Stanley Dubinsky (DUBINSK@vm.sc.edu)
Fri, 17 Oct 97 13:31:34 EDT
>Also, there seem to be two different types of >lexical rules: derrivational/inflectional, i.e. rules that take care of >morphological operations, and "transformational", those that alter the >argument structure or the syntactic properties of a lexical item. Has >anybody thought of the differences or similarities of these two kinds? >What is the current status of the discussion around this issue? You might want to have a look at an article in Language that I published with a student on this issue. It examines facts pertaining to this in Chichewa and English: Dubinsky, Stanley, & Silvester Ron Simango. 1996. Passive and stative in Chichewa: Evidence for modular distinctions in grammar. Language 72.683-781. The article revisits some of the issues originally brought up in Wasow 1977 and Bresnan 1982. The formal solution proposed for Chichewa is a Lexical Mapping Theory analysis, but I think that the empirical bases for the distinctions are valid from any theoretical perspective. Hope you find it useful. Best, Stan Dubinsky References: Bresnan, Joan. 1982. The passive in lexical theory. The mental representation grammatical relations, ed. by Joan Bresnan, 3-86. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wasow, Thomas. 1977. Transformations and the lexicon. Formal syntax, ed. by Peter Culicover, 327-60. New York: Academic Press. ******************************************************************* * Stanley Dubinsky E-mail: dubinsky@sc.edu * * Linguistics Program phone: 803-777-2056 * * U of South Carolina fax: 803-777-9064 * * Columbia, SC 29208 http://www.cla.sc.edu/ENGL/dubinskyst.html * *******************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri Dec 18 1998 - 20:36:09 PST