Advertisement

Morphology

, 16:41 | Cite as

External Evidence and the Semitic Root

  • Jean-François Prunet
Article

Keywords

Mental Lexicon External Evidence Source Word Parafoveal Preview Semitic Language 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Abd-El-Jawad H., Abu-Salim I. (1987). Slips of the tongue in Arabic and their theoretical implications. Language Sciences, 9(2): 145-171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. al-Farahiidi, al-Khaliil ibn A. (1988). Kitaab al-&’Ayn [the book of ayn], in Mahdi al-Makhzuumii and Ibraahim al-Saamarraa&’ii (eds.), 8 volumes, Beirut.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson S.R. (1992). A-morphous morphology, Cambridge studies in linguistics, (Vol. 62). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Angoujard J.-P. (1990). Metrical structure of Arabic. Foris, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  5. Anwar M.S. (1981). The legitimate fathers of speech errors. Historiographia Linguistica: 8: 249-265Google Scholar
  6. Arad M. (2003). Locality constraints on the interpretation of roots: The case of Hebrew denominal verbs. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 21: 737-778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arad M. (2005). Root and patterns, ms. Stanford University.Google Scholar
  8. Aronoff M. (1994). Morphology by itself: Stems and inflectional classes. Linguistic Inquiry monograph Vol. 22. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Bachra B.N. (2001). The phonological structure of the verbal roots in Arabic and Hebrew. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  10. Badry F. (2002). Acquiring the Arabic lexicon: Evidence of productive strategies and pedagogical implications. Academica Press, Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
  11. Bagemihl B. (1988). Alternate phonologies and morphologies. doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
  12. Bagemihl B. (1989). The crossing constraint and ’backwards’ languages. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 7: 481-549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Banksira D.P. (1996a). La de´rivation verbale en chaha. MA thesis, Universite´ du Que´bec a‘ Montre´ al.Google Scholar
  14. Banksira D.P. (1996b) Sonorant alternations in Chaha. In: Hudson G. (Ed.), Essays on Gurage language and culture. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 153-174Google Scholar
  15. Banksira D.P. (2000). Sound mutations: The morphophonology of Chaha. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  16. Bat-El O. (1994). Stem modification and cluster transfer in Modern Hebrew. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 12: 571-596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bat-El O. (2003). Semitic verb structure within a universal perspective. In J. Shimron (Ed.), 29-59Google Scholar
  18. Be´land R., Mimouni Z. (2001). Deep dyslexia in the two languages of an Arabic/French bilingual patient. Cognition, 82: 77-126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bender E.M. (2005). On the boundaries of linguistic competence: Matched-guise experiments as evidence of knowledge of grammar. Lingua, 115: 1579-1578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bender M. Fulass H. (1978). Amharic verb morphology. A generative approach. East Lansing: African Studies Center, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  21. Benmamoun E. (1999). Arabic morphology: The central role of the imperfective. Lingua, 108: 175-201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Benmamoun E. (2003). The role of the imperfective template in Arabic morphology. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 99-114Google Scholar
  23. Bentin S., Frost R. (2001). Linguistic theory and psychological reality: A reply to Boudelaa & Marslen-Wilson. Cognition, 81: 113-118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Berent I., Shimron J. (1997). The representation of hebrew words: Evidence from the Obligatory Contour Principle. Cognition, 64: 39-72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Berent I., Shimron J. (2003). Co-occurrence restrictions on identical consonants in the Hebrew lexicon: are they due to similarity?, Journal of Linguistics, 39: 31-55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Berg T., Abd-El-Jawad H. (1996). The unfolding of suprasegmental representations: a cross-linguistic perspective. Journal of Linguistics, 32: 291-324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Berman R.A. (2003). Children&’s lexical innovations: Developmental perspectives on Hebrew verb structures. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 243-291Google Scholar
  28. Blevins J.P. (2003). Stems and paradigms. Language, 79: 737-767Google Scholar
  29. Bohas G. (1997). Matrices, étymons, racines. Peeters, LeuvenGoogle Scholar
  30. Bohas G. (2000). Matrices et étymons. Développements de la thé orie. Séminaire de Saintes 1999, Instruments pour l&’e´tude des langues de l&’Orient ancien 3, Lausanne: E ´ ditions du Ze‘bre.Google Scholar
  31. Bolozky S. (1999). Measuring productivity in word formation: The case of Israeli Hebrew. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  32. Bolozky S. (2003). The &’root&’ of denominative Hebrew verbs. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 131-146Google Scholar
  33. Borer H. (2003). Computing argument structure: the early grammar. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 321-362Google Scholar
  34. Boudelaa S., Gaskell M.G. (2002). A re-examination of the default system for Arabic broken plurals. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17: 321-343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Boudelaa S., Marslen-Wilson W. (2001). Morphological units in the Arabic mental lexicon. Cognition, 81: 65-92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Boudelaa S., Marslen-Wilson W. (2004a). Abstract morphemes and lexical representation: The CV skeleton in Arabic. Cognition, 92: 271-303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Boudelaa S., Marslen-Wilson W. (2004b). Allomorphic variation in Arabic: implications for lexical processing and representations. Brain and Language, 90: 106-116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Boudelaa S., Marslen-Wilson W. (2005). Discontinuous morphology in time: incremental masked priming in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20: 207-260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Boudelaa S., Marslen-Wilson W., Pulvemuller F., Hauk O., Shtyrov Y. (2005). The neural correlates of Arabic morphology: A mismatch negativity study with roots and word patterns. Poster presented at the Neuroscience Conference, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, November 28, 2005Google Scholar
  40. Cantineau J. (1946). Esquisse d&’une phonologie de l&’arabe classique. Bulletin de la SociétéLin-guistique de Paris, 43: 93-140Google Scholar
  41. Cantineau J. (1950). Racines et sche‘mes. In Méanges William Marçais (pp. 119-124). Paris: G.-P. Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
  42. Carstairs-McCarthy A. (1993). Morphology without word-internal constituents: a review of Stephen R. Anderson&’s A-morphous morphology. Yearbook of Morphology, 1992, 209-233Google Scholar
  43. Cassuto P., Larcher P., Mugnaioni R. (eds., in press). La formation des mots en sé mitique. Aixen-Provence: Publications de l&’Universite´ de Provence.Google Scholar
  44. Chamora B., Hetzron R. (2000). Inor, Languages of the world/materials (Vol. 118). Lincom Europa, MuenchenGoogle Scholar
  45. Chekayri A., Scheer T. (1996). The apophonic origin of glides in the verbal system of Classical Arabic. In J. Lecarme J. Lowenstamm & U. Shlonsky (Eds.) Studies in Afroasiatic grammar (pp. 62-76). The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
  46. Cohen D. (1970). Remarques sur la de´rivation nominale par affixes dans quelques langues se´mitiques. In études de linguistique sémitique et arabe (pp. 31-48). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  47. Davis S., Zawaydeh B.A. (2001). Arabic hypocoristics and the status of the consonantal root. Linguistic Inquiry, 32: 512-520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Dell F., Elmedlaoui M. (2002). Syllables in Tashlhiyt Berber and in Moroccan Arabic. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  49. Deutsch A., Frost R., Forster K.I. (1998). Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24(5): 1238-1255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Deutsch A., Frost R., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. (2000). Early morphological effects in word recognition in Hebrew: evidence from parafoveal preview benefit. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4/5): 487-506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Deutsch A., Frost R. (2003). Lexical organization and lexical access in a non-concatenated morphology. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 165-186Google Scholar
  52. Dichy J. (2003). Sens des sche‘mes et sens des racines en arabe: Le Principe de figement lexical (PFL) et ses effets sur le vocabulaire d&’une langue se´mitique. In S. Re´mi-Giraud L. Panier (Eds.), La polysémie ou l&’empire du sens (pp. 89-211). Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.Google Scholar
  53. Doron E. (1999). A syntactic derivation of Semitic verbs. In S. Bird A. Carnie J. Haugen, P. Norquest (Eds.), WCCFL 18 proceedings (West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics) (pp. 106-120). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
  54. Edzard L. (2001). Grammatical systems in indigenous and in foreign perspective: The case of Arabic. In: Kniffka H. (Ed), Indigenous grammar across cultures. Peter Lang, Frankfurt, pp. 317-345Google Scholar
  55. Feldman L.B., Frost R., Pnini T. (1995). Decomposing words into their constituent morphemes: Evidence from English and Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4): 947-960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Feldman L.B., Raveh M. (2003). When degree of semantic similarity influences morphological processing. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 187-200Google Scholar
  57. Frisch S.A., Zawaydeh B.A. (2001). The psychological reality of OCP-Place in Arabic. Language, 77: 91-106Google Scholar
  58. Frisch S.A., Broe M.B., Pierrehumbert J.B. (2004). Similarity avoidance and the OCP. Natural Language Linguistic Theory, 22: 179-228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Frost R., Forster K.I., Deutsch A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked-priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 23(4): 829-856Google Scholar
  60. Frost R., Deutsch A., Forster K.I. (2000). Decomposing morphologically complex words in a nonlinear morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26(3): 751-765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Frost R., Deutsch A., Gilboa O., Tannenbaum M., Marslen-Wilson W. (2000). Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic, and morphological factors. Memory & Cognition, 28(8): 1277-1288Google Scholar
  62. Gafos A. (2003). Greenberg&’s asymmetry in Arabic: A consequence of stems in paradigms. Language, 79(2): 317-355Google Scholar
  63. Goldenberg G. (1994). Principles of Semitic word-structure. In: Goldenberg G., Raz S. (Eds), Semitic and Cushitic studies. Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 29-64Google Scholar
  64. Greenberg J.H. (1950). The patterning of root morphemes in Semitic. Word, 6: 162-181Google Scholar
  65. Greenberg J.H., Jenkins J.J. (1964). Studies in the psychological correlates of the sound system of American English. Word, 20: 157-177Google Scholar
  66. Guerssel M., Lowenstamm J. (1996). Ablaut in Classical Arabic measure I active verbal forms. In: Lecarme J., Lowenstamm J., Shlonsky U. (Eds), Studies in Afroasiatic grammar. Holland Academic Graphics, The Hague, pp. 123-124Google Scholar
  67. Hammond M. (1988). Templatic transfer in Arabic broken plurals. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 6(2): 247-270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Heath J. (1987). Ablaut and ambiguity: Phonology of a Moroccan Arabic dialect. State University of New York, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  69. Heath J. (1997). Moroccan Arabic Phonology. In A. S. Kaye (Ed.), Phonologies of Asia and Africa (including the Caucasus), (vol. 1, pp. 205-217). Winona Lake, Wisconsin: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
  70. Heath J. (2003). Arabic derivational ablaut, processing strategies, and consonantal &’roots&’. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 115-129Google Scholar
  71. Hoberman R.D. (1996). Subtractive morphology and morpheme identity in Arabic pausal forms. Yearbook of Morphology, 1995: 161-174Google Scholar
  72. Hockett C.F. (1954). Two models of grammatical description. Word, 10: 210-234Google Scholar
  73. Horowitz E. (1960). How the Hebrew language grew. KTAV Publishing House, New-YorkGoogle Scholar
  74. Idrissi A. (2000). Towards a root-and-template approach to shape-invariant morphology. Doctoral dissertation, Universite´ du Que´bec a‘ Montre´ al.Google Scholar
  75. Idrissi A., Kehayia E. (2004). Morphological units in the Arabic mental lexicon: evidence from an individual with deep dyslexia. Brain and Language, 90: 183-197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Idrissi A., Prunet J.-F., Be´land R. (2002). Metathesis errors in Arabic speech: implications for the status of abstract roots in Arabic. Brain and Language, 83(1): 90-92Google Scholar
  77. Idrissi A., Prunet J.-F. & Be´land R. (2006a). On the abstractness of Arabic roots. ms. United Arab Emirates University and Universite´ de Montre´ al.Google Scholar
  78. Idrissi A., Prunet J.-F. & Be´land R. (2006b). On the abstractness of Arabic roots. Poster presented at the Old World Conference on Phonology 3 (OCP3). Research Institute for Linguistics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, January 18: 2006.Google Scholar
  79. Kaye A.S. (1991). Semitic studies in honor of Wolf Leslau on the occasion of his 85th birthday (2 volumes). Otto Harrassowitz, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  80. Kenstowicz M. (1986). Multiple linking in Javanese. Proceedings of NELS 16 (North East Linguistic Society), pp. 230-248Google Scholar
  81. Larcher P. (1995). Ou‘ il est montre´ qu&’en arabe classique la racine n&’a pas de sens et qu&’il n&’y a pas de sens a‘ de´ river d&’elle. Arabica, XLII: 291-314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Larcher P. (1999). Vues &’nouvelles&’ sur la de´rivation lexicale en arabe classique. In: Edzard L., Nekroumi M. (Eds), Tradition and innovation. Norm and deviation in Arabic and Semitic linguistics. Harrassowitz, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  83. Lederman S. (1982). Problems in a prosodic analysis of Hebrew morphology. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 12(1): 141-163Google Scholar
  84. Leslau W. (1992). Gurage studies: Collected articles. Otto Harrassowitz, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  85. Longtin C.-M. (2003). Structure morphologique de surface et transparence sémantique. Doctoral dissertation, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, ParisGoogle Scholar
  86. Lowenstamm J. (1996). Five puzzling Chaha verbs: An exercise in practical morphophonemics. In: Hudson G (eds). Essays in Gurage language and culture. Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, pp. 123-132Google Scholar
  87. Mahadin R.S. (1982). The morphophonemics of the Standard Arabic tri-consonantal verbs doctoral dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  88. Malone J.L. (1985). Classical Mandaic radical metath zesis. radical assimilation and the devil&’s advocate&’ General Linguistics. 25(2): 92-122Google Scholar
  89. Marantz A. (2005). Generative linguistics within the cognitive neuroscience of language. The Linguistic Review. 22: 429-447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Marcos H.-M. (1974). Palatalization in Ennemor. In Proceedings of IV Congresso Internazionale di Studi Etiopici. Tomo II, Academia nazionale dei lincei. pp. 251-265Google Scholar
  91. Matthews P.H. (1991). Morphology (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  92. McCarthy J.J. (1994). The phonetics and phonology of Semitic pharyngeals. In: Keating P.A. (eds). Phonological structure and phonetic form: Papers in laboratory phonology III. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 191-233Google Scholar
  93. McCarthy J.J., Prince A.S. (1995). Prosodic morphology. In: Goldsmith J.A. (eds). The handbook of phonological theory. Blackwell, Cambridge, pp. 318-366Google Scholar
  94. Newmeyer F.J. (1983). Grammatical theory: Its limits and its possibilities. the University of Chicago Press. Chicago and LondonGoogle Scholar
  95. Ohala J.J., Ohala M. (1986). Testing hypotheses regarding the psychological manifestation of Morpheme Structure Constraints. In: Ohala J.J., Jaeger J.J (eds). Experimental phonology. Academic Press, Orlando, pp. 239-252Google Scholar
  96. Paradis C., & LaCharité , D. (Eds.) (1993). Constraint-based theories in multilinear phonology.Canadian Journal of Linguistics Vol. 38(2)Google Scholar
  97. Paradis C., Prunet J.-F. (1993). On the validity of Morpheme Structure Constraints. In Paradis C., LaCharité D. (Eds. 1993). pp. 235-256Google Scholar
  98. Penke M., Rosenbach A. (2004). What counts as evidence in linguistics?: An introduction. Studies in Language 28: 480-526Google Scholar
  99. Phillips C., Wagers M. (to appear). Relating structure and time in linguistics and psycholinguistics. In Gaskell M. G.(ed), Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  100. Plaut D., Gonnerman L.M. (2000). Are non-semantic morphological effects incompatible with a distributed connectionist approach to lexical processing. Language and Cognitive Processes 15: 445-485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Plunkett K., Nakisa R.C (1997). A connectionist model of the Arabic plural system. Language and Cognitive Processes 12: 807-836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Podolsky B. (1991). The schwa vowel in Amharic. In A. S. Kaye (Ed.), Vol. 2, pp. 1220-1225Google Scholar
  103. Prunet J.-F. (1996a). Some core properties of Semitic morphology: Evidence from the far south, In Durand J. Laks B. (eds.) Current trends in phonology: Models and methods. (Vol 2, pp. 617-652), European Studies Research Institute, University of Salford Publications.Google Scholar
  104. Prunet J.-F. (1996b). Guttural vowels. In: Hudson G.(ed), Essays on Gurage language and culture. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 175-203Google Scholar
