It’s time for a complete theory of partial predictability in language

Anderson, Stephen R. 1992. A-morphous morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511586262Search in Google Scholar

Apidianaki, Marianna. 2023. From word types to tokens and back: A survey of approaches to word meaning representation and interpretation. Computational Linguistics 49. 465–523.10.1162/coli_a_00474Search in Google Scholar

Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by itself. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bauer, Laurie. 1997. Derivational paradigms. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1996, 243–256. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-017-3718-0_13Search in Google Scholar

Bauer, Laurie. 2019. Notions of paradigm and their value in word-formation. Word Structure 12. 153–175. https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2019.0144.Search in Google Scholar

Blevins, James P. 2001. Paradigmatic derivation. Transactions of the Philological Society 99. 211–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968x.00080.Search in Google Scholar

Blevins, James P. 2016. Word and paradigm morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593545.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Search in Google Scholar

Bochner, Harry. 1993. Simplicity in generative morphology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110889307Search in Google Scholar

Bojanowski, Piotr, Edouard Grave, Armand Joulin & Tomas Mikolov. 2017. Enriching word vectors with subword information. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 5. 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00051.Search in Google Scholar

Bonami, Olivier & Matías Guzmán Naranjo. 2023. Distributional evidence for derivational paradigms. In Sven Kotowski & Ingo Plag (eds.), The semantics of derivational morphology: Theory, methods, evidence, 219–258. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783111074917-008Search in Google Scholar

Bonami, Olivier & Denis Paperno. 2018. Inflection vs. derivation in a distributional vector space. Lingue e Linguaggio 17. 173–195.Search in Google Scholar

Bonami, Olivier & Jana Strnadová. 2019. Paradigm structure and predictability in derivational morphology. Morphology 29. 167–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-018-9322-6.Search in Google Scholar

Booij, Geert. 1996. Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1995, 1–16. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-017-3716-6_1Search in Google Scholar

Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Booij, Geert & Francesca Masini. 2015. The role of second order schemas in the construction of complex words. In Laurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), Semantics of complex words, 47–66. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-14102-2_4Search in Google Scholar

Bowdle, Brian F. & Dedre Gentner. 2005. The career of metaphor. Psychological Review 112. 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.112.1.193.Search in Google Scholar

Boyé, Gilles & Gauvain Schalchli. 2016. The status of paradigms. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 206–234. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781139814720.009Search in Google Scholar

Bruening, Benjamin. 2018. The lexicalist hypothesis: Both wrong and superfluous. Language 94. 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0000.Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511612886Search in Google Scholar

Chowdhery, Aakanksha, et al.. 2022. Palm: Scaling language modeling with pathways. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02311.Search in Google Scholar

Devlin, Jacob, Ming-Wei Chang Kenton Lee & Kristina Toutanova. 2019. BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of NAACL-HLT 2019, 4171–4186. Minneapolis, MN: Association for Computational Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Di Sciullo, Anna Maria & Edwin Williams. 1987. On the definition of word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1989. Prototypical differences between inflection and derivation. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 42. 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-1989-0102.Search in Google Scholar

Erk, Katrin. 2022. The probabilistic turn in semantics and pragmatics. Annual Review of Linguistics 8. 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031120-015515.Search in Google Scholar

Erk, Katrin & Aurélie Herbelot. 2024. How to marry a star: Probabilistic constraints for meaning in context. Journal of Semantics. 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffad016.Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. Frame semanrics. In Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm 3. Selected papers from SICOL-1981, 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin.Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary Catherine O’Connor. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64. 501–538. https://doi.org/10.2307/414531.Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adèle. 2019. Explain me this. Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.2307/j.ctvc772nnSearch in Google Scholar

Halle, Morris & Alex Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2024. Inflection and derivation as traditional comparative concepts. Linguistics 62. 43–77. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2022-0086.Search in Google Scholar

Hathout, Nabil & Fiammetta Namer. 2022. ParaDis: A family and paradigm model. Morphology 32. 153–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-021-09390-w.Search in Google Scholar

Hay, Jennifer B. & R. Harald Baayen. 2005. Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. TRENDS in Cognitive Science 9. 342–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.04.002.Search in Google Scholar

Hockett, Charles F. 1954. Two models of grammatical description. Word 10. 210–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1954.11659524.Search in Google Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. 1984. Towards a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In Deborah Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, form, and use in context: Linguistic applications, 11–42. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1975. Morphological and semantic regularities in the lexicon. Language 51. 639–671. https://doi.org/10.2307/412891.Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1998. The architecture of the language faculty: A neominimalist perspective. In Peter Culicover & Louise McNally (eds.), The limits of syntax, 19–46. New York, NY: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004373167_003Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray & Jenny Audring. 2020. The texture of the lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198827900.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Kruszewski, Mikołai. 1883. Outline of linguistic science. Reprinted in Mikołai Kruszewki (1995). In Writings in general linguisitcs, 37–174. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/acil.11Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Revised 2003. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 2019. Morphology in cognitive grammar. In Jenny Audring & Francesca Masini (eds.), The Oxford handbook of morphological theory, 346–365. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199668984.013.19Search in Google Scholar

Lapata, Maria & Alex Lascarides. 2003. A probabilistic account of logical metonymy. Computational Linguistics 29. 261–315. https://doi.org/10.1162/089120103322145324.Search in Google Scholar

Lieber, Rochelle. 2004. Morphology and lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lieber, Rochelle. 2016. English nouns. The ecology of nominalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781316676288Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Qianchu, Diana McCarthy & Anna Korhonen. 2020. Towards better context-aware lexical semantics: Adjusting contextualized representations through static anchors. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), 4066–4075.10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.333Search in Google Scholar

Loureiro, Daniel, Kiamehr Rezaee, Mohammad Taher Pilehvar & Jose, Camacho-Collados. 2021. Analysis and evaluation of language models for word sense disambiguation. Computational Linguistics 47. 387–443.10.1162/coli_a_00405Search in Google Scholar

van Marle, Jaap. 1984. On the paradigmatic dimension of morphological creativity. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783111558387Search in Google Scholar

Matthews, Peter H. 1972. Inflectional morphology. A theoretical study based on aspects of Latin verb conjugation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

McRae, Ken & Kazunaga Matsuki. 2009. People use their knowledge of common events to understand language, and do so as quickly as possible. Language and Linguistics Compass 3. 1417–1429. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818x.2009.00174.x.Search in Google Scholar

Mikolov, Tomas, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado & Jeffrey, Dean. 2013. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781.Search in Google Scholar

OpenAI, et al.. 2024. GPT-4 technical report. arXiv: 2303.08774 [cs.CL].Search in Google Scholar

Perlmutter, David M. 1988. The split morphology hypothesis: Evidence from Yiddish. In Michael Hammond & Michael Noonan (eds.), Theoretical morphology: Approaches in modern linguistics, 79–100. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004454101_008Search in Google Scholar

Pounder, Amanda. 2000. Process and paradigms in word-formation morphology. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110814378Search in Google Scholar

Robins, Robert H. 1959. In defense of WP. Transactions of the Philological Society 58. 116–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968x.1959.tb00301.x.Search in Google Scholar

Salvadori, Justine & Richard Huyghe. 2023. Affix polyfunctionality in French deverbal nominalizations. Morphology 33. 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-022-09401-4.Search in Google Scholar

Sanford, Anthony J. & Simon C. Garrod. 1998. The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes 26. 159–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539809545043.Search in Google Scholar

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot.Search in Google Scholar

Sennrich, Rico, Barry Haddow & Alexandra Birch. 2015. Neural machine translation of rare words with subword units. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.07909.10.18653/v1/P16-1162Search in Google Scholar

Soler, Aina Garí, Matthieu Labeau & Chloé Clavel. 2024. The impact of word splitting on the semantic content of contextualized word representations. arXiv: 2402.14616 [cs.CL].10.1162/tacl_a_00647Search in Google Scholar

Spencer, Andrew. 2013. Lexical relatedness: A paradigm-based model. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679928.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Štekauer, Pavol. 2005. Meaning predictability in word formation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sfsl.54Search in Google Scholar

Štekauer, Pavol. 2014. Derivational paradigms. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 354–369. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Yeh, Wenchi & Lawrence W. Barsalou. 2006. The situated nature of concepts. The American Journal of Psychology 119. 349–384. https://doi.org/10.2307/20445349.Search in Google Scholar