Article published in:
Morphology and its interfaces: Syntax, semantics and the lexicon
Edited by Dany Amiot, Delphine Tribout, Natalia Grabar, Cédric Patin and Fayssal Tayalati
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes 37:2] 2014
► pp. 185193
References

References

Alexiadou, A., & Schäfer, F.
(2010) On the syntax of episodical vs. dispositional -er nominals. In A. Alexiadou & M. Rathert (Eds.), The syntax of nominalizations across languages and frameworks (pp. 9–30). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, S. R.
(1982) Where’s morphology? Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 571–612.Google Scholar
Aronoff, M.
(1994) Morphology by itself. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, M., & Anshen, F.
(1998) Morphology and the Lexicon: Lexicalization and productivity. In A. Spencer & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), The Handbook of Morphology (pp. 237–247). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Balota, D. A., & Chumbley, J. I.
(1984) Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 340–357. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barker, C.
(1998) Episodic -ee in English: A thematic role constraint on a new word formation. Language, 74, 695–727. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beard, R.
(1991) Decompositional composition: The semantics of scope ambiguities and ‘bracketing paradoxes’. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 9, 195–229. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995) Lexeme - Morpheme base morphology. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Bergman, M. W., Hudson, P. T. W., & Eling, P. A. T. M.
(1988) How simple complex words can be: Morphological processing and word representations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 41–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boas, H. C.
(2013) Cognitive construction grammar. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 233–254). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Booij, G.
(2010) Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Borer, H.
(2005) In name only. Structuring sense, vol. I. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, D.
(1980) Lexical representation of derivational relation. In M. Aronoff & M-L. Kean (Eds.), Juncture (pp. 37–55). Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
Butterworth, B.
(1989) Lexical access in speech production. In W. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.), Lexical representation and process (pp. 108–135). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
(1985) Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G. G.
(2006) Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corbin, D.
(1987) Morphologie dérivationnelle et structuration du lexique, vol. 2. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 2d ed 1991, Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses du septentrion.Google Scholar
(1992) De la Compositionnalité du Sens des Mots Construits (Réponse à Claire Vanderhoeft), Lingvisticae Investigationes, 16(1), 189–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, A.
(2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cruschina, S., Maiden, M., & Charles Smith, J.
(Eds.) (2013) The boundaries of pure morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.-M., & Williams, E.
(1987) On the definition of word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Embick, D., & Noyer, R.
(2007) Distributed morphology and the syntax/morphology interface. In G. Ramchand & C. Reiss (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces (pp. 289–324). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. A., Napps, S. E., & Feldman, L.
(1985) Relations among regular and irregular morphologically related words in the lexicon as revealed by repetition priming. Memory & Cognition, 13, 241–255. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fradin, B., & Kerleroux, F.
(2005) Troubles with lexemes. In G. Booij, J. de Cesaris, S. Scalise, & A. Ralli (Eds.), Topics in morphology. Selected papers from the Third Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (pp. 177–196). Barcelona: ULA-Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University 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: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger (pp. 111–176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hay, J. B., & Baayen, H. R.
(2005) Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in Morphology. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 342–348. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R.
(1975) Morphological and semantic regularities in the lexicon. Language, 51, 639–671. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1983) Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1990) Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D.
(1996) A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science, 20, 137–194 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P.
(1982) Word-formation and the Lexicon. In F. Ingemann (Ed.), Proceedings of the Mid-America Linguistics Conference (pp. 3–29). Lawrence: University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Levin, B., & Rappaport-Hovav, M.
(1998) Morphology and lexical semantics. In A. Spencer & A. M. Zwicky, The Handbook of Morphology (pp. 248–271). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Lieber, R.
(1980) On the organization of the Lexicon. PhD dissertation. MIT Cambridge MA [Published by Indiana University Club 1981, and Garland Press 1990].
(1992) Deconstructing morphology. Chicago: Press of the University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Lipka, L.
(1983) A multi-level approach to word-formation: Complex lexemes and word semantics. In S. Hattori & K. Inoue (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Linguists, Tokyo 1982 (pp. 926–928). The Hague: CIPL.Google Scholar
(1990), Metaphor and metonymy as productive processes on the level of the Lexicon. In W. Banner, J. Schildt, & D. Viehweger (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress of Linguists, Berlin 1987 (pp. 1207–1210). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W.
(2005) Morphology and language processing. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. 2nd ed. (pp. 295–300). Elsevier.Google Scholar
(2007) Morphological processes in language comprehension. In G. Gaskell (Ed.), Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 175–193). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Rappaport-Hovav, M., & Levin, B.
(1992) er Nominals: Implications for a theory of argument structure. In T. Stowell & E. Wehrli (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 26: Syntax and the Lexicon (pp. 127–153). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1996) Lexical semantics and syntactic structure. In S. Lappin (Ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory (pp. 487–507). Oxford: Balckwell Publishings.Google Scholar
Roy, I., & Soare, E.
(2012) L’enquêteur, le surveillant et le détenu : les noms déverbaux de participants aux événements, lectures événementielles et structure argumentale. Lexique, 20, 207–231.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L.
(1986) On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In J. L. McClelland & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing. Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Vol. 2: Psychological and biological models (pp. 216–271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E.
(1982) The syntax of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A., & Pullum G.
(1983) Cliticization vs. Inflection: English N’T. Language, 59, 502–513. CrossrefGoogle Scholar