Article published In:
Linguistics in the Netherlands 2020
Edited by Elena Tribushinina and Mark Dingemanse
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 37] 2020
► pp. 165179
References (32)
References
Anderson, Stephen R. 1992. A-Morphous Morphology, Cambridge, MA.: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald. 1992. “Quantitative Aspects of Morphological Productivity.” Yearbook of Morphology, ed. by G. Booij and J. van Marle. 109–149, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald & Petar Milin. 2010. “Analyzing reaction times.” International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(2): 12–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker. 2015. “Fitting linear mixed effects models using lme4.” Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1):1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beard, Robert. 1995. Lexeme-morpheme base morphology: a general theory of inflection and word formation. Suny Press.Google Scholar
Bertram, R., Laine, M., Baayen, R. H., Schreuder, R., & Hyönä, J. 2000. “Affixal homonymy triggers full-form storage, even with inflected words, even in a morphologically rich language.” Cognition, 74(2), B13–B25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 2017. “The Generative Word.” The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky, 2nd edition, ed. by J. McGilvray. 110–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 1995. “Regular morphology and the lexicon.” Language and Cognitive Processes, 10(5): 425–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crepaldi, Davide, Kathleen Rastle, Max Coltheart & Lyndsey Nickels. 2010. “‘Fell’ primes ‘fall’, but does ‘bell’ prime ‘ball’? Masked priming with irregularly-inflected primes.” Journal of Memory and Language, 63(1): 83–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creemers, A., Goodwin Davies, A., Wilder, R. J., Tamminga, M., & Embick, D. 2020. Opacity, transparency, and morphological priming: A study of prefixed verbs in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 1101, 104055. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Deyne, Samuel, Daniel J. Navarro, and Gert Storms, G. 2013. “Better explanations of lexical and semantic cognition using networks derived from continued rather than single word associations.” Behavior Research Methods, 45(2):480–498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frauenfelder, Uli & Robert Schreuder. 1992. “Constraining psycholinguistic models of morphological processing and representation: The role of productivity.” Yearbook of Morphology, ed. by G. Booij and J. van Marle. 165–183, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Fruchter, Joseph & Alec Marantz. 2015. “Decomposition, lookup, and recombination: MEG evidence for the full decomposition model of complex visual word recognition.” Brain and Language 1431: 81–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1993. “Distributed Morphology and the Pieces of Inflection.” The View from Building 20, Essays in Linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger ed. by K. Hale & S. J. Keyser. 111–176. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Keuleers, Emanuel, Marc Brysbaert & Boris New. 2010. “SUBTLEX-NL: A new measure for Dutch word frequency based on film subtitles.” Behavior Research Methods, 42(3): 643–650. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, Alexandra, Per B. Brockhoff & Rune H. B. Christensen. 2016. “Lmer Test: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models.” R package.Google Scholar
Labbé Grunberg, Hernán. 2020. Storage and processing of Dutch morphological information: Early electrophysiological responses to lexical, morphological and syntactic information, PhD dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Lowenstamm, Jean. 2015. “Derivational Affixes as Roots.” The Syntax of Roots and the Roots of Syntax ed. by A. Alexiadou, H. Borer & F. Schäfer. 230–259. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Manelis, Leon & David A. Tharp. 1977. “The Processing of Affixed Words.” Memory and Cognition 51: 690–695. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 2013a. “No Escape from Morphemes in Morphological Processing.” Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(7): 905–916. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013b. “Locality Domains for Contextual Allomorphy across the Interfaces.” Distributed Morphology Today, Morphemes for Morris Halle ed. by O. Mathushansky & M. Halle. 95–115 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morris, Joanna & Linnaea Stockall. 2012. “Early, equivalent ERP masked priming effects for regular and irregular morphology.” Brain and Language, 123(2): 81–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, Dennis, and James M. McQueen. 2008. “Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition.” Psychological Review, 115(2): 357–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peirce, Jonathan W. 2007. “Psychopy – psychophysics software in python.” Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 162(1): 8–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven & Michael T. Ullmann. 2002. “The past and future of the past tense.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(11): 456–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, Mark S. & Laura M. Gonnerman. 2000. “Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(9): 353–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stemberger, Joseph P. & Brian MacWhinney. 1988. “Are inflected forms stored in the lexicon?Theoretical morphology, ed. by M. Hammond and M. Noonan. 101–116. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stockall, Linnaea & Alec Marantz. 2006. “A single route, full decomposition model of morphological complexity: MEG evidence.” The Mental Lexicon, 1(1): 85–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taft, Marcus. 2004. “Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section A 571: 745–765. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taft, Marcus & Kenneth I. Forster. 1975. “Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 141: 638–647. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilder, R. J., Goodwin Davies, A., & Embick, D. 2019. “Differences between morphological and repetition priming in auditory lexical decision: Implications for decompositional models.” Cortex, 1161, 122–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar