Cover not available

In:Morphological Metatheory
Edited by Daniel Siddiqi and Heidi Harley
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 229] 2016
► pp. 271–302

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Morphology as an adaptive discriminative system

 | University of Cambridge
 | UCSD
 | San Diego State University
Published online: 29 June 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.229.10ble
The past decade has witnessed a productive convergence of a number of historically separate research strands. One strand explores the implicational models that grew out of classical WP approaches to inflection (e.g., Wurzel 1984; Maiden 2005; Blevins 2006; Ackerman et al. 2009). A second strand extends the information-theoretic perspectives on ‘morphological information’ developed originally in the processing models of Kostić et al. (2003), Moscoso del Prado Martín et al. (2004), and Milin et al. (2009a, b). A third strand investigates a ‘complex systems’ approach to grammatical organization (Ackerman & Blevins 2008; Ackerman et al. 2008; Beckner et al. 2009). The fourth strand develops a cohesive discriminative perspective on language learning and use (Ramscar & Yarlett 2007; Ramscar & Dye 2010; Ramscar et al. 2010, 2013; Ramscar 2013; Arnon & Ramscar 2012; Baayen et al. 2011). This chapter considers how the interaction of these distinct components has produced a general conception of the structure and function of morphological systems which opens significant points of contact with research in other domains.
References (104)
References
Ackerman, Farrell & Blevins, James P. 2008. Syntax: The state of the art. In Unity and Diversity of Languages, Piet van Sterkenberg (ed.), 215–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell, Blevins, James P. & Malouf, Robert. 2009. Parts and wholes: Implicative patterns in inflectional paradigms. In Analogy in Grammar: Form and Acquisition, James P. Blevins & Juliette Blevins (eds), 54–81. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell, Bonami, Olivier & Nikolaeva, Irina. 2012. Systemic polyfunctionality and morphology-syntax interdependencies. Defaults in Morphological Theory, Lexington KY.
Ackerman, Farrell & Malouf, Robert. 2013. Morphological organization: The Low Conditional Entropy Conjecture. Language 89: 429–464. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell, Malouf, Robert & Blevins, James P. 2008. Inflectional morphology as a complex adaptive system. Paper presented at the First Annual Complex Systems and Language Workshop, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Ackerman, Farrell & Stump, Gregory T. 2004. Paradigms and periphrasis: A study in realization-based lexicalism. In Projecting Morphology, Louisa Sadler & Andrew Spencer (eds), 111–157. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell & Webelhuth, Gert. 1998. A Theory of Predicates. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, Philip W. 1972. More is different. Science 177(4047): 393–396. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1992. A-Morphous Morphology. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. The morpheme: Its nature and use. In The Oxford Handbook of Inflection, Matthew Baerman (ed.), 11–33. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arnon, Inbal & Ramscar, Michael. 2012. Granularity and the acquisition of grammatical gender: How order-of-acquisition affects what gets learned. Cognition 122: 292–305. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, McQueen, James M., Dijkstra, Ton & Schreuder, Robert. 2003. Frequency effects in regular inflectional morphology: Revisiting Dutch plurals. In Morphological Structure in Language Processing, R. Harald Baayen & Robert Schreuder (eds), 355–370. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Milin, Petar, Filipović Ðurđević, Dusica, Hendrix, Peter & Marelli, Marco. 2011. An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review 118: 438–481. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baerman, Matthew, Brown, Dunstan & Corbett, Greville G. (eds). 2015. Understanding and Measuring Morphological Complexity. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bateson, Patrick & Gluckman, Peter. 2011. Plasticity, Robustness, Development and Evolution. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beard, Robert & Volpe, Mark. 2005. Lexeme-Morpheme Base Morphology. In Handbook of English Word-Formation, Pavel Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds), 189–205. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beckner, Clay, Blythe, Richard, Bybee, Joan L., Chrisiansen, Morton H., Croft, William, Ellis, Nick C., Holland, John, Ke, Jinyun, Larsen-Freeman, Diane & Schoenemann, Thomas. 2009. Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning 59: 1–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blazej, Laura J. & Cohen-Goldberg, Ariel M. 2015. Can we hear morphological complexity before words are complex? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 41(1): 50–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blevins, James P. 2006. Word-based morphology. Journal of Linguistics 42: 531–573. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Declension classes in Estonian. Linguistica Uralica 44(4): 241–267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013a. The information-theoretic turn. Psihologija 46(3): 355–375. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013b. Word-based morphology from Aristotle to modern WP. In Oxford Handbook of the History of Linguistics, Ch. 16, Keith Allan (ed.), 396–417. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Word and Paradigm Morphology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blevins, James P., Milin, Petar & Ramscar, Michael. 2016. The Zipfian Paradigm Cell Filling Problem. In Morphological paradigms and functions, Ferenc Kiefer, James P. Blevins & Huba Bartos (eds), in press. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloch, Bernard. 1947. English verb inflection. Language 23: 399–418. Reprinted in Joos 1957, 243–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1914[1983]. An Introduction to the Study of Language, new edn [Classics in Psycholinguistics 3]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1926. A set of postulates for the science of language. Language 2: 153–164. Reprinted in Joos 1957, 26–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1929. Review of Konkordanz Panini-Candra by Bruno Liebich. Language 5: 267–276. Reprinted in Hockett 1970, 219–226. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1933. Language. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bochner, Harry. 1993. Simplicity in Generative Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric, Leivada, Evelina & Tiago Martins, Pedro. 2013. Language and complexity considerations: A biolinguistic perspective. Llengua, Societat i Comunicació 11: 20–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bonami, Olivier. 2015. Periphrasis as collocation. Morphology 25: 63–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bonami, Olivier & Henri, Fabiola. 2010. Assessing empirically the inflectional complexity of Mauritian Creole. Paper presented at workshop on Formal Aspects of Creole Studies, Berlin. <[URL]>
Bonami, Olivier & Samvelian, Pollet. 2015. The diversity of inflectional periphrasis in Persian. Journal of Linguistics 51(2): 327–382. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Börjars, Kersti, Vincent, Nigel & Chapman, Carol. 1997. Paradigms, periphrases, and pronominal inflection: A featurebased account. In Yearbook of Morphology 1996, Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds), 155–180. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Dunstan, Chumakina, Marina, Corbett, Greville, Popova, Gergana & Spencer, Andrew. 2012. Defining ‘periphrasis’: Key notions. Morphology 22(2): 233–275. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cable, Seth. 2014. Average conditional entropy of the Tlingit verbal inflection paradigm: A brief report. Ms, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Capra, Fritjof & Luisi, Pier Luigi. 2014. The Systems View of Life. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 2004. The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity [Studies in Language Companion Series 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davis, Matthew H., Marslen-Wilson, William D. & Gaskell, M Gareth. 2002. Leading up the lexical garden-path: Segmentation and ambiguity in spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 28: 218–244. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elman, Jeffrey L., Bates, Elizabeth A., Johnson, Mark H., Karmiloff-Smith, Annette, Parisi, Domenico & Plunkett, Kim. 1996. Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erelt, Tiu, Leemets, Tiina, Mäearu, Sirje & Raadik, Maire (eds). 2013. Eesti keele õigekeelsussõnaraamat ÕS 2013. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas & Levinson, Stephen C. 2009. The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(5): 429–492. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fertig, David. 2013. Analogy and Morphological Change. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilbert, Scott F. & Epel, David. 2008. Ecological Developmental Biology. Sunderland MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gottlieb, G. 1997. Synthesizing Nature-nurture: The Prenatal Roots of Instinctive Behavior. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gukhman, M.M. 1955. Glagolnye analaticheskie konstruksii kak osobyj sochetanij chastichnogo i polnogo slova (na materiale istorii nemetskogo iazyka). In Voprosy grammatischeskogo stoia, V.V. Vonogradov (ed.). Moscow: Academic Sciences.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Marantz, Alec. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The View from Building 20. Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Silvain Bromberger, Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds), 111–176. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, Zelig S. 1942. Morpheme alternants in linguistic analysis. Language 18: 169–180. Reprinted in Joos 1957, 109–115.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer B. & Baayen, R. Harald. 2005. Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. Trends in Cognitive Science 9(73): 342–348. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1947. Problems of morphemic analysis. Language 23: 321–343. Reprinted in Joos 1957, 229–242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1954. Two models of grammatical description. Word 10: 210–231. Reprinted in Joos 1957, 386–399. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (ed.). 1970. A Leonard Bloomfield Anthology. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1987. Refurbishing our Foundations: Elementary Linguistics from an Advanced Point of View [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 56]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hofstadter, Douglas & Sander, Emmanuel. 2014. Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking. New York NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jablonka, Eva & Lamb, Marion J. 2006. Four Dimensions of Evolution: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. The Architecture of the Language Faculty. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Joos, Martin (ed.). 1957. Readings in Linguistics I. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaplan, Ronald M. & Bresnan, Joan. 1982. Lexical-functional grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, Joan Bresnan (ed.). Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri. 2003. Computing with realizational morphology. In Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing [Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 2588], Alexander Gelbukh (ed.), 205–216. Heidelberg: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri & Beesley, Kenneth R. 2003. Finite State Morphology. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kemps, Rachèl, Ernestus, Mirjam, Schreuder, Robert & Baayen, R. Harald. 2005. Prosodic cues for morphological complexity: The case of Dutch plural nouns. Memory & Cognition 33(3): 430–446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, Kimmo Matti. 1983. Two-level morphology: A general computational model for word-form recognition and production. Technical Report 11, Department of General Linguistics, University of Helsinki.
Kostić, Aleksandar, Marković, Tania & Baucal, Aleksandar. 2003. Inflectional morphology and word meaning: Orthogonal or coimplicative domains? In Morphological Structure in Language Processing, R. Harald Baayen & Robert Schreuder (eds), 1–44. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langendoen, D. Terence. 1981. The generative capacity of word-formation components. Linguistic Inquiry 12(2): 320–322.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lounsbury, Floyd. 1953. Oneida Verb Morphology [Yale University Publications in Anthropology 48]. New Haven CT: Yale University Press. Chapter 1 reprinted in Joos 1957, 379–385.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2005. Morphological autonomy and diachrony. In Yearbook of Morphology 2004, Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds), 137–175. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 2013. No escape from morphemes in morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(7): 905–916. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matthews, Peter H. 1965. The inflectional component of a word-and-paradigm grammar. Journal of Linguistics 1: 139–171. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1970. Recent developments in morphology. In New Horizon in Linguistics, John Lyons (ed.), Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1974. Morphology. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1991. Morphology. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1993. Grammatical Theory in the United States: From Bloomfield to Chomsky. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michel, George F. & Moore, Celia L. 1995. Developmental Psychobiology. Cambridge MA: Bradford Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milin, Petar, Filipović Ðurđević, Dusica & Moscoso del Prado Martín, Fermín. 2009a. The simultaneous effects of inflectional paradigms and classes on lexical recognition: Evidence from Serbian. Journal of Memory and Language 60: 50–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milin, Petar, Kuperman, Victor, Kostić, Aleksandar & Baayen, R. Harald. 2009b. Words and paradigms bit by bit: An information-theoretic approach to the processing of inflection and derivation. In Analogy in Grammar: Form and Acquisition, James P. Blevins & Juliette Blevins (eds), 214–253. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morpurgo Davies, Anna. 1978. Analogy, segmentation and the early Neogrammarians. Transactions of the Philological Society 76(1): 36–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moscoso del Prado Martín, Fermín, Kostić, Aleksandar & Baayen, R. Harald. 2004. Putting the bits together: An information-theoretical perspective on morphological processing. Cognition 94: 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mürk, Harri William. 1997. A Handbook of Estonian: Nouns, Adjectives and Verbs [Indiana University Uralic and Altaic Series 163]. Bloomington IN: Indiana University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Overton, Willis F. 2010. Life-span development: Concepts and issues. In The Handbook of Life-span Development, Vol. 1: Cognition, Biology and Methods, Richard M. Lerner & Willis F. Overton (eds), 1–29. Hoboken NJ: Wiley and Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan, Gray, Russell D. & Griffiths, Paul E. 2001. Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems Theory and Evolution. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plag, Ingo. 2014. Phonological and phonetic variability in complex words: An uncharted territory. Italian Journal of Linguistics 26(2): 209–228.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rácz, Péter, Pierrehumbert, Janet B., Hay, Jennifer B. & Papp, Victora. 2014. Morphological emergence. In The Handbook of Language Emergence, Brian MacWhinney & William O’Grady (eds). Hoboken NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ramscar, Michael, Dye, Melody & McCauley, Stewart M. 2013a. Error and expectation in language learning: The curious absence of mouses in adult speech. Language 89(4): 760–793. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ramscar, Michael, Hendrix, Peter, Love, Bradley & Baayen, R. Harald. 2013b. Learning is not decline: The mental lexicon as a window into cognition across the lifespan. The Mental Lexicon 3: 450–481. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ramscar, Michael, Yarlett, Daniel, Dye, Melody, Denny, Katie & Thorpe, Kirsten. 2010. The effects of feature-label-order and their implications for symbolic learning. Cognititive Science 34: 909–957. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robins, Robert H. 1959. In defence of WP. Transactions of the Philological Society 58: 116–144. Reprinted in Transactions of the Philological Society 99(2001): 116–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. A Short History of Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sadler, Louisa & Spencer, Andrew. 2001. Syntax as an exponent of morphological features. In Yearbook of Morphology 2001, Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds), 71–97. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey, Gil, David & Trudgill, Peter (eds). 2009. Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language. San Diego CA: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seyfarth, Scott, Ackerman, Farrell & Malouf, Robert. 2014. Implicative organization facilitates morphological learning. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Herman Leung, Zachary O’Hagan, Sarah Bakst, Auburn Lutzross, Jonathan Manker, Nicholas Rolle & Katie Sardinha (eds). Berkeley CA: BLS. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sims, Andrea. 2015. Inflectional Defectiveness. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spencer, Andrew J. 2012. Identifying stems. Word Structure 5: 88–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sproat, Richard. 2005. Current morphological theory. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 2(2): 63–75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stankiewicz, Edward (ed.). 1972. A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stump, Gregory & Finkel, Raphael. 2013. Morphological Typology: From Word to Paradigm. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thelen, Esther & Bates, Elizabeth. 2003. Connectionism and dynamic systems: Are they really different? Developmental Science 6(4): 378–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tuldava, Juhan. 1994. Estonian Textbook [Indiana University Uralic and Altaic Series 159]. Bloomington IN: Indiana University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weaver, Warren. 1948. Science and complexity. American Scientist 36: 536–544.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel. 1967. On arguing with Mr. Katz: A brief rejoinder. Foundations of Language 11(1): 284–287.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wurzel, Wolfgang U. 1984. Studien zur deutschen Lautstruktur. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Inflectional Morphology and Naturalness. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (16)

Cited by 16 other publications

Copot, Maria & Olivier Bonami
2024. Baseless derivation: the behavioural reality of derivational paradigms. Cognitive Linguistics 35:2 ► pp. 221 ff. DOI logo
Dattner, Elitzur, Orit Ashkenazi, Dorit Ravid & Ronit Levie
2023. Explaining dynamic morphological patterns in acquisition using Network Analysis. Morphology 33:4 ► pp. 511 ff. DOI logo
Hathout, Nabil & Fiammetta Namer
2022. ParaDis: a family and paradigm model. Morphology 32:2 ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
Herce, Borja
2022. Stress and stem allomorphy in the Romance perfectum: emergence, typology, and motivations of a symbiotic relation. Linguistics 60:4 ► pp. 1103 ff. DOI logo
Herce, Borja
2023. The Typological Diversity of Morphomes, DOI logo
Ackerman, Farrell
2021. Making sense of morphology. In All Things Morphology [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 353], ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Kapatsinski, Vsevolod
2021. What Are Constructions, and What Else Is Out There? An Associationist Perspective. Frontiers in Communication 5 DOI logo
Kapatsinski, Vsevolod
2023. Learning fast while avoiding spurious excitement and overcoming cue competition requires setting unachievable goals: reasons for using the logistic activation function in learning to predict categorical outcomes. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 38:4 ► pp. 575 ff. DOI logo
Schmitz, Dominic, Dinah Baer-Henney & Ingo Plag
2021. The duration of word-final /s/ differs across morphological categories in English: evidence from pseudowords. Phonetica 78:5-6 ► pp. 571 ff. DOI logo
TOMASCHEK, FABIAN, INGO PLAG, MIRJAM ERNESTUS & R. HARALD BAAYEN
2021. Phonetic effects of morphology and context: Modeling the duration of word-final S in English with naïve discriminative learning. Journal of Linguistics 57:1 ► pp. 123 ff. DOI logo
Wilmoth, Sasha & John Mansfield
2021. Inflectional predictability and prosodic morphology in Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara. Morphology 31:4 ► pp. 355 ff. DOI logo
Linke, Maja & Michael Ramscar
2020. How the Probabilistic Structure of Grammatical Context Shapes Speech. Entropy 22:1 ► pp. 90 ff. DOI logo
Boyé, Gilles & Gauvain Schalchli
2019. Realistic data and paradigms: the paradigm cell finding problem. Morphology 29:2 ► pp. 199 ff. DOI logo
Lepic, Ryan & Corrine Occhino
2018. A Construction Morphology Approach to Sign Language Analysis. In The Construction of Words [Studies in Morphology, 4], ► pp. 141 ff. DOI logo
Lepic, Ryan
2016. Motivation in morphology. Sign Language & Linguistics 19:2 ► pp. 285 ff. DOI logo
Sims, Andrea D. & Jeff Parker
2016. How inflection class systems work: On the informativity of implicative structure. Word Structure 9:2 ► pp. 215 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue