Acquaviva, P. (2004). Constraining inherent inflection: number and nominal Aspect. Folia Linguistica XXXVIII, 333–354.Google Scholar

Alexiadou, A. (2001). Functional Structure in Nominals: Nominalization and Ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Alexiadou, A. (2009). Form-meaning asymmetries in the noun phrase: the case of Number. Paper presented at Converging Linguistics and Cognitive Science: Nominal systems across languages. Barcelona, 14–16.Google Scholar

Alexiadou, A. and Stavrou, M. (2011). Ethnic adjectives as pseudo adjectives. Studia linguistic 65, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alexiadou, A., Haegeman, L. and Stavrou, M. (2007). Noun Phrase in the Generative Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anagnostopoulou, E. (2003). The Syntax of Ditransitives: Evidence from Clitics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Anderson, S. R. (1982). Where's morphology? Linguistic Inquiry 13, 571–612.Google Scholar

Anderson, S. R. (1992). A-morphous morphology. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aronoff, M. (1976). Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Aronoff, M. (1992). Noun classes in Arapesh. In Booij, G. and van Marle, J. (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1991. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aronoff, M. (1994). Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Arsenijević, B., Boleda, G., Gehrke, B. and McNally, L. (2014). Ethnic adjectives are proper adjectives. In Baglini, R., Grinsell, T., Keane, J., Singerman, A. R. and Thomas, J. (eds.), CLS-46-I The Main Session: 46th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 17–30.Google Scholar

Baker, M. (1985). The Mirror Principle and the morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry 16, 373–416.Google Scholar

Baker, M. (1988). Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar

Baker, M. (1998). A review of G. Sadock's “On the autonomy of compounding morphology.” In Lapointe, S. G., Brentari, D. K. and Farrell, P. (eds.), Morphology and its Relation to Phonology and Syntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 188–212.Google Scholar

Baker, M. (2003). Lexical Categories. Verbs, Nouns, and Adjectives. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bally, C. (1944). Linguistique générale et linguistique française. Berne: Franke.Google Scholar

Bartning, I. (1980). Remarkes sur la syntaxe et la sémantique du pseudo adjectif dénominaux en français. Stockholm: Almkvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar

Bauer, L. (1978). The Grammar of Nominal Compounding. Denmark: Odense University Press.Google Scholar

Bauer, L. (1983). English Word Formation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bauer, L. (1998a). When is a sequence of two nouns a compound in English? English Language and Linguistics 2(1), 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bauer, L. (1998b). Is there a class of neoclassical compounds, and if so, is it productive? Linguistics 36(3), 403–422.Google Scholar

Bauer, L. (2001). Compounding. In Haspelmath, M., König, E., Oesterreicher, W. and Raible, W. (eds.), Language Universals and Language Typology. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, pp. 695–707.Google Scholar

Bassac, C. and Bouillon, P. (2001). The telic relationship in compounds in French and Turkish. Paper presented at First International Workshop on Generative Approaches to the Lexicon. Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar

Beard, R. (1991). Decompositional composition: The semantics of scope ambiguities and bracketing paradoxes. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9(2), 195–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bisetto, A. and Scalise, S. (2005). The classification of compounds. Lingue e linguaggio. IV.2, 319–322.Google Scholar

Bolinger, D. (1967). Adjectives in English: Attribution and predication. Lingua 18, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonet, E. (1991). Morphology after syntax: Pronominal clitics in Romance. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar

Booij, G. (1977). Dutch Morphology: A Study of Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar

Booij, G. (1996). Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In Booij, G. and van Marle, J. (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1995. Springer, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar

Borer, H. (1994). On the projection of arguments. In Benedicto, E. and Runner, J. (eds.), Functional Projections, University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 17, pp. 19–48.Google Scholar

Borer, H. (2005). In Name Only. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Borsley, R. D. and Kornfilt, J. (2000). Mixed extended projections. In Borsley, R. D. (ed.), The Nature and Function of Syntactic Categories. New York: Academic Press, pp. 101–131.Google Scholar

Bosque, I. (1993). Sobre las diferencias entre los adjetivos relacionales y los calificativos. Revista Argentina de Linguistica 9, 9–48.Google Scholar

Bosque, I. and Picallo, C. (1996). Postnominal adjectives in Spanish DPs. Journal of Linguistics 32, 349–385.Google Scholar

Bunt, C. (1979). Ensembles and the Formal Semantic Properties of Mass Terms. In Pelletier, F. J. (ed.), Mass Terms: Some Philosophical Problems. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 249–278.Google Scholar

Cardinaletti, A. (1998). On the deficient/ strong opposition in possessive systems. In Alexiadou, A. and Wilder, C. (eds.), Possessors, Predicates and Movement in the DP. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cardinaletti, A. and Starke, M. (1995). The Typology of Structural Deficiency. In Alexiadou, A., et al. (eds.), On the Three Grammatical Classes. FAS Papers in Linguistics, vol. 1, Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung, Berlin, pp. 1–55.Google Scholar

Carlson, G. (1977). A unified analysis of the English bare plural. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 413–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chierchia, G. (1998). Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6, 339–405.Google Scholar

Chierchia, G. and McConnell-Ginet, S. (1990). Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1972). Some empirical issues in the theory of transformational grammar. In Peters, S. (ed.), Goals of Linguistic Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, pp. 63–130.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1994). A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory. The View from Building 20. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 1–59.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 1–54.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. and Halle, M. (1968). The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Cinque, G. (2005). The dual source of adjectives and phrasal movement in the Romance DP. Ms., University of Venice.Google Scholar

Cinque, G. (2007). La natura grammaticale del diminutive e del vezzeggiativo. In Maschi, R., Penello, N. and Rizzolatti, P. (eds.), Miscellanea di studi liguistici offerti a Laura Vanelli da amici e allievi padovani. Università degli Studi di Udine, pp. 229–236.Google Scholar

Cinque, G. (2010). The Syntax of Adjectives: A Comparative Study, Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, vol. 57. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Cinque, G. (2015). Augmentative, pejorative, diminutive and endearing heads in the extended nominal projection. In Di Domenico, E., Hamann, C. and Matteini, S. (eds.), Structures, Strategies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 67–81.Google Scholar

Coene, M. (1999). Definite null-nominals in Romanian and Spanish: A generative approach to the syntax of DP. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Antwerpen.Google Scholar

Cornilescu, A. (1995). Rumanian genitive constructions. In Cinque, G. and Giusti, G. (eds.), Advances in Romanian Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, Linguistik Aktuell 10.Google Scholar

Cornilescu, A. (2001). Romanian nominalizations: Case and aspectual structure. Journal of Linguistics 37(3), 467–501.Google Scholar

Cornilescu, A. (2005). Invited talk at the Romania Computational Linguistics Summer School, Sinaia www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/rocoli/talks.htmlGoogle Scholar

Cornilescu, A. (2006). Modes of semantic combinations: NP/DP. Adjectives and the structure of the Romanian DP. In Doetjes, J. and Gonzales, P. (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 43–70.Google Scholar

Cornilescu, A. (2009). Adjectives and nominal peripheries. Presentation at University of Paris 7.Google Scholar

Cornilescu, A. and Nicolae, A. (2009). On the syntax of Romanian definite Phases: Changes in the patterns of definiteness checking. Paper presented at Annual Meeting Variation and Change in the Romance and Germanic noun phrase, Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Dalrymple, M. and Mofu, S. (2008). Plural semantics, reduplication and numeral modification in Indonesian. AFLA XV.Google Scholar

De Belder, M., Faust, N. and Lampitelli, N. (2014). On a low and a high diminutive. In Alexiadou, A., Borer, H. and Schäfer, F. (eds.), The Syntax of Roots and the Roots of Syntax. Oxford University Press, pp. 149–163.Google Scholar

Déchaine, R. M., Girard, R., Mudzingwa, C., and Wiltschko, M. (2014). The internal syntax of Shona class prefixes. Language Sciences 43, 18–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Delfitto, D., Fábregas, A. and Melloni, C. (2008). Compounding at the interfaces. Presentation at NELS 39, Ithaca, New York.Google Scholar

Delfitto, D. and Paradisi, P. (2007). Prepositionless genitive and N+N compounding in (Old) French and Italian. Paper presented at Going Romance 20, December 7–8, 2006, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Demonte, V. (2008). Meaning-form correlations and adjective position in Spanish. In McNally, L. and Kennedy, C. (eds.), Adjectives and Adverbs: Syntax, Semantics, and Discourse, Studies in Theoretical Linguistics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Déprez, V. (1989). On the typology of syntactic positions and the nature of chains: Move A to the specifier of functional projections. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar

DiSciullo, A. M. and Williams, E. (1987). On the Definition of Word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dobrovie-Sorin, C., Bleam, T. and Teresa Espinal, M. (2006). Bare nouns, number and types of incorporation. In Vogeleer, S. and Tasmowski, L. (eds.), Non Definiteness and Plurality. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 51–79.Google Scholar

Dowty, D. R. (1979). Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar

Dubois, J. and Dubois-Charlier, F. (1970). Eléments de linguistique française: syntaxe. Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar

Embick, D. (1997). Voice and the interfaces of syntax, Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Embick, D. (1998). Voice systems and the syntax/morphology Interface. The Proceedings of the Penn/MIT Workshop on Aspect, Argument Structure, and Events, MITWPL.Google Scholar

Embick, D. (2000). Features, syntax and categories in the Latin perfect. Linguistic Inquiry 31(2), 185–230.Google Scholar

Embick, D. and Marantz, A. (2008). Architecture and blocking. Linguistic Inquiry 39, 1–53.Google Scholar

Embick, D. and Noyer, R. (2005). Distributed morphology and the syntax/morphology interface. Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Fábregas, A. (2007). The internal syntactic structure of relational adjectives. Probus 19, 135–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giegerich, H. (2004). Compound or phrase? English noun-plus-noun constructions and the stress criterion. English Language and Linguistics 8(1), 1–24.Google Scholar

Giegerich, H. J. (2005). Associative adjectives in English and the lexicon syntax interface. Journal of Linguistics 41, 571–591.Google Scholar

Giorgi, A. and Longobardi, G. (1991). The Syntax of Noun Phrases: Configuration, Parameters, and Empty Categories. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Giurgea, I. (2008). On Romanian predicative bare nouns. Paper presented at Workshop on bare singulars, argument structure and their interpretation. Barcelona 11–12 December 2008.Google Scholar

Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hale, K. and Keyser, J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Hale, K. and Keyser, J. S. (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberge. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press, pp. 51–109.Google Scholar

Halle, M. (1997). Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and fission. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30: Papers at the Interface. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, pp. 425–449.Google Scholar

Halle, M. and Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Hale, K. and Keyser, J. S. (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 111–176.Google Scholar

Halle, M. and Marantz, A. (1994). Some key features of distributed morphology. In Carnie, A. and Harley, H. (eds.) Papers on Phonology and Morphology, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 289–320.Google Scholar

Harley, H. (2009). Compounding in Distributed Morphology. In Lieber, R. and Stekauer, P. (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Compounding. Oxford University Press, pp. 129–144.Google Scholar

Harley, H. and Noyer, R. (1999). Distributed morphology. Glot International 4, 3–9.Google Scholar

Hawkins, J. A. (1991). On (in)definite articles: implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27, 405–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heim, I. and Kratzer, A. (1998). Semantics in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar

de Hoop, H. (1993). Case configuration and noun phrase interpretation. Ph.D dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar

Higginbotham, J. (1985). On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16, 547–593.Google Scholar

Horrocks, G. and Stavrou, M. (1987). Bounding theory and Greek syntax: evidence for wh movement in NP. Journal of Linguistics 23, 79–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnston, M. and Busa, F. (1999). Qualia structure and the compositional interpretation of compounds. In Viegas, E. (ed.), The Breadth and Depth of Semantics Lexicons. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 167–187.Google Scholar

Kamp, H. (1975). Two theories about adjectives. In Keenan, E. L. (ed.), Formal Semantics of Natural Language. Cambridge University Press, pp. 123–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kamp, H. and Partee, B. (1995). ‘Prototype theory and compositionality’. Cognition 57(2), 121–191.Google Scholar

Kamp, H. and Reyle, U. (1994). From Discourse to Logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar

Kayne, R. (1984). Connectedness and Binary Branching. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (2007). Vagueness and grammar: the semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30(1), 1–45.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, P. (1998). Partitive case and aspect. In Butt, M. and Geuder, W. (eds.), The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Compositional Factors. Standford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 265–308.Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (1994). On external arguments. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 17, 103–130.Google Scholar

Kupferman, L. (1991). L'aspect du groupe nominal at l'extraction de en. Le Français Moderne LIX 2. 113–147.Google Scholar

Kuryłowicz, J. (1936). Dérivation lexicale et dérivation syntaxique. BSL 37: 79–92.Google Scholar

Lasersohn, P. (1989). On the readings of plural noun phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 20, 130–134.Google Scholar

Larson, R. (1999). Semantics of adjectival modification. Lecture notes, LOT Winter School, Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Levi, J. N. (1978). The Syntax and Semantics of Complex Nominals. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Lewis, D. (1972). General semantics. In Davidson, D. and Harman, G. (eds.), Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, pp. 169–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lieber, R. (1983). Argument linking and compounds in English. Linguistic Inquiry 14, 251–286.Google Scholar

Lieber, R. (1992). Deconstructing Morphology. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Lieber, R. (1994). Root compounds and synthetic compounds. In Asher, R. E. (ed.) The Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol.17. Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 3607–3610.Google Scholar

Lin, J. (2008). The order of stage-level and individual-level relatives and superiority effects. Language and Linguistics 9(4), 839–864.Google Scholar

Lohrmann, S. (2010). The structure of the DP and its reflex in Scandinavian. Ph.D dissertation, Universität Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Longobardi, G. (1994). Reference to kinds and proper names: A theory of N movement in Syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 25, 609–665.Google Scholar

Marantz, A. (1991). Case and licensing. Proceedings of ESCOL 8: 234–253.Google Scholar

Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax: Don't try a morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In Dimitriadis, A., Siegel, L., Surek-Clark, C. and Williams, A. (eds.), University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4.2. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, pp. 201–225.Google Scholar

Marantz, A. (2001). Words and things. Ms., MIT.Google Scholar

Marchand, H. (1969). The Categories and Types of Present Day English Word Formation. München: Beck'sche Verlagsbuchlandlung.Google Scholar

Marchis, M. (2010). Relational adjectives at the syntax-morphology interface. Doctoral dissertation. Ms Stuttgart University.Google Scholar

Marchis, M. (2011). Compounding across languages. In Bern, J., Jacobs, H and Scheer, T. (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 167–183.Google Scholar

Marchis, M. and Alexiadou, A. (2009). On the distribution of adjectives in Romanian: the cel construction. In Aboh, E., van der Linden, E., Quer, J. and Sleeman, P. (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 161–178.Google Scholar

Marchis Moreno, M. (2015). Relational adjectives at interfaces. Studia Linguistica 69(3), 304–332.Google Scholar

Marchis Moreno, M. and Franco, L. (2016). Derivational suffixes at the borderline between inflection and derivation. Paper presented at 42 GGS-Tagung, Leipzig.Google Scholar

McFadden, T. (2004). The position of morphological case in the derivation: a study on the syntax-morphology interface. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar

McNally, L. and Boleda, G. (2004). Relational adjectives as properties of kinds. In Bonami, O. and Hofherr, P. Cabredo (eds.), Empirical Issues in Formal Syntax and Semantics 5. 179–196, online publication.Google Scholar

Mezhevich, I. (2002). English compounds and Russian relational adjectives. Proceedings NWLC.Google Scholar

Montague, R. (1974). Formal Philosophy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Morzycki, M. (2004). Feature bundles, prenominal modifier order, and modes of composition below the word level. Ms., Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar

Morzycki, M. (2005). Mediated modification: Functional structure and the interpretation of modifier position. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar

Murasugi, K. , G. (1992). Crossing and Nested Paths: NP movement in accusative and ergative Languages. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar

Niculescu, D. (2009). On two de phrases in the Romanian DP. Paper presented at the Conference Variation and change in the Romance and Germanic noun phrase, Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Nirenburg, S. and Raskin, V. (2004). Ontological Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Ott, D. (2011). Diminutive-formation in German. Spelling out the classifier analysis. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 14, 1–46.Google Scholar

Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the Semantics of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Pesetsky, D. (1995). Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Picallo, C. (1991). Nominals and nominalization in Catalan. Probus 3, 279–316.Google Scholar

Postal, P. (1969). Anaphoric islands. Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting Chicago Linguistic Society. University of Chicago, pp. 205–239.Google Scholar

Pustejovsky, J. (1992). The syntax of event structure. In Levin, B. and Pinker, S. (eds.), Lexical and Conceptual Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 47–83.Google Scholar

Quine, W. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar

Rae, M. (2010). Ordering restrictions of modifiers in complex nominals. Doctoral Dissertation, Università Ca’ Foscari di Venezia.Google Scholar

Radatz, H. (2001). Die Semantik der Adjektivstellung. Eine kognitive Studie zur Konstruktion „Adjektiv + Substantiv“ im Spanischen, Französischen und Italienischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 52–126.Google Scholar

Rappaport Hovav, M. and Levin, B. (1992) –er Nominals: Implications for a Theory of Argument Structure’. In Stowell, T. and Wehrli, E. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 26: Syntax and the Lexicon. New York: Academic Press, pp. 127–153.Google Scholar

Raskin, V. and Nirenburg, S. (1995). Lexical semantics of adjectives: A microtheory of adjectival meaning. Memoranda in Computer and Cognitive Science MCCS. 95–288. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University.Google Scholar

Reinhart, T. and Reuland, E. (1993). Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24, 657–720.Google Scholar

Roeper, T. and Siegel, M. E. A. (1978). A lexical transformation for verbal compounds. Linguistic Inquiry 9(2), 199–260.Google Scholar

Ronat, M. (1974). Echelles de base et mutation en syntaxe française. M.A. thesis, Vincennes University, Paris.Google Scholar

Rutkowski, P. and Progovac, L. (2005). Classification projection in Polish and Serbian: The position and shape of classifying adjectives. In Franks, S., Gladney, F. Y. and Tasseva-Kurktchieva, M. (eds.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 13: The South Carolina Meeting. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar

Sadock, J. M. (1998). On the autonomy of compounding morphology. In Lapointe, S. G., Brentari, D. K. and Farrell, P. (eds.), Morphology and its Relation to Phonology and Syntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 161–187.Google Scholar

Sato, Y. (2007). Phrasal compounding and the Lexicalist Hypothesis: A multiple Spell Out account. Paper presented at the 2007 International Conference on Linguistics in Korea, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea, January 20, 2007.Google Scholar

Savoia, L., Manzini, M. R., Baldi, B. & Franco, L. (2017). Nominal evaluative suffixes in Italia. http://permariag.wixsite.com/permariagrossmann/articoli.Google Scholar

Savoia, L., Manzini, M. R., Baldi, B. & Franco, L.. In Press. A morpho-syntactic analysis of evaluatives in Italian. Studi Italiani di Linguistica teorica e Applicata.Google Scholar

Scalise, S. (1984). Generative Morphology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar

Schweickard, W. (1992). Deonomastik: Ableitungen auf der Basis von Eigennamen im Französischen unter Berücksichtigung des Italienischen, Rumänischen und Spanischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Selkirk, E. (1982). The Syntax of Words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Siegel, M. (1974). Topics in English morphology. Ph.D. Dissertation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Siegel, M. (1976a). Capturing the adjective. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar

Siegel, M. (1976b). Capturing the Russian adjective. In Partee, B. H. (ed.), Montague Grammar. New York: Academic Press, pp. 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sleeman, P. (1996). Licensing empty nouns in French. Ph.D. Thesis. HIL. Leiden.Google Scholar

Spencer, A. (1999). Transpositions and argument structure. In Booij, G. and van Marle, J. (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1998. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 73–102.Google Scholar

Ticio, M. E., (2003). Adjective placement. Locality Domains in the Spanish Determiner Phrase. University of Connecticut, pp. 104–156.Google Scholar

Truswell, R. (2006). Adjectives and headedness. Oxford Working papers in Linguistics, Philology, and Phonetics 10, 1–19.Google Scholar

Valois, D. (1991). The internal structure of DP. Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar

Vendler, Z. (1967). The grammar of goodness. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 172–195.Google Scholar

Ware, R. (1975). Some bits and pieces. In Pelletier, F. J. (ed.), Mass Terms: Some Philosophical Problems. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 15–29.Google Scholar

Wheeler, S. C. (1972). Attributives and their modifiers. Noûs 6(4), 310–334.Google Scholar

Wiltschko, M. (2009). On the absence of a grammaticalized count/mass distinction in Halkomelem Salish. Ms. UBC.Google Scholar

Wiltschko, M. (2006). Why should diminutives count?. In Broekhuis, H., Corver, N., Huijbregts, R., Kleinhenz, U. and Koster, J. (eds.), Organizing Grammar. Linguistic Studies in Honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 669–679.Google Scholar

Wiltschko, M. and Steriopolo, O. (2007). Parameters of variation in the syntax of diminutives. In Actes du congrès annuel de l'Association canadienne de linguistique 2007. Proceedings of the 2007 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, 1 12.Google Scholar

de Wit, P. and Schoorlemmer, M. (1996). Prenominal arguments in Russian, German and Dutch. ZASPIL 5, 184–202.Google Scholar

Zamparelli, R. (1993). Aspects of a ADJP = DP = CP hypothesis. Ms., University of Rochester.Google Scholar

Zubizarreta, M. L. (1987). Levels of Representation in the Lexicon and in the Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar