Syncretism in paradigm function morphology and distributed morphology

Abstract

In the development of morphological theory, restrictiveness and maximal empirical coverage of the facts must be carefully balanced. In this discussion chapter, I use the empirical phenomenon of syncretism to explore the restrictiveness/coverage dichotomy in two morphological theories: Distributed Morphology (DM) and Paradigm Function Morphology 2 (PFM2), drawing on Stump (this vol.) and Trommer (this vol.). As previous work has observed, the theories contrast in their approach to this dichotomy: DM tends towards restrictiveness, whereas PFM2 tends towards maximal empirical coverage. I show that syncretism is a useful tool for exploring the advantages and pitfalls of these positions, and I identify open questions for both theories whose answers would contribute to resolving this dichotomy.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.