On the Relation Between Morphology And Syntax

Julien, Marit

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199247455.013.0008

Cited by 43 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both analyses postulate a parallel underlying structure for diminutives and numeral-classifier constructions; the former (but not the latter) require an additional movement step. The theoretical difference is that for Wiltschko, this movement is head movement, while I argue (following Julien 2002Julien , 2007) that word-formation in this case results from movement to Spec (as in (24c) above). 26 Recall now that for Wiltschko, movement of the nominalized root to the light noun is possible only if the latter is affixal (i.e., in the case of diminutive formation): since her account is based on the stipulation that only one light noun can combine with the head noun, movement is not predicted to be possible in combination with a numeral classifier.…”

Section: Holzmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Notice that, as indicated by 'X * ', (53) rules out any movement that takes place within the same XP, no matter how many bar-levels intervene. As a reviewer correctly points out, this constraint rules out many of the derivations proposed in Julien (2002Julien ( , 2007 and Svenonius (2007). In and of itself, this fact does not of course render the current account incompatible with their basic assumptions, as outlined in Section 3.1 above.…”

Section: Bisschen and Anti-localitymentioning

confidence: 94%

“…The general framework assumed here is developed in Julien (2002Julien ( , 2003Julien ( , 2007 (see also Svenonius 2007). Roughly, this approach assumes that morphology entirely dissolves into syntax, going in some ways beyond the basic assumptions of "classical" Distributed Morphology Marantz 1993, 1994;Marantz 1997); see Julien (2002) for discussion.…”

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…See Julien (2002Julien ( , 2007 and Svenonius (2007) for general discussion and further illustrations of this movement-based analysis of morphology. I will now show that Svenonius's decomposition of the noun phrase can be fruitfully employed in the analysis of German diminutives.…”

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Diminutive-formation in German

Ott

2011

J Comp German Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In German, mass nouns can be turned into count nouns by means of two alternative strategies: either by using them in connection with a numeral classifier, or by adding the diminutive morpheme (-chen). In this paper, I argue that the two strategies are structurally exactly parallel, with both kinds of elements (numeral classifiers and diminutive -chen) being exponents of an individuating functional head. The (superficial) difference is that -chenwhich I show is a clitic-like element-triggers obligatory movement of the nominalized root to its Spec. By contrast, this movement is optional with a (non-deficient) numeral classifier, yielding both 'analytic' and 'compound' forms. The picture that emerges from the discussion is a unified analysis of count structures in German.

show abstract

Section: Holzmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Bisschen and Anti-localitymentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Diminutive-formation in German

Ott

2011

J Comp German Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the one side, there have been studies that derived, rather than postulated as a distinctive property, the range of phenomena where 'words' seem to behave differently from phrases (for instance, Baker 1988;Marantz 1997Marantz , 2000Huang 2010). On the other side, there are studies that denied that the notion of word as a syntactic atom makes the right empirical predictions (eg., Lieber 1992; Hale & Keyser 1993Julien 2000Julien , 2007Artstein 2005). Morphology cannot be defined, thus, on a notion that has been disputed to that extreme.…”

Section: Morphological Variationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphological variation in Spanish

Fábregas

Gallego

2014

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. In this article, we examine the current situation of studies that concentrate on the study of morphological variation in Spanish. We start discussing the place of morphology in current linguistic theory, and what its different aspects are, a question that is previous to the identification of the relevant phenomena. §2 provides an overview of the situation of variationist studies in Spanish, and §3 presents the main morphological variation phenomena. §4 introduces in the picture the different approaches to variation that are currently discussed in the relevant literature. We close with an overview of the articles included in this volume.Highlights:• The study of morphological variation is complicated by the difficulty of finding an autonomous definition of morphology • Morphological variation phenomena frequently are visible at the mapping between syntax and phonology or syntax and semantics • Spanish exhibits a wide range of variation phenomena that affect, in one sense or the other, the morphological expression of units • Both macro-and micro-parametric approaches have been proposed in order to capture morphological variation Morphological variationIn order to explain what 'morphological variation' means, it is necessary first to define what is understood by 'morphology' and 'variation'. This proves not to be an easy task, as the many different approaches show, both with respect to morphology (cf. Halle 1973;Siegel 1974;Aronoff 1976Aronoff , 1994Bauer 1978;Booij 1977; Lieber 1980Lieber , 1992Lieber , 2004Lapointe 1980;Selkirk 1982; Scalise 1983;Anderson 1992;Halle & Marantz 1993, Marantz 1995, to cite only some of the most influential works) and variation (cf. Baker 1996, 2001, Belletti & Rizzi 1996, Biberauer 2008, Biberauer et al. 2010, Borer 1984, Chomsky 1981, Kayne 2000, Newmeyer 2004, Roberts & Holmberg 2005, keeping things to a few relevant works).Let's start with morphology. Traditional definitions were based on the assumption that words and phrases are ontologically different objects: morphology was the science that studied the issues that had to do with words (including their grammatical properties, their phonology and their semantics), while syntax studied the same range of issues but in word combinations, that is, phrases. However, relatively recent 1 We are grateful to Víctor Acedo and Peter Svenonius for comments and feedback. Antonio Fábregas' research is financed by projects PICS 6422 (Deverbative) and FFI2013-41509-P (Information and argument structure). Ángel J. Gallego

show abstract

Introduction

Dékány

2021

Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the Relation Between Morphology And Syntax

Cited by 43 publications

References 22 publications

Diminutive-formation in German

Diminutive-formation in German

Morphological variation in Spanish

Introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About