1. Acedo Matellán, V. 2010. Argument structure and the syntaxmorphology interface. A case study in Latin and other languages. PhD Thesis. Universitat de Barcelona.
2. Barbelenet, D. 1913 (2010). De l’aspect verbal en latin ancient et particulierèment dans Térence, Paris.
3. Cinque, G. 2010. “Mapping spatial Pps: an introduction”, in Mapping spatial Pps. The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 6. G. Cinque, L. Rizzi (eds.). Oxford-New York: 3-25.
4. Den Dikken, M. 1995. On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. Oxford-New York.
5. García Hernández, B. 2005. “L’antonymie aspectuelle des préverbes allatifs et ablatifs”, in La composition et la préverbation en latin. C. Moussy (ed.). Paris: 229-241.
6. Hale, K., Keyser, S.J. 1993. “On the argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations”, in The view from Building 20. Essays of linguistics in honor of S. Bomberger. K. Hale, S. J. Keyser (eds.). Cambridge (MA): 53-109.
7. Harley, H. 2005. “How do verbs get their names? Denominal verbs, manner incorporation and the ontology of verbs in English”, in The Syntax of aspect. Deriving thematic and aspectual interpretation. N. Erteschik-Shir, T. Rapoport (eds.). Oxford: 42-63.
8. Haverling, G. 2000. On -sco verbs, prefixes and semantic functions. Göteborg.
9. Haverling, G. 2010. “Actionality, tense and viewpoint”, in New perspectives on historical Latin syntax 2. Constituent syntax: adverbial phrases, adverbs, mood, tense. P. Baldi, P. Cuzzolin (eds.). Berlin-New York: 278-523.
10. Hewson, J., Bubenik, V. 2006. From case to adpositions. The development of configurational syntax in Indo-European languages. Amsterdam.
11. Haugen, J.D. 2009. “Hyponymous objects and late insertion”. Lingua, 119: 242-262.
12. Kratzer, A. 1996. “Severing the external argument from its verb”, in Phrase structure and the lexicon. J. Rooryck, L. Zaring (eds). Dordrecht: 109-137.
13. Lehmann, C. 1983. “Latin preverbs and cases”, in Latin Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. H. Pinkster (ed.). Amsterdam: 145-161.
14. Mateu, J. 2012. “Conflation and incorporation processes in resultative constructions”, in Telicity, Change, and State: A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure. D.V. Demonte, L. McNally (eds.). Oxford: 252-278.
15. Pinkster, H. 1990. Latin syntax and semantics. London.
16. Pokorny, J. 1959. Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bern.
17. Ramchand, G.C., Tungseth M.E. 2006. “Aspect and verbal prepositions”. Nordlyd, 33.2: 149-175.
18. Ramchand, G.C. 2008a. Verb meaning and the lexicon. A first phase syntax. Cambridge.
19. Ramchand, G.C. 2008b. “Perfectivity as aspectual definiteness: Time and the event in Russian”. Lingua, 118: 1690-1715.
20. Romagno, D. 2003. “Azionalità e transitività: il caso dei preverbi latini”. Archivio glottologico italiano, 88.2: 154-170.
21. Svenonius, P. 2004. “Slavic prefixes inside and outside VP”. Nordlyd, 32.2: 205-253.
22. Svenonius, P. 2008. “Projections of P”, in Syntax and semantics of spatial P. A. Asbury, J. Dotlačil, B. Gehrke, R. Nouwen (eds.). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: 63-84.
23. Tenny, C. 1994. Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht.
24. Tungseth, M.E. 2008. Verbal prepositions and argument structure. Amsterdam-Philadelphia.
25. Washio, R. 1997. “Resultatives, compositionality and language variation”. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 6: 1-49.

Chapter Information

Bibliographic Information