Cover not available
Part of
Morphological Metatheory
Edited by Daniel Siddiqi and Heidi Harley
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 229] 2016
► pp. 223–236

Building words

| Humboldt University of Berlin

This chapter discusses some views on syntactic word formation, by focusing on the assumptions being made within the framework of Distributed Morphology. This is contrasted to two other syntactic views on word formation, namely the exoskeletal model and span based word formation. The chapter also discusses the three individual contributions to this volume that precede it and outlines how these relate to the more general issue of word internal complexity.

Published online: 29 June 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.229.08ale
References
Alexiadou, Artemis
2001 Functional Structure in Nominals: Nominalization and Ergativity [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 42]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Roots don’t take complements. Theoretical Linguistics 40: 278–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Schäfer, Florian
2006 The properties of anticausatives crosslinguistically. In Phases of Interpretation, Mara Frascarelli (ed.), 187–212. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 External Arguments in Transitivity Alternations: A Layering Approach. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan & Wurmbrand, Susi
2013 Suspension across domains. In Distributed Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle, Ora Matushansky & Alec Marantz (eds), 185–198. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit
2005 In Name Only. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2013 Taking Form. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro
1989/2004 A semantics for unaccusatives and its syntactic consequences. In The Unaccusativity Puzzle: Explorations of the Syntax-Lexicon Interface, Artemis Alexiadou, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Martin Everaert (eds), 22–59. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1970 Remarks on nominalization. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Roderick Jacobs & Peter Rosenbaum (eds), 184–221. Waltham MA: Ginn.Google Scholar
1995 The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
2001 Beyond explanatory adequacy [MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 20]. Cambridge MA: MIT.Google Scholar
De Belder, Marijke & van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen
2015 How to merge a root. Linguistic Inquiry 46(4). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doron, Edit
2003 Agency and voice: The semantics of semitic templates. Natural Language Semantics 11: 1–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David
1979 Word, Meaning and Montague Grammar. The Semantics of Verbs and Time in Generative Semantics and Montague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David
2010 Localism versus Globalism in Morphology and Phonology. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David & Halle, Morris
2005 On the status of stems in morphological theory. In Proceedings of Going Romance 2003 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 270], Twan Geerts, Ivo van Ginneken & Haike Jacobs (eds), 37–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gennari, Silvia & Poeppel, David
2003 Processing correlates of lexical semantic complexity. Cognition 89: B27–B41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane
2005 Extended projection. In Words and Structure, Jane Grimshaw (ed.), 1–74. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi
2014 On the identity of roots. Theoretical Linguistics 40: 225–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Jason & Siddiqi, Daniel
2013 Roots and the derivation. Linguistic Inquiry 44: 493–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth
1993 English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport Hovav, Malka
1995 Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec
2001 Words. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David
1995 Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Piñon, Christopher
2001 A finer look at the causative-inchoative alternation. In Procedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 11, Rachel Hastings, Brendan Jackson & Zsofia Zvolenszky (eds), 346–364. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Pylkkänen, Liina
2008 Introducing Arguments. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian
2008 Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax Approach. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya
2002 The theta system – An overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28: 229–290.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Florian
2008 The Syntax of (Anti-)Causatives. External Arguments in Change-of-state Contexts [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 126]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 The causative alternation. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(2): 641–681. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siddiqi, Daniel
2009 Syntax Within the Word: Economy, Allomorphy, and Argument Selection in Distributed Morphology [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 138]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Spencer, Andrew
2019. Manufacturing consent over Distributed Morphology. Word Structure 12:2 ► pp. 208 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 may 2023. 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.