jelenségek szintaktikai háttere [Syntactic background of inflectional phenomena]. In Kiefer (2000, 653–762).
Bartos , Huba . 2009 . The syntax of Hungarian -va adverbial pariticiples: A single affix with variable merge-in locations. In É. Kiss (2009, 75
The traditional literature on English morphophonology highlights a phonological distinction between two classes of affixes; Level 1/Stem affixes are included in the phonological domain of the base to which they attach and, for example, affect the
In this paper, I review how formal features are currently regarded and used in the Minimalist Program. Although features are the cornerstone in Minimalism, they are used in many different and conflicting ways. Features may seem particularly relevant to affix-hop because the affix has to be checked against a higher verb or auxiliary. Chomsky’s (1957) analysis of affix-hop has the affix connected with an auxiliary, e.g., the -en of have-en, move to a verb on its right, as in have see-en. This analysis is one of the high points of early generative grammar but, with each new instantiation of the generative model, it has needed adjustments and the phenomenon is still debated. I will elaborate on a proposal made in van Gelderen (2013) who argues that interpretable tense, mood, or aspect are in a low position being probed by the relevant uninterpretable features in a high position. This view I claim is consistent with data from change and acquisition. I also discuss the implications of this reliance on features for learnability and Universal Grammar.
This paper is concerned with the status of bound forms in compounds and other lexical items, but it ultimately aims at setting up a hierarchy of lexical items of various degrees of “freedom”, making use of clear-cut criteria applicable in at least one (fairly large) group of languages. In spite of the difficulties of the various (phonological, morphological, lexical, and semantic) definitions of ‘word’, Bloomfield’s characterization of minimum free forms is applied to designate items at the top of the hierarchy, which are called ‘autonomous words’. Bound forms that allow autonomous words to occur between them and the lexical item they are bound to are ‘dependent words’. The novelty of this paper lies in dividing the rest of the lexical items “below”, i.e., ‘nonwords’, into three groups: semiwords, affixoids, and affixes, based on a new application of a familiar operation, coordination reduction, which is shown to work both backward and forward for some items, but only backward reduction is possible for others.
The morphological analysis of Hungarian in the early period of grammatical work was based on three interlaced traditions: Classical Graeco-Roman, Hebrew and German. These were applied to languages that were structurally very much unlike Hungarian. The evolution of morphological analysis was therefore a relatively slow and complicated process, whose milestones discussed in this paper, the four earliest grammars of Hungarian, all represent different stages of development. The grammar by Pál Pereszlényi, which is analysed in some detail here, surpasses the earlier grammars in its acumen on at least three counts: the same set of analytical terms is applied in the description of nominal and verbal morphology; the notions of bound stem and relative stem are clearly recognised; a distinction is made between stems as morphological constituents and word forms serving as starting points of paradigms.
stress. Ichishkiin Sɨnwit (henceforth IS) is additionally interesting for a study of morphology-phonology interplay in lexical stress as it has been previously analyzed as a unique example of an Affix Controlled Accent language ( Hargus & Beavert 2006
] [ + c o n s o n a n t a l + o b s t r u e n t ] In an extensive study of the grammar of MSA, Ryding (2005) describes the assimilation that happens in the pattern of “ɪ-ta-a” and with the definite article “al-”. She points out that the affix /t/ in