Reviewed by: Crossing boundaries ed. by István Kenesei Catherine Rudin Crossing boundaries. Ed. by István Kenesei. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999. Pp. 301. The last decade has been an exciting period for generative work on Eastern European languages as Eastern European linguists have gained easier access to western linguistic theories and western theorists have gained easier access to Eastern European data. This crossing of boundaries—geographical, political, theoretical, and even syntactic—is the foundation for this book, a collection of selected proceedings from the first Conference on Linguistic Theory in Eastern European Languages (Hungary, 1998). The volume is unusually coherent and well-organized for a conference collection. All of the papers treat syntactic issues in some Eastern European language, within a more-or-less minimalist framework. Kenesei’s excellent introduction outlines the papers, pointing out common themes and differences among them and explaining their division into three groups, ‘Clitic, head, and phrasal movement’, with six papers; ‘DP structure’, with three papers; and ‘Clausal structure’, with two papers. The range of languages discussed makes the volume broadly representative of Eastern Europe: Three papers concentrate primarily on Hungarian, two on Bulgarian, and one each on Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, Polish, Romanian, and Albanian. Olga Tomic, ‘Cliticization and clitichood’, distinguishes two types of clausal clitics, ‘inflection’ and ‘operator’, and argues that some clitics are not inherently directional. Ljiljana Progovac, ‘Eventive TO and the placement of clitics in Serbo-Croatian’, provides evidence that second-position clitic placement in Serbo-Croatian is syntactic, not phonological, and suggests that it is a reflection of (covert) V2. David Willis, ‘The structure of Old Russian periphrastic verbal construction’, argues that participle movement in Old Russian is adjunction to I, not long head movement, and includes fascinating data on the historical reanalysis of conditional Aux as a particle. María Luisa Rivero, ‘Stylistic verb movement in yes-no questions in Bulgarian and Breton’, argues that stylistic verb movement in several languages is a ‘hybrid’ rule between syntax and phonology. Katalin É Kiss, ‘Strategies of complex predicate formation and the Hungarian verbal complex’, analyzes complex predicates in Hungarian as strings of light verbs subject to both syntactic and phonological constraints. She argues that verb modifier climbing is head movement, triggered by a restriction against light verbs in VP-initial stressed position. Hilda Koopman and Anna Szabolcsi, ‘Hungarian complex verbs and XP-movement’, address exactly the same data as É Kiss but argue for an XP movement analysis and come to different conclusions about the factors which trigger movement within the complex verb construction. Marcel den Dikken, ‘On the structural representation of possession and agreement’, analyzes patterns of case and agreement within two types of possessive constructions in three different dialects of Hungarian, arguing against an earlier analysis by Szabolcsi. Ewa Willim, ‘On the syntax of the genitive in nominals: The case of Polish’, uses comparative data from a dozen languages [End Page 198] to argue that differences in how many genitive arguments are allowed within a nominal phrase are due to differences in availability of a D head and strength of genitive case features of N and/or D. Polish has only one genitive argument per NP because it lacks D. Alexandra Cornilescu, ‘Aspect and nominalizations: The case of Romanian’, claims that event nominals have the same argument structure as their corresponding verbs and that which arguments are projected depends crucially on aspect. Iliyana Krapova, ‘Subjunctive complements, null subjects and case checking in Bulgarian’, distinguishes two types of subjunctive clauses in Bulgarian, with pro vs. PRO subjects. The two differ in the morphological content of subjunctive tense, resulting in different case checking properties. Dalina Kallulli, ‘Non-active morphology in Albanian and event (de)composition’, derives the several readings of ‘nonactive’ constructions through the interaction of various semantic and morphological factors. Most of the papers are well-written, clearly argued, and interesting, and the volume as a whole testifies to the liveliness and sophistication of Eastern European linguistics in the post-communist era. Catherine Rudin Wayne State College Copyright © 2002 Linguistic Society of America