Exponence, allomorphy and haplology in the number and State morphology of Modern Hebrew

What it is about

Faust asks why plural marking in Modern Hebrew behaves as it does. The masculine plural is -im in the Free State but -ej in the Construct State; the feminine plural is -ot in both States, and the feminine singular -a has a Construct form -at. He writes these regularities as Distributed Morphology Vocabulary Items. Two cases of double plural marking appear on feminine nouns but not on the parallel masculine ones: possessed plurals (sus-ot-ej-xem 'your mares' against *sus-ej-ej-xem for the masculine) and new dual nouns (sus-ot-áim). His account is that the masculine exponents become near-identical adjacent suffixes, so an OCP-type haplology deletes one at Spell-Out, while the feminine -ot and -ej are dissimilar and both survive. The paper is a formal analysis of example paradigms; it reports no counts or measurements.

Ideas

• I1. Store the plural exponents as an explicit table keyed by (gender, State, possessed or not), not as string rules, so that a lexicon or a segmenter reads the same table: masculine Free -im, masculine Construct -ej, feminine -ot in both States, feminine Construct -at.
• I2. Haplology as a deterministic repair with a test: when two adjacent suffixes are identical or nearly identical, drop one before the surface form. The three forms sus-ej-xem (kept single), *sus-ej-ej-xem (blocked) and sus-ot-ej-xem (kept double) make a small gold set that a rule must pass and that goes red if the rule is wrong.
• I3. Treat the final /t/ of Construct -at as a floating segment linked to an empty final slot, not as part of the suffix. A segmenter that splits a Construct feminine form should record it this way, so the lemma of the Free form is recovered.

For Mova

I1 and I3 go into Nouns, adjectives, pronouns and numerals (noun plurals and the Construct State). I2 is a test set for the same chapter: the three forms above with the expected analysis; the rule itself is a repair step in the Hebrew noun morphology.

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.5334/gjgl.228

@article{faust2018exponence,
  title = {{Exponence, allomorphy and haplology in the number and State morphology of Modern Hebrew}},
  author = {Faust, Noam},
  journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics},
  year = {2018},
  doi = {10.5334/gjgl.228},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.228}
}

References

43 references, 3 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Acquaviva, Paolo. 2008. Lexical plurals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
2. Alexiadou, Artemis, Liliane Haegeman & Melita Stavrou. 2007. Noun phrase in the generative perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110207491 ↗
3. Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by itself: Stems and inflectional classes. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 22. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
4. Arregi, Karlos & Andrew Nevins. 2014. A monoradical approach to some cases of dis-uppletion. Theoretical Linguistics 40(3/4). 311 – 330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ tl-2014-0014 Bat-El, Outi. 1989. Phonology and word structure in Modern Hebrew. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA dissertation. ↗
5. Bat-El, Outi. 1997. On the visibility of word internal morphological features. Linguistics 35. 289–316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1997.35.2.289 ↗
6. Bat-El, Outi. 2009. A gap in the feminine paradigm of Hebrew: A consequence of identity avoidance in the suffix domain. In Curt Rice & Sylvia Blaho (eds.), Modeling ungrammaticality in Optimality Theory, 165–194. London: Equinox. find
7. Bennett, Ryan, Emily Elfner & James McCloskey. 2016. Lightest to the right: An apparently anomalous displacement in Irish. Linguistic Inquiry 47(2). 169–234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00209 ↗
8. Bonet, Eulàlia & Daniel Harbour. 2012. Contextual allomorphy. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), The morphology and phonology of exponence, 195–235. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
9. Borer, Hagit. 1999. Deconstructing the construct. In Kyle Johnson & Ian Robert (eds.), Beyond principles and parameters, 43–89. Dodrecht: Kluwer publications. find
10. Borer, Hagit. 2008. Compounds: the view from Hebrew. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavel Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounds, 491–511. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
11. Borer, Hagit. 2013. The syntactic domain of content. In Misha Becker, John Grinstead & Jason Rothmann (eds.), Generative linguistics and aqcuisition: Studies in honor of Nina M. Hyams, 205–248. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ lald.54.09bor Faust: Exponence, allomorphy and haplology in the number and State morphology of Modern Hebrew Danon, Gabi. 2008. Definiteness spreading in the Hebrew construct state. Lingua 118(7). 872–906. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.05.012 ↗ our card
12. Embick, David. 2010. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262014229.001.0001 ↗
13. Fathi, Radwa & Jean Lowenstamm. 2016. The gender assignment pattern of French nouns: Selection and allomorphy. Morphology 26(3). 477–509. find
14. Faust, Noam. 2011. Forme et fonction dans la morphologie nominale de l’hébreu moderne: Études en morpho-syntaxe. Paris: Université Paris VII dissertation. find
15. Faust, Noam. 2013. Decomposing the feminine suffixes of Modern Hebrew: A morphosyntactic analysis. Morphology 23. 409–440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-013-9230-8 ↗
16. Faust, Noam. 2014. Where it’s [at]: A phonological correlate to the Phase Impenetrability Condition in the Construct State of Modern Hebrew. Lingua 150. 315–331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.08.001 ↗
17. Goldenberg, Gideon. 1995. Attribution in Semitic languages. Langues Orientales Anciennes: Philologie et Linguistique, 7–20. find
18. Halle, Morris. 1997. Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and fission. In Benjamin Bruening, Yoonjung Kang & Martha McGinnis (eds.), PF: Papers at the interface, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30, 425–450. find
19. Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
20. Harris, John & Edmund Gussmann. 1998. Final Codas: Why the west was wrong. In Eugeniusz Cyran (ed.), Structure and interpretation. Studies in phonology, 139–162. Lublin: Folium. find
21. Henderson, Robert. 2012. Morphological alternations at the intonational phrase edge: The case of K’ichee’. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30(3). 741–787. find
22. Kaye, Jonathan, Jean Lowenstamm & Jean-Roger Vergnaud. 1985. The internal structure of phonological representations. Phonology Yearbook 2. 305–328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000476 Kihm, Alain. 2005. Noun class, gender, and the lexicon-syntax-morphology interfaces. In Guglielmo Cinque & Richard S. Kayne (eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative Syntax, 459–512. New York: Oxford University Press. ↗
23. Kramer, Ruth. 2015. The morphosyntax of gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679935.001.0001 ↗
24. Kramer, Ruth. 2016. The location of gender features in the syntax. Language and linguistics Compass 10(11). 661–677. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12226 ↗
25. Lowenstamm, Jean. 2008. On little n, √, and types of nouns. In Jutta M. Hartmann, Veronika Hegedüs & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The sounds of silence, 105–143. Oxford: Elsevier. find
26. Lowenstamm, Jean. 2014. Derivational affixes as roots: Phasal spellout meets English stress shift. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schafer (eds.), The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, 230–258. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
27. Marantz, Alec. 2007. Phases and words. In Choe Sook-hee (ed.), Phases in the theory of grammar, 196–226. Seoul: Dong-in. find
28. Nevins, Andrew. 2011a. Phonologically conditioned allomorph selection. In Marc van Oostendorp, Colin Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology, 2357–2382. New York: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0099 Faust: Exponence, allomorphy and haplology in the number and State morphology of Modern Hebrew Nevins, Andrew. 2011b. Marked triggers vs. marked targets and impoverishment of the dual. Linguistic Inquiry 42. 413–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00052 ↗ our card
29. Nevins, Andrew. 2012. Haplological dissimilation at distinct stages of exponence. In Jochen Trommer (ed.), The phonology and morphology of exponence, 84–116. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573721.003.0003 ↗
30. Pak, Marjorie. 2008. The postsyntactic derivation and its phonological reflexes. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania dissertation. find
31. Paster, Mary. 2014. Allomorphy. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavel Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 219–234. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
32. Picallo, M. Carme. 1991. Nominals and nominalization in Catalan. Probus 3. 279–316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.1991.3.3.279 ↗
33. Roehrs, Dorian. 2013. Possessives as extended projections. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 91. 37–112 Ritter, Elisabeth. 1988. A head-movement approach to Construct State noun phrases. Linguistics 26(6). 909–929. find
34. Ritter, Elisabeth. 1995. On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13. 405–443. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992737 ↗
35. Scheer, Tobias. 2016. Melody-free syntax and phonologically-conditioned allomorphy. Morphology 26. 341–378. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-016-9283-6 ↗
36. Schwarzwald, Ora R. 1982. Feminine formation in Modern Hebrew. Hebrew Annual Review 6. 153–178. find
37. Schwarzwald, Ora R. 2002. Studies in Hebrew morphology 1–4 (in Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Open University Press. find
38. Shlonsky, Ur. 2004. The form of Semitic nominals. Lingua 114(12). 1465–1526. find
39. Siloni, Tal. 2001. Construct states at the PF interface. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 1. 229–266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/livy.1.10sil ↗
40. Svenonius, Peter. 2016. Spans and words. In Daniel Siddiqi & Heidi Harley (eds.), Morphological metatheory, 201–222. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.229.07sve How to cite this article: Faust, Noam. 2018. Exponence, allomorphy and haplology in the number and State morphology of Modern Hebrew. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3(1): 48. 1–25, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ gjgl.228 ↗ our card
41. Submitted: 13 August 2016 find
42. Accepted: 30 January 2018 find
43. Copyright: © 2018 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press. OPEN ACCESS ↗

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/lingbulk-2018-faust-exponence-allomorphy-haplology-number-state/