References
- Dehé, N. 2007. ‘The relation between syntactic and prosodic parenthesis’ in Parentheticals (Linguistikaktuell/ Linguistics today, 106.). N. Dehé and Y. Kavalova (eds.). Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 261-284.
- Dehé, N. and A. Wichmann. 2010. ‘The multifunctionality of epistemic parentheticals in discourse - Prosodic cues to the semantic-pragmatic boundary’ in Functions of Language 17/1, pp 1-28.
- Emonds, Joseph .1970. Root and Structure Preserving Transformations, Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.
- Ernst, Th. B. 2002. The Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Nespor, M. and I. Vogel. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
- Marković, M. and T. Milićev (forthcoming). ‘Clitic placement and the properties of the Intonational Phrase in Serbian’. Proceedings of SinFonIJA 3, University of Novi Sad.
- Pierrehumbert, J. and J. Hirschberg. 1990. ‘The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse’ in Intentions in communication. Ph. R. Cohen, J. Morgan and M. E. Pollack (eds.). Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, pp. 271-311.
- Potts, Ch. 2003. The Logic of Conventional Implicatures, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Linguistics, University of California at Santa Cruz.
- Selkirk, E. 1984. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
- Selkirk, E. 1986. ‘On derived domains in sentence phonology’. Phonology 3, pp. 371-405.
- Selkirk, E. 1995. ‘Sentence prosody: intonation, stress and phrasing’ in The Handbook of Phonological Theory. John Goldsmith (ed.). London: Blackwell.
- Selkirk, E. 2005. ‘Comments on the Intonational Phrasing in English’ in Prosodies. S. Frota, M. Vigario and M. JoaoFreitas (eds.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 11-58.