
Knowledge of language, its structure and grammar are an essential part of our education and daily activities. Despite the importance of language in our lives, linguistic theories that explain how the language system operates are often disconnected from our knowledge of the brain’s neurocognitive mechanisms underpinning the linguistic function. This is reflected, for example, in the inclusion of abstract and often controversial elements into theories of language. Here, we discuss the case of the so-callednull constituentand its smallest and the most controversial variant – thezero morpheme, a hypothetical morphosyntactic device that has no overt physical (phonological or orthographic) expression. Focusing on the putative inflectional zero morpheme, we discuss the theoretical origins and pitfalls of this approach and advocate the important role for neurobiological research that could try to elucidate the neurocognitive reality of such constructs in linguistic communication.
universal grammar, Psychology, linguistic theories, null constituent, zero morpheme, inflectional zeroes, BF1-990
universal grammar, Psychology, linguistic theories, null constituent, zero morpheme, inflectional zeroes, BF1-990
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
