Review published In:
Functions of Language
Vol. 12:1 (2005) ► pp.133140
References (9)
References
Baayen, H. and R. Lieber. (1991). Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics 291: 801–843. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H. and A. Renouf. (1996). Chronicling the Times: Productive lexical innovations in an English newspaper. Language 721: 69–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fabb, N. (1998) Compounding. In A. Spencer and A. Zwicky (eds.) The handbook of morphology. Oxford: Blackwell. 66–83.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, Mass: MIT.Google Scholar
Haig, G. (2003) From lexical class to syntactic function: a model of Turkish word structure. In S. Özsoy, D. Akar, M. Nakipoğlu-Demiralp, E. Erguvanli-Taylan and A. Aksu-Koç (eds.). Studies in Turkish Linguistics. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, August 16–18, 2000, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul. Istanbul: Boğaziçi UP. 59–68.
(In print) Constraints on morpheme repetition in Turkish? Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, 7–9. August 2002, North Cyprus.
Jackendoff, R. and P. Culicover. (2003). The semantic basis of control in English. Language 791: 517–556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, G. (1967). Turkish grammar. Oxford: Oxford UP.Google Scholar
Plag, I. (1999). Morphological productivity. Structural constraints in English derivation. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar