This article proposes a measure of the competitive strength of two rival patterns in the domain of a subgroup of irregular verbs in
English. There is competition between simple pasts built on the vowels /æ/ and /ʌ/, and the same competition is found in the
domain of past participles. As a result of such competition, the past tense stang (from sting)
was replaced with stung. The /ʌ/ forms are more competitive than the /æ/ forms (Bybee & Slobin 2007, Bybee & Moder
2007). To understand this, we counted the number of types for /æ/ (such as sang, rang)
and /ʌ/ (such as stung, stuck) in the irregular simple past and did the same in the irregular participle (such as
sat, had and sung, done). We calculated a measure of competitiveness for these two patterns
incorporating type frequency and token frequency. This measure was used to explain why /ʌ/ forms are more competitive than
/æ/ forms.
(2009) The Morphology of English Dialects. Verb Formation in Non-Standard English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aronoff, M.
(2016) Competition and the lexicon. In A. Elia, C. Iacobini, & M. Voghera (Eds.), Livelli di Analisi e fenomeni di interfaccia. Atti del XLVII congresso internazionale della società di linguistica Italiana (pp. 39–52). Roma: Bulzoni Editore.
Berg, T.
(2014) On the relationship between type and token frequency. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 21, 3, 199–222.
Brysbaert, M. & New, B.
(2009) Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior research methods 41, 4, 977–990.
Bybee, J.
(1995) Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 101: 425–455.
Bybee, J.
(2007) [Hooper 1976]Word Frequency in Lexical Diffusion and the Source of Morphophonological Change. In J. Bybee (Ed.), Frequency of use and the organization of language (23–34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, J.
(2010) Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. & Slobin, D.
(2007) [1982]Rules and schemas in the Development of the English Past Tense. In J. Bybee (Ed.), Frequency of use and the organization of language (pp. 101–126). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, J. & Moder, C.
(2007) [1983]Morphological Classes as Natural Categories. In J. Bybee (Ed.) Frequency of use and the organization of language (pp. 127–147). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dehaene, S.
(2003) The neural basis of the Weber-Fechner law: a logarithmic mental number line. Update Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7, 4, 145–147.
Diessel, H.
(2007) Frequency effects in language acquisition, language use, and diachronic change. New Ideas in Psychology 25, 2, 104–123.
Eisma, D. & Popkema, J.
(2006) Tiidwurden [Verbs]. Ljouwert / Leeuwarden: AFUK.
Gahl, S.
(2008) “Thyme” and “time” are not homophones. The effect of lemma frequency on word durations in spontaneous speech. Language 84, 3, 474–496.
Grabowski, E. & Mindt, D.
(1995) A corpus-based learning list of irregular verbs in English. International Computer Archive of Modern English (ICAME) 191, 5–22.
Haeseryn, W., Romijn, K., Geerts, G., de Rooij, J., & van den Toorn, M.
(1997) Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst [General Dutch Grammar]. Groningen: Martinus Nijhoff.
Hinskens, F.
(1996) Dialect levelling in Limburg. Structural and sociolinguistic aspects. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Jescheniak, J., & Levelt, W.
(1994) Word frequency effects in speech production. Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 20, 4, 824–843.
Jespersen, O.
(1942) A modern English grammar on historical principles. Volume 6: Morphology. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
Krott, A., Baayen, H., & Schreuder, R.
(2001) Analogy in morphology: modeling the choice of linking morphemes in Dutch. Linguistics 39, 1, 51–93.
McSparran, F., Schaffner, P., Latta, J., Pagliere, A., Powell, C., & Stoeffler, M.
(2006) Middle English Dictionary. University of Michigan. Accessed 16 February 2017. [URL].
Mufwene, S.
(2008) Language Evolution. Contact, Competition and Change. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Phillips, B.
(2006) Word Frequency and Lexical Diffusion. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Versloot, A. & Hoekstra, E.
(2016) Attraction between words as a function of frequency and representational distance: words in the bilingual brain. Linguistics 54, 6, 1223–1240.
Wedel, A., A. Kaplan, A., & Jackson, S.
(2013) High functional load inhibits phonological contrast loss: A corpus study. Cognition 128, 2, 179–186.
Wieling, M., Nerbonne, J., & Baayen, R. H.
(2011) Quantitative social dialectology: Explaining linguistic variation geographically and socially. PLoS ONE 6, 9, e23613. .
Wright, R.
(2004) Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation. Papers in laboratory phonology VI1, 75–87.
Zipf, G.
(1935) The Psycho-Biology of Language. An introduction to Dynamic Philology. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. Reprint 1965 Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.
Zipf, G.
(1949) Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. An Introduction to Human Ecology. Cambridge (Mass.): Addison-Wesley. Reprint 1965 New York: Hafner.
van de Weijer, Jeroen, Weiyun Wei, Yumeng Wang, Guangyuan Ren & Yunyun Ran
2020. Words are constructions, too: A construction-based approach to English ablaut reduplication. Linguistics 58:6 ► pp. 1701 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 april 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.