Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Recent psycholinguistic studies have provided evidence that regularly inflected words are decomposed into stems and affixes, both of which have their own representations in the mental lexicon. Specific models of the lexical organization of inflectional affixes have, however, only rarely been investigated in psycho- or neurolinguistic work. We test two recently proposed theoretical models: a representation of affixes (i) in default inheritance trees (Corbett and Fraser, 1993) and (ii) in underspecified paradigms (Wunderlich, 1996). Based on an analysis of agreement errors in elicited speech-production data of German agrammatic aphasics, we argue that affixes are organized with respect to the morphosyntactic features they encode. Specifically, our data indicate that inflectional affixes are best captured within an underspecified paradigm.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/brln.2001.2516 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!