Cited by 259Natural Language Processing TechniquesPhonetics and Phonology ResearchSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

From phoneme to morpheme

Harris, Zellig S.·1955·Language

Abstract

The following investigation presents a constructional procedure segmenting an utterance in a way which correlates well with word and morpheme boundaries. The procedure requires a large set of utterances, elicited in a certain manner from an informant (or found in a very large corpus); and it requires that all the utterances be written in the same phonemic representation, determined without reference to morphemes. It then investigates a particular distributional relation among the phonemes in the utterances thus collected; and on the basis of this relation among the phonemes, it indicates particular points of segmentation within one utterance at a time. For example, in the utterance /hiyzkwikər/ He's quicker it will indicate segmentation at the points marked by dots: /hiy.z.kwik.ər/; and it will do so purely by comparing this phonemic sequence with the phonemic sequences of other utterances.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/411036

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The transitional probability between two sounds, when tracked across a corpus of utterances, will generally be greatest when the two sounds are within the same word.

    “Returning to the domain of word segmentation, the transitional probability between two sounds, when tracked across a corpus of utterances, will generally be greatest when the two sounds are within the same word.”

    From Statistical learning of tone sequences by human infants and adults (1999) · cites this paper as Harris (1955)

  • When computed across word boundaries, probabilities of sound pairs should generally be lower.

    “When computed across word boundaries, probabilities of sound pairs should generally be lower, reflecting the decreased constraints at boundaries noted by Harris (1955).”

    From Statistical learning of tone sequences by human infants and adults (1999) · cites this paper as Harris (1955)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Harris, Z. S.
Corresponding author
Harris, Zellig S.
Venue
Language
Published
1955-06
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
190-222
ISSN
  • 0097-8507 (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-0665
OpenAlex
W4251556668
Cited by
256
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 8
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Language (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Keywords
utterance segmentation, morpheme boundaries, word boundaries, phonemic representation, phoneme sequences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review