Cyclicity

Abstract

The phonology of a natural language will often treat the same string differently according to whether it is wholly contained within a single morph, arises through a morphological operation like affixation, or straddles the edges of two adjacent grammatical words. In the generative tradition there is a widespread and longstanding consensus that such morphosyntactic conditioning effects may come about in two ways: representationally or procedurally (Scheer 2008: §3ff.; see Table 85.1). Representational morphosyntactic conditioning occurs when phonological processes are sensitive to the presence or absence of certain phonological objects—boundary symbols inSPE, prosodic categories in most later frameworks—which are in turn positioned by reference to the edges of morphosyntactic units. In procedural morphosyntactic conditioning, in contrast, morphosyntax directly controls the amount of structure visible during a given round of phonological computation, either by submitting to the phonology only a morphosyntactic sub‐constituent of a complete linguistic expression (as in the theory of the cycle) or by allowing the phonology access to the surface representation of some morphosyntactically related expression (as in the theory of transderivational or output‐ output correspondence, henceforth OO‐correspondence).

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 — 119 citations exist upstream.

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