Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/143067
Title:
Reduplication in Distributed Morphology
Author:
Haugen, Jason D.
Affiliation:
Oberlin College
Publisher:
University of Arizona Linguistics Circle
Journal:
Coyote Papers: Working Papers in Linguistics, Linguistic Theory at the University of Arizona
Issue Date:
2011
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/143067
Abstract:
The two extant approaches to reduplication in Distributed Morphology (DM) are: (i) the readjustment approach, where reduplication is claimed to result from a readjustment operation on some stem triggered by a (typically null) affix; and (ii) the affixation approach, where reduplication is claimed to result from the insertion of a special type of Vocabulary Item (i.e. a reduplicative affix–“reduplicant” or “Red”) which gets inserted into a syntactic node in order to discharge some morphosyntactic feature(s), but which receives its own phonological content from some other stem (i.e. its “base”) in the output. This paper argues from phonologically-conditioned allomorphy pertaining to base-dependence, as in the case of durative reduplication in Tawala, that the latter approach best accounts for a necessary distinction between “reduplicants” and “bases” as different types of morphemes which display different phonological effects, including “the emergence of the unmarked” effects, in many languages. I also defend a blended model of DM which incorporates a constraint-based Correspondence Theoretic vision of Phonological Form. In this model the syntax builds morphological structure as per standard DM assumptions, which in turn leads to local and cyclic restrictions on allomorph selection, as argued in Embick (2010). I argue contra Embick (2010), however, that the phonology must be an essential part of the grammar in order to account for surface form-oriented (or “output-centered”) prosodic morphology such as reduplication and mora affixation. In this model, the output of Morphological Structure serves as an input into PF, which I construe as Optimality Theoretic tableaux as in Correspondence Theory, thus accounting for surface-oriented phonological copying effects like base-dependence.
Type:
text; Article
Language:
en_US
ISSN:
0894-4539

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorHaugen, Jason D.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-09-23T20:36:02Z-
dc.date.available2011-09-23T20:36:02Z-
dc.date.issued2011-
dc.identifier.issn0894-4539-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/143067-
dc.description.abstractThe two extant approaches to reduplication in Distributed Morphology (DM) are: (i) the readjustment approach, where reduplication is claimed to result from a readjustment operation on some stem triggered by a (typically null) affix; and (ii) the affixation approach, where reduplication is claimed to result from the insertion of a special type of Vocabulary Item (i.e. a reduplicative affix–“reduplicant” or “Red”) which gets inserted into a syntactic node in order to discharge some morphosyntactic feature(s), but which receives its own phonological content from some other stem (i.e. its “base”) in the output. This paper argues from phonologically-conditioned allomorphy pertaining to base-dependence, as in the case of durative reduplication in Tawala, that the latter approach best accounts for a necessary distinction between “reduplicants” and “bases” as different types of morphemes which display different phonological effects, including “the emergence of the unmarked” effects, in many languages. I also defend a blended model of DM which incorporates a constraint-based Correspondence Theoretic vision of Phonological Form. In this model the syntax builds morphological structure as per standard DM assumptions, which in turn leads to local and cyclic restrictions on allomorph selection, as argued in Embick (2010). I argue contra Embick (2010), however, that the phonology must be an essential part of the grammar in order to account for surface form-oriented (or “output-centered”) prosodic morphology such as reduplication and mora affixation. In this model, the output of Morphological Structure serves as an input into PF, which I construe as Optimality Theoretic tableaux as in Correspondence Theory, thus accounting for surface-oriented phonological copying effects like base-dependence.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Arizona Linguistics Circleen_US
dc.titleReduplication in Distributed Morphologyen_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOberlin Collegeen_US
dc.identifier.journalCoyote Papers: Working Papers in Linguistics, Linguistic Theory at the University of Arizonaen_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.