Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Latest SpecGram: The Morphome Issue

Expand Messages
  • David Peterson
    At the end of this month, there s going to be a workshop in Portugal dedicated entirely to the theoretical notion of the morphome :
    Message 1 of 4 , Oct 1, 2010
      At the end of this month, there's going to be a workshop in Portugal
      dedicated entirely to the theoretical notion of the "morphome":

      http://www.uc.pt/uid/celga/workshop_morphome

      As a tribute, SpecGram decided to devote an entire issue to the
      morphome:

      http://specgram.com/CLX.1/

      The morphome has come up here before, so I thought I'd share.
      (Not because I think this issue will clear anything up. Far, far from
      it, in fact.)

      -David
      *******************************************************************
      "A male love inevivi i'ala'i oku i ue pokulu'ume o heki a."
      "No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

      -Jim Morrison

      http://dedalvs.com/

      LCS Member Since 2007
      http://conlang.org/
    • Peter Bleackley
      ... Morphome appears to mean, a morphological process that I don t understand . Pete
      Message 2 of 4 , Oct 1, 2010
        staving David Peterson:
        > At the end of this month, there's going to be a workshop in Portugal
        > dedicated entirely to the theoretical notion of the "morphome":
        >
        > http://www.uc.pt/uid/celga/workshop_morphome
        >
        > As a tribute, SpecGram decided to devote an entire issue to the
        > morphome:
        >
        > http://specgram.com/CLX.1/
        >
        > The morphome has come up here before, so I thought I'd share.
        > (Not because I think this issue will clear anything up. Far, far from
        > it, in fact.)
        >

        "Morphome" appears to mean, "a morphological process that I don't
        understand".

        Pete
      • Alex Fink
        ... Has it? Man, I read the issue last night after getting Trey s (automated?) announcement, and figured that one of the SpecGram cabal must have invented the
        Message 3 of 4 , Oct 1, 2010
          On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 01:01:49 -0700, David Peterson <dedalvs@...> wrote:

          >At the end of this month, there's going to be a workshop in Portugal
          >dedicated entirely to the theoretical notion of the "morphome":
          >
          >http://www.uc.pt/uid/celga/workshop_morphome
          >
          >As a tribute, SpecGram decided to devote an entire issue to the
          >morphome:
          >
          >http://specgram.com/CLX.1/
          >
          >The morphome has come up here before, so I thought I'd share.
          >(Not because I think this issue will clear anything up. Far, far from
          >it, in fact.)

          Has it? Man, I read the issue last night after getting Trey's (automated?)
          announcement, and figured that one of the SpecGram cabal must have invented
          the morphome for its purposes -- my suspicions were on you, actually.
          Evidently my faith should've been shaken a little bit more by all the
          earnest citations of Aronoff 1994.

          Several very nice things in this issue, anyhow, kudos.

          The earlier thread on the morphome, which I was here for but clearly totally
          forgot, is
          http://archives.conlang.info/ghu/terdhua/tree.html

          I should probably read up on this stuff a little -- I've been realising,
          while musing about plans for my language generators, that I'd need a level
          like (how I understand one version of) the morphome, sitting between the
          generation of the set of categories that a word class inflects for and the
          generation of the morphophonological processes, so that a given "morpheme"
          i.e. system of morphs can be involved in expressing an interesting selection
          of categories. Probably something to do the same for stem shapes, too
          (that's another version of the morphome, isn't it).

          Is there anything in the literature that you'd recommend reading? that's
          insightful, beyond just noting that these phenomena exist (... or trying to
          figure out where to shove them in an extant theoretical apparatus)?

          Alex
        • David Peterson
          ... Anderson, Stephen. 1991. A-morphous Morphology. Cambridge U. Press. Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology By Itself. MIT Press. Blevins, Jim. 2009. Analogy in
          Message 4 of 4 , Oct 1, 2010
            On Oct 1, 2010, at 8◊11 AM, Alex Fink wrote:

            > Is there anything in the literature that you'd recommend reading? that's
            > insightful, beyond just noting that these phenomena exist (... or trying to
            > figure out where to shove them in an extant theoretical apparatus)?


            Anderson, Stephen. 1991. A-morphous Morphology. Cambridge U. Press.
            Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology By Itself. MIT Press.
            Blevins, Jim. 2009. Analogy in Grammar: Form and Acquisition. Oxford.
            Bochner, Harry. 1993. Simplicity in generative grammar. Mouton de Gruyter.
            Stump, Gregory. 2001. Inflectional Morphology: A theory of paradigm structure. Cambridge U. Press.

            Farrell Ackerman and Stump have a new one out called Paradigms and Periphrasis that's probably got the absolute current state of things (at the time being), but I haven't read any of it. (Saw much of Jim Blevins book in a pre-publication form.)

            -David
            *******************************************************************
            "Sunlü eleškarez ügrallerüf üjjixelye ye oxömeyze."
            "No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

            -Jim Morrison

            http://dedalvs.com/

            LCS Member Since 2007
            http://conlang.org/
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.