Docs / Studies / Studies.ItoMester2019

Match as Syntax-Prosody MAX/DEP: Prosodic Enclisis in English

Itô, J. & Mester, A. (2019). English Linguistics, 36(1), 1–28

Source Bibliography Paper

Itô and Mester replace Match Theory's demand that each phrase be matched exactly by a φ with the existential correspondence of Correspondence Theory: SP:MAX-XP asks only that each phrase have a corresponding φ, no φ answering to two phrases. An English auxiliary reduces to an enclitic 's phrase-medially (Kim's leaving) but not phrase-finally (I wonder if Kim is, not Kim's): a final 's leaves its phrase without a φ of its own, a medial one does not. With PRIORITY of 's unranked against Align-R(XP, φ) the medial position varies and the final one does not, a line that exact Match cannot draw.

Implementation notes

  • A φ or ω corresponds to a phrase or lexical word when it contains its head and no foreign head (Prosody.Corresponds), and no φ answers to two phrases: a φ over a verb and a stranded preposition is no φ of the PP, and one φ over a subject and T serves only one of their phrases.
  • Positions are terminals: the host, the function word, and the lexical word after it if any. Each word is one syllable, and a host's syllable realizes an enclitic 's too, so the spans of the prosodic tree are carried to terminal cuts by the number of terminals each syllable realizes.
  • GEN pairs each form with every choice of φs over the host, over the function word and what follows it, and over both. A φ over nothing is no φ, so the ban on prosodic vacuity (39) needs no statement.
  • The topmost phrase is counted, which the tableaux of (40)–(46) leave out. The flat and enclitic rows of (40) and (42) then have two MAX-XP violations, not one; exact Match(ω, lex) counts ω(Kim's), which spans the enclitic, as (43)–(46) do not; and PRIORITY counts əs in (42) as it does in (41). No winner changes.

References

Inputs and candidates

L56–68
L74–82
L84–86
L90–92
L94–95
L97–98
L106–116
L130–136
L146–155
L157–164

Constraints

L176–199

English

A phrase-final function word takes its strong form, and an object pronoun inside the verb its weak form ((18), (25)).

theorem forms_phraseFinalL227–233
(r : OptimalityTheory.Ranking Con 6) :
r ∈ [alignFirst, priorityFirst] → Finset.image (fun (x : Candidate) => x.form) (correspondence.language r lookAt) = {Form.strong} ∧ Finset.image (fun (x : Candidate) => x.form) (correspondence.language r seeYa) = {Form.weak}

Built from , , , , , ,

Exact Match

Existential correspondence draws the line: under priorityFirst an enclitic wins in Kim 's leaving and none in Kim 's, against the implication exact Match obeys.

theorem correspondence_not_enclitic_final_of_medialL278–285
:
¬∀ (r : OptimalityTheory.Ranking Con 6), Form.enclitic ∈ Finset.image (fun (x : Candidate) => x.form) (correspondence.language r kimIsLeaving) → Form.enclitic ∈ Finset.image (fun (x : Candidate) => x.form) (correspondence.language r kimIs)

Built from , , , ,