Abstract The question of whether differentially marked objects require raising is not a simple one for languages like Romanian. Kalin and Weisser (2019) use asymmetric coordination involving marked and unmarked objects to support the hypothesis that both classes (can) share the same position. Here we point out numerous complications in the data; crucially, it cannot be confirmed that asymmetric coordination applies at the DP level in Romanian. This raises doubts about the reliability of asymmetric coordination as a test for DOM position in the language.
{"title":"Asymmetric Coordination in Romanian: A Diagnostic for DOM Position?","authors":"Monica Alexandrina Irimia","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00522","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00522","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The question of whether differentially marked objects require raising is not a simple one for languages like Romanian. Kalin and Weisser (2019) use asymmetric coordination involving marked and unmarked objects to support the hypothesis that both classes (can) share the same position. Here we point out numerous complications in the data; crucially, it cannot be confirmed that asymmetric coordination applies at the DP level in Romanian. This raises doubts about the reliability of asymmetric coordination as a test for DOM position in the language.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135854053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The rule MOVE, used in various forms in generative grammars to capture displacement or discontinuous constituency, has recently been talked of as an “internal” version of MERGE, the operation of simple node- or set-formation. Internal merge “reconstructs” the displaced element in its original argument-structural position at the level of logical form via a “copy”, to which it has been identical throughout the derivation. Reducing MOVE to MERGE seems to be on the side of simplifying the theory of grammar, potentially eliminating the need for constraints on movement in order to limit overgeneration. The paper addresses the question of how internal merge should be defined in formal terms. An account of discontinuity is proposed in which copies originate in the lexicon, as seems to be required by a strict interpretations of the Inclusiveness Condition of Chomsky (1995b), where they can be thought of as binders and variables in lexical logical form (lf). Merger is defined via a small number of type-dependent combinatory rules, which apply to strictly string-adjacent categories to monotonically project from the lexical array varieties of discontinuous dependencies that have been described in terms of various forms of movement, including “A”, “Ā”, “remnant”, “head”, “parallel”, “sideward”, “covert”, “roll-up”, and “late merge”, without any attendant “constraints on movement” other than those projected from lexical types. The analysis extends to a plethora of other discontinuous operations that have been proposed in addition to or instead of MOVE, including AGREE, LABEL, TRANSFER, and DELETE, all of which are replaced by synchronous monotonic lf and pf merger of contiguous categories. The result is to eliminate structure-dependence and action-at-a-distance of all kinds from syntactic rules.
{"title":"On Internal Merge","authors":"Mark Steedman","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00521","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00521","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The rule MOVE, used in various forms in generative grammars to capture displacement or discontinuous constituency, has recently been talked of as an “internal” version of MERGE, the operation of simple node- or set-formation. Internal merge “reconstructs” the displaced element in its original argument-structural position at the level of logical form via a “copy”, to which it has been identical throughout the derivation. Reducing MOVE to MERGE seems to be on the side of simplifying the theory of grammar, potentially eliminating the need for constraints on movement in order to limit overgeneration. The paper addresses the question of how internal merge should be defined in formal terms. An account of discontinuity is proposed in which copies originate in the lexicon, as seems to be required by a strict interpretations of the Inclusiveness Condition of Chomsky (1995b), where they can be thought of as binders and variables in lexical logical form (lf). Merger is defined via a small number of type-dependent combinatory rules, which apply to strictly string-adjacent categories to monotonically project from the lexical array varieties of discontinuous dependencies that have been described in terms of various forms of movement, including “A”, “Ā”, “remnant”, “head”, “parallel”, “sideward”, “covert”, “roll-up”, and “late merge”, without any attendant “constraints on movement” other than those projected from lexical types. The analysis extends to a plethora of other discontinuous operations that have been proposed in addition to or instead of MOVE, including AGREE, LABEL, TRANSFER, and DELETE, all of which are replaced by synchronous monotonic lf and pf merger of contiguous categories. The result is to eliminate structure-dependence and action-at-a-distance of all kinds from syntactic rules.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135719548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Wei and Walker (2020) and Zymet (2018) claim that derivational lookahead effects are attested in the interactions between reduplication and other phonological processes in Mbe and Logoori, respectively. On the basis of this evidence, they argue that reduplication in these languages cannot be modeled by Serial Template Satisfaction (McCarthy, Kimper, and Mullin 2012), a theory of reduplication set in Harmonic Serialism. This article refutes these claims and provides serial analyses for both languages. It further identifies a novel prediction of Base-Reduplicant Correspondence Theory (McCarthy and Prince 1994, 1995, 1999), a parallel theory of reduplication, that reduplicants may surface with marked structures unattested elsewhere in the language, and it demonstrates that these patterns are not replicated in serial.
{"title":"Serial Reduplication Is Empirically Adequate and Typologically Restrictive","authors":"Andrew Lamont","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00452","DOIUrl":"10.1162/ling_a_00452","url":null,"abstract":"Wei and Walker (2020) and Zymet (2018) claim that derivational lookahead effects are attested in the interactions between reduplication and other phonological processes in Mbe and Logoori, respectively. On the basis of this evidence, they argue that reduplication in these languages cannot be modeled by Serial Template Satisfaction (McCarthy, Kimper, and Mullin 2012), a theory of reduplication set in Harmonic Serialism. This article refutes these claims and provides serial analyses for both languages. It further identifies a novel prediction of Base-Reduplicant Correspondence Theory (McCarthy and Prince 1994, 1995, 1999), a parallel theory of reduplication, that reduplicants may surface with marked structures unattested elsewhere in the language, and it demonstrates that these patterns are not replicated in serial.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"54 4","pages":"797-839"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47289752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We provide an account of clause-boundedness in multiple sluicing that also captures its exceptions. Clause-boundedness arises whenever an embedded clause’s subject is not coreferential with a topical discourse referent in the embedding clause. Our account ties clause-boundedness to discourse factors. We discuss implementations that import sensitivity to information structure into the syntax, and compare our approach with recent work—in particular, Grano and Lasnik 2018 and “short source” accounts (most recently, Abels and Dayal 2017, 2021)—and demonstrate that these accounts both under- and overgenerate. The empirical coverage of our account argues against purely syntacticized agreement-based approaches to clause-boundedness.
{"title":"Attention and Locality: On Clause-Boundedness and Its Exceptions in Multiple Sluicing","authors":"Matthew Barros;Robert Frank","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00458","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00458","url":null,"abstract":"We provide an account of clause-boundedness in multiple sluicing that also captures its exceptions. Clause-boundedness arises whenever an embedded clause’s subject is not coreferential with a topical discourse referent in the embedding clause. Our account ties clause-boundedness to discourse factors. We discuss implementations that import sensitivity to information structure into the syntax, and compare our approach with recent work—in particular, Grano and Lasnik 2018 and “short source” accounts (most recently, Abels and Dayal 2017, 2021)—and demonstrate that these accounts both under- and overgenerate. The empirical coverage of our account argues against purely syntacticized agreement-based approaches to clause-boundedness.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"54 4","pages":"649-684"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71902893","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Binding and ellipsis are empirically and theoretically symbiotic: each reveals otherwise hidden facts about the other. Here I investigate a case where a theory of binding is entwined with a problematic ellipsis- licensing mechanism, with the result that there are strong reasons to abandon both. The ellipsislicensing mechanism in question is Referential Parallelism (Fox 2000), according to which a bound pronoun may support strict identity under ellipsis. Jettisoning this mechanism forces us to abandon theories of binding that involve what I call compulsory binding, which encode a grammatical preference for binding over coreference and for local over nonlocal binding (Reinhart 1983, Grodzinsky and Reinhart 1993, Fox 2000, Büring 2005). In their place, I suggest that we adopt what I call the violation equivalence approach to binding (Heim 1993, Reinhart 2006, Roelofsen 2010) and a Foxstyle ellipsis-licensing mechanism based on formal alternatives (Katzir 2007, Fox and Katzir 2011).
{"title":"On Referential Parallelism and Compulsory Binding","authors":"Nicholas Fleisher","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00480","DOIUrl":"10.1162/ling_a_00480","url":null,"abstract":"Binding and ellipsis are empirically and theoretically symbiotic: each reveals otherwise hidden facts about the other. Here I investigate a case where a theory of binding is entwined with a problematic ellipsis- licensing mechanism, with the result that there are strong reasons to abandon both. The ellipsislicensing mechanism in question is Referential Parallelism (Fox 2000), according to which a bound pronoun may support strict identity under ellipsis. Jettisoning this mechanism forces us to abandon theories of binding that involve what I call compulsory binding, which encode a grammatical preference for binding over coreference and for local over nonlocal binding (Reinhart 1983, Grodzinsky and Reinhart 1993, Fox 2000, Büring 2005). In their place, I suggest that we adopt what I call the violation equivalence approach to binding (Heim 1993, Reinhart 2006, Roelofsen 2010) and a Foxstyle ellipsis-licensing mechanism based on formal alternatives (Katzir 2007, Fox and Katzir 2011).","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"54 4","pages":"841-860"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45236091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On the basis of revised syntactic structures for the French faire-causatives, this article argues that the placement of various clitics in these causatives can be accounted for by making reference to the feature defectivity/completeness of clitics and that of their host. I show that the faire-à construction involves a biclausal structure, where the raised causativized v in the embedded clause is defective and activates the object to prepose. In addition, I identify four types of clitics with respect to their feature contents, which are licensed by different applications of three syntactic dependency operations: Agree-match, Agree-value, and Agree-check.
