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

(53) v dolea/zákonub/kolec/máled/nožie/ložif kterýabe/kterécdf zbylabe/zbylocdf
in mine/law/wheel/little/knife/bed.LOC that.SGM/N remained.SGM/N
(Czech; other phi-features on the verb impossible)
Metaparadigmatic phi-syncretisms illustrate the three elements of the modular
signature of morphology. They are inert for syntax and its interpretation because
they do not feed syntax. They may refer to nonsyntactic information like arbitrary
noun-classes. And the case could be made that nonsyntactic mechanisms are
needed, if there are distinctive powers or limits needed for the mechanism of phisyncretisms.
One is locality. Phi-syncretisms never seem to refer to the surrounding
syntactic structure, setting aside perhaps a small window of the extended word
and its edges, while syntactic dependencies span phrase-structurally unbounded
domains. Another is arbitrariness, if the coupling between the features syncretised
and those of the context is more arbitrary than in syntactic dependencies, as when
gender syncretism occurs for the locative and genitive in the singular but only for
the locative in the plural.
These are all matters taken up in the next two sections for phi-conditioned clitic
and agreement syncretisms and synthetic-analytic alternations. Beyond indicating
what powers morphology ought to have, they reveal its limits, and thus the criteria
that put a phi-feature phenomenon into the syntax. Both the syncretisms and the
alternations will prove important through the following chapters. As much as they
have a morphological signature, superficially similar phenomena in the next two
chapters will have a syntactic one, permitting a minimal contrast.
2.2 Opaque cliticization and agreement
'Opaque' combinations of clitic and agreement affix are a potent source of evidence
about modularity. In Old and Middle French, the 3PL.ACC clitic les and the
1SG.DAT me, 2SG.DAT te, 3SG.DAT li could combine transparently as les
me/te/li. However, they could also give rise to opaque combinations where
3PL.ACC appears as 3SG.ACC le, or disappears, and may or may not contribute
-s to the following clitic, under specific conditions. For les me/te appears mes/tes,
or le mes/tes, rarely les mes/tes, but not ∅ me/te; inversely for les li, there is frequently
∅ li but not lis (Zink 1997: 245f., de Kok 1985: 277ff.).
Similar opaque cliticization occurs in other Romance varieties. A clitic, in a
context defined by other clitics, is realized by one or more exponent(s) different
from or in addition to the one it has independently (Bonet 1991, 1993, 1995ab,
Manzini and Savoia 2002, 2005, 2008, 2010, Pescarini 2010, Rezac 2010ac).
These opaque exponents may be ∅ or parts of the clitic involved, as above. However,
they may also be distinct clitics and even unique. In Ruffieu-en-Valrômey
Occitan, 3PLM/F.ACC loz, lez combining with 3SGM/F.DAT lo/la gives loz/lez-i,
where i is independently the dative clitic, but combining with 3PLM/F.DAT
loz/lez, the result is loz/lez-au, where au does not otherwise occur in the clitic sys-
37