From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Thu Sep 5 15:41:27 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 09:41:27 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpoe: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis Message-ID: Dear Listers, Greenberg identifies the universal tendency for obligatory Number morphology to be in complementary distribution with Numeral Quantifier systems. English and Japanese are examples good examples of the contrasting systems. One therefore expects that if NQs are analogous to Number, as Greenberg's generalization seems to suggest, NQs are phenomena associated with functional heads. Number however, is able to be characterized in binary features, but not NQs. Far from it, there seem to be approximately 27 different classifiers (which suffix to the numeral) in current usage in modern Japanese. Additionally, these classifiers are closely identified with semantic properties of the Nouns they are used with, e.g., '-mai' is used for flat objects, pieces of paper, dishes, towels, etc. '-hon' is for thinnish, elongated objects such as pencils, trees, cucumbers. In traditional approaches to morphology, one would assign each Noun to a Noun Class, based on the NQ, and enumerate the 27 or so classes. Has anyone been working on NQs in Japanese or other languages within the DM-framework? Anyone have an intuition or a conviction about how to deal with the idea? Thanks,---Mark __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Thu Sep 5 22:57:34 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:57:34 -0600 Subject: Heidi Harley: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Mark Volpe) Message-ID: Hi all -- I did have a guess about NQs and NumP, that I haven't pursued but I thought I'd throw it out for musing: seems to me that num and NQs might be instantiations of the head that nominalizes roots -- the nominal equivalent of vP, in other words, nP. Here's the kind of thoughts I've had about it: as I work along I find that, with regard to v, I more and more think that, while sometimes the root which gets stuck onto v comes from the phrase that is v's complement (as in H&K denominal verbs, e.g.), other times the root that shows up in v is a Manner element that just gloms in there for free, to realize the v head itself (as in e.g. resultative constructions, way-constructions, etc.) In Persian, I have recently discovered (duh!) there are essentially no verbs as we normally think of them, but rather just about 80-100 'light' verbs that combine with non-verbal elements to make real verbs. Seems like we can really 'see' the light-verb structure there. But nonetheless I still feel strongly that there aren't 80-100 UG-provided "v" heads, per se; rather, there's just 2, 3, or at most, 4 (configurationally defined). The Persian light verbs are just the few Manner elements that get to show up in v in Persian. Along the same lines, then, classifier systems are just systems where there is hardly any incorporation into n. The classifiers that you see are like the persian light verbs, drawn from a medium-size class of 'manner' elements that can realize n. Semantically the analogy seems pretty good, I think; I'm not sure how the syntax works out, but it does seem clear that we need some candidates for 'n', cross-lingusitically, and classifier systems look to me like a good bet. In any case, I don't think that it's a problem that we can't do a nice feature-based analysis of Persian light verbs, nor do I think it's a problem for classifiers, if the guess turns out to the right. I do think v and n do have just a few 'real' values ([+/-change], [+/-external], if you want to do v in terms of features, which I'm not crazy about); and similarly n could have 'Num' -style features. But the fact that both v and n have multiple overt realizations of each set of possible feature values, I think, is just something we're going to have to grit our teeth and accept. Or maybe there really is a set of UG-provided light verbs (and classifiers). Who knows? keep me posted, :) hh --------------------------------------------------------------------- Heidi Harley Department of Linguistics Douglass 200E University of Arizona Tucson, AZ 85721 Ph: (520) 626-3554 Fax: (520) 626-9014 hharley at u.arizona.edu From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 15:06:19 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:06:19 -0600 Subject: Dan Everett: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Heidi Harley) Message-ID: The posting by Heidi is extremely interesting. The question of light verbs she raises arises in other frameworks as the question of lexical vs. morphological verbs. I hadn't realized that Persian is like this. From what Heidi describes, the only languages I was previously aware of like this were languages of New Guinea (see especially Kalam, in particular as it is described in Andrew Pawley's fascinating work) and the Amazon, e.g. Piraha (which I have not written up well yet, though there is a mention of this property in my sketch of Piraha in the Handbook of Amazonian Languages, vol. 1). Piraha has at most 80-100 verb roots, like Kalam, yet these do not correspond to basic kinds of predicates that I have seen in any theory of lexical semantics. As Pawley points out for Kalam, there are cultural templates of possible events and event structures and the verb roots (this is true for Piraha as well, I believe) can combine to form new verbs just in case they fit the possible event template made available by Kalam/Piraha culture. Here is a place where I would argue that culture, not the mind per se, impinges directly on verbal morphology in a fascinating way, though how it might be formalized in a tree structure may or may not turn out to be interesting. On number, there are languages (Piraha for sure, others probably) that lack number altogether, yet have quantifiers based on individuated vs. non-individuated (what one might otherwise have called 'count' vs. 'mass' distinctions) quantities. Peter Gordon, my wife, and I carried out experiments among the Piraha and Peter wrote this all up ("Numerical cognition without words: evidence from Amazonia for strong determinism". I am not of the reference here. The email information I have to get the full citation is: bmf2003 at columbia.edu.) Best, Dan ......................... Dan Everett Professor of Phonetics and Phonology Department of Linguistics Arts Building University of Manchester Oxford Road M13 9PL Manchester, UK dan.everett at man.ac.uk From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 15:06:48 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:06:48 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Heidi Harley) Message-ID: Dear Listers, I think in light of the Japanese facts, Heidi's analogy between light verbs and Numeral Classifiers is very compelling. There is widespread agreement that Japanese NCs are nominals or at least nominal-like. NCs, rather than their complement NPs, can be marked for case by postpositions in certain configurations. They can be scrambled much as Japanese Ns are. Like light verbs without VP complements, they can even stand alone without complement NPs when reference is pragmatically clear, doing the service of PNs. In terms of syntax, the analogy places them right where I think they should be, that is; to the right of the NP they agree with (in base position), though not everyone is in agreement on this. I think Hisatsugu Kitahara's article (1993), in which he postulates a Numeral Classifier Phrase in between NP and DP, has it just about right; this is right where Heidi's nP would be. Other than appealing to the venerable Panini and his principles, is there no alternate way of assuring agreement between Ns and NCs? The number of classifiers (say 25 in Japanese, many more in old Japanese and perhaps in more exotic languages) just make this somehow not to my liking. Thanks,---Mark __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 15:08:05 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:08:05 -0600 Subject: Sze-Wing Tang: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Mark Volpe) Message-ID: Dear all, A related question I have in mind: Does anyone talk about 'phases' in nominals? If NumP is regarded as the nominal equivalent of vP, would it be a phase then? Just curious. Sze-Wing Tang _____________________________________ Department of Chinese and Bilingual Studies The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Hung Hom, Kowloon Hong Kong http://www.swtang.net/ From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 20:03:05 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:03:05 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Dan Everett) Message-ID: Hi again, Interesting message from Dan. I agree that morphology and culture interact as I think can be demonstrated by the following data from Turkish. Turkish has 2 interesting suffixes. The first changes nouns into "professional doers" associated with the noun, suffixation of an additional morpheme denotes the field in which the doer is involved. 1) gazete ('newspaper') - gazete-ci (journalist) - gazete-ci-lik ('journalism'). 2) banka ('bank') - banka-ci ('banker') - banka-ci-lik ('banking, i.e., the business'). Now here is where culture seems to interact with the perfectly productive morphological process. 3) kitap ('book') - kitapi-ci - kitap-ci-lik. One might expect that the derivations mean 'writer' and 'literature', respectively, but in fact they mean 'bookseller' and 'the book business', respectively. Beard (1981) has also discussed a suffix in Serbo- Croatian which when applied to animals indicates the most culturally relevant part of the animal, so that 'elephant' suffixed would mean 'tusk', 'fox' might mean 'fur', 'pig' - 'meat', or something to this effect. Getting back to Heidi's anology between light verbs and NCs. I can really see this. In the languages such as Persian, mentioned by Heidi, and Piraha, mentioned by Dan, where the are 80 and upwards light verbs, just as in NC systems where the numbers are large, one might say that vs and ns come in different "flavors", but in the end their effect is very limited, 2 or so light verbs, singular or plural NCs. Dare I to extend the analogy, all food, no matter what the flavor, results in digestion. Mark __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Tue Sep 10 15:08:03 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:08:03 -0600 Subject: Azita Abbassi: binding Message-ID: Dear all Does anybody know if any research has been done on the Binding Theory below word level ( of course besides Lieber)? Thank you, Azita Abbassi From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Tue Sep 10 15:23:49 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:23:49 -0600 Subject: Martha McGinnis: binding (reply to Azita Abbassi) Message-ID: In Chapter 7 of _The Polysynthesis Parameter_, Mark Baker argues that incorporated nominals in Mohawk are subject to standard Condition C effects. Reinhart and Reuland's 1993 paper "Reflexivity" takes a rather different approach to binding theory, but argues that inherently reflexive verbs have the same binding-theoretic analysis as certain combinations of a verb and a reflexive object. >Dear all > >Does anybody know if any research has been done on the Binding Theory >below word level ( of course besides Lieber)? > >Thank you, >Azita Abbassi From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Tue Sep 10 16:06:33 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 10:06:33 -0600 Subject: Dan Everett: binding (reply to Azita Abbassi) Message-ID: Of course, there is also all the work on Postal's Anaphoric Islands paper (1969), especially the interesting paper in Language a few years back by Ward, Sproat, and someone else (prominent no doubt, I am just not remembering who) in which binding into and out of words is discussed. -- DLE ......................... Dan Everett Professor of Phonetics and Phonology Department of Linguistics Arts Building University of Manchester Oxford Road M13 9PL Manchester, UK dan.everett at man.ac.uk -----Original Message----- From: The Distributed Morphology List [mailto:DM-LIST at listserv.linguistlist.org] On Behalf Of Martha McGinnis Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:08 PM To: DM-LIST at listserv.linguistlist.org Subject: Azita Abbassi: binding Dear all Does anybody know if any research has been done on the Binding Theory below word level ( of course besides Lieber)? Thank you, Azita Abbassi From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 23 21:41:12 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:41:12 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: Unaccusatives and special meaning (reply to Heidi Harley) Message-ID: Hi Listers, This is a very belated response, but, I think like many others, I just assumed that Inchoatives were embedded under Lexical Causatives. I think Heidi has been able to tease out a valid explanation for that assumption. The reason I raise this now is that I've recently been looking at Reduced Causatives (RC) and their interaction with unaccusatives. Notice that in non-agentive RCs the principle exponent is identical to that of the passive, e.g., 'I had my car stolen' and 'My car was stolen'. I'm trying to tease out whether unaccusatives embedded under RC are in fact unaccusatives or passives or perhaps both, e.g., 'I had the suitcase opened on me'. With a by-marked Agent it's unambiguously passive, but is it ever unaccusative? Any thoughts? A perhaps interesting theoretical aspect is that some unaccusatives ae formed by passive morphology, e.g., Turkish, which also has only RCs. RCs seem to despise passive morphology and Turkish unaccusatives formed with passives must eliminate the passive morpheme to appear in RC. The same question about interpretation as posed above arises; passive or unaccusative? You can see similar behaviour in English when the extended exponence of passive is embedded, e.g., *'I had my suitcase be opened.' RCs don't like it! Mark __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 30 14:53:50 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 08:53:50 -0600 Subject: copies of papers Message-ID: Dear DM-List, I am Alexandra Galani (The University of York). I am trying to get hold of a copy of the following papers (since June): TI: Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and Fission AU: Halle,-Morris PB: 425-49 IN Bruening-Benjamin (ed. and preface); Kang-Yoonjung (ed. and preface); McGinnis-Martha (ed. and preface). PF: Papers at the Interface. Cambridge, MA : Department of Linguistics, MIT, 1997. iv, 479 pp. (OR ALTERNATIVELY IN) TI: Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and Fission; Papers from the Third Conference on Afroasiatic Languages, Sophia Antipolis, France, 1996 AU: Halle,-Morris PB: 125-49 IN Lecarme-Jacqueline (ed.); Lowenstamm-Jean (ed.); Shlonsky-Ur (ed.). Research in Afroasiatic Grammar. Amsterdam, Netherlands : Benjamins, 2000. vi, 386 pp. TI: No Escape from Syntax: Don't Try Morphological Analysis in the Privacy of Your Own Lexicon AU: Marantz,-Alec SO: University-of-Pennsylvania-Working-Papers-in-Linguistics (UPWPL) Philadelphia, PA. 1997; 4(2): 201-25 Marantz, Alec (1992). What kind of pieces are inflectional morphemes? I was wondering if someone could send one to me? Many thanks! Alexandra From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 30 15:09:44 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:09:44 -0600 Subject: Martha McGinnis: copies of papers (reply to Alexandra Galani) Message-ID: Dear Alexandra, The first two papers are in working papers volumes that can be ordered online: Halle paper: MITWPL - http://web.mit.edu/mitwpl/ Marantz paper: PWPL - http://ling.upenn.edu/papers/pwpl.html If you've already looked up these options and had difficulties, please let the list know. I'm not sure what the other Marantz reference is ("What kind of pieces are inflectional morphemes?") -- maybe a handout from a talk? If so, it's not one I have. If anyone would like to send Alexandra the papers directly, her address is . Best regards, Martha -- _____________________________________________ Dr. Martha McGinnis, Assistant Professor Linguistics Department, University of Calgary 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary AB T2N 1N4 phone: (403) 220-6119 fax: (403) 282-3880 http://www.ling.ucalgary.ca/~mcginnis/ _____________________________________________ From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 30 15:24:41 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:24:41 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: copies of papers (reply to Alexandra Galani) Message-ID: Hi listers, I don't know if this will work, but here's an attachment of "No Escape from Syntax". If it doesn't work, I think it's available on the DM home page. Mark [Moderator's Note: the attachment did not come through, but Mark is right: a PostScript version of Marantz's paper is available on Rolf Noyer's DM Bibliography page: http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~rnoyer/dm/bib.html.] From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Thu Sep 5 15:41:27 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 09:41:27 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpoe: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis Message-ID: Dear Listers, Greenberg identifies the universal tendency for obligatory Number morphology to be in complementary distribution with Numeral Quantifier systems. English and Japanese are examples good examples of the contrasting systems. One therefore expects that if NQs are analogous to Number, as Greenberg's generalization seems to suggest, NQs are phenomena associated with functional heads. Number however, is able to be characterized in binary features, but not NQs. Far from it, there seem to be approximately 27 different classifiers (which suffix to the numeral) in current usage in modern Japanese. Additionally, these classifiers are closely identified with semantic properties of the Nouns they are used with, e.g., '-mai' is used for flat objects, pieces of paper, dishes, towels, etc. '-hon' is for thinnish, elongated objects such as pencils, trees, cucumbers. In traditional approaches to morphology, one would assign each Noun to a Noun Class, based on the NQ, and enumerate the 27 or so classes. Has anyone been working on NQs in Japanese or other languages within the DM-framework? Anyone have an intuition or a conviction about how to deal with the idea? Thanks,---Mark __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Thu Sep 5 22:57:34 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:57:34 -0600 Subject: Heidi Harley: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Mark Volpe) Message-ID: Hi all -- I did have a guess about NQs and NumP, that I haven't pursued but I thought I'd throw it out for musing: seems to me that num and NQs might be instantiations of the head that nominalizes roots -- the nominal equivalent of vP, in other words, nP. Here's the kind of thoughts I've had about it: as I work along I find that, with regard to v, I more and more think that, while sometimes the root which gets stuck onto v comes from the phrase that is v's complement (as in H&K denominal verbs, e.g.), other times the root that shows up in v is a Manner element that just gloms in there for free, to realize the v head itself (as in e.g. resultative constructions, way-constructions, etc.) In Persian, I have recently discovered (duh!) there are essentially no verbs as we normally think of them, but rather just about 80-100 'light' verbs that combine with non-verbal elements to make real verbs. Seems like we can really 'see' the light-verb structure there. But nonetheless I still feel strongly that there aren't 80-100 UG-provided "v" heads, per se; rather, there's just 2, 3, or at most, 4 (configurationally defined). The Persian light verbs are just the few Manner elements that get to show up in v in Persian. Along the same lines, then, classifier systems are just systems where there is hardly any incorporation into n. The classifiers that you see are like the persian light verbs, drawn from a medium-size class of 'manner' elements that can realize n. Semantically the analogy seems pretty good, I think; I'm not sure how the syntax works out, but it does seem clear that we need some candidates for 'n', cross-lingusitically, and classifier systems look to me like a good bet. In any case, I don't think that it's a problem that we can't do a nice feature-based analysis of Persian light verbs, nor do I think it's a problem for classifiers, if the guess turns out to the right. I do think v and n do have just a few 'real' values ([+/-change], [+/-external], if you want to do v in terms of features, which I'm not crazy about); and similarly n could have 'Num' -style features. But the fact that both v and n have multiple overt realizations of each set of possible feature values, I think, is just something we're going to have to grit our teeth and accept. Or maybe there really is a set of UG-provided light verbs (and classifiers). Who knows? keep me posted, :) hh --------------------------------------------------------------------- Heidi Harley Department of Linguistics Douglass 200E University of Arizona Tucson, AZ 85721 Ph: (520) 626-3554 Fax: (520) 626-9014 hharley at u.arizona.edu From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 15:06:19 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:06:19 -0600 Subject: Dan Everett: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Heidi Harley) Message-ID: The posting by Heidi is extremely interesting. The question of light verbs she raises arises in other frameworks as the question of lexical vs. morphological verbs. I hadn't realized that Persian is like this. From what Heidi describes, the only languages I was previously aware of like this were languages of New Guinea (see especially Kalam, in particular as it is described in Andrew Pawley's fascinating work) and the Amazon, e.g. Piraha (which I have not written up well yet, though there is a mention of this property in my sketch of Piraha in the Handbook of Amazonian Languages, vol. 1). Piraha has at most 80-100 verb roots, like Kalam, yet these do not correspond to basic kinds of predicates that I have seen in any theory of lexical semantics. As Pawley points out for Kalam, there are cultural templates of possible events and event structures and the verb roots (this is true for Piraha as well, I believe) can combine to form new verbs just in case they fit the possible event template made available by Kalam/Piraha culture. Here is a place where I would argue that culture, not the mind per se, impinges directly on verbal morphology in a fascinating way, though how it might be formalized in a tree structure may or may not turn out to be interesting. On number, there are languages (Piraha for sure, others probably) that lack number altogether, yet have quantifiers based on individuated vs. non-individuated (what one might otherwise have called 'count' vs. 'mass' distinctions) quantities. Peter Gordon, my wife, and I carried out experiments among the Piraha and Peter wrote this all up ("Numerical cognition without words: evidence from Amazonia for strong determinism". I am not of the reference here. The email information I have to get the full citation is: bmf2003 at columbia.edu.) Best, Dan ......................... Dan Everett Professor of Phonetics and Phonology Department of Linguistics Arts Building University of Manchester Oxford Road M13 9PL Manchester, UK dan.everett at man.ac.uk From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 15:06:48 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:06:48 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Heidi Harley) Message-ID: Dear Listers, I think in light of the Japanese facts, Heidi's analogy between light verbs and Numeral Classifiers is very compelling. There is widespread agreement that Japanese NCs are nominals or at least nominal-like. NCs, rather than their complement NPs, can be marked for case by postpositions in certain configurations. They can be scrambled much as Japanese Ns are. Like light verbs without VP complements, they can even stand alone without complement NPs when reference is pragmatically clear, doing the service of PNs. In terms of syntax, the analogy places them right where I think they should be, that is; to the right of the NP they agree with (in base position), though not everyone is in agreement on this. I think Hisatsugu Kitahara's article (1993), in which he postulates a Numeral Classifier Phrase in between NP and DP, has it just about right; this is right where Heidi's nP would be. Other than appealing to the venerable Panini and his principles, is there no alternate way of assuring agreement between Ns and NCs? The number of classifiers (say 25 in Japanese, many more in old Japanese and perhaps in more exotic languages) just make this somehow not to my liking. Thanks,---Mark __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 15:08:05 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:08:05 -0600 Subject: Sze-Wing Tang: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Mark Volpe) Message-ID: Dear all, A related question I have in mind: Does anyone talk about 'phases' in nominals? If NumP is regarded as the nominal equivalent of vP, would it be a phase then? Just curious. Sze-Wing Tang _____________________________________ Department of Chinese and Bilingual Studies The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Hung Hom, Kowloon Hong Kong http://www.swtang.net/ From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Fri Sep 6 20:03:05 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:03:05 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: Numeral Quantifiers in the l-node hypothesis (reply to Dan Everett) Message-ID: Hi again, Interesting message from Dan. I agree that morphology and culture interact as I think can be demonstrated by the following data from Turkish. Turkish has 2 interesting suffixes. The first changes nouns into "professional doers" associated with the noun, suffixation of an additional morpheme denotes the field in which the doer is involved. 1) gazete ('newspaper') - gazete-ci (journalist) - gazete-ci-lik ('journalism'). 2) banka ('bank') - banka-ci ('banker') - banka-ci-lik ('banking, i.e., the business'). Now here is where culture seems to interact with the perfectly productive morphological process. 3) kitap ('book') - kitapi-ci - kitap-ci-lik. One might expect that the derivations mean 'writer' and 'literature', respectively, but in fact they mean 'bookseller' and 'the book business', respectively. Beard (1981) has also discussed a suffix in Serbo- Croatian which when applied to animals indicates the most culturally relevant part of the animal, so that 'elephant' suffixed would mean 'tusk', 'fox' might mean 'fur', 'pig' - 'meat', or something to this effect. Getting back to Heidi's anology between light verbs and NCs. I can really see this. In the languages such as Persian, mentioned by Heidi, and Piraha, mentioned by Dan, where the are 80 and upwards light verbs, just as in NC systems where the numbers are large, one might say that vs and ns come in different "flavors", but in the end their effect is very limited, 2 or so light verbs, singular or plural NCs. Dare I to extend the analogy, all food, no matter what the flavor, results in digestion. Mark __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Tue Sep 10 15:08:03 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:08:03 -0600 Subject: Azita Abbassi: binding Message-ID: Dear all Does anybody know if any research has been done on the Binding Theory below word level ( of course besides Lieber)? Thank you, Azita Abbassi From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Tue Sep 10 15:23:49 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:23:49 -0600 Subject: Martha McGinnis: binding (reply to Azita Abbassi) Message-ID: In Chapter 7 of _The Polysynthesis Parameter_, Mark Baker argues that incorporated nominals in Mohawk are subject to standard Condition C effects. Reinhart and Reuland's 1993 paper "Reflexivity" takes a rather different approach to binding theory, but argues that inherently reflexive verbs have the same binding-theoretic analysis as certain combinations of a verb and a reflexive object. >Dear all > >Does anybody know if any research has been done on the Binding Theory >below word level ( of course besides Lieber)? > >Thank you, >Azita Abbassi From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Tue Sep 10 16:06:33 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 10:06:33 -0600 Subject: Dan Everett: binding (reply to Azita Abbassi) Message-ID: Of course, there is also all the work on Postal's Anaphoric Islands paper (1969), especially the interesting paper in Language a few years back by Ward, Sproat, and someone else (prominent no doubt, I am just not remembering who) in which binding into and out of words is discussed. -- DLE ......................... Dan Everett Professor of Phonetics and Phonology Department of Linguistics Arts Building University of Manchester Oxford Road M13 9PL Manchester, UK dan.everett at man.ac.uk -----Original Message----- From: The Distributed Morphology List [mailto:DM-LIST at listserv.linguistlist.org] On Behalf Of Martha McGinnis Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:08 PM To: DM-LIST at listserv.linguistlist.org Subject: Azita Abbassi: binding Dear all Does anybody know if any research has been done on the Binding Theory below word level ( of course besides Lieber)? Thank you, Azita Abbassi From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 23 21:41:12 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:41:12 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: Unaccusatives and special meaning (reply to Heidi Harley) Message-ID: Hi Listers, This is a very belated response, but, I think like many others, I just assumed that Inchoatives were embedded under Lexical Causatives. I think Heidi has been able to tease out a valid explanation for that assumption. The reason I raise this now is that I've recently been looking at Reduced Causatives (RC) and their interaction with unaccusatives. Notice that in non-agentive RCs the principle exponent is identical to that of the passive, e.g., 'I had my car stolen' and 'My car was stolen'. I'm trying to tease out whether unaccusatives embedded under RC are in fact unaccusatives or passives or perhaps both, e.g., 'I had the suitcase opened on me'. With a by-marked Agent it's unambiguously passive, but is it ever unaccusative? Any thoughts? A perhaps interesting theoretical aspect is that some unaccusatives ae formed by passive morphology, e.g., Turkish, which also has only RCs. RCs seem to despise passive morphology and Turkish unaccusatives formed with passives must eliminate the passive morpheme to appear in RC. The same question about interpretation as posed above arises; passive or unaccusative? You can see similar behaviour in English when the extended exponence of passive is embedded, e.g., *'I had my suitcase be opened.' RCs don't like it! Mark __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 30 14:53:50 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 08:53:50 -0600 Subject: copies of papers Message-ID: Dear DM-List, I am Alexandra Galani (The University of York). I am trying to get hold of a copy of the following papers (since June): TI: Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and Fission AU: Halle,-Morris PB: 425-49 IN Bruening-Benjamin (ed. and preface); Kang-Yoonjung (ed. and preface); McGinnis-Martha (ed. and preface). PF: Papers at the Interface. Cambridge, MA : Department of Linguistics, MIT, 1997. iv, 479 pp. (OR ALTERNATIVELY IN) TI: Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and Fission; Papers from the Third Conference on Afroasiatic Languages, Sophia Antipolis, France, 1996 AU: Halle,-Morris PB: 125-49 IN Lecarme-Jacqueline (ed.); Lowenstamm-Jean (ed.); Shlonsky-Ur (ed.). Research in Afroasiatic Grammar. Amsterdam, Netherlands : Benjamins, 2000. vi, 386 pp. TI: No Escape from Syntax: Don't Try Morphological Analysis in the Privacy of Your Own Lexicon AU: Marantz,-Alec SO: University-of-Pennsylvania-Working-Papers-in-Linguistics (UPWPL) Philadelphia, PA. 1997; 4(2): 201-25 Marantz, Alec (1992). What kind of pieces are inflectional morphemes? I was wondering if someone could send one to me? Many thanks! Alexandra From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 30 15:09:44 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:09:44 -0600 Subject: Martha McGinnis: copies of papers (reply to Alexandra Galani) Message-ID: Dear Alexandra, The first two papers are in working papers volumes that can be ordered online: Halle paper: MITWPL - http://web.mit.edu/mitwpl/ Marantz paper: PWPL - http://ling.upenn.edu/papers/pwpl.html If you've already looked up these options and had difficulties, please let the list know. I'm not sure what the other Marantz reference is ("What kind of pieces are inflectional morphemes?") -- maybe a handout from a talk? If so, it's not one I have. If anyone would like to send Alexandra the papers directly, her address is . Best regards, Martha -- _____________________________________________ Dr. Martha McGinnis, Assistant Professor Linguistics Department, University of Calgary 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary AB T2N 1N4 phone: (403) 220-6119 fax: (403) 282-3880 http://www.ling.ucalgary.ca/~mcginnis/ _____________________________________________ From mcginnis at ucalgary.ca Mon Sep 30 15:24:41 2002 From: mcginnis at ucalgary.ca (Martha McGinnis) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:24:41 -0600 Subject: Mark Volpe: copies of papers (reply to Alexandra Galani) Message-ID: Hi listers, I don't know if this will work, but here's an attachment of "No Escape from Syntax". If it doesn't work, I think it's available on the DM home page. Mark [Moderator's Note: the attachment did not come through, but Mark is right: a PostScript version of Marantz's paper is available on Rolf Noyer's DM Bibliography page: http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~rnoyer/dm/bib.html.]