Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis

  • Chapter
Yearbook of Morphology 1995

Part of the book series: Yearbook of Morphology ((YOMO))

Abstract

The position of morphology in the grammar is the subject of a lively debate.2 A major issue is that of the demarcation between morphology and syntax. Are there word formation processes that can be or should be accounted for by independently motivated syntactic rules, or is all word formation to be accounted for by a separate morphological component? A second important issue is that of the relation between word formation and inflection. Word formation seems to be more of a lexical nature, whereas inflection has a syntactic flavour. So the question is whether inflection should be seen as part of the pre-syntactic morphological component, or as belonging to a separate post-syntactic component of inflection, in which the morphosyntactic features of words are spelled out.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allen, S. 1988. “Noun Incorporation in Eskimo: Postpositions and Case Marking”. Mc Gill Working Papers in Linguistics 5 (2), 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, A. S. 1989. “The Lexical, Derivational, and Inflectional Continuum in Verb Morphology”. In Th. Walsh (ed.) GURT ‘88. Synchronic and Diachronic Approaches to Linguistic Variation and Change. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, S. R. 1992. A-morphous Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Aronoff. M. 1994. Morphology by Itself Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. 1988. Incorporation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beard, R. 1982. “The Plural as a Lexical Derivation”. Glossa 16, 133–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, B. 1994. Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booij, G. E. 1989. “Complex Verbs and the Theory of Level Ordering”. In G. E. Booij & J. van Marle (eds.) Yearbook of Morphology 1989. Dordrecht: Foris, 21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booij, G. E. 1994. “Against Split Morphology”. In G. E. Booij & J. van Marle (eds.) Yearbook of Morphology 1993. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 27–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booij, G. E. 1995. The Phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booij, G. E. ms. “Autonomous Morphology”. HIL/Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booij, G. E. & R. Lieber 1993. “On the Simultaneity of Morphological and Prosodic Struc-ture”. In S. Hargus & E. Kaisse (eds.) Studies in Lexical Phonology. San Diego: Academic Press, 23–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, J. 1985. Morphology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, C. 1994. “A Diachronic Argument against the Split Morphology Hypothesis”. Transactions of the Philological Society 92, 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chelliah, S. 1992. “Pretty Derivational Morphemes All in a Row”. Proceedings of the Berkely Linguistic Society 18, 287–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clahsen, H. 1986. “Verb Inflection in German Child Language: Acquisition of Agreement Markings and the Functions they Encode”. Linguistics 24, 79–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clahsen, H. 1989. “The Grammatical Characterization of Developmental Dysphasia”. Linguistics 27, 897–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clahsen, H. & M. Rothweiler 1992. “Inflectional Rules in Children’s Grammars: Evidence from German Participles”. In G. E. Booij & J. van Marle (eds.) Yearbook of Morphology 1992. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Combrink, J. G. H. 1990. Afrikaanse Morfologie. Pretoria: Academica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dressler. W. U. 1989. “Prototypical Differences between Inflection and Derivation”. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 42, 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dressler, W. U. & U. Doleschal 1990. “Gender Agreement via Derivational Morphology”. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 40, 115–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyk, J. 1994. Participles in Context. A Computer-assisted Study of Old Testament Hebrew. Amsterdam: VU University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, P. 1985. “Level Ordering in Lexical Development”. Cognition 21, 73–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groot, A. W. de 1966. “Structurele verschillen tussen flexie en derivatie”. In Id., Betekenis en betekenisstructuur. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff, 75–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, W. de & M. Trommelen 1993. Morfologisch handboek van het Nederlands. ‘s-Gravenhage: SDU Uitgeverij.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haspelmath, M. 1993. “The Diachronic Externalization of Inflection”. Linguistics 31, 279310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haspelmath, M. 1994. “Word-class Changing Inflection and Morphological Theory”. This volume.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imidadze, N. & K. Tuite 1992. “The Acquisition of Georgian”. in Slobin (ed.), 39–109. Kiefer, F. 1990. “Noun Incorporation in Hungarian”. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 40, 149178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurylowicz, J. 1964. Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. Lieber, R. 1989. “On Percolation”. In G. E. Booij & J. van Marie (eds.) Yearbook of Morphology 1989. Dordrecht: Foris, 95–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luraghi, S. 1991. “Paradigm Size, Possible Syncretism, and the Use of Adpositions with Cases in Flective Languages.” In F. Plank (ed.) Paradigms. The Economy of Inflection. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 57–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlmutter, D. M. 1988. “The Split Morphology Hypothesis, Evidence from Yiddish”. In M. Hammond & M. Noonan (eds.) Theoretical Morphology. San Diego: Academic Press, 79–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, A. 1992. “Meervoudloosheid en indeling van Nederlandse zelfstandige naamwoorden”. In H. Bennis & J. W. de Vries (eds.) De Binnenbouw van her Nederlands. Dordrecht: ICG Publications, 329–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaerlaeckens, A. M. & S. Gillis 1987. De taalverwerving van het kind. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultink, H. 1962. De morfologische valentie van het ongelede adjectief in modern Nederlands. Den Haag: Van Goor Zonen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slobin, D. I. (ed.) 1986–1992. The Cross-linguistic Study of Language Acquisition. 3 Vols. Hillsdale N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villiers, J. G. de & P. A. de Villiers 1986. “The Acquisition of English”. In Slobin (ed.), Vol I, 27–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetzels, L. 1995. “Mid-vowel Alternations in the Brazilian-Portuguese Verbs”. Phonology 12, 281–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Holland Institute of generative Linguistics, Vrije Universiteit, Vakgroep Taalkunde, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Geert Booij

Authors
  1. Geert Booij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. General Linguistics, Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Geert Booij

  2. P.J. Meertens Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Jaap van Marle (Director) (Director)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Booij, G. (1996). Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In: Booij, G., van Marle, J. (eds) Yearbook of Morphology 1995. Yearbook of Morphology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3716-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3716-6_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4687-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3716-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation