The Rule of Lower in Polish: Theoretical Implications (original) (raw)
Related papers
On the (non-)recursivity of the prosodic word in Polish
ZAS papers in linguistics, 2000
The present paper investigates the relationship between the morphological word and the prosodie word in Polish sequences consisting of proclitics and lexical words. Let us start by examining the placement of primary and secondary stresses in the phrases given in (1) in careful Polish.! Stressed syllables are marked below by capitalizing the appropriate vowels: (I) a. pO after polowAniu hunting.loc.sg 'after the hunting' b. dIA nieszczt(snlka for wretch.gen.sg 'for the/a wretched person' In (2) the phrases from (l) are represented as sequences of feet. The digit I stands for the primary stress and 2 for secondary (or tertiary) stresses (as in Kraska-Szlenk 1995 or Rubaeh and Booij 1985). Polish words have penultimate stress, i.e. a prosodie word (henceforth PW d) has a prominent trochaic foot at the right edge. 2 Following McCarthy and Prince (1993) and Selkirk (1995), I assurne that feet are binary and that some unstressed syllables remain unparsed, i.e.-10in (2a) and-szczes-in (2b). (2) a. (2 0) 0 (1 0) b. (2 0) o (I 0) po po 10 wa niu (=Ia) dIa me szezt(s ni ka (= 1 b) The monosyllabie preposition and the initial syllable of the host in eaeh phrase in (2) form a foot. MeCarthy and Prince (1993:129) assert that '[b]y the Prosodie Hierarehy, no foot can , This is a revised version of the talk given at the workshop 'Das Wort in der Phonologie' during the 22"d meeting of the Linguislic Associalion of Germany (DGfS) in Marburg in March 2000. I would like to express my gratitude to the participants of thc workshop for their questions and remarks, and to thc editors of the present volume for their help in preparing the final version of the manuscript. I am particularly indebted to GraZyna Rowicka and Marzena Rochon for reading carefully an earlier version of the paper. I would also like to thank Geert Booij and Gienek Cyran for their comments. I am alone responsible for any remaining eITors. 1 Thc phrases quoted hefe from Polish occur in their standard orthographie; form. Thc letter 'w' is used to represent a voiced labiodental fricative (i.e. the sound transcribed as [vJ in IPA transcription). The letter 'I' represents a labia-velar semivowel (i.c. [w] in IPA transcription) and 'j' stands a palatal semivowel. The digraph 'eh' is used for a voiceless velar fricative [xl. The digraphs 'cz' and 'dt' stand for post-alveolar affricates (voieeless and voiced, respeetively). Dental-alveolar affrieates are represented in spelling as 'c' (voiceless) and 'dz' (voiced). Post-alveolar tricalives are spelIed 'sz' (voiceless) and 'z' (voiced, with the variant spelling being 'rz'). Prepalatal equivalents of dental-alveolar and post-alveolar consonants are represented as sequences of such consonants and the letter 'i' (e.g. 'i', 'zi') or as the symbols 's', 't', 'c', 'dt' and 'TI'. The letter 'y' stands for a high central vowel. Nasal vowels are spelIed ''I' (back) and ',' (front). 2 A useful discussion of stress pattern in Polish can be found in Hayes (1995).
115Studies in Polish Linguistics 6, 2011
2014
Suffi x order in double and multiple diminutives: with data from Polish and Bulgarian1 In this article we investigate suffi x combinations in second- and third-grade diminutive nouns in Polish and Bulgarian. We show that the formation of double and multiple diminutives in both languages is subject to phonological, morphological, semantic and psycholinguistic constraints. Although diminutive suffi xes constitute a semantically homogeneous set, they do not combine freely with each other and of all possible combinations of diminutive suffi xes in a language only a very few exist. Both languages under scrutiny in this paper ‘fi lter ’ their relatively large sets of DIM1 suffi xes and use a very few of them for the formation of DIM2 nouns, and Bulgarian also for DIM3 nouns. Moreover, only suffi xes that occur in DIM2 nouns can derive DIM3 nouns in Bulgarian. Th e combinations of diminutive suffi xes in double and multiple diminutives are fi xed and resemble to some extent a template orde...
1993
This volume presents a sampling of papers devoted to different phenomena of Polish (and theoretical) morphology and syntax. The focus of attention of the Authors of the present volume is concentrated mostly on questions of syntactic and morphological analysis of Modern Standard Polish with exception of W. Me(rczAK's and (in part) G. HoNtscnpr.'s articles, which take the diachronic perspective. Some brief information should be provided about the papers included in the volume as well as about the arrangement of the papers. The first section containing the papers :rustrtN, and W. Meüczex deals with diflerent aspects of inflectional morphology: general problems (the papers by Bocuslews«I and Meficzex), verbal inflection (PuzvNINA's and ScupNxER's articles) and nominal morphology (the papers by Wotss, DUNAJ, L.q.sxowsxt and RorH-sroIN). The second section is devoted to syntax and syntactic semantics. GRzncoRCzYKowA discusses temporal and factivity relations within a sentence. The papers by H. WrooARCzYK, Z. TopoLIxsxa and A.
Phonotactics and morphonotactics of Polish and English. Theory, description, tools and applications
2016
Phonotactics determines phonological conditions and constraints on the occurrence or cooccurrence of sounds (vowels and consonants) in a given language. Morphonotactics refers to the interaction between phonotactics and morphotactics. The main approach to consonant clusters is based on the division into phonotactic and morphonotactic clusters. Phonotactic clusters occur within morphemes. Morphonotactic clusters arise as a result of morphological operations such as concatenation or apophony. Morphonotactic clusters are often phonotactically marked and often fail to surface as phonotactic clusters. The research focuses both on morphologically simple and complex clusters. The leitmotif of the present book is the verification of the hypothesis concerning the markedness of clusters in relation to their phonotactic or morphonotactic character. The dictionary and corpus data was examined in terms of markedness, based on universal phonotactic preferences. In order to evaluate cluster preferability, a phonotactic calculator was devised, which enables making measurements on a large scale.
Compounding in Polish and English. Chapter III
Kolbusz-Buda, Joanna. 2014. A morpho-semantic analysis of synthetic deverbal compound nouns in Polish in the light of paralel constructions in English. Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL, 2014
While the morphological make-up of root compounds in English and Polish is rather unambiguous, the structure of synthetic deverbal compounds calls for some clarification We want to argue that the morphology of endocentric and, in particular, exocentric synthetic compound nouns in Polish and English is best reflected by the left-branching structure.
Polish in the light of grammaticalization theory
2010
Polish in the light of grammaticalization theoryThe paper is concerned with grammaticalization, a type of language change whereby lexical items, in specifi contexts, come to serve grammatical functions, and grammatical items acquire new grammatical functions. The aim is twofold: to shed light at the main properties of grammaticalization, and to demonstrate its applicability to Polish data. Some prominent examples in Polish are discussed: the grammaticalization of modals, imperative and avertive constructions. The paper closes with a non-exhaustive list of leads for further research into grammaticalization in Polish.
Studies in Polish Linguistics 6, 2011
In this article we investigate suffi x combinations in second-and third-grade diminutive nouns in Polish and Bulgarian. We show that the formation of double and multiple diminutives in both languages is subject to phonological, morphological, semantic and psycholinguistic constraints. Although diminutive suffi xes constitute a semantically homogeneous set, they do not combine freely with each other and of all possible combinations of diminutive suffi xes in a language only a very few exist. Both languages under scrutiny in this paper 'fi lter' their relatively large sets of DIM1 suffi xes and use a very few of them for the formation of DIM2 nouns, and Bulgarian also for DIM3 nouns. Moreover, only suffi xes that occur in DIM2 nouns can derive DIM3 nouns in Bulgarian. Th e combinations of diminutive suffi xes in double and multiple diminutives are fi xed and resemble to some extent a template order. Th e paper also contributes to morphological theory: to the proper understanding of diminutivization, to the defi nition of closing suffi xation, and to revealing the way affi x order is constrained in human languages.
Journal of Slavic Linguistics 12(1–2). 285–321.
This is an elaborate and in many ways insightful monograph on the syntax of clisis, primarily in South Slavic. However, despite the reference to the syntax-phonology interface in the title, this work's strengths lie almost exclusively on the syntactic side. The subtitle of an earlier, manuscript version of this book is sometimes listed in the literature (e.g., in Boeckx and Stjepanoviç 2000: 37) as A view from the syntax. That would have been more fitting. Unfortunately, the book's reliability in terms of syntactic theory is not matched in the areas of morphology or phonology.* This review begins by providing an overview of the book. Next, I assess some of its strengths and shortcomings in terms of linguistic theory. I then separately consider more practical issues: organization as well as empirical and bibliographic accuracy. * I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the following colleagues: Theresa Alt, Wayles Browne, Uwe Junghanns, Paul Law, Denisa Lenertová, and Anjum Saleemi. In addition, Îeljko Bo‰koviç, who was shown a draft of this review, generously sent comments directly to me in lieu of submitting a formal reply. Despite all these individuals' assistance, only I am responsible for any failings that remain herein.
The interface between phonology and other components of grammar: the case of Hungarian
Phonology Yearbook, 1987
When a phonological rule applies across words, it is necessary to be able to specify across which types of words it may apply and across which it may not, or in other words, within which domain it applies. That such domains do not necessarily coincide with syntactic constituents has been amply demonstrated in such works as Clements (1978), Napoli & Nespor (1979), Rotenberg (1978), Selkirk (1978, 1984), Nespor & Vogel (1982, 1986) and Kaisse (1985). As has been argued in recent work, what is needed instead is a somewhat more complex theory in which there is a more complex type of interaction between phonological rules and syntactic structures. In the past few years, several such theories have been proposed, in particular, those advanced by Selkirk (1984), Kaisse (1985) and Nespor & Vogel (1986).