Cover not available
Article published In:
New Questions for the Next Decade
Edited by Gonia Jarema, Gary Libben and Victor Kuperman
[The Mental Lexicon 11:3] 2016
► pp. 467–493

Morphological schemas

Theoretical and psycholinguistic issues

| Tufts University
| Leiden University

We propose a theory of the lexicon in which rules of grammar, encoded as declarative schemas, are lexical items containing variables. We develop a notation to encode precise relations among lexical items and show how this differs from the standard notion of inheritance. We also show how schemas can play both a generative role, acting as productive rules, and also a relational role, where they codify nonproductive but nevertheless prolific patterns within the lexicon. We then show how this theory of lexical relations can be embedded directly into a theory of lexical access and lexical processing, such that it can make direct contact with experimental findings.

Keywords: morphology, Construction Morphology, Construction Grammar, lexical processing, morphological processing, lexicon
Published online: 31 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.11.3.06jac
References
Amenta, S., & Crepaldi, D
(2012) Morphological processing as we know it: An analytical review of morphological effects in visual word identification. Frontiers in Psychology. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H
(1993) On frequency, transparency and productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1992 (pp. 181–208). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R.H., Dijkstra, T., & Schreuder, R
(1997) Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual-route model. Journal of Memory and Language, 371, 94–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R.H., & Lieber, R
(1991) Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics, 291, 801–844. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A
(1986) Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Berwick, R., & Chomsky, N
(2016) Why only us? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bien, H., Baayen, R.H., & Levelt, W.J.M
(2011) Frequency effects in the production of Dutch deverbal adjectives and inflected verbs. Language and Cognitive Processes, 261, 683–715. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bock, K., & Loebell, H
(1990) Framing sentences. Cognition, 351, 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, G
(2010) Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
to appear). Inheritance and motivation in Construction Morphology. In N. Gisborne & A. Hippisley (Eds.) Default inheritance Oxford Oxford University Press DOI logo
Butterworth, B
(1983) Lexical representation. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production (vol. 21, pp. 257–294). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, J
(1985) Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995) Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 101, 425–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J., & Slobin, D
(1982) Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language 581: 265–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N
(1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H
(1999) Lexical entries and rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 221, 991–1060. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, A., & Loftus, E
(1975) A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 821, 407–428. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, A., & Quillian, M
(1969) Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 91, 240–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culicover, P.W
(1999) Syntactic nuts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Culicover, P.W., & Jackendoff, R
(2005) Simpler Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culicover, P.W., & Nowak, A
(2003) Dynamical grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Daelemans, W., De Smet, K., & Gazdar, G
(1992) Inheritance in natural language processing. Computational Linguistics, 181, 205–218.Google Scholar
deJong, N
(2002) Morphological families in the mental Lexicon. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. Google Scholar
de Saussure, F
(1916) Cours de linguistique générale, ed. by C. Bally & A. Sechehaye, with the collaboration of A. Riedlinger, Lausanne and Paris: Payot; trans. by W. Baskin, Course in general linguistics, Glasgow: Fontana/Collins 1977.Google Scholar
Fiorentino, R., & Poeppel, D
(2007) Compound words and structure in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 221, 953–1000. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J.D
(1998) Learning to parse? In D. Swinney (Ed.), Anniversary Issue of Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27(2), 285–318.Google Scholar
Gallistel, C.R., & King, P.A
(2009) Memory and the computational brain. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A
(1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2005) Constructions at work. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hagoort, P
2005 On Broca, brain, and binding: A new framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 91, 416–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, J
(2003) The information conveyed by words in sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 321, 101–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) What a rational parser would do. Cognitive Science, 351, 399–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, M., & Marantz, A
(1993) Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S.J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 111–176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hankamer, J
(1989) Morphological parsing and the lexicon. In W. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.), Lexical representation and process (pp. 392–408). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hay, J., & Baayen, H
(2005) Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology, Trends in Cognitive Science, 9(7), 342–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, T., & Trousdale, G
(Eds.) (2013) The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R
(1975) Morphological and semantic regularities in the Lexicon, Language, 51(3), 639–671. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) A Parallel Architecture perspective on language processing. Brain Research, 11461, 2–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Meaning and the lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R., & Audring, J
forthcoming). The texture of the mental Lexicon.
Kapatsinski, V
(2007) Frequency, neighborhood density, age-of-acquisition, lexicon size, neighborhood density and speed of processing: Towards a domain-general, single-mechanism account. In S. Buescher, K. Holley, E. Ashworth, C. Beckner, B. Jones, & C. Shank (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th annual High Desert Linguistics Society Conference (pp. 121–140). Albuquerque, NM: High Desert Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Kuperberg, G., & Jaeger, F
2015). What do we mean by prediction in language processing? Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(1), 32–59. DOI logo
Kuperman, V., Bertram, R., & Baayen, R.H
(2008) Morphological dynamics in compound processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 231, 1089–1132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G
(1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar (vol. 11). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A
(1999) A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 221, 1–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levy, R
(2008) Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106(3), 1126–1177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Libben, G
(2006) Why study compounds? An overview of the issues. In G. Libben & G. Jarema (Eds.), The representation and processing of compound words (pp. 1–21). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marcus, G
(1998) Rethinking eliminative connectionism. Cognitive Psychology, 371, 243–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) The algebraic mind. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marr, D
(1982) Vision. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L.K
(1980) The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 81, 1–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W
(1987) Functional parallelism in spoken language understanding. Cognition, 251, 71–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., & Zwitserlood, P
(1989) Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 151, 576–585. DOI logoGoogle Scholar

Moscoso del Prado Martín, F., Bertram, R., Häikiö, T., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R.H
(2004) Morphological family size in a morphologically rich language: The case of Finnish compared with Dutch and Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(6), 1271–1278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murphy, G
(2002) The big book of concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nooteboom, S., Weerman, F., & Wijnen, F
(Eds.) (2002) Storage and computation in the language faculty. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, T.J
(2015) Productivity and reuse in language: A theory of linguistic computation and storage. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oldfield, R., & Wingfield, A
(1965) Response latencies in naming objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 171, 273–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S
(1999) Words and rules. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Plag, I
(2003) Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollard, C., & Sag, I
(1994) Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Radden, G., & Panther, K.-U
(2004) Introduction: Reflections on motivation. In G. Radden & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Studies in linguistic motivation (pp. 1–46). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Reifegerste, J
(2014) Morphological processing in younger and older people: Evidence for flexible dual-route access. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. Google Scholar
Riehemann, S
(1988) Type-based derivational morphology. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 21, 49–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rumelhart, D
(1980) Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. Spiro, B. Bruce, & W. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 33–58). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D., & McClelland, J
(1986) On learning the past tense of English verbs. In J. McClelland, D. Rumelhart, & the PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing (vol. ii1, pp. 216–271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R.H
(1995) Modeling morphological processing. In L. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 131–154). Hove: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Siddiqi, D
to appear). Distributed Morphology. In J. Audring & F. Masini (Eds.) The Oxford handbook of morphological theory Oxford Oxford University Press
Smolensky, P., & Legendre, G
(2006) The harmonic mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Swinney, D
(1979) Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 181, 645–659. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taft, M
(2004) Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A1, 745–765. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tanenhaus, M., Leiman, J.M., & Seidenberg, M
(1979) Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 181, 427–440. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M
(2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ullman, M.T
(2015) The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiologically motivated theory of first and second language. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 135–158). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wittenberg, E., & Snedeker, J
(2014) It takes two to kiss, but does it take three to give a kiss? Categorization based on thematic roles. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(5), 635–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woods, W
(1980) Multiple theory formation in speech and reading. In R. Spiro, B. Bruce, & W. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 59–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Yang, Charles
(2016) The price of linguistic productivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 24 other publications

