Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:06:13.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cruschina Silvio, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds.), The boundaries of pure morphology: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Pp. xiii + 319.

Review products

Cruschina Silvio, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds.), The boundaries of pure morphology: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Pp. xiii + 319.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2015

Fiammetta Namer
Fiammetta Namer*
Affiliation:
UMR 7118 ATILF & Université de Lorraine, France
*
Author's address: Université de Lorraine, Campus Lettres et Sciences Humaines, 23 bd Albert 1er, BP3397, 54015 Nancy Cedex, France[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract 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
Reviews
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , March 2015 , pp. 245 - 249
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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

REFERENCES

Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by itself. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baerman, Matthew, Brown, Dunstan & Corbett, Greville G.. 2005. The syntax–morphology interface: A study of syncretism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blevins, James P. 2006. Word-based morphology. Linguistics 42, 531–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonami, Olivier & Boyé, Gilles. 2003. Supplétion et classes flexionnelles. Langages 152, 103–126.Google Scholar
Bonami, Olivier & Boyé, Gilles. 2005. Construire le paradigme d'un adjectif. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 34, 77–98.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Marantz, Alec. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Hale, Kenneth & Keyser, Samuel J. (eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2004. When lexemes become allomorphs: On the genesis of suppletion. Folia Linguistica 38/3–4, 227–256.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2005. Morphological autonomy and diachrony. In Booij, Geert & van Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 2004, 137–175. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2009. From pure phonology to pure morphology: The reshaping of the Romance verb. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 38, 45–82.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2011. Morphomes and ‘stress-conditioned allomorphy’ in Romansh. In Maiden, et al. (eds.), 36–50.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin, Smith, John Charles, Goldbach, Maria & Hinzelin, Marc-Olivier (eds.). 2011. Morphological autonomy: Perspectives from Romance inflectional morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pirrelli, Vito & Battista, Marco. 2000. The paradigmatic dimension of stem allomorphy in Italian verb inflection. Rivista di Linguistica 12, 307–380.Google Scholar
Spencer, Andrew. To appear. Stems, the morphome, and meaning-bearing inflection. In Luís, Ana R. & Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo (eds.), The morphome debate: Diagnosing and analysing morphomic patterns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar