Abstract
Recent work suggests that prosodic structure has the capacity to retain significant information about recursive syntactic constituency. This paper presents a novel argument for this view from the domain of second-position clitic linearization. In Mandar (Austronesian, Indonesia), many second-positon elements are linearized in domains which correspond to functional projections along the clausal spine (TP, vP). The process which positions these clitics is irreducibly postsyntactic in nature. This observation suggests that TP, vP, and other 'functional' phrases must remain constituents at a prosodic level of representation. This conclusion provides further evidence for the view that under ideal circumstances, syntactic phrases map to prosodic equivalents in a one-to-one fashion.
Highlights
Second-position (2P) phenomena raise questions about the nature of the interaction between the syntax and the phonology
This paper investigates the process of 2P linearization in Mandar, an Austronesian language of Indonesia. This language contains a set of 2P elements which are linearized in the phonology: they split syntactic islands, follow prosodic words, and form a cluster in which their linear position is determined by their weight
7 Conclusion In Mandar, the process of second-position linearization positions enclitics within domains that correspond to the vP, TP, and CP
Summary
Second-position (2P) phenomena raise questions about the nature of the interaction between the syntax and the phonology. For instance, the process which linearizes 2P elements appears to place them after phonological constituents but respects certain types of syntactic constraint (Halpern, 1995). This paper investigates the process of 2P linearization in Mandar, an Austronesian language of Indonesia This language contains a set of 2P elements which are linearized in the phonology: they split syntactic islands, follow prosodic words, and form a cluster in which their linear position is determined by their weight. Many of these clitics, show a specific type of positional constraint: they appear to be linearized in domains that correspond to syntactic projections along the clausal spine.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
