Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 26 January 2021

(p. 615) References

(p. 615) References

Aarons, Debra, Benjamin Bahan, Judy Kegl, & Carol Neidle. 1992. Clausal structure and a tier for grammatical marking in American Sign Language. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 15(2). 103–42.Find this resource:

Abercrombie, David. 1948. Forgotten phoneticians. Transactions of the Philological Society 47(1). 1–34.Find this resource:

Abrahamsson, Niclas. 2003. Development and recovery of L2 codas. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 25(3). 313–49.Find this resource:

Ackema, Peter. 1995. Syntax below zero. OTS publications, University of Utrecht.Find this resource:

Ackema, Peter & Ad Neeleman. 2004. Beyond morphology: Interface conditions on word formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell. 1987. Miscreant morphemes: Phrasal predicates in Ugric. Berkeley, CA: University of California-Berkeley PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell. 2000. Lexical constructions: Paradigms and periphrastic expression. Manuscript, University of California at San Diego.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell. 2003. Lexical derivation and multi-word predicate formation in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 50(1/2). 7–32.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell, James Blevins, & Robert Malouf. 2009. Parts and wholes: Implicative patterns in inflectional paradigms. In James P. Blevins & Juliette Blevins (eds.), Analogy in grammar: Form and acquisition, 54–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell & Phil LeSourd. 1997. Toward a lexical representation of phrasal predicates. In Alex Alsina, Joan Bresnan, & Peter Sells (eds.), Complex predicates, 67–106. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell & Robert Malouf. 2013. Morphological organization: The low conditional entropy conjecture. Language 89(3). 429–64.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell & Robert Malouf. 2015. The No Blur Principle effects as an emergent property of language systems. In Anna E. Jurgensen, Hannah Sande, Spencer Lamoureux, Kenny Baclawski, & Alison Zerbe (eds.), Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 1–14. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell & Gregory Stump. 2004. Paradigms and periphrastic expression: A study in realization-based lexicalism. In Louisa Sadler & Andrew Spencer (eds.), Projecting morphology, 111–57. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell, Gregory Stump, & Gert Webelhuth. 2011. Lexicalism, periphrasis and implicative morphology. In Robert D. Borsley & Kersti Börjars (eds.), Non-transformational syntax: Formal and explicit models of grammar, 325–58. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell & Gert Webelhuth. 1997. The composition of (dis)continuous predicates: Lexical or syntactic? Acta Linguistica Hungarica 44(3/4). 317–40.Find this resource:

Ackerman, Farrell & Gert Webelhuth. 1998. A theory of predicates. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Acquaviva, Paolo. 2009. Roots and lexicality in Distributed Morphology. In Alexandra Galani, Daniel Redinger, & Norman Yeo (eds.), York-Essex Morphology Meeting 2, 1–21. York: York University.Find this resource:

Adam, Robert. 2012. Language contact and borrowing. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach, & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook. vol. 37, 841–61. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Adams, Valerie. 1973. An introduction to modern English word-formation. London: Longman.Find this resource:

Adger, David & Peter Svenonius. 2011. Features in Minimalist syntax. In Cedric Boeckx (ed.), Oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism, 27–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Ahlberg, Malin, Markus Forsberg, & Mans Hulden. 2014. Semi-supervised learning of morphological paradigms and lexicons. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the (p. 616) Association for Computational Linguistics, 569–78. Gothenburg: Association for Computational Linguistics.Find this resource:

Aho, Alfred V., Ravi Sethi, & Jeffrey D. Ullman. 1986. Compilers: Principles, techniques and tools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Find this resource:

Akinlabi, Akinbiyi. 1996. Featural affixation. Journal of Linguistics 32. 239–89.Find this resource:

Akinlabi, Akinbiyi. 1997. Patterns of tonal transfer I. Paper presented at ACAL 28, Cornell University, 12 July 1997.Find this resource:

Alber, Birgit & Sabine Arndt-Lappe. 2012. Templatic and subtractive truncation. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), The morphology and phonology of exponence, 289–325. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Albright, Adam. 2002. Islands of reliability for regular morphology: Evidence from Italian. Language 78. 684–709.Find this resource:

Albright, Adam. 2007. Morpheme position. In Paul de Lacy (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of phonology, 457–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Albright, Adam & Bruce Hayes. 2002. Modeling English past tense intuitions with minimal generalization. In Michael Maxwell (ed.), Proceedings of the 2002 Workshop on Morphological Learning, Association for Computational Linguistics, 58–69. Philadelphia, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Find this resource:

Alderete, John, Jill Beckman, Laura Benua, Amalia Gnanadesikan, John McCarthy, & Suzanne Urbanczyk. 1999. Reduplication with fixed segmentism. Linguistic Inquiry 30. 327–64.Find this resource:

Alegre, Maria & Peter Gordon. 1999a. Rule-based versus associative processes in Derivational Morphology. Brain and Language 68. 347–54.Find this resource:

Alegre, Maria & Peter Gordon. 1999b. Frequency effects and the representational status of regular inflections. Journal of Memory and Language 40. 41–61.Find this resource:

Alexiadou, Artemis. 2016. Building words. In Daniel Siddiqi & Heidi Harley (eds.), Morphological metatheory, 223–36. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Alexiadou, Artemis & Gereon Müller. 2008. Class features as probes. In Asaf Bachrach & Andrew Nevins (eds.), Inflectional identity, 101–56. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Allen, Margaret R. 1978. Morphological investigations. Storrs: University of Connecticut PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Alpatov, Vladimir M. 1985. Ob utočnenii ponjatij ‘flektivnyj jazyk’ i ‘aggljutinativnyj jazyk’ [On clarification of the notions ‘flective language’ and ‘agglutinative language’]. In Vadim M. Solncev & Igor’ F. Vardul’ (eds.), Lingvističeskaja tipologija [Linguistic Typology]. Moscow: Nauka, 92–101.Find this resource:

Alsina, Alex & Sam A. Mchombo. 1993. Object asymmetries and the Chicheŵa applicative construction. In Sam A. Mchombo (ed.), Theoretical aspects of Bantu grammar, 17–45. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Altmann, Gerry. 2001. The language machine: Psycholinguistics in review. British Journal of Psychology 92. 129–70.Find this resource:

Álvarez, Carlos J., Mabel Urrutia, Alberto Domínguez, & Rosa Sánchez-Casas. 2011. Processing inflectional and derivational morphology: Electrophysiological evidence from Spanish. Neuroscience Letters 490(1). 6–10.Find this resource:

Ambridge, Ben & Elena Lieven. 2011. Child language acquisition: Contrasting theoretical approaches. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Anastasiadis-Symeonidis, Anna. 1994. Neologikos Danismos tis Neoellinikis [Neological borrowing in Modern Greek]. Thessaloniki: Institute for Modern Greek Studies.Find this resource:

Andersen, Henning. 2008. Naturalness and markedness. In Klaas Willems & Ludovic De Cuypere (eds.), Naturalness and iconicity in language, 101–19. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Andersen, Roger W. (1978). An implicational model for second language research. Language Learning 28. 221–81.Find this resource:

Andersen, Torben. 1993. Vowel quality alternation in Dinka verb inflection. Phonology 10. 1–42.Find this resource:

Andersen, Torben. 1994. Morphological stratification in Dinka: On the alternations of voice quality, vowel length and tone in the morphology of transitive verbal roots in a monosyllabic language. Studies in African Linguistics 23(1). 1–63.Find this resource:

(p. 617) Andersen, Torben. 2002. Case inflection and nominal head marking in Dinka. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 23. 1–30.Find this resource:

Anderson, Lloyd. 1982. Universals of aspect and parts of speech: Parallels between signed and spoken languages. In Paul J. Hopper (ed.), Tense and aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics, 91–114. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1969. West Scandinavian vowel systems and the ordering of phonological rules. Boston, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1977a. Comments on Wasow: The role of the Theme in lexical rules. In Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow, & Adrian Akmajian (eds.), Formal syntax, 361–77. New York: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1977b. On the formal description of inflection. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 13. 15–44.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1982. Where’s morphology? Linguistic Inquiry 13(4). 571–612.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1985. Phonology in the twentieth century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1986. Disjunctive ordering in inflectional morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4. 1–31.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1988. Morphological theory. In Frederick J. Newmeyer (ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge survey, vol. 1, 146–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1990. Sapir’s approach to typology and current issues in morphology. In Wolfgang U. Dressler, Hans C. Luschützky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer, & John R. Rennison (eds.), Contemporary morphology, 277–95. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1992. A-morphous morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 1993. Wackernagel’s revenge: Clitics, morphology, and the syntax of second position. Language 69(1). 68–98.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 2005. Aspects of the theory of clitics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 2014. Morphological change. In Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 264–85. London, New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 2015a. Dimensions of morphological complexity. In Matthew Baerman, Dunstan Brown, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Understanding and measuring morphological complexity, 11–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 2015b. The morpheme: Its nature and use. In Matthew Baerman (ed.), The Oxford handbook of inflection, 11–34. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. 2016. The role of morphology in Transformational Grammar. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 587–608. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Anderson, Stephen R. & Louis de Saussure (eds.). 2018. René de Saussure and the theory of word formation. (Classics in Linguistics 6). Berlin: Language Science Press.Find this resource:

Andreou, Marios. 2015. On headedness in word formation. Patras: University of Patras PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Andresen, Julie Tetel. 1990. Linguistics in America 1769–1924: A Critical History. New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Andrews, Avery. 1982. The representation of case in Modern Icelandic. In Joan Bresnan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations, 427–503. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Andrews, Avery. 1990. Unification and morphological blocking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8(4). 507–58.Find this resource:

Andrews, Avery. 1996. Semantic case-stacking and inside-out unification. Australian Journal of Linguistics 16(1). 1–55.Find this resource:

Andrews, Avery. 2005. F-structural spellout in LFG morphology. Manuscript, Australian National University.Find this resource:

Andrews, Edna. 1990. Markedness theory: The union of asymmetry semiosis in language. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Find this resource:

Andrews, Sally. 1986. Morphological influences on lexical access: Lexical or nonlexical effects? Journal of Memory and Language 25. 726–40.Find this resource:

(p. 618) Andrews, Sally, Brett Miller, & Keith Rayner. 2004. Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound words: There is a mouse in mousetrap. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 16. 285–311.Find this resource:

Anshen, Frank & Mark Aronoff. 1988. Producing morphologically complex words. Linguistics 26. 641–55.Find this resource:

Anttila, Raimo. 1977. Analogy. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Antworth, Evan. 1990. PC-KIMMO: A two-level processor for morphological analysis. Occasional Publications in Academic Computing 16. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Find this resource:

Antzakas, Klimis & Bencie Woll. 2001. Head movements and negation in Greek Sign Language. In Eleni Efthimiou, Georgios Kouroupetroglou, and Stavroula-Evita Fotinea (eds.), International Gesture Workshop, 193–6. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Find this resource:

Arad, Maya. 2003. Locality constraints on the interpretation of roots: the case of Hebrew denominal verbs. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 737–78.Find this resource:

Arad, Maya & Ur Shlonsky. 2005. Roots and patterns. Hebrew morpho-syntax. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Archangeli, Diana. 1988. Aspects of underspecification theory. Phonology 5. 183–207.Find this resource:

Archangeli, Diana. 1999. Introducing Optimality Theory. Annual Review of Anthropology 28. 531–52.Find this resource:

Archangeli, Diana & D. Terence Langendoen (eds.). 1997. Optimality Theory: An overview. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Find this resource:

Arcodia, Giorgio Francesco. 2011. Constructions and headedness in derivation and compounding. Morphology 22(3). 365–97.Find this resource:

Arduino, Lisa S., Cristina Burani, & Giuseppe Vallar. 2002. Lexical effects in left neglect dyslexia: A study in Italian patients. Cognitive Neuropsychology 19. 421–44.Find this resource:

Aristar, Anthony R. 1997. Marking and hierarchy types and the grammaticalization of case-markers. Studies in Language 21. 313–68.Find this resource:

Arkadiev, Peter M. 2017. Multiple ergatives: From allomorphy to differential agent marking. Studies in Language 41(3). 717–80.Find this resource:

Arkhangelskiy, Timofey & Yury Lander. 2015. Some challenges of the West Circassian polysynthetic corpus. Working Papers of the Higher School of Economics. Series: Linguistics. No. 37.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word formation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 1992. Noun classes in Arapesh. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1991, 21–32. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by itself: Stems and inflectional classes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 2000a. Generative grammar. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, & Joachim Mugdan (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An international handbook on inflection and word-formation, vol. 1, 194–209. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 2000b. Morphology between lexicon and grammar. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, & Joachim Mugdan (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An international handbook on inflection and word-formation, vol. 1, 344–9. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 2007. In the beginning was the word. Language 83(4). 803–30.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 2012. Morphological stems: What William of Ockham really said. Word Structure 5(1). 28–51.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 2014. Face the facts: Reading Chomsky’s Remarks on nominalization after forty years. In Florence Villoing, Sophie David, & Sarah Leroy (eds.), Foisonnements morphologiques. Etudes en hommage à Françoise Kerleroux, 309–26. Nanterre: Presses Universitaires de Paris Ouest.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 2015. Thoughts on morphological and cultural evolution. In Laurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy, & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), Semantics of complex words, 77–88. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark. 2016a. Competition and the lexicon. In Annibale Elia, Claudio Iacobini, & Miriam Voghera (eds.), Livelli di analisi e fenomeni di interfaccia. Atti del XLVII congresso internazionale della Società di Linguistica Italiana, 39–52. Roma: Bulzoni.Find this resource:

(p. 619) Aronoff, Mark. 2016b. A fox knows many things but a hedgehog one big thing. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 186–205. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark & Frank Anshen. 1981. Morphological productivity and phonological transparency. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 26. 63–72.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark & Frank Anshen. 1998. Morphology and the lexicon: Lexicalization and productivity. In Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 237–47. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark & Nana Fuhrhop. 2002. Restricting suffix combinations in German and English: closing suffixes and the monosuffix constraint. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20. 451–90.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark, Irit Meir, Carol Padden, & Wendy Sandler. 2005. Morphological universals and the sign language type. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2004, 19–39. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark, Irit Meir, & Wendy Sandler. 2005. The paradox of sign language morphology. Language 81(2). 301–44.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark & Shikaripur Sridhar. 1983. Morphological levels in English and Kannada; or Atarizing Reagan. In John F. Richardson, Mitchell Marks, & Amy Chukerman (eds.), Papers from the Parasession on the Interplay of Phonology, Morphology, and Syntax, 3–16. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Find this resource:

Aronoff, Mark & Shikaripur Sridhar. 1987. Morphological levels in English and Kannada. In Edmund Gussmann (ed.), Rules and the lexicon, 9–22. Lublin: Catholic University.Find this resource:

Arregi, Karlos & Andrew Nevins. 2013. Morphotactics: Basque auxiliaries and the structure of spellout. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Ashton, E. O. 1944. Swahili grammar. Essex: Longman.Find this resource:

Assink, Egbert M. H. & Dominiek Sandra (eds.). 2003. Reading complex words: Cross-language studies. New York: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Asudeh, Ash, Gianluca Giorgolo, & Ida Toivonen. 2014. Meaning and valency. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG14 Conference, 68–88. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Asudeh, Ash & Ewan Klein. 2003. Shape conditions and phonological context. In Frank Van Eynde, Lars Hellan, & Dorothee Beermann (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International HPSG Conference, 20–30. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Audring, Jenny. 2017. Calibrating complexity: How complex is a gender system? Language Sciences 60.53–68. DOI: 10.1016/j.langsci.2016.09.003Find this resource:

Audring, Jenny & Geert Booij. 2016. Cooperation and coercion. Linguistics 54(4). 617–37.Find this resource:

Audring, Jenny, Geert Booij, & Ray Jackendoff. 2017. Menscheln, kibbelen, sparkle: Verbal diminutives between grammar and lexicon. In Bert Le Bruyn & Sander Lestrade (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2017. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald. 1989. A corpus-based approach to morphological productivity. Amsterdam: Free University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald. 1992. Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1991, 109–49. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald. 1993. On frequency, transparency and productivity. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1992, 181–208. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald. 2007. Storage and computation in the mental lexicon. In Gonia Jarema & Gary Libben (eds.), The mental lexicon: Core perspectives, 81–104. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald. 2009. Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. In Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, vol. 2, 899–919. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald. 2014. Experimental and psycholinguistic approaches. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 95–117. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 620) Baayen, Harald, Ton Dijkstra, & Robert Schreuder. 1997. Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual-route model. Journal of Memory and Language 37(1). 94–117.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald & Rochelle Lieber. 1991. Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics 29. 801–44.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald, James M. McQueen, Ton Dijkstra, & Robert Schreuder. 2003. Frequency effects in regular inflectional morphology: Revisiting Dutch plurals. In Harald Baayen & Robert Schreuder (eds.), Morphological structure in language processing, 355–90. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald, Petar Milin, Dusica Filipović Đurđević, Peter Hendrix, & Marco Marelli. 2011. An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review 118(3). 438–81.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald, Richard Piepenbrock, & Leon Gulikers. 1996. CELEX. Philadephia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald, Richard Piepenbrock, & Hedderik Van Rijn. 1993. The CELEX lexical data base on CD-ROM. Philadephia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald & Ingo Plag. 2009. Suffix ordering and morphological processing. Language 85(1). 109–52.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald & Antoinette Renouf. 1996. Chronicling the times: Productive lexical innovations in an English newspaper. Language 72(1). 69–96.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald & Robert Schreuder. 1999. War and peace: Morphemes and full forms in a noninteractive activation parallel dual-route model. Brain and Language 68. 27–32.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald & Robert Schreuder. 2000. Towards a psycholinguistic computational model for morphological parsing. Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 358. 1281–93.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald & Robert Schreuder. 2003. Morphological structure in language processing. Berlin: Mouton.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald, Robert Schreuder, Nivja de Jong, & Andrea Krott. 2002. Dutch inflection: the rules that prove the exception. In Sieb Nooteboom, Fred Weerman, & Frank Wijnen (eds.), Storage and computation in the language faculty, 61–92. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Baayen, Harald, Lee H. Wurm, & Joanna Aycock. 2007. Lexical dynamics for low-frequency complex words: A regression study across tasks and modalities. The Mental Lexicon 2(3). 419–63.Find this resource:

Bach, Emmon. 1983. On the relationship between word-grammar and phrase-grammar. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1. 65–89.Find this resource:

Baddeley, Alan. 2007. Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Badecker, William & Alfonso Caramazza. 1987. The analysis of morphological errors in a case of acquired dyslexia. Brain and Language 32. 278–305.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew. 2012. Paradigmatic chaos in Nuer. Language 88(3). 467–94.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew. 2014. Covert systematicity in a distributionally complex system. Journal of Linguistics 50. 1–47.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew (ed.). 2015. The Oxford handbook of inflection. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew. 2016. Seri verb classes: Morphosyntactic motivation and morphological autonomy. Language 92(4). 792–823.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew & Dunstan Brown. 2005a. Case syncretism. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World Atlas of Language Structures, 118–21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew & Dunstan Brown. 2005b. Syncretism in verbal person/number marking. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World Atlas of Language Structures, 122–5. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown, & Greville G. Corbett. 2005. The syntax–morphology interface: A study of syncretism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown, & Greville G. Corbett. 2009. Surrey Typological Database on Defectiveness. University of Surrey. DOI: 10.15126/SMG.21/1Find this resource:

