Part of
Competition in Word-Formation
Edited by Alexandra Bagasheva, Akiko Nagano and Vincent Renner
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 284] 2024
► pp. 3471
References (67)
References
Alexiadou, Artemis. 2014. Nominal derivation. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 235–256. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis & Schäfer, Florian. 2010. On the syntax of episodic vs. dispositional ‑er nominals. In Syntax of Nominalizations across Languages and Frameworks, Artemis Alexiadou & Monika Rather (eds), 9–38. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andreou, Marios & Lieber, Rochelle. 2020. Aspectual and quantificational properties of deverbal conversion and ‑ing nominalizations: the power of context. English Language and Linguistics 24(2): 333–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arndt-Lappe, Sabine. 2014. Analogy in suffix rivalry: The case of English ‑ity and ‑ness. English Language and Linguistics 18(3): 497–548. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1984. Morphology and lexical semantics. Quaderni di Semantica 5(1): 45–49.Google Scholar
. 2019. Competitors and alternants in linguistic morphology. In Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation, Franz Rainer, Francesco Gardani, Wolfgang U. Dressler, & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds), 39–66. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Three ways of looking at morphological rivalry. Word Structure 16 (1): 49–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark & Cho, Sungeun. 2001. The semantics of ‑ship suffixation. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 167–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark & Lindsay, Mark. 2014. Productivity, blocking, and lexicalization. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 67–83. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barker, Chris. 1998. Episodic ‑ee in English: A thematic role constraint on new word formation. Language 74: 695–727. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 2006. Compounds and minor word-formation types. In The Handbook of English Linguistics, Bas Aarts & April McMahon (eds), 483–506. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Notions of paradigm and their value in word-formation. Word Structure 12(2): 153–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie & Huddleston, Rodney. 2002. Lexical word-formation. In The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds), 1621–1721. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Lieber, Rochelle & Plag, Ingo. 2013. The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beard, Robert. 1995. Lexeme-Morpheme Base Morphology: A General Theory of Inflection and Word Formation. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Berg, Thomas. 2020. Morphological slips of the tongue. In Word Knowledge and Word Usage: A Cross-Disciplinary Guide to the Mental Lexicon, Vito Pirrelli, Ingo Plag & Wolfgang U. Dressler (eds), 634–679. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert. 1986. Form and meaning in morphology: The case of Dutch ‘agent nouns’. Linguistics 24: 503–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1998. Phonological output constraints in morphology. In Phonology and Morphology of the Germanic Languages, Wolfgang Kehrein & Richard Wiese (eds), 143–163. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Polysemy and construction morphology. In Leven met Woorden, Fons Moerdijk, Ariane van Santen & Rob Tempelaars (eds), 355–364. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
. 2012. The Grammar of Words: An Introduction to Linguistic Morphology. Third edition. 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 & Co.Google Scholar
. 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Copestake, Ann & Briscoe, Ted. 1995. Semi-productive polysemy and sense extension. Journal of Semantics 12(1): 15–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crystal, David. 2019. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Third edition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2008–. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). 〈[URL]〉 (1 November 2022).
Díaz-Negrillo, Ana. 2017. On the identification of competition in English derivational morphemes: The case of ‑dom, -hood and ‑ship. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 119–161. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Fernández-Domínguez, Jésus, Bagasheva, Alexandra, & Lara-Clares, Cristina. 2020. Paradigmatic Relations in Word Formation. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1986. Pragmatically controlled zero anaphora. Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS 12), 95–107. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fradin, Bernard. 2019. Competition in derivation: What can we learn from French doublets in ‑age and ‑ment? In Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation, Franz Rainer, Francesco Gardani, Wolfgang U. Dressler, & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds), 67–93. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gause, Georgyi Frantsevich. 1934. The Struggle for Existence. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff. 2003. Componential analysis. In Handbook of Pragmatics Online, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
ten Hacken, Pius. 2015. Transposition and the limits of word formation. In Semantics of Complex Words, Laurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 187–216. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Word-Formation in Parallel Architecture: The Case for a Separate Component. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport Hovav, Malka. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle. 2004. Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. A lexical semantic approach to compounding. In The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 78–104. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Toward an OT morphosemantics: The case of ‑hood, -dom, and ‑ship. In New Impulses in Word Formation, Susan Olsen (ed), 61–80. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2014. Theoretical approaches to derivation. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 50–66. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. English Nouns: The Ecology of Nominalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Ghost aspect and double plurality: On the aspectual semantics of eventive conversion and ‑ing nominalizations in English. In The Semantics of Derivational Morphology: Theory, Methods, Evidence, Sven Kotowski & Ingo Plag (eds), 15–36. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2024. Derivation and semantic theory: Foundations, frameworks, and outcomes. To appear in English Linguistics 40.Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle & Plag, Ingo. 2022. The semantics of conversion nouns and ‑ing nominalizations: A quantitative and theoretical perspective. Journal of Linguistics 58(2): 307–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marchand, Hans. 1969. The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation. A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach. Second edition. Munich: Beck.Google Scholar
Mittwoch, Anita. 2005. Unspecified arguments in episodic and habitual sentences. In The Syntax of Aspect, Nomi Erteschik-Shir & Tova Rapoport (eds), 237–273. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nagano, Akiko. 2018. A conversion analysis of so-called coercion from relational to qualitative adjectives in English. Word Structure 11(2): 185–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021. On property concept constructions in English derivational morphology. Paper read at the 5th American International Morphology Meeting, the Ohio State University, August 28, 2021.
. 2023. Affixal rivalry and its purely semantic resolution among English derived adjectives. Journal of Linguistics 59(3): 499–530. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olsen, Susan. 2019. Interconnectedness and variation of meaning in derivational patterns. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 16(1): 19–34.Google Scholar
Ono, Naoyuki. 2014. ‘N o suru’ kôbun ni okeru kôsentaku to kyôsei (Argument selection and coercion in ‘N o suru’ construction). In Hukuzatuzyutugokenkyû no Genzai (Current issues in complex predicate research), Hideki Kishimoto & Yoko Yumoto (eds), 17–40. Tokyo: Hituzi.Google Scholar
. 2016. Agent nominals. In Handbook of Japanese Lexicon and Word Formation, Taro Kageyama & Hideki Kishimoto (eds), 599–629. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Keidôsikôbun ni okeru kyôsei to kyôgôsei – ‘suru’ to ‘aru’ o megutte (Coercion and co-composition in light verb constructions involving suru and aru). In Meisi o Meguru Syomondai: Gokeisei, Imi, Kôbun (Issues relating to nouns: word-formation, semantics, and constructions), Yoko Yumoto & Hideki Kishimoto (eds), 88–108. Kaitakusha: Tokyo.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David M. 1978. Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS 4), 157–189. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological Productivity: Structural Constraints in English Derivation. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Raffelsiefen, Renate. 2010. Idiosyncrasy, regularity, and synonymy in derivational morphology: Evidence for default word interpretation strategies. In New Impulses in Word Formation, Susan Olsen (ed), 173–232. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Rainer, Franz. 2015. Agent and instrument nouns. In Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Language of Europe, Volume 2, Peter O. Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen & Franz Rainer (eds), 1304–1316. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka & Levin, Beth. 1992. -ER nominals: implications for a theory of argument structure. In Syntax and Semantics 26: Syntax and the Lexicon, Tim Stowell & Eric Wehrli (eds), 127–153. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, Carlota S. 1991. The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer, Andrew. 2010. Factorizing lexical relatedness. In New Impulses in Word Formation, Susan Olsen (ed), 133–171. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Sugioka, Yoko. 1986. Interaction of Derivational Morphology and Syntax in Japanese and English. New York: Garland. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. ‘Dôsiren’yôkei + meisi’ hukugôgo no tagi ni tuite (On the polysemy of ‘ren’yô-form verb + noun’ compounds). In Meisi o Meguru Syomondai: Gokeisei, Imi, Kôbun (Issues relating to nouns: word-formation, semantics, and constructions), Yoko Yumoto & Hideki Kishimoto (eds), 2–23. Kaitakusha: Tokyo.Google Scholar
Sutton, Peter Roger. 2022. Restrictions on copredication: A situation theoretic approach. Proceedings of SALT 32: 335–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1981. Argument structure and morphology. Linguistic Review 1: 81–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar