Scrambling of definite object NPs in Dutch

References

1. Aguilar-Guevara, Ana (2014). Weak definites: Semantics, lexicon and pragmatics. PhD thesis, Utrecht University.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Barbiers, Sjef (2018). Adverbs in strange places: On the syntax of adverbs in Dutch. Nederlandse Taalkunde23: 57-87.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Broekhuis, Hans (2000). Against feature strength: The case of Scandinavian object shift. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory18, 673-721.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Broekhuis, Hans (2007). Subject shift and object shift. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics10, 109-141.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Broekhuis, Hans (2008). Derivations and evaluations: Object shift in the Germanic languages. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Broekhuis, Hans (2009). Scrambling as object shift. Nederlandse Taalkunde14, 201-227.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Broekhuis, Hans (2016). Syntax of Dutch: The data set. Nederlandse Taalkunde21, 297-325.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Broekhuis, Hans (2020). The unification of object shift and object scrambling. In: M.T.Putnam & B.R.Page (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Germanic linguistics. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 413-435.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Broekhuis, Hans (2022). VO or OV: V to v or not to v. Linguistic Variation. https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.22005.bro
   [Google Scholar]
10. Broekhuis, Hans & NorbertCorver (2016). Syntax of Dutch: Verbs and verb phrases, volume 3. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Broekhuis, Hans & MarcelDen Dikken (2012). Syntax of Dutch: Nouns and noun phrases, volume 2. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Chomsky, Noam (1995a). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Chomsky, Noam (1995b). Bare phrase structure. In: G.Webelhuth (ed.), Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program. Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 383-439.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Chomsky, Noam (2001). Derivation by phase. In: M.Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale. A life in language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1-52.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Cinque, Guglielmo (1999). Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Corver, Norbert & Henk vanRiemsdijk (1994). Studies on scrambling: Movement and non-movement approaches to free word-order phenomena. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
17. De Hoop, Helen (2000). Otje en scrambling in het Nederlands. Tabu30, 97-112.
    [Google Scholar]
18. De Hoop, Helen (2003). Scrambling in Dutch: Optionality and optimality. In: S.Karimi (ed.), Word order and scrambling. Malden, MA/Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 201-216.
    [Google Scholar]
19. De Hoop, Helen (2016). Woordvolgordevariatie: Theorie versus empirie?Nederlandse Taalkunde21, 265-284.
    [Google Scholar]
20. De Swart, Peter & GeertjeVan Bergen (2011). Definiteness and adverb-object order in Dutch. Ms., University of Groningen/Université catholique de Louvain.
    [Google Scholar]
21. De Swart, Peter & GeertjeVan Bergen (2014). Unscrambling the lexical nature of weak definiteness. In: A.Aguilar-Guevara, B.Le Bruyn & J.Zwarts (eds.), Weak referentiality. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 287-309.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Den Dikken, Marcel (1995). Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Diesing, Molly (1992). Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Diesing, Molly (1997). Yiddish VP order and the typology of object movement in Germanic. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory17, 369-427.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Diesing, Molly & EloiseJelinek (1995). Distributing arguments. Natural Language Semantics3, 123-176.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Dik, Simon C. (1997). The theory of Functional Grammar. Part 1: The structure of the clause. 2nd revised edn. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Engels, Eva & StenVikner (2014). Scandinavian object shift and optimality theory. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Ernst, Thomas (2002). The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Haegeman, Liliane (1993). The morphology and distribution of object clitics in West Flemish. Studia Linguistica47, 57-94.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Haegeman, Liliane (1995). The syntax of negation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Haeseryn, Walter, KirstenRomijn, GuidoGeerts, Jaap deRooij & Maarten C.van den Toorn (eds.) (1997). Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. 2nd revised edn. Groningen: Nijhoff.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Haider, Hubert, SusanOlsen & StenVikner (1995). Introduction. In: H.Haider, S.Olsen & S.Vikner (eds.), Studies in comparative Germanic syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1-45.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Holmberg, Anders (1986). Word order and syntactic features in the Scandinavian languages and English. PhD thesis, University of Stockholm.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Holmberg, Anders (1999). Remarks on Holmberg’s generalization. Studia Linguistica53, 1-39.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Karimi, Simin (2003). Word order and scrambling. Malden, MA/Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Kayne, Richard S. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Komen, Erwin (2013). Finding focus: A study of the historical development of focus in English. PhD thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Kraak, Albert (1966). Negatieve zinnen: Een methodische en grammatische analyse. Hilversum: W. de Haan.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Longobardi, Giuseppi (1994). Reference and proper names: A theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry25, 609-665.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Neeleman, Ad (1994a). Scrambling as a D-structure phenomenon. In: N.Corver & H. vanRiemsdijk (eds.), 387-429.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Neeleman, Ad (1994b). Complex predicates, PhD thesis, Utrecht University.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Neeleman, Ad & TanyaReinhart (1998). Scrambling and the PF Interface. In: M.Butt & W.Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 309-353.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Neeleman, Ad & HansVan de Koot (2008). Dutch scrambling and the nature of discourse templates. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics11, 137-189.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Neeleman, Ad & ReikoVermeulen (2012). The syntax of topic, focus, and contrast An interface-based approach. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Newmeyer, Frederick J. (1983). Grammatical theory: Its limits and possibilities. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Ross, John (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Schaeffer, Jeannette C. (2000). The acquisition of direct object scrambling and clitic placement: Syntax and pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Schoenmakers, Gert-Jan (2020). Freedom in the Dutch middle-field: Deriving discourse structure at the syntax-pragmatics interface. Glossa5(1), 114. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1307
    [Google Scholar]
49. Schoenmakers, Gert-Jan (2022). Definite objects in the wild: A converging evidence approach to scrambling in the Dutch middle-field. PhD thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Schoenmakers, Gert-Jan & PeterDe Swart (2019). Adverbial hurdles in Dutch scrambling. In: R.Gattnar, R.Hörnig, M.Störzer & S.Featherston (eds.), Proceedings of Linguistic Evidence 2018: Experimental data drives linguistic theory. Tübingen: University of Tübingen, 124-145.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Struik, Tara (2022). Information structure triggers for word order varation and change: The OV/VO alternation in the West Germanic languages. PhD thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Thráinsson, Höskuldur (2007). The syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Unsworth, Sharon (2005). Child L2, adult L2, child L1: Differences and similarities. A study on the acquisition of direct object scrambling in Dutch. PhD thesis, Utrecht University.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Van Bergen, Geertje & Peterde Swart (2009). Definiteness and scrambling in Dutch: Where theory meets practice. In: A.Schardl & H.Morales (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 38. Amherst: GLSA, 113-124.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Van Bergen, Geertje & Peterde Swart (2010). Scrambling in spoken Dutch: Definiteness versus weight as determinants of word order variation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory6, 267-295.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Van der Does, Jaap & Helende Hoop (1998). Type-shifting and scrambled definites. Journal of Semantics15, 393-416.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Vanden Wyngaerd, Guido (1988). Raising-to-object in English and Dutch. Dutch Working Papers in English Language and Linguistics14, 1-19.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Vanden Wyngaerd, Guido (1989). Object shift as an A-movement rule. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics11, 256-271.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Verhagen, Arie (1986). Linguistic theory and the function of word order in Dutch. A study on interpretive aspects of the order of adverbials and noun phrases. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Zwart, Jan-Wouter (1993). Dutch syntax: A minimalist approach. PhD thesis, University of Groningen.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Zwart, Jan-Wouter (1997). Morphosyntax of verb movement: A minimalist approach to the syntax of Dutch. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]