How Lexical Conservatism Can Lead to Paradigm Gaps (original) (raw)

Paradigm gaps in Whole Word Morphology

The authors present an account of paradigm gaps of defective verbs taken from French, Spanish, English and Russian, couched in Whole Word Morphology (WWM). After locating paradigm gaps within defective verbs in general, they first show how theories relying on general defaults are by definition incapable of accounting for such phenomena and how two participation conditions among morphological choices (Word-Formation Strategies–WFS–in WWM) are independently motivated. Under the present analysis, defective verbs end up " caught " between WFS, because they partially behave like one WFS and partially like another, without ever satisfying both participation conditions. The uncovered similarity across the languages analyzed is striking. The case of Russian gaps is particularly enlightening, as it has almost systematically been analyzed as one of " lexical gaps " in previous analyses. With original data and an experimental survey on recent borrowings from English, the authors demonstrate the " productivity " of Russian gaps and their essentially grammatical nature.

AN IMPORTANT FEATURE OF THE LEXICAL GAP

AN IMPORTANT FEATURE OF THE LEXICAL GAP, 2023

This study showed the practical importance of studying gaps in the language lexicon through nomination. This research raises certain issues regarding the naming of concepts that are present in thought but not expressed in language. In fact, many concepts that are not named in the language "live" without being named, depending on the will of the language owners. Such concepts can be noticed in the analysis of certain lexical-semantic groups. As the lexicon of the language is considered as a system, each of its units must have a lexeme with a specific lexical relationship. This makes it possible to find many lexical spaces based on the search for words that are paradigmatically related to a lexeme. Identifying the "empty cells" in the lexicon of the language without comparing it to another language and filling them is necessary for the development of the language. After all, unnamed concepts tend to have their own expression in language. In this article, the emergence of lexical gaps and their inevitable presence in the language are cognitively based.

Morphosyntactic complexity: a typology of lexical splits

Language 91, no. 1, 145-193, 2015

A key notion in understanding language is ‘possible word (lexeme)’. While there are lexemes that are internally homogeneous and externally consistent, we find others with splits in their internal structure (morphological paradigm) and inconsistencies in their external behavior (syntactic requirements). I first explore the characteristics of the most straightforward lexemes, in order to establish a point in the theoretical space from which we can calibrate the real examples we find. I then schematize the interesting phenomena that deviate from this idealization, including suppletion, syncretism, deponency, and defectiveness. Next I analyze the different ways in which lexemes are ‘split’ by such phenomena. I set out a typology of possible splits, along four dimensions: splits that are (i) based on the composition/feature signature of the paradigm versus those based solely on morphological form; (ii) motivated (following a boundary motivated from outside the paradigm) versus purely morphology-internal (‘morphomic’); (iii) regular (extending across the lexicon) versus irregular (lexically specified); (iv) externally relevant versus irrelevant: we expect splits to be internal to the lexeme, but some have external relevance (they require different syntactic behaviors). I identify instances of these four dimensions separately: they are orthogonal, and therefore not dependent on each other. Their interaction gives a substantial typology, and it proves to be surprisingly complete: the possibilities specified are all attested. The typology also allows for the unexpected patterns of behavior to overlap in particular lexemes, producing some remarkable examples. Such examples show that the notion ‘possible word’ is more challenging than many linguists have realized.

1 The Paradigmatics and Declension of Nouns

2014

The main focus in this noun description is the paradigm of the noun as well as its case and gender. These issues have been selected first and foremost because the paradigm of the declinable parts of speech of the Latvian language has been insufficiently revealed in theoretical overviews that refer in particular to the structure of parts of speech and the range of the means used to express the grammatical meaning in their paradigms. The noun paradigm is directly connected with the number of cases and the interpretation of their functions in Latvian. Secondly, these issues also have been selected because the Latvian system of noun cases is markedly polyfunctional which means that, alongside the syncretism of endings, noun cases also display curious tendencies of syntactical use and semantic structure that accordingly deserves a more detailed analysis. Thirdly, the use of noun genders is also polyfunctional in Latvian, so they can display various asymmetric uses of noun form and content. In order to make the noun paradigm as well as the case and gender function analysis more explicit, the paradigm of all six declensions is presented in Section 1.2.

Morphological theory and English

This paper presents a review of a number of recent issues in the field of generative morphology, with their implications for the description of English. After an introduction to the field two types of question are considered. First, 1 examine the nature of word structure and illustrate two competing approaches, one of which assurnes that words have a constituent structure (much like the phrase structure of syntax) and the other of which rejects this assumption. Then we look at the way morphologicai structure interacts with syntax. We examine the extent to which syntactic principles can account for the behaviour of certain types of compounds and aiso the expression of syntactic arguments in nominaiizations.

The Paradox of Grammatical Change

Amsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science, 2008

FOLIA LINGUISTICA is the peer-reviewed journal of the Societas Linguistica Europaea. It appears in Spring and Autumn (ca. 450 pages in all) and covers all nonhistorical areas in the traditional disciplines of general linguistics (phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics), and also sociological, discoursal, computational and psychological aspects of language and linguistic theory. Other areas of central concern are grammaticalization and language typology. The journal consists of scientific articles presenting results of original research, review articles, critical surveys of research in specific areas, book reviews, and a miscellanea section carrying brief descriptive reports and discussion notes. Manuscript submission: Please consult the FoL style sheet (to be found at the FoL homepage www.folialinguistica.com). Contact details: All correspondence concerning FOLIA LINGUISTICA should be sent to Prof.