بررسی ساخت‌های دومفعولی و دومتعدی در زبان فارسی در چارچوب صرف توزیعی

References

Acedo-Matellan, V. & J. Mateu (2013). Satellite-framed Latin vs. verb-framed Romance: a syntactic approach, Probus 25, 227-265

Anousheh, M. (2018). Review of the past tense in Persian based on the theory of Distributed Morphology. Linguistic Quarterly, 9 (1), PP. 57-80 (In Persian).

Aoun, J. & Y. A. Li (1989). Scope and Constituency. Linguistic Inquiry PP. 141-172.

Arad, M. (2005). Roots and Patterns: Hebrew morpho-syntax. Dordrecht: Spingeter.

Barss, A. & H. Lasnik (1986). A note on anaphora and double objects. Linguistic Inquiry 17, 347-354.

Bobaljik, J. (2015). Distributed Morphology. U Conn Storrs

Bruening, B. (2010a). Double object constructions disguised as prepositional datives. Linguistic Inquiry 41(2). 287–305.

Caha, P. (2009). The Nanosyntax of Case, Doctoral dissertation, University of Tromsø.

Cuervo, M. C. (2003). Datives at Large. Cambridge, MA: MIT Doctoral dissertation.

Faghiri, P. & P. Samvelian (2014). Position of direct object & indirect object in Persian: a data-based study. 1_st National Conference on Semantics and Syntax of Iranian Languages, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. pp. 61-74. (In Persian).

Hale, K. & Keyser, S.J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical representation of syntactic relations. In The View from Building 20, Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, K. Hale & S.J. Keyser (eds), 53–109. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.

Halle, M. & A. Marantz (1993). Distributed Morphology and the pieces of infelection. In: K. Hale & S. J. Kayser (eds.), The view from building 20. Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111-179. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.

Harley, H. & S. Miyagawa (2018). Syntax of Ditransitive. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics.

Harley, H. (2013). External Arguments and the Mirror Principle: On the distinctness of Voice and v. Lingua 123. 34-57.

Karimi Doostan, Gh. & A. Safari (2011). General / partial effect on spatial rotation of Persian language. Linguistic Research (Journal of Isfahan Faculty of Literature and Humanities), 3 (1), PP. 77-99 (In Persian).

Karimi, S. (2005). A Minimalist Approach to Scrambling: Evidence from Persian. De Gruyter Mouten.

Karimi, Y. & E. Najafi (2017). Supplementary construction: description and theoretical implications. Linguistic Research (Journal of Isfahan Faculty of Literature and Humanities, 9 (1), PP. 99-120 (In Persian).

Kayne, R. S. (1984) Connectedness and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.

Kelly, J. R. (2013). The Syntax-Semantics Interface in Distributed Morphology. Doctoral dissertation, Washington, DC.

Larson, RK. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguist. Inq.19: 335-92

Legate, J. A. (2014). Voice and V: Lesson from Acehness. MIT Press.

Levin, B. (1993). English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.

Marantz, A. (2013). Verbal argument structure: events and participants, Lingua 130, 152-168

Moayed, M. & A. Lotfi (2013). A study of the construction of two objects in Persian literature texts. Linguistic Research (Journal of Isfahan Faculty of Literature and Humanities), 5 (1), PP.101-119 (In Persian).

Oblishevska, O. (2005). Locative Alternation in Slavic. University of Ottawa.

Ormazabal, J. & J. Romero (2010). The derivation of dative alternations, In M. Dugine, S. Huidobro, N. Madariaga (eds), Argument structure and syntactic relations: A crosslinguistic perspective, 203-232. Benjamins

Pesetesky, D. (1982). Paths and Categories, Doctoral dissertation, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Pylkkänen, L. (2008). Introducing Arguments. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Ramchand, G. (2008). Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax. Cambridge: CUP.

Rappaport, H. & B. Levin (1988). What to do with theta-roles. IN: W. Wilkins (eds.), Thematic Relations. 7-36. San Diago. CA: Acadeic Press.

Rappaport, H. & B. Levin (2008). The English dative alternation: the case for verb sensitivity. J. Linguist. 44: 129-67

Roshan, B. (1998). Lexical Semantics: Classification of Persian Verbs. Doctoral dissertation, University of Tehran. (In Persian).

Siddiqi, D. (2009). Syntax within the word: economy, allomorphy, and argument selection in Distributed Morphology. John Benjamins B.V.

Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Vaezi, H. (2015). Two-verb verbs in Persian: Interaction between syntax and speech. Linguistic inquiries, 5 (21), PP. 251-274 (In Persian).

Wood & Zanuttini. (2018). Datives, data and dialect syntax in American English. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. 3(1): 86. 1-22.

Wood, J. & A. Marantz (2017). The Interpretation of External Arguments. The Verbal Domain. Print ISBN-13: 97801987678.

Wood, J. (2015). Icelandic Morphosyntax and Argument Srtucture. Vol. 90 of Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. Spinger. 2, 3, 4.

Yakhabi, M. & A. Lotfi (2017). Does the syntax in Modern Persian allow the locative verbs to participate in alternation? International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature. 6 (5), 255-262.