LFG List - query on LIH

[Daniel L. Everett]

Dick,


Well Pullum and Zwicky have spent a lot of energy on phonology-free syntax
and, subsequently morphology-free syntax too (although they do take a
'separationist' view, allowing for the possibility that morphemes are
determined postsyntactically). I know that literature.  I was especially
interested in LFG suggestions, because I don't know that literature as
well as I ought to. 

Note that monostratal theories do not necessarily rule out such
interactions (well, come to think of it, there are NO monostratal
theories, since they all must recognize at least input and output, or some
other (at least) bipartite split, such as F-structures and C-structures). 
In one 'monostratal' theory, OT, the absence of intermediate levels need
not rule out mixing morphological and syntactic constraints in a single
ranking hierarchy. So in that theory, if there were empirical motivation,
one could argue for a LI constraint ranked lower in some languages than
others. The question is whether LI in OT (and this translates into other
theories) should be part of the violable constraints or part of the
inviolable constraints tucked away in GEN(erate). 

-- Dan