Editorial published in:
Representation and Processing in Bilingual Morphology
Edited by Jennifer R. Austin
[Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9:1] 2019
► pp. 15
References

References

Anderson, S.
(1982) Where’s morphology? Linguistic Inquiry, 13(4), 571–612.Google Scholar
Baker, M.
(1985) The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry, 16(3), 373–415.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L.
(1985) Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form (Vol. 9). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010) Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1970) Remarks on nominalization. In R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar. Boston: Ginn, 184–221.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., Felser, C., Neubauer, K., Sato, M., & Silva, R.
(2010) Morphological structure in native and nonnative language processing. Language Learning, 60(1), 21–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Culicover, P. & Jackendoff, R.
(2005) Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Grauwe, S., Lemhöfer, K., Willems, R. M., & Schriefers, H.
(2014) L2 speakers decompose morphologically complex verbs: fMRI evidence from priming of transparent derived verbs. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 802.Google Scholar
Diependaele, K., Duñabeitia, J. A., Morris, J., & Keuleers, E.
(2011) Fast morphological effects in first and second language word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(4), 344–358. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Di Sciullo, A. M., & Williams, E.
(1987) On the definition of word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halle, M., & Marantz, A.
(1993) Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S. Keyser (Eds.), The View from Building 20. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 111–176.Google Scholar
Gor, K., Chrabaszcz, A., & Cook, S. V.
(2019) A case for agreement: Processing of case inflection by early and late learners. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9(1).Google Scholar
Harley, H. & Ritter, E.
(2002) Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78(3), 482–526. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee, E. & Lardiere, D.
(2019) Feature reassembly in the acquisition of plural marking by Korean and Indonesian bilinguals: A bidirectional study. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9(1).Google Scholar
Liceras, J. M. & Klassen, R.
(2019) Compounding and derivation: On the ‘promiscuity’ of derivational affixes. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9(1).Google Scholar
Mueller Gathercole, V.
(2007) Miami and North Wales, so far and yet so near: A constructivist account of morphosyntactic development in bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(3), 224–247. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S.
(2004) Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morphosyntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2), 125–142. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nicoladis, E., Palmer, A., & Marentette, P.
(2007) The role of type and token frequency in using past tense morphemes correctly. Developmental Science, 10(2), 237–254. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nicoladis, E., Song, J., & Marentette, P.
(2012) Do young bilinguals acquire past tense morphology like monolinguals, only later? Evidence from French-English and Chinese-English bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33(3), 457–479. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., Nicoladis, E., Crago, M., & Genesee, F.
(2011) Bilingual children’s acquisition of the past tense: A usage-based approach. Journal of Child Language, 38(3), 554–578. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silva, R., & Clahsen, H.
(2008) Morphologically complex words in L1 and L2 processing: Evidence from masked priming experiments in English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(2), 245–260. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sagarra, N., Sánchez, L., & Bel, A.
(2019) Processing DOM in relative clauses: Salience and optionality in early and late bilinguals. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 9(1).Google Scholar
Unsworth, S.
(2013) Assessing the role of current and cumulative exposure in simultaneous bilingual acquisition: The case of Dutch gender. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(1), 86–110. CrossrefGoogle Scholar