Phi-features and the Modular Architecture of - UMR 7023 - CNRS

36
like (52) never affect the phi-features of linked pronouns, if true. It follows from
morphology-free syntax if they occur in the morphology, but then morphology
must manipulate phi-features, an information primitive it shares with syntax.
More complex phi-syncretisms afford stronger evidence in their reference to
nonsyntactic properties (cf. also Stump 1993, 2001, Bobaljik 2002, Baerman
2004, Baerman, Brown and Corbett 2005). Consider the paradigms of Czech masculine
and neuter inanimate nouns in Table 2.1. Genitive, dative, locative, and instrumental
are syncretic (shaded) across different exponents. The syncretisms are
specific to masculine and neuter inanimates, and within them depend on number
but also on arbitrary classes noun classes, a nonsyntactic property. The genders are
syncretic in the locative singular across its exponents u, e, i, whose choice depends
on arbitrary noun classes, and in the locative plural ech. 15 There is nearly as much
syncretism in the genitive singular across a and e, but excludes the noun-class exemplified
by důl and the plural. (53) shows that the syncretisms are all invisible to
the phi-features of linked elements, as in (51) and (52). 16
Table 2.1: Czech masculine inanimate nouns
Hard Stems Soft Stems
M (inan.) N M (inan.) N
'mine' | 'stake' 'church' | 'january' 'wheel' | 'morning' 'knife' 'bed' | 'airport'
N/A důl kostel kol-o nůž lož-e
V dol-e kostel-e kol-o nož-i lož-e
G dol-u kostel-a kol-a nož-e lož-e
D dol-u kostel-u kol-u nož-i lož-I
L dol-e | kůl-u kostel-e | leden-u kol-e | rán-u nož-i lož-I
I dol-em kostel-em kol-em nož-em lož-em
N/A/Vdol-y kostel-y kol-a nož-e lož-e
G dol-ů kostel-ů kol nož-ů lož-í | letišt'
D dol-ům kostel-ům kol-ům nož-ům lož-ím
L dol-ech kostel-ech kol-ech nož-ích lož-ích
I dol-y kostel-y kol-y nož-i lož-I
15 The hard/soft-stem distinction is not synchronically phonological.
16 Phi-syncretisms also give eloquent testimony as to the reality of metaparadigmatic syncretisms.
A nice example is Slovene 'man, person' in (Corbett 2007: 30). In Slovene noun morphology,
there is a dual-plural syncretism in the genitive and locative cases. It interacts with suppletion
in the roots for 'man, person', plural ljudj-, elsewhere človek-. Most of the dual forms are
thus based on človek-, because dual is not plural: nominative-accusative dual človek-a. However,
the genitive and locative dual obey the dual-plural syncretism and thus use ljudj-, as in genitive
dual ljud-i. The phi-syncretism must feed root insertion. The reality of syncretisms in case is eloquently
attested to by their visibility in resolving case conflicts in spell-out, discussed by
McCreight (1988); for similar phenomena, see Franks (1995: 62f., 79f.).