Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 23 - Language, culture, and computation:

  • from Part III - Language evolution
  • Edited by Cedric Boeckx, Kleanthes K. Grohmann, University of Cyprus
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Biolinguistics
    Published online:
    05 May 2013
    Print publication:
    14 February 2013, pp 460-477

  • Summary

    This chapter offers a satisfactory account of morphological processing within the overall language system from a neurobiological perspective. It discusses the computational primitives in morphology and their possible brain correlates. The chapter reviews research on the two morphological distinctions that have attracted the most attention in the literature on the neural bases of morphological processing: regular versus irregular morphology and inflection versus derivation. It argues that neither of these two oppositions appears suited to explaining how morphology is organized in the brain. The chapter offers some more positive suggestions regarding the neural representation and processing of morphology. It also argues for the primarily relational role of morphology, which serves to distinguish it from the combinatory nature of syntax, and for the importance of distinguishing between purely formal and interpretively relevant relations in this regard.