Abstract
It has often been argued that the (type or token) frequency of an affix in the lexicon cannot be used to predict the degree to which that affix is productive. Affix type frequency refers to the number of different words which contain an affix, token frequency refers to the summed lexical frequency of those words. The observation that neither of these counts relates straightforwardly to productivity, raises difficult questions about the source of different degrees of productivity, making the nature of morphological productivity one of the “central mysteries of word-formation” (Aronoff 1976:35). If productivity does not arise as a function of frequency, then where does it come from?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aronoff, M. (1976). Word Formation in Generative Grammar. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Baayen, H. (1989). A Corpus-based approach to morphological productivity: Statistical analysis and psycholinguistic interpretations. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
Baayen, H. (1992). Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In G. Booij and J. van Marie (eds.). Yearbook of Morphology 1991. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 109–50.
Baayen, H. (1993). On frequency, transparency and productivity. In G. Booij and J. van Marie (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1992. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 181–208.
Baayen, H. (to appear). Probability in morphology. In R. Bod. J. Hay and S. Jannedy (eds.), Probabilistic Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Baayen, H. and Lieber, R. (1991). Productivity and English derivation: A corpus based study. Linguistics 29, 801–43.
Baayen, R.H. (1994). Productivity in language production, Language and Cognitive Processes 9, 447–69.
Baayen, R.H. (2001). Word Frequency Distribution. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Baayen, R.H. and Schreuder, R. (2000). Towards a psycholinguistic computational model for morphological parsing, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (Series A): Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 358, 1–13.
Baayen, R.H., Schreuder, R. and Sproat, R. (2000). Morphology in the mental lexicon: a computational model for visual word recognition. In E. van Eynde and D. Gibbon (eds.), Lexicon Development for Speech and Language Processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 267–91.
Baayen, R.H., Schreuder, R., Bertram, R. and Tweedie, E. (1999). The semantic functions of the Dutch suffix -heid: evidence from lexicography, lexical statistics, and psycholinguistics. In M. Nenonen and J. Jarvikivi (eds.), Languages, Minds and Brains. Joensu: University of Joensu.
Baayen, R.H, Piepenbrock, R. and Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (release 2) cd-rom., Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, Univesity of Pennsylvania (Distributor).
Bertram, R., Baayen, R.H. and Schreuder, R. (2000). Effects of family size for complex words. Journal of Memory and Language 42, 390–405.
Cleveland, W.S. (1979). Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74, 829–36.
Cutler, A., Hawkins, J.A. and Gilligan, G. (1985). The suffixing preference: a processing explanation. Linguistics 23, 723–58.
De Jong, N.H., Feldman, L., Schreuder, R., Pastizzo M. and Baayen, H. (2001). The processing and representation of Dutch and English compounds: Peripheral morphological, and central orthographic effects. Brain and Language (to appear).
De Jong, N.H., Schreuder, R. and Baayen, R.H. (2000). The morphological family size effect and morphology. Language and Cognitive Processes 15, 329–65.
Dressler, W.U. (1997). On productivity and potentiality in inflectional morphology. CLASNET Working Papers 7, 2–22.
Hay, J. (2000). Causes and Consequences of Word Structure, PhD thesis, Northwestern University.
Hay, J. (2001). Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative?, Linguistics 39, 1041–70.
Laudanna, A. and Burani, C. (1995). Distributional properties of derivational affixes: Implications for processing. In L.B. Feldman (ed.), Morphological Aspects of Language Processing. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 345–64.
Norris, D.G. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition 52, 189–234.
Pierrehumbert, J. (2001). Why phonological constraints are so coarse-grained. Language and Cognitive Processes 16, 691–8.
Renouf, A. (1987). Corpus development. In J. Sinclair (ed.), Looking up: An account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing and the development of the Collins COBUILD English Language Dictionary. Collins, pp. 1–40.
Rousseeuw, P. and Leroy, A. (1987). Robust Regression and Outlier Detection. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Schreuder, R. and Baayen, R.H. (1997). How complex simplex words can be. Journal of Memory and Language 37, 118–39.
Segui, I. and Zubizarreta, M.-L. (1985). Mental representation of morphologically complex words and lexical access. Linguistics 23, 759–74.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hay, J., Baayen, H. (2002). Parsing and productivity. In: Booij, G., Van Marle, J. (eds) Yearbook of Morphology 2001. Yearbook of Morphology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3726-5_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3726-5_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6061-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3726-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive