Is There Any Need for the Concept of Directional
      Syncretism?

Wunderlich, Dieter

doi:10.1515/9783110197501.373

Cited by 19 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this is not accomplished by a single minimality condition (like the Nearest Neighbour Principle in Weisser (2007, 26), or the Minimality principle in Lahne (2007, 11)), but by a set of ranked faithfulness constraints for the features involved (as in Grimshaw (2001), Trommer (2001Trommer ( , 2006, Wunderlich (2004)). Sixth and finally, feature decomposition yielding natural classes of instantiations of grammatical categories (e.g., [-obl] capturing nominative and accusative in German) is needed exactly as before.…”

Section: Outline Of the Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this section, I focus on two optimality-theoretic analyses of instances of syncretism that rely on underspecification, viz., Grimshaw's (2001) approach to Italian object clitics, and Wunderlich's (2004) approach to animacy effects with case marking in Russian.…”

Section: Reanalyses Of Underspecification-based Optimality-theoretic mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To ensure that an animacy effect does not show up with the (predominantly) feminine inflection class 2, a high-ranked constraint Max(+hr)/ -pl, a] is adopted which makes it possible that the exponent /-u/ (which is specified for [+hr]) can appear, i.e., that the accusative marker for the second declension can in fact show up in (inanimate) accusative second declension contexts; see (24-a). In addition, Wunderlich's (2004) analysis relies on two high-ranked constraints that capture the specificity and compatibility requirements of the Subset Principle in a fairly straightforward way; see (24-bc).…”

Section: Original Underspecification-based Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For reasons of overall coherence, I will adapt aspects of Wunderlich's (2004) analysis that are of secondary importance in the present context to the current set of assumptions, as I did in the case of Grimshaw (2001). More specifically, I will replace Wunderlich's decomposed case features with the system adopted above; and I will replace his way of encoding inflection class information by listing the (ending of the) nominative forms with a feature-based mechanism as well.…”

Section: Revised Analysis Without Underspecificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 This type of analysis has been pursued by Grimshaw (2001), Wunderlich (2001aWunderlich ( , 2004, Trommer (2001Trommer ( , 2003Trommer ( , 2006, Ortmann (2002), and Don & Blom (2006), among others. These approaches have to a large extent been developed independently, but they all share a common core: The morpho-syntactic features that are associated with morphological exponents can be (and often are) underspecified, which derives syncretism.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Syncretism without underspecification: The role of leading forms

Müller

2011

Word Structure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Outline Of the Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reanalyses Of Underspecification-based Optimality-theoretic mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Original Underspecification-based Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Revised Analysis Without Underspecificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Syncretism without underspecification: The role of leading forms

Müller

2011

Word Structure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Taking the nominative (back) out of the accusative

Christopoulos

Zompì

2022

Nat Lang Linguist Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nominative, the accusative and the dative have been recently argued to stand in proper containment to one another. In contrast to more traditional decompositions which posited no such containment, this new decomposition has been shown to account for the absence of ABA exponence patterns for this triplet of cases, i.e. for the fact that no rule of exponence applies in both nominative and dative without also applying in the accusative. We point out that, in addition to its desirable predictions regarding *ABA, the more recent decomposition also makes an undesirable prediction about the derivation of ABB patterns, as we show based on data from Indo-European languages. We argue that a third theory—under which the accusative is properly contained within the dative, but the nominative and the accusative do not stand in a containment relation to one another—accounts for all the relevant facts.

show abstract

Semantic agreement in Russian: Gender, declension, and morphological ineffability

Privizentseva

2023

Nat Lang Linguist Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I argue that declension classes are not primitives (see Aronoff 1994; Alexiadou 2004; Kramer 2015; i.a.), but are decomposed into simpler features, one of which is gender (Harris 1991; Wiese 2004; Caha 2019). The argument is based on semantic gender agreement in Russian, where a grammatically masculine noun can trigger feminine agreement if its referent is female (Mučnik 1971; Pesetsky 2013). Semantic agreement is grammatical only in those forms where a regular nominal exponent is syncretic with an exponent of a declension class that includes feminine nouns. In other forms, conflicting masculine and feminine gender features lead to ineffability in morphology (cf. Schütze 2003; Asarina 2011; Coon and Keine 2020). Ineffability arises because the Subset Principle (Halle 1997) that holds between features of a vocabulary item and a terminal at the point of Vocabulary Insertion is violated later in the derivation. This is in turn possible if Vocabulary Insertion applying cyclically bottom-up (Bobaljik 2000) is interleaved with Lowering that alters structure below a triggering node (Embick and Noyer 2001). Finally, I show that Russian also has a number of cases where conflicting gender features in a noun phrase do not result in a realization failure (Iomdin 1980). The difference between these patterns is derived in a principled way and follows from the positions where conflicting features are introduced.

show abstract

Is There Any Need for the Concept of Directional Syncretism?

Cited by 19 publications

References 7 publications

Syncretism without underspecification: The role of leading forms

Syncretism without underspecification: The role of leading forms

Taking the nominative (back) out of the accusative

Semantic agreement in Russian: Gender, declension, and morphological ineffability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About