Haplological dissimilation at distinct stages of exponence

© Editorial matter and organization Jochen Trommer 2012. © The Chapters their several authors 2012. All rights reserved. This chapter considers how the general task of exponence is divided up between the lexicon, morphology, and phonology within the overall architecture of grammar. It argues that dual-route approaches to exponence should be supplemented with a distinction between two types of lexical listing: analytic and nonanalytic. In a stratal architecture, the syndrome of properties characterizing stem-level morphophonology (including lexical exceptions and irregular cyclic effects) is shown to arise from the combination of nonanalytic listing with explicit symbolic generalizations subject to blocking. The chapter further argues for a modular and local approach to morphology-phonology interactions. A programme is proposed consisting of four hypotheses: that morphology selects and concatenates morphs without altering their phonological content; that phonological constraints other than those on alignment may not refer to morphosyntactic information; that output phonological representations do not contain diacritics of morphosyntactic affiliation; and that morphosyntactic conditioning in phonology is subject to cyclic locality.

[1]  Chris Golston,et al.  Syntax outranks phonology: evidence from Ancient Greek , 1995, Phonology.

[2]  Karlos Arregi,et al.  Obliteration vs. impoverishment in the Basque g-/z- constraint , 2007 .

[3]  Jeffrey Heath,et al.  Pragmatic Skewing in 1 ↔ 2 Pronominal Combinations in Native American Languages , 1998, International Journal of American Linguistics.

[4]  Moira Yip,et al.  Repetition and its Avoidance: The Case in Javanese , 1995 .

[5]  M. Yip The obligatory contour principle and phonological rules: a loss of identity , 1988 .

[6]  Dieter Wanner,et al.  On the order of clitics in Italian , 1977 .

[7]  Kenny Smith,et al.  Eliminating unpredictable variation through iterated learning , 2010, Cognition.

[8]  Kevin Russell,et al.  Contrastive Focus Reduplication in English (The Salad-Salad Paper) , 2004 .

[9]  N. Kanwisher Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation , 1987, Cognition.

[10]  M. Grammont La dissimilation consonantique dans les langues indo-européennes et dans les langues romanes , 1895 .

[11]  Milan Rezac,et al.  Phi-features and the Modular Architecture of Language , 2010 .

[12]  Richard S. Kayne The Antisymmetry of Syntax , 1994 .

[13]  Lise Menn,et al.  The Repeated Morph Constraint: Toward an Explanation , 1984 .

[14]  C. Spence,et al.  Spatial modulation of repetition blindness and repetition deafness , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[15]  Andrew Nevins,et al.  Locality in Vowel Harmony , 2010 .

[16]  Zheng Xu,et al.  Optimality Theory and Morphology , 2011, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[17]  Eulàlia Bonet,et al.  Feature structure of Romance clitics , 1995 .

[18]  Elabbas Benmamoun,et al.  Featureless Expressions: When Morphophonological Markers Are Absent , 2006, Linguistic Inquiry.

[19]  I. Plag Morphological haplology in a constraint-based morpho-phonology , 1998 .

[20]  W. Zonneveld Dutch 2nd Singular Prosodic Weakening: Two Rejoinders , 2007, Linguistic Inquiry.

[21]  A. Nevins Marked Targets versus Marked Triggers and Impoverishment of the Dual , 2011, Linguistic Inquiry.

[22]  Omer Preminger,et al.  Breaking Agreements: Distinguishing Agreement and Clitic Doubling by Their Failures , 2009, Linguistic Inquiry.

[23]  Anastasia Karlsson,et al.  The Phonology of Mongolian , 2005 .

[24]  Bonet i Alsina,et al.  Morphology after syntax : pronominal clitics in romance , 1991 .

[25]  David M. Perlmutter Deep and surface structure constraints in syntax , 1973 .

[26]  Eric Raimy,et al.  The phonology and morphology of reduplication , 2000 .

[27]  Larry M. Hyman,et al.  Identity Avoidance in Phonology and Morphology , 1999 .

[28]  P. Ackema Colliding Complementizers in Dutch: Another Syntactic OCP Effect , 2001, Linguistic Inquiry.

[29]  Norvin Richards,et al.  A Distinctness Condition on Linearization , 2006 .

[30]  Birgit Gerlach,et al.  Clitics between Syntax and Lexicon , 2002 .

[31]  Hubert Truckenbrodt,et al.  On the Relation between Syntactic Phrases and Phonological Phrases , 1999, Linguistic Inquiry.

[32]  Mary Ann Walter,et al.  Repetition Avoidance in Human Language , 2007 .

[33]  Elena Anagnostopoulou,et al.  Observations about the form and meaning of the Perfect , 2003 .

[34]  Andrew Nevins,et al.  Metalinguistic, Shmetalinguistic: The Phonology of Shmreduplication , 2003 .

[35]  A. Nevins,et al.  Linearization of Nested and Overlapping Precedence in Multiple Reduplication , 2004 .

[36]  Ad Neeleman,et al.  Context-Sensitive Spell-Out , 2003 .

[37]  Diego Pescarini Elsewhere in Romance: Evidence from Clitic Clusters , 2010, Linguistic Inquiry.

[38]  Rolf Noyer,et al.  Movement Operations after Syntax , 2001, Linguistic Inquiry.

[39]  Howard Lasnik,et al.  The Who/Whom Puzzle: On The Preservation Of An Archaic Feature , 2000 .

[40]  A. Nevins The representation of third person and its consequences for person-case effects , 2007 .