Lexical morphology and phonology

Lexical morphology and phonology

Introduction (preliminaries)

From the previous chapters, we have been suggesting that all morphological operations take place before all phonological rules in the beginning of work in generative grammar, for example the regular English plural morpheme /-z/ is attached to a noun, then phonological rules of vowel insertion and devoicing are applied;

Noun	cow	cat	horse
Underived lexical items	/kaw/	/kᴂt/	/hᴐrs/
Morphology:  add plural /-z/	/kaw+z/	/kᴂt+z/	/hᴐrs+z/
Phonology : Vowel insertion Devoicing	- -	/kᴂt+s/	/hᴐrs+ɩz/
Final form	/kawz/	/kᴂts/	/hᴐrsɩz/

But, there is some evidence that at least some phonological rules apply before some morphological rules where some affixes are sensitive the phonological structure of the words they attach to while the phonological structure itself is produced by rules. The example is suffix –al which is attached to certain verbs to give nouns. The condition is that the verb must have stress on its final syllable and may have no more than two consonant at the end, where the last must be anterior (labial or alveolar) and the next-to-last must be a sonorant.

Vowel Final	Labials	Alveolar
Deny         Denial	Retrieve           Retrieval	procure              Procedural
try             Trial	arrive                Arrival	appraise             Appraisal

In this case, the model of lexicon is incorporated at least in the level;

The Level-Ordering Hypothesis

Siegel (1974) shows that morphological processes are also assigned to distinct levels where one indication of this is the ordering of affixes, for example; suffix-ism which attaches to nouns or adjectives to form nouns and suffix-ian which attaches to nouns to form adjectives. He distinguished primary affixes by a +boundary (boundary:morpheme, e.g. +ian) and secondary affixes by a # boundary (boundary:word, e.g. #ism). We can indicate that English requires three levels of morphology and phonology. This is the level-ordering hypothesis for phonology and morphology;

The level of morphology feeding back into the corresponding level of phonology, this is because primary suffixes like +ian can have additional phonological consequences. For example; Mendel – Mendélian, Mongol-Mongólian, Parkinson-Parkinsónian, where the root words have [ә] in the last syllable and are stressed on the first syllable, then, when the +ian is attached, the vowel is lengthened and the stress shifts to the syllable before the suffix. This shows that the stress rules must apply both before and after the attachment of primary suffixes in English. As shown in the model above, the rules that appear at one (or more) lexical level (either phonological or morphological) as lexical rules, while phonological rules that apply outside the lexicon are called postlexical rules. The examples of  level 1 phonology In English are the negative prefixes in- that undergoes the rule of assimilating n to l (irreversible, impossible) and the suffix –ity which forms noun from adjectives, as in the combining two morpheme: sane+ity, sanity, we called it as Trisyllabic Laxing, which laxes the vowel in the third syllable from the end of a word (on condition that the penultimate vowel is unstressed). This applies only in a derived environment.

 Zero Derivation

English allows the process of zero derivation from noun to verb, for example; spyN ‘one who spies’ to spyV ‘to act as a spy’. But when the verb is turned to a noun it may shift its stress to the noun pattern, the result of derivation is the noun having stress one syllable earlier than the corresponding verb. As illustrated in below;

Underived lexical item :	[protest]V
Level 1 phonology : stress	[protést]V
Level 1 morphology : zero derivation of noun	[[protést]V Ø]N
Level 1 phonology : stress	[[prótѐst]V Ø]N

The second syllable does not completely lose stress in this word, but is reduced to secondary stress, showing that it is originally stressed as verb. The stress shift in nouns zero-derived from verbs shows that this morphological operation must be assigned to level 1 morphology, since the stress rules are on level 1 phonology.

Productivity and Blocking

The difference between the levels of zero derivation of nouns and verbs correlates with a difference in productivity. Verbs are derived freely from nouns by zero derivation at level 2 unless there exists a level 1 form the same meaning. Thus, pattern_N  can turn to a pattern_v , but in *to system  because the existence of systematize. This process is known as blocking.

Aronoff (1976, 43-5) shows that adjective in +ous do not form derivative nouns in +ity if a noun presumed meaning exits independently. For example, curious gives curiousity but glorious doen’s give *gloriousity because the existence of glory. However, the existence of of an +ity form does not block the formation of noun in #ness such as curiousness.

In a similar vein, consider the zero derived noun spy_N  which we derived at level 1 from the verb spy_{V .} The existence of spy_N blocks the otherwise very produvtivity level 2 rule that forms agentive nouns by suffixing #er. We don’t have *spier because it would mean he same as spy_N.  Similarity the existence of nouns bore_N, (dull person of activity) guide_N, inhabit+ant, block the level 2 derivation of *bor#er, *guide#er, *inhabit#er.

However blocking is inapplicable if words of different meaning are derived. For example from Kiparsky (1983).

a. drill (device)                                               driller (person)

b. cook (person)                                            cooker (device)

c. informant (in linguistics)                                informer ( to the police)

d. bore (cylindrical hole)                                   borer (tool of boring holes, kind of insect)

Further Result of Level-Ordered Morphology

The rule of level 3 attaches the regular plural suffix /-z/ in English. We assume that irregular plurals are formed at level 1. This implies that irregular plurals are available for compounding, a level 2 morphological process, but the regular plurals are not. For instance:

teeth marks             *claws marks

lice-infested             *rats-infested

The regular plural inside compounds is when they are pluria tantum-words that exist only in the plural.

almsgiving                         *almsgiving

oddsmaker                        *odd maker

painstaking                       *paintaking

Humanities Department       *Humanity Department

clothesbrush                      *clothbrush

In irregular pluria tantum, such as cattle, which, because it is inherit [+plural], is not provided with a plural affix at level 3: *cattles.            

There are two further result of having verb-t-noun zero derivation on level 1 and noun- to-verb zero derivation on level 2. First, notice that most verbs ending in Xing or Xink are irregular in that they form their inflected forms by ABLAUT. Some example are below:

a. sing                    sang                       sung

b. bring                  brought                  brought

c. sink                    sank                       sunk

d. think                   thought                   thought

          Since the derivation occurs in level 2, we predict that only regular inflectios are possible with these word. For example:

          a. ring                    ringed                     ringed (to surround a circle)

          b.link                      linked                     linked (to connect with links)

The second result concerned noun-verb pairs referring to an instrument and the activity carried out with an instrument. Some example of the nouns; hammer, brush, paddle, string. These nouns are the most typical instrument for the activity, but the activity can be carried out using other instrument. The example of the sentences are given below:

a. he hammered the nail with a rock

b. he brushed the clothes with his hand

c. I paddled the canoe with a copy of The Fnancial Times

d. She strung the picture up with a wire

          In other seemingly similar pairs, the noun is the only possible instrument for the activity named by the verb. The example are; tape, rivet, chain, button. The impossibility of using another instrument are demonstrated in some examples below:

          a. *she taped the picture to the wall with pushpins

          b. *he riveted the parts together with nails

          c. *they chained the entrance off with a rope

          d. *she buttoned up her dress with snaps

          The verbs of those examples above are derived from the corresponding nouns by zero derivation at level 2; thus the meaning of the nouns is an essential component of the meaning of the verb and no other instrument can be mentioned.

          A key idea in lexical morphology is that the internal brackets re erased at the end of each level. Kiparsky states this condition as Bracket Erasure. Bracket erasure are erased at the end of the level.

          The derivation of the noun protest_N  is at level 1. This noun can in turn derive a verb at level 2, to protest. The derivation is given below:

          underived lexical item                             [protest]v

          level 1 phonology : stress                       [protést]v

          level 1 morphology: zero derivation        [[protést]v Ø]N

          Level 1 phonology : stress                      [[prótѐst]v Ø]N

          Bracket eraser                                        [prótѐst]N

          Level 2 phonology                                 ________

          Level 2 morphology                               [[prótѐst]N Ø]v

          Level 2 phonology                                 ________

          Level 3 morphology and phon                ________