Abstract
During the process of language acquisition, learners must discover which strings constitute the affixes of their language and which words of the language can be decomposed into affixes and other components. These are prerequisites to morphological acquisition.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baayen, Harald (1994). Productivity in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes 9, 447–469.
Baayen, Harald and Rochelle, Leiber (1991). Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics 29, 801–843.
Baayen, Harald, Robert Schreuder and Cristina Burani (to appear). Parsing and semantic opacity. In: Morphology and the Mental Lexicon, E. Assink and D. Sandra (eds.). Dordrecht: Kluwer. In press.
Baroni, Marco (2000a). Using distributional information to discover morphemes: A distribution-driven prefix learner. Paper presented at the LSA Meeting, Chicago.
Baroni, Marco (2000b). Distributional Cues in Morpheme Discovery: A Computational Model and Empirical Evidence. UCLA dissertation.
Baroni, Marco (2001). The representation of prefixed forms in the Italian lexicon: Evidence from the distribution of intervocalic [s] and [z] in northern Italian. In G. Booij and J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1999, 121–152.
Bentin, Shlomo and Laurie Feldman (1990). The contribution of morphological and semantic relatedness to repetition priming at short and long lags: Evidence from Hebrew. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 42A, 693–711.
Brent, Michael (1993). Minimal generative explanations: A middle ground between neurons and triggers. Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 28–36.
Brent, Michael and Timothy Cartwright (1996). Distributional regularity and phonotactic constraints are useful for segmentation. Cognition 61, 93–125.
Brent, Michael, Sreerama Murthy and Andrew Lundberg (1995). Discovering morphemic suffixes: A case study in minimum description length induction. Presented at the Fifth International Workshop on AI and Statistics.
Emmorey, Karen (1989). Auditory morphological priming in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 4, 73–92.
Feldman, Laurie (ed.) (1995). Morphological Aspects of Language Processing. Hillsdale: LEA.
Goldsmith, John (2001). Unsupervised learning of the morphology of a natural language. Computational Linguistics 27, 153–198.
Harris, Zellig (1955). From phoneme to morpheme. Language 31, 190–222.
Hay, Jennifer (2000). Causes and Consequences of Word Structure. Northwestern University dissertation, 2000.
Kucera, Henry and Nelson Francis (1967). Computational Analysis of Present-day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.
Marchand, Hans (1969). The Categories and Types of Present-day English Word-formation: A Synchronic-diachronic Approach. Munich: Beck.
Marslen-Wilson, William, Lorraine Tyler, Rachelle Waksler and Lianne Older (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review 101, 3–33.
Maxwell, Michael (ed.) (2002). Morphological and Phonological Learning: Proceedings of the Sixth ACL-SIGPHON Meeting. Philadelphia: ACL.
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffry Leech and Jan Svartvik (1985). A Compresive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
Redington, Martinand Nick Chater (1998). Connectionist and statistical approaches to language acquisition: A distributional perspective. Language and Cognitive Processes 13, 129–191.
Rissanen, Jorma (1978). Modeling by shortest data description. Automatica 14, 456–471.
Roelofs, Ardi and Harald Baayen (2001). Morphology by itself in planning the production of spoken words. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9, 132–138.
Schreuder, Robert and Harald Baayen (1994). Prefix stripping re-revisited. Journal of Memory and Language 33, 357–375.
Schreuder, Robert and Harald Baayen (1995). Modeling morphological processing. In: Feldman (1995), 131–154.
Seidenberg, Mark and Laura Gonnerman (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4, 353–361.
Seitz, Philip Lynne Bernstein, Edward Auer and Margaret MacEachern (1998). The PHLEX Database. Los Angeles: House Ear Institute.
Smith, Philip (1988). How to conduct experiments with morphologically complex words. Linguistics 26, 699–714.
Snover, Matthew and Michael Brent (2001). A Bayesian model for morpheme and paradigm identification. Proceedings of ACL 39, 482–490.
Stolz, Jennifer and Laurie Feldman (1995). The role of orthographic and semantic transparency of the base morpheme in morphological processing. In: Feldman (1995), 109–129.
Wurm, Lee (1997). Auditory processing of prefixed English words is both continuous and decompositional. Journal of Memory and Language 37, 438–461.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Baroni, M. (2003). Distribution-driven morpheme discovery: a computational/experimental study. In: Booij, G., Van Marle, J. (eds) Yearbook of Morphology 2003. Yearbook of Morphology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-1513-7_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-1513-7_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-1272-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-1513-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive