This book contains 14 articles by Teun Hoekstra (1953-1998) on core issues in syntactic theory. Some articles focus on the structure of DP, others on the structure of the sentence as a whole, while others still deal explicitly with the parallels between the two. The papers are distributed over four sections: "Argument structure", "T-chains", "The morpho-syntax of verbal and nominal projections" and "Small clauses". More than half of the articles in this book are published here for the first time or appear for the first time in English. Hoekstra's work is characterized by a fundamental interest in the central questions of syntactic theory, most notably the relation between argument structure and X-bar structure. This concentrated interest led to a deep understanding of the notion of transitivity, with respect to both the status of the external argument and that of the internal argument, where "status" refers to both the content and the licensing. In this collection of papers, Hoekstra reports on his insights in these matters. As far as content and licensing of the external argument is concerned, this collection contains papers on the relation between passives and their active counterparts, the parallels between possessives and transitives and the differences and similarities between past participles and infinitives. As to the internal argument, we find papers addressing sentential complementation, verbal affixation and resultatives. And there is a whole section on tense, and its role in keeping the sentence together. One of the papers in this collection is Hoekstra's classic, but hitherto unpublished "Small clauses everywhere" (more than 70 pages), which summarizes Hoekstra's views on such issues as resultatives, particle verbs and double object constructions.

This book examines the distribution and interpretation of anaphors and pronouns. Through a detailed analysis of simplex and complex anaphors in Dutch and English, as well as other Romance and Germanic languages, the authors show that the relationship between an anaphor and its antecedent can be captured in terms of general Minimalist principles.