On the quantified determiner phrase and quantifier float in Modern Standard Arabic

References

• Albirni, A. (2016). Modern Arabic Sociolinguistics: Diglossia, variation, codeswitching, attitudes and identity. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315683737
   Google Scholar
• Al Khalaf, E. (2019). Floating quantifiers are autonomous phrases: A movement analysis. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 4(1), 89, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benmamoun, E. (1999). The syntax of quantifiers and quantifier float. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(4), 621–642. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 1–52). MIT.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389052993655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hornstein, N. (2001). Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Kayne, R. (1975). French syntax: The transformational cycle. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kayne, R. (1981). On certain differences between French and English. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 349–371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayne, R. (1989). Facets of romance past participle agreement. In P. Beninca (Ed.), Dialect variation and the theory of grammar (pp. 85–103). Foris. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110869255-005
   Google Scholar
• Koopman, H., & Sportiche, D. (1991). The position of subjects. Lingua, 85(2–3), 211–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(91)90022-W
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lacerda, R. (2016). Rebel without a case: Quantifier floating in Brazilian Portuguese and Spanish. In M. A. Kato & F. Ordóñez (Eds.), Morphosyntax of Portuguese and Spanish in Latin America (pp. 78–106). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190465889.003.0004
   Google Scholar
• McKee, C., & McDaniel, D. (2001). Resumptive pronouns in English relative clauses’. Language Acquisition, 9(2), 113–156. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327817LA0902_01
   Google Scholar
• Musabhien, M. (2008). Case, Agreement and Movement in Arabic: A Minimalist Approach [ Doctoral Dissertation]. Newcastle University.
   Google Scholar
• Ott, D. (2011). Local instability: The syntax of split topics. Harvard University dissertation.
   Google Scholar
• Ott, D. (2012). Local instability: Split topicalization and quantifier float in German. de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110290950
   Google Scholar
• Ott, D. (2015). Symmetric merge and local instability: Evidence from split topics. Syntax, 18(2), 157–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12027
   Google Scholar
• Pesetsky, D. (1997). Optimality theory and syntax: Movement and pronunciation. In D. Archangeli & T. Donald (Eds.), Optimality theory: An overview (pp. 134–170). Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Pesetsky, D. (1998). Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation. In B. Pilar, F. Daniel, H. P. M. Martha, & P. David (Eds.), Is the best good enough? (pp. 337–383). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shlonsky, U. (1991a). Quantifier phrases and quantifier float. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS), Montréal, Université du Québec. Amherst, MA: GLSA, 21, 337–350.
   Google Scholar
• Shlonsky, U. (1991b). Quantifiers as functional heads: A study of quantifier float in Hebrew. Lingua, 84(2–3), 159–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(91)90069-H
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shlonsky, U. (1992). Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry, 23(33), 443–468.
   Google Scholar
• Sportiche, D. (1988). A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure’. Linguistic Inquiry, 19(3), 425–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stowell, T. (2013). Binominal each: A DP that may not be. In K.-H. Gil, S. Harlow, & G. Tsoulas (Eds.), Strategies of quantification (pp. 260–294). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199692439.003.0012
   Google Scholar