Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Foundations of Morphological Theory
- Part II Issues in Morphological Theory
- Part III Morphological Principles
- Part IV Morphological Frameworks
- 13 Classical Morphemics: Assumptions, Extensions, and Alternatives
- 14 Natural Morphology
- 15 Distributed Morphology
- 16 Construction Morphology
- 17 Paradigm Function Morphology
- 18 Network Morphology
- Part V The Role of Morphology in Theories of Phonology and Syntax
- Part VI Domains for the Evaluation of Morphological Theories
- Index of languages
- Index of names
- Index of subjects
- References
13 - Classical Morphemics: Assumptions, Extensions, and Alternatives
from Part IV - Morphological Frameworks
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 January 2017
By
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Foundations of Morphological Theory
- Part II Issues in Morphological Theory
- Part III Morphological Principles
- Part IV Morphological Frameworks
- 13 Classical Morphemics: Assumptions, Extensions, and Alternatives
- 14 Natural Morphology
- 15 Distributed Morphology
- 16 Construction Morphology
- 17 Paradigm Function Morphology
- 18 Network Morphology
- Part V The Role of Morphology in Theories of Phonology and Syntax
- Part VI Domains for the Evaluation of Morphological Theories
- Index of languages
- Index of names
- Index of subjects
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology , pp. 331 - 355Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016
References
Anderson, John, and Ewen, Colin. 1987. Principles of Dependency Phonology. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1984. Rules as “morphemes” in a theory of inflection. In Rood, D. (ed.), Mid-America Linguistics Conference Papers, 3–21. Boulder: University of Colorado.Google Scholar
Baudouin de Courtenay, , Jan. 1972. An attempt at a theory of phonetic alternations. In Stankiewicz, Edward (ed.), A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology, 141–212. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1994. Structural analogy: An examination of some recent claims. Studies in Language 18, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie; Lieber, Rochelle, and Plag, Ingo. 2013. The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadwell, George A. 1993. Subtractive morphology in Southern Muskogean. International Journal of American Linguistics 59, 416–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. The Hague and Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Cruschina, Silvio; Maiden, Martin, and Smith, John Charles (eds.) 2013. The Boundaries of Pure Morphology. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dressler, , Wolfgang, U.; Libben, Gary, Stark, Jacqueline, Pons, Christiane, and Jarema, Gonia. 2001. The processing of interfixed German compounds. Yearbook of Morphology 1999, 185–220.Google Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio, and Scalise, Sergio. 2012. Morphology: From Data to Theories. Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 1999. An overview of Autosegmental Phonology [1976]. In Goldsmith, John (ed.), Phonological Theory: The Essential Readings, 137–61. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hammer, A. E. 1991. German Grammar and Usage, 2nd edn., revised by Durrell, Martin. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi, and Noyer, Rolf. 1999. Distributed Morphology. Glot International 4.4, 3–9.Google Scholar
Harris, Zellig S. 1958 Morphemic alternants in linguistic analysis. Language 18 [1942]: 169–80. Reprinted in Joos, Martin (ed.), Readings in Linguistics, 109–15. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
Haugen, Jason D. 2005. Reduplicative allomorphy and language prehistory in Uto-Aztecan. In Hurch, Bernard (ed.), Studies on Reduplication, 315–49. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1958a. A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1958b. Two models of grammatical description. Word 10 [1954]: 210–231. Reprinted in Joos, Martin (ed.), Readings in Linguistics, 386–99. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1987. Refurbishing our Foundations. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Householder, Fred W. 1952. Review of Methods in Structural Linguistics (1951), by Harris, Zellig S.. International Journal of American Linguistics 18, 260–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimball, Geoffrey D. 1991. Koasati Grammar. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Kubryakova, Elena S., and Mugdan, Joachim. 2000. Submorphemische Einheiten. In Booij, Geert, Lehmann, Christian, and Mugdan, Joachim (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology, 417–26. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lightner, Theodore M. 1983. Introduction to English Derivational Morphology. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lombardi, Linda, and McCarthy, John. 1991. Prosodic circumscription in Choctaw morphology. Phonology 8, 37–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luschützky, Hans Christian. 2000. Morphem, Morph und Allomorph. In Booij, Geert, Lehmann, Christian, and Mugdan, Joachim (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology, 451–62. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mugdan, Joachim. 1986. Was ist eigentlich ein Morphem? Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 39, 29–43.Google Scholar
Myers, Scott. 1984. Zero-derivation and inflection. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 7: 53–69.Google Scholar
Nettle, Daniel. 1998. The Fyem language of Northern Nigeria. Munich and Newcastle: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene A. 1958. The identification of morphemes. In Joos, Martin (ed.), Readings in Linguistics, vol. 1, 255–71. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
Stankiewicz, Edward. 1972. Baudouin de Courtenay: His life and work. In Stankiewicz, Edward (ed.), A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology, 3–48. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Tobin, Yishai. 2004. Hebrew (Semitic). In Booij, Geert, Lehmann, Christian, Mugdan, Joachim, and Skopeteas, Stavros (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology, Vol. 2, 1343–58. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Trommer, Jochen. 2012. Ø-exponence. In Trommer, Jochen (ed.), The Morphology and Phonology of Exponence, 326–54. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40
- Cited by