Lightest to the Right: An Apparently Anomalous Displacement in Irish

Bennett, Ryan; Elfner, Emily; McCloskey, James

doi:10.1162/ling_a_00209

Cited by 56 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 59 publications

(52 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Scrambling in Japanese is quite different and primarily syntactic in the narrow sense; even there, though, there is a substantial element of phonological movement that cannot be overlooked (Agbayani, Golston & Ishii 2015). And phonological movement has also been reported on the corners of Irish (Bennett, Elfner & McCloskey 2016).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological Movement in Ukrainian

Teliga¹,

Agbayani²,

Golston

2016

AMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extant accounts of scrambling in Ukrainian generally don’t extend past object- and other NP-related processes (Féry et al. 2007, Mykhaylyk 2010). Analysis of Slavic scrambling as XP movement (Corver 1992, Bošković 2005) runs into problems with split constituency, as does OT syntax (Gouskova 2001). Remnant movement (Sekerina 1997, Bašić 2004) runs afoul of Slavic data and theory too (Pereltsvaig 2008, Kariaeva 2009). Analyses that mix syntax with prosody (Antonyuk-Yudina & Mykhaylyk 2013; Mykhaylyk 2012) are more promising but also fail. Ukrainian scrambles only prosodic entities, ignores core principles of syntax, and respects core principles of phonology.The driving force behind the scrambling is not our focus here. It is generally assumed to be pragmatic in nature, based on things like topic, focus, and givenness (e.g., Féry et al. 2007). Fanselow & Lenertová have recently argued against this, however, and claim for most scrambling that ‘accentuation rather than informational status determines which categories can be fronted’ (2012:169); their findings support Chomsky’s (2008) view that information structure does not result in movement. We leave this to future research and focus here on which part of the grammar the movement takes place in. We propose that Ukrainian scrambling is phonological movement of exactly the sort found in Ancient Greek and Latin (Agbayani & Golston 2010, 2016), and similar to the more limited type found in Japanese (Agbayani, Golston & Ishii 2015) and Irish (Bennett, Elfner, & McCloskey 2016).

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological Movement in Ukrainian

Teliga¹,

Agbayani²,

Golston

2016

AMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 We may assume, then, that English single-word DPs do not by default map to ɸs, and that out of the two candidates in (3), the Match-violating structure in (3b) is in fact the winner. To account for this, I assume that the pressure for ɸs to be binary-branching outranks the pressure to map XPs to ɸs-see Ghini (1993); Inkelas & Zec (1995); Selkirk (2000); Elordieta (2007); Itô & Mester (2009a); Elfner (2012); Clemens (2014) and Bennett et al (2015;2016) for discussion of binarity in phrase-level prosody. In OT, we can embody each of these pressures in a constraint: on the one hand there is Match Phrase, which enforces correspondence between XPs and ɸs, and on the other hand there is Binarity(ɸ), which enforces binary-branching ɸs.…”

Section: Indirect Reference Theories Of Syntax-prosody Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simplifying M<small>ATCH</small> W<small>ORD</small>: Evidence from English functional categories

Tyler

2019

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In work on the syntax-prosody interface, there is a prevalent idea that while lexical categories are preferentially mapped to prosodic words, no such pressure exists for functional categories (Selkirk 1984; 1996; 2011; Selkirk & Shen 1990; Truckenbrodt 1999; Elfner 2012). In Match Theory (Selkirk 2011), in which syntax-prosody isomorphism is enforced by a series of violable constraints, this supposed pressure is built into the system with the claim that MATCH WORD in some sense “ignores” functional categories. I argue that this idea is misguided, and that MATCH WORD does not discriminate between lexical and functional heads. The pervasive phonological reduction of function words is instead ascribed to the idiosyncratic prosodic requirements of the function words themselves. In particular, I adopt the model of Prosodic Subcategorization (Inkelas 1989; Zec 2005). This approach explains particular interactions that would be unexpected if MATCH WORD were genuinely indifferent to functional categories, and fits in with a large body of evidence suggesting that functional elements can behave in prosodically idiosyncratic ways (Nespor & Vogel 1986; Inkelas & Zec 1990; Zec 2005). The evidence comes from the behavior of several classes of English functional categories: prepositions, auxiliaries, determiners, weak object pronouns and contracted negation -n’t.

show abstract

“…A number of related optimality-theoretic constraints formulated in terms of the size of prosodic constituents (taking prosodic constituents more deeply embedded to be relatively smaller in size than those higher in the prosodic tree) have been proposed to drive prosodic phrasing choices that appear to mismatch with syntactic constituency. For instance, Myrberg (2013) accounts for variability in the prosodic phrasing of clauses with embedded structures in Stockholm Swedish by showing how a markedness constraint equalsisters (sister nodes in prosodic structure are instantiations of the same prosodic category) might underlie the well-formedness of prosodic phrasing choices that mismatch with syntactic constituency; see also related work in Irish (Elfner, 2012(Elfner, , 2015Bennett et al, 2016).…”

Section: Evidence For Insensitivity Of the Absolutive High To Prosodimentioning

confidence: 99%

(In)variability in the Samoan syntax/prosody interface and consequences for syntactic parsing

Stabler

2017

Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While it has long been clear that prosody should be part of the grammar influencing the action of the syntactic parser, how to bring prosody into computational models of syntactic parsing has remained unclear. The challenge is that prosodic information in the speech signal is the result of the interaction of a multitude of conditioning factors. From this output, how can we factor out the contribution of syntax to conditioning prosodic events? And if we are able to do that factorization and define a production model from the syntactic grammar to a prosodified utterance, how can we then define a comprehension model based on that production model? In this case study of the Samoan morphosyntax-prosody interface, we show how to factor out the influence of syntax on prosody in empirical work and confirm there is invariable morphosyntactic conditioning of high edge tones. Then, we show how this invariability can be precisely characterized and used by a parsing model that factors the various influences of morphosyntax on tonal events. We expect that models of these kinds can be extended to more comprehensive perspectives on Samoan and to languages where the syntax/prosody coupling is more complex.

show abstract

Lightest to the Right: An Apparently Anomalous Displacement in Irish

Cited by 56 publications

References 59 publications

Phonological Movement in Ukrainian

Phonological Movement in Ukrainian

Simplifying M<small>ATCH</small> W<small>ORD</small>: Evidence from English functional categories

(In)variability in the Samoan syntax/prosody interface and consequences for syntactic parsing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About