(p. 621) Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.). 2015a. Understanding and measuring morphological complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown, & Greville G. Corbett. 2015b. Understanding and measuring morphological complexity: An introduction. In Matthew Baerman, Dunstan Brown, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Understanding and measuring morphological complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–10.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew & Greville G. Corbett. 2007. Linguistic typology: Morphology. Linguistic Typology 11. 115–17.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew & Greville G. Corbett. 2012. Stem alternations and multiple exponence. Word Structure 5(1). 52–68.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew, Greville G. Corbett, & Dunstan Brown (eds.). 2010. Defective paradigms: Missing forms and what they tell us. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Baerman, Matthew, Greville G. Corbett, Dunstan Brown, & Andrew Hippisley (eds.). 2007. Deponency and morphological mismatches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Baeskow, Heike. 2010a. His Lordship’s -ship and the King of Golfdom, Against a purely functional analysis of suffixhood. Word Structure 3(1). 1–30.Find this resource:

Baeskow, Heike. 2010b. Derivation in Generative Grammar and Neo-Construction Grammar: A critical evaluation and a new proposal. In Susan Olsen (ed.), New impulses in word-formation, 21–60. Hamburg: Buske.Find this resource:

Bailey, Nathalie, Carolyn Madden, & Stephen Krashen. 1974. Is there a ‘natural sequence’ in adult second language learning? Language Learning 24(2). 235–43.Find this resource:

Baker, Brett, Kate Horrack, Rachel Nordlinger, & Louisa Sadler. 2010. Putting it all together: Agreement, incorporation, coordination and external possession in Wubuy (Australia). In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of LFG10, 64–84. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Baker, Mark C. 1985. The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry 16(3). 373–415.Find this resource:

Baker, Mark C. 1988. Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Baker, Mark C. 1996. The polysynthesis parameter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Baker, Mark C. 2003. Lexical categories: Verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Baker, Mark C. 2008. The macroparameter in a microparametric world. In Theresa Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation, 351–73. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Baker, Philip. 1972. Kreol: A description of Mauritian Creole. Ann Arbor: Karoma.Find this resource:

Bakker, Dik & Anna Siewierska. 1996. The distribution of subject and object agreement and word order type. Studies in Language 20(1). 115–61.Find this resource:

Bakker, Peter. 2003. The absence of reduplication in pidgins. In Silvia Kouwenberg (ed.), Twice as meaningful. Reduplication in pidgins, creoles and other contact languages, 37–46. London: Battlebridge.Find this resource:

Baldwin, Timothy & Su Nam Kim. 2010. Multiword expressions. In Nitin Indurkhya & Fred J. Damerau (eds.), Handbook of natural language processing, 267–92. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Find this resource:

Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2008. Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Barðdal, Jóhanna, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer, & Spike Gildea (eds.). 2015. Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Barlow, Michael & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.). 2000. Usage-based models of language. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Baroni, Marco, Emiliano Guevara, & Roberto Zamparelli. 2009. The dual nature of Deverbal Nominal Constructions: Evidence from acceptability ratings and corpus analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 5(1). 27–60.Find this resource:

Baroni, Marco & Alessandro Lenci. 2010. Distributional memory: A general framework for corpus-based semantics. Computational Linguistics 36(4). 673–721.Find this resource:

(p. 622) Barr, Robin Craig. 1994. A lexical model of morphological change. Harvard: Harvard University PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Barsalou, Laurence. 1992. Frames, concepts and conceptual fields. In Eva Kitay & Adrienne Lehrer (eds.), Frames, fields, and contrasts: New essays in semantic and lexical organization, 21–74. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Find this resource:

Bates, Elizabeth. 1994. Modularity, domain specificity and the development of language. Discussions in Neuroscience 10(1–2). 136–49.Find this resource:

Battison, Robin. 1978. Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Lindstok.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 1988. Introducing linguistic morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 1990. Be-heading the word. Journal of Linguistics 26(1). 1–31.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 1997. Derivational paradigms. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1996, 243–56. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 2002. What you can do with derivational morphology. In Sabrina Bendjaballah, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Oskar E. Pfeiffer, & Maria D. Voeikova (eds.), Morphology 2000: Selected papers from the 9th Morphology Meeting, Vienna, 24–28 February 2000, 37–48. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 2003. Introducing linguistic morphology. 2nd edn. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 2004a. A glossary of morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 2004b. The function of word-formation and the inflection-derivation distinction. In Henk Aertsen, Mike Hannay, & Rod Lyall (eds.), Words in their places. A festschrift for J. Lachlan Mackenzie, 283–92. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 2008. Exocentric compounds. Morphology 18. 51–74.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie. 2009. Typology of compounds. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding, 343–56. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Lieber, & Ingo Plag. 2013. The Oxford reference guide to English morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Beard, Robert. 1995. Lexeme-morpheme base morphology: A general theory of inflection and word formation. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Find this resource:

Beauvillain Cécille. 1996. The integration of morphological and whole-word information during eye fixations on prefixed and suffixed words. Journal of Memory and Language 35. 801–20.Find this resource:

Beesley, Kenneth R. & Lauri Karttunen. 2003. Finite-state morphology. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bellugi, Ursula & Susan Fischer. 1972. A comparison of sign language and spoken language. Cognition 1(2). 173–200.Find this resource:

Bellugi, Ursula & Edward Klima. 1976. Two faces of sign: Iconic and abstract. In Stevan R. Harnad, Horst D. Steklis, & Jane Lancaster (eds.), Origins and evolution of language and speech, 514–38. New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences.Find this resource:

Bender, Emily, Scott Drellishak, Antske Fokkens, Laurie Poulson, & Safiyyah Saleem. 2010. Grammar customization. Research on Language and Computation 8(1). 23–72.Find this resource:

Benedicto, Elena & Diane Brentari. 2004. Where did all the arguments go? Argument changing properties of classifiers in American Sign Language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22. 743–810.Find this resource:

Bengio, Yoshua, Réjean Ducharme, Pascal Vincent, & Christian Janvin. 2003. A neural probabilistic language model. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3. 1137–55.Find this resource:

Benigni, Valentina & Francesca Masini. 2010. Nomi sintagmatici in russo. Studi slavistici 7. 145–72.Find this resource:

Benitez-Quiroz, C. Fabian, Kadir Gökgöz, Ronnie B. Wilbur, & Aleix M. Martinez. 2014. Discriminant features and temporal structure of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. PloS ONE 9(2) e86268.Find this resource:

(p. 623) Bentin, Shlomo & Laurie B. Feldman. 1990. The contribution of morphological and semantic relatedness to repetition priming at short and long lags: Evidence from Hebrew. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology 42. 693–711.Find this resource:

Benua, Laura. 1995. Identity effects in morphological truncation. In Jill Beckman, Laura Walsh-Dickey, & Suzanne Urbanczyk (eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, 77–136. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts.Find this resource:

Benveniste, Émile. 1946. Structure des relations de personne dans le verbe. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 43. 1–12.Find this resource:

Beretta, Alan, Carrie Campbell, Thomas H. Carr, Jie Huang, Lothar M. Schmitt, Kiel Christianson, & Yue Cao. 2003. An ER-fMRI investigation of morphological inflection in German reveals that the brain makes a distinction between regular and irregular forms. Brain and Language 85. 67–92.Find this resource:

Berger, Adam, Vincent Della Pietra, & Stephan Della Pietra. 1996. A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Computational Linguistics 22(1). 39–71.Find this resource:

Bergman, Brita. 1983. Verbs and adjectives: Morphological processes in Swedish Sign Language. In Jim Kyle & Bencie Woll (eds.), Language in sign: An international perspective on sign language, 3–9. London: Croom Helm.Find this resource:

Bergman, Brita & Östen Dahl. 1994. Ideophones in sign languages? The place of reduplication in the tense-aspect system of Swedish Sign Language. In Carl Bache, Hans Basboll, and Carl-Erik Lindberg (eds.), Tense, aspect and action: Emripical and theoretical contributions to language typology, 397–422. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Bergs, Alexander & Gabriele Diewald (eds.). 2008. Constructions and language change. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Berko, Jean. 1958. The child’s learning of English Morphology. Word 14. 150–77.Find this resource:

Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 2012. The architecture of grammar and the division of labour in exponence. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), The morphology and phonology of exponence, 8–83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 2013. The Spanish lexicon stores stems with theme vowels, not roots with inflectional class features. Probus 25(1). 3–103.Find this resource:

Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 2016. We do not need structuralist morphemes, but we do need constituent structure. In Daniel Siddiqi & Heidi Harley (eds.), Morphological metatheory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Bertram, Raymond, Matti Laine, Harald Baayen, Robert Schreuder, & Jukka Hyönä. 2000. Affixal homonymy triggers full-form storage, even with inflected words, even in a morphologically rich language. Cognition 74. B13–B25.Find this resource:

Bertram, Raymond, Robert Schreuder, & Harald Baayen. 2000. The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homonymy, and productivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26. 489–511.Find this resource:

Beuzeville, Louise de, Trevor A. Johnston, & Adam Schembri. 2009. The use of space with indicating verbs in Auslan: A corpus-based investigation. Sign Language & Linguistics 12(1). 53–82.Find this resource:

Beyersmann, Elisabeth, Anne Castles, & Max Coltheart. 2011. Early morphological decomposition during visual word recognition: Evidence from masked transposed-letter priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 18. 937–42.Find this resource:

Beyersmann, Elisabeth, Samantha F. McCormick, & Kathleen Rastle. 2013. Letter transpositions within morphemes and across morpheme boundaries. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 66(12). 2389–410.Find this resource:

Bhatt, Parth & Ingo Plag (eds.). 2006. The structure of creole words: Segmental, syllabic and morphological aspects. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Find this resource:

Bickel, Balthasar. 2007. Typology in the 21st century: Major current developments. Linguistic Typology 11. 239–51.Find this resource:

(p. 624) Bickel, Balthasar. 2010. Capturing particulars and universals in clause linkages: A multivariate analysis. In Isabelle Bril (ed.), Clause-hierarchy and clause-linking: The syntax and pragmatics interface, 51–102. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Bickel, Balthasar. 2011. Multivariate typology and field linguistics: A case study on detransitivization in Kiranti (Sino-Tibetan). In Peter K. Austin, Oliver Bond, David Nathan, & Lutz Marten (eds.), Proceedings of Conference on Language Documentation and Linguistic Theory 3, 3–13. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Find this resource:

Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2005a. Locus of marking: Whole-language typology. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World Atlas of Language Structures, 106–9. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2005b. Inflectional synthesis of the verb. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World Atlas of Language Structures, 94–7. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2007. Inflectional morphology. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. vol. 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 2nd edn, 169–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bickel, Balthasar, Goma Banjade, Martin Gaenszle, Elena Lieven, Netra Prasad Paudyal, Ichchha Purna Rai, Manoj Rai, Novel Kishore Rai, & Sabine Stoll. 2007. Free prefix ordering in Chintang. Language 83(1). 43–73.Find this resource:

Bickel, Balthasar & Fernando Zúñiga. 2017. The ‘word’ in polysynthetic languages: phonological and syntactic challenges. In Michael Fortescue, Nicholas Evans, & Marianne Mithun (eds.), The Oxford handbook of polysynthesis, 158–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bien, Heidrun, Willem J. M. Levelt, & R. Harald Baayen. 2005. Frequency effects in compound production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102. 17876–81.Find this resource:

Bildhauer, Felix. 2008. Clitic left dislocation and focus projection in Spanish. In Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, 346–57. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bisang, Walter. 2011. Variation and reproducibility in linguistics. In Peter Siemund (ed.), Linguistic Universals and Language Variation, 237–63. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Bisetto, Antonietta & Sergio Scalise. 2005. The classification of compounds, Lingue e Linguaggio 4. 319–32.Find this resource:

Bishop, Dorothy V. M. 2017. Why is it so hard to reach agreement on terminology? The case of developmental language disorder (DLD). International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 52(6). 671–80.Find this resource:

Bittner, Andreas. 1996. Starke ‘schwache’ Verben—schwache ‘starke’ Verben: deutsche Verbflexion und Natürlichkeit. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Find this resource:

Bittner, Dagmar. 1991. Von starken Feminina und schwachen Maskulina. Die neuhochdeutsche Substantivflexion—Eine Systemanalyse im Rahmen der natürlichen Morphologie. Jena: Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena PhD dissertation [appeared in ZAS Papers in Linguistics 31, 2003].Find this resource:

Bittner, Dagmar, Wolfgang U. Dressler, & Marianne Kilani-Schoch. 2003. Development of inflection in first language acquisition: A cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2001. Realisation-based Lexicalism. Journal of Linguistics 37. 317–27.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2003. Stems and paradigms. Language 79(4). 737–67.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2004. Inflection classes and economy. In Lutz Gunkel, Gereon Müller, & Gisela Zifonun (eds.), Explorations in nominal inflection, 41–85. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2006. Word-based morphology. Journal of Linguistics 42(3). 531–73.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2008. The post-transformational enterprise. Journal of Linguistics 44(3). 723–42.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2013. Word-based morphology from Aristotle to modern WP (Word and paradigm models). In Keith Allan (ed.), The Oxford handbook of the history of linguistics, 375–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2014. The morphology of words. In Matthew Goldrick, Victor Ferreira, & Michele Miozzo (eds.), The Oxford handbook of language production, 152–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 625) Blevins, James P. 2015. Inflectional paradigms. In Matthew Baerman (ed), The Oxford handbook of inflection, 87–111. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P. 2016. Word and paradigm morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Blevins, James P., Petar Milin, & Michael Ramscar. 2017. The Zipfian Paradigm Cell Filling Problem. In Ferenc Kiefer, James P. Blevins, & Huba Bartos (eds.), Perspectives on morphological structure: Data and analyses. Leiden: Brill.Find this resource:

Blevins, Juliette. 1996. Mokilese reduplication. Linguistic Inquiry 27. 523–30.Find this resource:

Bloch, Bernard. 1947. English verb inflection. Language 23(4). 399–418.Find this resource:

Bloch, Bernard & George L. Trager. 1942. Outlines of linguistic analysis. Baltimore, MD: Linguistic Society of America.Find this resource:

Blom, Elma. 2007. Modality, infinitives and finite bare verbs in Dutch and English child language. Language Acquisition 14(1). 75–113.Find this resource:

Blom, Elma & Johanne Paradis. 2013. Past tense production by English second language learners with and without language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 56. 281–94.Find this resource:

Blom, Elma, Johanne Paradis, & Tamara Sorenson Duncan. 2012. Effects of input properties, vocabulary size, and L1 on the development of third person singular ‑s in child L2 English. Language Learning 62(3). 965–94.Find this resource:

Blom, Elma & Frank Wijnen. 2013. Optionality of finiteness: evidence for a no overlap stage in Dutch child language. First Language 33(3). 225–45.Find this resource:

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1914a. An introduction to the study of language. New York: Holt.Find this resource:

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1914b. Sentence and word. Transactions of the American Philological Society 45. 65–75.Find this resource:

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1926. A set of postulates for the science of language. Language 2. 153–64.Find this resource:

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Find this resource:

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1984. Language (Reprint). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press [original edition: New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1933].Find this resource:

Blust, Robert A. 2003. The phonestheme n- in Austronesian languages. Oceanic Linguistics 42(1). 187–212.Find this resource:

Boas, Franz. 1911. Handbook of American Indian languages. Part 1. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Find this resource:

Boas, Hans & Ivan Sag (eds.). 2012. Sign-based Construction Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bobaljik, Jonathan D. 2000. The ins and outs of contextual allomorphy. In Kleanthes Grohmann & Caro Struijke (eds.), University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 35–71. College Park: University of Maryland, Department of Linguistics.Find this resource:

Bobaljik, Jonathan D. 2007. Paradigms, optimal and otherwise: A case for skepticism. In Asef Bachrach & Andrew I. Nevins (eds.), Inflectional identity, 29–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2008. Where’s phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation. In Daniel Harbour, David Adger, & Susana Béjar (eds.), Phi-theory: Phi features across modules and interfaces, 295–328. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bobaljik, Jonathan D. 2012. Universals in comparative morphology: Suppletion, superlatives, and the structure of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bochner, Harry. 1984. Inflection within derivation. The Linguistic Review 3. 411–21.Find this resource:

Bochner, Harry. 1993. Simplicity in Generative Morphology. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Boeckx, Cedric. 2008. Bare syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Boeckx, Cedric. 2010. Defeating lexicocentrism: Outline of elementary syntactic structures. Manuscript, ICREA/Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Find this resource:

Bögel, Tina. 2010. Pashto (endo)clitics in a parallel architecture. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of LFG 2010, 85–105. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bögel, Tina, Miriam Butt, Ronald M. Kaplan, Tracy Holloway King, & John Maxwell III. 2009. Prosodic phonology in LFG: A new proposal. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of LFG 2009, 146–66. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier. 2015. Periphrasis as collocation. Morphology 25. 63–110.Find this resource:

(p. 626) Bonami, Olivier & Sarah Beniamine. 2015. Implicative structure and joint predictiveness. In Vito Pirelli, Claudia Marzi, & Marcello Ferro (eds.), Word structure and word usage. Proceedings of the NetWordS final conference, 4–9. CEUR Workshop Proceedings.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Gilles Boyé. 2002. Suppletion and dependency in inflectional morphology. In Frank van Eynde, Lars Hellan, & Dorothee Beermann (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International HPSG Conference, 51–70. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Gilles Boyé. 2003. La nature morphologique des allomorphies conditionées. In Bernard Fradin (ed.), Actes du Troisième Forum de Morphologie, 39–48. Lille: UMR SILEX, Université Lille 3.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Gilles Boyé. 2006. Deriving inflectional irregularity. In Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Varna, 361–80. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Gilles Boyé. 2007. French pronominal clitics and the design of Paradigm Function Morphology. In Geert Booij, Luca Ducceschi, Bernard Fradin, Emiliano Guevara, Angeliki Ralli, & Sergio Scalise (eds.), On-line proceedings of the Fifth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM5) Fréjus, 15–18 September 2005, 291–322. Bologna: University of Bologna.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Gilles Boyé. 2010. La morphologie flexionnelle est-elle une fonction? In Injoo Choi-Jonin, Marc Duval, & Olivier Soutet (eds.), Typologie et comparatisme, hommage offert à Alain Lemaréchal, 21–35. Leuven: Peeters.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Berthold Crysmann. 2013. Morphotactics in an information-based model of realisational morphology. In Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Freie Universität Berlin, 27–47. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Berthold Crysmann. 2016. The role of morphology in constraint-based lexicalist grammars. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 609–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier, Fabiola Henri, & Ana Luís. 2011. The emergence of morphomic structure in Romance-based Creoles. Paper presented at the 20th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Osaka, July 25–30.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Ana R. Luís. 2015. Sur la morphologie implicative dans la conjugaison du portugais: une étude quantitative. Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 22. 111–51.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Pollet Samvelian. 2008. Sorani Kurdish person markers and the typology of agreement. Paper presented at the 13th International Morphology Meeting, Vienna, 3–6 February 2008.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Pollet Samvelian. 2015. The diversity of inflectional periphrasis in Persian. Journal of Linguistics 51(2). 327–82.Find this resource:

Bonami, Olivier & Gregory Stump. 2016. Paradigm Function Morphology. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 449–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bond, Oliver. 2013. A base for canonical negation. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 20–47. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bonet, E. 1991. Morphology after syntax: Pronominal clitics in Romance. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Bonet, Eulàlia & Daniel Harbour. 2012. Contextual allomorphy. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), The morphology and phonology of exponence, 195?235. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 1977. Dutch morphology. A study of word formation in Generative Grammar. Lisse: The Peter De Ridde Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 1990. The boundary between morphology and syntax: Separable complex verbs in Dutch. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1990, 45–64. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 1993. Against split morphology. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1993, 27–49. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 1996. Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1995, 1–16. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

(p. 627) Booij, Geert. 1997. Autonomous morphology and paradigmatic relations. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1996, 35–53. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2000. Inflection and derivation. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehman, & Joachim Mugdan (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An international handbook on inflection and word-formation, vol. 1, 360–9. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2002a. Constructional idioms, morphology and the Dutch lexicon. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 14(4). 301–29.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2002b. Separable complex verbs in Dutch: A case of periphrastic word formation. In Nicole Dehé, Ray Jackendoff, Andrew Macintyre, & Silke Urban (eds.), Verb-particle explorations, 21–42. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2002c. The morphology of Dutch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2003. Periphrastic word formation. In Geert Booij, Janet DeCesaris, Angela Ralli, & Sergio Scalise (eds.), Papers from the Third Mediterranean Morphology Meeting, Barcelona, 20–23 September 2001, 15–28. Barcelona: IULA Universita Pompeu Fabra.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2004. Constructions and the interface between lexicon and syntax. In Henk Aertsen, Mike Hannay, & Gerard Steen (eds.), Words in their place. Festchrift for J.L. Mackenzie, 275–81. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2005a. Compounding and derivation: Evidence for Construction Morphology. In Wolfgang U. Dressler, Dieter Kastovsky, Oskar Pfeiffer, & Franz Rainer (eds.), Morphology and its demarcations, 109–32. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2005b. Morphology and the tripartite parallel architecture of the grammar. In Maria Grossmann & Anna-Maria Thornton (eds.), La formazione delle parole, 109–25. Roma: Bulzoni.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2005c. Construction-dependent morphology. Lingue e Linguaggio 4. 31–46.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2005d. The grammar of words. 1st edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2006. Inflection and derivation. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd edn, 654–61. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2007a. Construction morphology and the lexicon. In Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé, & Nabil Harbout (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 5th Décembrettes. Morphology in Toulouse, 34–44. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2007b. Polysemy and Construction Morphology. In Fons Moerdijk, Ariane van Santen, & Rob Tempelaars (eds.), Leven met woorden, 355–64. Leiden: Instituut voor Nederlandse Lexicologie.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2008a. Constructional idioms as products of linguistic change: the aan het + infinitive construction in Dutch. In Alexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), Constructions and language change, 79–104. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2008b. Paradigmatic morphology. In Bernard Fradin (ed.), La raison morphologique. Hommage á la mémoire de Danielle Corbin, 29–38. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2008c. Composition et morphologie des constructions. In Dany Amiot (ed.), La composition dans une perspective typologique, 49–73. Artois: Artois Presses Université.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2009a. Phrasal names: A constructionist analysis. Word Structure 2(2). 219–40.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2009b. Lexical integrity as a formal universal: A constructionist view. In Sergio Scalise, Elisabetta Magni, & Antonietta Bisetto (eds.), Universals of language today, 83–100. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2009c. Construction morphology and compounding. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding, 201–16. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2009d. A constructional analysis of quasi-incorporation in Dutch. Gengo Kenkyu 135. 5–27.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2010a. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2010b. Construction morphology. Language and Linguistics Compass 4(7). 543–55.Find this resource:

(p. 628) Booij, Geert. 2010c. Compound construction: Schemas or analogy? A Construction Morphology perspective. In Sergio Scalise & Irene Vogel (eds.), Cross-disciplinary issues in compounding, 93–108. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2012. The grammar of words, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2013. Morphology in Construction Grammar. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 255–74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2015. Word formation in Construction Grammar. In Peter O. Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen, & Franz Rainer (eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe, vol. 1, 188–202. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2016. Construction Morphology. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 424–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2017a. Construction Morphology. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.254.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert. 2017b. Inheritance and motivation in Construction Morphology. In Nikolas Gisborne & Andrew Hippisley (eds.), Defaults in morphological theory, 18–39. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert (ed.). 2018. The construction of words. Advances in Construction Morphology. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Jenny Audring. 2017. Construction Morphology and the Parallel Architecture of Grammar. Cognitive Science 41. 277–302. doi:10.1111/cogs.12323.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Jenny Audring. 2018. Partial motivation, multiple motivation: The role of output schemas in morphology. In Geert Booij (ed.), The construction of words. Advances in Construction Morphology. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Jenny Audring. To appear. Category change in Construction Morphology. In Kristel Van Goethem, Muriel Norde, Evie Coussé, & Gudrun Vanderbauwhede (eds.), Category change from a constructional perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Matthias Hüning. 2014. Affixoids and constructional idioms. In Ronny Boogaart, Timothy Colleman, & Gijsbert Rutten (eds.), Extending the scope of Construction Grammar, 77–105. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Rochelle Lieber. 1993. On the simultaneity of morphological and prosodic structure. In Sharon Hargus & Ellen Kaisse (eds.), Studies in Lexical Phonology, 23–44. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Jaap van Marle (eds.). 2003. Yearbook of morphology 2002. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Francesca Masini. 2013. Semantic perspectives in Construction Morphology. Manuscript, University of Bologna.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Francesca Masini. 2015. The role of second order schemas in the construction of complex words. In Laurie Bauer, Livia Kőrtvélyessy, & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), Semantics of complex words, 47–66. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Booij, Geert & Jerzy Rubach. 1987. Postcyclic versus postlexical rules in Lexical Phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 18. 1–44.Find this resource:

Borer, Hagit. 2005a. In name only. Structuring sense, vol. I. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Borer, Hagit. 2005b. The normal course of events. Structuring sense, vol. II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Borer, Hagit. 2013. Taking form. Structuring sense, vol. III. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Boretzky, Norbert & Peter Auer (eds.). 1990. Spielarten der Natürlichkeit—Spielarten der Ökonomie: Beiträge zum 5. Essener Kolloquium über “Grammatikalisierung: Natürlichkeit und Systemökonomie” vom 6.10.–8.10.1988 an der Universität Essen. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Find this resource:

Boretzky, Norbert, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Janez Orešnik, Karmen Teržan, & Wolfgang U. Wurzel (eds.). 1995. Natürlichkeitstheorie und Sprachwandel/Teorija naravnosti in jezikovno spreminjanie. Beiträge zum internationalen Symposium über “Natürlichkeitstheorie und Sprachwandel” an der Universität Maribor vom 13.5.–15.5.1993. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Find this resource:

(p. 629) Börjars, Kersti, Nigel Vincent, & Carol Chapman. 1997. Paradigms, periphrases and pronominal inflection: A feature-based account. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1996, 155–80. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Borsley, Robert. 1999. Weak auxiliaries, complex verbs and inflected complementizers in Polish. In Robert D. Borsley & Adam Przepiórkowski (eds.), Slavic in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, 29–59. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Börstell, Carl. 2011. Revisiting reduplication: Toward a description of reduplication in predicative signs in Swedish Sign Language. Stockholm: Stockholms Universitet MA thesis.Find this resource:

Botha, Rudolf. 1981. A base rule theory of Afrikaans synthetic compounding. In Michael Moortgat, Harry van der Hulst, & Teun Hoekstra (eds.), The scope of lexical rules, 1–77. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

Botha, Rudolf. 1988. Form and meaning in word formation: A study of Afrikaans reduplication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bouvet, Danielle. 1997. Le corps et la métaphore dans les langues gestuelles: à la recherche des modes de production des signes. Paris: L’Harmattan.Find this resource:

Bowern, Claire. 2015. Diachrony. In Matthew Baerman (ed.), The Oxford handbook of inflection, 233–50. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Boyé, Gilles. 2000. Problèmes de morpho-phonologie verbale en français, en espagnol et en italien. Paris: University of Paris VII PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Boyes Braem, Penny & Rachel Sutton-Spence (eds.). 2001. The hands are the head of the mouth: The mouth as articulator in sign languages. Hamburg: Signum Press.Find this resource:

Bozic, Mirjana & William Marslen-Wilson. 2010. Neurocognitive contexts for morphological complexity: dissociating inflection and derivation. Language and Linguistics Compass 11. 1063–73.Find this resource:

Bradley, Dianne. 1980. Lexical representation of derivational relation. In Mark Aronoff & Mary-Louise Kean (eds.), Juncture, 37–55. Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Find this resource:

Braun, Maria. 2009. Word-formation and creolisation. The case of Early Sranan. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Braun, Maria & Ingo Plag. 2003. How transparent is creole morphology? A study of early Sranan word-formation. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2002, 81–104. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Brekle, Herbert. 1970. Generative Satzsemantik und transformationelle Syntax im System der englischen Nominalkomposition. Munich: Fink.Find this resource:

Brennan, Mary. 1990. Word formation in British Sign Language. Stockholm: Stockholms Universitet.Find this resource:

Brennan, Mary. 1992. The visual world of British Sign Language: An introduction. In David Brien (ed.), Dictionary of British Sign Language/English, 1–18. London: Faber and Faber.Find this resource:

Brennan, Mary. 2001. Encoding and capturing productive morphology. Sign Language and Linguistics 4.(1/2). 47–62.Find this resource:

Brentari, Diane. 2002. Modality differences in sign language phonology and morphophonemics. In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier, & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 35–64. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Brentari, Diane & Carol Padden. 2001. Native and foreign vocabulary in American Sign Language: A lexicon with multiple origins. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Foreign vocabulary in sign languages: A cross-linguistic investigation of word formation, 87–119. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan. 1978. A realistic transformational grammar. In Morris Halle, Joan Bresnan, & George Miller (eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality, 1–59. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan (ed.). 1982a. The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan. 1982b. The passive in lexical theory. In Joan Bresnan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations, 3–86. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan. 1998. Morphology competes with syntax: Explaining typological variation in weak crossover effects. In Pilar Barbosa, Danny Fox, Paul Hagstrom, Martha McGinnis, & David Pesetsky (eds.), Is the best good enough? Proceedings from the Workshop on Optimality in Syntax, 59–92. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 630) Bresnan, Joan. 2000. Explaining morphosyntactic competition. In Mark Baltin & Chris Collins (eds.), Handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, 11–44. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan. 2001a. Lexical functional syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan. 2001b. Optimal syntax. In Joost Dekkers, Frank van der Leeuw, & Jeroen van de Weijer (eds.), Optimality theory: Phonology, syntax and acquisition, 334–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan, Ash Asudeh, Ida Toivonen, & Stephen Wechsler. 2016. Lexical functional syntax, 2nd edn. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan & Jonni M. Kanerva. 1989. Locative Inversion in Chicheŵa: A case study of factorization in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 1–50.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan & Ronald Kaplan. 1982. Lexical-Functional Grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In Joan Bresnan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan & Sam Mchombo. 1987. Topic, pronoun and agreement in Chicheŵa. Language 63(4). 741–82.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan & Sam Mchombo. 1995. The Lexical Integrity Principle: Evidence from Bantu. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13(2). 181–254.Find this resource:

Bresnan, Joan & Lioba Moshi. 1990. Object asymmetries in comparative Bantu syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 21(2). 147–85.Find this resource:

Broadwell, George Aaron. 2008. Turkish suspended affixation is lexical sharing. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), The Proceedings of the LFG08 conference, 198–213. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Broselow, Ellen and John J. McCarthy. 1983/84. A theory of internal reduplication. The Linguistic Review 3. 25–88.Find this resource:

Brousseau, Anne-Marie, Sandra Filipovich, & Claire Lefebvre. 1989. Morphological processes in Haitian Creole: The question of substratum and simplification. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 4(1). 1–36.Find this resource:

Brown, Dunstan. 2016. Defaults and overrides in morphological description. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 272–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Brown, Dunstan & Marina Chumakina. 2013. What there is and what there might be: An introduction to Canonical Typology. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 1–19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Brown, Dunstan, Marina Chumakina, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.). 2013. Canonical morphology and syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Brown, Dunstan, Maria Chumakina, Greville G. Corbett, Gergana Popova, & Andrew Spencer. 2012. Defining ‘periphrasis’: Key notions. Morphology 22(2). 233–75. DOI: 10.1007/s11525-012-9201-5Find this resource:

Brown, Dunstan, Greville G. Corbett, Norman Fraser, Andrew Hippisley, & Alan Timberlake. 1996. Russian noun stress and network morphology. Linguistics 34. 53–107.Find this resource:

Brown, Dunstan & Andrew Hippisley. 2012. Network Morphology: A defaults-based theory of word structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Brown, Roger. 1973. A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Bruck, Anthony, Robert A. Fox, & Michael W. La Galy (eds.). 1974. Papers from the Parasession on Natural Phonology, Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Find this resource:

Brysbaert, Marc & Boris New. 2009. Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods 41. 977–90.Find this resource:

Burani, Cristina & Alfonso Caramazza. 1987. Representation and processing of derived words. Language and Cognitive Processes 2. 217–27.
Find this resource:

Burani, Cristina, Dario Salmaso, & Alfonso Caramazza. 1984. Morphological structure and lexical access. Visible Language 18. 342–52.
Find this resource:

(p. 631) Burzio, Luigi. 2004. Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in Italian verbal inflection. In Julie Auger, J. Clancy Clements, and Barbara Vance (eds.), Contemporary approaches to Romance linguistics. 17–44. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Butt, Miriam & Tracy Holloway King. 1998. Interfacing phonology with LFG. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG98 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Butt, Miriam, Tracy Holloway King, María-Eugenia Niño, & Frédérique Segond. 1999. A grammar writer’s cookbook. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Butt, Miriam, María-Eugenia Niño, & Frédérique Segond. 1996. Multilingual processing of auxiliaries in LFG. In Dafydd Gibbon (ed.), Natural language processing and speech technology, 111–22. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Butt, Miriam & Louisa Sadler. 2003. Verbal morphology and agreement in Urdu. In Uwe Junghanns & Luka Szucsich (eds.), Syntactic structures and morphological information, 57–100. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Butterworth, Brian. 1983. Lexical representation. In Brian Butterworth (ed.), Language production, vol. 2, 257–94. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Find this resource:

Butterworth, Brian. 1989. Lexical access in speech production. In William Marslen-Wilson (ed.), Lexical representation and process, 108–35. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan. 1995. Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10(5). 425–55.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan. 2007. Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan & Paul Hopper (eds.). 2001. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan & Carol L. Moder. 1983. Morphological classes as natural categories. Language 59. 251–70.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan, William Pagliuca, & Revere D. Perkins. 1990. On the asymmetries in the affixation of grammatical material. In William Croft, Suzanne Kemmer, & Keith Denning (eds.), Studies in typology and diachrony. Papers presented to Joseph H. Greenberg on his 75th birthday, 1–42. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins, & William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Bybee, Joan & Dan Slobin. 1982. Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language 58(2). 265–89.Find this resource:

Bye, Patrick & Peter Svenonius. 2012. Non-concatenative morphology as epiphenomenon. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), The morphology and phonology of exponence, 427–95. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Caballero, Gabriela & Alice C. Harris. 2012. A working typology of multiple exponence. In Ferenc Kiefer, Mária Ladányi, & Péter Siptár (eds.), Current issues in morphological theory: (Ir)regularity, analogy and frequency. Selected papers from the 14th International Morphology Meeting, Budapest, 13–16 May 2010, 163–88. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Caha, Pavel. 2009. The nanosyntax of case. Tromsø: University of Tromsø PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Cahill, Aoife, Michael Burke, Martin Forst, Ruth O’Donovan, Christian Rohrer, Josef van Genabith, & Andy Way. 2005. Treebank-based acquisition of multilingual unification grammar resources. Research on Language and Computation 3(2). 247–79.Find this resource:

Calcagno, Mike. 1995. Interpreting lexical rules. Proceedings of the First Conference on Formal Grammar, 33–45. Barcelona.Find this resource:

Cameracanna, Emanuela, Serena Corazza, Elena Pizzuto, & Virginia Volterra. 1994. How visual spatial-temporal metaphors of speech become visible in sign. In Inger Ahlgren, Brita Bergman, & Mary Brennan (eds.), Perspectives on sign language structure: Papers from the Fifth International (p. 632) Symposium on Sign Language Research. vol. 1; Held in Salamanca, Spain, 25–30 May 1992, 55–68. Durham, UK: International Sign Linguistics Association.Find this resource:

Camilleri, Maris & Phyllisienne Gauci. 2014. Syncretism and its effects within Maltese nominal paradigms. Folia Linguistica 47(2). 323–43.Find this resource:

Campbell, Lyle & Richard Janda. 2001. Introduction: conceptions of grammaticalization and their problems. Language Sciences 23. 93–112.Find this resource:

Cappellaro, Chiara. 2013. Overabundance in diachrony: A case study. In Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden, & John Charles Smith (eds.), The boundaries of pure morphology: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives, 209–20. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Cappelle, Bert. 2005. Particle patterns in English: A comprehensive coverage. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Caramazza, Alfonso. 1984. The logic of neuropsychological research and the problem of patient classification in aphasia. Brain and Language 21. 9–20.Find this resource:

Caramazza, Alfonso. 1997. How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? Cognitive Neuropsychology 14. 177–208.Find this resource:

Caramazza, Alfonso & Argye E. Hillis. 1990. Levels of representation, co-ordinate frames, and unilateral neglect. Cognitive Neuropsychology 7. 391–445.Find this resource:

Caramazza, Alfonso, Alessandro Laudanna, & Cristina Romani. 1988. Lexical access and inflectional morphology. Cognition 28. 297–332.Find this resource:

Cardoso, Hugo C. 2009. The Indo-Portuguese language of Diu. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Carr, Charles T. 1939. Nominal compounds in Germanic. London: Milford.Find this resource:

Carstairs, Andrew. 1983. Paradigm economy. Journal of Linguistics 19(1). 115–28.Find this resource:

Carstairs, Andrew. 1987. Allomorphy in inflection. London: Croom Helm.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1991. Inflection classes: Two questions with one answer. In Frans Plank (ed.), Paradigms. The economy of inflection, 213–53. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1992. Current morphology. London/New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1994. Inflection classes, gender, and the Principle of Contrast. Language 70(4). 737–88.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1998. How lexical semantics constrains inflectional allomorphy. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1997, 1–24. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 2000. Paradigm structure conditions in affixal and nonaffixal inflection. In Andreas Bittner, Dagmar Bittner, & Klaus-Michael Köpcke (eds.), Angemessene Strukturen: Systemorganisation in Phonologie, Morphologie und Syntax, 79–89. Hildesheim: Olms.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 2001. Grammatically conditioned allomorphy, paradigmatic structure, and the ancestry constraint. Transactions of the Philological Society 99(2). 223–45.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 2002a. Current morphology. London/New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 2002b. How stems and affixes interact. In Sabrina Bendjaballah, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Oskar E. Pfeiffer, & Maria Voeikova (eds.), Morphology 2000. Selected Papers from the 9th Morphology Meeting, Vienna, 24–28 February 2000, 49–57. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 2005. Phrases inside compounds: A puzzle for lexicon-free morphology. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 2(3). 34–42.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 2008. System-congruity and violable constraints in German weak declension. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26(4). 775–93.Find this resource:

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 2010. The evolution of morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Cazden, Courtney B. 1968. The acquisition of noun and verb inflection. Child Development 39. 433–48.Find this resource:

Channon, Rachel. 2002. Beads on a string? Representations of repetition in spoken and signed languages. In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier, & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 65–87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 633) Chapman, Don & Royal Skousen. 2005. Analogical Modeling and morphological change: The case of the adjectival negative prefix in English. English Language and Linguistics 9(2). 333–57.Find this resource:

Chater, Nick, Alexander Clark, John A. Goldsmith, & Amy Perfors. 2015. Empiricism and language learnability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Cheng, Chenxi, Min Wang, & Charles Perfetti. 2011. Acquisition of compound words in Chinese-English bilingual children: Decomposition and cross-language activation. Applied Psycholinguistics 32. 583–600.Find this resource:

Chersi, Fabian, Marcello Ferro, Giovanni Pezzulo, & Vito Pirrelli. 2014. Topological self‐organization and prediction learning support both action and lexical chains in the brain. Topics in Cognitive Science 6(3). 476–91.Find this resource:

Chialant, Doriana & Alfonso Caramazza. 1995. Where is morphology and how is it processed? The case of written word recognition. In Laurie B. Feldman (ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing, 55–76. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Find this resource:

Cho, Young-Mee Yu & Peter Sells. 1995. A lexical account of inflectional suffixes in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 4(2). 119–74.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1953. Systems of syntactic analysis. The Journal of Symbolic Logic 18. 242–56.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1959. Review of Verbal Behavior, by B.F. Skinner. Language 35. 26–57.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1963. Formal properties of grammars. In Duncan Luce, Robert Bush, & Eugene Galanter (eds.) (1963–1965), Handbook of mathematical psychology (3 vols), vol. 2, 323–418. New York: Wiley.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Roderick A. Jacobs & Peter S. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar, 184–221. Waltham, MA: Ginn.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1972. Studies on semantics in Generative Grammar. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1975. The logical structure of linguistic theory. New York/London: Plenum Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1979 [1951]. The morphophonemics of modern Hebrew. New York: Garland Publishing [revision of 1951 University of Pennsylvania MA thesis].Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1985 [1955–6]. The logical structure of linguistic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press [edited version of 1955–1956 manuscript, with 1979 index; earlier edition published by Plenum Press, New York, copyright 1975].Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1987. Language and problems of knowledge: The Managua lectures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1992. A Minimalist program for linguistic theory. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 1. 1–71.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A Minimalist program for linguistic theory. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries. In Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step, 89–115. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by Phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 3, 104–31. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 1–22.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 2008a. The biolinguistic program: Where does it stand today? Manuscript, MIT.Find this resource:

(p. 634) Chomsky, Noam. 2008b. On phases. In Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero, & María Luisa Zubizarreta (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, 133–66. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam. 2013. Problems of projection. Lingua 130. 33–49.Find this resource:

Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Find this resource:

Christianson, Kiel, Rebecca L. Johnson, & Keith Rayner. 2005. Letter transpositions within and across morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 31. 1327–9.Find this resource:

Christoffels, Ingrid K., Christine Firk, & Niels O. Schiller. 2007. Bilingual language control: an event-related brain potential study. Brain Research 1147. 192–208.Find this resource:

Chumakina, Marina. 2011. Nominal periphrasis: A canonical approach. Studies in Language 35(2). 247–74.Find this resource:

Chumakina, Marina & Greville G. Corbett (eds.). 2013. Periphrasis. The role of syntax and morphology in paradigms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Clahsen, Harald. 1999. Lexical entries and rules of language: A multi-disciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22. 991–1013.Find this resource:

Clahsen, Harald & Mayella Almazán. 1998. Syntax and morphology in Williams Syndrome. Cognition 68. 167–98.Find this resource:

Clahsen, Harald & Mayella Almazán. 2001. Compounding and inflection in language impairment: evidence from Williams Syndrome (and SLI). Lingua 111. 729–57.Find this resource:

Clahsen, Harald, Claudia Felser, Kathleen Neubauer, Mikako Sato, & Renita Silva. 2010. Morphological structure in native and nonnative language processing. Language Learning 60(1). 21–43.Find this resource:

Clahsen, Harald, Gary Marcus, Susanne Bartke, & Richard Wiese. 1996. Compounding and inflection in German child language. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1995, 115–42. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Clahsen, Harald, Ingrid Sonnenstuhl, & James P. Blevins. 2003. Derivational morphology in the German mental lexicon: A dual-mechanism account. In Harald Baayen & Robert Schreuder (eds.), Morphological structure in language processing, 125–55. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Clark, Eve V. 1993. The lexicon in acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Clark, Eve V. 2009. First language acquisition, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Clements, Clancy. 1996. The genesis of a language: The formation and development of Korlai Portuguese. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Clements, Clancy & Ana R. Luís. 2015. Contact intensity and the borrowing of bound morphology in Korlai Indo-Portuguese. In Francesco Gardani, Peter Arkadiev, & Nino Amiridze (eds.), Borrowed morphology, 219–40. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Cogill‐Koez, Dorothea. 2000a. Signed language classifier predicates: linguistic structures or schematic visual representation? Sign Language and Linguistics 3(2). 153–207.Find this resource:

Cogill‐Koez, Dorothea. 2000b. A model of signed language ‘Classifier Predicates’ as templated visual representation. Sign Language and Linguistics 3(2). 209–36.Find this resource:

Colé, Pascale, Cécile Beauvillain, & Juan Segui. 1989. On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect. Journal of Memory and Language 28. 1–13.Find this resource:

Colé, Pascale, Juan Segui, & Marcus Taft. 1997. Words and morphemes as units for lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language 37. 312–30.Find this resource:

Collier, Scott. 2013. The evolution of complexity in Greek noun inflection. Guildford: University of Surrey PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Collins, Allan M. & M. Ross Quillian. 1969. Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verb Learning and Verbal Behavior 8. 240–7.Find this resource:

Collins, Chris. 1997. Local economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Collobert, Ronan, Jason Weston, Léon Bottou, Michael Karlen, Koray Kavukcuoglu, & Pavel Kuksa. 2011. Natural language processing (almost) from scratch. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12. 2493–537.Find this resource:

(p. 635) Coltheart, Max, Karalyn Patterson, & John C. Marshall. 1980. Deep dyslexia. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Find this resource:

Coltheart, Max, Kathleen Rastle, Conrad Perry, Robyn Langdon, & Johannes Ziegler. 2001. DRC: A Dual Route Cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review 108. 204–56.Find this resource:

Comrie, Bernard. 1991. Form and function in identifying cases. In Frans Plank (ed.), Paradigms: The economy of inflection, 41–55. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Comrie, Bernard. 2003. When agreement gets trigger-happy. Transactions of the Philological Society 101(2). 313–37. Special issue on Agreement: A typological perspective edited by Dunstan Brown, Greville G. Corbett, & Carole Tiberius.Find this resource:

Corazza, Serena. 1990. The morphology of classifier handshapes in Italian Sign Language (LIS). In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 71–82. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 1998. Morphology and agreement. In Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 191–205. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2003a. Agreement: Canonical instances and the extent of the phenomenon. In Geert Booij, Janet DeCesaris, Angela Ralli, & Sergio Scalise (eds.), Topics in morphology: Selected papers from the Third Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (Barcelona, September 20–22, 2001), 109–28. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2003b. Agreement: The range of the phenomenon and the principles of the Surrey Database of Agreement. Transactions of the Philological Society 101(2). 155–202. Special issue on Agreement: A typological perspective edited by Dunstan Brown, Greville G. Corbett, & Carole Tiberius.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2005. The canonical approach in typology. In Zygmunt Frajzyngier, Adam Hodges, & David S. Rood (eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories, 25–49. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2007a. Canonical typology, suppletion and possible words. Language 83(1). 8–42.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2007b. Deponency, syncretism, and what lies between. In Matthew Baerman, Greville G. Corbett, Dunstan Brown, & Andrew Hippisley (eds.), Deponency and morphological mismatches, 21–43. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2008. Determining morphosyntactic feature values: The case of case. In Greville G. Corbett & Michael Noonan (eds.), Case and grammatical relations: Papers in honour of Bernard Comrie, 1–34. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2009. Canonical inflectional classes. In Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé, & Jesse Tseng (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 6th Décembrettes, 1–11. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2010. Canonical derivational morphology. Word Structure 3(2). 141–55.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2011. Higher order exceptionality in inflectional morphology. In Horst J. Simon & Heike Wiese (eds.), Expecting the unexpected: Exceptions in grammar, 107–26. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2012. Features. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2013. Canonical morphosyntactic features. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 48–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. 2015. Morphosyntactic complexity: A typology of lexical splits. Language 91. 145–93.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. & Matthew Baerman. 2006. Prolegomena to a typology of morphological features. Morphology 16(2). 231–46.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G., Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina, & Andrew Hippisley. 2005. Resources for suppletion: A typological database and a bibliography. In Geert Booij, Eilianao Guevara, Angela (p. 636) Ralli, Salvatore Sgroi, & Sergio Scalise (eds.), Morphology and linguistic typology. On-line proceedings of the Fourth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM4) Catania 21–23 September 2003, 35–44. University of Bologna.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. & Sebastian Fedden. 2016. Canonical gender. Journal of Linguistics 52(3). 495–531.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G., Sebastian Fedden, & Raphael Finkel. 2017. Single versus concurrent feature systems: Nominal classification in Mian. Linguistic Typology 21(2). 209–60.Find this resource:

Corbett, Greville G. & Norman M. Fraser. 1993. Network Morphology: A DATR account of Russian nominal inflection. Journal of Linguistics 29(1). 113–42.Find this resource:

Corbin, Danielle. 1987. Morphologie dérivationnelle et structuration du lexique (2 vols). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Corbin, Danielle. 2001. Préfixes et suffixes: du sens aux catégories. Journal of French Language Studies 11(1). 41–69.Find this resource:

Cormier, Kearsy, Jordan Fenlon, Ramas Rentelis, & Adam Schembri. 2011. Lexical frequency in British Sign Language conversation: A corpus-based approach. In Peter K. Austin, Oliver Bond, Lutz Marten, & David Nathan (eds.), Proceedings of the conference on Language Documentation and Linguistic Theory 3, 1–10. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Find this resource:

Cormier, Kearsy, Adam Schembri, & Martha E. Tyrone. 2008. One hand or two? Nativisation of fingerspelling in ASL and BANZSL. Sign Language & Linguistics 11(1). 3–44.Find this resource:

Cormier, Kearsy, Adam Schembri, & Bencie Woll. 2013. Pronouns and pointing in sign languages. Lingua 137. 230–47.Find this resource:

Coseriu, Eugenio. 1962. Sistema, norma y habla. In Eugenio Coseriu, Teoría del lenguaje y lingüística general. Cinco estudios, 3–73. Madrid: Gredos.Find this resource:

Costello, Brendan. 2016. Effects of the use of space in the agreement system of lengua de signos española (Spanish Sign Language). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Cowie, Claire & Christiane Dalton-Puffer. 2002. Diachronic word-formation and studying changes in productivity over time: Theoretical and methodological considerations. In E. Díaz Vera (ed.), A changing world of words, 410–37. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Find this resource:

Cowper, Elizabeth. 2005. The geometry of interpretable features: INFL in English and Spanish. Language 81. 10–46.Find this resource:

Crasborn, Onno Alex, Els van der Kooij, Dafydd Waters, Bencie Woll, & Johanna Mesch. 2008. Frequency distribution and spreading behavior of different types of mouth actions in three sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics 11(1). 45–67.Find this resource:

Creider, Chet & Richard Hudson. 1999. Inflectional morphology in Word Grammar. Lingua 107. 163–87.Find this resource:

Crepaldi, Davide, Kathleen Rastle, & Colin J. Davis. 2010. Morphemes in their place: Evidence for position specific identification of suffixes. Memory & Cognition 38. 312–21.
Find this resource:

Crepaldi, Davide, Kathleen Rastle, Colin J. Davis, & Stephen J. Lupker. 2012. Seeing stems everywhere: Position-independent identification of stem morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 39. 510–25.Find this resource:

Crocco Galèas, Grazia. 1990. Conversion as morphological metaphor. In Julián Méndez Dosuna & Carmen Pensado (eds.), Naturalists at Krems. Papers from the Workshop on Natural Phonology and Natural Morphology (Krems 1–7 July 1988), 23–32. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.Find this resource:

Croft, William. 1990. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Crouch, Richard, Mary Dalrymple, Ron Kaplan, Tracy King, John Maxwell, & Paula Newman. 2008. XLE Documentation. Palo Alto, CA: Palo Alto Research Centre.Find this resource:

Crowley, Terry. 2008. Pidgin and creole morphology. In Silvia Kouwenberg & John Victor Singler (eds.), The handbook of pidgin and creole studies. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Find this resource:

Cruschina, Silvio, Martin Maiden, & John Charles Smith (eds.). 2013. The boundaries of pure morphology: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Crysmann, Berthold. 2003. Constraint-based coanalysis: Portuguese cliticisation and morphology–syntax interaction in HPSG. Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes and DFKI PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

(p. 637) Crysmann, Berthold. 2006. Floating Affixes in Polish. In Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Varna, 123–39. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Crysmann, Berthold & Olivier Bonami. 2012. Establishing order in type-based realisational morphology. In Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, 123–43. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Crysmann, Berthold & Olivier Bonami. 2016. Variable morphotactics in Information-based Morphology. Journal of Linguistics 52. 311–74.Find this resource:

Cuervo, María Cristina. 2003. Datives at large. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter & Ray Jackendoff. 2005. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Culicover, Peter & Andrzej Nowak. 2003. Dynamical grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Curme, George O. 1922. A grammar of the German language. London: Macmillan.Find this resource:

Curme, George O. 1935. A grammar of the English language. Boston: Heath.Find this resource:

Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Cysouw, Michael. 2005. What it means to be rare: The case of person marking. In Zygmund Frajzyngier & David Rood (eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories, 235–58. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Cysouw, Michael. 2011. Very atypical agreement indeed. Theoretical Linguistics 37. 153–60.Find this resource:

D’Esposito, Mark. 2007. From cognitive to neural models of working memory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Biological Sciences 362. 761–72.Find this resource:

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2001. Learning a morphological system without a default: The Polish genitive. Journal of Child Language 28. 545–74.Find this resource:

Dąbrowska, Ewa & Marcin Szczerbinski. 2006. Polish children’s productivity with case marking: the role of regularity, type frequency, and phonological diversity. Journal of Child Language 33(3). 559–97.Find this resource:

Daelemans, Walter & Antal Van den Bosch. 2005. Memory-based language processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Dahl, Östen. 2004. The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Dalal, Rinky H. & Loeb, Diane F. (2005). Imitative production of regular past tense ‑ed by English-speaking children with specific language impairment. International Journal of Communication Disorders 40(1). 67–82.Find this resource:

Dalrymple, Mary. 2001. Lexical Functional Grammar. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Dalrymple, Mary. 2015. Morphology in the LFG Architecture. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG15 Conference, 64–83. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Dalrymple, Mary, Ronald Kaplan, John Maxwell III, & Annie Zaenen (eds.). 1995. Formal issues in Lexical Functional Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Davidson, Kathryn. 2014. Quotation, demonstration, and iconicity. Manuscript, Harvard University.

Davis, Colin J. 2010. The spatial coding model of visual word identification. Psychological Review 117(3). 713–58.Find this resource:

Davis, Matthew H. & Kathleen Rastle. 2010. Form and meaning in early morphological processing: Comment on Feldman, O’Connor, and Moscoso del Prado Martin. 2009. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 17. 749–55.Find this resource:

Davis, Stuart & Natsuko Tsujimura. 2014. Non-concatenative derivation: Other processes. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 190–218. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dawkins, Richard. 1916. Modern Greek in Asia Minor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

De Jorio, Andrea. 2000 [1832]. La mimica degli antichi investigata nel gestire napoletano. Napoli: Fibreno [reprint Sala Bolognese: Arnaldo Forni, 1979; English translation Gesture in Naples and gesture in classical antiquity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000].Find this resource:

(p. 638) De Pauw, Guy & Peter W. Wagacha. 2007. Bootstrapping morphological analysis of Gīkūyū using maximum entropy learning. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (INTERSPEECH 2007), 1517–20. Antwerp.Find this resource:

DeGraff, Michel A. F. 2001. Morphology in creole genesis: A prolegomenon. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 53–121. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Dékány, Éva. 2011. A profile of the Hungarian DP: The interaction of lexicalization, agreement and linearization with the functional sequence. Tromsø: University of Tromsø PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Dell, Gary S. 1986. A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review 93. 283–321.Find this resource:

Dell, Gary & Joana Cholin. 2012. Language production: Computational models. The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics, 426–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

DeLong, Katherine A., Thomas P. Urbach, & Marta Kutas. 2005. Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience 8. 1117–21.Find this resource:

Demske, Ulrike. 2000. Zur Geschichte der ung-Nominalisierung im Deutschen: Ein Wandel morphologischer Produktivität. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache und Literatur 122(3). 365–411.Find this resource:

Deo, Ashwini. 2007. Derivational morphology in inheritance-based lexica: Insights from Pāṇṇini. Lingua 117. 175–201.Find this resource:

Desmets, Marianne & Florence Villoing. 2009. French VN lexemes: Morphological compounding in HPSG. In Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany, 89–109. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Di Sciullo, Anna Maria & Daniela Isac. 2008. The asymmetry of Merge. Biolinguistics 2(4). 260–90.Find this resource:

Di Sciullo, Anna Maria & Edwin Williams. 1987. On the definition of word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Diependaele, Kevin, Dominiek Sandra, & Jonathan Grainger. 2005. Masked cross-modal morphological priming: Unravelling morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic influences in early word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes 20(1). 75–114.Find this resource:

Diependaele, Kevin, Dominiek Sandra, & Jonathan Grainger. 2009. Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: The case of prefixed words. Memory & Cognition 37. 895–908.
Find this resource:

Dijkhoff, Marta. 1993. Papiamentu word formation: A case study of complex nouns and their relation to phrases and clauses. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Dima, Corina & Erhard Hinrichs. 2015. Automatic noun compound interpretation using deep neural networks and word embeddings. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computational Semantics (IWCS 2015). London, UK.Find this resource:

Dimmendaal, Gerrit. 2014. Nilo-Saharan. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 591–608. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dively, Valery. 2001. Signs without hands: Nonhanded signs in American Sign Language. In Valery Dively, Melanie Metzger, Sarah Taub, & Ann Marie Baer (eds.), Signed languages: discoveries from international research, 62–73. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Find this resource:

Dixon, James A. & Virginia A. Marchman. 2007. Grammar and the lexicon: Developmental ordering in language acquisition. Child Development 78. 190–212.Find this resource:

Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Aikhenvald (eds.). 2002a. Word: A cross-linguistic typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Aikhenvald. 2002b. Word: A typological framework. In R. M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), Word: A cross-linguistic typology, 1–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Döhler, Christian. 2015. Morphological complexity in Komnzo verbs. Presentation at the international conference Diversity Linguistics: Retrospect and Prospect, Leipzig, May 2015.Find this resource:

(p. 639) Döhler, Christian. 2016. Komnzo: A language of Southern New Guinea. Canberra: Australian National University PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Dohmes, Petra, Pienie Zwitserlood, & Jens Bölte. 2004. The impact of semantic transparency of morphologically complex words on picture naming. Brain and Language 90. 203–12.Find this resource:

Doke, Clement M. & S. Machabe Mofokeng. 1985. Textbook of Southern Sotho grammar, 2nd edn. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.Find this resource:

Dokulil, Miklos. 1968. Zur Theorie der Wortbildung. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universität Leipzig, Gesellschafts- und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe 17. 203–11.Find this resource:

Doleschal, Ursula and Anna M. Thornton (eds.). 2000. Extragrammatical and marginal morphology. Munich: LINCOM.Find this resource:

Donegan, Patricia J. 2001. Constraints and processes in phonological perception. In Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk (ed.), Constraints and preferences, 43–68. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Donegan, Patricia J. & David Stampe. 1979. The study of natural phonology. In Daniel A. Dinnsen (ed.), Current approaches to phonological theory, 126–73. Bloomington/London: Indiana University Press.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. 1998a. Prosodic misalignment and reduplication. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1997, 83–120. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. 1998b. On the prosodic misalignment of onsetless syllables. NLLT 16. 1–52.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. 1999. Morphological constraints on Bantu reduplication. Linguistic Analysis 29(1–2). 6–46.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. 2000. Morphological and prosodic constraints on Kinande verbal reduplication. Phonology 17. 1–38.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. 2003. Compounding and tonal non-transfer in Bantu languages. Phonology 20. 1–42.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. 2006. Canonical forms in Prosodic Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. 2007. Review of Reduplication: Doubling in morphology. Lingua 117. 1144–9.Find this resource:

Downing, Laura J. & Sharon Inkelas. 2015. What is reduplication? Typology and analysis part 2/2: The analysis of reduplication. Language and Linguistics Compass 9(12). 516–28.Find this resource:

Downing, Pamela. 1977. On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language 53(4). 810–42.Find this resource:

Dowty, David R. 1995. Toward a minimalist theory of syntactic structure. In Pauline Jacobson & Geoff Pullum (eds.), Syntactic discontinuity, 11–62. Dordrecht: Reidel.Find this resource:

Dresher, Elan & Harry van der Hulst. 1998. Head-dependent asymmetries in phonology: Complexity and visibility. Phonology 15. 317–52.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1974. Diachronic puzzles for natural phonology. In Anthony Bruck, Robert A. Fox, & Michael W. La Galy (eds.), Papers from the parasession on natural phonology, 95–102. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1977a. Grundfragen der Morphonologie. Vienna: Akademie Verlag.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1977b. Elements of a polycentristic theory of word formation. Wiener Linguistische Gazette 15. 13–32.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1981a. On word formation in natural morphology. Wiener Linguistische Gazette 26. 3–14 [also appeared in Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Linguists (Tokyo 1982), 172–82. Tokyo, 1983].Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1981b. Language shift and language death—a Protean challenge for the linguist.Folia Linguistica 15(1–2). 5–28.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1981c. General principles of poetic license in word formation. In Horst Geckeler (ed.), Logos Semantikos. Festschrift für Eugenio Coseriu, vol. 2, 423–31. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1984. Subtraction in word formation and its place within a theory of Natural Morphology. Quaderni di Semantica 5(1). 78–85.Find this resource:

(p. 640) Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1985a. On the predictiveness of Natural Morphology. Journal of Linguistics 21. 321–37.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1985b. Typological aspects of Natural Morphology. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 35. 51–70.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1985c. Morphonology: The dynamics of derivation. Ann Arbor: Karoma Press.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1986. Explanations in Natural Morphology, illustrated with comparative and agent-noun formation. Linguistics 24. 519–48.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1987. Word formation as part of natural morphology. In Wolfgang U. Dressler, Willy Mayerthaler, Oswald Panagl, & Wolfgang U. Wurzel (eds.), Leitmotifs in Natural Morphology, 99–126. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1988. Preferences vs. strict universals in morphology: Word-based rules. In Michael Hammond & Michael Noonan (eds.), Theoretical morphology: Approaches in modern linguistics, 143–54. New York: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1989. Prototypical differences between inflection and derivation. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 42. 3–10.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1990a. The cognitive perspective of ‘naturalist’ linguistic models. Cognitive Linguistics 1. 75–98.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1990b. Sketching submorphemes within natural morphology. In Julián Méndez Dosuna & Carmen Pensado (eds.), Naturalists at Krems. Papers from the Workshop on Natural Phonology and Natural Morphology (Krems 1–7 July 1988), 33–41. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1994a. Diminutivbildung als nicht-prototypische Wortbildungsregel. In Klaus-Michael Köpcke (ed.), Funktionale Untersuchungen zur deutschen Nominal- und Verbalmorphologie, 131–48. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1994b. Evidence of the first stages of morphology acquisition for linguistic theory: Extragrammatic morphology and diminutives. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 27(1). 91–108.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1996a. Language death. In Rajendra Singh (ed.), Towards a critical sociolinguistics, 195–210. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1996b. Parallelisms between natural textlinguistics and other components of natural linguistics. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung (STUF) 49(3). 295–311.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2000a. Naturalness. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, & Joachim Mugdan (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An international handbook on inflection and word-formation, vol. 1, 288–96. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2000b. Extragrammatical vs. marginal morphology. In Ursula Doleschal & Anna M. Thornton (eds,). Extragrammatical and marginal morphology, 1–10. Munich: LINCOM.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2000c. Subtraction. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, & Joachim Mugdan (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An international handbook on inflection and word-formation, vol. 1, 581–7. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2003. Naturalness and morphological change. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 461–71. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2005. Word-formation in Natural Morphology. In Pavol Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds.), Handbook of word-formation, 267–84. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2006. Compound types. In Gary Libben & Gonia Jarema (eds.), The representation and processing of compound words, 23–44. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Gianfranco Denes. 1988. Word formation in Italian-speaking Wernicke’s and Broca’s aphasics. In Wolfgang U. Dressler & Jacqueline Stark (eds.), Linguistic analyses of aphasic language, 69–88. New York: Springer.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Annemarie Karpf. 1995. The theoretical relevance of pre- and protomorphology in language acquisition. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1994, 99–122. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

(p. 641) Dressler, Wolfgang U., Willi Mayerthaler, Oskar Panagl, & Wolfgang U. Wurzel. 1987. Leitmotifs in natural morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Lavinia Merlini Barbaresi. 1994a. Italian dimuinutives as non-prototypical word formation. In Livia Tonelli & Wolfgang U. Dressler (eds.), Natural morphology: Perspectives for the nineties, 21–9. Padova: Unipress.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Lavinia Merlini Barbaresi. 1994b. Morphopragmatics: Diminutives and intensifiers in Italian, German, and other languages. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Karlheinz Mörth. 2012. Produktive and weniger produktive Komposition in ihrer Rolle im Text an Hand der Beziehungen zwischen Titel und Text. In Livio Gaeta & Barbara Schlücker (eds.), Das Deutsche als kompositionsfreudige Sprache. Strukturelle Eingeschaften und systembezogene Aspekte, 219–33. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Livia Tonelli (eds.). 1985. Natural Phonology from Eisenstadt: Papers on Natural Phonology from the Fifth International Phonology Meeting, June 25–28. Padova: CLESP.Find this resource:

Drews, Etta & Pienie Zwitserlood. 1995. Morphological and orthographic similarity in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21. 1098–116.Find this resource:

Dryer, Matthew. 2005a. Prefixing versus suffixing in inflectional morphology. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World atlas of language structures, 110–13. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dryer, Matthew. 2005b. Position of case affixes. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World atlas of language structures, 210–13. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dryer, Matthew. 2005c. Position of pronominal possessive affixes. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World atlas of language structures, 234–7. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dryer, Matthew. 2005d. Position of tense-aspect affixes. In Matthew Dryer, Martin Haspelmath, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), World atlas of language structures, 282–5. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Dulay, Heidi C. & Marina K. Burt. 1974. Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning 24(1). 37–53.Find this resource:

Duñabeitia, Jon Androni, Sachiko Kinoshita, Manuel Carreiras, & Dennis Norris. 2011. Is morpho-orthographic decomposition purely orthographic? Evidence from masked priming in the same-different task. Language and Cognitive Processes 26. 509–29.Find this resource:

Duñabeitia, Jon Andoni, Itziar Laka, Manuel Perea, & Manuel Carreiras. 2009. Is milkman a superhero like batman? Constituent morphological priming in compound words. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 21. 615–40.Find this resource:

Duñabeitia, Jon Andoni, Manuel Perea, & Manuel Carreiras. 2007. The role of the frequency of constituents in compound words: Evidence from Basque and Spanish. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14. 1171–6.Find this resource:

Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna (ed.). 1996. Intercomponential parallelisms in Natural Linguistics. Special issue of Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 49(3).Find this resource:

Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna. 2002. Challenges for Natural Linguistics in the 21st century: A personal view. In Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk & Jarosław Weckwerth (eds.), Future challenges for Natural Linguistics, 103–28. Munich: LINCOM.Find this resource:

Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna & Jarosław Weckwerth (eds.). 2002. Future challenges for Natural Linguistics. Munich: LINCOM.Find this resource:

Eggert, Elmar. 2008. Morphological variation in the construction of French names for inhabitants. In Franz Rainer, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Dieter Kastofsky, & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds.), Variation and change in morphology, 75–88. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Eisenberg, Peter. 1992. Suffixreanalyse und Syllabierung. Zum Verhältnis von phonologischer und morphologischer Segmentierung. Folia Linguistica Historica 13(1–2). 93–113.Find this resource:

(p. 642) El Yagoubi, Radouane, Valentina Chiarelli, Sara Mondini, Gelsomina Perrone, Morena Danieli, & Carlo Semenza. 2008. Neural correlates of Italian nominal compounds and potential impact of headedness effect: An ERP study. Cognitive Neuropsychology 25. 559–81.Find this resource:

Elman, Jeffrey, Annette Karmiloff-Smith, Elizabeth Bates, Mark Johnson Domenico Parisi, & Kim Plunkett. 1996. Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Elsen, Hilke. 2009. Affixoide: Nur was benannt wird, kann auch verstanden werden. Deutsche Sprache 04(2009). 316–33.Find this resource:

Embick, David. 2000. Features, syntax, and categories in the Latin perfect. Linguistic Inquiry 31(2). 185–230.Find this resource:

Embick, David. 2007. Linearization and Local Dislocation: Derivational mechanics and interactions. Linguistic Analysis 33(3–4). 303–36.Find this resource:

Embick, D. 2010. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Embick, David. 2012. On the targets of phonological realization. Paper presented at the MSPI Workshop at Stanford University. 13 October 2012.Find this resource:

Embick, David & Alec Marantz. 2008. Architecture and blocking. Linguistic Inquiry 39(1). 1–53.Find this resource:

Embick, David & Rolf Noyer. 2007. Distributed morphology and the syntax/morphology interface. In Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, 289–324. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Emmorey, Karen. 1995. The confluence of space and language in signed languages. In Clayton Valli & Ceil Lucas (eds.), Linguistics of American Sign Language: An introduction, 3rd edn, 318–46. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Find this resource:

Emmorey, Karen. 2007. The psycholinguistics of signed and spoken languages: How biology affects processing. In Gareth Gaskell (ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics, 703–21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Emmorey, Karen, Thomas Grabowski, Stephen McCullough, Laura L. B. Ponto, Richard D. Hichwa, & Hanna Damasio. 2005. The neural correlates of spatial language in English and American Sign Language: A PET study with hearing bilinguals. Neuroimage 24(3). 832–40.Find this resource:

Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 1990. Pragmatics of nonmanual behavior in Danish Sign Language. In William H. Edmondson & Fred Karlsson (eds.), SLR 87: Papers from the Fourth International Symposium on Sign Language Research, Lappeenranta, Finland, July 15–19, 1987, 121–8. Hamburg: Signum.Find this resource:

Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 1993. Space in Danish Sign Language: The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. Hamburg: Signum.Find this resource:

Eppler, Eva. 2010. Emigranto: The syntax of German-English code-switching. Vienna: Braunmüller.Find this resource:

Epstein, Samuel D., Hisatsugu Kitahara, & T. Daniel Seely. 2014. Labeling by minimal search: Implications for successive-cyclic A-movement and the conception of the postulate ‘Phase’. Linguistic Inquiry 45(3). 463–81.Find this resource:

Epstein, Samuel D. & T. Daniel Seely. 2006. Derivations in minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Erelt, Mati, Tiiu Erelt, & Kristiina Ross. 2000. Eesti keele käsiraamat. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.Find this resource:

Erlenkamp, Sonja. 2000. Syntaktische Kategorien und lexikalische Klassen. Typologische Aspekte der Deutschen Gebärdensprache. Munich: LINCOM.Find this resource:

Evans, Nicholas. 1995. A grammar of Kayardild. With historical-comparative notes on Tangkic. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Evans, Nicholas. 2003a. Bininj Gun-Wok. A pandialectal grammar of Mayali, Kunwinjku and Kune, 2 vols. Canberra: Australian National University.Find this resource:

Evans, Nicholas. 2003b. Typologies of agreement: Some problems from Kayardild. Transactions of the Philological Society 101(2). 203–34. Special issue on Agreement: A typological perspective edited by Dunstan Brown, Greville G. Corbett, & Carole Tiberius.Find this resource:

(p. 643) Evans, Nicholas. 2011. Semantic typology. In Jae-Jung Song (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology, 504–33. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Evans, Nicholas. 2012. Even more diverse than we had thought: The multiplicity of Trans-Fly languages. In Nicholas Evans & Marian Klamer (eds.), Melanesian languages on the edge of Asia: challenges for the 21st century, 109–49. Honolulu: Hawai‘i University Press.Find this resource:

Evans, Nicholas. 2013. Some problems in the typology of quotation: A canonical approach. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 66–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Evans, Nicholas. 2015. Inflection in Nen. In Matthew Baerman (ed.), The Oxford handbook of inflection, 543–75. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Evans, Nicholas, Dunstan Brown, & Greville G. Corbett. 2002. The semantics of gender in Mayali: partially parallel systems and formal implementation. Language 78. 111–55.Find this resource:

Evans, Roger & Gerald Gazdar. 1996. DATR: A language for lexical knowledge representation. Computational Linguistics 22(2). 167–216.Find this resource:

Everaert, Martin. 2013. The criteria for reflexivization. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 190–206. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Eynde, Frank Van. 1994. Auxiliaries and verbal affixes: A monostratal cross-linguistic analysis. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Habilitation thesis.Find this resource:

Fabb, Nigel. 1988. English suffixation is constrained only by selectional restrictions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6(4). 527–39.Find this resource:

Fabb, Nigel. 1998. Compounding. In Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 66–83. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Fábregas, Antonio. 2007. An exhaustive lexicalization account of directional complements. Nordlyd: Tromsø University Working Papers on Language & Linguistics 34(2). 165–99. Special Issue on Space, Motion, and Result edited by Monika Bašić, Marina Pantcheva, Minjeong Son, & Peter Svenonius.Find this resource:

Fábregas, Antonio & Francesca Masini. 2015. Prominence in morphology: The notion of head. Lingue e Linguaggio XIV(1). 79–96.Find this resource:

Falk, Yehuda. 1984. The English auxiliary system: A lexical-functional analysis. Language 60(3). 483–509.Find this resource:

Falk, Yehuda. 2001. Lexical-functional grammar: An introduction to parallel constraint-based syntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Falk, Yehuda. 2006. On the representation of case and agreement. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG06 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Falkenstein, Michael, Joachim Hohnsbein, Jörg Hoormann, & Ludger Blanke (1990). Effects of errors in choice reaction tasks on the ERP under focused and divided attention. In Cornelis Henri Marie Brunia, Anthony W. K. Gaillard, & Albert Kok (eds.), Psychophysiological Brain Research, vol. 1, 192–5. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.Find this resource:

Faltz, Leonard. 2000. Some notes on derivational relationships among Navajo verbs. In Andrew Carnie, Eloise Jelinek, & Mary Anne Willie (eds.), Papers in Honor of Ken Hale. Working Papers on Endangered and Less Familiar Languages 1. 151–64. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Find this resource:

Fanciullo, Franco. 1998. Per una interpretazione dei verbi italiani a ‘inserto’ velare. Archivio Glottologico Italiano LXXXIII(II). 188–239.Find this resource:

Farquharson, Joseph T. (2007). Creole morphology revisited. In Umberto Ansaldo, Stephen Matthews, & Lisa Lim (eds.), Deconstructing creole, 21–37. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Farrar, Scott. 2013. An ontological approach to Canonical Typology: Laying the foundations for e-Linguistics. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina, & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 239–61. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Faurot, Karla, Dianne Dellinger, Andy Eatough, & Steve Parkhurst. 1999. The identity of Mexican sign as a language. SIL Survey Report. Internet Publication [http://www.sil.org/mexico/lenguajes-de-signos/G009i-Identity-mfs.pdf, accessed 20 August 2014].Find this resource:

(p. 644) Fedden, Sebastian & Greville G. Corbett. 2017. Gender and classifiers in concurrent systems: Refining the typology of nominal classification. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 2(1). Art. 34. 1–47.Find this resource:

Federmeier, Kara D. 2007. Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology 44. 491–505.Find this resource:

Feldman, Jerome A. 2006. From molecule to metaphor: A neural theory of language. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press/Bradford.Find this resource:

Feldman, Laurie Beth. 2000. Are morphological effects distinguishable from the effects of shared meaning and shared form? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26. 1431–44.Find this resource:

Feldman, Laurie B., Emily G. Soltano, Matthew J. Pastizzo, & Sarah E. Francis. 2004. What do graded effects of semantic transparency reveal about morphological processing? Brain and Language 90. 17–30.Find this resource:

Fernald, Theodore B. 2000. Athabaskan Satellites and ASL Ion-morphs. In Sandy Chung, Jim McCloskey, & Nathan Sanders (eds.), Jorge Hankamer Webfest. [http://babel.ucsc.edu/Jorge/fernald.html, accessed 20 August 2014].Find this resource:

Fernald, Theodore B. & Donna Jo Napoli. 2000. Exploitation of morphological possibilities in signed languages: Comparison of American Sign Language with English. Sign Language & Linguistics 3(1). 3–58.Find this resource:

Figueiredo-Silva, Maria Cristina & Fabíola Ferreira Sucupira Sell. 2009. Algumas notas sobre os compostos em português brasileiro e em LIBRAS. [http://www.linguistica.fflch.usp.br/sites/linguistica.fflch.usp.br/files/compostos_usp.pdf, accessed 20 August 2014].