Audring, Jenny
2019. Mothers or sisters? The encoding of morphological knowledge. Word Structure 12:3 ► pp. 274 ff. DOI logo
Audring, Jenny, Geert Booij & Ray Jackendoff
2017. Menscheln, kibbelen, sparkle. Linguistics in the Netherlands 34 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Baló, Márton A.
2021. Variation in the nominal morphology of Northern Vlax Romani. Word Structure 14:1 ► pp. 25 ff. DOI logo
Booij, Geert
2018. The Construction of Words: Introduction and Overview. In The Construction of Words [Studies in Morphology, 4], ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Booij, Geert & Jenny Audring
2018. Partial Motivation, Multiple Motivation: The Role of Output Schemas in Morphology. In The Construction of Words [Studies in Morphology, 4], ► pp. 59 ff. DOI logo
CHUA, DEBORAH
2019. Comparative alternation iny-adjectives: insights from self-paced reading. Language and Cognition 11:3 ► pp. 373 ff. DOI logo
Cohn, Neil
2018. Combinatorial Morphology in Visual Languages. In The Construction of Words [Studies in Morphology, 4], ► pp. 175 ff. DOI logo
Diewald, Gabriele
2020. Paradigms lost – paradigms regained. In Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 27], ► pp. 278 ff. DOI logo
Gaeta, Livio & Marco Angster
2019. Stripping paradigmatic relations out of the syntax. Morphology 29:2 ► pp. 249 ff. DOI logo
Hagel, Anna
2023. Chapter 3. One man’s [ɕœtː] is another man’s [kʰøð̞]. In Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 37], ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Hilpert, Martin
2019. Higher-order schemas in morphology: What they are, how they work, and where to find them. Word Structure 12:3 ► pp. 261 ff. DOI logo
Inglese, Guglielmo & Anne C. Wolfsgruber
2023. The rise and fall of morphological schemas. Constructions and Frames 15:2 ► pp. 187 ff. DOI logo
Jackendoff, Ray & Jenny Audring
2020. Morphology and Memory: Toward an Integrated Theory. Topics in Cognitive Science 12:1 ► pp. 170 ff. DOI logo
Kapatsinski, Vsevolod
2021. What Are Constructions, and What Else Is Out There? An Associationist Perspective. Frontiers in Communication 5 DOI logo
Kapatsinski, Vsevolod
2022. Morphology in a Parallel, Distributed, Interactive Architecture of Language Production. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 5 DOI logo
Kendall, Lia N., Quentin Raffaelli, Rebecca M. Todd, Alan Kingstone & Neil Cohn
2020. Show me how you feel. In Operationalizing Iconicity [Iconicity in Language and Literature, 17], ► pp. 214 ff. DOI logo
Lee, Senyung & Sun-Young Shin
2021. Towards Improved Assessment of L2 Collocation Knowledge. Language Assessment Quarterly 18:4 ► pp. 419 ff. DOI logo
M. Shamionov, Rail & Anton V. Grigoryev
2019. The image of socially active individual in the representations of student youth. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science Engineering and Education 7:1 ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
Norde, Muriel & Graeme Trousdale
2023. Issues in Diachronic Construction Morphology. Constructions and Frames 15:2 ► pp. 145 ff. DOI logo
Pereira, Rui
2019. A Morfologia Derivacional na Aquisição do Português como Língua Estrangeira / Língua Segunda. Diacrítica 33:2 ► pp. 278 ff. DOI logo
ten Hacken, Pius
2019. Morphology in Jackendoff’s Parallel Architecture. In Word Formation in Parallel Architecture [SpringerBriefs in Linguistics, ], ► pp. 23 ff. DOI logo
ten Hacken, Pius
2019. Productivity and Onomasiological Coercion. In Word Formation in Parallel Architecture [SpringerBriefs in Linguistics, ], ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
Zwitserlood, Pienie
2018. Processing and Representation of Morphological Complexity in Native Language Comprehension and Production. In The Construction of Words [Studies in Morphology, 4], ► pp. 583 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2023. A Constructional Account of Verb-Forming Suffixation [Constructional Approaches to Language, 36], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 june 2024. 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.