A rigorous definition of 'suppletion' is proposed, based on prototypical cases and the following pivotal idea of the current notion: two linguistic signs are in relation of suppletion if the semantic difference between them is maximally regular (i.e., it is grammatical inflectional or derivational) while their formal difference is maximally irregular (i.e., it is not covered by any alternation). The paper offers a concise survey of major types of suppletion: derivational vs. inflectional suppletion; radical vs. affixal suppletion; suppletion of morphs vs. of megamorphs vs. of idioms; a few dozen examples are quoted. After an analysis of five difficult cases, suppletion is considered along the diachronic axis. As a conclusion, a related concept is introduced and delineated with respect to suppletion: pseudo-suppletion.
2019. Inflectional Suppletion and Heteroclite Inflection from a Diachronic Perspective. Transactions of the Philological Society 117:3 ► pp. 372 ff.
Juge, Matthew L.
2019. The Sense That Suppletion Makes: Towards a Semantic Typology on Diachronic Principles. Transactions of the Philological Society 117:3 ► pp. 390 ff.
Plank, Frans & Nigel Vincent
2019. Suppletion: Questions for History and Theory. Transactions of the Philological Society 117:3 ► pp. 319 ff.
Pomino, Natascha & Eva‐Maria Remberger
2019. Verbal Suppletion in Romance Synchrony and Diachrony: The Perspective of Distributed Morphology. Transactions of the Philological Society 117:3 ► pp. 471 ff.
Smith, Peter W., Beata Moskal, Ting Xu, Jungmin Kang & Jonathan David Bobaljik
2019. Case and number suppletion in pronouns. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37:3 ► pp. 1029 ff.
Moskal, Beata
2018. Excluding exclusively the exclusive: Suppletion patterns in clusivity. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3:1
Ripamonti, Fabio
2018. Normatività e trasgressione nella distribuzione paradigmatica del suppletivismo verbale romanzo. Études romanes de Brno :1 ► pp. 79 ff.
Beck, David
2017. The Typology of Morphological Processes: Form and Function. In The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Typology, ► pp. 325 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.