% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
% %
% File: derivatn.dtr %
% Purpose: English derivational morphology %
% Author: Roger Evans, April 1992 %
% Email: Roger.Evans@itri.bton.ac.uk %
% Address: ITRI, Univ. Brighton, Lewes Road, Brighton BN2 4GJ, UK %
% Related files: german_d.dtr %
% Documentation: Cognitive Science Research Paper CSRP 239, Univ. Sussex %
% Version: 1.03 %
% %
% Copyright (c) University of Sussex 1992. All rights reserved. %
% %
% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
% Roger Evans (1992) "Derivational morphology in DATR" in Lynne Cahill &
% Richard Coates, eds. Sussex Papers in General and Computational Linguistics
% Cognitive Science Research Paper CSRP 239, University of Sussex, 55-69.
%
% This paper presents a DATR analysis of some aspects of
% English derivational morphology, and demonstrate how the
% facilities of the language allow succinct description of
% derivational concepts. The aim is not to present a new
% theory of derivational morphology, but rather to show how
% existing ideas in the field can be expressed in terms of
% DATR's default and inheritance mechanisms. To this end, the
% analysis is based on a single, coherent, but informal
% account of the data, namely Bauer's "English Word-formation"
% (Cambridge University Press, 1983). The account presented
% is a description rather than a representation of
% derivational morphology. This entails that representational
% issues such as productivity and lexicalisation lie outside
% its scope. The implications of this are discussed, and it
% is suggested that such a DATR description offers a well-
% defined basis for a theory of representation which does
% encompass such issues.
% Note that the last line of the definition of CURY in the above paper is
% incorrect - the correct version appears below.
% Abstract category nodes
CATEGORY:
== ""