Faust (2026) — Intrusion as Template Satisfaction #
@cite{faust-2026} @cite{mccarthy-1981} @cite{broselow-1984} @cite{lowenstamm-1996} @cite{lowenstamm-2014} @cite{kramer-2020}
Faust, Noam. 2026. Intrusion as template satisfaction and the QaTaT–QaTa problem in Semitic. Linguistic Inquiry 57(2): 427–441. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00524
Core contribution #
A single alignment principle, *Misalignment — "a nonfinal root element must not be template-final" (@cite{faust-2026} (2)/(6b)) — jointly resolves three Semitic puzzles:
The QaTaT–QaTa gap (Modern Hebrew). Triradical [j]-final roots like √klj
roastwould be predicted by template satisfaction (@cite{mccarthy-1981}) to fill the [+c]-specified template-final slot via spreading of the medial radical /l/, yielding *[kalal]. They surface instead as [kala] with an unfilled C-slot (@cite{faust-2026} (3c), (4)). *Misalignment derives this: spreading /l/ to template-final would put a nonfinal root element in template-final position. The grammar tolerates an unfilled C-slot rather than violate *Misalignment.Amharic [t]-intrusion (@cite{broselow-1984}). The [t] in Amharic gerund [fädʤto] and INF forms is reanalyzed not as a default consonant inserted to satisfy the template (@cite{broselow-1984}), but as the feminine /t/ — the n[+gen] exponent realized as a sister bound root in the sense of @cite{lowenstamm-2014} — which satisfies the template without being a nonfinal root segment, hence not violating *Misalignment. The strategy is unavailable for verbal forms because gender markers are inherent on n, not contextual on Agr (@cite{faust-2026} (11) — connects to @cite{kramer-2020}).
Apparent OCP-violating Amharic biradicals are reanalyzed. @cite{broselow-1984} concluded that Amharic admits OCP-violating √TT roots like √dd for [wäddäd-ä]
liked. @cite{faust-2026} (page 432) shows: oncescorch-type verbs are reanalyzed as triradical (√fdj, not biradical √fd), there is no remaining reason to posit OCP-violating roots. The [wäddäd-ä] form is based on biradical √wd, where /w/ ≠ /d/ — the surface gemination is a template-spreading effect, and *Misalignment is satisfied because the spread /d/ is the final root segment.
Architectural integration #
This file consumes and exercises the shared infrastructure:
Core.Morphology.Root— polymorphic consonantal-root carrier.Phonology.Templates—CVSlot,Template,Association,RootTemplateMatch, with derivedisMisaligned,allCSlotsFilled,satisfies.Phonology.Templates.starMisalign— the *Misalignment alignment constraint, built via the genericmkAlignconstructor.Phonology.Constraints.adjacentIdentical— drives the root-level OCP, used to verify @cite{faust-2026}'s OCP-related reanalysis.
Per-derivation decide theorems test all four combinations of
isMisaligned ∈ {true, false} × allCSlotsFilled ∈ {true, false},
making the central squib claim — Misalignment-violating candidates
are blocked even when they satisfy the template — visible at the
type level rather than restated in prose.
The Hebrew PST.3MSG verbal template CaCaC[+c] (@cite{faust-2026}
(1), (3a–c), (4)). Five slots; the final C-slot is [+consonantal],
blocking association from the glide /j/.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The Hebrew passive-participle template CaCuC (@cite{faust-2026}
(3c) discussion). Five slots; the final C-slot is not
[+c]-specified, so the glide /j/ associates to it freely
(yielding [kaluj], [tʃamuj]).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The Hebrew nominal template taQTiL[+c] (@cite{faust-2026} (9)–(10)):
six slots C V C C V C[+c]. The first C V (= "ta") is realized
by the n[+gen]-internal /t/ exponent and template vocalization;
the medial C C hosts the first two root radicals; the final
C[+c] is the slot that hosts the intruding feminine /t/ in the
feminine-noun reading (@cite{faust-2026} (10b–c)).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The Amharic PFV.3MSG verbal template (type-A pattern CäC.CäC[+c],
@cite{faust-2026} (5), (7)). Six slots C V C C V C[+c]; the
medial geminate C C is the position where Amharic spreads its
second radical, and the final C-slot is [+c]. The verbal -ä
person-marking suffix attaches outside this template.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The Amharic gerund template CäC.C[+c]-o (@cite{faust-2026} (8)).
