Abstract
Selection—the tendency of derivational affixes to choose the category of their base—has most often been couched in terms of syntactic categories such as Noun, Verb, and Adjective. In recent years several theories have claimed, however, that roots are categoryless, and receive category only by virtue of being merged with functional projections of various sorts. This article examines three such theories—Distributed Morphology, Borer’s Exo-Skeletal model, and DiSciullo’s Asymmetrical Morphology, and determines that none of them can handle the phenomenon of affixal selection. We may, however, maintain the claim that roots lack syntactic category if we make use of a system of lexical semantic categorization that allows us to state selection in terms of semantic categories. It is shown that the framework of Lieber (2004) allows for such categorization, and moreover that semantic categorization permits us to make generalizations that are not available in a theory in which selection is purely on the basis of syntactic category.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aronoff M. (1976). Word formation in generative grammar. MIT Press, Cambridge MA
Barker C. (1998): Episodic -ee in English: A thematic role constraint on new word formation. Language 74: 695–727
Booij G. (1986): Form and meaning in morphology, the case of Dutch ‘agent nouns’. Linguistics 24, 503–517
Borer, H. (2003). Exo-skeletal vx endo-skeletal explanations: Syntactic projections and the lexicon. In J. Moore & M. Polinsky (Eds.), The nature of explanation in linguistic theory. pp. 31–67.
Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar. Waltham, MA: Ginn.
Croft W. (1991). Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
DiSciullo A.-M. (2005). Asymmetric morphology. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Dowty D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. Reidel, Dordrecht
Embick D. (1997). Voice and the interfaces of syntax. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania
Embick D. (2000): Features, syntax, and categories in the Latin perfect. Linguistic Inquiry 31(2): 185–230
Embick, D., & Noyer, R. (in press). Distributed morphology and the syntax–morphology interface. To appear In The Oxford handbook of interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grimshaw J. (1979): Complement selection and the lexicon. Linguistic Inquiry 10(2): 279–326
Halle M., Marantz A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In: Hale K., Keyser S.J. (eds). The view from building Vol. 20. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, pp. 111–176
Harley H., Noyer R. (1998). Mixed nominalizations, short verb movement, and object shift in English. In: Tamanaji P.N., Kusumoto K. (eds). Proceedings of NELS28. Amherst, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, pp. 143-157
Harley H., Noyer R. (1999): Distributed Morphology. Glot International 4(4): 3–9
Harley, H., & Noyer, R. (2000). Formal versus encyclopedic properties of vocabulary: Evidence from nominalizations. In B. Peeters, (Ed.), The Lexicon–encyclopedia interface. Amsterdam: Elsevier Press.
Jackendoff R. (1990). Semantic structures. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Lehnert M. (1971). Rückläufiges Wörterbuch der Englischen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig, VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie
Levin B., Rappaport Hovav M. (1995). Unaccusativity. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Lieber, R. (1980). On the organization of the lexicon. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. [Published 1981, Indiana University Linguistics Club, and 1990, Garland Publishing.]
Lieber R. (2004). Morphology and lexical semantics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Lieber R., Baayen H. (1997): A semantic principle of auxiliary selection in Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15, 789–845
Marantz A. (1997): No escape from syntax: Don”t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 4(2): 201–225
Marchand H. (1969). The categories and types of present-day English synchronic-diachronic approach. Beck, Munich
Pesetsky, D. (1982). Paths and categories. Doctoral dissertation. MIT.
Pesetsky D. (1995). Zero syntax: Experiencers and cascades. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Plag I. (2004): Syntactic category information and the semantics of derivational morphological rules. Folia Linguistica 38(3–4): 193–225
Rappaport-Hovav M., Levin B. (1992). ER Nominals: Implications for the theory of argument structure. In: Stowell T., Wehrli E. (eds). Syntax and semantics, Syntax and the Lexicon, Vol. 26. New York, Academic Press, pp. 127–153
Smith C. (1997). The parameter of aspect (2nd ed.). Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers
Spencer A. (1999). Transpositions and argument structure. In: Booij G., van Marle J. (eds). Yearbook of morphology 1998. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 73–102
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
I am grateful to the faculty and students of the University of Patras, Greece for discussion and comments on an earlier version of this work. Thanks also to Sergio Scalise, Antonietta Bisetto, Chiara Melloni, and three anonymous reviewers for useful comments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lieber, R. The category of roots and the roots of categories: what we learn from selection in derivation. Morphology 16, 247–272 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-006-9106-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-006-9106-2