How to be positive

Wyngaerd, Guido Vanden; Starke, Michal; Clercq, Karen De; Caha, Pavel

doi:10.5334/gjgl.1114

Cited by 14 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2019, Wiland 2019, Vanden Wyngaerd et al. 2020, Blix 2021a). The algorithm governs the process of spellout.…”

Section: Spelloutmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The final piece of the Nanosyntactic spellout technology that I will be using is the spellout algorithm (76) (Starke 2018, see also Caha et al 2019, Wiland 2019, Vanden Wyngaerd et al 2020, Blix 2021a). The algorithm governs the process of spellout.…”

Section: Kekmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unlike the structure of the obliques, there is no pied-piping of number by the noun, and we therefore have a portmanteau. 29 ... t 29 The fact that we sometimes get pied-piping of number (in (133)) and sometimes not (in (135)) can be explained by the so-called backtracking (Starke 2018, Vanden Wyngaerd et al 2020, Kloudov a 2020. The spellout-movement algorithm leads to a derivation where the nominative (135) is produced first; however, when an accusative feature added to the tree, spellout fails and we must go back to CLP, which gets then pied-piped across PL.…”

Section: (132)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The pronunciation of these structures takes place only after syntax. As for the specific implementation, I adopt the Nanosyntax model of spellout (Starke 2009, Vanden Wyngaerd et al 2020, although as far as I can see, an account within Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz 1993) can also be formulated.…”

Section: Spelloutmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Marking of Mass, Count and Plural Denotations in Multi‐dimensional Paradigms*

Caha

2021

Studia Linguistica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the morphology of nouns in pseudo‐partitive constructions, noun‐numeral constructions and plurals. The data discussed reveal a *ABA pattern that restricts syncretism among these categories. Specifically, in the sequence pseudo‐partitive, counting form and plural, only adjacent forms can be syncretic. I argue that the constraint can be derived from a particular morphosyntactic structure, where, following Borer (2005), mass nouns have the smallest structure, count nouns (found after numerals) are derived by dividing the mass into units, and plural is derived by restricting the count denotation to pluralities. The article further investigates how the relevant forms interact with case marking, and suggests that the forms should be organized into a two‐dimensional paradigm space where syncretic forms occupy contiguous regions.

show abstract

“…2019, Wiland 2019, Vanden Wyngaerd et al. 2020, Blix 2021a). The algorithm governs the process of spellout.…”

Section: Spelloutmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Kekmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: (132)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spelloutmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Marking of Mass, Count and Plural Denotations in Multi‐dimensional Paradigms*

Caha

2021

Studia Linguistica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first thing to notice in the table is the different contributions of the suffix -CIk. Previous research only mentions the endearment and diminutive meanings of the suffix (Sebüktekin 1984, Sezer 1981, Taylan 2015, Zimmer 1970 apart from Göksel & Kerslake (2005) mentioning the emphatic nature of the suffix. This gap has led to an over-generalization that calls for "kü.çü.cük to be analyzed as the diminutive of kü."çük.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tackling the Augmentative Puzzle in Turkish

Türk

2020

PTU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with the suffix -cIk in Turkish, and argues that the suffix -cIk has an augmentative meaning, as well as a diminutive meaning which has been mentioned in the literature extensively. The different meanings of the suffix -cIk are due to two different structures that I propose. While the structure of the diminutive is made of one single morpheme -cIk, that of the augmentative suffix is composed of two morphemes: -cI and -k. I offer phonotactic and morphological evidence that shows -k has its own life. I also show strict categorical selection properties for the diminutive and augmentative suffix: The augmentative one can only be attached to adjectival bases that express negative orderings. The diminutive -cIk, on the other hand, attaches to nouns. I capture this contrast using the nanosyntax model of spellout.

show abstract

Degree Morphology

De Clercq,

Caha,

Starke

et al. 2023

The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This entry provides a chronological overview of the treatment of degree morphology in the generative literature from the 1970s until today. Starting out from Ultan's four basic degrees of comparison, it initially widens the scope to consider other types of degree morphology. It then homes in on the expression of the positive, comparative and superlative degrees, and the way these are related to one another. It is shown how the functional superstructure of the adjective became increasingly fine‐grained, with the earliest proposals involving a partitive layer (QP) with a degree determiner ( deg ) on top of the lexical adjectival core. It is then shown how deg is split up into a comparative head cmpr and a superlative head sprl in the work of Bobaljik, which is based on attested and unattested patterns in root suppletion in the triplet positive–comparative–superlative. Nanosyntactic treatments are discussed, which decompose Bobaljik's heads even further, on the basis of evidence from Czech comparatives and Latin superlatives. Finally, the particular position of the positive degree is discussed, in particular its relation to the comparative, both with respect to their morphological marking and their underlying structural and semantic relationship.

show abstract

How to be positive

Cited by 14 publications

References 25 publications

The Marking of Mass, Count and Plural Denotations in Multi‐dimensional Paradigms*

The Marking of Mass, Count and Plural Denotations in Multi‐dimensional Paradigms*

Tackling the Augmentative Puzzle in Turkish

Degree Morphology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About