Article published in:
The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 16:1 (2021) ► pp. 165198
References

References

Baayen, R. Harald
(2008) Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, W. Levelt, Robert Schreuder & Mirjam Ernestus
(2007) Paradigmatic structure in speech production. In Proceedings from the annual meeting of the Chicago linguistic society, vol. 43, 1–29. Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald & Elnaz Shafaei-Bajestan
(2019) languageR: Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics. https://​CRAN​.R​-project​.org​/package​=languageR (20 April 2020).
Barton, Kamil
Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Lieber & Ingo Plag
(2015) The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, Alan, Jason M. Brenier, Michelle Gregory, Cynthia Girand & Dan Jurafsky
(2009) Predictability effects on durations of content and function words in conversational English. Journal of Memory and Language 60(1). 92–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Alan, Daniel Jurafsky, Eric Fosler-Lussier, Cynthia Girand, Michelle Gregory & Daniel Gildea
(2003) Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. Acoustical Society of America 113(2). 1001–1024. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Melanie J., Sonia Ben Hedia & Ingo Plag
(2019) How morphological structure affects phonetic realization in English compound nouns. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ben Hedia, Sonia
(2019) Gemination and degemination in English affixation: Investigating the interplay between morphology, phonology and phonetics. Studies in Laboratory Phonology. Crossref (30 September 2019).Google Scholar
Ben Hedia, Sonia & Ingo Plag
(2017) Gemination and degemination in English prefixation: Phonetic evidence for morphological organization. Journal of Phonetics 62. 34–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bethin, Christina Y.
(2012) On paradigm uniformity and contrast in Russian vowel reduction. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30(2). 425–463. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blazej, Laura J. & Ariel M. Cohen-Goldberg
(2015) Can We Hear Morphological Complexity Before Words Are Complex? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 41(1). 50–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul & David Weenink
(2015) Praat: doing Phonetics by Computer. (Version 6.0.08). http://​www​.fon​.hum​.uva​.nl​/praat/
Bonami, Olivier, Gilles Boyé, Matthew Baerman, Oliver Bond & Andrew Hippisley
(2019) Paradigm uniformity and the French gender system. Perspectives on morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, to appear.Google Scholar
Braver, Aaron
(2014) Imperceptible incomplete neutralization: Production, non-identifiability, and non-discriminability in American English flapping. Lingua 152. 24–44. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Burzio, Luigi
(1998) Multiple correspondence. Lingua. Elsevier 104(1–2). 79–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Byrd, D., J. Krivokapic & S. Lee
(2006) How far, how long: On the temporal scope of prosodic boundary effects. Journal Of The Acoustical Society Of America 120(3). 1589–1599. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Byrd, Dani
(1994) Relations of sex and dialect to reduction. Speech Communication 15(1–2). 39–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Caselli, Naomi K., Michael K. Caselli & Ariel M. Cohen-Goldberg
(2016) Inflected words in production: Evidence for a morphologically rich lexicon. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 69(3). 432–454. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Clara
(2014) Probabilistic reduction and probabilistic enhancement. Morphology 24(4). 291–323. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dell, Gary S.
(1986) A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological review. American Psychological Association 93(3). 283. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eddington, David
(2006) Paradigm uniformity and analogy: The capitalistic versus militaristic debate. International Journal of English Studies 6(2). 1–18.Google Scholar
Engemann, U. Marie & Ingo Plag
(2020) Paradigm uniformity effects in spontaneous speech. submitted to The Mental Lexicon.Google Scholar
Engemann, U. Marie, Ingo Plag & Julia Zimmermann
(2019) Paradigmatic effects in speech production: Do bare stems influence the pronunciation of suffixed forms? In MoProc 2019 – International Morphological Processing Conference. Tübingen, Germany.Google Scholar
Ernestus, Mirjam & Harald Baayen
(2007) Paradigmatic effects in auditory word recognition: The case of alternating voice in Dutch. Language and Cognitive Processes. Routledge 22(1). 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ernestus, Mirjam & R. Harald Baayen
(2006) The functionality of incomplete neutralization in Dutch: The case of past-tense formation. (Ed.) L. Goldstein, D. H. Whalen & C. T. Best. LabPhon 8. 27–49.Google Scholar
Fougeron, C. & P. A. Keating
(1997) Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 101(6). 3728–3740. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox, John & Sanford Weisberg
(2011) Multivariate linear models in R. An R Companion to Applied Regression. Los Angeles: Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
Frazier, Melissa
(2006) Output-output faithfulness to moraic structure: Evidence from American English. In PROCEEDINGS-NELS, vol. 36, 1.Google Scholar
Fromont, Robert & Jennifer Hay
(2012) LaBB-CAT: an Annotation Store. In Proceedings of Australasian Language Technology Association Workshop, 113–117. Australasian Language Technology Associatio. http://​labbcat​.sourceforge​.net/ (6 May 2019).
Gafos, Adamantios I.
(2006) Dynamics in grammar: Comment on Ladd and Ernestus & Baayen* Adamantios I. Gafos. Laboratory phonology 8(4). 51.Google Scholar
Gafos, Adamantios I. & Angela Ralli
(2002) Morphosyntactic features and paradigmatic uniformity in two dialectal varieties of the island of Lesvos. Journal of Greek linguistics 2(1). 41–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gahl, Susanne
(2008) “Time” and “thyme” are not homophones: the effect of lemma frequency on word durations in spontaneous speech. Language 84(3). 474–496. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gahl, Susanne, Yao Yao & Keith Johnson
(2012) Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language 66(4). 806. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldrick, Matthew
(2006) Limited interaction in speech production: Chronometric, speech error, and neuropsychological evidence. Language and Cognitive Processes. Routledge 21(7–8). 817–855. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) Phonological processing: The retrieval and encoding of word form information in speech production. In The Oxford handbook of language production, 228–244. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldrick, Matthew & Sheila E. Blumstein
(2006) Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters. Language and Cognitive Processes. Taylor & Francis 21(6). 649–683. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldrick, Matthew, H. Ross Baker, Amanda Murphy & Melissa Baese-Berk
(2011) Interaction and representational integration: Evidence from speech errors. Cognition 121(1). 58–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Green, Christopher R.
(2009) Paradigm uniformity in Luwanga derived nouns. In 6th World Congress on African Linguistics, Cologne, Germany. August, 17–21.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer
(2003) Causes and Consequences of Word Structure (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
(2007) The phonetics of ‘un.’ Lexical creativity, texts and contexts 39–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hothorn, Torsten, Kurt Hornik, Carolin Strobl & Achim Zeileis
(2020) party: A Laboratory for Recursive Partytioning. https://​CRAN​.R​-project​.org​/package​=party (20 April 2020).
Jurafsky, Daniel, Alan Bell, Michelle Gregory & William D. Raymond
(2001) Probabilistic relations between words: Evidence from reduction in lexical production. In Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (Typological Studies in Language, Vol. 45), 229–254. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kemps, Rachel J. J. K., Mirjam Ernestus, Robert Schreuder & R. Harald Baayen
(2005) Prosodic cues for morphological complexity: the case of Dutch plural nouns. Memory & Cognition 33(3). 430. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael & Hyang-Sook Sohn
(2008) Paradigmatic uniformity and contrast: Korean liquid verb stems. Phonological Studies 11. 99–110.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul
(2015) Stratal OT: A Synopsis and FAQs. In Capturing phonological shades within and across languages, 2–44. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Klatt, Dennis H.
(1976) Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic and perceptual evidence. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 59(5). 1208–1221. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William
(1972) Sociolinguistic Patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Laks, Lior, Evan-Gary Cohen & Stav Azulay-Amar
(2016) Paradigm uniformity and the locus of derivation: The case of vowel epenthesis in Hebrew verbs. Lingua 170. 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee-Kim, Sang-Im, Lisa Davidson & Sangjin Hwang
(2013) Morphological effects on the darkness of English intervocalic /l/. Laboratory Phonology 4(2). 475–511. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M., Ardi Roelofs & Antje S. Mayer
(1999) A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22(1). https://​www​.researchgate​.net​/publication​/27269195​_A​_theory​_of​_lexical​_access​_in​_speech​_production. Crossref
Lohmann, Arne
(2017) Phonological properties of word classes and directionality in conversion. Word Structure. Edinburgh University Press The Tun-Holyrood Road, 12 (2f) Jackson’s Entry … 10(2). 204–234.Google Scholar
(2018) Cut (n) and cut (v) are not homophones: Lemma frequency affects the duration of noun–verb conversion pairs. Journal of Linguistics 54(4). 753–777. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lõo, Kaidi, Juhani Järvikivi, Fabian Tomaschek, Benjamin V. Tucker & R. Harald Baayen
(2018) Production of Estonian case-inflected nouns shows whole-word frequency and paradigmatic effects. Morphology 28(1). 71–97. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, Sara, Erin Olson, Meghan Clayards & Michael Wagner
(2018) North American/l/both darkens and lightens depending on morphological constituency and segmental context. Laboratory Phonology. Ubiquity Press 9(1).Google Scholar
Marian, Viorica
(2012) CLEARPOND: Cross-Linguistic Easy-Access Resource for Phonological and Orthographic Neighborhood Densities. United States, North America: Public Library of Science (PLoS).Google Scholar
McMillan, Corey T., Martin Corley & Robin J. Lickley
(2009) Articulatory evidence for feedback and competition in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes. Routledge 24(1). 44–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Park, Sunwoo
(2006) Paradigm uniformity effects in Korean phonology. PhD dissertation, Korea University, Seoul, Korea.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. R. & P. Savoy
(1998) Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascaded processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology.Google Scholar
Plag, Ingo & Sonia Ben Hedia
(2018) The phonetics of newly derived words: Testing the effect of morphological segmentability on affix duration.Google Scholar
Plag, Ingo, U. Marie Engemann & Gero Kunter
(2018a) The effect of morphological boundaries on stem vowel duration in English. In 40. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft. Stuttgart: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
(2018b) The effect of morphological boundaries on stem vowel duration in English. In LabPhon 16 – Variation, development and impairment: Between phonetics and phonology. Lisbon: Association for Laboratory Phonology.Google Scholar
Plag, Ingo, Julia Homann & Gero Kunter
(2017) Homophony and morphology: The acoustics of word-final S in English. Journal of Linguistics 53(1). 181–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plag, Ingo, Arne Lohmann, Sonia Ben Hedia & Julia Zimmermann
(2020a) An <s> is an <s’>, or is it? Plural and genitive-plural are not homophonous. In To appear in Livia Körtvélyessy & Pavel Stekauer (eds.) Complex Words. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2020b) What is the difference between _boys_ and_boys’_? The phonetics of plural vs. genitive-plural in English and its implications for morphological theory. In 19th International Morphology Meeting. Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Pluymaekers, Mark, Mirjam Ernestus & R. Harald Baayen
(2005a) Articulatory planning is continuous and sensitive to informational redundancy. Phonetica. Karger Publishers 62(2–4). 146–159. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005b) Lexical frequency and acoustic reduction in spoken Dutch. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118(4). 2561–2569. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pluymaekers, Mark, Mirjam Ernestus, R. Harald Baayen & Geert Booij
(2010) Morphological effects on fine phonetic detail: The case of Dutch-igheid. (Ed.) C. Fougeron, B. Kühnert, M. D’Imperio & N. Vallée. Laboratory phonology 10. 511–531.Google Scholar
R Core Team
(2015) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (Version 3.2.1). Vienna, Austria. https://​www​.R​-project​.org
Raffelsiefen, Renate
(2004) Paradigm Uniformity Effects Versus Boundary Effects. In Paradigms in Phonological Theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. http://​www​.oxfordscholarship​.com​/view​/10​.1093​/acprof:oso​/9780199267712​.001​.0001​/acprof​-9780199267712​-chapter​-9 (10 April 2019) Crossref
Ramig, Lorraine A. & Ringel, Robert L.
(1983) Effects of Physiological Aging on Selected Acoustic Characteristics of Voice. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 26(1). 22–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rapp, B. & M. Goldrick
(2000) Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. Psychological review. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rebrus, Péter & Miklós Törkenczy
(2005) Uniformity and contrast in the Hungarian verbal paradigm. na.Google Scholar
Riehl, Anastasia K.
(2003) American English flapping: Perceptual and acoustic evidence against paradigm uniformity with phonetic features. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 15(271–337).Google Scholar
Roettger, T. B.
(2014) Assessing incomplete neutralization of final devoicing in German. Journal of Phonetics 43. 11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roettger, Timo B., Bodo Winter, S. Grawunder, J. Kirby & M. Grice
(2014) Assessing incomplete neutralization of final devoicing in German. Journal of Phonetics 43. 11–25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmitz, Dominic, Ingo Plag & Dinah Baer-Henney
(2020) How real are acoustic differences between different types of final /s/ in English? Evidence from pseudowords. In 19th International Morphology Meeting. Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Seyfarth, Scott, Marc Garellek, Gwendolyn Gillingham, Farrell Ackerman & Robert Malouf
(2017) Acoustic differences in morphologically-distinct homophones. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 33(1). 32–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Seyfarth, Scott, Jozina Vander Klok & Marc Garellek
(2019) Evidence against interactive effects on articulation in Javanese verb paradigms. Psychonomic bulletin & review 1–7. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skoog Waller, Sara, Mårten Eriksson & Patrik Sörqvist
(2015) Can you hear my age? Influences of speech rate and speech spontaneity on estimation of speaker age. Frontiers in Psychology. Frontiers 6. Crossref. https://​www​.frontiersin​.org​/articles​/10​.3389​/fpsyg​.2015​.00978​/full (22 April 2020).
Sproat, Richard & Osamu Fujimura
(1993) Allophonic variation in English/l/and its implications for phonetic implementation. Journal of phonetics 21(3). 291–311. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Steriade, Donca
(2000) Paradigm Uniformity and the Phonetics-Phonology Boundary. (Ed.) Edited Michael Broe & Janet Pierrehumbert. Papers in Laboratory Phonology 5.Google Scholar
Tabain, Marija
(2003) Effects of prosodic boundary on /aC/ sequences: articulatory results. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 113(5). 2834–2849. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tomaschek, Fabian, Peter Hendrix & R. Harald Baayen
(2018) Strategies for addressing collinearity in multivariate linguistic data. Journal of Phonetics 71. 249–267. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tomaschek, Fabian, Ingo Plag, Mirjam Ernestus & R. Harald Baayen
(2019) Modeling the duration of word-final S in English with Naive Discriminative Learning. submitted to Journal of Linguistics. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torreira, Francisco & Mirjam Ernestus
(2009) Probabilistic effects on French [t] duration. In 10th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (Interspeech 2009), 448–451. Causal Productions Pty Ltd.Google Scholar
Tucker, Benjamin V. & Mirjam Ernestus
(2016) Why we need to investigate casual speech to truly understand language production, processing and the mental lexicon. The mental lexicon. John Benjamins 11(3). 375–400. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Oostendorp, Marc
(2008) Incomplete devoicing in formal phonology. Lingua. Elsevier 118(9). 1362–1374. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, Liam, Jen Hay, Derek Bent, Jeanette King, Paul Millar, Viktoria Papp & Kevin Watson
(2013) The UC QuakeBox Project: Creation of a community-focused research archive. https://​ir​.canterbury​.ac​.nz​/handle​/10092​/15635 (20 November 2018).
Wightman, Colin W., Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel, Mari Ostendorf & Patti J. Price
(1992) Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 91(3). 1707–1717. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Winter, Bodo & Timo B. Roettger
(2011) The nature of incomplete neutralization in German: Implications for laboratory phonology. Grazer Linguistische Studien 76. 55–74.Google Scholar
Zee, Tim
(2019) Morphological effects on the acoustics of Dutch /s/. In 15. Phonetik und Phonologie Tagung. Düsseldorf, Germany.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Julia
(2016) Morphological Status and Acoustic Realization: Findings from NZE. In C. Carignan & M. D. Tyler (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, 6–9. Sydney: University of Western Sydney.Google Scholar
Zuraw, Kie & Sharon Peperkamp
(2015) Aspiration and the gradient structure of English prefixed words. In ICPhS.Google Scholar