Movement Operations after Syntax

Abstract

We develop a theory of movement operations that occur after the syntactic derivation, in the PF component, within the framework of Distributed Morphology. The properties of syntactic movement have been studied extensively in linguistic theory, both in terms of locality conditions and in terms of the types of constituents affected (phrases, subparts of phrases, heads). Despite differences in particular analyses or frameworks, the locality conditions on movement operations are a central concern of current research. Here we address movement operations as well, but operations of a different type. In particular, we examine and analyze movement operations that occur after the syntactic derivation, in the PF component, and provide a theory that makes proposals concerning (a) the locality conditions on such movements, (b) the types of constituents they affect, and (c) the position of such operations in the sequential derivation from the output of syntax to phonologically instantiated expressions.From a somewhat abstract perspective, the fact on which we base our study is that not all structures and strings are the result of operations that occur exclusively in the syntactic component of the grammar; this observation stems from a body of prior research investigating the relationship between syntactic structure and phonological form. The observation covers two domains: one dealing with linear sequences that are syntactically opaque, the other with movement operations. In the first domain it has been demonstrated that the internal ordering of clitic clusters cannotWe would like to thank

Morphological alternations at the intonational phrase edge

“…Finally, while the analysis does not settle the question of whether prosodically conditioned morphological alternations should be handled in the OT phonology or in a derivational approach like Distributed Morphology (Halle and Marantz 1993;Embick and Noyer 2001;Embick 2010, inter alia), this work places clear empirical boundaries on what a derivational account would look like. Most importantly, it must associate feature bundles with phonological exponents after parsing the syntax into intonational phrases, supporting a view of the morphological component like that of Ackema and Neeleman (2003).…”

“…The hallmark of late insertion theories of morphology is that the phonological content of morphemes is separated from their featural content, and is then distributed across the syntaxphonology interface (Anderson 1982(Anderson , 1992Embick and Noyer 2001;Halle and Marantz 1993;Hayes 1990, among others). For example, in Distributed Morphology (Halle and Marantz 1993;Embick and Noyer 2001, inter alia), morphological feature bundles get associated with their phonological forms along the PF branch at the point when the operation Vocabulary Insertion applies.…”

“…30 The fact that prosodic information is available to condition morphological alternations in OT approaches to morphophonology does not extend to other theories of morphology. For example, prosody is built late in most strands of Distributed Morphology, as in (Embick and Noyer 2001), whose model is presented in the figure below. The problem with the model in figure 4.3.2 is that vocabulary insertion happens before prosody domains are built.…”

Rethinking Amharic prepositions as case markers inserted at PF

“…Kramer 2009Kramer , 2010 develops an analysis of the definite marker along these lines. She proposes that the definite marker is a realization of the D head itself, and the D head then undergoes the PF operation Local Dislocation to find a host within the nominal phrase (Embick and Noyer 2001). Local Dislocation occurs after Vocabulary Insertion and Linearization, and trades a relationship of adjacency between two M-Words for one of affixation.…”

“…By the expression "full word", we mean a stem together with the affixes and clitics that attach to it, a Morphological Word (M-Word) in the sense of Embick and Noyer 2001. This is a potentially complex head that is not dominated by a further head projection.…”