Distributed Morphology definition

Distributed Morphology. Impoverishment and Fission.” In Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxx, & Xxxxxx XxXxxxxx (eds.), PF: Papers At the Interface. MITWPL 30, 425-­‐‑450. Cambridge, Mass.: Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx. 1992. Topics in the placement and morphology of clitics. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxx. 2003. “The Kiowa Case for Feature Insertion.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 543-­‐‑578. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx & Xxxxxx Xxxxxx. 1989. “On the position of inflection in West Germanic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 44, 75-­‐‑88. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx & Xxxxxxxx Xxxxx. 1999. “Everything you always wanted to know about complementizer agreement.” In X. xxx Xxxxxxxx & X. Xxxxxxx (eds.), Proceedings of WECOL 1998. Fresno, CA: California State University Press.
Sample 1
Distributed Morphology. Impoverishment and Fission.” In Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxx, & Xxxxxx XxXxxxxx (eds.), PF: Papers At the Interface. MITWPL 30, 425-450. Cambridge, Mass.: Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx. 1992. Topics in the placement and morphology of clitics. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxx. 2003. “The Kiowa Case for Feature Insertion.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 543-578. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx & Xxxxxx Xxxxxx. 1989. “On the position of inflection in West Germanic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 44, 75-88. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx & Xxxxxxxx Xxxxx. 1999. “Everything you always wanted to know about complementizer agreement.” In X. xxx Xxxxxxxx & X. Xxxxxxx (eds.), Proceedings of WECOL 1998. Fresno, CA: California State University Press. Xxxxxxxxxx, X.X. 2001. “IP-internal topic and focus positions.” Studia Linguistica 55.1, 39-75. Xxxxxx, Xxxxx van. 2005. One Probe – Two Goals: Aspects of Agreement in Dutch Dialects. Utrecht: LOT. Xxxxxx, Xxxxx van. 0000.Xxx probe, multiple goals: the case of First Conjunct Agreement. In: Xxxxx xxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxx & Xxxxxxx xxx xxx Xxx (eds.), Special Issue of Leiden Papers in Linguistics 3.2, 25-52. Leiden.
Sample 1
Distributed Morphology. Impoverishment and Fission”. Papers at the Interface (= MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30), ed. by Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxx, and Xxxxxx XxXxxxxx, 425–449. Cambridge MA: MITWPL. Xxxxx, Xxxxxx and Xxxx Xxxxxxx 1993. “Distributed Morphology and the Pieces of Inflection”. The View from Building 20, ed. by Xxxxxxx Xxxx and Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, 111–176. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxx 2000. ”Morphology Squib”. Ms., MIT. Xxxxxx, Xxxxx and Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx 2002. “A Feature-Geometric Analysis of Person and Number”. Language, 78(3).482–526. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx 1998. “Nganasan”. The Uralic Languages, ed. by Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, 480–515. London and New York: Routledge. Xxxxx, Xxxxxxx X. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Xxxxxxx, Xxxx 2001. ”Words”. Handout from WCCFL XX, available at xxxx://xxxxxx.xxx.xx.xx/zs2001/papersMarantz/WCCFL.doc. Xxxxx, Xxxx 1998. “Impoverishment Theory and Morphosyntactic Markedness”. Mor- phology and its Relation to Morphology and Syntax, ed. by Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxx
Sample 1

Examples of Distributed Morphology in a sentence

  • In Distributed Morphology, Vocabulary Insertion (VI) refers to the pairing of syntactic nodes with phonological representations or exponents, thus the mapping from syntax to phonological form.

  • Morphology consuming syntax’ resources: Generation and parsing in a minimalist version of Distributed Morphology.

  • We have also shown that agreement operations should not be handled by post-syntactic rules, such as those proposed in Distributed Morphology.

  • According to Distributed Morphology, the unexpected, but systematic, occurrence of the default form can happen due to language-specific, context-sensitive rules that “impoverish” contextual information (Bonet, 1991; Halle, 1997).

  • In Distributed Morphology, besides lexical roots and the category-defining nodes n0, v0 and a0, a third category consists of functional morphemes bearing their own category.

  • The MSIH adopts the premises of Distributed Morphology, a morphological theory in which obedience to a blocking principle leads to use of the most specific paradigmatic form given contextual restrictions (in this case, restricting properties of the subject).

  • Although Semitic discontinuous agreement has been discussed extensively in the previous literature on Distributed Morphology, going back to Xxxx Xxxxx’x (1992) MIT dissertation, the basic facts have continued to challenge theories of the post-syntactic component.

  • The analysis laid out here shares much in common with hybrid approaches to discontinuous agreement, though it departs from these proposals in several crucial ways, providing a novel account of the Semitic data in the framework of Distributed Morphology (DM) with important consequences for the formalization of certain post-syntactic operations (Halle and Marantz 1993, 1994; Harley and Noyer 1999).

  • The Russian Declension: An Illustration of the Theory of Distributed Morphology.

  • It is proposed that Fròʔò has a partly non-concatenative morphology and that a standard Distributed Morphology analysis cannot fully account for the phonology of the resulting morphemes.


More Definitions of Distributed Morphology

Distributed Morphology. Impoverishment and Fission.” In Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxx, & Xxxxxx XxXxxxxx (eds.), PF: Papers At the Interface. MITWPL 30, 425-450. Cambridge, Mass.: Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx. 1992. Topics in the placement and morphology of clitics. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxx. 2003. “The Kiowa Case for Feature Insertion.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 543-578. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx & Xxxxxx Xxxxxx. 1989. “On the position of inflection in West Germanic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 44, 75-88. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx & Xxxxxxxx Xxxxx. 1999. “Everything you always wanted to know about complementizer agreement.” In E. van Gelderen & X. Xxxxxxx (eds.), Proceedings of WECOL 1998. Fresno, CA: California State University Press. Xxxxxxxxxx, X.X. 2001. “IP-internal topic and focus positions.” Studia Linguistica 55.1, 39-75. Xxxxxx, Xxxxxx. 2001. “When can you save a structure by destroying it?” In Xxxxxx Xxx and Xxx Xxxxxxx (eds.), Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 31, 301-320. Amherst, Mass.: Graduate Linguistics Students Association. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx. 2001. “Reduced and phrasal comparatives.” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 19, 683–735. Xxxxxx, Xxxx. 1995. Ellipsis: Functional Heads, Licensing, and Identification. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Marantz, Alec. 1992. “Case and licensing.” In: Proceedings of ESCOL 1991, 234-253. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxx. 2001. The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands, and the Theory of Ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Xxxxx, Xxxx. 1997. Features, Positions, and Affixes in Autonomous Morphological Structure. New York: Garland.
Sample 1
Distributed Morphology. Impoverishment and Fission.” In Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxx, & Xxxxxx XxXxxxxx (eds.), PF: Papers At the Interface. MITWPL 30, 425-450. Cambridge, Mass.: Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx. 1992. Topics in the placement and morphology of clitics. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxx. 2003. “The Kiowa Case for Feature Insertion.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 543-578. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx & Xxxxxx Xxxxxx. 1989. “On the position of inflection in West Germanic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 44, 75-88. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx & Xxxxxxxx Xxxxx. 1999. “Everything you always wanted to know about complementizer agreement.” In E. van Gelderen & X. Xxxxxxx (eds.), Proceedings of WECOL 1998. Fresno, CA: California State University Press. Kinyalolo, Kasangati. 1991. Syntactic dependencies and the spec-head agreement hypothesis in Kilega. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx. 2001. “Reduced and phrasal comparatives.” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 19, 683–735. Xxxxxxx, Xxxx. 0000. “Case and licensing.” In: Proceedings of ESCOL 1991, 234-253. Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxx. 2001. The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands, and the Theory of Ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sample 1

Related to Distributed Morphology

  • distributed ledger technology means a database system in which—

  • Distributed Generation means generating plant equipment collectively used for generating electricity that is connected, or proposed to be connected, to the Network or a Customer's Installation, but does not include:

  • Distributed Generator means a person who owns or operates Distributed Generation;

  • Distributed generation facility means a facility owned and operated by a member of the Cooperative for the production of electrical energy that:

  • Distribution Protocol means the plan for distributing the Settlement Amount and accrued interest, in whole or in part, as approved by the Courts.

  • Intermediate Distribution Frame (IDF means a second frame that augments an existing Main Distribution Frame. Lines or outside cables that do not terminate on the IDF.

  • Nontraditional mortgage product means any mortgage product other than a 30-year fixed rate mortgage.

  • Cannabinoid extract means a substance obtained by separating cannabinoids from marijuana by:

  • Geothermal fluid means water in any form at temperatures greater than 120

  • explosive actuated fastening device means a tool that is activated by an explosive charge and that is used for driving bolts, nails and similar objects for the purpose of providing fixing;

  • Distribution Licensee means a licensee authorised to operate and maintain a distribution system for supplying electricity to the consumers in his area of supply;

  • HEPA filter means a high efficiency particulate absolute air filter capable of trapping and retaining 99.97 percent of fibers greater than 0.3 micrometers in mass median aerodynamic diameter equivalent.

  • Gasification means the substoichiometric oxidation or steam reformation of a substance to produce a gaseous mixture containing two or more of the following: (i) oxides of carbon; (ii) methane; and (iii) hydrogen;

  • Anti-Static Product means a product that is labeled to eliminate, prevent, or inhibit the accumulation of static electricity. “Anti-Static Product” does not include “Electronic Cleaner,” “Floor Polish or Wax,” “Floor Coating,” and products that meet the definition of “Aerosol Coating Product” or “Architectural Coating.”

  • Analytical x-ray system means a group of components utilizing x-rays to determine the elemental composition or to examine the microstructure of materials.

  • Mist spray adhesive means any aerosol which is not a special purpose spray adhesive and which delivers a particle or mist spray, resulting in the formation of fine, discrete particles that yield a generally uniform and smooth application of adhesive to the substrate.

  • Residual disinfectant concentration means the concentration of disinfectant measured in mg/L in a representative sample of water.

  • Medical marijuana concentrate means a specific subset of Medical Marijuana that was produced by extracting cannabinoids from Medical Marijuana. Categories of Medical Marijuana Concentrate include Water-Based Medical Marijuana Concentrate, Food-Based Medical Marijuana Concentrate and Solvent-Based Medical Marijuana Concentrate.

  • Total tetrahydrocannabinol means the sum of the percentage by weight of tetrahydrocannabinolic acid multiplied by eight hundred seventy-seven thousandths plus the percentage of weight of tetrahydrocannabinol.

  • Biological safety cabinet means a containment unit suitable for the preparation of low to moderate risk agents where there is a need for protection of the product, personnel, and environment, according to National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) Standard 49.

  • Combination Products means any product containing both a pharmaceutically active agent or ingredient which constitutes a Licensed Product and one or more other pharmaceutically active agents or ingredients which do not constitute Licensed Products.

  • COVID-19 symptoms means fever of 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit or higher, chills, cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headache, new loss of taste or smell, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, nausea or vomiting, or diarrhea, unless a licensed health care professional determines the person’s symptoms were caused by a known condition other than COVID-19.

  • inherited metabolic disease means a disease caused by an inherited abnormality of body chemistry for which testing is mandated by law;

  • Small Diversity business concern means a small business concern that is at least fifty-one (51) percent unconditionally owned by one or more individuals who are both socially and economically diverse, or a publicly owned business that has at least fifty-one (51) percent of its stock unconditionally owned by one or more socially and economically diverse individuals and that has its management and daily business controlled by one or more such individuals. This term also means a small business concern that is at least fifty-one (51) percent unconditionally owned by an economically diverse Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian Organization, or a publicly owned business that has at least fifty-one (51) percent of its stock unconditionally owned by one of these entities, that has its management and daily business controlled by members of an economically diverse Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

  • Assisted amusement device means an amusement device, skill device, or ride

  • Distributor / Distribution Company means Company(ies), Firm(s), Sole Proprietorship concern(s), individual(s), Banks or any other Financial Institution appointed by the Management Company under intimation to the Trustee for performing any or all of the Distribution Functions and who are registered with MUFAP as Registered Service Providers. The Management Company may itself also performs the Distribution Function.