Central to the debate on the demarcation of morphology and syntax is the position staked out by the Lexicalist Hypothesis, which holds that morphology and syntax are distinct systems which interface with each other in a particular way. Proponents of the Lexicalist Hypothesis point to a suite of diagnostics collectively known as lexical integrity tests (Bresnan and Mchombo 1995) as evidence pointing to the fundamental difference between morphology and syntax. The tests revolve around the apparent failure of principles of phrasal syntax at the threshold of words. If morphology and syntax constitute a unified rule system, as assumed in current approaches such as Distributed Morphology, such failure is not predicted. It is surprising therefore that lexical integrity has not played a significant role in arguments for Distributed Morphology (Lieber and Scalise 2007). The purpose of this paper is to introduce two types of denominal predicates in Korean, which are distinguished by the fact that lexical integrity is observed in one but not the other type. I explore how the behaviors of the two classes of denominal predicates can be modeled using the theoretical and empirical machinery of current DM, in particular, the distinction between roots and words. While this is a welcome result, it turns out that DM predicts that more languages should behave like Korean in allowing massive violations of lexical integrity. I provide an analysis of the differences between languages like Korean that allow selective access of word-internal structure by syntactic principles and languages like English where such access is prohibited by focusing on the mechanics of Vocabulary Insertion and complex head formation. The paper concludes with the implications of the analysis of the two types of predicates in Korean for both lexicalist and DM architectures of morphology and syntax interaction.
The is never regarded as declined in Modern English, although formally, the words and possibly correspond to forms of the predecessor of ( m., n., f.) as it was declined in Old English.The following hypothetical examples illustrate how languages with declension work.
or Lexicalist Hypothesis is a ..
The close link between politeness and culture has often been highlighted, with some scholars having proposed taxonomies of cultures based on the diverse uses and conceptions of politeness. Generally, research (Hickey 2005; Ardila 2005) places Spanish-speaking cultures in the group of rapprochement cultures, which relate politeness to positively assessing the addressee and creating bonds of friendship and cooperation; and English-speaking cultures in the group of distancing cultures,which primarily use politeness to generate respect and social differentiation. This means that English politeness is not only supposed to be different from Spanish politeness, but diametrically opposed to it. The main goal of this study is to check these predictions against the understandings and use of politeness by native speakers of Spanish from Spain and nonnative speakers of Spanish from the U.S. Thus, this research is grounded in first-order politeness norms, which are then correlated with the informants’ behavior as reported in written questionnaires. The results confirmed these predictions and further showed that the more advanced learners were able to align themselves better with Spanish norms. Nevertheless, even they found some aspects of Spanish politeness –– such as the turn-taking system –– harder to adapt to, suggesting that certain aspects of native norms may be more difficult to abandon. We propose that first-order notions of politeness may be prototypically structured, with some aspects being more central to its definition and therefore less easily foregone than others.
rejects the Lexicalist Hypothesis
Erosion of differential object marking (DOM)—the overt morphological marking of animate direct objects—has been observed in Spanish heritage speakers who are second-generation immigrants in the United States (Montrul 2004, Montrul & Bowles 2009). We investigated whether DOM is similarly vulnerable in heritage speakers of Hindi and Romanian, two other languages that also exhibit DOM, as well as in first-generation immigrants, adults who are presumably the main source of input to heritage speakers. We report the results of three experimental studies testing acceptability of DOM through a bimodal judgment task in first- and second-generation Spanish, Hindi, and Romanian speakers in the US and native speakers in Mexico, India, and Romania matched for age and socioeconomic status. Our results show structural changes with DOM in all of the heritage speaker groups to different degrees. Acceptance of nontarget DOM omission was more extensive in Spanish than in Hindi and Romanian. First-generation Hindi and Romanian immigrants did not differ in their grammatical proficiency and acceptance of DOM omission from the Hindi and Romanian speakers tested in India and in Romania. However, the first-generation Mexican immigrants displayed similar performance to the Spanish heritage speakers, suggesting that Spanish DOM is prone to L1 attrition in the first generation as well. We discuss linguistic and experiential factors relevant to the three languages and the three immigrant communities to explain these findings.