Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T04:46:16.870Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - A Fox Knows Many Things but a Hedgehog One Big Thing

from Part II - Issues in Morphological Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 January 2017

By
Mark Aronoff
Edited by
Andrew Hippisley  and
Gregory Stump
Andrew Hippisley
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Gregory Stump
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology , pp. 186 - 205
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

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.)

References

Ackema, Peter, and Neeleman, Ad. 2013. Person features and syncretism. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31, 901–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albright, Adam. 2008. Explaining universal tendencies and language particulars in analogical change. In Good, J. (ed.), Language Universals and Language Change, 144–81. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Arad, Maya. 2005. Roots and Patterns: Hebrew Morpho-Syntax. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 2012. Morphological stems: What William of Ockham really said. Word Structure 5, 28–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 2013. Face the facts. In Villoing, Florence and David, Sophie (eds.), Foisonnements morphologiques: Études en hommage à Françoise Kerleroux, 307–24. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Paris Ouest.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark; Meir, Irit, and Sandler, Wendy. 2005. The paradox of sign language morphology. Language 81, 301–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berlin, Isaiah. 1953. The Hedgehog and the Fox. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson.Google Scholar
Bloch, Bernard. 1947. English verb inflection. Language 23, 399–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2002. Syncretism without paradigms: Remarks on Williams 1981, 1984. Yearbook of Morphology 2001, 53–85.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2012. Universals of Comparative Morphology: Suppletion, Superlatives, and the Structure of Words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonami, Olivier, and Boyé, Gilles. 2002. Suppletion and stem dependency in inflectional morphology. In Van Eyde, Franck, Hellan, Lars, and Beermann, Dorothee (eds.), Prceedings of the HPSG 2001 Conference, 51–70. Standford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Bonami, Olivier; Boyé, Gilles, and Kerleroux, Françoise. 2009. L’allomorphie radicale et la relation flexion-construction. In Fradin, Bernard, Kerleroux, Françoise, and Plénat, Marc (eds.), Aperçus de morphologie du français, 103–25. Saint-Denis: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.Google Scholar
Burns, James McGregor. 1956. Roosevelt: The Lion and the Fox. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Burns, James McGregor. 1970. Roosevelt: The Soldier of Freedom. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1987. Allomorphy in Inflexion. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Jacobs, Roderick and Rosenbaum, Peter (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, 184–221. Waltham, MA: Ginn and Co.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1975. The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 45, 463–81.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2012. The Science of Language: Interviews with James McGilvray. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 2013. Number of genders. In Dryer, Matthew S. and Haspelmath, Martin (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at http://wals.info/chapter/30, accessed on August 27, 2014.)Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiSciullo, Anna Maria, and Williams, Edwin. 1987. On the Definition of Word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1972. The Djirbal Language of North Queensland. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, Laura J.; Alan Hall, T., and Raffelsiefen, Renate. 2004. Paradigms in Phonological Theory. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Embick, David. To appear. On the distribution of stem alternants: Separation and its limits. In Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo and Luís, Ana (eds.), The Morphome Debate: Diagnosing and Analyzing Morphomic Patterns.Google Scholar
Embick, David, and Halle, Morris. 2005. On the status of stems in morphological theory. In Geerts, Twan, van Ginneken, Ivo, and Jacobs, Haike (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2003, 37–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Embick, David, and Marantz, Alec. 2005. Cognitive neuroscience and the English past tense: Comments on the paper by Ullman et al. Brain and Language 93, 243–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gazdar, Gerald; Pullum, Geoffrey, and Sag, Ivan. 1982. Auxiliaries and related phenomena in a restrictive theory of grammar. Language 58, 591–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harbour, Daniel. 2011. Descriptive and explanatory markedness. Morphology 21, 223–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, Heidi, and Ritter, Elizabeth. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78, 482–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Randy Allan. 1993. The Linguistics Wars. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, Marc; Chomsky, Noam, and Fitch, Tecumseh. 2002. The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 198, 1569–79.Google Scholar
Hebb, Donald. 1949. The Organization of Behavior. New York: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles. 1947. Problems of morphemic analysis. Language 23, 321–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, and Pullum, Geoffrey (eds.) 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, C. Douglas. 1972. Formal Aspects of Phonological Description. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joos, Martin. 1957. Readings in Linguistics: The Development of Descriptive Linguistics in America since 1925. Washington, DC: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
Julien, Marit. 2002. Syntactic Heads and Word Formation. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kibort, Anna, and Corbett, Greville G.. 2008. Number. Grammatical Features, January 25, 2008. (Available online at www.grammaticalfeatures.net/features/number.html, accessed on March 28, 2016.)Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langendoen, D. Terence. 2013. Eugene Nida. Language 89, 163–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, Mark, and Mark, Aronoff. 2013. Natural selection in self-organizing morphological systems. In Montermini, Fabio, Boyé, Gilles, and Tseng, Jesse (eds.), Morphology in Toulouse: Selected Proceedings of Décembrettes 7, 133–53. Germany: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 1992. Irregularity as a determinant of morphological change. Journal of Linguistics 28, 285–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2005. Morphological autonomy and diachrony. Yearbook of Morphology 2004, 137–75.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own Lexicon. In Dimitriadis, Alexis, Siegel, Laura, Surek-Clark, Clarissa, and Williams, Alexander (eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium: Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 4.2, 201–25.Google Scholar
Meir, Irit; Padden, Carol, Aronoff, Mark, and Sandler, Wendy. 2007. Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics 43, 531–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Gereon. 2013. Review of Baerman, Corbett, Brown, and Hippisley. Word Structure 6, 100–22.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene A. 1948. The identification of morphemes. Language 24, 414–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene A. 1949. Morphology: The Descriptive Analysis of Words. 2nd edn. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene A. 1969. Science of translation. Language 45, 483–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 1999. Words and Rules: The Ingredients of Language. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1991. Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postal, Paul M. 1972. The best theory. In Peters, S. (ed.), Goals of Linguistic Theory, 131–70. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1879. Mémoire sur le système primitive des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 2000. Paradigm uniformity and the phonetics-phonology boundary. In Broe, Michael and Pierrehumbert, Janet (eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology, vol. 5: Acquisition and the Lexicon, 313–34. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stump, Gregory. 2001. Inflectional Morphology: A Theory of Paradigm Structure. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trager, George L. 1951. Review of Nida 1949. International Journal of American Linguistics 17, 126–31.Google Scholar
Ullman, Michael T.; Pancheva, Roumyana; Love, Tracy, Yee, Eiling, Swinney, David, and Hickok, Gregory. 2005. Neural correlates of lexicon and grammar: Evidence from the production, reading, and judgment of inflection in aphasia. Brain and Language 93, 185–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, Stephen. 2010. What “You” and “I” Mean to Each Other: Person Marking, Self-Ascription, and Theory of Mind. Language 86, 332–65.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin S. 1994. Remarks on lexical theory. Lingua 92, 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 2007. Dumping lexicalism. In Ramchand, Gillian and Reiss, Charles (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, 353–82. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Xu, Zheng; Aronoff, Mark, and Anshen, Frank. 2007. Deponency in Latin. In Baerman, Matthew. Corbett, Greville G.. Brown, Dunstan, and Hippisley, Andrew (eds.), Deponency and Morphological Mismatches. Proceedings of the British Academy 145, 127–43. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×