Syntax as an exponent of morphological features

Sadler, Louisa; Spencer, Andrew

doi:10.1007/978-94-017-3724-1_4

Cited by 92 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A technical solution which makes this consistent with the assumptions of pfm is available by taking the Number Block to be obligatory (in the normal way), associating the (morphological) Num:Sing feature with the ifd and then permitting the morphology-syntax interface to interpret morphological Sing as ambiguous between singular and non-singular interpretations. This is possible once the morphological features are disassociated from the syntactically or semantically relevant features (as for example, in Sadler and Spencer's (2001) distinction between m-features and s-features, or Ackerman and Stump's (2004) distinction between morphological paradigms and content paradigms). This disassociation would allow us to maintain the notion that Number is obligatory in the morphological paradigm space, but is associated with a nontrivial (i.e.…”

Section: Interactions With Numbermentioning

confidence: 99%

Case stacking in realizational morphology

Sadler¹,

Nordlinger²

2006

Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Case stacking, the phenomenon whereby a single word may bear multiple cases reflecting its relation to a number of different syntactic elements, is an important phenomenon both for the development of theories of inflectional morphology and for our understanding of the relation between morphology and syntax. However, to date it has received virtually no attention from theoretical morphology. Working within the inferentialrealizational framework of paradigm function morphology (pfm), we provide a morphological analysis of the phenomenon of case stacking as found in the Australian Aboriginal languages Kayardild (Tangkic) and Martuthunira (Pama-Nyungan). We argue that the standard assumptions concerning morphological property sets in pfm are too weak to satisfactorily accommodate case stacking morphology, and we propose that (in some languages) the morphological property sets which define paradigm cells are structured rather than the simple objects of the standard view. We show how this provides a comprehensive analysis of the complex case and number stacking facts and further, allows for a straightforward (although non-trivial) mapping between the morphology and the syntax as outlined in Sadler and Nordlinger (2004).

show abstract

Section: Interactions With Numbermentioning

confidence: 99%

Case stacking in realizational morphology

Sadler¹,

Nordlinger²

2006

Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recently, Ackerman, Stump and Webelhuth (2011) proposed, particularly in the lexicalist approach to periphrasis in morphology and syntax, that a morphological perspective on periphrasis in the inflectional domain could be developed, or even extended to the derivational domain. The same trail could be established in the works of a number of researchers such as Börjars et al (1997), Spencer (2001); Sadler & Spencer (2001) and Stump (2001Stump ( , 2002.…”

Section: Inflectional Vs Periphrastic Stucturesmentioning

confidence: 84%

A Study of Gender-Conditioned Use of Inflectional and Periphrastic Forms in English Adjective Comparison

Grofulovic

Jovanović

2017

FU Ling Lit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(11) The behaviours the periphrastic negative, polite, past expression exhibits clearly indicates that the copula and the preceding verb(s) constitute a single clausal unit. Moreover, the deviation from regular compositional patterns can be attributed to 'constructional' nature of this periphrastic exponents (Sadler and Spencer 2001, Ackerman and Stump 2004, Booij 2010, Ackerman et al 2011. Thus, the grammar must be able to utilise this type of construction only when a certain set of morphosyntactic features are realised.…”

Section: Constructional Exponentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructional Paradigm in Constraint-based Morphosyntax: A Case of Japanese Verb Inflection

Otoguro¹

2012

BLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionIt is a well-known fact that tense, aspect and mood/modality (TAM) are encoded in morphosyntactically diverse ways across languages. Some languages realise them purely by verb inflectional morphology, while others express them periphrastically by a verb and auxiliary/copula complex. Since Japanese is one of the languages that exhibit a combination of those two strategies in rather complicated manners, it poses a serious challenge to any grammatical theory as to how lexical verbs, auxiliaries, copulas, particles and inflectional suffixes are located in morphosyntactic structures, and how they are related to TAM functions in relevant components of the grammar. In the frameworks that place syntactic derivation in the central component of the grammar such as Minimalist Program and its variant, particularly in the recent development of syntactic structure above the proposition level (Rizzi 1997, Cinque 1999, it is assumed that mood suffixes head Fin(ite) or Mood projection and modal expressions and sentence final particles head Mod(al) or Force projection above T(ense) and Asp(ect) (Hasegawa 2009, Endo 2007. Lexicalist frameworks, on the other hand, maintain the division between word-internal and word-external structures. TAM realisation below V 0 -level, therefore, are operated

show abstract

Syntax as an exponent of morphological features

Cited by 92 publications

References 8 publications

Case stacking in realizational morphology

Case stacking in realizational morphology

A Study of Gender-Conditioned Use of Inflectional and Periphrastic Forms in English Adjective Comparison

Constructional Paradigm in Constraint-based Morphosyntax: A Case of Japanese Verb Inflection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About