This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Bibliography
Anderson, S.: 1971, ‘On the Role of Deep Structure in Semantic Interpretation’,Foundations of Language 7, 387.
Bloom, L.: 1970, ‘Why Not Pivot Grammar?’,Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, February, 1970.
Bresnan, J.: 1970, ‘On Complementizers: Towards a Syntactic Theory of Complement Types’,Foundations of Language 6, 297–321.
Brown, R.: 1970, ‘The First Sentences of Child and Chimpanzee’, inPyscholinguistics, Free Press, New York.
Chomsky, N.: 1959, ‘Review of Skinner’,Language 35.
Chomsky, N.: 1965,Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Chomsky, N.: 1966,Cartesian Linguistics, Harper and Row, New York.
Chomsky, N.: 1967, ‘Recent Contributions to the Theory of Innate Ideas’, inBoston Studies in the Philosophy of Science vol.III, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Chomsky, N.: 1971, ‘Conditions on Transformations’, to appear in S. Anderson and P. Kiparsky (eds.),Festschrift for Morris Halle.
Emonds, J.: 1970,Root and Structure Preserving Transformations, unpublished MIT dissertation.
Hankamer, J.: 1973, ‘Unacceptable Ambiguity’,Linguistic Inquiry 4, 17–68.
Jackendoff, R.: 1972,Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Jakobson, R.: 1941,Child Language, Aphasia, and Phonological Universals (transl. from the German by A. Keiler (1968)), Mouton, The Hague.
Lakoff, G.: 1973, ‘Deep Language’, Letter to theNew York Review of Books XX, 1.
McCawley, J.: 1968, ‘The Role of Semantics in a Grammar’, in E. Bach and R. Harms (eds.),Universals in Linguistic Theory, Holt, Rinehart, New York.
McNeill, D.: 1970a,The Acquisition of Language, Harper and Row, New York.
McNeill, D.: 1970b, ‘Explaining Linguistic Universals’, in Morton (1970).
McNeill, D.: 1971, ‘The Capacity for the Ontogenesis of Grammar’, in Slobin (1971b).
McNeill, D.: 1972, ‘Some Signs of Language’, unpublished paper, Psycholinguistics Laboratory, Univ. of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.
Morton, J. (ed.): 1970,Biological and Social Factors in Psycholinguistics, Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana, Ill.
Ploog, D. and Melnechuk, T.: 1971, ‘Are Apes Capable of Language?’Neurosciences Research Program Bulletin 9, No. 5.
Postal, P.: 1972, ‘The Best Theory’, in S. Peters (ed.),Goals of Linguistic Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Quine, W. V. O.: 1960,Word and Object, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Quine, W. V. O.: 1969a, ‘Linguistics and Philosophy’, in S. Hook (ed.),Language and Philosophy, NYU Press, New York.
Quine, W. V. O.: 1969b, ‘Replies’, inWords and Objections, ed. by D. Davidson and J. Hintikka, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 306–307.
Quine, W. V. O.: 1969b, ‘Replies’, in D. Davidson and J. Hintikka (eds.),Words and Objections, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 306–307.
Rosemont, H.: 1974, ‘On Representing Abstractions in Archaic Chinese’,Philosophy East and West 24 (1974), No. 1.
Ross, J. R.: 1967,Constraints on Variables in Syntax, unpublished dissertation.
Schlesinger, I. M.: 1970, ‘The Grammar of Sign Language and the Problems of Language Universals’, in Morton (1970).
Schlesinger, I. M.: 1971, ‘Production of Utterances and Language Acquisition’, in Slobin (1971b).
Sinclair de Zwart, H.: 1970, ‘Sensorimotor Action Schemes as a Condition of the Acquisition of Syntax’, in R. Huxley and E. Ingram (eds.),Mechanisms of Language Development, Academic Press, New York and London.
Slobin, D.: 1971a, ‘Cognitive Prerequisites for the Development of Grammar’, in W. O. Dingwall (ed.),A Survey of Linguistic Science, Univ. of Maryland Linguistics Program, College Park, Maryland.
Slobin, D. (ed.): 1971b,The Ontogenesis of Grammar, Academic Press, New York and London.
van Lawick-Goodall, J.: 1971,In the Shadow of Man, Dell, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This is a radically revised version of a paper entitled ‘Grammatical Relations and the Innateness Hypothesis’. I received many comments on that paper which were helpful in the preparation of this one. I am grateful for their help to the following people: Adrian Akmajian, Pamela Bricker, Kenneth Hale, Eric Leskowitz, David McNeill, Thomas Roeper, and Neil Stillings. I am especially indebted to Henry Rosemont, Jr., without whose encouragement and suggestions this paper would never have been written. All errors are of course solely my responsibility.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wasow, T. The innateness hypothesis and grammatical relations. Synthese 26, 38–56 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00869755
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00869755