Word Decomposition in Hebrew as a Semitic Language

  • Joseph Shimron
Part of the Neuropsychology and Cognition book series (NPCO, volume 22)


Most researchers of Semitic morphology refer to the principal characteristic of Semitic morphology as non-linear or non-concatenative. Namely, instead of the morphemes being placed linearly, one after the other before or after the word stem (or base), as prefixes and suffixes, as in English, the morphemic structure of Semitic words is characterized by at least two morphemes interwoven (or interdigitated) within each other in a discontinuous (or non-concatenative) manner. Thus, we have one morpheme, the root, inserted into the other (call it template, pattern or scheme) in certain slots of the word stem structure.


Mental Lexicon Word Stem Source Word Hebrew Word Word Pattern 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bat-El, O. (1994). Stem modification and cluster transfer in Modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Natural Linguistic Theory. 12: 571–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balota, D. A., Flores D’Arcais, Giovanni, B., & Rayner, K. (1990) (Eds.). Comprehension processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Benmamoun, E. (1999). Arabic Mophology: the Central Role of Imperfective. Lingua, 108: 175–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentin, S. (1989). Orthography and phonology in lexical decision: Evidence from repetition effects at different lags. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15. 61–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bentin, S. and Feldman, L.B. (1990). The contribution of morphological and semantic relatedness to the repetition effect at long and short lags: Evidence from Hebrew. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 42A: 693–711.Google Scholar
  6. Berent, I., and Shimron, J. (1997). The representation of Hebrew words: Evidence from the obligatory contour principle. Cognition 64 (1): 39–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berman, R. A. (1987a). Productivity in the lexicon: New-word formation in Modern Hebrew. Folia Lin-guistica 21: 425–461.Google Scholar
  8. Berman, R. A. (1987b). A developmental route: Learning about the form and use of complex nominals. Linguistics 27: 1057–1085.Google Scholar
  9. Berman, R. A. (1997). “Preliterate knowledge of language”. In Writing Development: An Interdisciplinary View, C. Pontecorvo (ed.), 61–76, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  10. Berman, R. A. (1998). “Children’s innovative verbs versus nouns: Structured elicitations and spontaneous coinages.” In Methods in Studying Language Production, L. Menn and N. Bernstein-Ratner (eds.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Bolozky, S. (1978). Word formation strategies in the Hebrew verb system: denominative verbs. Afroasi-atic Linguistics 5.3: 111–135.Google Scholar
  12. Buccellati, G. (1997). In R. Hetzron (Ed.) The Semitic languages. New York: Routledge (69–99).Google Scholar
  13. Clark, E.V. & R. A. Berman, (1984). Structure and use in the acquisition of word-formation. Language 60: 542–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clark, E. V. & R. A. Berman, (1987). Types of linguistic knowledge: Interpreting and producing compound nouns. Journal of Child Language 14: 547–568.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Deutsch, A. & Frost, R. (in press). Lexical organization and lexical access in a non-concatenated morphology: Mapping the mental lexicon.Google Scholar
  16. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., and Forster, K. (1998). Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 24: 1238–1255.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Rayner, K., and Pollatsek, A. (in preparation). Early morphological effects in word recognition in Hebrew: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit effect.Google Scholar
  18. Feldman, L.B. (1992). Morphological relationships revealed through the repetition priming task. In: N. Moonan, P. Downing & S. Lima (eds.), Literacy and linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  19. Feldman, L. B. (1995) (Ed.). Morphological aspects of language processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Erelbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Feldman, L. B. & Bentin, S. (1994). Morphological analysis of disrupted morphemes: Evidence from Hebrew. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Google Scholar
  21. Feldman, L.B., Frost, R., & Pnini, T. 1995. Decomposing words into their constituent morphemes: Evidence from English and Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 21: 947–960.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Feldman, L.B. & Raveh. M. (in press). When degree of semantic similarity influences morphological processing: cross language and cross task comparisons.Google Scholar
  23. Forster, K.J., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frost, R., Forster, K.I., & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew: a masked priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, & Cognition 23: 829–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goldenberg, G. (1994). Principles of Semitic word-structure. In Semitic and Cushitic Studies, G. Golden-berg and S. Raz (eds.), 29–64. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
  26. Goldsmith, J. (1990). Autosegmental & metrical phonology. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  27. Goral, M. & Obier, L.K. (in press). In: Shimron, J. (ed.) Language processing and language acquisition in root-based (Semitic) languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  28. Greenberg, J. (1950). The patterning of root morphemes in Semitic. Word, 6, 162–182.Google Scholar
  29. Heath, J. (1987). Ablaut and Ambiguity: Phonology of a Moroccan Arabic Dialect. Albany NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hoberman, R.D. & Aronoff, M. (in press). The verbal morphology of Maltese: From Semitic to Romance. In: Shimron, J. (ed.) Language processing and language acquisition in root-based (Semitic) languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  31. Junger, J. 1987. Predicate Formation in the Verbal System of Modern Hebrew. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leben, L. (1973). Suprasegmental phonology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press dissertation.Google Scholar
  33. Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101. 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McCarthy, J. (1979). Formal problems in Semitic phonology and morphology.Google Scholar
  35. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Ph. D. dissertation. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club. New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar
  36. McCarthy, J. (1986). OCP effects: Gemination and antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 207–263.Google Scholar
  37. McCarthy, J., 1993. Templatic Form in Prosodie Morphology. Proceedings of FLSM III.Google Scholar
  38. Oman, U. (1959). DikdukHa-pe Ve-ha-ozen (the grammar of the mouth and the ear) Jerusalem: Inbal.Google Scholar
  39. Oman, U. (1971). Binyanim u-bsisim, netiyot u-gzarot (Verbal structures and bases, inflections and derivations) Ha’universita, 15, 2.Google Scholar
  40. Oman, U. 1983. How do we build a new Hebrew word?. In. M. Bar-Asher, A. Dotan, G. B. Sarfatti and D. Tene (eds), Hebrew Language Studies 13–42. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
  41. Oman, U., Machinery for Hebrew word formation, In M. Golumbic (Ed.), Advances in Artificial Intelligence. Springer Verlag, pp. 75–93, 1990.Google Scholar
  42. Owens, J. (1997). The Arabic grammatical tradition. In R. Hetzron (Ed.) The Semitic languages. New York: Routledge (46–58).Google Scholar
  43. Pinker, S. 1999. Words and rules: The ingredients of language. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  44. Ravid, D. (1990). Internal structure constraints on new-word formation devices in modern Hebrew. Folia Linguistica 24: 289–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ravid, D. (1995). Language change in child and adult Hebrew: A psycholinguistic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Ravid, D. & R. Farah. 1999. Learning about noun plurals in early Palestinian Arabic. First Language. 19, 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rose, S. (1998). Triple take: Tigre and the case of internal reduplication. Paper given at the 4th Conference on Afroasiatic Languages, SOAS, London.Google Scholar
  48. Schwarzvald, O. (1973–1974). Roots, bases and the structure of morphemes. Leshonenu, 38,131–136.Google Scholar
  49. Schwarzwald (Rodrigue), O. (1996). Syllable structure, alternations, and verb complexity: Modern Hebrew verb patterns reexamined. In S. Isre’el and S. Raz (Eds.) Israel Oriental Studies, XVI. Studies in Modern Semitic Languages (95–112).Google Scholar
  50. Schwarzwald (Rodrigue), O. (2000). Shoresh ha-po’al ve-zikat ha-shem la-po’al. (The verb’s root and the relation of the noun to the verb). In O. Schwarzwald (Rodrigue), S. Blum-Kulka, and E. Olshtein (Ed.), Sefer Refa’el Nir. Jerusalem: Carmel.Google Scholar
  51. Taft, M. (1991). Reading and the mental lexicon. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  52. Taft, M. & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14. 683–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Taft, M. & Forster, K. I. (1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15. 607–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ussishkin, A. to appear a. The inadequacy of the consonantal root: Modern Hebrew denominal verbs and output-output correspondence. Phonology 16, 3Google Scholar
  55. Ussishkin, A to appear b. Root-and-pattern morphology without roots and patterns. Proceedings of NELS, 30.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations