The root of ruthless

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Buy this article

Price: $35.00+Taxes
Add to favourites

Individual variation as a window on mental representation

The full text of this article is not currently available.

Data & Media loading...


Full text loading...


Baayen, R.H
(2008) Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511801686
Barlow, M
(2013) Individual differences and usage-based grammar. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(4), 443–478. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.18.4.01bar
Bauer, L
(2001) Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486210
Becker, T
(1994) Back-formation, cross-formation, and ‘bracketing paradoxes’ in Paradigmatic Morphology. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1993 (pp. 1–26). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Booij, G
(2007) Construction morphology and the lexicon. In F. Montermini , G. Boyé , & N. Hathout (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 5th Décembrettes. Morphology in Toulouse (pp.34–44). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Bybee, J
(1985) Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.9
(2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. doi: 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
Bybee, J. , & McClelland, J.L
(2005) Alternatives to the combinatorial paradigm of linguistic theory based on domain general principles of human cognition. The Linguistic Review, 22(2-4), 381–410. doi: 10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2‑4.381
Bybee, J. , & Slobin, D.I
(1982) Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language, 58(2), 265–289. doi: 10.1353/lan.1982.0021
De Smet, H
(2016) How gradual change progresses: The interaction between convention and innovation. Language Variation and Change, 28(1), 83–102. doi: 10.1017/S0954394515000186
Gonnerman, L.M. , Seidenberg, M.S. , & Andersen, E.S
(2007) Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: Evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(2), 323–345. doi: 10.1037/0096‑3445.136.2.323
Haspelmath, M
(2002) Understanding Morphology. London: Arnold.
Hay, J.B. , & Baayen, R.H
(2005) Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 342–348. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.04.002
Kemmer, S. , & Barlow, M
(2000) Introduction: A usage-based conception of language. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based Models of Language (pp.i–xxvii). Stanford, CA: CSLI.
Labov, W
(2001) Principles of Linguistic Change: Vol. 2. Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
Langacker, R.W
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Vol. 1. Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
(2000) A dynamic usage-based model. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based Models of Language (pp. 1–63). Stanford, CA: CSLI.
Mollin, S
(2009) “I entirely understand” is a Blairism: The methodology of identifying idiolectal collocations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3), 367–392. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.14.3.04mol
Plag, I
(2003) Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511841323
Schmid, H.-J. , & Mantlik, A
(2015) Entrenchment in historical corpora? Reconstructing dead authors’ minds from their usage profiles. Anglia, 133(4), 583–623. doi: 10.1515/ang‑2015‑0056
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address