Abstract

AbstractMarlo et al. (2015) claim that Kuria verbal tone morphology undermines three well-established principles of locality and modularity: (1) Phonological Locality: the assumption that rules and constraints may only evaluate a small window of phonological objects; (2) Cyclic Locality: the stratal organization of morphophonology into stems, words and phrases; and (3) Indirect Reference: the claim that phonological rules and constraints cannot directly access morphosyntactic information. Sande et al. (2020) turn this claim into an argument for a new model of the morphosyntax–phonology interface, Cophonologies by Phase, which erases the separation between phonology and morphology and abandons standard locality domains in favour of syntactic phases. In this article, I show that the conclusions of both articles are unfounded: the Kuria data follow naturally from an analysis based on autosegmental tone melodies in a version of Stratal Optimality Theory which embraces all three restrictions, Phonological and Cyclic Locality and Indirect Reference, the latter implemented by Coloured Containment Theory. I argue that this approach obviates the technical and conceptual objections raised by Marlo et al. against a tone-melody analysis of Kuria, and makes more restrictive predictions about possible systems of tonal morphophonology compared to construction phonology frameworks.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call