• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Saterfrisian
  • Afrikaans
Show all
38.5. Bibliographical notes
quickinfo

The semantic and syntactic literature on coordination is extensive. A concise review of the various syntactic approaches to coordination in the pre-generative period is given in Bakker (1968) and Dik (1968), and of the earlier generative approaches in Van Oirsouw (1987). Zamparelli (2011) provides a review of various semantic approaches to coordination, in particular the distinction between the distributive and collective reading of coordinated phrases (and plural definite noun phrases). More recent reviews of formal syntactic approaches to the internal structure of coordination can be found in Grootveld (1992/1994), Johannessen (1998: §3), Bredschneijder (1999), Progovac (2003), Zhang (2010), and De Vries (2017).

There seems to be little consensus on even the most basic questions about coordination. The position taken in our discussion is that coordination can target non-clausal constituents (VPs, NPs, APs, PPs, etc.), which was vigorously defended by Dik (1968). This position has been rejected by several researchers in the last decades: Van Oirsouw (1987), Goodall (1987: §2), Cremers (1993: §2), and to some extent Wilder (1997) have all argued for the more traditional view that such structures are derived from coordination of clauses and some form of forward conjunction reduction; cf. Zhang (2010: §3.5) for further references. Coordination has also received many formal syntactic analyses. The conventional analyses evolved from completely “flat” structures in Chomsky (1957:36) to “layered” (binary branching) structures in Thiersch (1993a), Munn (1993), Kayne (1994: §6), Johannessen (1998), and Zhang (2010). More innovative analyses include various forms of parallel and three-dimensional structures; cf. Goodall (1987), Grootveld (1992/1994), and G. de Vries (1992). The wide range of available syntactic analyses may reflect progress in formal linguistics, but it may also be due in part to the fact that coordination is special because it goes beyond “ordinary” sentence syntax.

References

  • Ackema, Peter. 2000. Botsende voegwoorden: een syntactisch OCP-effect. Nederlandse Taalkunde 5: 244-249.
  • Bakker, Dirk Miente. 1968. Samentrekking in Nederlandse syntactische groepen. Leiden University: PhD thesis.
  • Becker, Karl Ferdinand. 1832. Schulgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Frankfurt am Main.
  • Birner, Betty J. 2013. Introduction to pragmatics. Malden (USA)/Oxford (UK): Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Boogaart, Ronny. 2004. 'Meet het en je weet het': van gebod naar voorwaarde. In Taal in verandering, eds. Saskia Daalder et al., 23-36. Münster: Nodus Publikationen.
  • Boogaart, Ronny & Radolova Trnavac. 2004. Conditional imperatives in Dutch and Russian. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 2004, eds. Leonie Cornips and Jenny Doetjes, 25-35. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Borsley, Robert D. 2005. Against ConjP. Lingua 115: 461-482.
  • Bos, Gijsbertha F. 1962. The coordinative construction in modern Dutch. Lingua: 45-58.
  • Bos, Gijsbertha F. 1964. Het probleem van de samengestelde zin. Utrecht University: PhD thesis.
  • Bredschneijder, Martijn. 1999. Reeksvorming: initiële coördinatie in het Nederlands. Tabu 29: 1-20.
  • Broekhuis, Hans. 2008. Derivations and evaluations: object shift in the Germanic languages. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Broekhuis, Hans. 2011. A typology of clause structure. In Linguistic Variation Yearbook 2010, eds. Jeroen van Craenenbroeck and Johan Rooryck, 1-31. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Broekhuis, Hans. 2018. Asymmetrical coordination: Syntax/semantics and pragmatics. Nederlandse Taalkunde/Dutch Linguistics 23: 325-357.
  • Broekhuis, Hans. 2023. VO or OV: V to v or not to v. Linguistic Variation 23: 343-378.
  • Broekhuis, Hans & Norbert Corver. 2017. The expressive en maar-construction. In Crossroads semantics: computation, experiment and grammar, eds. Hilke Reckman et al., 305-325. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Chaves, Rui P. 2012. On the grammar of extraction and coordination. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30: 465-512.
  • Chierchia, Gennaro. 2004. Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In Structures and beyond: the cartography of syntactic structures, volume 3, ed. Adriana Belletti. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
  • Corbett, Greville G. 1983. Resolution rules: agreement in person, number, and gender. In Order, concord and constituency, eds. Gerald Gazdar et al., 175-206. Dordrecht: Foris publications.
  • Corbett, Greville G. 2000. Number. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Corver, Norbert. 1990. The syntax of left branch extractions. Tilburg University: PhD thesis.
  • Corver, Norbert. 2005. Approximative of zo as a diagnostic tool. In Organizing grammar. Linguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, eds. Hans Broekhuis et al. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Corver, Norbert. 2014. Recursing in Dutch. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 32: 423-457.
  • Corver, Norbert. 2015a. Interjections as structured root expressions. In Representing structure in phonology and syntax, eds. Marc van Oostendorp and Henk van Riemsdijk, 41-83. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Corver, Norbert. 2015b. (Un)boundedness across syntactic categories. Theoretical Linguistics: 151-165.
  • Cremers, Crit. 1993. On parsing coordination categorially. Leiden University: PhD thesis.
  • Cremers, Crit. 2001. Why pluralities don't mean a thing. In Quitte ou double sens. Articles sur l'ambiguïté offerts à Ronald Landheer, eds. Paul Boogaards et al., 33-43. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi B.V.
  • Culicover, Peter W. & Ray Jackendoff. 1997. Semantic subordination despite syntactic coordination. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 195-217.
  • De Groot, Albert W. 1949. Structurele syntaxis (2nd impression, 1965). Den Haag: Servire.
  • De Jong, Eveline D. 1979. Spreektaal. Woordfrequenties in gesproken Nederlands. Utrecht: Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema.
  • De Vries, Gertrud. 1992. On coordination and ellipsis. Tilburg University: PhD thesis.
  • De Vries, Mark. 2005. Coordination and syntactic hierarchy. Studia Linguistica 59: 83-105.
  • De Vries, Mark. 2006. The syntax of appositive relativization: on specifying coordination, false free relatives, and promotion. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 229-270.
  • De Vries, Mark. 2009. Specifying coordination: an investigation into the syntax of dislocation, extraposition and parenthesis. In Language and linguistics: emerging trends, ed. Cynthia R. Dreyer, 37-98. New York: Nova.
  • De Vries, Mark. 2017. Across-the-board phenomena. In The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax [2nd, revised edition], eds. Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk, 20-50. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley Blackwell.
  • De Vries, Mark & Herman Herringa. 2008. Congruentie met nevengeschikte subjecten: de invloed van distributiviteit. Tabu 37: 3-18.
  • Den Besten, Hans. 1983. On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. In On the formal nature of the Westgermania, ed. Werner Abraham, 47–131. Amsterdam: Benjamins. [Reprinted in Den Besten (1989), Studies in West Germanic syntax. Amsterdam: Rodopi.].
  • Den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Either-float and the syntax of co-or-dination. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 24: 689-749.
  • Dik, Simon C. 1968. Coordination: its implications for the theory of general linguistics. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
  • Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of functional grammar. Part 2: complex and derived constructions, 2nd, revised edition.
  • Elffers-van Ketel, Els. 1991. The historiography of grammatical concepts: 19th and 20th-century changes in the subject-predicate conception and the problem of their historical reconstruction. University of Amsterdam: PhD thesis.
  • Féry, Caroline & Gerrit Kentner. 2010. The prosody of embedded coordinations in German and Hindi. In Proceedings of speech prosody, 5th International Conference, Chicago.
  • Fortuin, Egbert & Ronny Boogaart. 2009. Imperative as conditional: from constructional to compositional semantics. Cognitive Linguistics 20: 641-673.
  • Gamut, L.F.T. 1991. Logic, language, and meaning, volume I: introduction to logic. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12: 155-184.
  • Goodall, Grant. 1987. Parallel structures in syntax. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Grice, Herbert Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Speech acts: Syntax and Semantics 3, eds. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41-58. New York: Academic Press.
  • Grootveld, Marjan. 1992. On the representation of coordination. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 1992, eds. Reineke Bok-Bennema and Roeland Van Hout, 61-73. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Grootveld, Marjan. 1994. Parsing coordination generatively. Leiden University/HIL: PhD thesis.
  • Haeseryn, Walter et al. 1997. Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunst, 2nd, revised edition. Groningen: Nijhoff.
  • Haslinger, Irene. 2007. The syntactic location of events. Aspects of verbal complementation in Dutch. Tilburg University: PhD thesis.
  • Hendriks, Petra. 2001a. Initial coordination and the law of coordination of likes. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 2001, eds. Ton Van der Wouden and Hans Broekhuis, 127-138. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Hendriks, Petra. 2001b. Either as a focus particle. In University of Groningen Artifical Intelligence prepublications. Groningen.
  • Hendriks, Petra. 2004. Either, both and neither in coordinate structures. In The composition of meaning: from lexeme to discourse, eds. Alice ter Meulen and Werner Abraham, 115-138. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Herringa, Herman & Mark De Vries. 2008. Enkelvoudige congruentie bij nevenschikking met en: puzzels met betrekking to massa's en demonstratieven. Tabu 37: 19-38.
  • Hoeksema, Jack. 1983. Plurality and conjunction. In Studies in modeltheoretic semantics, ed. Alice Ter Meulen, 63-83. Dordrecht: Foris.
  • Hoeksema, Jack. 1989. Only in Dutch: a comparison of three adverbs. Penn Review of Linguistics 13: 106-121.
  • Hoekstra, Eric. 1992. Of en dat nader bekeken. De Nieuwe Taalgids 85: 441-445.
  • Höhle, Tilman N. 1990. Assumptions about asymmetric coordination in German. In Grammar in progress. GLOW essays for Henk van Riemsdijk, eds. Joan Mascaró and Marina Nespor, 221-235. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
  • Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum (eds). 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 1998. Coordination. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 2005. The syntax of correlative adverbs. Lingua 115: 419-443.
  • Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Kraak, Albert & Wim Klooster. 1968. Syntaxis. Culemborg: Stam/Robijns.
  • Lagerwerf, Luuk. 1998. Causal connectives have presuppositions. Effects on coherence and discourse structure. Tilburg University: PhD thesis.
  • Larson, Richard K. 1985. On the syntax of disjunction scope. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3: 218-264.
  • Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, Ma/London: MIT Press.
  • Malepaard, Joop. 2007. Inverse disjuncties. Voortgang. Jaarboek voor de Neerlandistiek XXV: 311-360.
  • Malepaard, Joop. 2008. Anticipatie en versnelde successie als referentie van inverse disjuncties met nog niet en nog niet eens. Voortgang. Jaarboek voor de Neerlandistiek XXVI: 253-297.
  • Munn, Alan B. 1993. Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures. University of Maryland: PhD thesis.
  • Neijt, Anneke. 1979. Gapping. A contribution to sentence grammar. Utrecht University: PhD thesis.
  • Newmeyer, Frederick J. 1983. Grammatical theory. Its limits and possibilities. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
  • Overdiep, Gerrit S. 1937. Stilistische grammatica van het moderne Nederlandsch. Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink.
  • Paardekooper, P.C. 1986. Beknopte ABN-syntaksis, 7th, revised edition. Eindhoven: P.C. Paardekooper.
  • Postma, Gertjan. 1995. Zero semantics. A study of the syntactic conception of quantificational meaning. Leiden University: PhD thesis.
  • Proeme, Henk. 1984. Over de Nederlandse imperativus. Forum der Letteren 25: 241-258.
  • Progovac, Ljiljana. 2003. Structure for coordination. In The second Glot International state-of-the-article book, eds. Lisa Cheng and Rint Sybesma, 241-287. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar. Handbook of generative grammar, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 281-337. Dordrecht/Boston/Londen: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Ross, John. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club [Reprinted as Infinite syntax!, Ablex, Norwood New Jersey, 1986].
  • Schachter, Paul. 1977. Constraints on coordination. Language 53: 86-103.
  • Schmerling, Susan F. 1975. Asymmetric conjunction and rules of conversation. In Syntax and semantics, volume 3: speech acts, eds. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 211-231. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
  • Schwarz, Bernard. 1999. On the syntax of either ... or ... Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17: 339-370.
  • Seuren, Lucas. 2019. Dit is het einde van de zin, of niet? Blog: https://neerlandistiek.nl/2019/12/dit-is-het-einde-van-de-zin-of-niet/.
  • Tarski, Alfred. 1995. Introduction to logic and to the methodology of deductive sciences. New York: Dover Publications [Reprint of the second, revised edition published in 1946 by Oxford University Press].
  • Terwey, Tijs. 1892. Over de zoogenaamde bijzinnen met of, die met een ontkennenden hoofdzin in verband staan. Taal en Letteren 2: 76-91.
  • Thiersch, Craig. 1993a. On the formal properties of constituent coordination. Glow Newsletter 30: 70-71.
  • Thiersch, Craig. 1993b. Some remarks on asymmetrical coordination. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 1993, eds. Frank Drijkoningen and Kees Hengeveld, 141-152. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Uit den Boogaart, Pieter C. 1975. Woordfrequenties in geschreven en gesproken Nederlands. Utrecht: Oosthoek, Scheltema & Holkema.
  • Van Canegem-Ardijns, Ingrid & William Van Belle. 2010. Wanneer of geen en is. Asymmetrische exclusieve disjuncties in het Nederlands. Nederlandse Taalkunde 15: 54-78.
  • Van den Toorn, Maarten C. 1972. Balansschikking en disjunctie. De Nieuwe Taalgids 65: 104-123.
  • Van der Heijden, Emmeke. 1999. Tussen nevenschikking en onderschikking. Een onderzoek naar verschillende vormen van verbinding in het Nederlands. University of Nijmegen: PhD thesis.
  • Van der Wouden, Ton & Frans Zwarts. 2017. Whether you like it or not, this paper is about or not. In Crossroads semantics: computation, experiment and grammar, eds. Hilke Reckman et al., 249-261. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Van Hauwermeiren, Paul. 1973. Enkele opmerkingen bij M.C. van den Toorn: Balansschikking en disjunctie. De Nieuwe Taalgids 66: 148-150.
  • Van Koppen, Marjo. 2005. One probe - two goals: aspects of agreement in Dutch dialects. Leiden University: PhD thesis.
  • Van Oirsouw, Robert S. 1987. The syntax of coordination. London/New York/Sidney: Croom Helm.
  • Van Zonneveld, Ron. 1992. Ongelijke nevenschikking en SGF. Tabu 22: 153-170.
  • Van Zonneveld, Ron. 1992. X-bar syntax and coordination. In Language and Cognition 2, eds. Dicky Gilbers and Sietze Looyinga. Groningen: University of Groningen.
  • Verhagen, Arie. 2000. Achter het Nederlands. Over interacties tussen taal en achtergrondcognitie. Inaugural address: Leiden University.
  • Verhagen, Arie. 2005. Constructions of intersubjectivity: discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Wagner, Michael. 2010. Prosody and recursion in coordinate structures and beyond. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 28: 183-237.
  • Welschen, Ad. 1999. Duale syntaxis en polaire contractie. Negatief gebonden of-constructies in het Nederlands. Free University Amsterdam: PhD thesis.
  • Wilder, Chris. 1997. Some properties of ellipsis in coordination. In Studies on universal grammar and typological variation, eds. Artemis Alexiadou and T. Alan Hall, 50-107. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Williams, Edwin. 1978. Across-the-board rule application. Linguistic Inquiry 9: 31-43.
  • Winter, Yoad. 2001a. Flexible principles in Boolean semantics. The interpretation of coordination, plurality, and scope in natural language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Winter, Yoad. 2001b. Plural predication and the strongest meaning hypothesis. Journal of Semantics 18: 333-365.
  • Zamparelli, Roberto. 2011. Coordination. In Semantics. An international handbook of natural language meaning [Volume 2], eds. Klaus von Heusinger et al., 1713-1741. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Zhang, Niina Ning. 2010. Coordination in syntax. Cambridge (UK)/New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 1995. Review of Coordination: a minimalist approach by Janne Bondi Johannessen. GLOT International 1.
  • Zwarts, Frans. 1981. Negatief polaire uitdrukkingen I. GLOT 4: 35-132. [S. Barbiers et al. (eds.), De Nederlandse taalkunde in honderd artikelen, http://www.dbnl.org/tekst/zwar007nega01_01/].
  • readmore
    References:
      report errorprintcite