Fillmore, Charles. 2013. Berkeley construction grammar. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 111–32. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay, & Mary Catherine O’Connor. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64(3). 501–38.Find this resource:

Finin, Timothy W. 1980. The semantic interpretation of compound nominals. Proceedings of the First National Conference on AI, 310–12, Stanford, CA.Find this resource:

Finkel, Raphael & Gregory Stump. 2007. Principal parts and morphological typology. Morphology 17. 39–75.Find this resource:

Finkel, Raphael & Gregory Stump. 2009. Principal parts and degrees of paradigmatic transparency. In James P. Blevins & Juliette Blevins (eds.), Analogy in grammar, 13–52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Fiorentino, Robert & David Poeppel. 2007. Compound words and structure in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 22. 953–1000.Find this resource:

Firth, John Rupert. 1930. Speech. London: Ernest Benn.Find this resource:

Firth, John Rupert (ed.). 1957. Papers in linguistics 1934–1951. London: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Firth, John Rupert. 1968. A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–55. In Frank R. Palmer (ed.), Selected Papers of J. R. Firth 1952–59, 168–205. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Find this resource:

Fischer, Olga. 2011. Cognitive iconic grounding of reduplication in language. Semblance and Signification: Iconicity in Language and Literature 10. 55–82.Find this resource:

Fischer, Susan D. 1973. Two processes of reduplication in the American Sign Language. Foundations of Language 9(4). 469–80.Find this resource:

Fischer, Susan D. 2008. Sign languages East and West. In Piet van Sterkenburg (ed.), Unity and diversity of languages, 3–16. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Fischer, Susan D., Yu Hung, & Shih-Kai Liu. 2011. Numeral incorporation in Taiwan Sign Language. In Jung-hsing Chang & Jenny Yichun Kuo (eds.), Language and cognition: Festschrift in honor of James H-Y. Tai on his 70th birthday, 147–69. Taipei: The Crane Publishing.Find this resource:

Flach, Susanne, Kristin Kopf, & Anatol Stefanowitsch. 2018. Skandale und Skandälchen konstrastiv: Das Konfix ‑gate im Deutschen und Englischen. In Rita Heuser & Mirjam Schmuck (eds.), Sonstige Namenarten: Stiefkinder der Onomastik, 239–68. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

(p. 645) Fleischer, Wolfgang & Irmhild Barz. 2012. Wortbildung der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. 4. Auflage; völlig neu bearbeitet von Irmhild Barz unter Mitarbeit von Marianne Schröder (De Gruyter Studium). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Flickinger, Dan. 1987. Lexical rules in the hierarchical lexicon. Stanford: Stanford University PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Flickinger, Dan. 2000. On building a more efficient grammar by exploiting types. Natural Language Engineering 6(1). 15–28.Find this resource:

Folli, Raffaella & Heidi Harley. 2005. Flavours of v. In Paula Kempchinsky & Roumyana Slabakova (eds.), Aspectual inquiries, 95–120. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Folli, Raffaella & Heidi Harley. 2006. On the licensing of causatives of directed motion: Waltzing Matilda all over. Studia Linguistica 60(2). 121–55.Find this resource:

Forker, Diana. 2014. A canonical approach to the argument/adjunct distinction. Linguistic Discovery 12(2). 27–40.Find this resource:

Forker, Diana. 2016. Conceptualization in current approaches of language typology. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 48. 70–84.Find this resource:

Forster, Kenneth I., Christopher Davis, C. Schoknecht, & R. Carter. 1987. Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 39. 211–51.Find this resource:

Fortin, Antonio. 2011. The morphology and semantics of expressive affixes. Oxford: University of Oxford PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Fortune, Reo F. 1942. Arapesh. Publications of the American Ethnological Society XIX. New York: J. J. Augustin.Find this resource:

Fox, Barbara, Fay Wouk, Steven Fincke, Wilfredo Hernandez Flores, Makoto Hayashi, Minna Laakso, Yael Maschler, Abolghasem Mehrabi, Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Susanne Uhmann, & Hyun Jung Yang. 2017. Morphological self-repair. Self-repair within the word. Studies in Language 41(3). 638–59.Find this resource:

Fradin, Bernard. 1996. On morphological entities and the Copy Principle. Acta linguistica hungarica 341(2). 111–51.Find this resource:

Fradin, Bernard. 2001. Adéquation terminologique et adéquation descriptive en linguistique: le terme de sous-catégorisation. In Bernard Colombat & Marie Savelli (eds.), Métalangage et terminologie linguistique, 167–83. Leuven: Peeters.Find this resource:

Franceschina, Florencia. 2001. Morphological or syntactic deficits in near-native speakers? An assessment of some current proposals. Second Language Research 17(3). 213–47.Find this resource:

Frank, Anette & Annie Zaenen. 2002. Tense in LFG: Syntax and morphology. In Hans Kamp & Uwe Reyle (eds.), How we say WHEN it happens, 17–53. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Frank, Wright J. 1999. Nuer noun morphology. Buffalo: State University of New York MA thesis.Find this resource:

Fraser, Norman M. & Greville G. Corbett. 1997. Defaults in Arapesh. Lingua 103. 25–57.Find this resource:

Frauenfelder, Uli H. & Robert Schreuder. 1992. Constraining psycholinguistic models of morphological processing and representation: The role of productivity. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1991, 165–83. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Freidin, Robert. 2004. Syntactic structures redux. Syntax 7(2). 101–27.Find this resource:

Freidin, Robert & Jean-Roger Vergnaud. 2001. Exquisite connections: Some remarks on the evolution of linguistic theory. Lingua 111. 639–66.Find this resource:

Freudenthal, Daniel, Julian Pine, & Fernand Gobet. 2009. Simulating the referential properties of Dutch, German and English root infinitives in MOSAIC. Language Learning and Development 5. 1–29.Find this resource:

Friederici, Angela D., Erdmut Pfeifer, & Anja Hahne. 1993. Event-related brain potentials during natural speech processing: Effects of semantic, morphological and syntactic violations. Cognitive Brain Research 1. 183–92.Find this resource:

Friedline, Benjamin E. 2011. Challenges in the second language acquisition of derivational morphology: From theory to practice. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Fries, Charles. 1940. American English grammar. New York: D. Appleton-Century.Find this resource:

(p. 646) Fries, Charles. 1964. Linguistics: The study of language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Find this resource:

Frishberg, Nancy. 1972. Sharp and soft: Two aspects of movement in sign. Working paper, La Jolla, CA: Salk Institute for Biological Studies.Find this resource:

Frishberg, Nancy. 1975. Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language 51(3). 696–719.Find this resource:

Frishberg, Nancy & Bonnie Gough. 2000. Morphology in American Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics 3(1). 101–35.Find this resource:

Fromkin, Victoria A. 1973. Speech errors as linguistic evidence. The Hague, Paris: Mouton.Find this resource:

Frost, Ram, Tamar Kugler, Avital Deutsch, & Kenneth I. Forster. 2005. Orthographic structure versus morphological structure: Principles of lexical organization in a given language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 31. 1293–326.Find this resource:

Fruchter, Joseph, Linnaea Stockall, & Alec Marantz. 2013. MEG masked priming evidence for form-based decomposition of irregular verbs. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00798.Find this resource:

Fuks, Orit & Yishai Tobin. 2008. The signs B and B‐bent in Israeli sign language according to the theory of Phonology as Human Behavior. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 22(4–5). 391–400.Find this resource:

Funnell, Elaine. 1987. Morphological errors in acquired dyslexia: A case of mistaken identity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 39. 497–539.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 1995. Italian loan words in the inflexional noun system of Modern German. Folia Linguistica 29(3–4). 407–21.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2002a. Growth of symbols: The inexorable fate of diagrams. In Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk & Jarosław Weckwerth (eds.), Future challenges for Natural Linguistics, 129–51. Munich: LINCOM.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2002b. Quando i verbi compaiono come nomi. Un saggio di morfologia naturale. Milano: Franco Angeli.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2002c. Umlaut extension in German modals as natural change. Diachronica 19(1). 1–41.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2005. Suffissi non produttivi. In Maria Grossmann & Franz Rainer (eds.), La formazione delle parole in italiano, 349–51. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2006. How to live naturally and not be bothered by economy. Folia Linguistica 40(1–2). 7–28.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2007. Is analogy economic? In Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé, & Nabil Hathout (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 5th Décembrettes: Morphology in Toulouse, 20–33. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2008. Die deutsche Pluralbildung zwischen deskriptiver Angemessenheit und Sprachtheorie. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 36(1). 74–108.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2010. Analogical change. In Silvia Luraghi & Vit Bubenik (eds.), Continuum companion to historical linguistics, 147–60. London/New York: Continuum.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2013. Affix ordering and conversion: Looking for the place of zero. Lingue e Linguaggio 12(2). 145–70.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2015a. Lexeme formation in a conscious approach to the lexicon. In Laurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy, & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), Semantics of complex words, 115–41. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2015b. Restrictions in word formation. In Peter O. Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen, & Franz Rainer (eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe, vol. 2, 858–74. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2015c. Evaluative morphology and sociolinguistic variation. In Nicola Grandi & Lívia Körtvélyessy (eds.), Edinburgh handbook of evaluative morphology, 121–33. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio. 2016. Irregularität und Systemangemessenheit. In Andreas Bittner & Klaus-Michael Köpcke (eds.), Prozesse der Regularität und Irregularität in Phonologie und Morphologie, 29–46. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio & Davide Ricca. 2006. Productivity in Italian word formation: A variable-corpus approach. Linguistics 44(1). 57–89.Find this resource:

(p. 647) Gaeta, Livio & Davide Ricca. 2009. Composita solvantur. Compounds as lexical units or morphological objects? Italian Journal of Linguistics/Rivista di linguistica 21(1). 35–70.Find this resource:

Gaeta, Livio & Davide Ricca. 2015. Productivity. In Peter O. Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen, & Franz Rainer (eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe, vol. 2, 841–58. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Gagné, Christina L. 2002. Lexical and relational influences on the processing of novel compounds. Brain and Language 81. 723–35.Find this resource:

Gagné, Christina L. & Edward J. Shoben. 1997. Influence of thematic relations on the comprehension of modifier-noun compounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 23(1). 71–87.Find this resource:

Gagné, Christina L. & Thomas L. Spalding. 2009. Constituent integration during the processing of compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? Journal of Memory and Language 60. 20–35.Find this resource:

Gagné, Christina L., Thomas L. Spalding, Lauren Figueredo, & Allison C. Mullaly. 2009. Does snow man prime plastic snow? The effect of constituent position in using relational information during the interpretation of modifier-noun phrases. The Mental Lexicon 4. 41–76.Find this resource:

Gallego, Ángel. 2010. Phase theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Gallego, Ángel (ed.). 2012. Phases: developing the framework. Berlin: Mouton.Find this resource:

Gallistel, C. R. & Adam Philip King. 2010. Memory and the computational brain. Why cognitive science will transform neuroscience. Malden & Oxford: Wiley/Blackwell.Find this resource:

Ganushchak, Lesya Y., Ingrid K. Christoffels, & Niels O. Schiller. 2011. The use of electroencephalography in language production research: A review. Frontiers in Psychology 2. 208.Find this resource:

Ganushchak, Lesya Y. & Niels O. Schiller. 2006. Effects of time pressure on verbal self-monitoring: An ERP study. Brain Research 1125. 104–15.Find this resource:

Ganushchak, Lesya Y. & Niels O. Schiller. 2008. Motivation and semantic context affect brain error-monitoring activity: An event-related brain potentials study. NeuroImage 39. 395–405.Find this resource:

Gardani, Francesco. 2008. Borrowing of inflectional morphemes in language contact. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Find this resource:

Gardani, Francesco, Peter Arkadiev, & Nino Amiridze (eds.). 2015. Borrowed morphology. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Gärtner, Hans-Martin. 2002. Generalized transformations and beyond: Reflections on Minimalist syntax. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Find this resource:

Gaskell, Gareth (ed.). 2007. The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Gawlitzek-Maiwald, Ira. 1994. How do children cope with variation in the input? The case of German plurals and compounding. In Rosemarie Tracy & Elsa Lattey (eds.), How tolerant is universal grammar? Essays on language learnability and language variation, 225–66. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Gay, Linda S. & W. Bruce Croft. 1990. Interpreting nominal compounds for information retrieval. Information Processing & Management 26(1). 21–38.Find this resource:

Gazdar, Gerald. 1992. Paradigm function morphology in DATR. In Lynne Cahill & Richard Coates (eds.), Sussex Papers in General and Computational Linguistics (Cognitive Science Research Paper CSRP 239), 43–53. Brighton: University of Sussex.Find this resource:

Gazdar, Gerald, Ewan Klein, Geoffrey K. Pullum, & Ivan Sag. 1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Geertzen, Jeroen, James P. Blevins, & Petar Milin. 2016. The informativeness of linguistic unit boundaries. Italian Journal of Linguistics 28(1). 25–48.Find this resource:

Gernsbacher, Morton A. 1984. Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113. 256–81.Find this resource:

Giegerich, Heinz. 1999. Lexical strata in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Giegerich, Heinz. 2001. Synonymy blocking and the elsewhere condition: Lexical morphology and the speaker. Transactions of the Philological Society 99(1). 65–98.Find this resource:

(p. 648) Giegerich, Heinz. 2009. The English compound stress myth. Word Structure 2(1). 1–17.Find this resource:

Gijn, Rik van & Fernando Zúñiga. 2014. Word and the Americanist perspective. Morphology 24. 135–60.Find this resource:

Ginzburg, Jonathan & Ivan Sag. 2000. Interrogative investigations. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Giraudo, Hélène & Jonathan Grainger. 2000. Effects of prime word frequency and cumulative root frequency in masked morphological priming. Language and Cognitive Processes 15(4/5). 421–44.Find this resource:

Giraudo, Hélène & Jonathan Grainger. 2001. Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8. 127–31.Find this resource:

Gisborne, Nikolas. 2010. The event structure of perception verbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Gisborne, Nikolas. 2011. Constructions, word grammar, and grammaticalization. Cognitive Linguistics 22/1. 155–82.Find this resource:

Gisborne, Nikolas. 2012. The semantics of definite expressions and the grammaticalization of THE. Studies in Language 36/3. 603–44.Find this resource:

Gisborne, Nikolas. 2017. Defaulting to the new Romance synthetic future. In Nikolas Gisborne & Andrew Hippisley (eds.), Defaults in morphological theory, 151–80. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Gisborne, Nikolas & Andrew Hippisley (eds.). 2017. Defaults in morphological theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Givón, T. 1991. Isomorphism in the grammatical code: cognitive and biological considerations. Studies in Language 15(1). 85–114.Find this resource:

Gleitman, Lila & Henry Gleitman. 1970. Phrase and paraphrase: Some innovative uses of language. New York: W. W. Norton.Find this resource:

Glück, Susanne & Roland Pfau. 1999. A distributed morphology account of verbal inflection in German Sign Language. In Tina Cambier-Langeveld, Anikó Lipták, Michael Redford, & Erik Jan van der Torre (eds.), Proceedings of ConSole VII, 65–80. Bergen: University of Bergen.Find this resource:

Goad, Heather & Lydia White. 2004. Ultimate attainment of L2 inflection: Effects of L1 prosodic structure. In Susan Foster-Cohen, Mike Sharwood Smith, Antonella Sorace, & Mits Ota (eds.), Eurosla Yearbook, vol. 4, 119–45. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Goad, Heather, Lydia White, & Jeffrey Steele. 2003. Missing surface inflection in L2 acquisition: a prosodic account. In Proceedings of BUCLD. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Find this resource:

Goddard, Ives. 1990. Primary and secondary stem derivation in Algonquian. International Journal of American Linguistics 56(4). 449–83.Find this resource:

Göksel, Asli & Celia Kerslake. 2005. Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London and New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions. A Construction Grammar approach to argument structures. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Goldberg, Adele. 2003. Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Studies 7(5). 219–24.Find this resource:

Goldberg, Adele. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalizations in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Goldberg, Adele. 2013. Constructionist approaches. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 15–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Goldschneider, Jennifer & Robert DeKeyser. 2001. Explaining the ‘natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition’ in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning 51(1). 1–50.Find this resource:

Goldsmith, John A. 2001a. On information theory, entropy and phonology in the 20th century. Folia Linguistica 34. 85–100.Find this resource:

Goldsmith, John A. 2001b. Unsupervised learning of the morphology of a natural language. Computational Linguistics 27(2). 153–98.Find this resource:

Goldsmith, John. 2006. An algorithm for the unsupervised learning of morphology. Natural Language Engineering 12. 1–19.Find this resource:

(p. 649) Golston, Chris. 1996. Direct Optimality Theory: Representation as pure markedness. Language 72. 713–48.Find this resource:

Gonnerman, Laura M., Mark S. Seidenberg, & Elaine S. Andersen. 2007. Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: Evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 136. 323–45.Find this resource:

Good, Jeff. 2016. The linguistic typology of templates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Goodglass, Harold. 1993. Understanding aphasia. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Gordon, Matthew. 1999. Syllable weight: Phonetics, phonology, and typology. Los Angeles: UCLA PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Gouskova, Maria. 2007. The reduplicative template in Tonkawa. Phonology 24. 367–96.Find this resource:

Grainger, Jonathan, Pascale Colé, & Juan Segui. 1991. Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 30(3). 370–84.Find this resource:

Grainger, Jonathan & Walter J. B. van Heuven. 2003. Modeling letter position coding in printed word perception. In Patrick Bonin (ed.), The mental lexicon, 1–24. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Find this resource:

Grech, Roberta, Tracey Cassar, Joseph Muscat, Kenneth P. Camilleri, Simon G. Fabri, Michalis Zervakis, Petros Xanthopoulos, Vangelis Sakkalis, & Bart Vanrumste. 2008. Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 5. 25.Find this resource:

Green, David. 1998. Mental control and the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1(2). 67–81.Find this resource:

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1954. A quantitative approach to the morphological typology of language. In Robert F. Spencer (ed.), Method and perspective in anthropology, 192–220. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press.Find this resource:

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1960. A quantitative approach to the morphological typology of language. International Journal of American Linguistics 26. 178–94.Find this resource:

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963/1966. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Joseph H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of language. 2nd edn. 1966, 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. Language universals, with special reference to feature hierarchies (Janua Linguarum, Series Minor 59). The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Grimshaw, Jane. 1982. On the lexical representation of Romance reflexive clitics. In Joan Bresnan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations, 87–148. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Grosjean, François. 1979. A study of timing in a manual and a spoken language: American Sign Language and English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 8(4). 379–405.Find this resource:

