Paradigms at the interface of a lexeme’s syntax and semantics with its inflectional morphology
The interface of a language’s syntax and semantics with its inflectional morphology is quite constrained: canonically, the morphosyntactic property set that determines a word form’s use and interpretation in a particular syntactic context also determines its inflectional shape in that context. There are, however, frequent deviations from this canonical congruence. Deviations of this sort favor a theory of morphology in which the definition of a word form’s syntactico-semantic content is in principle separate from that of its morphological realization. Such a theory necessitates the postulation of two sorts of paradigms: content paradigms constitute the interface of word forms’ inflectional morphology with their syntax and semantics; form paradigms determine the definition of word forms’ morphological realizations. In a theory of this sort, a language’s inflectional morphology must not only define patterns of inflectional exponence; it must also define the linkage between the cells of a lexeme’s content paradigm and the cells of the form paradigm through whose mediation they are realized morphologically. The Old English conjugational system provides a rich basis for exemplifying a theory of this sort.
References
Aronoff, Mark
1994 Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes [
Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 22]. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.

Bonet, Eulàlia
1991 Morphology after Syntax: Pronominal Clitics in Romance. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

Brook, George L
1955 An Introduction to Old English. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Brown, Dunstan, Chumakina, Marina & Corbett, Greville G
(eds) 2013 Canonical Morphology and Syntax. Oxford: OUP.

Corbett, Greville G
2005 The canonical approach in typology. In
Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories [
Studies in Language Companion Series 72],
Zygmunt Frajzyngier,
Adam Hodges &
David S. Rood (eds), 25–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.


Corbett, Greville G
2009 Canonical inflectional classes. In
Selected Proceedings of the 6th Décembrettes,
Fabio Montermini,
Gilles Boyé &
Jesse Tseng (eds), 1–11. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

Gazdar, Gerald, Pullum, Geoffrey K., Carpenter, Robert, Klein, Ewan, Hukari, Thomas E. & Levine, Robert D
1988 Category structures.
Computational Linguistics 14: 1–19.

Kasper, Robert T. & Rounds, William C
1986 A logical semantics for feature structures. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 257–266.

Lass, Roger
1994 Old English: A Historical Linguistic Companion. Cambridge: CUP.


Matthews, Peter H
1972 Inflectional Morphology: A Theoretical Study Based on Aspects of Latin Verb Conjugation. Cambridge: CUP.

O’Neill, Paul
2013a The morphome and morphosyntactic/semantic features. In
The Boundaries of Pure Morphology: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives,
Silvio Cruschina,
Martin Maiden &
John Charles Smith (eds), 221–246. Oxford: OUP.


O’Neill, Paul
2013b The notion of the morphome. In
Morphological Autonomy: Perspectives from Romance Inflectional Morphology,
Martin Maiden,
John Charles Smith,
Maria Goldbach &
Marc-Olivier Hinzelin (eds), 70–94. Oxford: OUP.

Quirk, Randolph & Wrenn, Charles L
1955 An Old English Grammar. London: Methuen & Co.

Round, Erich R
2013 Kayardild Morphology and Syntax. Oxford: OUP.

Sievers, Eduard & Cook, Albert S
1903 An Old English Grammar, 3rd edn. Boston MA: Ginn.

Stewart, Tom & Stump, Gregory
2007 Paradigm function morphology and the morphology/syntax interface. In
The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces,
Gillian Ramchand &
Charles Reiss (eds), 383–421. Oxford: OUP.


Stump, Gregory
1993 On rules of referral.
Language 69: 449–479. Reprinted in
Morphology: Critical Concepts in Linguistics, Francis Katamba (ed.). London: Routledge, 2003.


Stump, Gregory
2001 Inflectional Morphology: A Theory of Paradigm Structure. Cambridge: CUP.


Stump, Gregory
2002 Morphological and syntactic paradigms: Arguments for a theory of paradigm linkage. In
Yearbook of Morphology 2001,
G. Booij &
J. van Marle (eds), 147–80. Dordrecht: Kluwer.


Stump, Gregory
2006 Heteroclisis and paradigm linkage.
Language 82: 279–322.


Stump, Gregory
2012 The formal and functional architecture of inflectional morphology. In
Morphology and the Architecture of Grammar: On-line Proceedings of the Eighth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM8), Cagliari, Italy, 14–17 September 2011,
Angela Ralli,
Geert Booij,
Sergio Scalise &
Athanasios Karasimos (eds), 254–270.
[URL]
Stump, Gregory
2016 Inflectional Paradigms: Content and Form at the Syntax-Morphology Interface. Cambridge: CUP.


Thornton, Anna M
2012 Reduction and maintenance of overabundance: A case study on Italian verb paradigms.
Word Structure 5(2): 183–207.


Zwicky, Arnold M
1985 How to describe inflection. In
Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society,
Mary Niepokuj,
Mary Van Clay,
Vassiliki Nikiforidou &
Deborah Feder (eds), 372–386. Berkeley CA: BLS.

Cited by
Cited by 3 other publications
Goldstein, D. M.
2020.
Homeric ‐phi(n) is an oblique case marker1.
Transactions of the Philological Society 118:3
► pp. 343 ff.

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 september 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.