Volume 14, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1871-1340
  • E-ISSN: 1871-1375
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Verbs constitute one of the basic building blocks of a clause, setting the structure of arguments and expressing the relationships among nouns in various thematic roles. In general terms, verbs are lexical items expressing verb-oriented notions such as activities, processes, and states. In morphology-rich languages, the syntactic and lexical roles of verbs are mediated by typologically-oriented morphological means. The current Special Issue contrasts the structure and functions of verbs in languages from two morphologically rich, yet typologically different families. The articles in the Special Issue present spoken and written aspects of verbs in usage and development in German (a Germanic language) on the one hand, in Hebrew, Neo-Aramaic, and Arabic (Semitic languages), on the other. From a theoretical linguistic perspective, we ask how the different typological features of these languages affect the function of verbs in sentences, and from a psycholinguistic perspective, we ask how typological differences affect the processing of verbs in the mature minds of adults and in the developing minds of children.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Armon-Lotem, S. & Berman, R. A.
    (2003) The emergence of grammar: Early verbs and beyond. Journal of Child Language, 30, 845–878. 10.1017/S0305000903005750
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000903005750 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ashkenazi, O.
    (2015) Input-output relations in the morphological acquisition of Hebrew verbs. Doctoral dissertation, Tel Aviv University.
  3. Ashkenazi, O., D. Ravid & S. Gillis
    (2016) Breaking into the Hebrew verb system: a learning problem. First Language, 36, 505–524. 10.1177/0142723716648865
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723716648865 [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashkenazi, O., Gillis, S., & Ravid, D.
    (In press). Input-output relations in the early acquisition of Hebrew verbs. Journal of Child Language. doi:  10.1017/S0305000919000540
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000919000540 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bar-Kochva, I. & Hasselhorn, M.
    (2017) The training of morphological decomposition in word processing and its effects on literacy skills. Frontiers in Psychology. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01583
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01583 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bar-On, A. & D. Ravid
    (2011) Morphological decoding in Hebrew pseudowords: a developmental study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 553–581. 10.1017/S014271641100021X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271641100021X [Google Scholar]
  7. Behrens, H.
    (1998) How difficult are complex verbs? Evidence from German, Dutch and English. Linguistics, 36(4), 679–712. 10.1515/ling.1998.36.4.679
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1998.36.4.679 [Google Scholar]
  8. Berman, R. A.
    (1985) Acquisition of Hebrew. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (1986) A step-by-step model of language learning. InI. Levin (Ed.) Stage and structure: Re-opening the debate. (pp.191–219). Norwood, N.J: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. (1988) Productivity in the lexicon: New-word formation in Modern Hebrew”. Folia Linguistica, 21, 425–461.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (1993a) Marking of verb transitivity by Hebrew-speaking children. Journal of Child Language, 20, 641–669. 10.1017/S0305000900008527
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900008527 [Google Scholar]
  12. (1993b) Developmental perspectives on transitivity: A confluence of cues. InY. Levy (Ed.), Other children, other languages: issues in the theory of acquisition (pp.189–241). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (1994) Formal, lexical, and semantic factors in acquisition of Hebrew resultative participles. Berkeley Linguistic Society, 20, 82–92. 10.3765/bls.v20i1.1452
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v20i1.1452 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2012) Revisiting roots in Hebrew: A multi-faceted view. InM. Muchnik & Z. Sadan. Studies on Modern Hebrew and Jewish languages in honor of Ora (Rodriguez) Schwarzwald (pp.132–158). Jerusalem: Carmel Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Bolozky, S.
    (1999) Measuring productivity in word-formation: The case of Israeli Hebrew. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004348431
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004348431 [Google Scholar]
  16. Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
    (2004) Allomorphic variation in Arabic: Implications for lexical processing and representation. Brain and Language, 90, 106–116. 10.1016/S0093‑934X(03)00424‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00424-3 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bozic, M., Tyler, L. K., Su, L., Wingfield, C., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
    (2013) Neurobiological systems for lexical representation and analysis in English. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(10), 1678–1691. 10.1162/jocn_a_00420
    https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00420 [Google Scholar]
  18. Cremeer, A., Goodwin, D. A., Wilder, R. J., Tamminga, M., & Embick, D.
    (2019) Opacity, transparency, and morpholgoical priming: A study of prefixed verbs in Dutch. Cremeer: Manuscript submitted for publication.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dattner, E.
    (2015) Mapping Hebrew dative constructions. Ph.D dissertation, Tel Aviv University.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2019) The Hebrew dative: Usage patterns as discourse profile constructions. Linguistics. doi:  10.1515/ling‑2019‑0022
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2019-0022 [Google Scholar]
  21. De Grauwe, S., Lemhöfer, K., & Schriefers, H.
    (2019) Processing derived verbs: the role of motor-relatedness and type of morphological priming. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34(8), 973–990. doi:  10.1080/23273798.2019.1599129
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1599129 [Google Scholar]
  22. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., & Forster, K. I.
    (1998) Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(5), 1238–1255.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Diessel, H.
    (2015) Frequency shapes syntactic structure. Journal of Child Language, 42, 278–281. 10.1017/S0305000914000622
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000914000622 [Google Scholar]
  24. D’Odorico, L., Carubbi, S., Salerni, N., & Calvo, V.
    (2001) Vocabulary development in Italian children: A longitudinal evaluation of quantitative and qualitative aspects. Journal of Child Language, 28, 351–72. 10.1017/S0305000901004676
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000901004676 [Google Scholar]
  25. Domínguez, A., de Vega, M., & Barber, H.
    (2004) Event-related Brain Potentials Elicited by Morphological, Homographic, Orthographic, and Semantic Priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(4), 598–608. doi:  10.1162/089892904323057326
    https://doi.org/10.1162/089892904323057326 [Google Scholar]
  26. Dörre, L., & Smolka, E.
    (2019) When the pig is bought in a poke – The influence of transitivity and adjacency on the processing of passivized idiomatic sentences. Manuscript submitted for publication.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Dressler, Wolfgang U., Lavinia Merlini Barbaresi, Sonja Schwaiger, and Jutta Ransmayr
    2018 Skalierung der morphosemantischen Transparenz/Opazität deutscher und italienischer Diminutive. InDie Zukunft von Grammatik – Die Grammatik der Zukunft. Festschrift für Werner Abraham anlässlich seines80. Geburtstags, eds.E. Leiss and S. Zeman, 117–132. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Drews, E., Zwitserlood, P., & Neuwinger, E.
    (2000) How semantic is morphological priming? Evidence from derivationally prefixed verbs in German. Unpublished Manuscript.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Durrell, M.
    (2001) Strong verb ablaut in the West Germanic Languages. Linguistische Arbeiten, 446.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Eisenberg, P.
    (2004) Grundriß der deutschen Grammatik: Das Wort (2nd ed.Vol.1). Stuttgart-Weimar: J. B. Metzler. 10.1007/978‑3‑476‑03763‑3
  31. Feldman, L. B., & Soltano, E. G.
    (1999) Morphological priming: The role of prime duration, semantic transparency, and affix position. Brain and Language, 68(1–2), 33–39. 10.1006/brln.1999.2077
    https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2077 [Google Scholar]
  32. Feldman, L. B., Soltano, E. G., Pastizzo, M. J., & Francis, S. E.
    (2004) What do graded effects of semantic transparency reveal about morphological processing?Brain and Language, 90(1–3), 17–30. doi:  10.1016/S0093‑934X(03)00416‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00416-4 [Google Scholar]
  33. Fleischer, W., & Barz, I.
    (1992) Wortbildung der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
  34. Frost, R.
    (2012) Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(5), 263–279. doi:  10.1017/S0140525X11001841
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X11001841 [Google Scholar]
  35. Frost, R., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. I.
    (2000) Decomposing morphologically complex words in a nonlinear morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(3), 751–765. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.26.3.751
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.3.751 [Google Scholar]
  36. Frost, R., Deutsch, A., Gilboa, O., Tannenbaum, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
    (2000) Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic and morphological factors. Memory and Cognition, 28(8), 1277–1288. doi:  10.3758/BF03211828
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211828 [Google Scholar]
  37. Frost, R., Forster, K. I., & Deutsch, A.
    (1997) What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked-priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(4), 829–856.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Golinkoff, R. M. & Hirsh-Pasek, K.
    (2008) How toddlers begin to learn verbs. Trends in Cognitive Science, 12, 397–403. 10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  39. 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. 10.1037/0096‑3445.136.2.323
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.2.323 [Google Scholar]
  40. Gumnior, H., Bölte, J., & Zwitserlood, P.
    (2006) A chatterbox is a box: Morphology in German word production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21(7–8), 920–944. 10.1080/016909600824278
    https://doi.org/10.1080/016909600824278 [Google Scholar]
  41. Günther, F., Smolka, E., & Marelli, M.
    (2019) ‘Understanding’ differs between English and German: Capturing systematic language differences of complex words. Cortex, 116, 158–175. doi:  10.1016/j.cortex.2018.09.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2018.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  42. Halle, M.
    (1953) The German conjugation. Word, 9, 45–53. 10.1080/00437956.1953.11659455
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1953.11659455 [Google Scholar]
  43. Kielar, A., & Joanisse, M. F.
    (2011) The role of semantic and phonological factors in word recognition: An ERP cross-modal priming study of derivational morphology. Neuropsychologia, 49(2), 161–177. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.11.027
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.11.027 [Google Scholar]
  44. Klampfer, S.
    (2003) Emergence of verb paradigms in one Austrian child. InD. Bittner, W. Dressler, & M. Kilani-Schoch (Eds.), Development of Verb Inflection in First Language Acquisition: A Cross-linguistic Perspective, (pp.297–321). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110899832.297
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110899832.297 [Google Scholar]
  45. Levie, R., Ben Zvi, G. & Ravid, D.
    (2017) Morpho-lexical development in language-impaired and typically developing Hebrew-speaking children from two SES backgrounds. Reading and Writing, 30, 1035–1064. 10.1007/s11145‑016‑9711‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9711-3 [Google Scholar]
  46. Levie, L., Ashkenazi, O., Eitan Stanzas, S., Zwilling, R., Raz, E., Hershkovitz, L. & Ravid, D.
    (Under review). The route to the derivational verb family in Hebrew: A psycholinguistic study of acquisition and development.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Lüdeling, A., & De Jong, N. H.
    (2001) German particle verbs and word formation. InN. Dehé, R. Jackendoff, A. McIntyre, & S. Urban (Eds.), Explorations in verb-particle constructionsBerlin: Mouton der Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Lustigman, L.
    (2012) Developing structural specification: Productivity in early Hebrew verb usage. First Language, 33, 47–67. 10.1177/0142723711426828
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723711426828 [Google Scholar]
  49. Marslen-Wilson, W. D., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L.
    (1994) Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101(1), 3–33. 10.1037/0033‑295X.101.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  50. Meunier, F., & Longtin, C.-M.
    (2007) Morphological decomposition and semantic integration in word processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(4), 457–471. 10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  51. Nichols, J.
    (2016) Morphology in typology. InAndrew Hippisley and Gregory Stump (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of morphology (pp.710–742). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139814720.025
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139814720.025 [Google Scholar]
  52. Olsen, S.
    (1996) Partikelverben im deutsch-englischen Vergleich. InE. Lang & G. Zifonun (Eds.), Deutsch-typologisch (pp.261–288). Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110622522‑013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110622522-013 [Google Scholar]
  53. Plaut, D. C., & Gonnerman, L. M.
    (2000) Are non-semantic morphological effects incompatible with a distributed connectionist approach to lexical processing?Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4–5), 445–485. 10.1080/01690960050119661
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960050119661 [Google Scholar]
  54. Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K.
    (2000) Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4–5), 507–537. 10.1080/01690960050119689
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960050119689 [Google Scholar]
  55. Ravid, D.
    (1990) Internal structure constraints on new-word formation devices in Modern Hebrew. Folia Linguistica, 24, 289–346. 10.1515/flin.1990.24.3‑4.289
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.1990.24.3-4.289 [Google Scholar]
  56. (2003) A developmental perspective on root perception in Hebrew and Palestinian Arabic. InY. Shimron (Ed.), Language processing and acquisition in languages of Semitic, root-based morphology (pp.293–319). Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/lald.28.14rav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.28.14rav [Google Scholar]
  57. (2006) Word-level morphology: A psycholinguistic perspective on linear formation in Hebrew nominals. Morphology, 16, 127–148. 10.1007/s11525‑006‑0006‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-006-0006-2 [Google Scholar]
  58. (2012) Spelling morphology: the psycholinguistics of Hebrew spelling. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4419‑0588‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0588-8 [Google Scholar]
  59. (2019a) Derivation. InRuth A. Berman (Ed.), Usage-based studies in Modern Hebrew: Background, morpho-lexicon, and syntax (pp.203–265). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. (2019b) First language acquisition of morphology. InR. Lieber (Ed.) The Oxford encyclopedia of morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.603
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.603 [Google Scholar]
  61. Ravid, D. & R. Schiff
    (2006) Roots and patterns in Hebrew language development: evidence from written morphological analogies. Reading and Writing, 19, 789–818. 10.1007/s11145‑006‑9004‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-006-9004-3 [Google Scholar]
  62. Ravid, D., Ashkenazi, O., Levie, R., Ben Zadok, G., Grunwald, T., Bratslavsky, R., & Gillis, S.
    (2016) Foundations of the root category: analyses of linguistic input to Hebrew-speaking children. InR. Berman (ed.) Acquisition and development of Hebrew: From infancy to adolescence (pp.95–134). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tilar.19.04rav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.19.04rav [Google Scholar]
  63. Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S.
    (1998) Metrical structure in planning the production of spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 922–939.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Saiegh-Haddad, E.
    (2018) MAWRID: A model of Arabic word reading in development. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51, 454–462. 10.1177/0022219417720460
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219417720460 [Google Scholar]
  65. Sandoval, M. & Gómez, R. L.
    (2013) The development of nonadjacent dependency learning in natural and artificial languages. WIRES Cognitive Science, 4, 511–522. 10.1002/wcs.1244
    https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1244 [Google Scholar]
  66. Schirmeier, M. K., Derwing, B. L., & Libben, G.
    (2004) Lexicality, morphological structure, and semantic transparency in the processing of German ver-verbs: The complementarity of on-line and off-line evidence. Brain and Language, 90, 74–87. 10.1016/S0093‑934X(03)00421‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00421-8 [Google Scholar]
  67. Schriefers, H., Zwitserlood, P., & Roelofs, A.
    (1991) The identification of morphologically complex spoken words: Continuous processing or decomposition?Journal of Memory and Language, 30(1), 26–47. 10.1016/0749‑596X(91)90009‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90009-9 [Google Scholar]
  68. Schwarzwald, O. R.
    (2000) Morphology in context [in Hebrew]. Helkat Lashon, 29–32, 310–314.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Slobin, D. I.
    (Ed.) (1985) The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, Vol.1. The data; Vol.2. Theoretical issues. Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Smolka, E.
    (this volume). Aufhören (‘stop’) activates hören (‘hear’) but not Musik (‘music’) – The difference between lexical and semantic processing of German particle verbs. The Mental Lexicon.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Smolka, E., & Eulitz, C.
    (2018) Psycholinguistic measures for German verb pairs: Semantic trans-parency, semantic relatedness, verb family size, and age of reading acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, 50(4), 1540–1562. doi:  10.3758/s13428‑018‑1052‑5
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1052-5 [Google Scholar]
  72. Smolka, E., & Baayen, H.
    (in prep.). When stems mean more than words: Developmental trajectories in the processing of complex verbs in German-speaking 11–15 year olds.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Smolka, E., Gondan, M., & Rösler, F.
    (2015) Take a stand on understanding: Electrophysiological evidence for stem access in German complex verbs. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9(62). doi:  10.3389/fnhum.2015.00062
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00062 [Google Scholar]
  74. Smolka, E., Khader, P. H., Wiese, R., Zwitserlood, P., & Rösler, F.
    (2013) Electrophysiological evidence for the continuous processing of linguistic categories of regular and irregular verb inflection in German. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(8), 1284–1304. doi:  10.1162/jocn_a_00384
    https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00384 [Google Scholar]
  75. Smolka, E., Komlósi, S., & Rösler, F.
    (2009) When semantics means less than morphology: The processing of German prefixed verbs. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(3), 337–375. doi:  10.1080/01690960802075497
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802075497 [Google Scholar]
  76. Smolka, E., Libben, G., & Dressler, W.
    (2019) When Morphological Structure Overrides Meaning: Evidence from German Prefixed and Particle Verbs. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 34(5), 599–614. doi:  10.1080/23273798.2018.1552006
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1552006 [Google Scholar]
  77. Smolka, E., Preller, K. H., & Eulitz, C.
    (2014) ‘Verstehen’ (‘understand’) primes ‘stehen’ (‘stand’): Morphological structure overrides semantic compositionality in the lexical representation of German complex verbs. Journal of Memory and Language, 72, 16–36. doi:  10.1016/j.jml.2013.12.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  78. Smolka, E., Zwitserlood, P., & Rösler, F.
    (2007) Stem access in regular and irregular inflection: Evidence from German participles. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(3), 325–347. doi:  10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.005 [Google Scholar]
  79. Tatsumi, T. & Pine, J. M.
    (2016) Comparing generativist and constructivist accounts of the use of the past tense form in early child Japanese. Journal of Child Language, 43, 1365–1384. 10.1017/S0305000915000732
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000732 [Google Scholar]
  80. Wegener, H.
    (2003) Entstehung und Funktion der Fugenelemente im Deutschen, oder: warum wir keine *Autosbahn haben. Linguistische Berichte, 196, 425–457.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Wiese, R.
    (1996) Phonological versus morphological rules: on German Umlaut and Ablaut. Journal of Linguistics, 32(1), 113–135. 10.1017/S0022226700000785
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700000785 [Google Scholar]
  82. Xanthos, A., Laaha, S., Gillis, S., Stephany, U., Aksu-Koc, A., Christofidou, A., Gagarina, N., Hrzica, G., Ketrez, F. N., Kilani-Schoch, M., Korecky-Kröll, K., Kovačević, M., Laalo, K., Palmović, M., Pfeiler, B., Voeikova, M. D., & Dressler, W. U.
    (2011) On the role of morphological richness in the early development of noun and verb inflection. First Language, 31(4), 461–479. 10.1177/0142723711409976
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723711409976 [Google Scholar]
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error