30.3034, Diss: Linguistic Theories; Morphology; Psycholinguistics; Semantics; Syntax: Doug Merchant: ''Idioms at the Interface(s): Towards a psycholinguistically grounded model of sentence generation''

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-30-3034. Mon Aug 05 2019. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 30.3034, Diss: Linguistic Theories; Morphology; Psycholinguistics; Semantics; Syntax: Doug Merchant: ''Idioms at the Interface(s): Towards a psycholinguistically grounded model of sentence generation''

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Peace Han, Nils Hjortnaes, Yiwen Zhang, Julian Dietrich
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Sarah Robinson <srobinson at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 15:29:04
From: Doug Merchant [mercator at uga.edu]
Subject: Idioms at the Interface(s): Towards a psycholinguistically grounded model of sentence generation

 
Institution: University of Georgia 
Program: Department of Linguistics 
Dissertation Status: Completed 
Degree Date: 2019 

Author: Doug Merchant

Dissertation Title: Idioms at the Interface(s): Towards a psycholinguistically
grounded model of sentence generation 

Dissertation URL:  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334960876_IDIOMS_AT_THE_INTERFACES

Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories
                     Morphology
                     Psycholinguistics
                     Semantics
                     Syntax


Dissertation Director(s):
Timothy Gupton
Vera Lee-Schoenfeld
Paula Schwanenflugel

Dissertation Abstract:

The primary goal of this dissertation is to demonstrate that a close analysis
of the syntactic and semantic properties of phrasal idioms, both with respect
to some well-known constraints on idioms’ syntactic mobility (e.g., Newmeyer,
1974; Nunberg, Sag, & Wasow, 1994; Jackendoff, 1997) and to some lesser-known
aspectual co-occurrence restrictions (McGinnis, 2002; Glasbey, 2003, 2007),
leads directly to the conclusion that the phonological forms of idioms are not
present in narrow syntax. I therefore propose a model of sentence generation
in which the conceptual-intentional system is involved at the outset of a
derivation in choosing phonologically null but semantically individuated Roots
(as in Pfau, 2009); this is what I refer to as the 'first lexical interface'.
These abstract Roots-as-nodes (following Acquaviva’s 2008 distinction), or
N-Roots, are the units processed by the computational component of the
grammar. Cyclically transferred to the semantic interface for interpretation
and the phonological interface for externalization (Chomsky, 2001, 2008), they
are paired at the latter with the phonological forms of Roots-as-exponents
(E-Roots), via syntactic and semantic feature mapping; I refer to this as the
'second lexical interface'. In this model, idioms are simply possible
exponents of N-Roots (which can also be exponed by non-idiomatic forms);
idiomaticity is therefore a property of the second lexical interface only.
This novel account of idioms, which are exceptional only in that they can be
complex E-Roots with multiple components, removes them from the theoretical
dustbin, and brings them in line with recent treatments of the syntax-lexicon
interface(s).

The secondary goal of this dissertation is to demonstrate that from the
psycholinguistic perspective, syntactic structure-building in the context of
language production cannot plausibly be modelled as a bottom-up process
powered by iterative Merge, as is standardly assumed. Surveying a range of
theory-external as well as theory-internal evidence to this effect (Cowan,
2001; Phillips & Lewis, 2013; Chesi, 2015; den Dikken, 2018), I argue instead
for top-down structure-building powered by iterative Branch, wherein N-Roots
are inserted in functional, discourse, and scopal positions, and head chains
which terminate in their theta positions. Although this aspect of the model is
provisional, my intention is to lay the groundwork for in-depth consideration
of the interaction between the timing of insertion question (pre-syntactic or
post-syntactic) and the directionality of derivations question (bottom-up or
top-down structure-building) in a unified model. I refer to this combined,
provisional model as Late Insertion, Top-Down (LIT-D), to differentiate it
from models involving other settings of what one might call 'meta-parameters':
Late Insertion, Bottom-Up (LIB-U), as assumed by most advocates of Distributed
Morphology; Early Insertion, Top-Down (EIT-D), as assumed by most who have
worked on top-down derivations; and Early Insertion, Bottom-Up (EIB-U), as
assumed in most other versions of the Minimalist Program.




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2019 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
               https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list-2019

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-30-3034	
----------------------------------------------------------