Defaults in Arapesh

Fraser, Norman; Corbett, Greville G.

doi:10.1016/s0024-3841(97)00012-0

Cited by 78 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In linguistics it has been mainly used as the normal choice, unless explicitly excluded by some special condition, thus very similar to Paul Kiparsky's "elsewhere condition", a notion which goes back, via his Polish teacher Jerzy Kuryłowicz, to the ancient Indian grammarian Panini. However, as Fraser and Corbett (1997) have pointed out, in morphology it is necessary to distinguish such general defaults (normal case defauts) from defaults as a last resort (exceptional case defaults), when no other solution is possible. The general default indicates in quantitative terms a clear and massive contrast between a majority default and marginal remainders.…”

Section: Hay and Baayen 2002) Is Too Simplisticmentioning

confidence: 99%

On inadequacies in transferring concepts from one to another (linguistic sub)discipline

Dressler

2016

Yearbook of the Poznan Linguistic Meeting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper discusses several methodological problems in the necessary (mostly metaphorical) transfer of concepts from one discipline (or subdiscipline) into another one, especially when interdisciplinary research demands mutual understanding in terms of translation and correspondence of concepts. After differentiating between multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity, the first is rejected and it is pleaded that the second and third should be combined. Several adequate and inadequate transfers of concepts into linguistics are dealt with, especially in the areas of morphology and language acquisition. Successful transfer is characterised by the formal transfer of new terms and their easy adaptation to already existing linguistic conceptions, especially between subdisciplines. Most often, further important differentiations of a concept cannot be transferred from the original discipline but must be added as enrichments within linguistics itself. This may lead to a split-up of concepts in different subdisciplines of linguistics. The concepts discussed are regression, self-organization, complexity, transparency vs. opacity, figure and ground, top-down processing, default, input, grammaticalisation.

show abstract

Section: Hay and Baayen 2002) Is Too Simplisticmentioning

confidence: 99%

On inadequacies in transferring concepts from one to another (linguistic sub)discipline

Dressler

2016

Yearbook of the Poznan Linguistic Meeting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, these examples also demonstrate 4 that the CATEGORY and SYNTACTIC POSTION of the target are also important 5 factors in explaining this asymmetry. 6 In this paper, I argue that despite the complexities of the Eleme participant 7 reference system, intra-paradigmatic asymmetry between the distribution of 8 the subject suffixes can be adequately explained in terms of differing 9…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Perhaps the most 5 intriguing of these idiosyncrasies concerns the different positions occupied by 6 suffixes marking second-person and third-person plural subjects in Auxiliary 7 Verb Constructions (AVC) and Serial Verb Constructions (SVC). A typical 8 example of an AVC paradigm in the language finds a second-person plural 9 subject marked by a suffix -i on the lexical verb (1a), while in a comparable 10 construction with a third-person plural subject, the suffix -ri is found on the 11 auxiliary (1b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 There are six independent pronouns that can be assigned different 1 case roles and they are therefore not restricted to functioning as subject 2 pronouns (see Bond 2006a). 6 The full paradigm is given in Dependent person/number forms in Eleme are multitudinous. Discussion here 9…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this paper, where the gender of the participants is irrelevant, 's/he' or 'him/her' will be used in the English translations. 6 Following Siewierska (2004: 17), morphological and prosodic independence are taken to be characteristic properties of independent pronoun. They are typically separate words that may take primary stress (cf.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Intra-paradigmatic variation in Eleme verbal agreement

Bond

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mismatches in the morphosyntactic features of controllers and targets in the Eleme (Ogonoid, Niger-Congo) participant reference system allow for a subject agreement paradigm in which the person of the grammatical subject is indicated by a verbal prefix, while plural number is marked by a suffix on different targets — either lexical verbs or auxiliaries — based on the person value of the controller. I examine the distribution of Eleme ‘Default Subject’ agreement affixes and the intra-paradigmatic asymmetry found between second-person plural and third-person plural subjects in Auxiliary Verb Constructions (AVC) and Serial Verb Constructions (SVC). I argue that the criteria by which the various agreement affixes select an appropriate morphological host can be modelled in terms of agreement prerequisites even when distributional variation is paradigm internal.

show abstract

On the acquisition of inflectional morphology: introduction

Dressler

2012

Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acquisition of inflectional morphology has been investigated for the purpose of delivering external or substantial evidence for theoretical problems of morphology, similarly to other linguistic domains, since Baudouin de Courtenay (1974, posthumously) and Jakobson (1941, 1977). In the last two decades this area has been dominated by controversies between dual-route and single-route models of the acquisition of inflection (cf. Clahsen 1999; Clark 2003, pp. 207-212; Dąbrowska 2008). Radical proponents of dual-route models (e.g. Pinker 1999; Pinker and Ullmann 2002) assume that any regular inflectional form is computed in the grammar by a single rule that productively combines a base with an affix (e.g. English regular weak past tense forms with the affix /d/). In order to produce a regular form for a given category, a language has just one affix (e.g. English gerundive-ing), as is typically the case in agglutinating languages, or it has one default operation (e.g. in the English past tense). All non-default forms, called irregulars, are stored and acquired like any other words of the lexicon. New irregular forms (e.g. E. brung for brought) are formed via analogy to stored forms (e.g. forms like sung). This has been a return to traditional views on regular vs. irregular inflection, whereas in earlier generative grammar there was a tripartition between major rules (regulars), minor rules (subregulars like sing, sang, sung) and truly irregular, stored forms (such as brought, went). This distinction between subregular and irregular morphology can easily explain why many English children produce forms like brung (by overgeneralising not only regular but also subregular patterns), but have never been recorded to overgeneralise truly irregular forms, e.g. by forming past participles *sought, *stought to sing, sting on analogy to bring, brought.

show abstract

Defaults in Arapesh

Cited by 78 publications

References 6 publications

On inadequacies in transferring concepts from one to another (linguistic sub)discipline

On inadequacies in transferring concepts from one to another (linguistic sub)discipline

Intra-paradigmatic variation in Eleme verbal agreement

On the acquisition of inflectional morphology: introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About