LI 200 1 9 9

(2) (- .,)

2 0 0 LI 200

LI 200 2.01

2 0 2 LI 200

LI 200 2 0 3

2 0 4 k1 2 0 0

LI 200 2 0 5

LI 200

LI 200 2 0 7

2 0 8 LI 200

(31) I hclieve John to be here.

L I 2 0 0 2 0 9

2 1 0 L I 200

LI 200 2 1 1

(44)

N P

AV N P

2 1 2 LI 200

(48)

A%PANP ‘N V Adi D

I /-lJohn’s

N P P is

j p.N P

nice

pictureI I

Of himself

(49)

/+----lvpI\

N P N V N P

IJohn’s

. I IN likes himself

Imother

LI 200 2 1 3

(51) fl. John bclievca himwIt to llkc Jaw.

“II. John believes him to like Jane.

Fl. John, believes that he, likes Jane.

%*John, believes that hrmself, likes Jane

9. ~~~sa,ba~~~-dls~l,~oElr~u

9 wdu,adl.s-d1& LO9 ,%OElL9U

2 1 4 LI 200

(54) n.*John, thinks John, lihe\ Jane.

“u. John, thinks hc, likes .larlc.

215LI 200

2 1 6 LI 200

L I 2 0 0 2 1 7

2 1 8 LI 200

LI 200 2 1 9

(70) * John asked Mary about each other

2 2 0 LI 2 0 0

LI 200 221

2 2 2 L I 200

L I 200 2 2 3

Anderson, M. 1979. Noun \‘/J~;Is~ Structure. Doctoral dissertation. University of Connecticut.Aoun, 5.1979. On government, case marking, and clitic placement. mimeographed, Massa-

chusetts Institute of Technolgy.1982. The Formal Nature of Anaphoric Relations. Doctoral dissertation, Massa-

chusetts Institute of Technology.1986. Generalized Binding. Dordrecht, Foris.

Aoun, .I.. N. I [orn\tcin, and I>. Sportiche. 19x1. Some aqxct~ ot wide scc~?c quantification..lot~rml of Linp~iafic Kescarch I .?I.

Aoun, J. and D. Sportiche. 19X3. On the formal theory of government. 7;he LinguisticReview 2.3.Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. The Hague, Mouton and Company.

1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.1970. Remarks on Nominalization. Readings in English Transformational

Grammar. ed. by R. Jacob and P. Rosenbaum. Waltham, MA, Ginn and Company.1973. Conditions on transformation. A Festschrift for Morris Hal/e. ed. by S.

Anderson and P. Kiparsky. New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.1976. Conditions on rules of grammar. Linguistic Analysis 2.41977. On wh- movement.Forma/ Syntax. ed. by P.W. Culicover, T. Wasow, and A.

Akamajian. New York, Academic Press.1980. On binding. Linguistic Inquiry 11.119X2. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and

Binding. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.1984. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht, Foris.1986a. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin. and Use. New York, Praeger.lYX6b. Barriers. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. and H. Lasnik. 1977. Filters and control. Linguistic Inquiry 8.3.

Davis, L. 1984. Arguments and Expletives. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Connecticut.Fillmore. C. 1975. The future of semantics. The Scope of American Linguistics. ed. by R.

Austeritz. Amsterdam, Peter de Ridder Press.Freidin, R. 197X. Cyclicity and the theory of grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 9.4.Freidin, R., and H. Lasnik. 1981. Disjoint reference and wh-trace. Ljngujstjc Inquiry 12.1.

Higginbotham, J. 19XOa. Pronouns and bound variables. Lingujstjc Inquiry 11.4.I9SOb. Anaphora and GB: some preliminary remarks. I’roc,cetlirlps to t/lc Tcar,t/I

Annaul Meeting of NELS. ed. by J. Jensen. Ottawa, University of Otawa.19X3. Logical form, binding, and nominals. Linguistic Inquiry 14.3.19%. On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16.4.

Hackett, C.F.1958. A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York, Macmillan.Jackendoff. R. 1977. Constraint on phrase structure rules. Forma/ Syntax. cd, by P.W.

Culicover, T. Wasow, and A. Akamajian. New York, Academic Press.Langacker, R. 1969. On pronominalization and the chain of command. Modern Sfudjes jn

English. ed. by D. Reibel and S. Schane. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.Lasnik, H. 1976. Remarks on coreference. Linguistic Analysis 2.1.

1981. On two recent treatments of disjoint reference. Journal of LinguisticResearch I .4.

2 2 4 LI 200

1985. A note on illicit NP movement. Linguistic Inquiry 16.3.Lasnik, H.. and R. Ficngo. 1974. Complement object deletion. Linguistic Inquiry 5.4.Lasnik. H.. and R. Freidin. IYHI. Core grammar, Case theory. and markedness. Theory of

Mr~rkcdness in Generative Grammar. cd. by A. Balletti. A. Brandi, and L. Rizzi,Piss. Scuola Normale Superiorc.

Lasnik. H., and M. Saito. 1YX4. On the nature of proper govcrnmcnt. Lifl~uislic~nyuiry 15.2.Lasnik, H. and J. Uriagereka. 988. A Course in GE Syntas. Cambridge MA, MIT Press.May, R. 1977. The Grammar ofOuantific;,fion. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute

of Technology.lY7Y. Must Comp-to Comp movement he stipulated? Linguistic Inquiry 10.4.

hlorl(allxtt;. M. I W-l. .\t/c,, H;/,tl;/+: O/I !/IL. I/~te//,ri~/;//;~,/, <>I I’rc~o~mr. I>oclor;~l dl\\crl;ll!c,n.Massachusetts Institute of Technoloy.

Pesetsky. D. 1YXZa. Paths and Categories. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology.

lY82b. Complentizer-trace phenomena and the nomiative island constraint. TheLinguistic Review 1.3.

Reinhart, T. 1976. The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora. Doctoral Dissertation. MassachusettsInstitute of Tqchnology.

Stowell, T. 1981. Origins ofPhrase Structure. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology.

W;lrotam~~~lkhh~~~lit. lJ. lYX3. Suhjcctlv;lli~ltic,n in I‘hai. ~;f/l~~l~/~~lJ~l/J~~er?, 11 Unr\cr.\il\ ./~wrn;r/ 9. I.1988. There are no prepositions in Thai. Paper presented at the 21st. International

Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. Lund, Sweden, LundUniversity.

1989. Exclusive anaphor in Thai. Paper presented at the 22nd International Con-ference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. Honolulu, HI, University ofHawaii.

LI 200 225