Part of
Paradigms in Word Formation: Theory and applications
Edited by Alba E. Ruz, Cristina Fernández-Alcaina and Cristina Lara-Clares
[Studies in Language Companion Series 225] 2022
► pp. 129152
References (37)
References
Aronoff, Mark. 1983. Potential words, actual words, productivity and frequency. In Proceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Linguists, August 29–September 4, 1982, Tokyo, Shirō Hattori & Kazuko Inoue (eds), 163–171. Tokyo: Permanent International Committee on Linguistics.Google Scholar
Bagasheva, Alexandra. 2020. Paradigmaticity in compounding. In Paradigmatic Relations in Word Formation, Jesús Fernández-Domínguez, Alexandra Bagasheva & Cristina Lara-Clares (eds), 21–48. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English Word-formation. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. The borderline between derivation and compounding. In Morphology and its Demarcations [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 264], Wolfgang U. Dressler, Dieter Kastovsky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer & Franz Rainer (eds), 97–108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2022. Interlocking paradigms in English compounds. In Paradigms in Word Formation: Theory and Applications [Studies in Language Companion Series 225], Alba E. Ruz, Cristina Fernández-Alcaina & Cristina Lara-Clares (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Lieber, Rochelle & Plag, Ingo. 2013. The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Beliaeva, Natalia & Tarasova, Elizaveta. 2019. Recalibrating productivity: Factors involved. Zeitschrift für Wortbildung / Journal of Word Formation 3(1): 44–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Becker, Thomas. 1993. Back-formation, cross-formation, and ‘bracketing paradoxes’ in paradigmatic morphology. In Yearbook of Morphology 1993, Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds), 1–25. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beliaeva, Natalia. 2019. Blending creativity and productivity: On the issue of delimiting the boundaries of blends as a type of word formation. Lexis [Online] 14: 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonami, Olivier & Strnadová, Jana. 2019. Paradigm structure and predictability in derivational morphology. Morphology 29(2): 167–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert & Hüning, Matthias. 2014. Affixoids and constructional idioms. In Extending the Scope of Construction Grammar, Ronny Boogaart, Timothy Colleman & Gijsbert Rutten (eds), 77–106. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cetnarowska, Bożena. 2022. Paradigm families in compounding: The case of English compound nouns headed by -er deverbal nouns. In Paradigms in Word Formation: Theory and Applications [Studies in Language Companion Series 225], Alba E. Ruz, Cristina Fernández-Alcaina & Cristina Lara-Clares (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2016–. Corpus of News on the Web (NOW). <[URL]> (6 May 2020).
Díaz-Negrillo, Ana. 2020. Neoclassical word formation in English: A paradigm-based account of -scope formations. In Paradigmatic Relations in Word Formation, Jesús Fernández-Domínguez, Alexandra Bagasheva & Cristina Lara-Clares (eds), 213–261. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1989. Prototypical differences between inflection and derivation. STUF-Language Typology and Universals 42: 3–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000. Extragrammatical vs. marginal morphology. In Extragrammatical and Marginal Morphology, Ursula Doleschal & Anna M. Thornton (eds), 1–10. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Eitelmann, Matthias, Haugland, Kari & Haumann, Dagmar. 2020. From engl-isc to whatever-ish: A corpus-based investigation of -ish derivation in the history of English. English Language & Linguistics 24(4): 801–831. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Domínguez, Jesús, Bagasheva, Alexandra & Lara-Clares, Cristina (eds). 2020. Paradigmatic Relations in Word Formation. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fradin, Bernard. 2000. Combining forms, blends and related phenomena. In Extragrammatical and Marginal Morphology, Ursula Doleschal & Anna M. Thornton (eds), 11–59. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Hathout, Nabil & Namer, Fiammetta. 2019. Paradigms in word formation: What are we up to? Morphology 29(2): 153–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 1998. Scapes, holics, and thons: The semantics of combining forms. American Speech 73(1): 3–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Blendalicious. In Lexical Creativity, Texts and Contexts [Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 58], Judith Munat (ed.), 115–133. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mattiello, Elisa. 2016. Analogical neologisms in English. Italian Journal of Linguistics 28(2): 103–142.Google Scholar
. 2017. Analogy in Word-Formation. A Study of English Neologisms and Occasionalisms. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Online Etymology Dictionary. 2021. <[URL]> (6 May 2021).
Oxford English Dictionary Online (OED). 2021. OUP. <[URL]> (6 May 2020).
Plank, Frans. 1994. Inflection and derivation. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 3, Ronald E. Asher & J. M. Y. Simpson (eds), 1671–1678. Oxford: Pergamon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raffelsiefen, Renate. 1992. Relating Words: A New Approach to English Morphology. PhD dissertation, University of Washington.
Rainer, Franz. 2012. Morphological metaphysics: Virtual, potential and actual words. Word Structure 5(2): 165–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Saussure, Ferdinand. 1916. Cours de Linguistique Générale. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Štekauer, Pavol. 2014. Derivational paradigms. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 354–369. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Christopher M. 2005. Revisiting the affixoid debate. On the grammaticalization of the word. In Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen, Torsten Leuschner, Tanja Mortelmans & Sarah de Groodt (eds), 71–83. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stump, Gregory T. 1991. A paradigm-based theory of morphosemantic mismatches. Language 67: 675–725. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Marle, Jaap. 1985. On the Paradigmatic Dimension of Morphological Creativity. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Warren, Beatrice. 1990. The importance of combining forms. In Contemporary Morphology, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Hans C. Luschützky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer & John R. Rennison (eds), 111–132. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Fábregas, Antonio

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.