Network Core Mechanisms of Exponence

Adger, David, Susana Béjar and Daniel Harbour (2003)

Abstract

This article is a reply to Carstairs-McCarthy (2001b) who critizises the restrictions on allomorphy in Bobaljik (2000). The authors claim that the data presented by Bobaljik are indeed counter-evidence for Carstairs-McCarthy’s predictions on possible patterns of allomorphy, which the latter denied. Furthermore, Adger et al. (2003) argue that Carstairs-McCarthy’s system is conceptually and technically more complex than Bobaljik’s and that his proposal is simply a generalization, but no explanation of the facts, since his concept of ancestry is not independently motivated. Finally, they show that Carstairs-McCarthy’s example for inward sensitivity to morphosyntactic features – which Bobaljik’s proposal excludes – can easily be explained in Bobaljik’s framework by general principles (locality, feature projection) without weakening the restrictions on possible allomorphy.

Adger&Bejar&Harbour:2003
authorAdger, David, Susana Béjar and Daniel Harbour
year2003
titleDirectionality of Allomorphy: A Reply to Carstairs-McCarthy
entrytypearticle
journalTransactions of the Philological Society
volume101
number1
pages109–115

BibTeX

@article{Adger&Bejar&Harbour:2003,
    author = {Adger, David, Susana Béjar and Daniel Harbour},
    year = {2003},
    title = {Directionality of Allomorphy: A Reply to Carstairs-McCarthy},
    journal = {Transactions of the Philological Society},
    volume = {101},
    number = {1},
    pages = {109–115},
}
last changed: