Como Citar
Resumo
This paper is based on a debate between Richard Larson and RayJackendoff about the treatment to be given to structures involving verbs which select two internal arguments. Its aim is to analyse the kinds of arguments used by each author in light of the scientific investigation program proposed by Popper in his article Philosophy of Science: a personal report.
Referências
BARSS, A. & H. LASNIK (1986). “A Note on Anaphora and Double Objects”. Linguistic Inquiry, 17:347-354
CHOMSKY, N. (1975). The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, Chicago, Illinois, University of Chicago Press.
______. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding, Dordrecht Foris.
______. (1993). “A minimalist program for linguistic theory”. In: K. HALE & S. J. KEYSER (eds) The View from Building, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press.
EMONDS, J. (1993). “Projecting indirect objects”. The Linguistic Review, 10:211-63.
JACKENDOFF, R. (1990). “On Larson’s treatment of the double object construction”. Linguistic Inquiry, 21:427-56.
JAEGGLI, O. (1986). “Passive”. Linguistic Inquiry 17:587-622.
LARSON, R. (1988). “On the double object construction”. Linguistic Inquiry, 19:335-91.
OEHRLE, R. (1976). The Grammatical Status of the English Dative Alternation, Tese de Doutorado, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press.
POPPER, K. R. (1963). Conjecturas e refutações. Trad. Sérgio Bath. Brasília, Editora da Universidade de Brasília.
POSTAL, P. (1971). Crossover Phenomena, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
SCHER, A. P. (1996). As Construções com dois complementos no Inglês e no Português do Brasil: um estudo sintático comparativo, Campinas, UNICAMP.
O periódico Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos utiliza a licença do Creative Commons (CC), preservando assim, a integridade dos artigos em ambiente de acesso aberto.
Downloads
