1 Paradigms and Periphrastic Expression : A Study in Realization-based

Our intention in this paper is to develop an explanatory account of the special characteristics of periphrastic expressions by refining the traditional notion of PARADIGM employed within inferential-realizational approaches to morphology (Anderson 1992, Aronoff 1994, Zwicky 1990, Stump 1993, 2001). Our proposal draws on this notion in order to develop a substantive reconceptualization of the form and function of the lexicon in constraint-based theories of syntax. In particular, we argue that the paradigms defined by a language's morphology sometimes include periphrastic combinations (PERIPHRASES). As we show, this conclusion affords a simple resolution of a number of neglected problems which periphrases pose for theories of syntax; it also necessitates a radical rethinking of the relation between the form and content of syntactic structures. The proposals developed here are intended to be relatively neutral with respect to the choice among alternative lexicalist theories of syntax (including Lexical Functional Grammar, Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, and Construction Grammar); for concreteness, however, we articulate the details of our claims in the terminology of LFG .

[1]  M. Aronoff.  Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes , 1993 .

[2]  Pirkko Suihkonen,et al.  The Uralic languages , 2002 .

[3]  J. Bresnan,et al.  The lexical integrity principle: Evidence from Bantu , 1995 .

[4]  Gert Webelhuth,et al.  A theory of predicates , 1997 .

[5]  Yunheng Ji.  MORPHOLOGY , 1937, A Grammar of Italian Sign Language (LIS).

[6]  Louisa Sadler,et al.  Syntax as an exponent of morphological features , 2001 .

[7]  Denis Sinor,et al.  The Uralic languages : description, history and foreign influences , 1988 .

[8]  Peter Sells,et al.  Syntactic Information and Its Morphological Expression , 2004 .

[9]  C. O. Orgun,et al.  Sign-based morphology and phonology with special attention to optimality theory , 1996 .

[10]  A. Zwicky,et al.  Inflectional morphology as a (sub)component of grammar , 1990 .

[11]  Robert E. Beard,et al.  Lexeme-morpheme base morphology , 1995 .

[12]  Arnold M. Zwicky,et al.  How to Describe Inflection , 1985 .

[13]  Y. Falk.  The English Auxiliary System: A Lexical-Functional Analysis , 1984 .

[14]  Gregory Stump,et al.  On Rules of Referral , 1993 .

[15]  Farrell Ackerman,et al.  Miscreant Morphemes: Phrasal Predicates in Ugric , 1987 .

[16]  P. Suihkonen,et al.  Udmurt-English-Finnish dictionary : with a basic grammar of Udmurt , 1997 .

[17]  Susanne Z. Riehemann,et al.  Type-based derivational morphology , 1998 .

[18]  Nigel Vincent,et al.  Paradigms, periphrases and pronominal inflection: a feature-based account , 1997 .

[19]  P. Matthews.  Inflectional Morphology: A Theoretical Study Based on Aspects of Latin Verb Conjugation , 1972 .

[20]  Joseph H. Greenberg,et al.  Language Universals: With Special Reference to Feature Hierarchies , 1966 .

[21]  Stephen R. Anderson,et al.  On some issues in morphological exponence , 2001 .

[22]  W. U. Wurzel,et al.  On Morphological Naturalness , 1984, Nordic Journal of Linguistics.

[23]  Gregory Stump,et al.  Morphological and syntactic paradigms: Arguments for a theory of paradigm linkage , 2002 .