A follow-up

[Martha McGinnis]

Dear DM-List,
    I just wanted to follow-up a bit on the reply by
Martha to my query, and indeed it was very helpful! I
found it interesting that you should mention Levelt
and his massive 1989 monograph. Although not stated
so, my question was an attempt to clarify the
DM-position on lexical selection and its relation to
what seems, to be its opposite, Levelt's 1989 "Lexical
Hypothesis", which requires all structure to have a
Lexeme as its source or instigator; that is, an
Unaccusative structure could only be instigated by a
prior lexical selection of an Unaccusative.
    The reason for Levelt and DM to be associated
recently in my head, was the fact that an MIT
publication co-edited by Marantz on Neuro-Linguistics
contains an article by Levelt in which he reiterates
his 1989 hypothesis. I was wondering if DM was
entertaining any implementations of ideas in line with
Levelt's, which would remedy the massive
over-generation which seems unavoidable in a model
with Post-syntactic selection of open-classes?
    In my acquaintance with the DM literature, although
its position is very clear on late insertion of Vocab
Items, early selection of Open-Classes has not been
explicitly ruled out, at least to my knowledge. Is it
the case that DM is willing to tolerate massive
overgeneration or does it have a means to rule it out?
I do realize that DM need not be a production model of
language.
             Thanks in advance,
                   Mark

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/