Seeking the -ational in derivational morphology

References

• Baayen, R. H. (1989). A corpus-based approach to morphological productivity: Statistical analysis and psycholinguistic interpretation ( Doctoral dissertation), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H. (1994). Productivity in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 447–469. doi:10.1080/01690969408402127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Balling, L. W., & Baayen, R. H. (2008). Morphological effects in auditory word recognition: Evidence from Danish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 1159–1190. doi:10.1080/01690960802201010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beauvillain, C. (1996). The integration of morphological and whole-word form information during eye fixations on prefixed and suffixed words. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 801–820. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beckner, C., & Bybee, J. (2009). A usage-based account of constituency and reanalysis. Language Learning, 59, 27–46. doi:10.1111/lang.2009.59.issue-s1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertram, R., & Hyönä, J. (2003). The length of a complex word modifies the role of morphological structure: Evidence from eye movements when reading short and long Finnish compounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 615–643. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00539-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bybee, J. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82, 711–733. doi:10.1353/lan.2006.0186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, M. (2008). Corpus of contemporary American English. Retrieved from: http://corpus.byu.edu
   Google Scholar
• Derwing, B. (1973). Transformational grammar as a theory of language acquisition. Cambridge: University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Derwing, B. L. (2014). The role of suffix strings in the processing of multimorphemic words. Edmonton, Canada: Invited lecture presented at the Spring Training in Experimental Psycholinguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, L. B. (1994). Beyond orthography and phonology: Differences between inflections and derivations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 442–470. doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrand, L., Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., New, B., Bonun, P., & Méot, A., …, Pallier, C. (2011). Comparing word processing times in naming, lexical decision, and progressive demasking: Evidence from Chronolex. Frontiers of Psychology, 2, 306. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00306
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, M. A., Davis, M. H., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2010). Derivational morphology and base morpheme frequency. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 117–130. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680–698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grainger, J., & Segui, J. (1990). Neighborhood frequency effects in visual word recognition: A comparison of lexical decision and masked identification latencies. Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 191–198. doi:10.3758/BF03205983
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, A. C., & Coslett, H. B. (2007). Impairment in writing, but not reading, morphologically complex words. Neuropsychologia, 45, 1586–1590. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.12.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, J. (2001). Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? Linguistics, 39, 1041–1070. doi:10.1515/ling.2001.041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, J. (2002). From speech perception to morphology: Affix ordering revisited. Language, 78, 527–555. doi:10.1353/lan.2002.0159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, J., & Baayen, R. H. (2002). Parsing and productivity. In G. Booij & J. Van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2001 (pp. 203–235). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Hay, J., & Plag, I. (2004). What constrains possible suffix combinations? On the interaction of grammatical and processing restrictions in derivational morphology. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 22, 565–596. doi:10.1023/B:NALA.0000027679.63308.89
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohn, S. E., & Melvold, J. (2000). Effects of morphological complexity on phonological output deficits in fluent and nonfluent aphasia. Brain and Language, 73, 323–346. doi:10.1006/brln.2000.2179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Komisarjevsky Tyler, L., & Cobb, H. (1987). Processing bound grammatical morphemes in context: The case of an aphasic patient. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2, 245–262. doi:10.1080/01690968708406934
   Google Scholar
• Laudanna, A., Badecker, W., & Caramazza, A. (1992). Processing inflectional and derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 333–348. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(92)90017-R
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J.-E., & Hong, S.-H. (2011). Ordering paradoxes in English suffixation: An account based on relative frequency. Linguistic Research, 28, 95–115. doi:10.17250/khisli.28.1.201104.006
   Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (1990). Morphological representations and morphological deficits in aphasia. In J.-L. Nespoulous & P. Villiard (Eds.), Morphology, phonology, and aphasia (pp. 20–31). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (2012). Morphological assessment in bilingual aphasia: Compounding and the language nexus. In M. Gitterman, M. Goral, & L. K. Obler (Eds.), Aspects of multilingual aphasia (pp. 51–88). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (in press). The quantum metaphor and the organization of words in the mind. Cultural Cognitive Science, 1.
   Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (2014). The nature of compounds: A psychocentric perspective. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 31, 8–25. doi:10.1080/02643294.2013.874994
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G., Buchanan, L., & Colangelo, A. (2004). Morphology, semantics, and the mental lexicon: The failure of deactivation hypothesis. Logos and Language., 4, 45–53.
   Google Scholar
• Libben, G., Curtiss, K., & Weber, S. (2014). Psychocentricity and participant profiles: Implications for lexical processing among multilinguals. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00557
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G., & Jarema, G. (Eds.) (2006). The representation and processing of compound words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Libben, G., Weber, S., & Miwa, K. (2012). P3: A technique for the study of perception, production, and participant properties. The Mental Lexicon, 7, 237–248. doi:10.1075/ml.7.2
   Google Scholar
• Lieber, R., & Štekauer, P. (2009). Introduction: Status and definition of compounding. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (Eds.), The oxford handbook of compounding (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miceli, G., Capasso, R., & Caramazza, A. (2004). The relationships between morphological and phonological errors in aphasic speech: Data from a word repetition task. Neuropsychologia, 42, 273–287. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2003.09.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miceli, G., & Caramazza, A. (1988). Dissociation of inflectional and derivational morphology. Brain and Language, 35, 24–65. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(88)90100-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myers, J. (2007). Generative morphology as psycholinguistics. In G. Jarema & G. Libben (Eds.), The mental lexicon: Core perspectives (pp. 105–128). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 329–347. doi:10.1017/S0140525X12001495
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plag, I. (2002). Word-formation in English. Cambridge: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Plag, I., & Baayen, H. (2009). Suffix ordering and morphological processing. Language, 85, 109–152. doi:10.1353/lan.0.0087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahel, S., Nottbusch, G., Grimm, A., & Weingarten, R. (2008). Written production of German compounds: Effects of lexical frequency and semantic transparency. Written Language & Literacy, 11, 211–227. doi:10.1075/wll.11.2.06sah
   Google Scholar
• Schriefers, H., Friederici, A., & Graetz, P. (1992). Inflectional and derivational morphology in the mental lexicon: Symmetries and asymmetries in repetition priming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 44, 373–390. doi:10.1080/02724989243000073
   Google Scholar
• Semenza, C., Butterworth, B., Panzeri, M., & Ferreri, T. (1990). Word formation: New evidence from aphasia. Neuropsychologia, 28, 499–502. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(90)90075-Y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semenza, C., & Mondini, S. (2010). Compound words in neuropsychology. Linguistiche Berichte, 17, 331–348.
   Google Scholar
• Teddiman, L. (2012). An experimental investigation of complexity-based ordering ( Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Alberta, Edmonton.
   Google Scholar
• Will, U., Nottbusch, G., & Weingarten, R. (2006). Linguistic units in word typing: Effects of word presentation modes and typing delay. Written Language & Literacy, 9, 153–176. doi:10.1075/wll.9.1
   Google Scholar