1.

“The lexicon lists, in principle, all the lexical items of the language and
associates with each the syntactic, semantic and phonological information
required for the correct operation of the (phrase-structure) rules” (Lyons
1970: 125).

2. “(…) the lexicon specifies the abstract morphological structure of each

lexical item and its syntactic features, including its categorial features and
its contextual features” (Chomsky 1988: 5).

3. “words are understood as stimuli that operate directly on mental states.

The phonological, syntactic and semantic properties of a word are
revealed by the effects it has on those states” (Elman 2004: 301)

4. “(…) word forms are cues to activate stored information as needed and as
determined by the specifics of the internal neurocognitive and external
physical and social contexts. There is no principal distinction between
information cued by word-in-context that is constitutive of meaning versus
merely associated with it” (Casasanto y Lupyan 2015).

5. “The lexicon may be considered in close functional linkage with the other
sensory cognitive contents. Given its respectable size and phonological
nature, one would expect to find the lexicon stored and recorded in a
sizable neuronal network and in some predictable relation to other
cognitive systems” (Martin 1982: 65).

6. “(…) the store of our knowledge related to words. We will assume here the
current view o the mental lexicon as the important relay station connecting
certain specific sensory or motor (output) patterns with mentally
represented knowledge structures” (Schreuder / Flores d’Arcais 1989:
409).

7. “The mental lexicon is your mental dictionary, that vast compendium of

information about words and their relationships that you carry about in your
head (…). Like the dictionary on your bookshelf, it too is organized along
principles which reflect the phonological, orthographic, and semantic
characteristics that words share. But in searching through the mental
lexicon as we attempt to place a word, we note that the process of word
recognition is sensitive to other characteristics as well, characteristics like
word frequency and the effects of context” (Kess 1992: 80-81).

8. “Sticking with a strict modular definition, then, the lexicon contains all and
only information that is: (a) arbitrary (i.e., not derivable from other
information) and (b) necessary for linguistic competence. (…). An
alternative is to consider lexical information as a subtype of conceptual
information. But there are reasons to believe that lexical forms are not
represented as parts of (non-lexical) concepts. (…). Thus, knowledge of
words is a different type of knowledge than knowledge of things. These
 two types of knowledge interact in the processes of language production
and comprehension” (Murphy 2003: 14)

9. “The mental lexicon is the cognitive system that constitues the capacity for
conscius and unconscius lexical activity” (Jarema / Libben 2007: 2).

Referencias:

Casasanto, Daniel y Lupyan, Gary (2015): “All concepts are ad hoc”, Eric
Margolis y Stephen Laurence (eds.), The Conceptual Mind: New directions
in the Study of Concepts, Cambrigde MA: MIT Press, pp. 543-566.
Chomsky, Noam (1988): Language and problems of knowledge, Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Elman, Jeffrey L. (2004): “An alternative view of the mental lexicon”, Trends in
Cognitive Sciences, 8, 7, pp. 310-306.
Jarema, Gonia y Libben, Gary (eds.) (2007): Mental Lexicon: Core Perspectives,
Leiden, NDL: Elsevier Science and Technology.
Kess, Joseph F. (1992): Psycholinguistics: Psychology, Linguistics and the Study
of Natural Language, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lyons, John (1970): New Horizons in Linguistics, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Martin, Oscar S. M. (1982): “Brain and Language; The Rules of the Game”,
Michael Arbib, David Caplan y John C. Marshall (eds.), Neural models of
language processes, London: Academic Press, pp. 45-69.
Murphy, M. Lynne (2003): Semantic Relations and the Lexicon, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Schreuder, Robert y Flores d’Arcais, Giovanni (1989): “Psycholinguistics issues
in the lexical representation of meaning”, William Marslen-Wilson (ed.),
Lexical representation and process, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.