LINGUIST List 14.2440

Mon Sep 15 2003

Diss: Morphology/Phonology/Typology: Yu: 'The...'

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <foxlinguistlist.org>


Directory

  1. aclyu, The morphology and phonology of infixation

Message 1: The morphology and phonology of infixation

Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:27:16 +0000
From: aclyu <aclyusocrates.berkeley.edu>
Subject: The morphology and phonology of infixation

Institution: University of California, Berkeley
Program: Department of Linguistics
Dissertation Status: Completed
Degree Date: 2003

Author: Alan C. L. Yu 

Dissertation Title: The morphology and phonology of infixation

Dissertation URL: http://home.uchicago.edu/%7Eaclyu/dissertation.html

Linguistic Field: 	Typology 
			Phonology 
			Morphology 
			Linguistic Theories
			Historical Linguistics

Dissertation Director 1: Sharon Inkelas

Dissertation Abstract: 

The subject matter of this study is the formal properties of
infixes. This study begins with a catalogue of the placement
properties of infixation in Chapter 1, showing that there is a bias
for infixes to target edge constituents. This edge bias is explained
in Chapter 4 in terms of the Exogenesis Theory of Infixation (EXOTI),
which advocates the view that edge infixes originate from historical
prefixes and suffixes; an infix's original peripheral position is
reflected in its edge profile today. A synchronic theory of
infixation, Generalized Phonological Subcategorization (GPS), which
allows non-prosodic units to enter into subcategorization relations,
is proposed in Chapter 2 to encode the subcategorization requirement
of an infix. Past theories of infixation are reviewed also in Chapter
2, with particular attention focused on the Hybrid Models which
account for the prominence-driven infixes in terms of Prosodic
Subcategorization while promoting Displacement Theory (DT) as a mean
to explain the distribution of the edge-oriented infixes. Arguments on
both theoretical and empirical grounds are summoned against DT's view
that edge infixes result from the movement of an underlying prefix or
suffix acquiescing to certain phonological or morphological
constraints. I advance the Subcategorization Non-violability
Hypothesis (SNH), epitomized in the universal constraint ranking
schema, M-ALIGN P, in Chapter 3 to supplement GPS by restricting the
way morphological subcategorization requirement interacts with
phonological constraints in the grammar; coerced affix movement
(i.e. DT) is ruled out by virtue of the fact that constraints on
morphological subcategorization must outrank all phonological
constraints. Other typological aspects of infixation are reviewed in
Chapter 5.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue