Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the email-subscribers domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /hum/web/sitestest.hum.uu.nl/htdocs/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114
Utrecht Theoretical Linguistics | Syntax Interface Lecture: Marijke De Belder

Utrecht Theoretical Linguistics

Events

10 October 2019
16:00 - 17:00
Utrecht, Trans 10, room 0.19 (A.W. de Grootkamer)

Syntax Interface Lecture: Marijke De Belder

On 10 October, Marijke De Belder (Carl von Ossietzky University, Oldenburg) will give a Syntax Interface Lecture.

Title: Category-specific syllable structures

In this talk I present an experiment that shows that speakers of Dutch have intuitions on the category of a pseudoword. They ‘feel’ that the pseudoword ‘pardijf’ is fine as a noun -but not as a verb-, ‘streumel’, on the other hand, feels more like a verb. The syllable structure of the words steers this intuition (Trommelen 1989 and see Don & Erkelens 2006).

In typological literature, it has been observed that, cross-linguistically, a word’s suprasegmental phonological properties may be related to its category. The prosody of verbs is much more restricted than nominal prosody (Smith 2011). This seems to be true for Dutch as well. The morphological bases of morphologically simplex non-Latinate verbs are restricted to a single syllable (e.g. kom ‘come’, German) or a single syllable plus a reduced syllable (e.g. fluister ‘whisper’), whereas nouns can be polysyllabic (e.g. konijn ‘rabbit’). An analysis for the Dutch patterns could thus contribute to our general understanding of the phenomenon.

I hypothesise that the account of the phenomenon is to be found in morphosyntax. This part of the project will be embedded in the framework of Distributed Morphology. In this framework one finds morphosyntactic approaches to category-specific phonological restrictions. Various categories may differ as the words are built differently per category: structural differences result in phonological differences (Bobaljik 1998, 2006, Arad 2005, Holmberg & Wang 2019). Present proposals are limited to non-Indo-European languages. It is at this point an open question whether and how such explanatory insights can be applied to Germanic languages.