Difference between revisions of "Mapping Principle (in morphology)"
Haspelmath (talk | contribs) (from Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics) |
Haspelmath (talk | contribs) m (→Example) |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
(i) [[UN [GRAMMATICAL]A ]A ITY]N <=> [ITY [UN [GRAMMATICAL]A ]A ]N | (i) [[UN [GRAMMATICAL]A ]A ITY]N <=> [ITY [UN [GRAMMATICAL]A ]A ]N | ||
− | + | <=> [[GRAMMATICAL]A UN]A ITY]N <=> [ITY [[GRAMMATICAL]A UN]A ]N | |
(ii) [[un [grammatical]] ity] <=> [un [[grammatical] ity]] | (ii) [[un [grammatical]] ity] <=> [un [[grammatical] ity]] |
Revision as of 08:43, 6 October 2007
In morphology, the Mapping Principle is a principle proposed by Sproat (1985) to relate the phono-morphological and the syntactico-semantic level of representation of complex words to each other. He basically proposes the Mapping Principle to account for the so-called bracketing paradoxes.
Example
A standard example of a bracketing paradox is ungrammaticality. The phono-morphological representation of this form will include the information that un- is an unstressed prefix, and that -ity is a suffix which attracts stress to the previous syllable. The syntactico-semantic representation will include the information that un- selects adjectives and means 'NOT', and that -ity creates abstract nouns from adjectives. Furthermore, at the phono-morphological level hierarchical structure plays a relatively small role. Instead, strict adjacency tends to be much more relevant. On the other hand, at the syntactico-semantic level, linear order seems to be of little importance. Here, hierarchical structure or sisterhood between morphemes is crucial. At the syntactico-semantic level the representations of ungrammaticality in (i) are equivalent, since linear order is irrelevant. At the phono-morphological level the representations of ungrammaticality in (ii) are also equivalent, since hierarchical structure is irrelevant at this level of representation:
(i) [[UN [GRAMMATICAL]A ]A ITY]N <=> [ITY [UN [GRAMMATICAL]A ]A ]N
<=> [[GRAMMATICAL]A UN]A ITY]N <=> [ITY [[GRAMMATICAL]A UN]A ]N
(ii) [[un [grammatical]] ity] <=> [un [[grammatical] ity]]
Sproat defines his Mapping Principle in such a way that [[un [grammatical]] ity] can be rebracketed as [un [[grammatical] ity]], since morphological principles such as level ordering demand it.
Link
Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics
References
- Spencer 1991
- Sproat 1985