Five slots: the final V hosts the gerund [-o] suffix; the
penult C[+c] is where the [t]-intruder lands when the root is
[j]-final.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The three-way QaTaT–QaTa contrast (@cite{faust-2026} (3)) #
@cite{faust-2026} (3) presents three Modern Hebrew verbs sharing the
same CaCaC[+c] template:
- (3a) [kalat] from √klt — full triradical, all radicals surface.
- (3b) [kalal] from √kll — final radical /l/ spreads/associates to template-final; legitimate because the spreading segment IS the final root segment (no *Misalignment violation).
- (3c) [kala] from √klj — analogous spreading would put nonfinal /l/ at template-final; *Misalignment blocks it, so the [+c] slot is left unfilled and the surface form has only two consonants.
The squib's analytical move: (3b) and (3c) look superficially identical — both would (or do) involve the medial radical surfacing in the final position — but *Misalignment discriminates by which root index the template-final segment came from.
(3a) [kalat] from √klt: full triradical control case. Every root segment associates to a distinct template C-slot; no spreading, no misalignment.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
(3b) [kalal] from √kll: the attested QaTaT pattern. The final /l/ at root index 2 associates to template-final C[+c]; this is the final-of-final case and *Misalignment is satisfied.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Candidate (4) of @cite{faust-2026}: the spreading derivation of
*[kalal] from √klj + CaCaC[+c]. The medial /l/ at root
index 1 is spread to the [+c] template-final slot (template
index 4). This is the candidate template satisfaction predicts;
@cite{faust-2026} (4) shows it is ruled out by *Misalignment.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The actual surface form [kala] (@cite{faust-2026} (3c)): only /k/ and /l/ associate; the [+c] template-final slot is left unfilled because /j/ cannot satisfy [+c] and spreading /l/ would violate *Misalignment. The grammar tolerates the unfilled C-slot.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The passive participle [kaluj] (@cite{faust-2026} (3c)): /j/ surfaces because the final C-slot is not [+c]-specified, so direct association succeeds and no spreading is required — *Misalignment trivially satisfied, all C-slots filled.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The illicit derivation (@cite{faust-2026} (10a)): √dmj associated directly to taQTiL[+c]. The prefix /t/ fills C0 (intruder, since it belongs to the template-internal "ta" exponent rather than √dmj), the root /d/ and /m/ fill C2 and C3 respectively, and to fill the [+c] final slot we attempt to spread /m/ — but /m/ is nonfinal in √dmj, so this violates *Misalignment.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The licit [tadmit] derivation (@cite{faust-2026} (10b–c)): the feminine n[+gen] exponent /t/ is added as a sister bound root, and its /t/ associates from the right to the [+c] final C-slot. Both the prefix /t/ at C0 and the suffix /t/ at C5 are intruder associations (not part of √dmj), so *Misalignment doesn't fire on either; the root /d/ and /m/ occupy nonfinal C-slots.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Amharic [fädʤ-ä] PFV.3MSG: √fdj in CäC.CäC[+c]. Following
@cite{faust-2026} (7a) with truncation: /f/ → C0, /d/ → C2 (and
spreads to C3 for gemination), /j/ has no slot — its palatality
merges with the preceding /d/ to yield [dʒ], and the penult V
plus final C[+c] are truncated in the surface form. The unfilled
final C-slot is precisely what the squib's analysis predicts.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Amharic gerund [fädʤto] (@cite{faust-2026} (8)): the feminine /t/ intruder fills the [+c] penult slot, and the final V slot hosts the gerund [-o] suffix. Because /t/ is an intruder (not a root segment), *Misalignment does not block it.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Amharic [wäddäd-ä] liked PFV.3MSG: √wd is biradical
(@cite{faust-2026} page 432). /w/ → C0; /d/ → C2 (and spreads to
C3 for gemination, and to C[+c]5 to fill the final slot). The
spread of /d/ to template-final is licit under *Misalignment
because /d/ is at root index 1, the final root segment of
√wd — there is no nonfinal-to-final misalignment. This is the
type-level demonstration that the surface contrast between
[wäddäd-ä] (biradical, OK) and *[kalal] (triradical, blocked)
falls out of *Misalignment alone, with no need for OCP-violating
roots.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Hebrew QaTaT–QaTa (@cite{faust-2026} (3), (4)) #
(3a) [kalat] from √klt: the full-triradical control case satisfies everything — every C-slot filled, no *Misalignment.
(3b) [kalal] from √kll: the attested QaTaT pattern satisfies the template (every C-slot filled) AND respects *Misalignment, because the segment at template-final is /l/ at root index 2 — the final root segment, so no nonfinal-to-final misalignment fires.
(4) The spreading candidate *[kalal] from √klj is misaligned.
(3c) The empty-slot candidate [kala] from √klj is not misaligned.
Spreading would have satisfied the template — i.e., kalal fills every C-slot — but it violates *Misalignment. The squib's central argument is that this latter violation is decisive.
The empty-slot [kala] candidate violates the C-slot-filling
requirement. The grammar tolerates this because every alternative
violates *Misalignment. (See qataT_qata_three_way_contrast for
the joint statement of the three-way fate.)
The passive participle [kaluj] is unproblematic on every dimension: final C-slot is not [+c]-specified, /j/ associates directly, no spreading required.
The full three-way contrast of @cite{faust-2026} (3): three roots, one template, three different fates determined by *Misalignment + [+c]-specification. The decisive feature is which root index sits at template-final:
- √klt: root-index 2 (= final). *Misalignment satisfied. ✓ [kalat]
- √kll: root-index 2 (= final, identical to medial). ✓ [kalal]
- √klj→l: root-index 1 (= nonfinal!). *Misalignment fires. ✗
- √klj→∅: no association at template-final. ✓ but C-slot empty: [kala]
The QaTaT–QaTa "puzzle" dissolves: superficially-identical surface patterns ([kalal] from √kll vs hypothetical [kalal] from √klj) have different root-template alignments, and *Misalignment discriminates by alignment, not by surface form.
Hebrew taQTiL intrusion (@cite{faust-2026} (10)) #
The illicit spreading derivation (@cite{faust-2026} (10a)) is misaligned: nonfinal /m/ landed at the template-final slot.
The licit [tadmit] derivation (@cite{faust-2026} (10b–c)) — feminine /t/ intruder at the final [+c] slot — is not misaligned.
And [tadmit] does satisfy the template (all C-slots filled). This is the squib's central analytical move: intrusion is a template-satisfaction strategy that escapes *Misalignment by not being a root segment in the first place.
Amharic [j]-final verbal vs nominal (@cite{faust-2026} (5), (8)) #
Amharic [fädʤ-ä] PFV is not misaligned (the final [+c] slot is truncated/unfilled, so no nonfinal root element is there).
Amharic [fädʤto] gerund satisfies the template via [t]-intrusion.
Faust's biradical reanalysis (@cite{faust-2026} page 432) #
√wd's biradical [wäddäd-ä] satisfies the template — every C-slot filled, no *Misalignment violation (spreading /d/ to template-final is licit because /d/ is the final root segment). The OCP-violating √dd analysis @cite{broselow-1984} posited is therefore unnecessary.
@cite{faust-2026}'s central observation about Hebrew (4): for the
same root √klj and template CaCaC[+c], the spreading candidate
violates *Misalignment (despite satisfying the template) while
the empty-slot candidate satisfies *Misalignment (despite an
unfilled C-slot). The grammar's preference for the empty slot
is exactly what *Misalignment >> FILL predicts — the squib's
OT-implicit ranking.
@cite{faust-2026}'s analytical move on Hebrew (10): templatic intrusion via the feminine /t/ is licit precisely because the intruder is not a root segment, so *Misalignment doesn't apply to it — and because it's licit, the template can be satisfied without an unfilled C-slot. The intruder strategy is strictly superior to spreading on both dimensions.
@cite{faust-2026}'s reanalysis (page 432): biradical vs triradical roots interact with *Misalignment differently. Spreading the final radical of a biradical root to template-final is licit (final-of-final), while spreading the medial radical of a triradical root is not. This is the type-level demonstration that the surface contrast between [wäddäd-ä] (OK) and *[kalal] (blocked) reduces to *Misalignment alone — no OCP-violating biradicals like @cite{broselow-1984}'s √dd are needed.
The squib's core analytical claim, in one statement: across both languages and all three phenomena, every form claimed to surface satisfies *Misalignment, while every form claimed to be ruled out violates it.
Connecting to the OCP infrastructure (@cite{mccarthy-1981}) #
Faust's biradical reanalysis turns on a substantive empirical claim about the OCP at the root level: once √fdj is recognized as triradical (with /j/ as the third radical, not a default-[t]-inducing biradical √fd), the only remaining "OCP violators" — apparent biradicals like √wd — turn out to have distinct radicals after all (/w/ ≠ /d/), with surface gemination produced by template spreading rather than root identity.
The Root.satisfiesOCP predicate (in Core.Morphology) makes this
verifiable rather than asserted.
@cite{faust-2026} page 432: √wd has no OCP violation at the root level — even though [wäddäd-ä] surfaces with adjacent identical [d][d], the surface gemination is a template-spreading effect.
@cite{faust-2026}'s reanalysis: √fdj (the triradical analysis) has no OCP violation.
And the Hebrew [j]-final root √klj also satisfies the OCP.
Sanity: a hypothetical OCP-violating biradical √dd (which @cite{broselow-1984} would have posited but @cite{faust-2026} rejects) really does violate the OCP under our predicate.
@cite{faust-2026} (11)'s structural diagnosis — that [t]-intrusion
is the exponent of n[+gen] (cf. @cite{kramer-2020}) and unavailable
for verbs because gender lives on a higher Agr head — is formalized
cross-paper in §12 below (the verbal/nominal asymmetry). The structural
Kramer-2015/2020 background itself is verified in
Phenomena/Gender/Studies/Kramer2020.lean.
The medial- vs. final-empty asymmetry #
@cite{faust-2026} (13) presents an asymmetry inside the [t]-intrusion paradigm itself. Three Amharic INF forms are derived from roots whose "hollow" element (a non-consonantal radical merging with vocalization) sits at different positions in the root:
(13a) [mäsmat] from √sma — non-consonantal final /a/ leaves the template-final C-slot unfilled. Right-edge [t]-intrusion fills that slot; the intruder is at the right edge of the association lines, so no other root association sits to its right. No NCC violation.
(13b) [mäsam] from √sam — non-consonantal medial /a/ leaves the medial C-slot unfilled, but the final C-slot is filled by the third radical /m/. Right-edge [t]-intrusion would have to land at the medial slot, with /m/ already associated to the final slot — and the intruder line would cross the /m/ line. NCC blocks it.
(13c) [mähid] from √hid — same structural configuration as (13b), but with /i/ as the non-consonantal medial. Same NCC blocking.
The Strict-CV @cite{lowenstamm-1996} representation makes this asymmetry visible: which C-slot is empty matters because the No-Crossing Constraint @cite{goldsmith-1976} discriminates by position relative to the rest of the association lines.
The infrastructure for this analysis lives in
Theories/Phonology/Templates.lean:
RootTemplateMatch.unfilledCSlots, RootTemplateMatch.violatesNCC, and
the noCross constraint.
Amharic infinitive template (the five CV-skeletal slots after the [mä-] infinitive prefix). The final slot is [+c]-specified, which is what makes the [t]-intrusion question arise at all.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
(13a) [mäsmat] from √sma hear: the non-consonantal final
radical /a/ leaves the template-final C-slot unfilled, and right-edge
[t]-intrusion fills it without crossing any other root line.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
(13b) [mäsam] from √sam kiss: the non-consonantal medial
radical /a/ leaves the medial C-slot unfilled, while the third
radical /m/ fills the final C-slot. The medial position remains
empty in the surface form.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Hypothetical [t]-intrusion candidate for √sam: tries to fill the medial C-slot from the right. The /m/ at C4 forces line-crossing. Demonstrates why intrusion is blocked in (13b).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
(13c) [mähid] from √hid go: structurally identical to (13b) —
non-consonantal medial /i/ leaves the medial C-slot unfilled, /d/
fills the final C-slot. Same NCC blocking of [t]-intrusion.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Hypothetical [t]-intrusion candidate for √hid: same NCC violation
as amharicSam_inf_intrusion.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Theorems — final-empty licenses intrusion, medial-empty blocks it #
(13a): √sma's [t]-intrusion derivation satisfies the template — every C-slot is filled (root + intruder), no *Misalignment fires.
(13a): the right-edge intruder in √sma's INF does NOT violate the No-Crossing Constraint — there is no root association sitting to its right to be crossed.
(13b)/(13c): without intrusion, the medial C-slot of √sam INF is
unfilled. Indices into amharicInf = [C, V, C, V, Cspec]: only
C2 is unfilled (C0 and C4 have associations, V1 and V3 aren't C-slots).
(13c): same medial-only unfilled-slot pattern for √hid INF.
(13b): the hypothetical [t]-intrusion derivation for √sam violates the No-Crossing Constraint — the intruder at C2 would cross the /m/ root association at C4. This is what blocks intrusion in (13b).
(13c): same NCC violation blocks intrusion in √hid INF.
The structural asymmetry behind @cite{faust-2026} (13) in one statement: among the three hollow-root INFs, the one where the non-consonantal radical is final (√sma, leaving the final C-slot empty) admits [t]-intrusion without violating NCC, while the two where the non-consonantal radical is medial (√sam, √hid, leaving the medial C-slot empty) do not — a hypothetical medial intruder would have to cross the final root association line.
The QaTaT–QaTa choice as an OT optimization, grounded in §3 #
The squib's analysis is implicitly an OT ranking argument: the grammar
chooses the candidate that satisfies *Misalignment over the candidate
that satisfies FILL. Sections 7–8 state this ranking via the joint
hebrew_klj_misalign_dominates_fill predicate; here we make it
explicit by building tableaux directly over the RootTemplateMatch
candidates defined in §3, using the existing starMisalign and
fill constraints from Theories/Phonology/Templates.lean.
This is the "derive, don't stipulate" architecture: the OT verdicts
follow from the same isMisaligned and allCSlotsFilled predicates
that prove §3–§7, so any change to those predicates would propagate
into the tableau predictions automatically.
Two demonstrations:
- The empirical ranking *Misalign >> FILL selects [kala], the surface form. This is the prediction.
- The reversed ranking FILL >> *Misalign selects *[kalal], the form that is empirically ruled out. This shows that the ranking is doing real work — without *Misalignment dominating, the spreading candidate would win on template-satisfaction grounds.
The √klj candidate set: the spreading attempt and the empty-slot
actual surface form. Built as the RootTemplateMatch values from
§3 — no enum re-stipulation.
Equations
Instances For
The empirical ranking *Misalign >> FILL selects [kala]: the
surface form, with an unfilled template-final C-slot, wins because
*Misalignment outranks FILL. The verdict follows from the
isMisaligned/allCSlotsFilled computations on the RootTemplateMatch
values — no stipulated violation tables.
Reversed ranking FILL >> *Misalign predicts the spreading candidate *[kalal] — the form @cite{faust-2026} (4) explicitly argues against. The reversed-ranking demo shows that *Misalignment dominance is doing the empirical work; without it, template satisfaction would force the wrong winner.
Factorial typology over {*Misalign, FILL}: the two rankings yield two distinct optimal sets. This is the OT-typological statement of @cite{faust-2026}'s claim — the constraint set predicts exactly two languages, the attested Hebrew/Amharic pattern (kala- type, with empty C-slots tolerated) and a hypothetical mirror (kalal-type, where spreading wins).
The (3) three-way contrast as a tableau #
For √klt and √kll, no *Misalignment violation arises in any candidate,
so both surface forms (hebrewKlt_kalat, hebrewKll_kalal) are
unique winners under any ranking — the QaTaT–QaTa "puzzle" only bites
when the third radical is /j/.
(3a) [kalat] from √klt is the unique optimum because every C-slot is filled and *Misalignment is satisfied — both constraints have zero violations, so it wins under any ranking.
(3b) [kalal] from √kll likewise wins as the unique optimum: the legitimate final-of-final spreading satisfies *Misalignment AND fills the template. Same logic as (3a), but the empirical interest is that the surface form is identical to the ungrammatical *[kalal] derivation from √klj — only the underlying root index differs, and that's exactly what *Misalignment is sensitive to.
The Hebrew taQTiL intrusion case as a three-candidate tableau #
The taQTiL[+c] template admits three derivations for √dmj: the
illicit spreading (10a, hebrewDmj_illicit), the licit intrusion
(10b–c, hebrewDmj_tadmit), and the empty-slot fallback. We need to
construct the empty-slot candidate explicitly to populate the tableau.
Empty-slot candidate for √dmj + taQTiL[+c]: the prefix /t/ plus /d/ and /m/ at C2/C3, with the [+c] final C-slot unfilled. Hypothetical (not the empirical winner) — included to exhibit the full three-way comparison.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The intrusion candidate [tadmit] is strictly better than both alternatives: it has 0 violations on *Misalign AND 0 violations on FILL. So under any ranking of these two constraints, [tadmit] wins. This is @cite{faust-2026}'s core analytical point about (10): intrusion lets the grammar "have it both ways".
And it wins under the reversed ranking too — because intrusion satisfies both constraints, the ranking between them is irrelevant once the intrusion candidate is in the candidate set.
The taQTiL factorial typology collapses to one language: when an intrusion strategy is in the candidate set, both rankings of {*Misalign, FILL} pick the same winner. The OT-typological statement that intrusion is "ranking-invariant" — exactly the sense in which @cite{faust-2026} (10b–c) makes intrusion the grammar's optimal escape from the misalignment dilemma.
Cross-paper bridge — n[+gen] licenses intrusion, Agr does not #
@cite{faust-2026} (11) attributes the nominal-only distribution of [t]-intrusion to a structural fact: the intruding /t/ is the exponent of the n[+gen] head in @cite{kramer-2020}'s sense — gender is realized inherently on n, exposed as a sister bound root in @cite{lowenstamm-2014}'s sense. In verbal forms the corresponding gender feature lives on a higher Agr head as contextual agreement, not as an inherent root-like exponent on v itself; consequently no intruder is morphosyntactically available to fill the templatic slot.
Sections 1–11 verify the prosodic side of the analysis (intrusion
satisfies the template without violating *Misalignment). This
section verifies the morphological side by formalizing the Faust
claim as a predicate on Kramer's CatHead:
Intrusion is licensed iff the categorizer is
nand carries a gender feature.
Once that predicate is in place, the verbal/nominal asymmetry is no
longer a docstring stipulation — it falls out by rfl from
RootTemplateMatch.intrusionLicensed applied to the per-template
CatHead tags, and breaks if either Faust's morphological claim or
Kramer's CatHead taxonomy changes.
The morphological-licensing predicate CatHead.licensesIntrusion
itself lives in Theories/Morphology/DM/Categorizer.lean (alongside
the Kramer taxonomy it ranges over), together with its per-canonical-
head verification theorems (n_uFem_licenses_intrusion,
v_plain_blocks_intrusion, etc.) and the iff characterization
Morphology.DM.licensesIntrusion_iff_n_and_gen. The Faust-specific
content of §12 is the per-template CatHead tagging and the
per-derivation verdicts below.
Per-template CatHead tags #
Faust's analysis assigns each templatic morphology slot to a specific categorizer head. These are the morphosyntactic claims; the intrusion-licensing predictions follow mechanically.
Hebrew PST.3MSG CaCaC[+c] is realized at v (verbal categorizer);
gender lives on the Agr head outside the template, so v itself
has no gender-bearing exponent to intrude.
Equations
Instances For
Hebrew passive participle CaCuC is also v-realized.
Equations
Instances For
Hebrew taQTiL[+c] is a feminine deverbal noun realized at n[+gen] (the u[+FEM] head in Kramer's Set 1 taxonomy — the source of the intruding /t/).
Equations
Instances For
Amharic PFV.3MSG CäC.CäC[+c] is v-realized.
Equations
Instances For
Amharic gerund CäC.C[+c]-o is a deverbal nominal at n[+gen].
Equations
Instances For
Amharic infinitive mä-CVCVC[+c] is also a deverbal nominal at
n[+gen] — confirmed by the (13a) [t]-intrusion in [mäsmat].
@cite{faust-2026}'s analysis treats Amharic infinitives as
nominalizations whose template is hosted on n.
Equations
Instances For
Universal licensing structure (Faust + Kramer) #
The Faust-CatHead interaction is governed by a single structural
fact, derivable by composing intrusionLicensed_iff
(Templates.lean) with licensesIntrusion_iff_n_and_gen
(Categorizer.lean). The per-derivation decide theorems below and the
end-of-section verbal_nominal_asymmetry_from_kramer bundle are all
instances of this universal claim.
The Faust+Kramer integration theorem. A RootTemplateMatch
passes intrusion-licensing under a CatHead iff either the match
is intruder-free OR the head is a gender-bearing nominal (n[+gen],
in @cite{kramer-2020}'s sense).
This is the universal-quantification of @cite{faust-2026} (11): every per-derivation verdict in §12 reduces to checking which disjunct holds for the specific (match, head) pair.
Corollary (verbal half). Under a verbal locus (v_plain, with
no gender feature), licensing reduces to intruder-freeness. This is
why every verbal Faust derivation in §3–§6 must be intruder-free
to be morphologically licensed — the spreading and empty-slot
strategies are the only options open to v.
Corollary (nominal half). Under an n_uFem locus (gender-
bearing nominal), every match is licensed regardless of intruder
status. This is why intrusion is available to nominal templates
like Hebrew taQTiL and Amharic gerunds/INFs — the Kramer-2020
structure makes the n[+gen] exponent morphosyntactically present.
Per-derivation licensing theorems #
For every match, the predicate RootTemplateMatch.intrusionLicensed
applied to the corresponding template's CatHead.licensesIntrusion
gives the well-formedness verdict. The proofs are decide — the
disjunction reduces by rfl once the predicates evaluate.
Hebrew verbal forms (no intrusion possible) #
Hebrew nominal taQTiL (intrusion possible) #
The illicit-spreading derivation also passes intrusion-licensing (its prefix /t/ is an intruder, but n[+gen] licenses it). The derivation is ruled out by *Misalignment, not by the morphological licensing — a useful separation.
Amharic verbal vs nominal #
The verbal-intrusion blocking theorem #
The empirical content of @cite{faust-2026} (11) is negative: a verbal template cannot host an [t]-intruder, even when a phonological analog of intrusion would technically resolve a misalignment problem. Construct a hypothetical verbal candidate that tries to use intrusion — analogous to the licit nominal [tadmit] — and prove it fails morphological licensing.
Hypothetical: √dmj realized in the verbal PST.3MSG template
CaCaC[+c] with a feminine /t/ intruder occupying the [+c]
final slot. Phonologically identical to a nominal intrusion
candidate, but Agr-locus precludes the n[+gen] exponent
morphosyntactically.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The hypothetical verbal-intrusion candidate has all C-slots filled and is not misaligned: it satisfies the prosodic well-formedness conditions @cite{faust-2026} states.
But under @cite{faust-2026}'s morphological-licensing predicate, it fails: v-locus does not license n[+gen]'s /t/ exponent.
The cross-paper integration theorem #
The verbal/nominal asymmetry of @cite{faust-2026} (11), derived
from @cite{kramer-2020}'s CatHead taxonomy:
Intrusion is licensed at n[+gen] (here
n_uFem). Both Hebrew taQTiL [tadmit] and the hypothetical verbal-template intrusionhebrewDmj_pst3msg_intrusionwould pass intrusion-licensing if the locus were n[+gen]. The first derivation IS at n[+gen]; the second is not.Intrusion is blocked at v. The hypothetical verbal intrusion candidate, despite satisfying the template, fails intrusion-licensing because v doesn't expose a gender exponent.
Intruder-free verbal derivations always pass licensing. Every verbal candidate in §3–§6 (kala, kalal, kalat, kaluj, fdj_pfv, wd_pfv) is intruder-free, so it passes vacuously.
The asymmetry is therefore derived — not stipulated — from the
composition of two independent claims: Faust's licensing
predicate (only n with [+gen]) and Kramer's CatHead structure
(n vs. v).