  105. Prunet J.-F. (1998). When vowels function like consonants. Phonological Studies (Vol. 1, pp. 219- 226). The Phonological Society of Japan.Google Scholar
  106. Prunet J.-F. (2001). Roots and templates in the expression of lexical relatedness. Talk given at The conference on the syntax and semantics of Semitic Languages, workshop on root and template morphology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA, May 6, 2001Google Scholar
  107. Prunet J.-F., Chamora B. (2001). The canonical shapes of Gurage verbs. In: Zaborski A. (eds). New data and new methods in Afroasiatic linguistics: Robert Hetzron in memoriam. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 143- 152Google Scholar
  108. Prunet J.-F., Béland R., Idrissi A. (2000). The mental representation of Semitic words. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 609-648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Ratcliffe R.R. (1997). Prosodic templates in a word-based morphological analysis of Arabic. In: Mushira Eid, Ratcliffe R.R. (eds), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics X, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 147-171Google Scholar
  110. Ratcliffe R.R. (2003). Toward a universal theory of shape-invariant (templatic) morphology: Classical Arabic re-considered. In: Singh R., Starosta S. (eds). Explorations in seamless morphology. Sage Publications. New Delhi, London and Thousand Oaks, pp. 212-269Google Scholar
  111. Ratcliffe R.R. (2004). Sonority-based parsing at the margins of Arabic morphology: In reply to Prunet, Béland Idrissi (2000) and Davis and Zawaydeh (1999, 2001). Al-Agrave; rabiyya, 37: 73-95Google Scholar
  112. Raz S. (1983). Tigre grammar and texts, Afroasiatic dialects. (Vol. 4). Undena Publications, MalibuGoogle Scholar
  113. Rose S. (1993). De la palatalisation en chaha. MA Thesis, Université du Québec agrave;, MontréalGoogle Scholar
  114. Rose S. (2003). The formation of Ethiopian Semitic internal reduplication. In J. Shimron (Ed.), pp. 79-97Google Scholar
  115. Rousseau J. (1984). La racine arabe et son traitement par les grammairiens européens (1505-1831). Bulletin de la Socié té Linguistique de Paris 79(1): 285-321Google Scholar
  116. Rousseau J. (1987). La découverte de l&’a racine trilite‘re en sémitique par lidéologue Volney. Historiographia Linguistica XIV, 341-365Google Scholar
  117. Sandra D. (1998). What linguistics can and can&’t tell you about the human mind: a reply to Croft. Cognitive Linguistics 9: 361-378Google Scholar
  118. Sandra D., Rice S. (1995). Network analyses of prepositional meaning: mirroring whose mind-the linguist&’s or the language user&’s. Cognitive Linguistics 6: 89-130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Sara S.I. (2000). The Formal approach of al-Khaliil to Arabic lexicography. Word 51: 21-39Google Scholar
  120. Schramm G.M. (1991). Semitic morpheme structure typology. In A. S. Kaye (Ed.), Vol. 2, pp. 1402-1408Google Scholar
  121. Schwarzwald O.R. (1974). SoraSim, bsisim, u-mivne ha-morfemot [Roots, stems and the structure of morphemes]. Leshonenu 38: 131-136Google Scholar
  122. Shimron J. ed. (2003). Language processing and acquisition in languages of Semitic, root-based, morphology. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  123. Spencer A. (1991). Morphological theory. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  124. Stump G.T. (2001). Inflectional morphology: A theory of paradigm structure. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  125. Troupeau G. (1984). La notion de &’racine&’ chez les grammairiens arabes anciens. In S. Auroux M. Glatigny A. Joly A. Nicolas & I. Rosier (Eds.), Matériaux pour une histoire des théories linguistiques (pp. 239-245). Lille: Diffusion Presse de l&’Université de Lille.Google Scholar
  126. Ussishkin A. (1999). The inadequacy of the consonantal root: Modern Hebrew denominal verbs and output-output correspondence. Phonology 16: 401-442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Velan H., Frost R., Deutsch A., Plaut D.C (2005). The processing of root morphemes in Hebrew: contrasting localist and distributed accounts. Language and Cognitive Processes 20: 169-206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Versteegh K. (1997). Landmarks in linguistic thought III: The Arabic linguistic tradition. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  129. Voigt R.M. (1981). Hamzah als Konsonant in Amharischen. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 131: 234-262Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Language and Communications General Linquistics Department United Arab Emirates UniversityAl AinUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations