Here are the links to the first three Morphology as Syntax workshops. Hopefully, the fourth will be held soon. Keep your eyes open for announcements:
MaS IV (TBA)
For convenience, I also include a link to Collins and Kayne 2023, which is the philosophical foundation of the MaS workshop series:
MaS (Morphology as Syntax) is a framework which asks the question of whether putative morphological phenomena can be can be accounted for in terms of syntactic principles and operations. In MaS there is no morphological component, nor are there any post-syntactic morphological operations.
So far, I have been able to publish three papers in this framework. I list the papers, and their abstracts below, in chronological order. These three papers are enough to get a general feel for the framework, and some tools to begin working with it.
I would really love to hear from people who are doing work in a related spirt, taking syntax seriously in the analysis of putative morphological generalizations.
1. Spanish usted as an Imposter (2021, Probus, with Francisco Ordóñez)
Abstract: Across dialects, Spanish uses the third person forms usted and ustedes to refer to the addressee. In this squib, we propose an imposter analysis of these forms in the framework of Collins and Postal (2012. Imposters. MIT Press, Cambridge.). (link)
2. Towards a Theory of Morphology as Syntax (2023, Studies in Chinese Linguistics, with Richard Kayne)
Abstract: Phenomena traditionally thought of as morphological can be accounted for in terms of syntactic operations and principles, hence bringing forth questions that traditional morphology fails to ask (for instance, concerning the licensing of empty morphemes). The language faculty contains no specific morphological component, nor any post-syntactic morphological operations. (link)
3. A Syntactic Approach to Case Contiguity (2025, Continua)
Abstract: Building on the empirical results and theoretical insights of Caha (2013), I show howto derive the Case Contiguity Constraint in a syntactic theory of morphology. In particular, I show how to derive *ABA in the domain of case syncretism without appeal to late insertion. (link)
Here are the handouts which I distributed as part of the "Morphology as Syntax" seminar during Fall 2024. I do not include materials that Richie distributed or the student presentations, which were really interesting and very relevant to the goals of the course. As you can see, it was a productive semester, more for consolidating old ideas, than for proposing new ones.
The Juncture Morpheme in Kua (September 23 2024)
A Very Short History of MaS (September 24 2024)
Two Allomorphy Models without Late Insertion (September 24 2024)
A Syntactic Approach to Case Contiguity
Forms of the Copula in English
A Note on Singular They/Them (November 6 2024)
A Note on Singular They/Them (Addendum November 6 2024)
Abstract: MaS (“Morphology as Syntax”) is a framework for the analysis of so-called morphological phenomena developed in Collins and Kayne (2023) and the papers cited there. Without going into any technical proposals, I will cover some general ways in which MaS is more than a framework, but also a state of mind. Surprisingly, most of these high-level properties distinguish MaS from DM (“Distributed Morphology”) to some extent, as will be discussed below.
Abstract: Caha et. al. (2024) give an interesting account of the forms of adjectives in Czech. They propose that the different forms of the positive and comparative can be accounted for by a system of portmanteau lexical items, formalized in the Nanosyntax framework. In this squib, I give a alternative account of the data in the MaS (‘Morphology as Syntax’) framework (see Collins and Kayne 2023) without invoking portmanteau or Late Insertion. Rather, the account developed makes crucial use of the licensing of empty elements.
Allomorphy without Context: An MaS Alternative
Abstract: In this blog post, I situate the results of Kayne’s (2018) in the imposter framework of Collins and Postal (2012) and Collins and Ordóñez (2021).
Summary: Nanosyntax is a theory of syntax that assumes late insertion, and phrasal spell-out.
< /blikәt/ ⇔ [ZP Z [YP Y [XP X ]]] ⇔ BLICKET > (Baunaz and Lander 2018: 26)
Example: Russian accusative of ‘lip’ gub-ú (Caha 2020: 30, example (65))
[ACCP F2 [NOMP F1 [#P # [FEMP FEM REF]]]]
Discuss: Superset Principle, Elsewhere Principle, Cyclic Override Principle
Positives:
1. Minimalist (Merge), Cartography, LCA
2. One feature, one head (no bundling)
3. No Morphological Component (no impoverishment, no post-syntactic insertion)
Spellout-Driven Movement
1. Motivated by Spellout (in addition to syntactic movement)
2. Leaves no trace (needed for lexical insertion)
3. Spellout Algorithm/Lexicalization Algorithm (Caha et. al. 2024)
a. Merge F and lexicalize FP
b. If (a) fails, move the Spec of the complement of F, and lexicalize FP
c. If (b) fails, move the complement of F, and lexicalize FP
d. If (c) fails, go back to the previous cycle and try the next option for that cycle
Paval Caha (p.c.): “You need Spec movement before complement movement in all cases where an agglutinative form (derived by complement movement) could have been used, but never is, because there is a portmanteau morpheme.”
Worries:
1. Spellout driven movement seems like a second syntactic system (outside of regular syntax) needed for spell-out. In that way, it is similar to the operations of the morphological component (e.g., impoverishment, post-syntactic movement) in DM.
2. How does compositional semantics work in Nanosyntax?
a. Spell-out driven movement does not leave traces.
b. Lexical insertion introduces conceptual material at the phrasal level.
MaS and Nanosyntax:
Note: NS uses phrasal spell-out, where MaS uses empty elements.
Hypothesis: For every NS proposal, it is possible to translate that proposal mechanically into an MaS proposal in the following way:
a. If in NS, a lexical item spells out a phrase with one head H as PHON, then in MaS, there is the lexical item {H, PHON}.
b. If in NS, a lexical item spells out a phrase involving two heads H1 and H2 (H1 c-commands H2) as PHON, then in MaS, there is the lexical item {H2, PHON}, and H1 is licensed as an empty element when occurring with H2.
December 2020
First version of “Towards a Theory of Morphology as Syntax” posted to Lingbuzz.
(published in 2023)
August 2018
Collins’ “The Logical of Contextual Allomorphy” posted to Linguzz. “I explore ways of analyzing contextual allomorphy that eschew reference to competition and blocking.”
December 2016
Kayne’s “What is Suppletive Allomorphy? On ‘went’ and ‘*goed’ in English’ posted to Lingbuzz (published in 2019). “These analyses do not invoke late insertion. It may be that late insertion is systematically unavailable.”
September 28, 2015
The name “Morphology as Syntax (MAS)” is proposed for first time.
December 13, 2012
Considering names for approach:
syntax-based morphology, Merge-based morphology, minimalist morphology
January 14-19, 2012
Long e-mail discussions about English past tense morphology.
January 14, 2012
Long e-mail discussion of “contextual allomorphy” with the conclusion that there is no contextual allomorphy.
Here is a handout from my seminar with Richard Kayne (Morphology as Syntax). On this handout, I outline two approaches to allomorphy not involving late insertion. This list is not meant to be exclusive. In fact, in the very same class period (September 23 2023), I presented yet another completely different model of allomorphy based on autosegmental phonology.
Syllabus MaS Seminar (Fall 2024)
Course Description:
This seminar will develop the program sketched in Collins and Kayne (2023) (MaS or "Morphology as Syntax"). We will attempt to show that pursuing a syntactic approach to various questions that might otherwise be called ‘morphological’ yields deeper insights than could otherwise be achieved.
The choice of topics will in part be sensitive to the interests of the students. Some possible topics include (but are not limited to): grammatical gender and noun class, approaches to allomorphy and syncretism not based on late insertion and competition, the non-existence of post-syntactic operations, the non-existence of suppletion, the licensing of empty elements, merge-based approaches to phonology.
This seminar will develop the program sketched in Collins and Kayne (2023) (MaS or "Morphology as Syntax"). We will attempt to show that pursuing a syntactic approach to various questions that might otherwise be called ‘morphological’ yields deeper insights than could otherwise be achieved.
Course Description:
This seminar will develop the program sketched in Collins and Kayne (2023) (MaS or "Morphology as Syntax"). We will attempt to show that pursuing a syntactic approach to various questions that might otherwise be called ‘morphological’ yields deeper insights than could otherwise be achieved.
Morphology as Syntax 3
Short Title: MaS3
Date: 15-Sep-2023 - 16-Sep-2023
Location: Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada
Contact: Tom Leu
Contact Email: leu.thomas@uqam.ca
Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories
Meeting Description:
The purpose of this workshop is to investigate the relationship between morphology and syntax, and in particular to investigate the extent to which morphological generalizations can be accounted for in terms of purely syntactic operations and conditions. Can morphology and syntax be unified under purely Merge based theories with the same principles? If so, what does this tell us about the type of syntactic theory we should pursue?
Invited speakers (in alphabetical order):
Léna Baunaz (University of Geneva)
Vicki Carstens (University of Connecticut)
James Crippen (McGill University)
Peter Kondwandi Msaka (University of Malawi)
Neil Myler (Boston University)
Sandhya Sundaresan (SUNY Stony Brook)
Peter Svenonius (University of Tromsø)
SAVE THE DATE -- STAY TUNED FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
The second Morphology as Syntax workshop (MaS2), organized by UCLA, will take place online on June 10-11 2022, from 9 am-12.30pm PDT (Please adjust to your local time zone).
The purpose of the workshop is to investigate the relationship between morphology and syntax, and in particular to investigate the extent to which morphological generalizations can be accounted for in terms of purely syntactic operations and conditions. See here for MaS1.
The workshop will involve talks by invited speakers followed by question periods, and comments by panel members followed by general discussion. Here is the line-up of speakers and panel members:
Invited speakers (in alphabetical order):
Pavel Caha https://www.muni.cz/en/people/
Norbert Corver http://norbert.abelcorver.com,
Karen De Clercq http://www.llf.cnrs.fr/fr/
Marit Julien https://portal.research.lu.se/
Heather Newell https://heathernewell.ca,
Dimitrios Ntelitheos https://faculty.uaeu.ac.ae/
Edwin Williams https://scholar.princeton.edu/
Panel members:
Antonio Fábregas https://en.uit.no/ansatte/
Michelle Sheehan https://msheehan.net
The workshop will be free. Please spread the word. Hope to see many of you on zoom in June.
--Hilda Koopman
(on behalf of my fellow UCLA organizers, Stefan Keine and Harold Torrence)
Here are three Facebook threads on morphology. They contain many posts by various linguists on the topic of morphology, and in particular the relation between syntax and morphology. I have learned a lot from my colleagues by participating in these dialogues. Since I often have a difficult time locating these posts, I thought I would post them on my blog for ease of reference:
Abstract: Across dialects, Spanish uses the third person forms usted and ustedes to refer to the addressee. In this squib, we propose an imposter analysis of these forms in the framework of Collins and Postal 2012.
Keywords: imposters, camouflage, usted, ustedes, ghosting, impoverishment
Abstract: Building on the empirical results and theoretical insights of Caha 2013, I show how to derive the Case Contiguity Constraint in a syntactic theory of morphology. In particular, I show how to derive *ABA in the domain of case syncretism without appeal to late insertion.
Here is a new paper on morphology. I do not intend to post this to Lingbuzz.
Abstract: In this paper, I give a syntactic analysis of the suppletive forms of the copula (i.e., is, are, am) that eschews reference to late insertion, competition and blocking. Rather, the paradigm is explained in terms of a rich set of functional projections dominating the copular VP, and principles by which the heads of those projections are spelled-out.
