We propose an account of linking patterns that does away with intermediary mechanisms such as thematic or actor/undergoer hierarchies. Instead, constraints on word classes, defined by both syntactic and semantic criteria, encode generalizations between semantic roles and syntactic arguments. We show that the generalizations a linking theory needs to capture can be modeled via the same mechanisms as other lexical generalizations, using conditions specified within the hierarchy of word classes. Each condition provides a partial specification of the mapping between semantic roles and syntactic arguments. We argue that this constraint-based, verb-class-based view of linking offers several empirical advantages: partial regularities and exceptions are easily accommodated, fine-grained semantic distinctions relevant to linking are countenanced, and cross-cutting similarities between semantic and syntactic verb classes are economically captured.

The authors investigate how morphological relationships between inflected word forms are represented in the mental lexicon, focusing on paradigmatic relations between regularly inflected word forms and relationships between different stem forms of the same lexeme. We present results from a series of psycholinguistic experiments investigating German adjectives (which are inflected for case, number, and gender) and the so-called strong verbs of German, which have different stem forms when inflected for person, number, tense, or mood.

Evidence from three lexical-decision experiments indicates that regular affixes are stripped off from their stems for processing purposes. It will be shown that this holds for both unmarked and marked stem forms. Another set of experiments revealed priming effects between different paradigmatically related affixes and between different stem forms of the same lexeme.

We will show that associative models of inflection do not capture these findings, and we explain our results in terms of combinatorial models of inflection in which regular affixes are represented in inflectional paradigms and stem variants are represented in structured lexical entries. We will also argue that the morphosyntactic features of stems and affixes form abstract underspecified entries. The experimental results indicate that the human language processor makes use of these representations.

Commentators on the Christian missionary organization SIL International have long noted the organization's bipartite structure, which embraces both evangelism and linguistic science. These seemingly dissociate goals are mutually reinforcing, with SIL's linguistic work contributing to its evangelical aims and vice versa. This paper focuses on a third, equally important, component of SIL's work that academic linguists tend to overlook: community development. We argue that although this kind of work evidences a concern for speaker welfare, it also conceals an incompatibility with the principle of self-determination, the idea that communities have a right to freely choose their own futures. Despite a rhetorical commitment to the latter ideal, the practical effects of SIL involvement are closely aligned with the forces of politically and economically dominant societies that confront and overwhelm local indigenous societies and their languages.

The central goal of this article is to propose a systematic description of differental function marking (DM) in Korean, a language in which both subject and object markers may fail to be spelled out. Taking Aissen's theory of DM (Aissen 2003) as a starting point, we show that although its predictions seem mostly consistent with the statistical results of corpus-based research on Korean (and Japanese), this model does not accurately account for the Korean data. We argue that subject and object bareness (the lack of a functional particle) regularly correlates with interpretive effects that should be captured in terms of information structure (focus structure). Adapting Erteschik-Shir's (1997, 2007) framework to represent f(ocus)-structure, we argue that bare subjects and objects in Korean fail to be visible at this level. Consequently, they may be construed neither as active topics nor as foci, and thus must either be left out of f-structure or incorporated within larger f-structure constituents in order to be interpreted. We show that bare objects are never construed as topics or foci and always exhibit a form of semantic incorporation, while leul-marked objects always stand as f-structure constituents construed as focused at some level. Bare subjects, unlike neun-marked topical subjects and GA-marked subjects, can be construed neither as active topics nor as foci, and always occur in tense-deficient clauses construed as thetic and anchored to speech time. We argue that our assumptions correctly predict the results of corpus studies, and we suggest that as regards nominal arguments, f-structure visibility might ultimately stand as the crucial interpretive correlate of functional positions in syntax.