Sobre los mecanismos de competición

Referencias bibliográficas

• Abbott, B. (2006). Definiteness and indefiniteness. En L. R. Horn y G. Ward (Eds.).
• The handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch6
• Ahn, D. (2019). THAT thesis: A competition mechanism for anaphoric expressions. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Harvard. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/004742
• Ahn, D. (2020). It’s not just that: Analysis of demonstratives and pronouns. Manuscrito. https://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/TY1ZGRhY/ahn-2020-demonstratives.pdf
• Aloni, M. (2012). On epistemic indefinites: a note on emphatic free choice uses. En A. A. Guevara, A. Chernilovskaya y R. Nouwen (Eds.). Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 16, vol. 1, pp. 1–14. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics. doi: https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2012.v16i1.406
• Alonso-Ovalle, L. y P. Menéndez-Benito (2003). Some epistemic indefinites. En M. Kadowaki y S. Kawahara (Eds.). Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 33, pp. 1–12. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
• http://web.mit.edu/paulamb/www/menendez-alonso%20NELS%202002.pdf
• Alonso-Ovalle, L. y P. Menéndez-Benito (2010). Modal indefinites. Natural Language Semantics 18(1), 1–31. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-009-9048-4
• Alonso-Ovalle, L., S. Fernández Solera, L. Frazier y C. Clifton Jr. (2002). Null vs overt pronouns and the topic–focus articulation in Spanish. Rivista di Linguistica 14(2), 151–169.
• https://www.italian-journal-linguistics.com/app/uploads/2021/06/1.Alonso-Avalle.pdf
• Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun phrase antecedents. Londres: Routledge.
• Aronoff, M. (2016). Competition and the lexicon. En A. Elia, C. Iacobini y M. Voghera (Eds.). Livelli di analisi e fenomeni di interfaccia, pp. 39–52. Roma: Bulzoni. https://www.sunysb.edu/commcms/linguistics/faculty/mark.aronoff/files/publications/Competition%20and%20the%20Lexicon%20prepublication.pdf
• Aronoff, M. (2019). Competitors and alternants in linguistic morphology. En F. Rainer et al. (Eds.). Competition in inflection and word formation. Berlín: Springer Verlag. https://linguistics.stonybrook.edu/commcms/linguistics/faculty/mark.aronoff/files/Competitors%20and%20alternants.pdf
• Bade, N. y F. Schwarz. (2019). (In-)definites, (anti-)uniqueness, and uniqueness expectations, En A.K. Goel, C.M. Seifert, y C. Freksa (Eds.). Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 119-125. Montreal, QB: Cognitive Science Society. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11050-019-9149-7
• Bade, N. y F. Schwarz. (2021). New data on the competition between definites and indefinites, Proceedings of Experiments in Linguistic Meaning 1, 15-26.
• http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/ELM/article/view/4894
• Bauer, L., R. Lieber e I. Plag. (2013). Blocking, competition, and productivity. En L. Bauer, R. Lieber e I. Plag (Eds.). The Oxford reference guide to English morphology, pp. 568-582. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198747062.003.0026
• Bossi, M. (2021). N-effects are not-P-effects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 40, 425-445. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-021-09519-w
• Bresnan, J. (2001). Explaining morphosyntactic competition. In M. Baltin y Ch. Collins (Eds.), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory. pp. 11–44. Oxford: Blackwell. https://web.stanford.edu/~bresnan/handbook.pdf
• Buccola, B., M. Križ y E. Chemla. (2021). Conceptual alternatives. Competition in language and beyond. Linguistics and Philosophy 45, 265–291. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-021-09327-w
• Burzio, L. (1989). On the non-existence of disjoint reference principles. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 14, 3-27.
• https://lingbuzz.com/j/rgg/1989/burzio_rivista_1989.pdf
• Carminati, M. N. (2002). The processing of Italian subject pronouns. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Massachusetts.
• Charnavel, I. (2020). Logophoricity and locality: A view from French anaphors. Linguistic Inquiry 51/4, 671-723. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00349
• Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 1-22.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389052993655
• Degen, J. (2013). Alternatives in pragmatic reasoning. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Rochester. https://urresearch.rochester.edu/fileDownloadForInstitutionalItem.action?itemId=28156&itemFileId=143071
• Embick, D. (2008). Variation and morphosyntactic theory: Competition fractionated. Language and Linguistics Compass 2.1, 59-78.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00038.x
• Embick, D., J. Benz y L. Paparounas. (2021). Blocking effects. En P. Ackema, S. Bendjaballah, E. Bonet y A. Fábregas (Eds.). The Wiley Blackwell companion to morphology. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~embick/block-over-21.pdf
• Escandell Vidal, V. y M. Leonetti (2015). La interfaz sintaxis–pragmática. En Á. Gallego (Ed.), Perspectivas de sintaxis formal, pp. 569-603. Madrid: Akal.
• Fălăuş, A. (2013). Introduction: Alternatives in semantics and pragmatics. En A. Fălăuş (Ed.). Alternatives in semantics, pp.1-35. Londres: Palgrave Macmillan.
• https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01158558/document
• Farkas, D. y H. de Swart. (2010). The semantics and pragmatics of plurals. Semantics and Pragmatics 3, 1-54. doi: https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.3.6
• Filiaci, F., A. Sorace y M. Carreiras. (2013). Anaphoric biases of null and overt subjects in Italian and Spanish: a cross-linguistic comparison. Language and Cognitive Processes 29, 825-843. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.801502
• Fuente, I. de la (2015). Putting pronoun resolution in context: The role of syntax, semantics and pragmatics in pronoun interpretation. Tesis doctoral, Universidad París Diderot. https://theses.hal.science/tel-01535977/document
• Gause, G. F. (1934). The struggle for existence. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
• https://asantos.webs.ull.es/The%20Struggle%20for%20Existence.pdf
• Geurts, B. 2011. Quantity implicatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Girard, G. (1781). La justesse de la langue françoise ou les différentes significations des mots qui passent pour synonymes. (ed. M. G. Adamo (1999). París: Didier).
• Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. En P. Cole y J. Morgan (Eds.). Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3. Pp. 41-58. Nueva York: Academic Press,
• Grønn, A. y K. J. Saebø. (2012). A, the, another: A game of same and different. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 21, 75-95. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-011-9148-7
• Gundel, J. K. (2010): Reference and accessibility from a Givenness Hierarchy perspective. International Review of Pragmatics 2: 148-168.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/187731010X528322
• Gundel, J. K., N. Hedberg y R. Zacharski. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69, 274-307.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/416535
• Gundel, J.K. y N. Hedberg. (2016). Reference and cognitive status: scalar inference and typology. En M. J. Fernández-Vest y R. van Valin jr (Eds.), Information structure and spoken language in a cross-linguistic perspective, pp. 33-53. Berlín: Mouton De Gruyter. http://www.sfu.ca/~hedberg/Gundel_Hedberg_revised2_8_4_14.pdf
• Hardin, G. (1960). The Competitive Exclusion Principle. Science, 131(3409), 1292–1297.doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.131.3409.1292
• Hawkins, J. (1991). On (in)definite articles: implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27, 405-442.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700012731
• Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Massachusetts.
• https://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/jA2YTJmN/Heim%20Dissertation%20with%20Hyperlinks.pdf
• Heim, I. (1991). Artikel und Definitheit. En A. von Stechow y D. Wunderlich (Eds.), Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung, pp. 487–535. Berlín: De Gruyter. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110126969.7.487
• Heim, I. (2012). Definiteness and indefiniteness. En K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn y P. Portner (Eds.). Semantics, vol 2, pp. pp. 996-1025. Berlín: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110255072.996
• Hirschberg, J. (1985). A theory of scalar implicature. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Pennsylvania. https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI8603648/
• Horn, L. (1972): On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de California en Los Ángeles. https://linguistics.ucla.edu/images/stories/Horn.1972.pdf
• Horn, L. y B. Abbott (2012). : (In)definiteness and implicature. En W. Kabasenche et al. (Eds.), Reference and referring, pp. 325-355. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Jakobson, R. (1984). Russian and Slavic grammar (Studies 1931-1981). Berlín: Mouton.
• Katzir, R. (2008). Structural competition in grammar. Tesis doctoral, MIT.
• Kehler, A. y G. Ward. (2006). Referring expressions and conversational implicatures. En B. Birner y G. Ward (Eds.), Drawing the boundaries of meaning: Neo-gricean studies in pragmatics and semantics in honor of Lawrence R. Horn, pp. 183-200). Ámsterdam: John Benjamins. https://dedalvs.com/misc/kehler.pdf
• Krifka, M. (2008). Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55 (3-4), 243–276. doi: https://doi.org/10.1556/aling.55.2008.3-4.2
• Leonetti, M. (2014). On contrastive readings in the interpretation of NPs/DPs. En S. Chiriacescu (ed.): Proceedings of the VI NEREUS Workshop ‘Theoretical implications at the Syntax / Semantics interface in Romance’. Arbeitspapier 127, 99-116. Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270274587_On_contrastive_readings_in_the_interpretation_of_NPsDPs
• Leonetti, M. (2020). Referencia nominal y anáfora discursiva. En V. Escandell-Vidal, J. Amenós y A. Ahern (Eds.). Pragmática, pp. 145-165. Madrid: Akal.
• Leonetti, M. (2022). Topics and the interpretation of null subjects. En C. Gianollo, K. von Heusinger y M. Napoli (Eds.), Determiners and quantifiers. Functions, variation, and change, pp. 94-129. Leiden: Brill.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004473324_005
• Leonetti, M. y V. Escandell-Vidal. (2021). La estructura informativa. Preguntas frecuentes. En M. Leonetti y V. Escandell-Vidal (Eds.). La estructura informativa, pp. 15-181. Madrid: Visor.
• Levinson, S. (2000): Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Magri, G. (2009). A theory of individual-level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures, Natural Language Semantics 17, 245-297.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-009-9042-x
• Marty, P. (2018). An implicature-based approach to disjointness effects. En S. Maspong, B. Stefánsdóttir, K. Blake y F. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT 28), pp. 366-387.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v28i0.4421
• Matsumoto, Y. (1995). The conversational condition on Horn scales. Linguistics and Philosophy 18/1, 21-60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00984960
• Müller, G. y W. Sternefeld (2001). The rise of competition in syntax: a synopsis. En G, Müller y W. Sternefeld (Eds.). Competition in syntax, pp. 1-68. Berlín: De Gruyter. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110829068.1
• Nediger, W. (2017). Unifying structure-building in human language: The minimalist syntax of idioms. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Michigan. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/138471/wnediger_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• Nasta, A. (2015). The philosophy of generative linguistics [Book Review]. Philosophical Psychology 28 (1), 155-159
• Papadopoulou, D., E Peristeri, E. Plemenou. T. Marinis e I. Tsimpli. (2015). Pronoun ambiguity resolution in Greek: Evidence from monolingual adults and children, Lingua 155, 98-120. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.09.006
• Prince, A. y P. Smolensky. (1993). Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report 2.
• Rainer, F. (2016). Blocking. En Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.33
• Rainer, F., F. Gardani, W. U. Dressler y H. C. Luschützky (Eds.). (2019). Competition in inflection and word-formation. Dordrecht: Springer.
• Reinhart, T. (2006). Interface strategies: Optimal and costly computations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Repp, S. y K. Spalek (2021). The role of alternatives in language, Frontiers in Communication. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.682009
• Rohde, H. (2019). Pronoun interpretation and production. In C. Cummins, C. y N. Katsos (Eds.) The Oxford handbook of experimental semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~hrohde/papers/Rohde.2018.pdf
• Rohde, H. y C. Kurumada. (2018). Alternatives and inferences in the communication of meaning. Psychology of Learning and Motivation 68, pp. 215-261.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2018.08.012
• Rooth, M. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1, 75–116. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02342617
• Schlenker, P. (2005). Minimize restrictors! (Notes on definite descriptions, Condition C and epithets). En E. Buiry, C. Haitink y J. Maier (Eds.). Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 9, pp. 385-416. doi: https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2005.v9i0.776
• Sichel, I. y M. Wiltschko. (2021). The logic of person markedness: Evidence from pronominal competition. Language 97.1, 42-71.
• doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2021.0001
• Simonenko A. y A. Carlier (2020). Between demonstrative and definite: A grammar competition model of the evolution of French l-determiners. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 65(3). doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2020.14
• Singh, R. (2019). Context, content, and the occasional costs of implicature computation. Frontiers in Psychology 10, art. 2214. doi: https://doi/org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02214
• Sperber, D. y D. Wilson (1986/1995), Relevance. Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell (Trad. esp. La relevancia. Madrid: Visor, 1994)
• Strawson P. (1974). Subject and predicate in logic and grammar. Londres: Methuen.
• Tovena, L. M. y J. Jayez. (2006). Epistemic determiners. Journal of Semantics 23(3). 217–250. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffl002
• van Tiel, B., E. van Miltenburg, N. Zevakhina y B. Geurts. (2016). Scalar diversity. Journal of Semantics 33: 107-135. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffu017
• van Tiel, B., E. Pankratz y C. Sun. (2019). Scales and scalarity: Processing scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language 105, 427–441.
• doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.12.002
• van Tiel, B., E. Pankratz, P. Marty y C. Sun. (2019). Scalar inferences and cognitive load. En M. T. Espinal, E. Castroviejo, M. Leonetti, L. McNally y C. Real-Puigdollers (Eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 23, pp. 429–443. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. doi: https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2019.v23i2.622
• van Tiel, B. y E. Pankratz. (2021). Adjectival polarity and the processing of scalar inferences, Glossa 6(1): 32. doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1457
• Zacarías Ponce de León, R. (2016). Rivalidad entre esquemas de formación de palabras, México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
• Zamparelli, R. (2007). On singular existential quantifiers in Italian. En I. Comorovski y K. von Heusinger (Eds.). Existence: semantics and syntax, pp. 293–328. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6197-4_11
• Zufferey, S., J. Moeschler y A. Reboul (2019). Implicatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.