Abstract
In this paper, I propose to extend a model of grammar in which lexical spellout and phonological computation occur in the same component (e.g., serial OT with Optimal Interleaving (Wolf, 2008)) with a family of morphological markedness constraints. These constraints punish realization of morpho-syntactically marked combinations of features. They form a markedness hierarchy in which constraints against more marked feature(s) are ranked higher than constraints against less marked feature(s). Inclusion of such constraints provides a natural way to account for certain cases of non-realization of morphological contrasts in marked contexts (zero marking), as well as cases of syncretism in which a marked paradigm cell in certain contexts becomes occupied by an exponent typically used in less marked cells. Analyses of both types of cases are discussed in this paper. Moreover, this model predicts tradeoffs and interactions between morphological markedness and phonological constraints. Russian Genitive Plural allomorphy, discussed in this paper, provides one example of such interactions.
Highlights
This paper explores the role of morphological markedness constraints in an OT framework with interleaving of phonological and morphological constraints
2.1 Realizational model of morphology-phonology interleaving The idea that morphology and phonology are fully interleaved within a single competition-based component of grammar is explored in detail in Wolf (2008)
The output consists of chains of representations linked by correspondence relations of at least two different kinds: the syntactic feature nodes are linked with lexical entries by what I will call SM-correspondence and the phonological URs of lexical entries are linked with the phonetic surface
Summary
This paper explores the role of morphological markedness constraints in an OT framework with interleaving of phonological and morphological constraints. Morphological markedness constraints are constraints against the realization of marked combinations of features. Russian genitive plural (Gen-Pl) allomorphy is an example of such a case discussed in this paper. Morphological markedness constraints provide a way of capturing certain types of syncretisms through constraint interaction. These are syncretisms in which a morphologically marked cell in a paradigm under certain conditions is realized by an exponent which typically occurs in other less marked contexts (such cases are described as Impoverishment on alternative accounts). I present a portion of the analysis of Russian Gen-Pl allomorphy demonstrating the interactions between phonological and morphological markedness. I use morphological markedness to analyze an example of Impoverishment in OT
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
