Dissertation - Michael Becker

(155)C1 C2 C3 C4a. winner1 ≻ loser1 W Lb. winner2 ≻ loser2 W Lc. winner3 ≻ loser3 W Ld. winner4 ≻ loser4 L WCloning C3, for instance, and listing winner2 and winner3 with its clones, will lead tothe grammar C3 winner3 ≫ C4 ≫ C1 ≫ C2, C3 winner2 . If a different constraint is chosen forcloning, different lexical items will be made part of a lexical trend. For example, if C1 iscloned, winner1 and winner4 will be made part of the lexical trend. In other words, cloningany one of the constraints in (155) will resolve the conflict, but different predictions aremade about the lexical trend involved.A scenario similar to the one in (155) is in (156), where a single conflict involves threeconstraints, and cloning any of the three would solve the inconsistency.(156)C1 C2 C3a. winner1 ≻ loser1 W L Lb. winner2 ≻ loser2 L W Wc. winner3 ≻ loser3 W W L160