The morphome debate /:
This volume surveys the current debate on the morphome, bringing together experts from different linguistic fields-morphology, phonology, semantics, typology, historical linguistics-and from different theoretical backgrounds, including both proponents and critics of autonomous morphology. The concep...
Gespeichert in:
| Weitere Verfasser: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Elektronisch E-Book |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Oxford, United Kingdom :
Oxford University Press,
2016.
|
| Ausgabe: | First edition. |
| Schriftenreihe: | Oxford linguistics
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Zusammenfassung: | This volume surveys the current debate on the morphome, bringing together experts from different linguistic fields-morphology, phonology, semantics, typology, historical linguistics-and from different theoretical backgrounds, including both proponents and critics of autonomous morphology. The concept of the morphome is one of the most influential but contentious ideas in contemporary morphology. The term is typically used to denote a pattern of exponence lacking phonological, syntactic, or semantic motivation, and putative examples of morphomicity are frequently put forward as evidence for the existence of a purely morphological level of linguistic representation. Central to the volume is the need to attain a deeper understanding of morphomic patterns, developing stringent diagnostics of their existence, exploring the formal grammatical devices required to characterize them adequately, and assessing their implications for language acquisition and change. The extensive empirical evidence is drawn from a wide range of languages, including Archi, German, Kayardild, Latin and its descendants, Russian, Sanskrit, Selkup, Ulwa, and American Sign Language. |
| Beschreibung: | 1 online resource (xii, 376 pages) : illustrations |
| Bibliographie: | Includes bibliographical references (pages 341-364) and index. |
| ISBN: | 9780191771804 0191771805 0191006645 9780191006647 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000cam a2200000 i 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ZDB-4-EBA-ocn944211435 | ||
| 003 | OCoLC | ||
| 005 | 20241004212047.0 | ||
| 006 | m o d | ||
| 007 | cr |n||||||||| | ||
| 008 | 160309t20162016enka ob 001 0 eng d | ||
| 040 | |a YDXCP |b eng |e pn |c YDXCP |d YDX |d OCLCO |d OCLCQ |d VLB |d OCLCQ |d QCL |d OCLCQ |d STBDS |d OH1 |d IOG |d OTZ |d DGU |d N$T |d EBLCP |d BUF |d CEF |d KSU |d OCLCQ |d WYU |d OCLCQ |d K6U |d OCLCO |d OCLCQ |d OCLCO |d OCLCL | ||
| 019 | |a 982775620 |a 983022927 |a 983347037 |a 1066630285 | ||
| 020 | |a 9780191771804 |q (electronic bk.) | ||
| 020 | |a 0191771805 |q (electronic bk.) | ||
| 020 | |a 0191006645 | ||
| 020 | |a 9780191006647 | ||
| 020 | |z 9780198702108 | ||
| 020 | |z 0198702108 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)944211435 |z (OCoLC)982775620 |z (OCoLC)983022927 |z (OCoLC)983347037 |z (OCoLC)1066630285 | ||
| 050 | 4 | |a P242 |b .M68 2016eb | |
| 072 | 7 | |a LAN |x 006000 |2 bisacsh | |
| 072 | 7 | |a LAN |x 009060 |2 bisacsh | |
| 082 | 7 | |a 415/.9 |2 23 | |
| 049 | |a MAIN | ||
| 245 | 0 | 4 | |a The morphome debate / |c edited by Ana Luís and Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero. |
| 250 | |a First edition. | ||
| 264 | 1 | |a Oxford, United Kingdom : |b Oxford University Press, |c 2016. | |
| 264 | 4 | |c ©2016 | |
| 300 | |a 1 online resource (xii, 376 pages) : |b illustrations | ||
| 336 | |a text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a computer |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a online resource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 0 | |a Oxford linguistics | |
| 520 | 8 | |a This volume surveys the current debate on the morphome, bringing together experts from different linguistic fields-morphology, phonology, semantics, typology, historical linguistics-and from different theoretical backgrounds, including both proponents and critics of autonomous morphology. The concept of the morphome is one of the most influential but contentious ideas in contemporary morphology. The term is typically used to denote a pattern of exponence lacking phonological, syntactic, or semantic motivation, and putative examples of morphomicity are frequently put forward as evidence for the existence of a purely morphological level of linguistic representation. Central to the volume is the need to attain a deeper understanding of morphomic patterns, developing stringent diagnostics of their existence, exploring the formal grammatical devices required to characterize them adequately, and assessing their implications for language acquisition and change. The extensive empirical evidence is drawn from a wide range of languages, including Archi, German, Kayardild, Latin and its descendants, Russian, Sanskrit, Selkup, Ulwa, and American Sign Language. | |
| 504 | |a Includes bibliographical references (pages 341-364) and index. | ||
| 505 | 0 | |a Cover ; The Morphome Debate; Copyright; Contents; Notes on Contributors; Acknowledgements; List of Abbreviations; 1: Introduction; Part I Morphomic or not? Diagnosing morphomicity; 2: Unnatural kinds; 2.1 Natural kinds and natural language; 2.1.1 Natural kinds; 2.1.2 Natural languages; 2.1.3 Natural syntax; 2.1.4 Natural phonology and binary phonological features; 2.2 Embodied categories; 2.2.1 P(erson), N(umber), and G(ender); 2.2.2 Gender assignment and semantics; 2.2.3 Using PNG; 2.2.4 PNG and natural kinds; 2.3 Culture and unnatural acts. | |
| 505 | 8 | |a 2.3.1 Inflectional classes and other purely morphological kinds2.3.2 Morphomes; 2.4 Some sign language categories; 2.4.1 Sign language verb agreement; 2.4.2 Object vs handling; 2.5 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 3: Some lessons from history: Morphomes in diachrony; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Diachrony can provide evidence for the psychological reality of putative morphomes; 3.3 Diachrony can be used as a diagnostic of the synchronically morphomic nature of some alternation; 3.4 Typological comparison can serve to falsify the putatively morphomic status of some pattern of alternation. | |
| 505 | 8 | |a 3.5 Speakers do not especially prefer `non-morphomic ́over `morphomic ́patterns3.6 An alternation pattern can be morphomic even when it appears to be phonologically conditioned; 3.7 Conclusions; 4: Morphomic splits; 4.1 Introduction; 4.1.1 Recognizing motivated and morphomic splits; 4.1.2 Distinctions between motivated and morphomic splits; 4.2 A morphomic split can be nested within a motivated one, but not vice versa; 4.2.1 Definitions of nesting; 4.2.2 Nesting and Pirrelli and Battistaś `Schema Transition Hypothesis;́ 4.2.3 Nesting and Stumpś `Privileged Category Restrictioń | |
| 505 | 8 | |a 4.2.4 A further example (dependent on singletons)4.2.5 No nesting; 4.3 Interaction with semantic splits; 4.4 Optionality: the diachronic conjecture; 4.5 Relevance: internal vs external splits; 4.5.1 Gaelic; 4.5.2 Marsalese; 4.6 Reprise: definitions; 4.6.1 Motivation; 4.6.2 Regularity; 4.7 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 5: Thoughts on diagnosing morphomicity: A case study from Ulwa; 5.1 Introduction; 5.2 Diachronic evidence that the distribution of ka is not accidental; 5.3 Does ka realize a morphome?; 5.4 Cross-linguistic considerations; 5.4.1 The `have ́strategy. | |
| 505 | 8 | |a 5.4.2 Existential constructionsPrepositional strategy 1: Hausa; Prepositional strategy 2: Hausa; Possessive NP pivot: Bisa; 5.4.3 Interim summary; 5.5 Syntactic/Semantic considerations and the morphomic analysis of Ulwa ka; 5.6 Concluding remarks: Ulwa ka and morphomic analysis; Acknowledgements; 6: The morphome vs similarity-based syncretism: Latin t-stem derivatives; 6.1 Introduction; 6.2 The Latin syncretism: t-stem derivatives; 6.2.1 Overview of the Latin syncretism; 6.2.2 Morphomes; 6.2.3 Latin verbal bases; 6.2.4 Shared exponence properties of t-participles and agent nouns. | |
| 650 | 0 | |a Morphemics. |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85087341 | |
| 650 | 6 | |a Morphèmes. | |
| 650 | 7 | |a LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES |x Grammar & Punctuation. |2 bisacsh | |
| 650 | 7 | |a LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES |x Linguistics |x Syntax. |2 bisacsh | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Morphemics |2 fast | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Luís, Ana R., |e editor. |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2012147049 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, |d 1970- |e editor. |1 https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PCjH68mq9cyCQhKmDkT7pKd |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n00037441 | |
| 758 | |i has work: |a The morphome debate (Text) |1 https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PCGGdppKQtVjCMmpc9gpJKq |4 https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/ontology/hasWork | ||
| 776 | 0 | 8 | |i Print version: |t Morphome debate. |b First Edition. |d Oxford, United Kingdom : Oxford University Press, 2016 |z 9780198702108 |w (DLC) 2015956589 |w (OCoLC)959258799 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |l FWS01 |p ZDB-4-EBA |q FWS_PDA_EBA |u https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&AN=1506244 |3 Volltext |
| 938 | |a ProQuest Ebook Central |b EBLB |n EBL4842787 | ||
| 938 | |a EBSCOhost |b EBSC |n 1506244 | ||
| 938 | |a Oxford University Press USA |b OUPR |n EDZ0001530644 | ||
| 938 | |a YBP Library Services |b YANK |n 14198036 | ||
| 938 | |a YBP Library Services |b YANK |n 12878625 | ||
| 994 | |a 92 |b GEBAY | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-4-EBA | ||
| 049 | |a DE-863 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| DE-BY-FWS_katkey | ZDB-4-EBA-ocn944211435 |
|---|---|
| _version_ | 1816882341997445120 |
| adam_text | |
| any_adam_object | |
| author2 | Luís, Ana R. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, 1970- |
| author2_role | edt edt |
| author2_variant | a r l ar arl r b o rbo |
| author_GND | http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2012147049 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n00037441 |
| author_facet | Luís, Ana R. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, 1970- |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | localFWS |
| callnumber-first | P - Language and Literature |
| callnumber-label | P242 |
| callnumber-raw | P242 .M68 2016eb |
| callnumber-search | P242 .M68 2016eb |
| callnumber-sort | P 3242 M68 42016EB |
| callnumber-subject | P - Philology and Linguistics |
| collection | ZDB-4-EBA |
| contents | Cover ; The Morphome Debate; Copyright; Contents; Notes on Contributors; Acknowledgements; List of Abbreviations; 1: Introduction; Part I Morphomic or not? Diagnosing morphomicity; 2: Unnatural kinds; 2.1 Natural kinds and natural language; 2.1.1 Natural kinds; 2.1.2 Natural languages; 2.1.3 Natural syntax; 2.1.4 Natural phonology and binary phonological features; 2.2 Embodied categories; 2.2.1 P(erson), N(umber), and G(ender); 2.2.2 Gender assignment and semantics; 2.2.3 Using PNG; 2.2.4 PNG and natural kinds; 2.3 Culture and unnatural acts. 2.3.1 Inflectional classes and other purely morphological kinds2.3.2 Morphomes; 2.4 Some sign language categories; 2.4.1 Sign language verb agreement; 2.4.2 Object vs handling; 2.5 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 3: Some lessons from history: Morphomes in diachrony; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Diachrony can provide evidence for the psychological reality of putative morphomes; 3.3 Diachrony can be used as a diagnostic of the synchronically morphomic nature of some alternation; 3.4 Typological comparison can serve to falsify the putatively morphomic status of some pattern of alternation. 3.5 Speakers do not especially prefer `non-morphomic ́over `morphomic ́patterns3.6 An alternation pattern can be morphomic even when it appears to be phonologically conditioned; 3.7 Conclusions; 4: Morphomic splits; 4.1 Introduction; 4.1.1 Recognizing motivated and morphomic splits; 4.1.2 Distinctions between motivated and morphomic splits; 4.2 A morphomic split can be nested within a motivated one, but not vice versa; 4.2.1 Definitions of nesting; 4.2.2 Nesting and Pirrelli and Battistaś `Schema Transition Hypothesis;́ 4.2.3 Nesting and Stumpś `Privileged Category Restrictioń 4.2.4 A further example (dependent on singletons)4.2.5 No nesting; 4.3 Interaction with semantic splits; 4.4 Optionality: the diachronic conjecture; 4.5 Relevance: internal vs external splits; 4.5.1 Gaelic; 4.5.2 Marsalese; 4.6 Reprise: definitions; 4.6.1 Motivation; 4.6.2 Regularity; 4.7 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 5: Thoughts on diagnosing morphomicity: A case study from Ulwa; 5.1 Introduction; 5.2 Diachronic evidence that the distribution of ka is not accidental; 5.3 Does ka realize a morphome?; 5.4 Cross-linguistic considerations; 5.4.1 The `have ́strategy. 5.4.2 Existential constructionsPrepositional strategy 1: Hausa; Prepositional strategy 2: Hausa; Possessive NP pivot: Bisa; 5.4.3 Interim summary; 5.5 Syntactic/Semantic considerations and the morphomic analysis of Ulwa ka; 5.6 Concluding remarks: Ulwa ka and morphomic analysis; Acknowledgements; 6: The morphome vs similarity-based syncretism: Latin t-stem derivatives; 6.1 Introduction; 6.2 The Latin syncretism: t-stem derivatives; 6.2.1 Overview of the Latin syncretism; 6.2.2 Morphomes; 6.2.3 Latin verbal bases; 6.2.4 Shared exponence properties of t-participles and agent nouns. |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)944211435 |
| dewey-full | 415/.9 |
| dewey-hundreds | 400 - Language |
| dewey-ones | 415 - Grammar |
| dewey-raw | 415/.9 |
| dewey-search | 415/.9 |
| dewey-sort | 3415 19 |
| dewey-tens | 410 - Linguistics |
| discipline | Sprachwissenschaft |
| edition | First edition. |
| format | Electronic eBook |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>06883cam a2200649 i 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ZDB-4-EBA-ocn944211435</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">OCoLC</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20241004212047.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="006">m o d </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr |n|||||||||</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">160309t20162016enka ob 001 0 eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">YDXCP</subfield><subfield code="b">eng</subfield><subfield code="e">pn</subfield><subfield code="c">YDXCP</subfield><subfield code="d">YDX</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCO</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCQ</subfield><subfield code="d">VLB</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCQ</subfield><subfield code="d">QCL</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCQ</subfield><subfield code="d">STBDS</subfield><subfield code="d">OH1</subfield><subfield code="d">IOG</subfield><subfield code="d">OTZ</subfield><subfield code="d">DGU</subfield><subfield code="d">N$T</subfield><subfield code="d">EBLCP</subfield><subfield code="d">BUF</subfield><subfield code="d">CEF</subfield><subfield code="d">KSU</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCQ</subfield><subfield code="d">WYU</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCQ</subfield><subfield code="d">K6U</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCO</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCQ</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCO</subfield><subfield code="d">OCLCL</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="019" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">982775620</subfield><subfield code="a">983022927</subfield><subfield code="a">983347037</subfield><subfield code="a">1066630285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9780191771804</subfield><subfield code="q">(electronic bk.)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">0191771805</subfield><subfield code="q">(electronic bk.)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">0191006645</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9780191006647</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="z">9780198702108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="z">0198702108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)944211435</subfield><subfield code="z">(OCoLC)982775620</subfield><subfield code="z">(OCoLC)983022927</subfield><subfield code="z">(OCoLC)983347037</subfield><subfield code="z">(OCoLC)1066630285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">P242</subfield><subfield code="b">.M68 2016eb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="072" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">LAN</subfield><subfield code="x">006000</subfield><subfield code="2">bisacsh</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="072" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">LAN</subfield><subfield code="x">009060</subfield><subfield code="2">bisacsh</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">415/.9</subfield><subfield code="2">23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">MAIN</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The morphome debate /</subfield><subfield code="c">edited by Ana Luís and Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="250" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">First edition.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Oxford, United Kingdom :</subfield><subfield code="b">Oxford University Press,</subfield><subfield code="c">2016.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="c">©2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 online resource (xii, 376 pages) :</subfield><subfield code="b">illustrations</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">computer</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">online resource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Oxford linguistics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This volume surveys the current debate on the morphome, bringing together experts from different linguistic fields-morphology, phonology, semantics, typology, historical linguistics-and from different theoretical backgrounds, including both proponents and critics of autonomous morphology. The concept of the morphome is one of the most influential but contentious ideas in contemporary morphology. The term is typically used to denote a pattern of exponence lacking phonological, syntactic, or semantic motivation, and putative examples of morphomicity are frequently put forward as evidence for the existence of a purely morphological level of linguistic representation. Central to the volume is the need to attain a deeper understanding of morphomic patterns, developing stringent diagnostics of their existence, exploring the formal grammatical devices required to characterize them adequately, and assessing their implications for language acquisition and change. The extensive empirical evidence is drawn from a wide range of languages, including Archi, German, Kayardild, Latin and its descendants, Russian, Sanskrit, Selkup, Ulwa, and American Sign Language.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="504" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Includes bibliographical references (pages 341-364) and index.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cover ; The Morphome Debate; Copyright; Contents; Notes on Contributors; Acknowledgements; List of Abbreviations; 1: Introduction; Part I Morphomic or not? Diagnosing morphomicity; 2: Unnatural kinds; 2.1 Natural kinds and natural language; 2.1.1 Natural kinds; 2.1.2 Natural languages; 2.1.3 Natural syntax; 2.1.4 Natural phonology and binary phonological features; 2.2 Embodied categories; 2.2.1 P(erson), N(umber), and G(ender); 2.2.2 Gender assignment and semantics; 2.2.3 Using PNG; 2.2.4 PNG and natural kinds; 2.3 Culture and unnatural acts.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">2.3.1 Inflectional classes and other purely morphological kinds2.3.2 Morphomes; 2.4 Some sign language categories; 2.4.1 Sign language verb agreement; 2.4.2 Object vs handling; 2.5 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 3: Some lessons from history: Morphomes in diachrony; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Diachrony can provide evidence for the psychological reality of putative morphomes; 3.3 Diachrony can be used as a diagnostic of the synchronically morphomic nature of some alternation; 3.4 Typological comparison can serve to falsify the putatively morphomic status of some pattern of alternation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">3.5 Speakers do not especially prefer `non-morphomic ́over `morphomic ́patterns3.6 An alternation pattern can be morphomic even when it appears to be phonologically conditioned; 3.7 Conclusions; 4: Morphomic splits; 4.1 Introduction; 4.1.1 Recognizing motivated and morphomic splits; 4.1.2 Distinctions between motivated and morphomic splits; 4.2 A morphomic split can be nested within a motivated one, but not vice versa; 4.2.1 Definitions of nesting; 4.2.2 Nesting and Pirrelli and Battistaś `Schema Transition Hypothesis;́ 4.2.3 Nesting and Stumpś `Privileged Category Restrictioń</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">4.2.4 A further example (dependent on singletons)4.2.5 No nesting; 4.3 Interaction with semantic splits; 4.4 Optionality: the diachronic conjecture; 4.5 Relevance: internal vs external splits; 4.5.1 Gaelic; 4.5.2 Marsalese; 4.6 Reprise: definitions; 4.6.1 Motivation; 4.6.2 Regularity; 4.7 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 5: Thoughts on diagnosing morphomicity: A case study from Ulwa; 5.1 Introduction; 5.2 Diachronic evidence that the distribution of ka is not accidental; 5.3 Does ka realize a morphome?; 5.4 Cross-linguistic considerations; 5.4.1 The `have ́strategy.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5.4.2 Existential constructionsPrepositional strategy 1: Hausa; Prepositional strategy 2: Hausa; Possessive NP pivot: Bisa; 5.4.3 Interim summary; 5.5 Syntactic/Semantic considerations and the morphomic analysis of Ulwa ka; 5.6 Concluding remarks: Ulwa ka and morphomic analysis; Acknowledgements; 6: The morphome vs similarity-based syncretism: Latin t-stem derivatives; 6.1 Introduction; 6.2 The Latin syncretism: t-stem derivatives; 6.2.1 Overview of the Latin syncretism; 6.2.2 Morphomes; 6.2.3 Latin verbal bases; 6.2.4 Shared exponence properties of t-participles and agent nouns.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Morphemics.</subfield><subfield code="0">http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85087341</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="6"><subfield code="a">Morphèmes.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES</subfield><subfield code="x">Grammar & Punctuation.</subfield><subfield code="2">bisacsh</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES</subfield><subfield code="x">Linguistics</subfield><subfield code="x">Syntax.</subfield><subfield code="2">bisacsh</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Morphemics</subfield><subfield code="2">fast</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Luís, Ana R.,</subfield><subfield code="e">editor.</subfield><subfield code="0">http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2012147049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo,</subfield><subfield code="d">1970-</subfield><subfield code="e">editor.</subfield><subfield code="1">https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PCjH68mq9cyCQhKmDkT7pKd</subfield><subfield code="0">http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n00037441</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="758" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="i">has work:</subfield><subfield code="a">The morphome debate (Text)</subfield><subfield code="1">https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PCGGdppKQtVjCMmpc9gpJKq</subfield><subfield code="4">https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/ontology/hasWork</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Print version:</subfield><subfield code="t">Morphome debate.</subfield><subfield code="b">First Edition.</subfield><subfield code="d">Oxford, United Kingdom : Oxford University Press, 2016</subfield><subfield code="z">9780198702108</subfield><subfield code="w">(DLC) 2015956589</subfield><subfield code="w">(OCoLC)959258799</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="l">FWS01</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-4-EBA</subfield><subfield code="q">FWS_PDA_EBA</subfield><subfield code="u">https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&AN=1506244</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="938" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ProQuest Ebook Central</subfield><subfield code="b">EBLB</subfield><subfield code="n">EBL4842787</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="938" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">EBSCOhost</subfield><subfield code="b">EBSC</subfield><subfield code="n">1506244</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="938" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Oxford University Press USA</subfield><subfield code="b">OUPR</subfield><subfield code="n">EDZ0001530644</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="938" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">YBP Library Services</subfield><subfield code="b">YANK</subfield><subfield code="n">14198036</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="938" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">YBP Library Services</subfield><subfield code="b">YANK</subfield><subfield code="n">12878625</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="994" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">92</subfield><subfield code="b">GEBAY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-4-EBA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-863</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | ZDB-4-EBA-ocn944211435 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-11-27T13:27:05Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9780191771804 0191771805 0191006645 9780191006647 |
| language | English |
| oclc_num | 944211435 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | MAIN DE-863 DE-BY-FWS |
| owner_facet | MAIN DE-863 DE-BY-FWS |
| physical | 1 online resource (xii, 376 pages) : illustrations |
| psigel | ZDB-4-EBA |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publishDateSearch | 2016 |
| publishDateSort | 2016 |
| publisher | Oxford University Press, |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | Oxford linguistics |
| spelling | The morphome debate / edited by Ana Luís and Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero. First edition. Oxford, United Kingdom : Oxford University Press, 2016. ©2016 1 online resource (xii, 376 pages) : illustrations text txt rdacontent computer c rdamedia online resource cr rdacarrier Oxford linguistics This volume surveys the current debate on the morphome, bringing together experts from different linguistic fields-morphology, phonology, semantics, typology, historical linguistics-and from different theoretical backgrounds, including both proponents and critics of autonomous morphology. The concept of the morphome is one of the most influential but contentious ideas in contemporary morphology. The term is typically used to denote a pattern of exponence lacking phonological, syntactic, or semantic motivation, and putative examples of morphomicity are frequently put forward as evidence for the existence of a purely morphological level of linguistic representation. Central to the volume is the need to attain a deeper understanding of morphomic patterns, developing stringent diagnostics of their existence, exploring the formal grammatical devices required to characterize them adequately, and assessing their implications for language acquisition and change. The extensive empirical evidence is drawn from a wide range of languages, including Archi, German, Kayardild, Latin and its descendants, Russian, Sanskrit, Selkup, Ulwa, and American Sign Language. Includes bibliographical references (pages 341-364) and index. Cover ; The Morphome Debate; Copyright; Contents; Notes on Contributors; Acknowledgements; List of Abbreviations; 1: Introduction; Part I Morphomic or not? Diagnosing morphomicity; 2: Unnatural kinds; 2.1 Natural kinds and natural language; 2.1.1 Natural kinds; 2.1.2 Natural languages; 2.1.3 Natural syntax; 2.1.4 Natural phonology and binary phonological features; 2.2 Embodied categories; 2.2.1 P(erson), N(umber), and G(ender); 2.2.2 Gender assignment and semantics; 2.2.3 Using PNG; 2.2.4 PNG and natural kinds; 2.3 Culture and unnatural acts. 2.3.1 Inflectional classes and other purely morphological kinds2.3.2 Morphomes; 2.4 Some sign language categories; 2.4.1 Sign language verb agreement; 2.4.2 Object vs handling; 2.5 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 3: Some lessons from history: Morphomes in diachrony; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Diachrony can provide evidence for the psychological reality of putative morphomes; 3.3 Diachrony can be used as a diagnostic of the synchronically morphomic nature of some alternation; 3.4 Typological comparison can serve to falsify the putatively morphomic status of some pattern of alternation. 3.5 Speakers do not especially prefer `non-morphomic ́over `morphomic ́patterns3.6 An alternation pattern can be morphomic even when it appears to be phonologically conditioned; 3.7 Conclusions; 4: Morphomic splits; 4.1 Introduction; 4.1.1 Recognizing motivated and morphomic splits; 4.1.2 Distinctions between motivated and morphomic splits; 4.2 A morphomic split can be nested within a motivated one, but not vice versa; 4.2.1 Definitions of nesting; 4.2.2 Nesting and Pirrelli and Battistaś `Schema Transition Hypothesis;́ 4.2.3 Nesting and Stumpś `Privileged Category Restrictioń 4.2.4 A further example (dependent on singletons)4.2.5 No nesting; 4.3 Interaction with semantic splits; 4.4 Optionality: the diachronic conjecture; 4.5 Relevance: internal vs external splits; 4.5.1 Gaelic; 4.5.2 Marsalese; 4.6 Reprise: definitions; 4.6.1 Motivation; 4.6.2 Regularity; 4.7 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 5: Thoughts on diagnosing morphomicity: A case study from Ulwa; 5.1 Introduction; 5.2 Diachronic evidence that the distribution of ka is not accidental; 5.3 Does ka realize a morphome?; 5.4 Cross-linguistic considerations; 5.4.1 The `have ́strategy. 5.4.2 Existential constructionsPrepositional strategy 1: Hausa; Prepositional strategy 2: Hausa; Possessive NP pivot: Bisa; 5.4.3 Interim summary; 5.5 Syntactic/Semantic considerations and the morphomic analysis of Ulwa ka; 5.6 Concluding remarks: Ulwa ka and morphomic analysis; Acknowledgements; 6: The morphome vs similarity-based syncretism: Latin t-stem derivatives; 6.1 Introduction; 6.2 The Latin syncretism: t-stem derivatives; 6.2.1 Overview of the Latin syncretism; 6.2.2 Morphomes; 6.2.3 Latin verbal bases; 6.2.4 Shared exponence properties of t-participles and agent nouns. Morphemics. http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85087341 Morphèmes. LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Grammar & Punctuation. bisacsh LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Linguistics Syntax. bisacsh Morphemics fast Luís, Ana R., editor. http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2012147049 Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, 1970- editor. https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PCjH68mq9cyCQhKmDkT7pKd http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n00037441 has work: The morphome debate (Text) https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PCGGdppKQtVjCMmpc9gpJKq https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/ontology/hasWork Print version: Morphome debate. First Edition. Oxford, United Kingdom : Oxford University Press, 2016 9780198702108 (DLC) 2015956589 (OCoLC)959258799 FWS01 ZDB-4-EBA FWS_PDA_EBA https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&AN=1506244 Volltext |
| spellingShingle | The morphome debate / Cover ; The Morphome Debate; Copyright; Contents; Notes on Contributors; Acknowledgements; List of Abbreviations; 1: Introduction; Part I Morphomic or not? Diagnosing morphomicity; 2: Unnatural kinds; 2.1 Natural kinds and natural language; 2.1.1 Natural kinds; 2.1.2 Natural languages; 2.1.3 Natural syntax; 2.1.4 Natural phonology and binary phonological features; 2.2 Embodied categories; 2.2.1 P(erson), N(umber), and G(ender); 2.2.2 Gender assignment and semantics; 2.2.3 Using PNG; 2.2.4 PNG and natural kinds; 2.3 Culture and unnatural acts. 2.3.1 Inflectional classes and other purely morphological kinds2.3.2 Morphomes; 2.4 Some sign language categories; 2.4.1 Sign language verb agreement; 2.4.2 Object vs handling; 2.5 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 3: Some lessons from history: Morphomes in diachrony; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Diachrony can provide evidence for the psychological reality of putative morphomes; 3.3 Diachrony can be used as a diagnostic of the synchronically morphomic nature of some alternation; 3.4 Typological comparison can serve to falsify the putatively morphomic status of some pattern of alternation. 3.5 Speakers do not especially prefer `non-morphomic ́over `morphomic ́patterns3.6 An alternation pattern can be morphomic even when it appears to be phonologically conditioned; 3.7 Conclusions; 4: Morphomic splits; 4.1 Introduction; 4.1.1 Recognizing motivated and morphomic splits; 4.1.2 Distinctions between motivated and morphomic splits; 4.2 A morphomic split can be nested within a motivated one, but not vice versa; 4.2.1 Definitions of nesting; 4.2.2 Nesting and Pirrelli and Battistaś `Schema Transition Hypothesis;́ 4.2.3 Nesting and Stumpś `Privileged Category Restrictioń 4.2.4 A further example (dependent on singletons)4.2.5 No nesting; 4.3 Interaction with semantic splits; 4.4 Optionality: the diachronic conjecture; 4.5 Relevance: internal vs external splits; 4.5.1 Gaelic; 4.5.2 Marsalese; 4.6 Reprise: definitions; 4.6.1 Motivation; 4.6.2 Regularity; 4.7 Conclusion; Acknowledgements; 5: Thoughts on diagnosing morphomicity: A case study from Ulwa; 5.1 Introduction; 5.2 Diachronic evidence that the distribution of ka is not accidental; 5.3 Does ka realize a morphome?; 5.4 Cross-linguistic considerations; 5.4.1 The `have ́strategy. 5.4.2 Existential constructionsPrepositional strategy 1: Hausa; Prepositional strategy 2: Hausa; Possessive NP pivot: Bisa; 5.4.3 Interim summary; 5.5 Syntactic/Semantic considerations and the morphomic analysis of Ulwa ka; 5.6 Concluding remarks: Ulwa ka and morphomic analysis; Acknowledgements; 6: The morphome vs similarity-based syncretism: Latin t-stem derivatives; 6.1 Introduction; 6.2 The Latin syncretism: t-stem derivatives; 6.2.1 Overview of the Latin syncretism; 6.2.2 Morphomes; 6.2.3 Latin verbal bases; 6.2.4 Shared exponence properties of t-participles and agent nouns. Morphemics. http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85087341 Morphèmes. LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Grammar & Punctuation. bisacsh LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Linguistics Syntax. bisacsh Morphemics fast |
| subject_GND | http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85087341 |
| title | The morphome debate / |
| title_auth | The morphome debate / |
| title_exact_search | The morphome debate / |
| title_full | The morphome debate / edited by Ana Luís and Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero. |
| title_fullStr | The morphome debate / edited by Ana Luís and Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero. |
| title_full_unstemmed | The morphome debate / edited by Ana Luís and Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero. |
| title_short | The morphome debate / |
| title_sort | morphome debate |
| topic | Morphemics. http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85087341 Morphèmes. LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Grammar & Punctuation. bisacsh LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Linguistics Syntax. bisacsh Morphemics fast |
| topic_facet | Morphemics. Morphèmes. LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Grammar & Punctuation. LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES Linguistics Syntax. Morphemics |
| url | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&AN=1506244 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT luisanar themorphomedebate AT bermudezoteroricardo themorphomedebate AT luisanar morphomedebate AT bermudezoteroricardo morphomedebate |