Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton July 9, 2019

Constraining long-distance allomorphy

  • Jurij Božič EMAIL logo
From the journal The Linguistic Review

Abstract

This paper presents a cross-linguistic survey of non-local allomorphy and it develops a formal model that accounts for the observed patterns. The distance between the trigger and target of allomorphy in non-local patterns is much more conservative than expected. A model of Vocabulary Insertion is developed, where the limited distance follows from the basic linear computational properties of the PF-interface.

6 Appendix: Survey Data

6.1 Cases of Non-Local Suppletion

(22)

GREEK: Voice0-Asp0-triggered suppletion in v (Merchant 2015)[17]

tro(Ɣ)---o
eatactimpf1p.sg
troƔ---omun
eatnon-actimpf1p.sg
---o
eatactprf1p.sg
-ik-a
eatnon-actprf1p.sg
(23)

SLOVENIAN (South Slavic): Ptc0-triggered suppletion in v (Božič 2016)[18]

a.
žanj-e--m
reapasppres2p.sg
b.
-e-l-a
reapaspptcf.sg

(24)

TAMIL (Dravidian): K0-triggered suppletion of D0 in pronoun (Moskal and Smith 2016, 306)

a.
naan-gal-
1p.pronplnom
b.
-gal-ukku
1p.pronpldat
(25)

TOTONAC (Totozoquean): person-triggered[19] suppletion in v (Brown et al. 2003)

a.
maː-ná-
lieimpf1p.pl
b.
-nán-tit
lieimpf2p.pl
c.
ta-máː-na
3p.pllieimpf
(26)

LAK (NE Caucasian): K0-triggered suppletion in n (Radkevich 2014), (Moskal 2015, 35)

a.
barz-ru-
moonplnom
b.
-dald-il
moonplerg
(27)

TARIANA(Arawakan): num-triggered supp. in a (Brown et al. 2003), (Aikhenvald 2003, 173)

a.
hanu-pua-
bigclasssg
b.
-pua-pe
bigclasspl
(28)

KET (Yeniseian): T0-triggered suppletion in v (Brown et al. 2003), (Werner 1997, 284)[20]

a.
ku--Ɣu-tus’
2p.subjpres.tns2p.objintend
b.
-il’-gu-
2p.subjpast.tns2p.objintend
(29)

BASQUE: cmpr0-triggered suppletion in a (Bobaljik 2012, 156–158)[21]

a.
asko
much
b.
-ago
muchcmpr
c.
-xe-ago
muchdimcmpr
(30)

GEORGIAN (Kartvelian): K0-triggered supp. of D0 (Hewitt 1995)

a.
ege-eb-i
3p.pronplnom
b.
-t-it
3p.pronplinst

6.2 Cases of Non-Local Affixal Allomorphy

(31)

BULGARIAN (South Slavic): T0imprf-thm-triggered allomorphy ((Scatton 1984, 223–228))

a.
krad---ɛ
stealthmcl1imperf.tns2p.sg
b.
kradj-a-x-tɛ
stealthmcl1imperf.tns2p.pl
(32)

KIOWA (Tanoan): v0trns/intrns-triggered allomorphy of Mod0 (Bonet and Harbour 2012, 231) See example (16) in section 4.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the following people who provided valuable comments on the research that led to this paper: Lisa deMena Travis, Jessica Coon, Daniel Harbour, Chris Bruno, Nico Baier, Victor Acedo-Matellán, Andrew Nevins, Jason Merchant, Itamar Kastner, Jason Ostrove, and especially two anonymous reviewers for the Linguistic Review. Any errors are my own.

References

Aikhenvald, A. Y. 2003. A grammar of Tariana, from northwest Amazonia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107050952Search in Google Scholar

Allen, M. 1979. Morphological investigations. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.Search in Google Scholar

Arregi, K. & A. Nevins. 2012. Morphotactics: Basque auxiliaries and the structure of spellout. Studies in natrual language and linguistic theory 86. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-3889-8Search in Google Scholar

Bobaljik, J. 2000. The ins and outs of contextual allomorphy. In K. K. Grohman & C. Struijke (eds.), University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 35–71. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.Search in Google Scholar

Bobaljik, J. 2012. Universals in comparative morphology: Suppletion, superlatives and the structure of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9069.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Bobaljik, J. & H. Harley. 2017. Suppletion is local: Evidence from Hiaki. In H. Newell, M. Noonan, G. Piggott, & L. Travis (eds.), The Structure of Words at the Interfaces, 141–159. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198778264.003.0007Search in Google Scholar

Bobaljik, J. & S. Wurmbrand. 2002. Notes on Itelmen agreement. Linguistic Discovery 1(1). 1–27.10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.21Search in Google Scholar

Bonet, E. & D. Harbour. 2012. Contextual allomorphy. In J. Trommer (ed.), The morphology and phonology of exponence, 195–235. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573721.003.0007Search in Google Scholar

Božič, J. 2016. Locality of exponence in distributed morphology: Root suppletion in Slovenian. In C. Hammerly & B. Prickett (eds.), North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 46, 137–146. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Search in Google Scholar

Božič, J. 2017. Non-local allomorphy in a strictly local system. MS. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/-003469. accessed 16 February 2018).(Search in Google Scholar

Božič, J. 2018. Generalizations on root suppletion: Motivating a theory of contextual allomorphy. In W. G. Bennett, L. Hracs, & D. R. Storoshenko (eds.), Proceedings of the 35th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 114–123. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, D., M. Chumakina, G. G. Corbett, & A. Hippisley. 2003. Surrey suppletion database. University of Surrey. http://dx.doi.org/10.15126/smg.12/1. accessed 23 May 2017).(Search in Google Scholar

Brown, J. 2017. Non-adjacent reduplication requires spell-out in parallel. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, Published online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11049-017-9367-y.10.1007/s11049-017-9367-ySearch in Google Scholar

Bybee, J. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/tsl.9Search in Google Scholar

Caha, P. 2009. The nanosyntax of case. PhD thesis, University of Tromsø, Tromsø.Search in Google Scholar

Carstairs-McCarthy, A. 1992. Current morphology. London and New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: minimalist essays in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2001. Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale. A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads – A crosslinguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Embick, D. 2010. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262014229.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Halle, M., & A. Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Harley, H. 2014. On the identity of roots. Theoretical Linguistics 40(3-4). 225–276.10.1515/tl-2014-0010Search in Google Scholar

Harley, H. & E. Ritter. 2002. Person and number pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78(3). 482–526.10.1353/lan.2002.0158Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, M. 2016. Number suppletion vs. case suppletion: Does “locality” provide an explanation? Diversity Linguistics Comment (blog). http://dlc.hypotheses.org/902 accessed 23 May 2017).(Search in Google Scholar

Hewitt, B. G. 1995. Georgian: A structural reference grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/loall.2Search in Google Scholar

Keine, S. 2010. Case and agreement from Fringe to core: A minimalist approach. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110234404Search in Google Scholar

Kim, J., S. Pinker, A. Prince, & S. Prasada. 1991. Why no mere mortal has even flown out to center field. Cognitive Science 15(2). 173–218.10.1207/s15516709cog1502_1Search in Google Scholar

McCloskey, J. 1996. The scope of verb movement in Iirish. Linguistic Inquiry 14(1). 47–104.10.1007/BF00133403Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, J. 2015. How much context is enough? Two cases of span-conditioned stem allomorphy. Linguistic Inquiry 46(2). 273–303.10.1162/LING_a_00182Search in Google Scholar

Moskal, B. 2015. Domains on the border: Between morphology and phonology. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.Search in Google Scholar

Moskal, B. & P. W. Smith. 2016. Towards a theory without adjacency: Hyper-contextual VI-rules. Morphology 26. 295–312.10.1007/s11525-015-9275-ySearch in Google Scholar

Nevins, A. 2007. The representation of third person and its consequences for person-case effects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25(2). 273–313.10.1007/s11049-006-9017-2Search in Google Scholar

Nevins, A. 2010. Locality in vowel Harmony. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262140973.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Ostrove, J. (2016a). A case of non-linearly conditioned contextual allomorphy in Scottish Gaelic. MS, UCSC. https://people.ucsc.edu/jostrove/nlccasg_take1.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Ostrove, J. (2016b). Portmanteaux and locality in the Irish verbal complex. Handout from LSA 2016, 7th January. Washington DC. https://people.ucsc.edu/ jostrove/lsa2016.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Ostrove, J. 2017. Root suppletion in the context of morphological case in Scottish Gaelic. Paper presented at Roots V. 18th June. Queen Mary University of London. https://people.ucsc.edu/jostrove/qe.pdf. accessed 16 February 2018).(Search in Google Scholar

Pinker, S. & A. Prince. 1988. On language and connectionism. Cognition 28(1-2). 73–193.10.1016/0010-0277(88)90032-7Search in Google Scholar

Radkevich, N. 2014. Nominal allomorphy in Lak. Poster presented at NELS 45. 31 October – 2 November. MIT, Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar

Rezač, M. 2004. Elements of cylic syntax: Agree and merge. PhD thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.Search in Google Scholar

Scatton, E. A. 1984. A reference grammar of modern Bulgarian. Columbus, OH: Slavica Publishers, Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Siddiqi, D. 2009. Syntax within the word: Economy, allomorphy and argument seletion in distributed morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.138Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, D. 1978. The adjacency constraint and the theory of morphology. In Stein, M. (ed.), Northeast Linguistic Society (NELS) 8, 189–197. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Search in Google Scholar

Simpson, J. & M. Withgott. 1986. Pronominal clitic clusters and templates. In Borer, H. (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Volume 19: The Syntax of Pronominal Clitics, 149–74. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Stump, G. 1996. Template morphology and inflectional morphology. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1996, 217–241. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-017-3718-0_12Search in Google Scholar

Thornton, A. 2018. Plural verbs, participant number, and agree. In W. G. Bennett, L. Hracs, & D. R. Storoshenko (eds.), West coast conference on formal linguistics 35. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Search in Google Scholar

Trommer, J. 1999. Morphology consuming syntax’s resources: Generation and parsing in a minimalist version of distributed morphology. MS. Universität Potsdam, Potsdam.Search in Google Scholar

Vajda, E. J. 2003. Ket verb structure in typological perspective. Sprachtypol. Univ. Forsch. (STUF), 56(1/2). 55–92.10.1524/stuf.2003.56.12.55Search in Google Scholar

Watkins, L. J. 1984. A grammar of Kiowa. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Search in Google Scholar

Werner, H. 1997. Die ketische Sprache. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-07-09
Published in Print: 2019-09-25

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 26.4.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/tlr-2019-2031/html
Scroll to top button