Tamura in Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

PhD student Jun Tamura has recently published a paper titled “Compounding words in the syntax can produce phrasal phonology: Evidence from Japanese Aoyagi morphemes” in Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. The paper grew out of Jun’s QP1, chaired by Ryan Bennett, with Rachel Walker and Mia Gong serving on the committee. Congratulations Jun!

Abstract: Various proposals have been made to account for mismatches between syntax and prosody in natural languages. Prosodic prespecification (i.e., prosodic subcategorization) attributes such mismatches to morpheme-specific prosodic requirements (Bennett et al. 2018; Tyler 2019). On the other hand, Hsu (2019) and Revithiadou and Markopoulos (2021) argue that some patterns previously analyzed through subcategorization can instead be captured in Gradient Harmonic Grammar (Smolensky and Goldrick 2016) without a syntax-prosody mismatch. This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion about the syntax–prosody mismatch by addressing ‘Aoyagi prefixes’ in Japanese (e.g., gen ‘current’ in gen-daijin ‘current Minister’). While the ‘word-internal phrase boundary’ associated with Aoyagi morphemes has been attributed to prosodic subcategorization (Poser 1990), I argue that such subcategorization is unnecessary. The key evidence lies in the fact that all Aoyagi morphemes are accented. Vance (2008) and Ito and Mester (2013) independently observe that a prosodic phrase boundary emerges between the first and second elements only when the first element is an accented prosodic word in Japanese. Building on this correlation between accent and prosodic phrasing, I put forward an alternative analysis: I propose that Aoyagi morphemes are not prefixes but syntactic words (X⁰), such that the entire Aoyagi construction should be analyzed as a syntactic compound [X⁰ X⁰ X⁰] (Booij 2010). Given this structure, their prosodic behavior follows from an XP-to-φ mapping system (Ito and Mester 2013), where constraints on accent placement play a crucial role in mapping syntactic heads to phonological phrases, overriding Match constraints.

Sichel & Toosarvandani in _Linguistic Inquiry_

Congrats to Ivy and Maziar, whose new article appeared this past month in Linguistic Inquiry:

We introduce a novel locality violation and its repair in Southeastern Sierra Zapotec: an object pronoun cannot cliticize when the subject is a lexical DP. We develop an account in which pronouns and lexical DPs interact with the same probe because they share featural content. In particular, we suggest that the Person domain extends to include nonpronominal DPs, so that all nominals are specified for a feature we call [δ] (to resonate with DP), while all and only personal pronouns are specified for [π]. This account aims to unify the locality violation with the Weak Person-Case Constraint (PCC), as well as parallel constraints based on animacy, and requires a departure from Chomsky’s (2000, 2001) classical system of featural covariation (Agree). A functional head must be able to overprobe—that is, interact with more than one goal, even if its requirements appear to be met. We introduce a probe activation model for Agree in which, after applying once, the operation can apply again, subject to certain restrictions. We compare probe activation with two other systems recently proposed to account for overprobing: Deal’s (2015, 2022) “insatiable probes” and Coon and Keine’s (2021) “feature gluttony.” Neither can account for the locality pattern in Zapotec.