Grosjean, Francois. 2012. An attempt to isolate, and then differentiate, transfer and interference. International Journal of Bilingualism 16. 11–21.Find this resource:

Guilfoyle, Eithne & Máire Noonan. 1992. Functional categories and language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 37(2). 241–72.Find this resource:

Gumnior, Heidi, Jens Bölte, & Pienie Zwitserlood. 2006. A chatterbox is a box: Morphology in German word production. Language and Cognitive Processes 21. 920–44.Find this resource:

Gunter, Thomas C., Laurie A. Stowe, & Gusbertus Mulder. 1997. When syntax meets semantics. Psychophysiology 34. 660–76.Find this resource:

Gurevich, Olga I. 2006. Construction morphology: The Georgian version. Berkeley: University of California-Berkeley PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Gussmann, Edmund. 1988. Review of The theory of Lexical Phonology by K.P. Mohanan. Journal of Linguistics 24(1). 232–9.Find this resource:

Hacken, Pius ten. 2007. Chomskyan linguistics and its competitors. London: Equinox.Find this resource:

Hacken, Pius ten. 2009. Early generative approaches. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding, 54–77. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hacken, Pius ten. 2014. Delineating derivation and inflection. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 10–25, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 650) Hacken, Pius ten. 2016. Three analyses of compounding: A comparison. In Pius ten Hacken (ed.), The semantics of compounding, 211–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hagoort, Peter, Colin Brown, & Jolanda Groothusen. 1993. The syntactic positive shift as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processing 8. 439–83.Find this resource:

Hahn, Ulrike & Ramin C. Nakisa. 2000. German inflection: Single route or dual route? Cognitive Psychology 41(4). 313–60.Find this resource:

Haiman, John. 1980a. Dictionaries and encyclopedias. Lingua 50. 329–57.Find this resource:

Haiman, John. 1980b. Hua: A Papuan language of the eastern highlands of New Guinea. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Hale, Kenneth & Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger (Current Studies in Linguistics 24), 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Hale, Kenneth & Samuel Jay Keyser. 2002. Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Hale, Mark & Charles Reiss. 2008. The phonological enterprise. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hall, Christopher. 1988. Integrating diachronic and processing principles in explaining the suffixing preference. In John A. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining language universals, 321–49. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Halle, Morris. 1973. Prolegomena to a theory of word formation. Linguistic Inquiry 4(1). 3–16.Find this resource:

Halle, Morris. 1997. Impoverishment and fission. In Benjamin Bruening, Yoonjung Kang, & Martha Jo McGinnis (eds.), PF: Papers at the interface. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30. 425–49. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–76. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Halle, Morris & Karuvannur P. Mohanan. 1985. Segmental phonology of Modern English. Linguistic Inquiry 16. 57–116.Find this resource:

Halpern, Aaron. 1998. Clitics. In Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 101–22. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Halvorsen, Per-Kristian & Ronald M. Kaplan. 1988. Projections and semantic description in Lexical-Functional Grammar. Proceedings of the International Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems (FGCS-88), 1116–22. Tokyo.Find this resource:

Hammarström, Harald & Lars Borin. 2011. Unsupervised learning of morphology. Computational Linguistics 37(2). 309–50.Find this resource:

Hammond, Michael & Michael Noonan (eds.). 1988. Theoretical morphology. Approaches in modern linguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Harder, Peter. 2010. Meaning in mind and society: A functional contribution to the social turn in cognitive linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Harder, Rita. 2003. Meervoud in de NGT. Manuscript, Nederlands Gebarencentrum.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi. 1995. Subjects, events, and licensing. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi. 2009. Compounding in Distributed Morphology. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding, 129–44. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi. 2014. On the identity of roots. Theoretical Linguistics 40(3–4). 225–76.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi & Rolf Noyer. 1999. State-of-the-article: Distributed Morphology. Glot International 4(4). 3–9.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi & Rolf Noyer. 2000. Formal versus encyclopedic properties of vocabulary: Evidence from nominalisations. In Bert Peeters (ed.), The lexicon–encyclopedia interface, 349–74. Oxford: Elsevier.Find this resource:

Harley, Heidi & Elizabeth Ritter. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78(3). 482–526.Find this resource:

(p. 651) Harley, Heidi & Mercedes Tubino Blanco. 2013. Cycles, vocabulary items, and stem forms in Hiaki. In Ora Matushansky & Alec Marantz (eds.), Distributed Morphology today. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Harm, Michael W. & Mark S. Seidenberg. 1999. Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: Insights from connectionist models. Psychological Review 106(3). 491–528.Find this resource:

Harnisch, Rüdiger. 2001. Grundform- und Stamm-Prinzip in der Substantivmorphologie des Deutschen. Heidelberg: Winter.Find this resource:

Harris, Alice. 2006. Revisiting anaphoric islands. Language 82. 114–30.Find this resource:

Harris, Alice. 2017. Multiple exponence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Harris, Zellig. 1942. Morpheme alternants in linguistic analysis. Language 18. 169–80.Find this resource:

Harris, Zellig. 1945. Discontinuous morphemes. Language 21. 121–7.Find this resource:

Harris, Zellig. 1946. From morpheme to utterance. Language 22. 161–83.Find this resource:

Harris, Zellig. 1951. Methods in structural linguistics. 6th impression 1963, entitled Structural linguistics. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Harris, Zellig. 1955. From phoneme to morpheme. Language 31. 190–222.Find this resource:

Harris, Zellig. 1966. From morpheme to utterance. In Martin Joos (ed.), Readings in Linguistics I, 4th edn, 142–53. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press [reprint of Harris 1946].Find this resource:

Harris, Zellig. 1991. A theory of language and information. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Find this resource:

Hartmann, Stefan. 2014a. The rise and fall of word-formation patterns: A historical cognitive-linguistic approach to word-formation change. In Paula Rodríguez-Puente, Teresa Fanego, Evelyn Gandón-Chapela, Sara María Riveiro-Outeiral, & María Luisa Roca-Varela (eds.), Current research in applied linguistics: Issues on language and cognition, 74–102. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Find this resource:

Hartmann, Stefan. 2014b. Wortbildungswandel im Spiegel der Sprachtheorie: Paradigmen, Konzepte, Methoden. In Vilmos Ágel & Andreas Gardt (eds.), Paradigmen der aktuellen Sprachgeschichtsforschung, 176–93. (Jahrbuch für Germanistische Sprachgeschichte 5). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 1989. Schemas in Hausa plural formation: Product-orientation, and motivation vs. source-orientation and generation. Buffalo Working Papers in Linguistics 89. 32–74.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 1992. Grammaticalization theory and heads in morphology. In Mark Aronoff (ed.), Morphology now, 69–82. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 1996. Word-class-changing inflection and morphological theory. In Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1995, 43–66. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2002. Understanding morphology. London: Arnold.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2003. The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In Michael Tomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language, vol. II, 211–42. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology 11(1). 119–32.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2008. An empirical test of the Agglutination Hypothesis. In Sergio Scalise, Elisabetta Magni, & Antonietta Bisetto (eds.), Universals of language today, 13–29. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2009. Framework-free grammatical theory. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 341–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86(3). 663–87.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2011. The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica 45(1). 31–80.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2012. How to compare major word-classes across the world’s languages. In Thomas Graf, Denis Paperno, Anna Szabolcsi, & Jos Tellings (eds.), Theories of everything: in honor of Edward Keenan, 109–30 (UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 17). Los Angeles: UCLA.Find this resource:

Haspelmath, Martin. 2015. Defining vs. diagnosing linguistic categories: A case study of clitic phenomena. In Joanna Błaszczak, Dorota Klimek-Jankowska, & Krzysztof Migdalski (eds.), How categorical are categories?, 273–304. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

(p. 652) Haspelmath, Martin & Andrea Sims. 2010. Understanding morphology, 2nd edn. London: Hodder Education.Find this resource:

Hathout, Nabil, Fabio Montermini, & Ludovic Tanguy. 2008. Extensive data for morphology: Using the World Wide Web. Journal of French Language Studies 18(1). 67–85.Find this resource:

Hathout, Nabil & Fiammetta Namer. 2014. Discrepancy between form and meaning in word-formation: The case of over- and under-marking in French. In Franz Rainer, Francesco Gardani, Hans Christian Luschützky, & Wolfgang U. Dressler (eds.), Morphology and meaning: Selected papers from the 15th International Morphology Meeting, Vienna, February 2012, 177–90. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Haugen, Einar. 1950. The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language 26. 210–31.Find this resource:

Haugen, J. 2009. Morphology at the interfaces: Reduplication and noun incorporation in Uto-Aztecan. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Haugen, Jason. 2011. Reduplication in Distributed Morphology. Proceedings of the 4th Arizona Linguistics Circle Conference (ALC 4). Coyote Papers vol. 18. Tucson, AZ: Department of Linguistics, University of Arizona.Find this resource:

Haugen, Jason. 2016. Readjustment rejected? In Daniel Siddiqi & Heidi Harley (eds.), Morphological metatheory, 303–42. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Haugen, Jason & Daniel Siddiqi. 2013. Roots and the derivation. Linguistic Inquiry 44(3). 493–517.Find this resource:

Haugen, Jason & Daniel Siddiqi. 2016. Towards a restricted realization theory: Multimorphemic monolistemicity, portmanteaux, and post-linearization spanning. In Daniel Siddiqi & Heidi Harley (eds.), Morphological metatheory, 343–86. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Hauser, Marc D., Noam Chomsky, & W. Tecumseh Fitch. 2002. The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298. 1569–79.Find this resource:

Hawkins, John A. & Anne Cutler. 1988. Psycholinguistic factors in morphological asymmetry. In John A. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining language universals, 280–317. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hawkins, Roger & Cecilia Yuet-hung Chan. 1997. The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: The ‘failed functional features hypothesis’. Second Language Research 13. 187–226.Find this resource:

Hay, Jennifer. 2001. Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? Linguistics 39(6). 1041–70.Find this resource:

Hay, Jennifer. 2002. From speech perception to morphology: Affix-ordering revisited. Language 78. 527–55.Find this resource:

Hay, Jennifer. 2003. Causes and consequences of word structure. London/New York: Routledge.Find this resource:

Hay, Jennifer B. & Harald Baayen. 2002. Parsing and productivity. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2001, 203–35. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Hay, Jennifer B. & Harald Baayen. 2005. Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9(7). 342–8.Find this resource:

Hay, Jennifer & Ingo Plag. 2004. What constrains possible suffix combinations? On the interaction of grammatical and processing restrictions in derivational morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22(3). 565–96.Find this resource:

Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical stress theory: Principles and case studies. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Haynie, Hannah, Claire Bowern, & Hannah LaPalombara. 2014. Sound symbolism in the languages of Australia. PLoS ONE 9(4). e92852. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092852.Find this resource:

Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi, & Friederike Hünnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Heine, Bernd & Heiko Narrog. (eds.). 2015. The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hempel, Carl G. 1965. Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Free Press.Find this resource:

(p. 653) Henri, Fabiola. 2010. A constraint-based approach to verbal constructions in Mauritian. Paris: University of Mauritius and Université Paris Diderot PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Henson, Richard N. 1998. Short-term memory for serial order: The start-end model. Cognitive Psychology 36. 73–137.Find this resource:

Henzen, Walter. 1965. Deutsche Wortbildung. Dritte, durchgesehene und ergänzte Auflage. (Sammlung kurzer Grammatiken germanischer Dialekte). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Herlofsky, William J. 2003. What you see is what you get: Iconicity and metaphor in the visual language of written and signed poetry: A cognitive poetic approach. In Wolfgang G. Müller & Olga Fischer (eds.), From sign to signing, 41–61. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Herrmann, Annika & Markus Steinbach (eds.). 2013. Nonmanuals in sign language. vol. 53. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Hill, Jane H. 2006. A grammar of Cupeño. Berkeley: University of California Press.Find this resource:

Hilpert, Martin. 2013. Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hilpert, Martin. 2014. Construction grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Find this resource:

Hilpert, Martin. 2015. From hand-carved to computer-based. Noun-participle compounding and the upward strengthening hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics 26(1). 113–47.Find this resource:

Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2004. Lexicalization and grammaticization: Opposite or orthogonal? In Walter Bisang, Nikolaus Himmelmann, & Björn Wiemer (eds.), What makes grammaticalization? A look from its fringes and its components, 21–42. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2014. Asymmetries in the prosodic phrasing of function words: Another look at the suffixing preference. Language 90(4). 927–60.Find this resource:

Hinton, Leanne, Johanna Nichols, & John J. Ohala (eds.). 2006. Sound symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hippisley, Andrew. 2015. The word as a universal category. In John R. Taylor (ed.), The Oxford handbook of the word, 246–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hittmair-Delazer, Margarete, Barbara Andree, Carlo Semenza, Ria De Bleser, & Thomas Benke (1994). Naming by German compounds. Journal of Neurolinguistics 8. 27–41.Find this resource:

Hjelmslev, Louis. 1939. La structure morphologique (Types de système). Rapports du Ve Congrès international des linguistes, 66–93.Find this resource:

Hjelmslev, Louis. 1961 [1943]. Prolegomena to a theory of language. Translated by Francis J. Whitfield. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1947. Problems of morphemic analysis. Language 23(4). 321–43.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1952. A formal statement of morphemic analysis. Studies in Linguistics 10(2). 27–39.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1953. Review of The mathematical theory of communication by Claude L. Shannon and Warren Weaver. Language 29. 69–93.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1954. Two models of grammatical description. Word 10(2–3). 210–34.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1955. A manual of phonology. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics, Memoir 11.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1958. A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1966a. Problems of morphemic analysis. In Martin Joos (ed.), Readings in linguistics I, 4th edn, 229–42. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press [reprint; original version: Hockett 1947].Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1966b. Two models of grammatical description. In Martin Joos (ed.), Readings in Linguistics I, 4th edn, 386–99. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. [reprint; original version: Hockett 1954].Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. 1967. The Yawelmani basic verb. Language 43. 208–22.Find this resource:

Hockett, Charles F. (ed.). 1970. A Leonard Bloomfield anthology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

(p. 654) Hockett, Charles F. 1987. Refurbishing our foundations: Elementary linguistics from an advanced point of view. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Hoeksema, Jack. 1988. Head types in morpho-syntax. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1988, 123–38. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Hoekstra, Teun & Nina Hyams. 1998. Aspects of root infinitives. Lingua 106. 81–112.Find this resource:

Hoffmann, Thomas & Graeme Trousdale (eds.). 2013. The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hohenberger, Annette, Daniela Happ, & Helen Leuninger. 2002. Modality-dependent aspects of sign language production: Evidence from slips of the hands and their repairs in German sign language. In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier, & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 112–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Holm, J. 1988. Pidgins and Creoles. Theory and structure, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Holmes, Virginia M. & J. Kevin O’Regan. 1992. Reading derivationally affixed French words. Language and Cognitive Processes 7. 163–92.Find this resource:

Hoppe, Gabriele. 1999. Das Präfix ex-. Beiträge zur Lehn-Wortbildung: Mit einer Einführung in den Gegenstandsbereich von Gabriele Hoppe und Elisabeth Link. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Find this resource:

Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hornstein, Norbert. 2009. A theory of syntax: Basic operations and UG. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hornstein, Norbert, Jairo Nunes, & Kleanthes Grohmann. 2005. Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hruschka, Daniel J., Morten H. Christiansen, Richard A. Blythe, William Croft, Paul Heggarty, Salikoko S. Mufwene, Janet B. Pierrehumbert, & Shana Poplack. 2009. Building social cognitive models of language change. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13(11). 464–9.Find this resource:

Hsieh, Li, Laurence Leonard, & Lori Swanson. 1999. Some differences between English plural noun inflections and third singular verb inflections in the input: The contributions of frequency, sentence position, and duration. Journal of Child Language 26. 531–43.Find this resource:

Huck, Geoffrey J. & John A. Goldsmith. 1995. Ideology and linguistic theory: Noam Chomsky and the Deep Structure debates. London: Routledge.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 1984. Word Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 1987. Zwicky on heads. Journal of Linguistics 23. 109–32.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 1990. English word grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 1999. English subject–verb agreement. English Language and Linguistics 3(2). 173–207.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 2000. *I amn’t. Language 76. 297–323.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 2003. Gerunds without phrase structure. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 21. 579–615.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 2007. Language networks: Towards a new Word Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 2010. An introduction to Word Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hudson, Richard. 2017. French pronouns in cognition. In Nikolas Gisborne & Andrew Hippisley (eds.), Defaults in morphological theory, 114–50. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Hulst, Harry van der. 2006. On the parallel organization of linguistic components. Lingua 116. 657–88.Find this resource:

Hulstijn, Jan, Rod Ellis, & Søren Eskildsen. 2015. Orders and sequences in the acquisition of L2 morphosyntax, 40 years on: An introduction to the Special Issue. Language Learning 65(1). 1–5.Find this resource:

Humboldt, Wilhelm von. 1999 [1836]. On language: On the diversity of human language construction and its influence on the mental development of the human species [orig. Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaus und seinen Einfluss auf die geistige Entwicklung des (p. 655) Menschengeschlechts], edited by Michael Losonsky, translated by Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Hüning, Matthias. 1997. Het tegaan van een morfologische categorie: over het Middelnederlandse verbaalprefix te-. In Ariane van Santen & Marijke van der Wal (eds.), Taal in tijd en ruimte: Voor Cor van Bree bij zijn afscheid als hoogleraar Historische Taalkunde en Taalvariatie aan de Vakgroep Nederlands van de Rijksuniversiteit Leiden, 23–35. Leiden: Stichting Neerlandistiek Leiden.Find this resource:

Hüning, Matthias. 1999. Woordensmederij. De geschiedenis van het suffix -erij. (LOT International Series 19). The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Find this resource:

Hüning, Matthias. 2000. Monica en andere gates. Het ontstaan van een morfologisch procédé. Nederlandse taalkunde 5(2). 121–32.Find this resource:

Hüning, Matthias. 2009. Semantic niches and analogy in word formation: Evidence from contrastive linguistics. Languages in Contrast 9(2). 183–201.Find this resource:

Hüning, Matthias & Geert Booij. 2014. From compounding to derivation: The emergence of derivational affixes through “constructionalization”. Folia Linguistica 48(2). 579–604. Special issue on Refining grammaticalization edited by Ferdinand von Mengden & Horst Simon.Find this resource:

Hüning, Matthias & Barbara Schlücker. 2010. Konvergenz und Divergenz in der Wortbildung. Komposition im Niederländischen und im Deutschen. In Antje Dammel, Sebastian Kürschner, & Damaris Nübling (eds.), Kontrastive Germanistische Linguistik, vol. 2, 783–825. Hildesheim, Zürich, New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Find this resource:

Hüning, Matthias & Barbara Schlücker. 2015. Multi-word expressions. In Peter O. Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen, & Franz Rainer (eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe, vol. 1, 450–67. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Hyman, Larry M. 2003. Suffix ordering in Bantu: A morphocentric approach. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 2002, 245–81. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

Hyman, Larry M. 2009a. The natural history of verb stem reduplication in Bantu. Morphology 19. 177–206.Find this resource:

Hyman, Larry M. 2009b. How (not) to do phonological typology: The case of pitch-accent. Language Sciences 31(2–3). 213–38. Special issue on Data and theory: Papers in phonology in celebration of Charles W. Kisseberth edited by Michael J. Kenstowicz.Find this resource:

Hyman, Larry M. 2012. In defense of Prosodic Typology: A response to Beckman & Venditti. Linguistic Typology 16(3). 341–85.Find this resource:

Hyman, Larry M., Sharon Inkelas, & Galen Sibanda. 2009. Morpho-syntactic correspondence in Bantu reduplication. In Kristin Hanson & Sharon Inkelas (eds.), The nature of the word: Essays in honor of Paul Kiparsky, 273–309. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Hymes, Dell & John Fought. 1981. American Structuralism. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Iacobini, Claudio & Francesca Masini. 2007. The emergence of verb-particle constructions in Italian: Locative and actional meanings. Morphology 16(2). 155–88.Find this resource:

Igartua, Iván. 2015. From cumulative to separative exponence in inflection: Reversing the morphological cycle. Language 91(3). 676–722.Find this resource:

Indefrey, Peter. 2011. The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components: A critical update. Frontiers in Psychology 2. 255.Find this resource:

Indefrey, Peter & Willem J. M. Levelt. 2004. The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components. Cognition 92. 10144.Find this resource:

Ingram, John C. L. 2007. Neurolinguistics. An introduction to spoken language processing and its disorders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Inhoff, Albrecht W., Deborah Briihl, & Jill Schwartz. 1996. Compound word effects differ in reading, on-line naming, and delayed naming tasks. Memory & Cognition 24. 466–76.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon. 1998. The theoretical status of morphologically conditioned phonology: A case study of dominance effects. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1997, 121–55. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Find this resource:

(p. 656) Inkelas, Sharon. 2005. Morphological Doubling Theory: Evidence for morphological doubling in reduplication. In Bernhard Hurch (ed.), with editorial assistance of Veronika Mattes, Studies on reduplication, 65–88. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon. 2008. A dual theory of reduplication. Linguistics 46. 351–401.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon. 2012. Reduplication. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), The morphology and phonology of exponence, 355–78. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon. 2014. Non-concatenative derivation: Reduplication. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 169–89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon & Laura J. Downing. 2015. What is reduplication? Typology and analysis part 1/2: The typology of reduplication. Language and Linguistics Compass 9(12). 502–15.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon & Cemil Orgun. 1998. Level (non)-ordering in recursive morphology: Evidence from Turkish. In Steven Lapointe, Diane Brentari, & Patrick Farrell (eds.), Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax, 360–92. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon & Cheryl Zoll. 2005. Reduplication: Doubling in morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Inkelas, Sharon & Cheryl Zoll. 2007. Is grammar dependence real? A comparison between cophonological and indexed constraint approaches to morphologically conditioned phonology. Linguistics 45. 133–71.Find this resource:

Isel, Frédéric, Thomas C. Gunter, & Angela D. Friederici. 2003. Prosody-assisted head-driven access to spoken German compounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29. 277–88.Find this resource:

Ito, Junko. 1990. Prosodic minimality in Japanese. Proceedings of CLS 26, volume 2: Parasession on the Syllable in Phonetics and Phonology, 213–39.Find this resource:

Ito, Junko & Armin Mester. 1995. Japanese phonology. In John Goldsmith (ed.), The handbook of phonological theory, 817–38. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Iverson, Gregory & Joseph C. Salmons. 1995. Aspiration and laryngeal representation in Germanic. Phonology 12. 369–96.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 1975. Morphological and semantic regularities in the lexicon. Language 51(3). 639–71 [reprinted in Jackendoff 2010b, 40–84].Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 1983. Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2002. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2007. A Parallel Architecture perspective on language processing. Brain Research 1146. 2–22.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2008. Construction after construction and its theoretical challenges. Language 84(1). 8–28.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2009a. Compounding in the Parallel Architecture and Conceptual Semantics. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding, 105–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2009b. The Parallel Architecture and its place in cognitive science. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 645–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2010a. The ecology of English noun-noun compounds. In Ray Jackendoff (2010b), Meaning and the lexicon: The Parallel Architecture 1975–2010, 413–45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2010b. Meaning and the lexicon: The Parallel Architecture 1975–2010. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

(p. 657) Jackendoff, Ray. 2011a. Conceptual semantics. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger, & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, vol. 1, 688–709. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2011b. What is the human language faculty? Two views. Language 87(3). 586–624.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray. 2013. Constructions in the Parallel Architecture. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 70–92. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jackendoff, Ray & Jenny Audring. Forthcoming. The Texture of the Lexicon: Relational Morphology in the Parallel Architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Jacques, Guillaume & Anton Antonov. 2014. Direct/inverse systems. Language and Linguistics Compass 8(7). 301–18.Find this resource:

Jaeger, Jeri J., Alan H. Lockwood, David L. Kemmerer, Robert D. Van Valin Jr, Brian W. Murphy, & Hanif G. Khalak. 1996. A positron emission tomography study of regular and irregular verb morphology in English. Language 72. 451–97.Find this resource:

Jakobson, Roman. 1965. Quest for the essence of language. Diogenes 51. 21–37 [reprinted in Selected writings, The Hague: Mouton, 1971, vol. 2, 345–59].Find this resource:

Jakobson, Roman. 1971. Selected writings II: Word and language. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

Jakobson, Roman. 1990. On language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Janda, Richard D. 1983. ‘Morphemes’ aren’t something that grows on trees: Morphology as more the phonology than the syntax of words. In John F. Richardson, Mitchell Marks, & Amy Chukerman (eds.), Papers from the parasession on the interplay of phonology, morphology, and syntax, 79–95. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Find this resource:

Janse, Mark. 2004. Animacy, definiteness and case in Cappadocian and other Asia Minor dialects. Journal of Greek Linguistics 5. 3–26.Find this resource:

Janse, Mark. Forthcoming. Cappadocian. In Christos Tzitzilis (ed.), The Greek language and its dialects. Thessaloniki: Institute of Modern Greek Studies.Find this resource:

Janssen, Niels, Yanchao Bi, & Alfonso Caramazza. 2008. A tale of two frequencies: Determining the speed of lexical access in Mandarin Chinese and English compounds. Language and Cognitive Processes 23. 1191–223.Find this resource:

Jarema, Gonia, Céline Busson, Rossitza Nikolova, Kyrana Tsapkini, & Gary Libben. 1999. Processing compounds: A cross-linguistic study. Brain and Language 68. 362–9.Find this resource:

Jarema, Gonia & Gary Libben (eds.). 2007. The mental lexicon: Core perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Find this resource:

Jelinek, Frederick. 1997. Statistical methods for speech recognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Jerde, Thomas E., John F. Soechting, & Martha Flanders. 2003. Coarticulation in fluent fingerspelling. The Journal of Neuroscience 23(6). 2383–93.Find this resource:

Jescheniak, Jörg D., Herbert Schriefers, Merrill F. Garrett, & Angela D. Friederici. 2002. Exploring the activation of semantic and phonological codes during speech planning with event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 14. 951–64.Find this resource:

Ji, Hongbo, Christina L. Gagné, & Thomas L. Spalding. 2011. Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds. Journal of Memory and Language 65. 406–30.Find this resource:

Joanisse, Marc F. & Mark S. Seidenberg. 2005. Imaging the past: neural activation in frontal and temporal regions during regular and irregular past-tense processing. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience 5. 282–96.Find this resource:

Job, Remo & Giuseppe Sartori. 1984. Morphological decomposition: Evidence from crossed phonological dyslexia. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 36. 435–58.Find this resource:

Johanson, Lars & Martine Robbeets (eds.). 2012. Copies versus Cognates in Bound Morphology. Leiden: Brill.Find this resource:

Johnson, C. Douglas. 1972. Formal aspects of phonological description. The Hague: Mouton.Find this resource:

(p. 658) Johnston, Trevor A. 2013. Formational and functional characteristics of pointing signs in a corpus of Auslan (Australian Sign Language): Are the data sufficient to posit a grammatical class of ‘pronouns’ in Auslan?, Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 9(1). 109–59.Find this resource:

Johnston, Trevor A. & Adam Schembri. 1999. On defining lexeme in a signed language. Sign Language and Linguistics 2(2). 115–85.Find this resource:

Jong, Nivja H. de, Laurie B. Feldman, Robert Schreuder, Matthew Pastizzo, & Harald Baayen. 2002. The processing and representation of Dutch and English compounds: Peripheral morphological and central orthographic effects. Brain and Language 81. 555–67.
Find this resource:

Joos, Martin (ed.). 1957. Readings in linguistics I: The development of descriptive linguistics in America 1925–56, 4th edn. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Find this resource:

Joseph, Brian D. 1998. Diachronic morphology. In Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 351–73. Oxford: Blackwell.Find this resource:

Joseph, Brian D. 2011. A localistic approach to universals and variation. In Peter Siemund (ed.), Linguistic universals and language variation, 404–21. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Joseph, John E. 2012. Saussure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Joshi, Aravind K. 1987. An introduction to Tree-Adjoining Grammars. In Alexis Manaster-Ramer (ed.), Mathematics of language, 87–114. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Juhasz, Barbara J. 2008. The processing of compound words in English: Effects of word length on eye movements during reading. Language and Cognitive Processes 23. 1057–88.
Find this resource:

Juhasz, Barbara J., Matthew S. Starr, Albrecht W. Inhoff, & Lars Placke. 2003. The effects of morphology on the processing of compound words: Evidence from naming, lexical decisions and eye fixations. British Journal of Psychology 94. 223–44.Find this resource:

Julien, Marit. 1996. Syntactic word formation in Northern Sámi. Tromsø: Novus Press.Find this resource:

Julien, Marit. 2002. Syntactic heads and word formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Julien, Marit. 2006. Word. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd edn, 617–23. Oxford: Elsevier.Find this resource:

Juola, Patrick. 1998. Measuring linguistic complexity: The morphological tier. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 5. 206–13.Find this resource:

Justus, Timothy, Jary Larsen, Paul de Mornay Davies, & Diane Swick. 2008. Interpreting dissociations between regular and irregular past-tense morphology: Evidence from event-related potentials. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 8. 178–94.Find this resource:

Kaan, Edith, Anthony Harris, Edward Gibson, & Phillip Holcomb. 2000. The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes 15. 159–201.Find this resource:

Kaczer, Laura, Kalinka Timmer, Luz Bavassi, & Niels O. Schiller. 2015. Long-lag priming effects of novel and existing compounds on naming familiar objects reflect memory consolidation processes: a combined behavioral and ERP study. Brain Research 1629. 309–17.Find this resource:

Kager, René. 1995. On foot templates and root templates. In Marcel den Dikken & Kees Hengeveld (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1995, 125–38. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Kager, René. 1999. Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Kager, René, Harry van der Hulst, & Wim Zonneveld (eds.). 1999. The Prosody–Morphology Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Kaisse, Ellen. 2005. Word-formation and phonology. In Pavol Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds.), Handbook of word-formation. 25–47. Dordrecht: Springer.Find this resource:

Kaisse, Ellen & Sharon Hargus. 1993. Introduction. In Sharon Hargus & Ellen Kaisse (eds.), Phonetics and Phonology vol. 4: Studies in Lexical Phonology, 1–19. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Find this resource:

Kan, Irene P. & Sharon L. Thompson-Schill. 2004. Effect of name agreement on prefrontal activity during overt and covert picture naming. Cognitive, affective and behavioral neuroscience 4. 43–57.Find this resource:

Kapatsinski, Vsevolod. 2013. Conspiring to mean: Experimental and computational evidence for a usage-based harmonic approach to morphophonology. Language 89(1). 110–48.Find this resource:

Kaplan, Ronald M. & Joan Bresnan. 1982. Lexical Functional Grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In Joan Bresnan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations, 173–282. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

(p. 659) Kaplan, Ronald & Miriam Butt. 2002. The morphology–syntax interface in LFG. Paper presented at the LFG02 Conference, Athens, Greece.Find this resource:

Kaplan, Ronald M. & Martin Kay. 1981. Phonological rules and finite-state transducers. Paper presented to the Winter Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, New York.Find this resource:

Kaplan, Ronald M. & Martin Kay. 1994. Regular models of phonological rule systems. Computational Linguistics 20(3). 331–78.Find this resource:

Karanastasis, Anastasios. 1997. Grammatiki ton Ellinikon Idiomaton tis Kato Italias [Grammar of the Greek Dialects of South Italy]. Athens: Academy of Athens.Find this resource:

Karatsareas, Petros. 2009. The loss of grammatical gender in Cappadocian Greek. Transactions of the Philological Society 107(2). 196–230.Find this resource:

Karatsareas, Petros. 2011. A study of Cappadocian Greek nominal morphology from a diachronic and dialectological perspective. Cambridge: University of Cambridge PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Karttunen, Lauri. 2003. Computing with Realizational Morphology. In Alexander Gelbukh (ed.), Computational Linguistics and intelligent text processes: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference CICLing 2003, 203–14. Berlin: Springer.Find this resource:

Karttunen, Lauri, Ronald M Kaplan, & Annie Zaenen. 1992. Two-level morphology with composition. Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational Linguistics, volume 1, 141–8. Association for Computational Linguistics.Find this resource:

Kastovsky, Dieter. 1982. Word-formation: A functional view. Folia Linguistica 16. 181–98.Find this resource:

Kathol, Andreas. 1995. Linearization-based German syntax. Columbus: Ohio State University PhD dissertation.Find this resource:

Kathol, Andreas. 1999. Agreement and the syntax–morphology interface in HPSG. In Robert Levine & Georgia Green (eds.), Studies in Current Phrase Structure Grammar, 223–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Find this resource:

Kathol, Andreas. 2000. Linear Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Kathol, Andreas & Carl J. Pollard. 1995. Extraposition via complex domain formation. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the ACL, 174–80. Association for Computational Linguistics.Find this resource:

Kathol, Andreas, Adam Przepiórkowski, & Jesse Tseng. 2011. Advanced topics in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. In Robert D. Borsley & Kersti Börjars (eds.), Non-transformational syntax: Formal and explicit models of grammar, 54–111. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Find this resource:

Katz, Jerrold J. & Paul M. Postal. 1964. An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Find this resource:

Kay, Paul. 1997. Words and the grammar of context. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Kay, Paul. 2002. An informal sketch of a formal architecture for Construction Grammar. Grammars 5. 1–19.Find this resource:

Kay, Paul & Charles J. Fillmore. 1999. Grammatical Constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X doing Y? construction. Language 75(1). 1–33.Find this resource:

Kayne, Richard S. 2005. Movement and silence. New York: Oxford University Press.Find this resource:

Keane, Jon, Diane Brentari, & Jason Riggle. 2013. Coarticulation in ASL Fingerspelling. In Stefan Keine & Sjayne Sloggett (eds.), Proceedings from the North East Conference Linguistic Society (NELS) 42, vol. 2: 261–72.Find this resource:

Kel’makov, Valentin & Sara Hännikäinen. 1999. Udmurtin kielioppia ja harjoituksia. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Find this resource:

Keller, Jörg. 1998. Aspekte der Raumnutzung in der Deutschen Gebärdensprache. Hamburg: Signum.Find this resource:

Keller, Rudi. 1990. Sprachwandel. (UTB für Wissenschaft, Uni-Taschenbücher 1567). Tübingen: Francke Verlag.Find this resource:

Kerge, Krista. 1996. The Estonian agent nouns: Grammar versus lexicon. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 49(3). 286–94.Find this resource:

Keuleers, Emmanuel & Walter Daelemans. 2007. Memory-based learning models of inflectional morphology: A methodological case study. Lingue e Linguaggio VI(2). 151–74. Special issue on Psycho-computational issues in morphology and processing edited by Vito Pirrelli.Find this resource:

(p. 660) Keuleers, Emmanuel, Dominiek Sandra, Walter Daelemans, Steven Gillis, Gert Durieux, & Evelyn Martens. 2007. Dutch plural inflection: The exception that proves the analogy. Cognitive Psychology 54(4). 283–318.Find this resource:

Kibort, Anna & Greville G. Corbett. 2008. Grammatical features inventory. University of Surrey. DOI: 10.15126/SMG.18/1.Find this resource:

Kielar, Aneta & Marc F. Joanisse. 2011. The role of semantic and phonological factors in word recognition: An ERP cross-modal priming study of derivational morphology. Neuropsychologia 49. 161–77.Find this resource:

Kihm, Alain. 1994. Kriyol syntax: The Portuguese-based creole language of Guinea-Bissau. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Find this resource:

Kihm, Alain. 2003. Inflectional categories in creole languages. In Ingo Plag (ed.), Phonology and morphology in creole languages, 333–63. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Find this resource:

Kilani-Schoch, Marianne. 1988. Introduction à la morphologie naturelle. Berne: Peter Lang.Find this resource:

Kilani-Schoch, Marianne & Wolfgang U. Dressler. 2005. Morphologie naturelle et flexion du verbe français. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Find this resource:

King, Tracy Holloway. 1995. Configuring topic and focus in Russian. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Kinoshita, Sachiko & Dennis Norris. 2013. Letter order is not coded by open bigrams. Journal of Memory and Language 69(2). 135–50.Find this resource:

Kiparsky, Paul. 1973. ‘Elsewhere’ in phonology. In Stephen R. Anderson & Paul Kiparsky (eds.), A festschrift for Morris Halle, 93–106. New York: Harper & Row.Find this resource:

Kiparsky, Paul. 1982a. From cyclic phonology to lexical phonology. In Harry van der Hulst & Norval Smith (eds.), The structure of phonological representations (Part I), 131–75. Dordrecht: Foris.Find this resource:

Kiparsky, Paul. 1982b. Lexical morphology and phonology. In In-Seok Yang (ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm, 1–91. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing.Find this resource:

Kiparsky, Paul. 1983. Word formation and the lexicon. Proceedings of the 1982 Mid-America Linguistics Conference. 3–29.Find this resource:

Kiparsky, Paul. 1985. Some consequences of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2. 85–138.Find this resource:

Klamer, Marian. 1997. Spelling out clitics in Kambera. Linguistics 35. 895–927.Find this resource:

Klamer, Marian. 1998. A grammar of Kambera. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Klein, Wolfgang & Clive Perdue. 1997. The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research 13. 301–48.Find this resource:

Klima, Edward S. & Ursula Bellugi. 1979. The Signs of Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Find this resource:

Koda, Keiko. 2000. Cross-linguistic variations in L2 morphological awareness. Applied Psycholinguistics 21. 297–320.Find this resource:

Koefoed, Geert & Jaap van Marle. 2004. Fundamental concepts. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, Joachim Mugdan, & Stavros Skopeteas (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An international handbook on inflection and word-formation, vol. 2, 1574–89. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Find this resource:

Koenig, Jean Pierre. 1999. Lexical relations. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource:

Koenig, Jean-Pierre & Daniel Jurafsky. 1995. Type underspecification and on-line type construction in the lexicon. In Raul Aranovich, William Byrne, Susanne Preuss, & Martha Senturia (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 13, 27–85. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Find this resource: