Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-72crv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-05T17:19:25.745Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variable Affix Order: Grammar and Learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Kevin M. Ryan
Kevin M. Ryan*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
*
UCLA Department of Linguistics 3125 Campbell Hall Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543, [kmryan@humnet.ucla.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While affix ordering often reflects general syntactic or semantic principles, it can also be arbitrary or variable. This article develops a theory of morpheme ordering based on local morphotactic restrictions encoded as weighted bigram constraints. I examine the formal properties of morphotactic systems, including arbitrariness, nontransitivity, context-sensitivity, analogy, and variation. Several variable systems are surveyed before turning to a detailed corpus study of a variable affix in Tagalog. Bigram morphotactics is shown to cover Tagalog and the typology, while other formalisms, such as alignment, precedence, and position classes, undergenerate. Moreover, learning simulations reveal that affix ordering under bigram morphotactics is subject to analogical pressures, providing a learning-theoretic motivation for the specific patterns of variation observed in Tagalog. I raise a different set of objections to rule-based approaches invoking affix movement. Finally, I demonstrate that bigram morphotactics is restrictive, being unable to generate unattested scenarios such as nonlocal contingency in ordering.

Keywords

affix ordermorphotacticsmorphologyvariationTagalog

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 86 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 758 - 791
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

I wish to thank Kie Zuraw, Bruce Hayes, Hilda Koopman, Laura McPherson, Joe Pater, Colin Wilson, audiences at UCLA, UC Berkeley, and the LSA annual meeting, the editors, and three anonymous referees for their insightful questions, criticisms, and suggestions. I also thank Larry Hyman and Sam Mchombo for their assistance with the Chichewa data. All faults are my own. This material is based on work supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship.

References

Ackema, Peter, and Neeleman, Ad. 2004. Beyond morphology: Interface conditions on word-formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackema, Peter, and Neeleman, Ad. 2005. Word-formation in optimality theory. Handbook of word-formation, ed. by Štekauer, Pavol and Lieber, Rochelle, 285–313. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albó, Xavier. 1964. El Quechua a su Alcance. La Paz: Alianza para el Progreso.Google Scholar
Alsina, Alex. 1999. Where's the mirror principle? The Linguistic Review 16. 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Stephen. 1986. Disjunctive ordering in inflectional morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4. 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Stephen. 2008. The logical structure of linguistic theory. Language 84. 795–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Arto. 1997a. Deriving variation from grammar. Variation, change and phonological theory, ed. by Hinskens, Frans, Hout, Roeland van, and Wetzels, Leo, 35–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Arto. 1997b. Variation in Finnish phonology and morphology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark, and Xu, Zheng. 2010. A realization optimality-theoretic approach to affix order. Morphology, to appear. Online: roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?id=1518.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark. 1985. The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry 16. 373–415.Google Scholar
Baroni, Marco. 2003. Distribution-driven morpheme discovery: A computational/experimental study. Yearbook of Morphology 2003. 213–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, D. 2007. Variable ordering of affixes in Upper Necaxa Totonac. Paper presented at the 12th Workshop on Structure and Constituency of the Languages of the Americas, University of Lethbridge.Google Scholar
Becker, Michael, Pater, Joe; and Potts, Christopher. 2007. OT-Help 1.2. Software package. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar, Banjade, Goma, Gaenszle, Martin, Lieven, Elena, Paudyal, Netra Prasad, Rai, Ichchha Purna, Rai, Manoj, Rai, Novel Kishore; and Stoll, Sabine. 2007. Free prefix ordering in Chintang. Language 83. 43–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 2001. Nhanda: An aboriginal language of Western Australia. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 2004. Evolutionary phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan D. 2000. Adverbs: The hierarchy paradox. Glot International 4. 9–10.27–28.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul. 1997. How we learn variation, optionality, and probability. Proceedings of the Institute of Phonetic Sciences of the University of Amsterdam (IFA) 21. 43–58.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul, and Hayes, Bruce. 2001. Empirical tests of the gradual learning algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 32. 45–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul, and Pater, Joe. 2008. Convergence properties of a gradual learning algorithm for harmonic grammar. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam, and Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst, ms.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert, and Lieber, Rochelle. 1993. On the simultaneity of morphological and prosodic structure. Studies in lexical phonology (Phonetics and phonology 4), ed. by Hargus, Sharon and Kaisse, Ellen, 23–44. San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buell, Leston, Sy, Mariame; and Torrence, Harold. 2008. The syntax of mirror principle violations in Wolof. Handout from the 2008 International Morphology Meeting, Vienna, February 2008.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. (Typological studies in language 9.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Pagliuca, William; and Perkins, Revere D.. 1990. On the asymmetries in the affixation of grammatical material. Studies in typology and diachrony, ed. by Croft, William, Denning, Keith, and Kemmer, Suzanne, 1–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Caballero, Gabriela. 2008. Choguita Rarámuri (Tarahumara) phonology and morphology. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley dissertationGoogle Scholar
Caballero, Gabriela. 2010. Multiple exponence and the phonology-morphology interface. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 39, to appear.Google Scholar
Caballero, Gabriela. 2011. Scope, phonology and templates in an agglutinating language: Choguita Rarámuri (Tarahumara) variable suffix ordering. Morphology, to appear.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrier, Jill Louise. 1979. The interaction of morphological and phonological rules in Tagalog: A study in the relationship between rule components in grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertationGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. by Kenstowicz, Michael, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cole, Jennifer. 1994. A prosodic theory of reduplication. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Condoravdi, Cleo, and Kiparsky, Paul. 1998. Optimal order and scope. Paper presented at The Lexicon in Focus, Heinrich-Heine Universität Düsseldorf, August 1998.Google Scholar
Courtney, Ellen H., and Saville-Troike, Muriel. 2002. Learning to construct verbs in Navajo and Quechua. Journal of Child Language 29. 623–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Downing, Laura. 1998. Prosodic misalignment and reduplication. Yearbook of Morphology 1997. 83–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elman, Jeffrey. 1993. Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small. Cognition 48. 71–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Embick, David. 2007. Linearization and local dislocation: Derivational mechanics and interactions. Linguistic Analysis 33. 303–36.Google Scholar
Embick, David. 2008. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, ms.Google Scholar
Embick, David, and Noyer, Rolf. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32. 555–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabb, Nigel. 1988. English suffixation is constrained only by selectional restrictions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6. 527–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, Koleen. 1988. Insights into Tagalog: Reduplication, infixation and stress from nonlinear phonology. Dallas: SIL International and the University of Texas, Arlington.Google Scholar
Gansner, Emden, and North, Stephen. 1999. An open graph visualization system and its applications to software engineering. Software—Practice and Experience 30. 1203–33.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 2001. Unsupervised learning of the morphology of a natural language. Computational Linguistics 27. 153–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldwater, Sharon, and Johnson, Mark. 2003. Learning OT constraint rankings using a maximum entropy model. Proceedings of the Stockholm Workshop on Variation within Optimality Theory, ed. by Spenader, Jennifer, Eriksson, Anders, and Dahl, Östen, 111–20. Stockholm: Stockholm University Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Good, Jeff. 2003. Strong linearity: Three case studies towards a theory of morphosyntactic templatic constructions. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley dissertation.Google Scholar
Good, Jeff. 2005. Reconstructing morpheme order in Bantu: The case of causativization and applicativization. Diachronica 22. 3–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Good, Jeff. 2007. Strong linearity, weak linearity, and the typology of templates. New challenges in typology: Broadening the horizons and redefining the foundations, ed. by Miestamo, Matti and Wälchli, Bernhard, 11–33. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Good, Jeff, and Yu, Alan. 1998. Suffix ordering and variability in Turkish. Paper presented at the 25th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, California.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Good, Jeff, and Yu, Alan. 2005. Morphosyntax of two Turkish subject pronominal paradigms. Clitic and affix combinations, ed. by Heggie, Lorie and Ordóñez, Francisco, 315–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. Universals of human language, ed. by Greenberg, Joseph, 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grimes, Joseph E. 1983. Affix positions and co-occurrence: The PARADIGM program. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1990. An approach to morphology. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 20. 150–84.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris, and Marantz, Alec. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay, 111–76. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hargus, Sharon, and Tuttle, Siri G.. 1997. Augmentation as affixation in Athabaskan languages. Phonology 14. 177–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John, and Gilligan, Gary. 1988. Prefixing and suffixing universals in relation to basic word order. Lingua 74. 219–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer. 2003. Causes and consequences of word structure. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, and Plag, Ingo. 2004. What constrains possible suffix combinations? On the interaction of grammatical and processing restrictions in derivational morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22. 565–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce, and Wilson, Colin. 2008. A maximum entropy model of phonotactics and phonotactic learning. Linguistic Inquiry 39. 379–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrero, Joaquin, and de Lozada, Frederico Sánchez. 1978. Gramatica Quechua: Estructura del quechua boliviano contemporaneo. Cochabamba: Editorial Universo.Google Scholar
Horwood, Graham. 2002. Precedence faithfulness governs morpheme position. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) 21. 166–79.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1994. Conceptual issues in the comparative study of the Bantu verb stem. Topics in African linguistics, ed. by Mufwene, Salikoko and Moshi, Lioba, 3–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 2003. Suffix ordering in Bantu: A morphocentric approach. Yearbook of Morphology 2002. 245–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon. 1993. Nimboran position class morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11. 559–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon. 2000. Infixation obviates backcopying in Tagalog. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Chicago, IL, January 2000.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon, and Caballero, Gabriela. 2008. An inside-out approach to multiple exponence. Paper presented at the Berkeley Workshop on Affix Ordering, October 2008.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon, and Zoll, Cheryl. 2005. Reduplication: Doubling in morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jäger, Gerhard. 2007. Maximum entropy models and stochastic optimality theory. Architectures, rules, and preferences: A festschrift for Joan Bresnan, ed. by Grimshaw, Jane, Maling, Joan, Manning, Chris, Simpson, Jane, and Zaenen, Annie, 467–79. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Jaker, Alessandro. 2006. Split subject agreement and morphological typology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, ms.Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 2002. Optimality-theoretic lexical functional grammar. The lexical basis of sentence processing: Formal, computational, and experimental issues, ed. by Merlo, Paula and Stevenson, Susan, 59–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, Brian. 2007. What Greek can tell us about the remaking of verb endings. Columbus: The Ohio State University, ms. Online: www.ling.ohio-state.edu/~bjoseph/publicat.htm.Google Scholar
Jurafsky, Daniel, and Martin, James. 2000. Speech and language processing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982. From cyclic to lexical phonology. The structure of phonological representations, part 1, ed. by van, Harry Hulst, der and Smith, Norval, 131–75. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 2000. Opacity and cyclicity. The Linguistic Review 17. 351–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 2006. Amphichronic linguistics vs. evolutionary phonology. Theoretical Linguistics 32. 217–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroeger, Paul. 1993. Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Kurisu, Kazutaka. 2001. The phonology of morpheme realization. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz dissertation.Google Scholar
Luutonen, Jorma. 1997. The variation of morpheme order in Mari declension. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar
MacBride, Alex. 2004. A constraint-based approach to morphology. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles dissertation.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2011. Pausal phonology and morpheme realization. Prosody matters: Essays in honor of Lisa Selkirk, ed. by Borowsky, Toni, Kawahara, Shigeto, Shinya, Takahito, and Sugahara, Mariko. London: Equinox, to appear.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., and Prince, Alan S.. 1994. Generalized alignment. Yearbook of Morphology 1993. 79–153.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., and Prince, Alan S.. 1995. Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. Papers in optimality theory (University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics 18), ed. by Beckman, Jill, Dickey, Laura Walsh, and Urbanczyk, Suzanne, 249–384. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Graduate Linguistics Student Association.Google Scholar
McFarland, Teresa. 2005. The inflectional system of Totonaco de Filomeno Mata. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Oakland, CA, January 2005.Google Scholar
McFarland, Teresa. 2007. Free affix order in Filomeno Mata Totonac. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Anaheim, CA, January 2007.Google Scholar
McPherson, Laura, and Paster, Mary. 2009. Evidence for the mirror principle and morphological templates in Luganda affix ordering. Proceedings of the 39th annual Conference on African Linguistics, ed. by Ojo, Akinloye and Moshi, Lioba, 56–66. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Mercado, Ralph. 2007. The mystery of the mag- prefix: Phases and reduplication in Tagalog. Paper presented at the 14th meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association, Montreal, Quebec.Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. 1986. The theory of lexical phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott. 1999. Non-computable functions in optimality theory. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst, ms.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott. 2008. Analytic bias and phonological typology. Phonology 25. 83–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, Pamela, and Riggle, Jason. 2004. Productivity and lexicalization in Pima compounds. Berkeley Linguistics Society 30. 114–26.Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1981a. Quechua causatives and logical form: A case study in markedness. Theory of markedness in generative grammar, ed. by Belletti, Adriana, Brandi, Luciana, and Rizzi, Luigi, 445–73. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa.Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1981b. Quechua word structure. Binding and filtering, ed. by Heny, Frank, 279–327. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1986. Approaches to affix order. Linguistics 24. 629–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1988. Affix order and interpretation: Quechua. Morphology and modularity, ed. by Everaert, Martin, Evers, Arnold, Huybregts, Riny, and Trommelen, Mieke, 259–79. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Nagy, Naomi, and Reynolds, Bill. 1997. Optimality theory and word-final deletion in Faetar. Language Variation and Change 9. 37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevis, Joel, and Joseph, Brian. 1993. Wackernagel affixes: Evidence from Balto-Slavic. Yearbook of Morphology 1992. 93–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noyer, Rolf. 1993. Optimal words: Towards a declarative theory of word formation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, ms.Google Scholar
Paster, Mary. 2006a. Phonological conditions on affixation. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley dissertation.Google Scholar
Paster, Mary. 2006b. Pulaar verbal extensions and phonologically driven affix order. Yearbook of Morphology 2005. 155–99.Google Scholar
Pater, Joe. 2007. Morpheme-specific phonology: Constraint indexation and inconsistency resolution. Phonological argumentation: Essays on evidence and motivation, ed. by Parker, Steve, 123–54. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Pater, Joe. 2009. Weighted constraints in generative linguistics. Cognitive Science 33. 999–1035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pesetsky, David A. 1985. Morphology and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 16. 193–246.Google Scholar
Peterson, David A. 1994. Multiple exponence and morphosyntactic redundancy. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) 12. 83–100.Google Scholar
Plag, Ingo, and Baayen, Harald. 2009. Suffix ordering and morphological processing. Language 85. 109–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plank, Frans, and Filimonova, Elena. 2000. The Universals Archive: A brief introduction to prospective users. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 53. 109–23.Google Scholar
Poon, Hoifung, Cherry, Colin; and Toutanova, Kristina. 2009. Unsupervised morphological segmentation with log-linear models. Human Language Technologies: The 2009 annual conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, 209–17. Boulder, CO: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher, Pater, Joe, Jesney, Karen, Bhatt, Rajesh; and Becker, Michael. 2010. Harmonic grammar with linear programming: From linear systems to linguistic typology. Phonology 27. 77–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Press, William, Flannery, Brian, Teukolsky, Saul; and Vetterling, William. 1992. Numerical recipes in C: The art of scientific computing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan, and Smolensky, Paul. 2004 [2004]. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rackowski, Andrea. 1999. Morphological optionality in Tagalog aspectual reduplication. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics (Papers on morphology and syntax, cycle two) 34. 107–36.Google Scholar
Ramos, Teresita V., and Bautista, Maria Lourdes S.. 1986. Handbook of Tagalog verbs: Inflections, modes, and aspects. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, William. 1994. Variation and phonological theory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1993. The structure of the Slave (Northern Athapaskan) verb. Studies in lexical phonology (Phonetics and phonology 4), ed. by Hargus, Sharon and Kaisse, Ellen, 145–71. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 2000. Morpheme order and semantic scope: Word formation in the Athabaskan verb. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riggle, Jason, and Wilson, Colin. 2004. Local optionality. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 35. 539–50Google Scholar
Rose, Sharon. 1997. Theoretical issues in comparative Ethio-Semitic phonology and morphology. Montreal: McGill University dissertation.Google Scholar
Rosenblatt, Frank. 1958. The Perceptron: A probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. Psychological Review 65. 386–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sabimana, Firmard. 1986. The relational structure of the Kirundi verb. Bloomington: Indiana University dissertation.Google Scholar
Samek-Lodovici, Vieri. 1993. Morphological gemination. Paper presented at ROW-1, Rutgers University, October 1993.Google Scholar
Samuels, Bridget. 2006. Reduplication and verbal morphology in Tagalog. Paper presented at the Harvard Linguistics Theory Reading Group, October 2006.Google Scholar
Schachter, Paul, and Otanes, Fe. 1972. Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senn, Alfred. 1966. Handbuch der litauischen Sprache. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna, and Bakker, Dik. 1996. The distribution of subject and object agreement and word order type. Studies in Language 20. 115–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skinner, Tobin R. 2008. Morphological optionality in reduplication: A lowering account. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) 26. 420–28.Google Scholar
Smeets, Ineke. 1989. A Mapuche grammar. Leiden: University of Leiden dissertation.Google Scholar
Smolensky, Paul, and Legendre, Géraldine. 2006. The harmonic mind: From neural computation to optimality-theoretic grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Spencer, Andrew. 1991. Morphological theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stairs, Emily F., and Hollenbach, Barbara E.. 1981. Gramática huave. Diccionario huave de San Mateo del Mar, ed. by Kreger, G. A. S. and Stairs, Emily F., 283–391. Mexico City: SIL International.Google Scholar
Stevens, Alan M. 1971. Fixed morpheme order. Linguistic Inquiry 2. 420–21.Google Scholar
Stump, Gregory. 2006. Template morphology. Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, vol. 12, ed. by Brown, Keith, 559–63. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Travis, Lisa deMena. 1996. The syntax of achievements. Montreal: McGill University, ms.Google Scholar
Travis, Lisa deMena. 2007. Inner aspect: Articulation of the VP. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Trommer, Jochen. 2003. The interaction of morphology and syntax in affix order. Yearbook of Morphology 2002. 283–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ussishkin, Adam, and Wedel, Andrew. 2002. Neighborhood density and the root-affix distinction. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 32. 539–49.Google Scholar
van de Kerke, Simon. 1996. Affix order and interpretation in Bolivian Quechua. Meppel: Krips Repro.Google Scholar
Vaux, Bert. 2002. Iterativity and optionality. Paper presented at the 33rd conference of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS), November 2002.Google Scholar
Walker, Rachel. 1998. Nasalization, neutral segments, and opacity effects. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz dissertation. [Published, New York: Garland, 2000.]Google Scholar
Watters, David E. 2006. Notes on Kusunda grammar: A language isolate of Nepal. Himalayan Linguistics Archive 3. 1–182.Google Scholar
Wilson, Colin. 2006. Learning phonology with substantive bias: An experimental and computational study of velar palatalization. Cognitive Science 30. 945–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, Colin, and George, Benjamin. 2008. Maxent grammar tool. Software package. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Wolf, Matthew. 2008. Optimal interleaving: Serial phonology-morphology interaction in a constraint-based model. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst dissertation.Google Scholar
Zuraw, Kie. 1996. Floating phonotactics: Infixation and reduplication in Tagalog loanwords. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles masters thesis.Google Scholar
Zuraw, Kie. 2010. A model of lexical variation and the grammar with application to Tagalog nasal substitution. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28. 417–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar