Cover not available
Part of
Morphological Metatheory
Edited by Daniel Siddiqi and Heidi Harley
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 229] 2016
► pp. 201–222

Spans and words

ORCID logo | CASTL, University of Tromsø – The Arctic University of Norway
1. The problem: Words are a pervasive unit of syntax and yet the dominant theory of them, the X0 theory, is problematic, predicting more parallels between phrasal and head movement than are observed. Phrasal movement approaches to word formation fare even worse on that score. Mirror Theory (MT) also has shortcomings, for example in relying on an unmotivated notion of specifier. 2. The solution: A theory of how syntactic structures are mapped onto functional and lexical words, positing syntactic features w for lexical access points and @ for linearization points. The theory draws on the late insertion of DM, the cycles of phase theory, the direct linearization principles of MT, and the non-terminal spell-out of Nanosyntax, separating word formation from linearization and appealing to spans (head-complement sequences) as the units of cyclic lexical access and storage.
Published online: 29 June 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.229.07sve
References (66)
References
Adger, David. 2007. Stress and phasal syntax. Linguistic Analysis 33(3–4): 238–266.Google Scholar
. 2013. A Syntax of Substance. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Adger, David, Harbour, Daniel & Watkins, Laurel J. 2009. Mirrors and Microparameters: Phrase Structure Beyond Free Word Order. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark C. 1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1996. The Polysynthesis Parameter [Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax]. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 2011. Cyclicity. In The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, Vol. 4, Marc van Oostendorp, Colin Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds), 2019–2048. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 1995. Morphosyntax: The Syntax of Verbal Inflection. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
. 2012. Universals in Comparative Morphology: Suppletion, Superlatives, and the Structure of Words. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring Sense, Vol. I: In Name Only? Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Brody, Michael. 2000a. Mirror Theory: Syntactic representation in perfect syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 31(1): 29–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000b. Word order, restructuring, and Mirror Theory. In The Derivation of VO and OV [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 31], Peter Svenonius (ed.), 27–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bye, Patrik & Svenonius, Peter. 2012. Non-concatenative morphology as epiphenomenon. In The Morphology and Phonology of Exponence, Jochen Trommer (ed.), 427–495. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caha, Pavel. 2009. The Nanosyntax of Case. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tromsø.
Cardinaletti, Anna & Starke, Michal. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of three classes of pronouns. In Clitics in the Languages of Europe, Henk van Riemsdijk (ed.), 145–233. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Greg. 2006. The meaningful bounds of incorporation. In Non-definiteness and Plurality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 95], Svetlana Vogeleer & Liliane Tasmowski (eds), 35–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2008. On phases. In Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds), 133–166. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Corver, Norbert. 1997. Much-support as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 28(1): 119–164.Google Scholar
Déchaine, Rose-Marie. 2015. What “spell-out” reveals: Niger-Congo prosodification constrains the syntax-semantics interface. In Current Research in African Linguistics: Papers in Honor of Ọladele Awobuluyi, Ọlanikẹ Ọla Orie, Johnson Fọlọrunso Ilọri & Lendzemo Constantine Yuka (eds), 287–352. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria & Williams, Edwin. 1987. On the Definition of Word [Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 14]. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 1989. Plural words. Linguistics 27: 865–895. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David. 2007. Blocking effects and analytic/synthetic alternations. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25(1): 1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Localism versus Globalism in Morphology and Phonology. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David & Marantz, Alec. 2008. Architecture and blocking. Linguistic Inquiry 39(1): 1–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David & Noyer, Ralf. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32(4): 555–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, Danny & Pesetsky, David. 2005. Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics 31(1–2):1–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haider, Hubert. 2000. OV is more basic than VO. In The Derivation of VO and OV, [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 31], Peter Svenonius (ed.), 45–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris & Marantz, Alec. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds), 111–176. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Ritter, Elizabeth. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78(3): 482–526. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ito, Junko & Mester, Armin. 2012. Recursive prosodic phrasing in Japanese. In Prosody matters: Essays in Honor of Elisabeth Selkirk, Toni Borowsky, Shigeto Sugahara, Mariko Sugahara & Takahito Shinya (eds), 280–303. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Kahnemuyipour, Arsalan. 2009. The Syntax of Sentential Stress. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Some notes on comparative syntax, with special reference to English and French. In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Syntax, Guglielmo Cinque & Richard S. Kayne (eds), 3–69. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin. 1997. Turkish. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika & Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2007. Phase theory and prosodic spellout: The case of verbs. The Linguistic Review 24(2–3): 93–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 2001. Words. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
. 2007. Phases and words. In Phases in the Theory of Grammar, Sook-hee Choe (ed.), 196–226. Seoul: Dong-in.Google Scholar
. 2013. Locality domains for contextual allomorphy across the interfaces. In Distributed Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle, Ora Matushansky & Alec Marantz (eds), 95–115. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marvin, Tatjana. 2002. Topics in the Stress and Syntax of Words. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Nespor, Marina, Shukla, Mohinish, van de Vijver, Ruben, Avesani, Cinzia, Schraudolf, Hanna & Donati, Caterina. 2008. Different phrasal prominence realizations in VO and OV languages. Lingue e linguaggio 7(2): 139–168.Google Scholar
Newell, Heather. 2008. Aspects of the Morphology and Phonology of Phases. Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University, Montréal.
Nikolaeva, Irina. 2013. Periphrasis in Tundra Nenets. In Periphrasis: The Role of Syntax and Morphology in Paradigms, Marina Chumakina & Greville G. Corbett (eds), 77–140. Oxford: The British Academy.Google Scholar
Noyer, Rolf. 1998. Vietnamese ‘morphology’ and the definition of word. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 5(2): 65–89.Google Scholar
Platzack, Christer. 2013. Head movement as a phonological operation. In Diagnosing Syntax, Lisa Lai-Shen Cheng & Norbert Corver (eds), 21–43. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollock, Jean Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20(3): 365–424.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul. 1969. Anaphoric islands. In Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 205–239. Chicago IL: CLS.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008. Verb Meaning and the Lexicon. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian & Svenonius, Peter. 2014. Deriving the functional hierarchy. Language Sciences 46(B):152–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rijkhoff, Jan. 2002. The Noun Phrase. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2010. Agreement and Head Movement: Clitics, Incorporation, and Defective Goals. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheer, Tobias. 2008. Why the prosodic hierarchy is a diacritic and why the interface must be direct. In Sounds of Silence: Empty Elements in Syntax and Phonology, Jutta Hartmann, Veronika Hegedus & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), 145–192. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1996. The prosodic structure of function words. In Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition, James L. Morgan & Katherine Demuth (eds), 187–213. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
. 2011. The syntax-phonology interface. In The Handbook of Phonological Theory, 2nd edn, John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle & Alan Yu (eds), 435–483. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siddiqi, Daniel. 2009. Syntax within the Word: Economy, Allomorphy, and Argument Selection in Distributed Morphology [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 138]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Son, Minjeong & Svenonius, Peter. 2008. Microparameters of cross-linguistic variation: Directed motion and resultatives. In Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Natasha Abner & Jason Bishop (eds), 388–396. Somerville MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Starke, Michal. 2009. Nanosyntax: A short primer to a new approach to language. In Svenonius, Ramchand, Starke & Taraldsen (eds), 1–6. <[URL]>
Šurkalović, Dragana. 2013. Modularity, phase-phase faithfulness and prosodification of function words in English. Nordlyd 40(1): 301–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, Peter. 2005. Extending the extension condition to discontinuous idioms. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 5: 227–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Spanning. Ms, University of Tromsø. <[URL]>
. 2016. Complex predicates as complementation structures. In Approaches to Complex Predicates, Léa Nash & Pollet Samvelian (eds), 212–247. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, Peter, Ramchand, Gillian, Starke, Michal & Taraldsen, Knut Tarald (eds). 2009. Tromsø Working Papers on Language and Linguistics: Nordlyd 36.1, Special issue on Nanosyntax . <[URL]>Google Scholar
Travis, Lisa. 1984. Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Williams, Edwin. 1981. On the notions ‘lexically related’ and ‘head of a word’. Linguistic Inquiry 12(2): 245–274.Google Scholar
Woodbury, Anthony C. 1987. Meaningful phonological processes: A consideration of Central Alaskan Yupik Eskimo prosody. Language 63(4): 685–740. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (38)

Cited by 38 other publications

Caha, Pavel, Karen De Clercq & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd
2024. Allomorphy without context specification: a case study of Czech adjectival stems. Morphology DOI logo
Fuchs, Zuzanna, Maria Polinsky & Gregory Scontras
2024. Chapter 12. Explaining gender. In Multifaceted Multilingualism [Studies in Bilingualism, 66], ► pp. 292 ff. DOI logo
Kovačević, Predrag, Svitlana Antonyuk & Stefano Quaglia
2024. The status of verbal theme vowels in contemporary linguistic theorizing: some recent developments. An introduction.. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 9:1 DOI logo
Lohndal, Terje & Michael T. Putnam
2024. The importance of features and exponents. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 14:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Lohndal, Terje & Michael T. Putnam
2024. Modeling multilingual grammars. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 14:1 ► pp. 104 ff. DOI logo
Paparounas, Lefteris
2024. Visibility and Intervention in Allomorphy: Lessons from Modern Greek. Linguistic Inquiry 55:3 ► pp. 537 ff. DOI logo
Putnam, Michael & Åshild Søfteland
2024. When covert modality sneaks into your grammar: wh-infinitives in American Norwegian. Second Language Research 40:1 ► pp. 171 ff. DOI logo
Ksenia Bogomolets & Harry van der Hulst
2023. Word Prominence in Languages with Complex Morphologies, DOI logo
Fenger, Paula
2023. Multiple and Cumulative Exponence. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Morphology, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kodner, Jordan
2023. What learning Latin verbal morphology tells us about morphological theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 41:2 ► pp. 733 ff. DOI logo
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, Miguel
2023. Argument Structure in Peruvian Sign Language. In Formal Approaches to Languages of South America, ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Wood, Jim
2023. Icelandic Nominalizations and Allosemy, DOI logo
Bembridge, Gavin
2022. ASL negative incorporation as negative suppletion. Sign Language & Linguistics 25:2 ► pp. 135 ff. DOI logo
Brodkin, Dan
2022. Two steps to high absolutive syntax: Austronesian voice and agent focus in Mandar. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 31:4 ► pp. 465 ff. DOI logo
Ermolaeva, Marina & Gregory M. Kobele
2022. Agree as information transmission over dependencies. Syntax 25:4 ► pp. 466 ff. DOI logo
Rolle, Nicholas & Lee Bickmore
2022. Outward-sensitive phonologically-conditioned suppletive allomorphy vs. first-last tone harmony in Cilungu. Morphology 32:2 ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo
Tat, Deniz
2022. Lexical Borrowing Targets Spans. Languages 7:4 ► pp. 289 ff. DOI logo
Terenghi, Silvia
2022. Integrating deictic co-speech gestures in demonstrative forms. Linguistics in the Netherlands 39 ► pp. 225 ff. DOI logo
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor
2021. Goal, source, and route preverbs in Latin: their interaction with spatial datives. The Linguistic Review 38:2 ► pp. 233 ff. DOI logo
Acedo‐Matellán, Víctor
2023. Synthetic versus Analytic Expressions. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Morphology, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Arregi, Karlos & Asia Pietraszko
2021. The Ups and Downs of Head Displacement. Linguistic Inquiry 52:2 ► pp. 241 ff. DOI logo
Blix, Hagen
2021. Spans in South Caucasian agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 39:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Carlson, Matthew T., Antonio Fábregas & Michael T. Putnam
2021. How Wide the Divide? – Theorizing ‘Constructions’ in Generative and Usage-Based Frameworks. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Dékány, Éva
2021. Introduction. In The Hungarian Nominal Functional Sequence [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 100], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Georgieva, Ekaterina, Martin Salzmann & Philipp Weisser
2021. Negative verb clusters in Mari and Udmurt and why they require postsyntactic top-down word-formation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 39:2 ► pp. 457 ff. DOI logo
Hsu, Brian
2021. Coalescence: A Unification of Bundling Operations in Syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 52:1 ► pp. 39 ff. DOI logo
Kiparsky, Paul
2021. Phonology to the rescue: Nez Perce morphology revisited. The Linguistic Review 38:3 ► pp. 391 ff. DOI logo
Newell, Heather
2021. Bracketing Paradoxes resolved. The Linguistic Review 38:3 ► pp. 443 ff. DOI logo
Putnam, Michael T., Lara Schwarz & Andrew D. Hoffman
2021. Morphology of Heritage Languages. In The Cambridge Handbook of Heritage Languages and Linguistics, ► pp. 613 ff. DOI logo
Svenonius, Peter
2021. Prepositions with CP and their implications for extended projections. Linguistic Variation 21:1 ► pp. 11 ff. DOI logo
Ursini, Francesco-Alessio & Keith Tse
2021. Region Prepositions: The View from French. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 66:1 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Wiślicki, Jan
2021. Light heads and predicate formation: on two scopes of discontinuity. Linguistics 59:6 ► pp. 1389 ff. DOI logo
Harizanov, Boris & Vera Gribanova
2019. Whither head movement?. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37:2 ► pp. 461 ff. DOI logo
Taraldsen, Knut Tarald
2019. An introduction to Nanosyntax. Linguistics Vanguard 5:1 DOI logo
Böhm, Roger
2018. Just for the record. In Substance-based Grammar – The (Ongoing) Work of John Anderson [Studies in Language Companion Series, 204], ► pp. 261 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Stative Inquiries [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 264], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Grammatical Aspects of Heritage Languages. In The Cambridge Handbook of Heritage Languages and Linguistics, ► pp. 579 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2024. The Unity of Movement [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 283], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 october 2024. 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.