{"title":"Defectivity Matters: Cliticization in French Causatives Revisited","authors":"Xiaoshi Hu","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00451","DOIUrl":"10.1162/ling_a_00451","url":null,"abstract":"On the basis of revised syntactic structures for the French faire-causatives, this article argues that the placement of various clitics in these causatives can be accounted for by making reference to the feature defectivity/completeness of clitics and that of their host. I show that the faire-à construction involves a biclausal structure, where the raised causativized v in the embedded clause is defective and activates the object to prepose. In addition, I identify four types of clitics with respect to their feature contents, which are licensed by different applications of three syntactic dependency operations: Agree-match, Agree-value, and Agree-check.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"54 4","pages":"759-796"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46364507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Loes Koring, Eric Reuland, Nina Sangers, Kenneth Wexler
Abstract This contribution presents an account of why disjoint reference effects obtain in verbal but not in adjectival passives. Our focus will be on passives in child language, which are independently argued to be always adjectival. This allows us to use a natural experiment in child grammar that is not available in the adult grammar—predicting the lack of a disjoint reference effect in even those passives that might prima facie be conceived of as verbal. We will conduct our discussion against the background of the difference between adjectival and verbal passives in general. Our account is based on (grammatical) Implicature theory. We show that the initiator in the semantic representation of adjectival passives stays at a kind level, hence cannot introduce a discourse referent. It therefore cannot trigger a disjointness implicature, in contrast to the initiator in verbal passives (see Gehrke 2013, 2015). We show in two experiments, one in Dutch, one in English, that children’s passives do not exhibit disjoint reference, in contrast to adults’ verbal passives, even though children have no trouble computing disjointness implicatures elsewhere. Thus, our contribution confirms with a novel kind of evidence the syntactic nature of young children's difficulty with verbal passives. It offers a new perspective on the nature of the difference between verbal and adjectival passives based on Reinhart's theta-theory, while also offering additional evidence for a grammatical, rather than general pragmatic, theory of implicatures.
{"title":"On Realizing External Arguments: A Syntactic and Implicature Theory of the Disjointness Effect for Passives in Adult and Child Grammar","authors":"Loes Koring, Eric Reuland, Nina Sangers, Kenneth Wexler","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00520","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00520","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This contribution presents an account of why disjoint reference effects obtain in verbal but not in adjectival passives. Our focus will be on passives in child language, which are independently argued to be always adjectival. This allows us to use a natural experiment in child grammar that is not available in the adult grammar—predicting the lack of a disjoint reference effect in even those passives that might prima facie be conceived of as verbal. We will conduct our discussion against the background of the difference between adjectival and verbal passives in general. Our account is based on (grammatical) Implicature theory. We show that the initiator in the semantic representation of adjectival passives stays at a kind level, hence cannot introduce a discourse referent. It therefore cannot trigger a disjointness implicature, in contrast to the initiator in verbal passives (see Gehrke 2013, 2015). We show in two experiments, one in Dutch, one in English, that children’s passives do not exhibit disjoint reference, in contrast to adults’ verbal passives, even though children have no trouble computing disjointness implicatures elsewhere. Thus, our contribution confirms with a novel kind of evidence the syntactic nature of young children's difficulty with verbal passives. It offers a new perspective on the nature of the difference between verbal and adjectival passives based on Reinhart's theta-theory, while also offering additional evidence for a grammatical, rather than general pragmatic, theory of implicatures.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135718547","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We argue, following Barros and Vicente (2011), that right-node raising (RNR) results from either ellipsis or multidominance. Four considerations support this claim. (a) RNR has properties of ellipsis and of multidominance. (b) Where these are combined, the structure results from repeated RNR: a pivot created through ellipsis contains a right-peripheral secondary pivot created through multidominance. (c) In certain circumstances, one or the other derivation is blocked, so that RNR behaves like pure ellipsis or pure multidominance. (d) Linearization of RNR-as-multidominance requires pruning. The same pruning operation delivers RNR-as-ellipsis, which explains why the two derivations must meet the same ordering constraints.
{"title":"What Divides, and What Unites, Right-Node Raising","authors":"Zoe Belk;Ad Neeleman;Joy Philip","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00454","DOIUrl":"10.1162/ling_a_00454","url":null,"abstract":"We argue, following Barros and Vicente (2011), that right-node raising (RNR) results from either ellipsis or multidominance. Four considerations support this claim. (a) RNR has properties of ellipsis and of multidominance. (b) Where these are combined, the structure results from repeated RNR: a pivot created through ellipsis contains a right-peripheral secondary pivot created through multidominance. (c) In certain circumstances, one or the other derivation is blocked, so that RNR behaves like pure ellipsis or pure multidominance. (d) Linearization of RNR-as-multidominance requires pruning. The same pruning operation delivers RNR-as-ellipsis, which explains why the two derivations must meet the same ordering constraints.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"54 4","pages":"685-728"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47723774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The dialect of North Hail in Saudi Arabia, a variety of Najdi Arabic, has a set of sentence-initial particles marking topics of various kinds. The kinds of topics they mark correspond closely to the three classes of topics argued by Frascarelli & Hinterhölzl (2007) to be characteristic of Italian and German: Shift-Topic, Contrastive Topic, and Familiar Topic. In their work, as in much other work in the cartographic tradition, a hierarchy of abstract Topic heads is postulated in the C-domain, which host the topical phrases as specifiers. In North Hail Arabic, the Topic heads are not abstract, but overt, spelled out as particles. Some of the Topic headsmark topics by attracting them to the C-domain, as familiar from other languages, other particles mark topics by φ-feature agreement. The particles in the C-domain agree in person, number and gender with a DP in TP, subject or object. This is analysed in terms of Agree (Chomsky 2001, 2008). Arguments and adverbials are assigned particular Topic values either by agreement or by movement. The particles thus provide evidence that topicality can be a syntactic feature, inherent in lexical items (the particles), and assigned to constituents by operations familiar from standard syntactic relations such as subject agreement and case. The theory articulated observes the Inclusiveness condition, known to be a problem for the cartographic theory of topic and focus.
{"title":"Topic Particles, Agreement and Movement in an Arabic Dialect","authors":"M Alshamari, A Holmberg","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00519","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00519","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The dialect of North Hail in Saudi Arabia, a variety of Najdi Arabic, has a set of sentence-initial particles marking topics of various kinds. The kinds of topics they mark correspond closely to the three classes of topics argued by Frascarelli & Hinterhölzl (2007) to be characteristic of Italian and German: Shift-Topic, Contrastive Topic, and Familiar Topic. In their work, as in much other work in the cartographic tradition, a hierarchy of abstract Topic heads is postulated in the C-domain, which host the topical phrases as specifiers. In North Hail Arabic, the Topic heads are not abstract, but overt, spelled out as particles. Some of the Topic headsmark topics by attracting them to the C-domain, as familiar from other languages, other particles mark topics by φ-feature agreement. The particles in the C-domain agree in person, number and gender with a DP in TP, subject or object. This is analysed in terms of Agree (Chomsky 2001, 2008). Arguments and adverbials are assigned particular Topic values either by agreement or by movement. The particles thus provide evidence that topicality can be a syntactic feature, inherent in lexical items (the particles), and assigned to constituents by operations familiar from standard syntactic relations such as subject agreement and case. The theory articulated observes the Inclusiveness condition, known to be a problem for the cartographic theory of topic and focus.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134904233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article challenges the view that eventive and stative passive participles are verbs and adjectives, respectively. Instead, I argue that existing diagnostics are sensitive to the eventive/stative contrast and to independent restrictions on word order. I show that both eventive and stative participles in Serbo-Croatian have the external syntax and morphology of adjectives, and propose that passive participles in various languages are adjectives that embed varying amounts of verbal structure. Finally, I contend that agentive phrases are always available with stative participles that entail a prior event in languages that obligatorily express grammatical aspect on the verb stem.
{"title":"Revisiting Passive Participles: Category Status and Internal Structure","authors":"Maša Bešlin","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00463","DOIUrl":"10.1162/ling_a_00463","url":null,"abstract":"This article challenges the view that eventive and stative passive participles are verbs and adjectives, respectively. Instead, I argue that existing diagnostics are sensitive to the eventive/stative contrast and to independent restrictions on word order. I show that both eventive and stative participles in Serbo-Croatian have the external syntax and morphology of adjectives, and propose that passive participles in various languages are adjectives that embed varying amounts of verbal structure. Finally, I contend that agentive phrases are always available with stative participles that entail a prior event in languages that obligatorily express grammatical aspect on the verb stem.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"54 4","pages":"729-758"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41633562","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：