Cover not available
Part of
The Form of Structure, the Structure of Form: Essays in honor of Jean Lowenstamm
Edited by Sabrina Bendjaballah, Noam Faust, Mohamed Lahrouchi and Nicola Lampitelli
[Language Faculty and Beyond 12] 2014
► pp. 271–286

Phase cycles, φ-cycles, and phonological 
(In)activity

| University of Pennsylvania
This paper addresses the question of how phases interact with phonology. I argue that phonological operations can affect representations that are “inactive” in the phase-theoretic sense, but only in limited ways. Specifically, I hypothesize that only noncyclic phonological processes can violate “phase impenetrability”. I suggest further that it is the integrated linear nature of (late) PF representations that allows for this part of phonology to override phase domains. A further hypothesis concerns phase cycles and the cycles of cyclic phonology: I argue that phase cycles and phonological cycles are distinct, and that the latter are triggered on a morpheme- or exponent-specific basis.
Published online: 17 December 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.12.21emb
References (33)
References
Alexiadou, Artemis, and Florian Schaefer. 2007. “Decomposing -er nominalizations.” Talk Presented at the Workshop Nominalizations across Languages . University of Stuttgart.
Bennett, Ryan. 2010. “Reduplication and Morphological Locality.” Ms., U.C. Santa Cruz.
Booij, Geert, and Jerzy Rubach. 1984. “Morphological and Prosodic Domains in Lexical Phonology.” Phonology Yearbook 1: 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burenhult, Niclas. 2005. A Grammar of Jahai. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Morris Halle. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit Jan. 1983. The Turkana Language. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Embick, David. 2007. “Linearization and Local Dislocation: Derivational Mechanics and Interactions.” Linguistic Analysis 33 (3–4): 303–336.Google Scholar
. 2010a. Localism versus Globalism in Morphology and Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010b. “Stem Alternations and Stem Distributions.” Ms., University of Pennsylvania; [URL]
. 2012a. “Contextual Conditions on Stem Alternations: Illustrations from the Spanish Conjugation.” In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2010, ed. by Irene Franco, Sara Lusini, and Andrés Saab, 21–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. “Roots and Features (An Acategorial Postscript).” Theoretical Linguistics 38 (1–2): 73–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Morphemes and Morphophonological Loci.” In Distributed Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle, ed. by Alec Marantz, and Ora Matushansky, 151–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David, and Alec Marantz. 2008. “Architecture and Blocking.” Linguistic Inquiry 39 (1): 1–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David, and Rolf Noyer. 2001. “Movement Operations after Syntax.” Linguistic Inquiry 32 (4): 555–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris, and Andrew Nevins. 2009. “Rule Application in Phonology.” In Contemporary Views on Architecture and Representations in Phonology, ed. by Eric Raimy, and Charles E. Cairns, 355–382. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982a. “From Cyclic Phonology to Lexical Phonology.” In The Structure of Phonological Representations, ed. by Harry van der Hulst, and Norval Smith, 131–176. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
. 1982b. “Lexical Morphology and Phonology.” In Linguistics in the Morning Calm: Selected Essays from SICOL-1981, ed. by Linguistic Society of Korea, 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin. 1997. Turkish. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lowenstamm, Jean. 2010. “Derivational Affixes as Roots (Phasal Spellout meets English Stress Shift).” Ms., Universite Paris-Diderot and CNRS.
. 2012. “German Umlaut, an Outline of a Minimalist Account.” Ms., Universite Paris 7.
Mahanta, Shakuntala. 2007. Directionality and Locality in Vowel Harmony ( With Special Reference to Vowel Harmony in Assamese ). Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht UniversityGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 2001. “Words and Things.” handout, MIT.Google Scholar
. 2007. “Phases and Words.” In Phases in the Theory of Grammar, ed. by Sook-Hee Choe et al. 191–222. Seoul: Dong in Publisher.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Locality Domains for Contextual Allomorphy Across the Interfaces.” In Distributed Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle, ed. by Ora Matushansky, and Alec Marantz. 95–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marvin, Tatjana. 2002. Topics in the Stress and Syntax of Words. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Is Word Structure Relevant for Stress Assignment?” In Distributed Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle, ed. by Alec Marantz, and Ora Matushansky. 79–93. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mascaró, Joan. 1976. Catalan Phonology and the Phonological Cycle. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Newell, Heather. 2008. Aspects of the Morphology and Phonology of Phases. Doctoral dissertation, McGill University.Google Scholar
Noyer, Rolf. 2013. “A Generative Phonology of San Mateo Huave.” International Journal of American Linguistics 79 (1): 1–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pak, Marjorie. 2008. The Postsyntactic Derivation and Its Phonological Reflexes. Doctoral thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Rose, Sharon, and Rachel Walker. 2011. “Harmony Systems.” In Handbook of Phonological Theory, 2nd edn, ed. by John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle, and Alan Yu, 240–290. Malden, Mass: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Savà, Graziano. 2005. A Grammar of Ts’amakko. Cologne: Rudiger Koppe.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Harðarson, Gísli Rúnar
2021. On the domains of allomorphy, allosemy and morphophonology in compounds. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 39:4 ► pp. 1173 ff. DOI logo
Newell, Heather
2021. Bracketing Paradoxes resolved. The Linguistic Review 38:3 ► pp. 443 ff. DOI logo
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo
2016. We do not need structuralist morphemes, but we do need constituent structure. In Morphological Metatheory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 229], ► pp. 387 ff. DOI logo
Newell, Heather & Glyne Piggott
2014. Interactions at the syntax–phonology interface: Evidence from Ojibwe. Lingua 150 ► pp. 332 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 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.