From: Hector Fernandez Alcalde <hector.fernandezcchs.csic.es>
Subject: CCHS-CSIC Seminar on Theoretical Linguistics
E-mail this message to a friend
CCHS-CSIC Seminar on Theoretical Linguistics
Short Title: LyCC Colloquium Series
Date: 27-Apr-2009 - 27-Apr-2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact: Hector Fernandez Alcalde
Contact Email: seminariolycc.cchscchs.csic.es
Meeting URL: http://www.ile.csic.es/linguistica/seminario
Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories; Morphology; Syntax
Susanna Padrosa: 'Compounds in Distributed Morphology: Pros and Cons'
According to the framework of Distributed Morphology (DM), there is no component
specifically designed for word formation. Instead, there is a unique generative
component, namely syntax, which is responsible for both word and phrase
structure. The syntax manipulates terminals which can contain two types of
morphemes: abstract morphemes and roots (symbolised by ?). The former are
bundles of universal grammatical features (e.g. [Past]), and are related to
functional categories, while the latter are complexes of language-specific
phonological features, are assumed to be category neutral (e.g. ?cat), and are
related to lexical categories. Roots need to be categorized by a functional node
containing categorial information (i.e. nº, aº, vº). A tree structure, which is
derived by syntactic operations like Merge and Move, is sent to LF and PF
(Chomsky 1995). On the way to PF, terminal nodes can undergo some readjustment
operations (e.g. fusion, fission), before they are given phonological content by
insertion of Vocabulary Items (which occurs in a competitive fashion). Such
readjustment operations can explain mismatches between syntactic and
morphological structure (cf. Marantz 1997, 2001; Embick & Noyer 2007, among others).
In this talk, compounds in the DM framework will be considered by exploring
Harley's (2008) contribution. Harley understands compounding as being equivalent
to incorporation structures (cf. Baker 1988) and assumes that internal arguments
and modifiers of roots are merged with roots first, before the root undergoes
categorization. Synthetic argument compounds (e.g. truck driver) and synthetic
modifier compounds (e.g. quick-acting) are given the same analysis [...].
This Year the LINGUIST List hopes to raise $60,000. This money will go to help
keep the List running by supporting all of our Student Editors for the coming year.
See below for donation instructions, and don't forget to check out our Fund Drive
2009 LINGUIST List Restaurant and join us for a delightful treat!
There are many ways to donate to LINGUIST!
You can donate right now using our secure credit card form at
Alternatively you can also pledge right now and pay later. To do so, go to:
For all information on donating and pledging, including information on how to
donate by check, money order, or wire transfer, please visit:
The LINGUIST List is under the umbrella of Eastern Michigan University and as such
can receive donations through the EMU Foundation, which is a registered 501(c) Non
Profit organization. Our Federal Tax number is 38-6005986. These donations can be
offset against your federal and sometimes your state tax return (U.S. tax payers
only). For more information visit the IRS Web-Site, or contact your financial advisor.
Many companies also offer a gift matching program, such that they will match any
gift you make to a non-profit organization. Normally this entails your contacting
your human resources department and sending us a form that the EMU Foundation fills
in and returns to your employer. This is generally a simple administrative procedure
that doubles the value of your gift to LINGUIST, without costing you an extra penny.
Please take a moment to check if your company operates such a program.
Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue