Lexical morphology

Lexical Morphology is a theoretical model first proposed in Pesetsky (1979), and elaborated in Kiparsky (1982). Although it is impossible to say that there is a single model of Lexical Morphology (also known as Lexical Phonology), all theories have in common that the word formation rules and the phonological rules both apply in a single component of the grammar, viz. the Lexicon. We will present here a brief outline of Kiparsky's (1982) model, and next refer to a number of publications in which this model has undergone more or less significant changes. Siegel's (1974) Level Ordering Hypothesis and the Kiparsky-Mascaró theory of Cyclic Phonology lie at the heart of the development of Kiparsky's (1982) model of Lexical Morphology/Phonology. Within Cyclic Phonology it is assumed that cyclicity is a stipulated property of rules, and that cyclic application is a mode of application which is not an inherent property of the grammar. The basic idea of Kiparsky's (1982) paper is that the cyclic application of phonological rules should follow from the organization of the lexicon. Kiparsky proposes the following model:

 			     Underived lexical items	L
				     \/			E
Level 1 morphology	<->	Level 1 phonology	X
				     \/			I
Level 2 morphology	<->	Level 2 phonology	C
				     \/			O
Level n morphology	<->	Level n phonology	N
		Syntax	 ->	Postlexical Phonology

Each level is associated with a class of phonological rules for which it defines the domain of application. Within the lexicon, the output of a word formation rule is submitted to the phonological rules of that level. In this respect, the rules of lexical phonology are intrinsically cyclic, because they re-apply after each step of word formation at their level. The rules of postlexical phonology, on the other hand, are intrinsically noncyclic, since they apply after all word formation and syntactic processes. Since the appearance of Kiparsky's paper a number of different models of Lexical Morphology/Phonology have been proposed, making (slightly) different assumptions about the nature of phonological rules or morphological processes or the interaction between the two (e.g. Pulleyblank (1986), Mohanan (1986)). One aspect of the theory which is particularly prone to variation is level ordering (e.g. Kiparsky (1985), Halle & Mohanan (1985),Booij & Rubach (1987)). The theory of Lexical Morphology/Phonology has not remained unchallenged. Halle & Vergnaud (1987) reject this model primarily on the basis of the existence of bracketing paradoxes, and basically return to the SPE-model in which morphology and phonology are autonomous components of the grammar.

Link

Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics

References

• Booij, G. E. and J. Rubach 1987. Postcyclic versus Postlexical Rules in Lexical Phonology, Linguistic Inquiry 18, pp. 1-44
• Halle, M. & J.-R. Vergnaud 1987. An Essay on Stress, Cambridge, MIT-Press.
• Halle, M. & K.P. Mohanan 1985. Segmental phonology of Modern English, Linguistic Inquiry 16, pp. 57-116
• Kiparsky, P. 1985. Some Consequences of Lexical Phonology, in: Hulst, H. van der and N. Smith (eds.) The Structure of Phonological Representations, vol 1, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 131-175
• Kiparsky, P. 1982. From Cyclic Phonology to Lexical Phonology, in: Hulst, H. van der and N. Smith (eds.) The Structure of Phonological Representations (I), pp.131-175
• Pesetsky, D. 1979. Russian Morphology and Lexical Theory, ms. MIT.
• Siegel, D. 1974. Topics in English Morphology, PhD diss. MIT, Cambridge, Mass.