Morphotactics

In intuitive terms, the micromorphology hypothesis is the hypothesis that an affix can itself be morphologically complex. This is a widespread assumption in descriptive accounts of the morphology of individual languages; yet, with only the rarest exceptions, morphological theory has tended to reject this hypothesis, most often tacitly. My objective here is therefore threefold. ¶ I begin by characterizing the micromorphology hypothesis in more precise terms, exemplifying it with the analysis of nominal inflection in Noon (Niger-Congo/Atlantic; Senegal) presented by Soukka 2000 and showing that in a rule-based conception of morphology, this hypothesis entails an operation of rule composition similar (though not identical) to the operation of function composition in mathematics. ¶ I propose an inferential-realizational morphological theory that implements the micromorphology hypothesis by incorporating the notion of rule composition. I demonstrate its basic properties with regard to the Noon evidence. ¶ I survey several kinds of evidence that favor the conciliation of morphological theory with the micromorphology hypothesis and therefore necessitate a rather profound rethinking of the principles of morphotactics. I discuss a number of apparent morphotactic anomalies that can be readily accounted for by assuming that the default patterns of interaction among a language's morphological rules can be overridden by the composition of two or more rules.

In intuitive terms to be sharpened below, the micromorphology hypothesis is the hypothesis that an affix can itself be morphologically complex. This is a widespread assumption in descriptive accounts of the morphology of individual languages; yet, with only the rarest exceptions (e.g., the proposals of Bauer 1988; Bochner 1992 and Luís & Spencer 2005), morphological theory has tended to reject this hypothesis, most often tacitly. My objective here is therefore threefold. I begin by characterizing the micromorphology hypothesis in more precise terms, exemplifying it with the analysis of nominal inflection in Noon (Niger Congo/Atlantic; Senegal) presented by Soukka (2000) and showing that in a rule-based conception of morphology, this hypothesis entails an operation of rule conflation similar (though not identical) to the operation of function composition in mathematics. I propose an inferential realizational morphological theory that implements the micromorphology hypothesis by incorporating the notion of rule conflation. I demonstrate its basic properties with regard to the Noon evidence. I survey several kinds of evidence that favor the conciliation of morphological theory with the micromorphology hypothesis and therefore necessitate a rather profound rethinking of the principles of morphotactics. I discuss a number of apparent morphotactic anomalies that can be readily accounted for by assuming that the default patterns of interaction among a language’s morphological rules can be overridden by the conflation of two or more rules. I conclude by discussing the wider implications of the micromorphology hypothesis for refining a theory of inflectional exponence, observing that rule conflation is only one of the ways in which current conceptions of the algebra of morphotactics must be improved upon.

What is the full range of ways in which morphomes can figure in the organization of a morphological system? If we believe that arguments for the existence of morphomes are compelling, then this question demands attention. It is argued that morphomic organization can extend even to morphotactics. Earlier research (Round 2013, 2015) establishes that the realisation of morphosyntactic feature-values in Kayardild requires a morphomic analysis if empirical generalisations are to be adequately expressed within a formal account. Here it is demonstrated that morphotactic constraints, which determine licit and illicit morphological strings in Kayardild, operate in terms of the same morphomic categories motivated by other aspects of the inflectional system. Consequences and priorities for future morphomic research are discussed.

In a series of publications, Stephen Anderson developed the idea that the definition of a language's inflectional morphology involves blocks of realization rules such that (i) realization rules' order of application follows from the ordering of the blocks to which they belong and (ii) realization rules belonging to the same block stand in a relation of paradigmatic opposition. A question that naturally arises from this conception of rule interaction is whether it is possible for the same rule to figure in the application of more than one block. I discuss two systems of verb inflection exploiting exactly this possibility – those of Limbu and Southern Sotho. In order to account for the special properties of such systems, I argue that in the definition of a language's inflectional morphology, one rule may be dependent upon another, and that in such cases, the dependent rule may figure in the application of more than one block precisely because the " carrier " rules on which it is dependent differ in their block membership. In formal terms, this means that the definition of a language's inflectional morphology may draw upon principles of rule conflation by which a dependent realization rule combines with its carrier rule to form a single, more complex rule, typically occupying the same block as the carrier rule. I further show that there is considerable independent motivation for the postulation of these principles.