Modality effects in compounding with English inflectional morphology.
The treatment of plural morphemes in English noun-noun compounds is significant because it provides a test case for competing theories of language acquisition and representation. Even when the first noun in a compound refers to plural items, native speakers frequently use the singular form (Murphy,...
| Published in: | British Journal of Psychology Vol. 96; no. 3; pp. 295 - 312 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
August 2005
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=510440853&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 510440853 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00071269 BJP jtl: British Journal of Psychology issn: 00071269 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: August 2005 vid: 96 iid: 3 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 510440853 10.1348/000712605X48962 ppf: 295 ppct: 17 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.1MB tig: atl: Modality effects in compounding with English inflectional morphology. aug: au: Hayes, Jennifer A. Smith, Pamela M. Murphy, Victoria A. su: English nouns English linguistic morphology Age (Psychology) sug: subj: English nouns English linguistic morphology Age (Psychology) ab: The treatment of plural morphemes in English noun-noun compounds is significant because it provides a test case for competing theories of language acquisition and representation. Even when the first noun in a compound refers to plural items, native speakers frequently use the singular form (Murphy, 2000). Sometimes, they will use the irregular plural form (‘mice chaser’) but very rarely are regular plurals (‘rats chaser’) used as the first noun in a compound. This effect has been found with native English-speaking children (Gordon, 1985; Nicoladis, 2000; Oetting & Rice, 1993; van der Lely & Christian, 2000); native English-speaking teenagers (van der Lely & Christian, 2000); and native English-speaking adults (Lardiere & Schwartz, 1997; Murphy, 2000). The apparent dissociation between regular and irregular plurals (i.e. that irregular plurals are included before a second noun but regular plurals are almost never included before a second noun) is thought to be due to innate morphological constraints (Marcus, Brinkmann, Clahsen, Weise, & Pinker, 1995). Such constraints predict that all items of regular morphology should be treated differently from all items of irregular morphology by language users in all situations. However, if external factors such as input and response modality affect the number of plurals included in compounds, then this questions the internal constraint-based explanations of compounding and encourages investigation of how external factors might influence the number of plurals included in compounds. Reprinted by permission of the publisher. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|