A study of word structure using a specific theoretical framework known as 'Network Morphology'.

A revival of interest in morphology has occurred during recent years. The Yearbook of Morphology series, published since 1988, has proven to be an eminent support for this upswing of morphological research, since it contains articles on topics which are central in the current theoretical debates which are frequently referred to. The Yearbook of Morphology 2000 focuses on the relation between morphology and syntax. First, a number of articles is devoted to the ways in which morphological features can be expressed in the grammar of natural languages, both by morphological and syntactic devices. This also raises the more general issue of how we have to conceive of the relation between form and (grammatical) meaning. Several formalisms for inflectional paradigms are proposed. In addition, this volume deals with the demarcation between morphology and syntax: to which extent can syntactic principles and generalizations be used for a proper account of the morphology of a language? The languages discussed are Potawatomi, Latin, Greek, Romanian, West-Greenlandic, and German. A special feature of this volume is a section devoted to the analysis of the morphosyntax of a number of Austronesian languages, which are also relevant for deepening our insights into the relation between our morphology and syntax. Audience: Theoretical, descriptive, and historical linguists, morphologists, phonologists, computational linguists, and psycholinguists will find this book of interest.

The papers in this volume derive from the 13th International Morphology Meeting (Vienna 2008). They all address the main topic of the meeting, viz. variation and change in morphology. Inflectional and derivational morphology are represented on equal terms. The focus is on cases of language-internal variation, such as pattern competition, base variation, form–function mismatches, or morphological pleonasm. Other recurring themes are language contact as a cause of variation, the output-orientedness of morphological patterns, and linguistic economy.The contributions cover a wide variety of languages, both Indo-European (Romance, Germanic and Slavic; Latin, Lithuanian and Romani) and non-Indo-European (Hungarian, Maay, Chinese).

The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology describes the diversity of morphological phenomena in the world's languages, surveying the methodologies by which these phenomena are investigated and the theoretical interpretations that have been proposed to explain them. The Handbook provides morphologists with a comprehensive account of the interlocking issues and hypotheses that drive research in morphology; for linguists generally, it presents current thought on the interface of morphology with other grammatical components and on the significance of morphology for understanding language change and the psychology of language; for students of linguistics, it is a guide to the present-day landscape of morphological science and to the advances that have brought it to its current state; and for readers in other fields (psychology, philosophy, computer science, and others), it reveals just how much we know about systematic relations of form to content in a language's words - and how much we have yet to learn.

A revival of interest in morphology has occurred during recent years. The Yearbook of Morphology series, published since 1988, has proven to be an eminent support for this upswing of morphological research, since it contains articles on topics which are central in the current theoretical debates which are frequently referred to. The Yearbook of Morphology 1999 focuses on diachronic morphology, and shows, in a number of articles by renowned specialists, how complicated morphological systems develop in the course of time. In addition, this volume deals with a number of hotly debated issues in theoretical morphology: its interaction with phonology (including Optimality Theory), the relation between inflection and word formation, and the formal modeling of inflectional systems. A special feature of this volume is an article on morphology in sign language, a very new and exciting area of research in linguistics. The relevant evidence comes from a wide variety of languages, amongst which Germanic, Romance, and Slavic languages are prominent. Audience: Theoretical, descriptive, and historical linguists, morphologists, phonologists, and psycholinguists will find this book of interest.

This book constitutes the refereed proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Systems and Frameworks for Computational Morphology, SFCM 2011, held in Zurich, Switzerland in August 2011. The eight revised full papers presented together with one invited paper were carefully reviewed and selected from 13 submissions. The papers address various topics in computational morphology and the relevance of morphology to computational linguistics more broadly.

Chapters in this volume describe morphology using four different frameworks that have an architectural property in common: they all use defaults as a way of discovering and presenting systematicity in the least systematic component of grammar. These frameworks - Construction Morphology, Network Morphology, Paradigm-function Morphology, and Word Grammar - display key differences in how they constrain the use and scope of defaults, and in the morphological phenomena that they address. An introductory chapter presents an overview of defaults in linguistics and specifically in morphology. In subsequent chapters, key proponents of the four frameworks seek to answer questions about the role of defaults in the lexicon, including: Does a defaults-based account of language have implications for the architecture of the grammar, particularly the proposal that morphology is an autonomous component? How does a default differ from the canonical or prototypical in morphology? Do defaults have a psychological basis? And how do defaults help us understand language as a sign-based system that is flawed, where the one to one association of form and meaning breaks down in the morphology?