Mova0.5 pre-release⌕
☰
home / docs / papers / Modern Hebrew / Reflexive verbs in Hebrew: Deep unaccusativity meets lexical semantics

Reflexive verbs in Hebrew: Deep unaccusativity meets lexical semantics

What it is about

In Modern Hebrew, reflexive verbs use one of the seven verbal templates, hitXaYeZ, and the same template also carries anticausatives and reciprocals, which behave differently. Kastner proposes an analysis with no reflexive morphology at all. Reflexives are built with a non-active syntax, with no external argument, and an agentive reading comes only from a combination of functional heads and the root. The root's lexical semantics matter: roots that are Self-Oriented (dressing, shaving, making up) can carry an agent reading, while Other-Oriented roots (getting annoyed, being passed) cannot. Reflexive verbs show mixed unergative and unaccusative behaviour. The argument of a reflexive undergoes a change of state, so it behaves like an internal argument, but the paper admits that Hebrew has no clean diagnostics for deep unaccusativity. The conclusion is that the root and not the template determines the reading, and that lexical roots trigger particular interpretations of the syntax at the interfaces. Reading was done from the abstract, the introduction, the section headings and the conclusion, not the full text.

Ideas

For Mova

I1 goes into the template tables in 05b. Verb paradigms: the strong verb in seven binyanim and the weak roots, and the verb notes in 05. The verb: system, binyanim, tense and use. I2 is a rule for prag. I3 is the test set for both. Biblical Hebrew has the same hitpa'el template, so the root-class note could also go into The verb.

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.5334/gjgl.299

@article{kastner2017reflexive,
  title = {{Reflexive verbs in Hebrew: Deep unaccusativity meets lexical semantics}},
  author = {Kastner, Itamar},
  journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics},
  year = {2017},
  doi = {10.5334/gjgl.299},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.299}
}

References

95 references, 2 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Adam, Galit. 2002. From variable to optimal grammar: Evidence from language acquisition and language change. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University dissertation. find
  2. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2011. Post-verbal nominatives: an unaccusativity diagnostic under scrutiny. In Raffaella Folli & Christiane Ulbrich (eds.), Interfaces in Linguistics: New Research Perspectives, 56–77. Oxford University Press. find
  3. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2014. Roots don’t take complements. Theoretical Linguistics, 40(3/4). 287–297. find
  4. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2015. Roots in transitivity alternations: afto/auto reflexives. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer (eds.), The Syntax of Roots and the Roots of Syntax, 57–80. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  5. Alexiadou, Artemis & Edit Doron. 2012. The syntactic construction of two non-active voices: Passive and middle. Journal of Linguistics 48. 1–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0022226711000338 Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 1998. Parametrizing Agr: word order, vmovement and EPP-checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16(3). 491–539. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006090432389 ↗
  6. Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 2004. Voice morphology in the causative-inchoative alternation: Evidence for a non-unified structural analysis of unaccusatives. In Artemis Alexiadou, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Martin Everaert (eds.), The unaccusativity puzzle: Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface, 114–136. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  7. Alexiadou, Artemis, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Florian Schäfer. 2015. External arguments in transitivity alternations: A layering approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571949.001.0001 ↗
  8. Alexiadou, Artemis & Florian Schäfer. 2013. Towards a non-uniform analysis of naturally reflexive verbs. In Robert E. Santana-LaBarge (ed.), Proceedings of the 31st West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 31), 1–10. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. find
  9. Alexiadou, Artemis, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer. 2014. Introduction. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer (eds.), The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, 1–13. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  10. Alexiadou, Artemis, Mariangeles Cano, Gianina Iordăchioaia, Fabienne Martin & Florian Schäfer. 2013. ‘Direct participation’ and ‘agent exclusivity’ effects in derived nominals and beyond. In Gianina Iordăchioaia, Isabelle Roy & Kaori Takamine (eds.), Categorization and category change, 153–180. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. find
  11. Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Yota Samioti. 2014. Domains within words and their meanings: A case study. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer (eds.), The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, 81–111. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665266.003.0005 ↗
  12. Arad, Maya. 2003. Locality constraints on the interpretation of roots: The case of Hebrew denominal verbs. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 737–778. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025533719905 Arad, Maya. 2005. Roots and patterns: Hebrew morpho-syntax. Springer. ↗
  13. Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by itself: Stems and inflectional classes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
  14. Aronoff, Mark. 2007. In the beginning was the word. Language 83(4). 803–830. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2008.0042 ↗
  15. Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur. 2016. The Semitic templates from the perspective of reciprocal predicates. In Jenny Audring, Francesca Masini & Wendy Sandler (eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM10), 16–30. find
  16. Beavers, John & Andrew Koontz-Garboden. 2012. Manner and result in the roots of verbal meaning. Linguistic Inquiry 43(3). 331–369. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/ LING_a_00093 Beavers, John & Andrew Koontz-Garboden. 2013a. Complications in diagnosing lexical meaning: A rejoinder to Horvath and Siloni (2013). Lingua 134. 210–218. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.001 Beavers, John & Andrew Koontz-Garboden. 2013b. In defense of the reflexivization analysis of anticausativization. Lingua 131. 199–216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.10.009 ↗
  17. Berman, Ruth. 1978. Modern Hebrew structure. Tel-Aviv, Israel: Tel-Aviv Publishing Projects, Ltd. find
  18. Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2000. The ins and outs of contextual allomorphy. In Kleanthes Grohmann & Caro Struijke (eds.), University of Maryland working papers in linguistics 10. 35–71. find
  19. Bonet, Eulalia. 1991. Morphology after syntax: Pronominal clitics in Romance. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation. find
  20. Borer, Hagit. 1991. The causative-inchoative alternation: A case study in Parallel Morphology. The Linguistic Review 8. 119–158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ tlir.1991.8.2-4.119 Borer, Hagit. 1995. The ups and downs of Hebrew verb movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13(3). 527–606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992740 ↗
  21. Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring sense, vol. 2: The normal course of events. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  22. Borer, Hagit. 2013. Structuring sense, vol. 3: Taking form. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  23. Borer, Hagit & Yosef Grodzinsky. 1986. Syntactic cliticization and lexical cliticization: The case of Hebrew dative clitics. In Hagit Borer (ed.), Syntax and semantics 19. 175–217. New York: Academic Press. find
  24. Bruening, Benjamin. 2013. By phrases in passives and nominals. Syntax 16. 1–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00171.x ↗
  25. Bruening, Benjamin. 2014. Word formation is syntactic: Adjectival passives in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 32(2). 363–422. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11049-014-9227-y Burzio, Luigi. 1986. Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4522-7 ↗
  26. Chierchia, Gennaro. 2004. A semantics for unaccusatives and its syntactic consequences. In Artemis Alexiadou, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Martin Everaert (eds.), The unaccusativity puzzle: Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface, 22–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199257652.003.0002 ↗
  27. Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Studies on semantics in generative grammar, 11–61. The Hague: Mouton. find
  28. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
  29. Cuervo, María Cristina. 2014. Alternating unaccusatives and the distribution of roots. Lingua 141. 48–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.12.001 ↗
  30. Den Dikken, Marcel. 2003. On the syntax of locative and directional adpositional phrases. Ms., CUNY. find
  31. Den Dikken, Marcel. 2010. Directions from the GET-GO. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 9. 23–53. find
  32. Doron, Edit. 2003. Agency and voice: The semantics of the Semitic templates. Natural Language Semantics 11. 1–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023021423453 ↗
  33. Doron, Edit. 2014. The interaction of adjectival passive and voice. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer (eds.), The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, 164–191. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof: oso/9780199665266.003.0008 Doron, Edit & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 2009. A unified approach to reflexivization in Semitic and Romance. Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 1. 75–105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/187666309X12491131130503 ↗
  34. Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1991.0021 ↗
  35. Embick, David. 2010. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 60). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/ mitpress/9780262014229.001.0001 Folli, Raffaella. 2001. Constructing telicity in English and in Italian. Oxford: Oxford University dissertation. ↗
  36. Folli, Raffaella & Heidi Harley. 2008. Teleology and animacy in external arguments. Lingua 118. 190–202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.004 ↗
  37. Gafter, Roey. 2014a. The distribution of the hebrew possessive dative construction: Guided by unaccusativity or prominence? Linguistic Inquiry 45(3). 482–500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00164 Gafter, Roey. 2014b. “The most beautiful and correct Hebrew”: Authenticity, ethnic identity and linguistic variation in the greater Tel Aviv area. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation. ↗
  38. Gehrke, Berit. 2008. Ps in motion: On the semantics and syntax of P elements and motion verbs. Utrecht: Utrecht University dissertation. find
  39. Gouskova, Maria. 2012. Unexceptional segments. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30. 79–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9142-4 ↗
  40. Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
  41. Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Ken Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
  42. Harley, Heidi. 2014. On the identity of roots. Theoretical Linguistics 40(3/4). 225–276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2014-0010 ↗
  43. Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Bernard Comrie & Maria Polinsky (eds.), Causatives and transitivity, 87–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. find
  44. Heim, Irene & Angelika Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. find
  45. Horvath, Julia & Tal Siloni. 2011. Anticausatives: Against reflexivization. Lingua 121. 2176–2186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.09.006 ↗
  46. Horvath, Julia & Tal Siloni. 2013. Anticausatives have no cause(r): A rejoinder to Beavers & Koontz-Garboden. Lingua 131. 217–230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. lingua.2013.02.013 Irwin, Patricia. 2012. Unaccusativity at the interfaces. New York, NY: New York University dissertation. Lingbuzz/001617. ↗
  47. Jacobson, Pauline. 1999. Towards a variable free semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 22. 117–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005464228727 ↗
  48. Kastner, Itamar. 2016. Form and meaning in the Hebrew verb. New York, NY: New York University dissertation. Lingbuzz/003028. find
  49. Kastner, Itamar. 2017. Templatic morphology as an emergent property: Roots and functional heads in Hebrew. Ms., Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. lingbuzz/003103. find
  50. Kastner, Itamar & Vera Zu. 2015. Blocking and paradigm gaps. Ms., NYU. lingbuzz/002394. find
  51. Kayne, Richard S. 1975. French Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
  52. Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. 2009. Anticausativization. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27(1). 77–138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-008-9058-9 ↗
  53. Koopman, Hilda. 1997. Prepositions, postpositions, circumpositions and particles: The structure of Dutch PPs. Ms., UCLA. find
  54. Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Johan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8617-7_5 ↗
  55. Labelle, Marie. 2008. The French reflexive and reciprocal se. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26. 833–876. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-008-9053-1 ↗
  56. Laks, Lior. 2011. Morpho-phonological and morpho-thematic relations in Hebrew and Arabic verb formation. Tel-Aviv: Tel Aviv University dissertation. find
  57. Laks, Lior. 2013. Why and how do Hebrew verbs change their form? A morpho-thematic account. Morphology 23. 351–383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-013-9227-3 ↗
  58. Laks, Lior. 2014. Morpho-thematic mismatches in Hebrew: What happens when morphological and thematic criteria collide? Lingua 138. 107–127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.10.011 Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the syntax–lexical semantics interface (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 26). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ↗
  59. Levinson, Lisa. 2014. The ontology of roots and verbs. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer (eds.), The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, 208–229. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665266.003.0010 ↗
  60. Lev, Shaul. 2015. Hebrew labile alternation. Tel-Aviv: Tel Aviv University MA thesis. find
  61. Lidz, Jeffrey. 2001. The argument structure of verbal reflexives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19(2). 311–353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010676623092 ↗
  62. Linzen, Tal. 2014. Parallels between cross-linguistic and language-internal variation in Hebrew possessive constructions. Linguistics 52(3). 759–792. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2014-0007 Linzen, Tal. 2016. The diminishing role of inalienability in the Hebrew Possessive Dative. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistics Theory 2(2). 325–354. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ cllt-2015-0023 Lundquist, Björn, Martin Corley, Mai Tungseth, Antonella Sorace & Gillian Ramchand. 2016. Anticausatives are semantically reflexive in Norwegian, but not in English. Glossa 1(47). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.158 ↗ our card
  63. Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 10). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
  64. Marantz, Alec. 1991. Case and licensing. In German Westphal, Benjamin Ao & Hee-Rahk Chae (eds.), Proceesings of ESCOL, 234–253. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Cornell Linguistics Club. find
  65. Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In Alexis Dimitriadis, Laura Siegel, Clarissa Surek-Clark & Alexander Williams (eds.), PLC 21, 201–225. find
  66. Miller, D. Gary. 2010. The mediopassive: Latin to Romance. In Language change and linguistic theory 2. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof: oso/9780199583423.001.0001 Myler, Neil. 2016. Building and intepreting possession sentences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ↗
  67. Nevins, Andrew. 2011. Prospects and challanges for a clitic analysis of (A)SL agreement. Theoretical Linguistics 37(3/4). 173–187. find
  68. Nevins, Andrew. 2015. The exponent list and the encyclopedic list: Structurally parallel, mutually mute. In Roots IV, New York University. find
  69. Nissenbaum, Jon. 2000. Covert movement and parasitic gaps. In Masako Hirotani, Andries Coetzee, Nancy Hall & Ji-Yung Kim (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 30, 541–555. Amherst, MA: GLSA. find
  70. Noyer, Rolf. 1998. Impoverishment theory and morphosyntactic markedness. In Steve Lapointe, Diane Brentari & Patrick Farrell (eds.), Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax, 264–285. Stanford: CSLI. find
  71. Oseki, Yohei. 2017. Voice morphology in Japanese argument structures. Ms., NYU. lingbuzz/003374. find
  72. Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing arguments (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 49). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262162548.001.0001 ↗
  73. Reinhart, Tanya. 2002. The theta system: An overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28. 229–290. find
  74. Reinhart, Tanya & Tal Siloni. 2005. The lexicon-syntax parameter: Reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry 36(3). 389–436. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389054396881 Rooryck, Johan. 1996. Prepositions and minimalist case marking. In Höskuldur Thráinsson, Samuel Epstein & Steve Peter (eds.), Studies in comparative Germanic syntax 2. 226–256. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9806-9_9 ↗
  75. Schäfer, Florian. 2008. The syntax of (anti-)causatives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.126 ↗
  76. Schäfer, Florian. 2012. The passive of reflexive verbs and its implications for theories of binding and case. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 15(3). 213–268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-013-9052-4 ↗
  77. Schäfer, Florian. 2017. Romance and Greek medio-passives and the typology of Voice. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco & Ángel Gallego (eds.), The verbal domain, 129–152. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ oso/9780198767886.003.0006 Schäfer, Florian & Margot Vivanco. 2016. Anticausatives are weak scalar expressions, not reflexive expressions. Glossa 1(18). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.36 Schwarzwald, Ora (Rodrigue). 1981. dikduk u-metzi’ut ba-po’al ha-ivri [Grammar and Reality in the Hebrew Verb]. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press. ↗
  78. Shlonsky, Ur. 1987. Null and displaced pronouns. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation. find
  79. Shlonsky, Ur & Edit Doron. 1991. Verb second in Hebrew. In Dawn Bates (ed.), Proceedings of the tenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 10), 431–445. Stanford, CA: CSLI. find
  80. Sichel, Ivy. 2010. Event structure constraints in nominalization. In Artemis Alexiadou & Monika Rathert (eds.), The syntax of nominalizations across languages and frameworks, 151–190. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110245875.159 ↗
  81. Spathas, Giorgos, Artemis Alexiadou & Florian Schäfer. 2015. Middle Voice and reflexive interpretations: afto-prefixation in Greek. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 33. 1293–1350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9279-z ↗
  82. Sportiche, Dominique. 2014. Assessing unaccusativity and reflexivity: Using focus alternatives to decide what gets which θ-role. Linguistic Inquiry 45(2). 305–321. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00156 Sundaresan, Sandhya & Thomas McFadden. 2017. The articulated v layer: Evidence from Tamil. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco & Ángel Gallego (eds.), The verbal domain, 153–178. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ↗
  83. Svenonius, Peter. 2003. Limits on P: filling in holes vs. falling in holes. Nordlyd 31(2). 431–445. find
  84. Svenonius, Peter. 2007. Adpositions, particles and the arguments they introduce. In Eric Reuland, Tanmoy Bhattacharya & Giorgos Spathas (eds.), Argument structure, 63–103. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.108.08sve ↗
  85. Svenonius, Peter. 2010. Spatial P in English. In Guglielmo Cinque & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Mapping spatial PPs: The cartography of syntactic structures 6. 127–160. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  86. Szabolcsi, Anna. 1992. Combinatory grammar and projection from the lexicon. In Ivan Sag & Anna Szabolcsi (eds.), Lexical matters, 241–268. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. find
  87. Temkin Martínez, Michal. 2008. Exceptions encoded at the segmental level. In Charles B. Chang & Hannah J. Haynie (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 26, 463–470. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. find
  88. Temkin Martínez, Michal & Ivana Müllner. 2016. Specific exceptions driving variation: The role of orthography in Modern Hebrew spirantization. In Supplemental proceedings of the Annual Meeting on Phonology (AMP) 2015. van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1990. Functional prepositions. In Harm Pinkster & Inge Genee (eds.), Unity in diversity: Papers presented to Simon C. Dik on his 50th birthday, Dordrecht: Foris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110847420.229 ↗
  89. Wood, Jim. 2014. Reflexive -st verbs in Icelandic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 32(4). 1387–1425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9243-y ↗
  90. Wood, Jim. 2015. Icelandic morphosyntax and argument structure (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 90). Springer. find
  91. Wood, Jim & Alec Marantz. 2017. The interpretation of external arguments. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco & Ángel Gallego (eds.), The verbal domain, 255–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198767886.003.0011 ↗
  92. How to cite this article: Kastner, Itamar. 2017. Reflexive verbs in Hebrew: Deep unaccusativity meets lexical semantics. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 2(1): 75. 1–33, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.299 ↗ our card
  93. Submitted: 18 November 2016 find
  94. Published: 25 August 2017 find
  95. Copyright: © 2017 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press. OPEN ACCESS ↗

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/lingbulk-2017-kastner-reflexive-verbs-hebrew-deep-unaccusativity/