[Achimova, Asya, Peter Staroverov, Viviane Déprez & Julien Musolino. 2015. Pair-list answers in naïve speakers and professional linguists. In Peter Arkadiev, Ivan Kapitonov, Yury Lander, Ekaterina Rakhilina & Sergei Tatevosov (eds.), Donum semanticum: Opera linguistica et logica in honorem Barbarae Partee a discipulis amicisque Rossicis oblata, 21–34. Moscow: Languages of Slavic Culture.]Search in Google Scholar
[Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2013. Possession and ownership: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Possession and ownership: A cross-linguistic typology, 1–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660223.003.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Barker, Chris. 1995. Possessive descriptions. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.]Search in Google Scholar
[Beghelli, Filippo & Tim Stowell. 1997. Distributivity and negation: The syntax of each and every. In Anna Szabolcsi (ed.), Ways of scope taking, 71–107. Dordrecht: Kluwer Publications.10.1007/978-94-011-5814-5_3]Search in Google Scholar
[Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad & Randi Reppen. 1998. Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511804489]Search in Google Scholar
[Chappell, Hilary & William McGregor.1989. Alienability, inalienability and nominal classification. In Kira Hall, Michael Meacham & Richard Shapiro (eds.), Proceeding of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 24–36. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.10.3765/bls.v15i0.1734]Search in Google Scholar
[Chappell, Hilary & William McGregor. 1996. Prolegomena to a theory of inalienability. In Hilary Chappell & William McGregor (eds.), The grammar of inalienability: A typological perspective on body part terms and the part-whole relation, 3–30. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110822137.3]Search in Google Scholar
[Cheng, Lisa. 1995. On dou-quantification. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 4(3). 197–234.10.1007/BF01731509]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Cheng, Lisa & Elizabeth Ritter. 1988. A small clause analysis of inalienable possession in Mandarin and French. In James Blevins & Juli Carter (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Northeast Linguistic Society (NELS 18), 65–78. Amherst, MA: GLSA.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cheng, Lisa & Rint Sybesma. 1999. Bare and not-so-bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry 30(4). 509–542.10.1162/002438999554192]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Reference to kinds across language. Natural Language Semantics 6(4). 339–405.10.1023/A:1008324218506]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Chierchia, Gennaro. 2015. How universal is the mass/count distinction? Three grammars of counting. In Audrey Li, Andrew Simpson & Wei-Tien Dylan Tsai (eds.), Chinese syntax in a cross-linguistic perspective, 147–178. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945658.003.0006]Search in Google Scholar
[Diem, Werner. 1986. Alienable und inalienable possession im Semitischen. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 136(2). 227–291.]Search in Google Scholar
[Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites (Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 20). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dikken, Marcel den. 2011. Phi-feature inflection and agreement: An introduction. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29(4). 857–874.10.1007/s11049-011-9156-y]Search in Google Scholar
[Dragunov, Aleksandr A. 1961. Untersuchungen zur Grammatik der Modernen Chinesischen Sprache, trans. by Wolfgang Lippert. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.]Search in Google Scholar
[Duanmu, San. 2000. The phonology of standard Chinese. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Duanmu, San. 2012. Word-length preferences in Chinese: A corpus study. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 21(1). 89–114.10.1007/s10831-011-9087-y]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Fillmore, Charles. 1992. “Corpus linguistics” vs. “computer-aided armchair linguistics”. In Jan Svartvik (ed.), Directions in corpus linguistics: Proceedings from a 1991 Nobel symposium on corpus linguistics, 35–66. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.]Search in Google Scholar
[Greenberg, Joseph (ed.). 1963. Universals of Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Guéron, Jacqueline. 1985. Inalienable possession, PRO-inclusion and lexical chains. In Jacqueline Guéron, Hans-Georg Obenauer & Jean-Yves Pollock (eds.), Grammatical representation, 43–86. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783112328064-004]Search in Google Scholar
[Guéron, Jacqueline. 2006. Inalienable possession. In Martin Everaert & Henk van Rienmsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, 589–638. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.10.1002/9780470996591.ch35]Search in Google Scholar
[Haiman, John. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language 59(4). 781–819.10.2307/413373]Search in Google Scholar
[Hatcher, Anna Granville. 1944. Il tend les mains vs. il tend ses mains. Studies in Philology 41(3). 457–481.]Search in Google Scholar
[Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession: Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511581908]Search in Google Scholar
[Hoffmann, Sebastian, Stefan Evert, Nicholas Smith, David Y. W. Lee & Ylva Berglund Prytz. 2008. Corpus linguistics with BNCWeb: A practical guide. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.]Search in Google Scholar
[Huang, James, Audrey Li & Yafei Li. 2009. The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Iljic, Robert. 1994. Quantification in Mandarin Chinese: Two markers of plurality. Linguistics 32(1). 91–116.10.1515/ling.1994.32.1.91]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Joh, Yoon-kyoung. 2008. Plurality and distributivity. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania dissertation.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kayne, Richard. 1975. French syntax: The transformational cycle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kim, Young-Joo. 1990. The syntax and semantics of Korean case: The interaction between lexical and syntactic levels of representation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University dissertation.]Search in Google Scholar
[Klimov, Georgij. 1977. Tipologija Jazykov Aktivnogo Stroja [The typology of active languages]. Moscow: Nauka.]Search in Google Scholar
[Klimov, Georgij. 1983. Principy Kontensivnoj Tipologii [Principles of contentive typology]. Moscow: Nausea.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kratzer, Angelika. 1995. Stage-level and individual-level predicates. In Gregory N. Carlson & Francis Jeffry Pelletier (eds.), The generic book, 125–175. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Krifka, Manfred. 1995. Common nouns: A contrastive analysis of Chinese and English. In Gregory N. Carlson & Francis Jeffry Pelletier (eds.), The generic book, 398–412. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lévy-Bruhl, Lucien. 1914. L’expression de la possession dans les langues mélanésiennes. Mémoires de la Société de linguistique de Paris 19(2). 96–104.]Search in Google Scholar
[Li, Charles & Sandra Thompson. 1989. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley, CA: The University of California Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Liao, Wei-wen Roger & Yuyun Wang. 2015. The same difference: Comparative syntax-semantics of English same and Chinese tong/xiang-tong. In Audrey Li, Andrew Simpson & Dylan Tsai (eds.), Chinese syntax in a cross-linguistic perspective, 128–147. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945658.003.0005]Search in Google Scholar
[Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1983. A grammar of Manam. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Liu, Feng-hsi. 2014. Quantification and the count-mass distinction in Mandarin Chinese. In C.-T. James Huang & Feng-his Liu (eds.), Peaches and plums, 153–180. Taipei: Academia Sinica.]Search in Google Scholar
[Liu, Haiyong. 2002. The co-occurrences of Dou with DPs and Yiwencis in Mandarin Chinese. In Liu Feng-hsi (ed.), Proceedings of the 14th North American Conference on Chinese Linguisitcs (NACCL-14), 250–267. Los Angeles: GSIL Publications, University of Southern California.]Search in Google Scholar
[Longobardi, Giuseppe. 1993. Reference and names: A theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 25(4). 609–655.]Search in Google Scholar
[Maling, Joan & Soowon Kim. 1992. Case assignment in the inalienable possession construction in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1(1). 37–68.10.1007/BF00129573]Search in Google Scholar
[Michael, Lev. 2013. Possession in Nanti. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Possession and ownership: A cross-linguistic typology, 149–166. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660223.003.0006]Search in Google Scholar
[Modini, Paul. 1981. Inalienable possession and the “double subject” constructions in East Asian. Cahiers de Linguistique – Asie Orientale 9(1). 5–15.10.3406/clao.1981.1086]Search in Google Scholar
[Nevins, Andrew & Neil Myler. 2014. A brown-eyed girl. In Carson T. Schütze & Linnaea Stockall (eds.), Connectedness: Paper by and for Sarah VanWagenen (UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 18), 243–258. Los Angeles: UCLA Linguistics Department.]Search in Google Scholar
[Nichols, Johanna. 1988. On alienable and inalienable possession. In William Shipley (ed.), In honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American Linguistics, 557–609. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110852387.557]Search in Google Scholar
[Nichols, Johanna. 1992. Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226580593.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Schlüter, Norbert. 2006. How reliable are the results? Comparing corpus-based studies of the present perfect. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 54(2). 135–148.10.1515/zaa-2006-0205]Search in Google Scholar
[Schwarzschild, Roger. 2011. Stubborn distributivity, multiparticipant nouns and the count/mass distinction. In Suzi Lima, Kevin Mullin & Brian Smith (eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, vol. 2, 661–678. Amherst, MA: GLSA.]Search in Google Scholar
[Teng, Shou-hsin. 1974. Double nominatives in Chinese. Language 50(3). 455–473.10.2307/412218]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Tsunoda, Tasaku. 1996. The possession cline in Japanese and other languages. In Hilary Chappell & William McGregor (eds.), The grammar of inalienability: A typological perspective on body part terms and the part-whole relation, 565–632. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110822137.565]Search in Google Scholar
[Vergnaud, Jean-Roger & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta. 1992. The definite determiner and the inalienable constructions in French and English. Linguistic Inquiry 23(4). 595–652.]Search in Google Scholar
[Zhu, Dexi. 1962. Shuo de [On ‘de’]. Zhongguo Yuwen [Studies of the Chinese language] 12. 1–15.]Search in Google Scholar
[Zhu, Dexi. 1981. Yufa jiangyi [Lectures on Chinese grammar]. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan [The commercial press].]Search in Google Scholar
