Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy: Predictions?

[Martha McGinnis]

Speaking for myself, what I'd welcome is a summary of instances of
morphological behaviour that
(a)  could conceivably occur but doesn't;
(b)  isn't obviously 'bad' on syntactic or phonological grounds;
(c)  is predicted by DM not to occur, i.e. is incompatible with a version
of UG that incorporates the principles of DM.

That is, I'd like to see examples of pseudo-English, pseudo-Tagalog or
whatever, where the differences between them and actual English, Tagalog
etc. are claimed to be not just matters of historical accident but
attributable to DM principles.  Probably there are examples of this sort of
argumentation in the literature that I just don't know about.  To have a
handy checklist of them would be great.

I leave it to you to decide whether this is a suitable sort of message to
post to the DM list and hopefully stimulate more discussion.

Best wishes
Andrew

Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy
Associate Professor
Department of Linguistics, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800,
Christchurch, New Zealand
phone (work) +64-3-364 2211; (home) +64-3-355 5108
fax +64-3-364 2969
e-mail a.c-mcc at ling.canterbury.ac.nz
http://www.ling.canterbury.ac.nz/adc-m.html