Albright, A. 2002. Islands of reliability for regular morphology: Evidence from Italian. Language 78, 684–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Albright, A., and Hayes, B.. 2003. Rules vs. analogy in English past tenses: A computational/experimental study. Cognition 90, 119–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Alegre, M., and Gordon, P.. 1999. Frequency effects and the representational status of regular inflections. Journal of Memory and Language 40, 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Álvareza, C.; Urrutiaa, M., Domínguez, A., and Sánchez-Casas, R.. 2011. Processing inflectional and derivational morphology: Electrophysiological evidence from Spanish. Neuroscience Letters 490, 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, S. 1992. A-morphous Morphology. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aronoff, M. 1994. Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Aronoff, M. 2012. Morphological stems: What William of Ockham really said. Word Structure 5, 28–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baayen, H., and Neijt, N.. 1997. Productivity in context: A case study of Dutch suffix. Linguistics 35, 565–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baayen, H.; Milin, P., Ðurdević, D. Filipović´, Hendrix, P., and Marelli, M.. 2011. An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review 118, 438–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baayen, H.; Feldman, L., and Schreuder, R.. 2006. Morphological influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words. Journal of Memory and Language 55, 290–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baayen, H.; Wurm, L., and Aycock, J.. 2007. Lexical dynamics for low-frequency complex words: A regression study across tasks and modalities. The Mental Lexicon 2, 419–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baayen, H.; McQueen, J., Dijstra, T., and Schreuder, R.. 2003. Frequency effects in regular inflectional morphology: Revisiting Dutch plurals. In Baayen, H. and Schreuder, R. (eds.), Morphological Structure in Language Processing, 355–90. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beedham, C. 1994. The role of consonants in marking strong verb conjugation in German and English. Folia Linguistica 28, 279–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berent, I.; Vaknin, V., and Marcus, G.. 2007. Roots, stems, and the universality of lexical representations: Evidence from Hebrew. Cognition 104, 254–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berko, J. G. 1958. The child’s learning of English morphology. Word 14, 150–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bien, H.; Baayen, H., and Levelt, W.. 2011. Frequency effects in the production of Dutch deverbal adjectives and inflected verbs. Language and Cognitive Processes 26, 683–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bittner, A., and Köpcke, K.-M.. 2007. Überlegungen zur Repräsentation grammatischen Wissens am Beispiel der Verbmorphologie des Deutschen. In Di Meola, C. (ed.), Perspektiven Zwei. Akten der 2. Tagung Deutsche Sprachwissenschaft in Italien, 3–15. Rome: Istituto Italiano di Studi Germanici.Google Scholar

Blevins, J. 2006. Word-based morphology. Journal of Linguistics 42, 531–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonami, O.; Boyé, G., Giraudo, H., and Voga, M.. 2008. Quels verbes sont réguliers en français? In Durand, J., Habert, B., and Laks, B. (eds.), Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française: CMLF’08, 1511–23. Paris: Institut de Linguistique Française.Google Scholar

Božić, M.; Tyler, L., Su, L., Wingfield, C., and Marslen-Wilson, W.. 2013. Neurobiological systems for lexical representation and analysis in English. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 25, 1678–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Božić, M., and Marslen‐Wilson, W.. 2010. Neurocognitive contexts for morphological complexity: Dissociating inflection and derivation. Language and Linguistics Compass 4, 1063–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, J., and Moder, C.. 1983. Morphological classes as natural categories. Language 59, 251–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, J., and Pardo, E.. 1981. On lexical and morphological conditioning of alternations: A nonce-probe experiment with Spanish verbs. Linguistics 19, 937–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, J., and Hopper, P.. 2001. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs, A. 1987. Allomorphy in Inflexion. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Clahsen, H. 1997. The representation of participles in the German mental lexicon: Evidence for the dual-mechanism model. Yearbook of Morphology 1996, 73–96.Google Scholar

Clahsen, H. 2006. Dual-mechanism morphology. In Brown, K. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, vol. 4, 1–5. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Clahsen, H.; Eisenbeiss, S., Hadler, M., and Sonnenstuhl, I.. 2001a. The mental representation of inflected words: An experimental study of adjectives and verbs in German. Language 77, 510–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clahsen, H.; Sonnenstuhl, I., Hadler, M., and Eisenbeiss, S.. 2001b. Morphological paradigms in language processing and language disorders. Transactions of the Philological Society 99, 247–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clahsen, H.; Prüfert, P., Eisenbeiss, S., and Cholin, J.. 2002. Strong stems in the German mental lexicon: Evidence from child language acquisition and adult processing. In Kaufmann, I. and Stiebels, B. (eds.), More than Words: A Festschrift for Dieter Wunderlich, 91–112. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar

Clahsen, H.; Sonnenstuhl, I., and Blevins, J.. 2003. Derivational morphology in the German mental lexicon: A dual-mechanism account. In Baayen, H. and Schreuder, R. (eds.), Morphological Structure in Language Processing, 125–55. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Clahsen, H., and Neubauer, K.. 2010. Morphology, frequency, and the processing of derived words in native and non-native speakers. Lingua 120, 2627–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clahsen, H., and Ikemoto, Y.. 2012. The mental representation of derived words: An experimental study of -sa and -mi nominals in Japanese. The Mental Lexicon 7, 147–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clahsen, H., and Fleischhauer, E.. 2014. Morphological priming in child German. Journal of Child Language, 41, 1305–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Clahsen, H., and Veríssimo, J.. 2015. Morphology in the mental lexicon: Experimental evidence from the acquisition and processing of different languages. In Guijarro-Fuentes, P. et al. (eds.), The Acquisition of Romance Languages. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Colombo, L., and Burani, C.. 2002. The influence of age of acquisition, root frequency, and context availability in processing nouns and verbs. Brain and Language 81, 398–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Colombo, L.; Stoianov, I., Pasini, M., and Zorzi, M.. 2006. The role of phonology in the inflection of Italian verbs: A connectionist investigation. The Mental Lexicon 1, 147–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, G., and Fraser, N.. 1993. Network Morphology: A DATR account of Russian nominal inflection. Journal of Linguistics 29, 113–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davis, M.; van Casteren, M., and Marslen-Wilson, W.. 2003. Frequency effects in processing inflected Dutch nouns: A distributed connectionist account. In Baayen, H. and Schreuder, R. (eds.), Morphological Structure in Language Processing, 427–62. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Eddington, D. 2002. Dissociation in Italian conjugations: A single-route account. Brain and Language 81, 291–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Embick, D., and Halle, M. 2005. On the status of stems in morphological theory. In Geerts, T., van Ginneken, I., and Jacobs, H. (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2003: Selected Papers from “Going Romance” Nijmegen, 37–62. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fanselow, G., and Frisch, S.. 2006. Effects of processing difficulty on judgments of acceptability. In Fanselow, G., Féry, C., Schlesewsky, M., and Vogel, R. (eds.), Gradience in Grammar: Generative Perspectives, 291–316. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feldman, L., and Weber, K.. 2012. Morphological processing: A comparison of graded and categorical accounts. In Adelman, J. (ed.), Visual Word Recognition: Meaning and Context, Individuals and Development, vol. 2, 2–23. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Fiorentino, R.; Naito-Billen, Y., and Minai, U.. 2015. Morphological decomposition in Japanese de-adjectival nominals: Masked and overt priming evidence. To appear in: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research; doi 10.1007/s10936-015–9349-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fruchter, J.; Stockall, L., and Marantz, A.. 2013. MEG masked priming evidence for form-based decomposition of irregular verbs. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7, 798.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goldsmith, J., and O’Brien, J.. 2006. Learning inflectional classes. Language Learning and Development 2, 219–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gonnerman, L.; Seidenberg, M., and Andersen, E. S.. 2007. Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: Evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 136, 323–45.Google ScholarPubMed

Halle, M., and Marantz, A.. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Hale, K. and Keyser, J. (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–76. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hare, M.; Elman, J., and Daugherty, K.. 1995. Default generalisation in connectionist networks. Language and Cognitive Processes 10, 601–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Havas, V.; Rodríguez-Fornells, A., and Clahsen, H.. 2012. Brain potentials for derivational morphology: An ERP study of deadjectival nominalizations in Spanish. Brain and Language 120, 332–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Jacob, G., Fleischhauer, E., and Clahsen, H.. 2013. Stem allomorphy and affixation in morphological processing: A cross-modal priming study with late bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16, 924–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Janssen, U.; Eisenbeiss, S., and Penke, M.. 2001. Agreement features in sentence processing: A sentence-matching study on subject-verb and NP-internal agreement in German. Poster presented at the 14th CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar

Järvikivi, J.; Bertram, R., and Niemi, J.. 2006. Affixal salience and the processing of derivational morphology: The role of suffix allomorphy. Language and Cognitive Processes 21, 394–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kastovsky, D. 1986. The problem of productivity in word formation. Linguistics 24, 585–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kielar, A., and Joanisse, M.. 2011. The role of semantic and phonological factors in word recognition: An ERP cross-modal priming study of derivational morphology. Neuropsychologia 49, 161–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kiparsky, P. 1998. Paradigm Effects and Opacity. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Kuperman, V.; Bertram, R., and Baayen, H.. 2010. Processing trade-offs in the reading of Dutch derived words. Journal of Memory and Language 62, 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kutas, M., and Federmeier, K.. 2011. Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential. Annual Review of Psychology 62, 621–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Laudanna, A., and Burani, C.. 1995. Distributional properties of derivational affixes: Implications of processing. In Feldman, L. (ed.), Morphological Aspects of Language Processing, 345–64. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Leminen, A., and Clahsen, H.. 2014. Brain potentials to inflected adjectives: Beyond storage and decomposition. Brain Research 1543, 223–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Linares, R. E.; Rodríguez-Fornells, A., and Clahsen, H.. 2006. Stem allomorphy in the Spanish mental lexicon: Evidence from behavioral and ERP experiments. Brain and Language 97, 110–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Marslen-Wilson, W. 2007. Morphological processes in language comprehension. In Gaskel, G. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics, 175–93. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Marslen-Wilson, W.; Tyler, L., Waksler, R., and Older, L.. 1994. Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review 101, 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Matthews, P. 1972. Morphology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Matushansky, O., and Marantz, A. (eds.) 2013. Distributed Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McDowell, K.; Kerick, S., Maria, D. Santa, and Hatfield, B. 2003. Aging, physical activity, and cognitive processing: An examination of P300. Neurobiology of Aging 24, 597–606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Milin, P.; Kuperman, V., Kostić, A., and Baayen, H.. 2009. Words and paradigms bit by bit: An information-theoretic to the processing of inflection and derivation. In Blevins, J. P. and Blevins, J. (eds.), Analogy in Grammar: Form and Acquisition 214–53. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Moscoso del Prado Martín, F.; Kostić, A., and Baayen, H.. 2004. Putting the bits together: An information theoretical perspective on morphological processing. Cognition 94, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neubauer, K., and Clahsen, H.. 2009. Decomposition of inflected words in a second language: An experimental study of German participles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 31, 403–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neubauer, K. 2010. The Processing of Inflection and Derivation in German as a Second Language. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Essex.Google Scholar

Opitz, A.; Regel, S., Müller, G., and Friederici, A.. 2013. Neurophysiological evidence for morphological underspecification in German strong adjective inflection. Language 89, 231–64.Google Scholar

Penke, M.; Janssen, U., and Eisenbeiss, S.. 2004. Psycholinguistic evidence for the underspecification of morphosyntactic features. Brain and Language 90, 423–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Pinker, S. 1999. Words and Rules: The Ingredients of Language. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Plag, I. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Plaut, D. 2011. Connectionist perspectives on lexical representation. In Gaskell, G. and Zwitserlood, P. (eds.), Lexical Representation: A Multidisciplinary Approach, 149–70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Prasada, S., and Pinker, S.. 1993. Generalization of regular and irregular morphological patterns. Language and Cognitive Processes 8, 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raveh, M., and Rueckl, J.. 2000. Equivalent effects of inflected and derived primes: Long-term morphological priming in fragment completion and lexical decision. Journal of Memory and Language 42, 103–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raveh, M. 2002. The contribution of frequency and semantic similarity to morphological processing. Brain and Language 81, 312–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sampson, G. 2007. Grammar without grammaticality. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 3, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Say, T., and Clahsen, H.. 2002. Words, rules and stems in the Italian mental lexicon. In Nooteboom, S., Weerman, F., and Wijnen, F. (eds.), Storage and Computation in the Language Faculty, 93–129. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sekerina, I.; Fernández, E., and Clahsen, H. (eds.) 2008. Developmental Psycholinguistics: On-line Methods in Children’s Language Processing. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smolka, E.; Zwitserlood, P., and Rösler, F.. 2007. Stem access in regular and irregular inflection: Evidence from German participles. Journal of Memory and Language 57, 325–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sonnenstuhl, I., and Huth, A.. 2002. Processing and representation of German -n plurals: A dual mechanism approach. Brain and Language 81, 276–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sonnenstuhl, I.; Eisenbeiss, S., and Clahsen, H.. 1999. Morphological priming and the mental lexicon: Evidence from German. Cognition 72, 203–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Soveri, A.; Lehtonen, M., and Laine, M.. 2007. Word frequency and morphological processing in Finnish revisited. The Mental Lexicon 3, 359–85.Google Scholar

Spencer, A. 2013. Lexical Relatedness. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stanners, R.; Neiser, J., Hernon, W., and Hall, R.. 1979. Memory representation for morphologically related words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18, 399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stockall, L., and Marantz, A.. 2006. A single route, full decomposition model of morphological complexity: MEG evidence. The Mental Lexicon 1, 85–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stump, G. 2001. Inflectional Morphology: A Theory of Paradigm Structure. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taft, M. 2004. Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 745–65.Google Scholar

Traficante, D., and Burani, C.. 2003. Visual processing of Italian verbs and adjectives: the role of the inflectional family size. In Baayen, H. and Schreuder, R. (eds.), Morphological Structure in Language Processing, 45–64. Berlin: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Trompelt, H.; Bordag, D., and Pechmann, T.. 2013. (Ir)regularity of verbs revisited: Evidence for lexical entry complexity. The Mental Lexicon 8, 26–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tyler, L.; Stamatakis, E., Post, B., Randall, B., and Marslen-Wilson, W.. 2005. Temporal and frontal systems in speech comprehension: An fMRI study of past tense processing. Neuropsychologia 43, 1963–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

van der Lely, H., and Ullman, M.. 2001. Past tense morphology in specifically language impaired and normally developing children. Language and Cognitive Processes 16, 177–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

van Herten, M.; Chwilla, D., and Kolk, H.. 2006. When heuristics clash with parsing routines: ERP evidence for conflict monitoring in sentence perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18, 1181–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Veríssimo, J., and Clahsen, H.. 2014. Variables and similarity in linguistic generalization: Evidence from inflectional classes in Portuguese. Journal of Memory and Language 76, 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vogel, I. 1993. Verbs in Italian morphology. Yearbook of Morphology 1993, 219–54.Google Scholar

Walenski, M.; Mostofsky, S., and Ullman, M.. 2014. Inflectional morphology in high-functioning autism: Evidence for speeded grammatical processing. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 8, 1607–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Westermann, G., and Ruh, N.. 2012. A neuroconstructivist model of past tense development and processing. Psychological Review 119, 649–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wunderlich, D. 1996. Minimalist morphology: The role of paradigms. Yearbook of Morphology 1995, 93–114.Google Scholar

Zwicky, A. 1985. How to describe inflection. Berkeley Linguistics Society 11, 372–86.Google Scholar