The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 129–167

Realizing Germanic Inflection: Why Morphology Does Not Drive Syntax

  • Jonathan David Bobaljik


This paper examines and evaluates what may be called the “Rich Agreement Hypothesis” (RAH) in the domain of verb movement asymmetries in Germanic. The most prominent current accounts (e.g., Rohrbacher’s 1999 Morphology-Driven Syntax) require inspection of the internal make-up of paradigms and take overt morphological variation to be the cause of syntactic variation. A survey of the literature shows that these proposals are empirically untenable in their strong (bi-conditional) form; there are numerous cases of syntactic variation attested in the absence of corresponding morphological variation. The strongest sustainable descriptive generalization is a one-way implication from rich morphology to verb movement. Though this has been noted before, its implications have not been adequately discussed. While morphology-driven approaches could have explained a strong RAH, when faced with the weaker, one-way implication, they can provide no account of why that correlation should hold and are thus at best incomplete. That is, they provide no insight as to why there are no languages with rich morphology but in which the finite verb remains in the VP. The particular correlations that are attested, and in particular the absence of a certain class of languages, do however follow from a theory which takes morphology to be not the cause but rather a reflection of syntactic structure, in line with common theorizing in morphology. The inflection-movement correlations that do exist therefore challenge rather than support morphology-driven approaches to morphosyntax.

late insertion Morphology-Syntax Interface paradigms (Rich) Agreement verb movement 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ackema, Peter: 2001, 'On the Relation between V-to-I and the Structure of the Inflectional paradigm', The Linguistic Review 18(3), 233–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexiadou, Artemis and Gisbert Fanselow: 2000, 'On the Correlation between Morphology and Syntax: The Case of V to I', ms., Universität Potsdam and AUTH, Potsdam.Google Scholar
  3. Alexiadou, Artemis and Gisbert Fanselow: 2001, 'Laws of Diachrony as a Source for Syntactic Generalizations: The Case of V-to-I Movement', paper presented at Glow 24 Workshop on Language Change and Variation, Porto, Portugal (April 2001).Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, Stephen R.: 1992, A-Morphous Morphology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  5. Barnes, Michael: 1987, 'Some Remarks on Subordinate-clause Word Order in Faroese', Scripta Islandica 38, 3–35.Google Scholar
  6. Bendjaballah, Sabrina and Martin Haiden: 2001, 'Templatic Inflection in German', paper presented at 25th Penn Linguistics Colloquium, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (March 2001).Google Scholar
  7. Bobaljik, Jonathan David: 1995, Morphosyntax: The Syntax of Verbal Inflection, unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  8. Bobaljik, Jonathan David: 1997, 'If the Head Fits...: On the Morphological Determination of Germanic Syntax', Linguistics 35, 1029–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bobaljik, Jonathan David: 2000, 'The Ins and Outs of Contextual Allomorphy', in K. K. Grohmann and C. Struijke (eds.), University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 10, pp. 35–71.Google Scholar
  10. Bobaljik, Jonathan David: 2001, 'The Implications of Rich Agreement: Why Morphology Does Not Drive Syntax', paper presented at GLOW 24, Universidade Minho, Braga, Portugal (April 9th, 2001).Google Scholar
  11. Bobaljik, Jonathan David: 2002a, 'A Chains at the PF-interface: Copies and “Covert” Movement', Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, pp. 197–267.Google Scholar
  12. Bobaljik, Jonathan David: 2002b, 'Syncretism without Paradigms: Remarks on Williams 1981, 1994', in G. Booij and J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 2001, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 53–85.Google Scholar
  13. Bobaljik, Jonathan David and Dianne Jonas: 1993, 'Subject Positions and the Role of TP', talk given at GLOW 16, Lund, Sweden (April 1993).Google Scholar
  14. Bobaljik, Jonathan David and Dianne Jonas: 1996, 'Subject Positions and the Roles of TP', Linguistic Inquiry 27, 195–236.Google Scholar
  15. Bobaljik, Jonathan David and Höskuldur Thráinsson: 1998, 'Two Heads aren't Always Better than One', Syntax 1(1), 37–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bonet, Eulàlia: 1995, 'Feature Structure of Romance Clitics', Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13, 607–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brannstrom, Ingvar: 1993, Söjna tå'la vä: grammatik på Pitemelet, Piteå.Google Scholar
  18. Bures, Anton: 1993, 'There is an Argument for a Cycle at LF, Here', in Papers from the Parasession of the 28th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS 28), Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, pp. 14–35.Google Scholar
  19. Carstairs, Andrew: 1987, Allomorphy in Inflexion, Croom Helm, London.Google Scholar
  20. Chomsky, Noam: 1957, Syntactic Structures, Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
  21. Chomsky, Noam: 1991, 'Some Notes on the Economy of Derivation and Representations', in R. Freidin (ed.), Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 417–454.Google Scholar
  22. Chomsky, Noam: 1993, 'A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory', in K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–52.Google Scholar
  23. Chomsky, Noam: 1995, The Minimalist Program, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  24. Clahsen, Harald: 1988, 'Parameterized Grammatical Theory and Language Acquisition', in S. Flynn and W. O'Neil (eds.), Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 47–75.Google Scholar
  25. Diesing, Molly: 1992a, 'Bare Plural Subjects and the Derivation of Logical Representations', Linguistic Inquiry 23, 353–380.Google Scholar
  26. Diesing, Molly: 1992b, Indefinites, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  27. DiSciullo, Anna Maria and Edwin Williams: 1987, On the Definition of Word, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  28. Einarsson, Stefán: 1949, Icelandic, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  29. Emonds, Joseph: 1978, 'The Verbal Complex V′-V in French', Linguistic Inquiry 9, 151–175.Google Scholar
  30. Falk, Cecilia: 1993, Non-Referential Subjects in the History of Swedish, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Lund.Google Scholar
  31. Frampton, John: 2000, 'Paradigm Patterns and Impoverishment', ms., Northeastern University, Boston.Google Scholar
  32. Gelderen, Elly van: 1997, Verbal Agreement and the Grammar behind Its Breakdown, Niemeyer, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  33. Gotfredsen, Laurits Peder: 1955, Langelandsk grammatik, J.H. Schultz Forlag, København.Google Scholar
  34. Halle, Morris: 1990, 'An Approach to Morphology', in J. Carter, R.-M. Dechaine, B. Philip, and T. Sherer (eds.), Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting (NELS 20), GLSA, Amherst, pp. 150–184.Google Scholar
  35. Halle, Morris: 1997, 'Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and Fission', in B. Bruening, Y. Kang and M. McGinnis (eds.), PF: Papers at the Interface: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30, pp. 425–449.Google Scholar
  36. Halle, Morris and Alec Marantz: 1993, 'Distributed Morphology and the Pieces of inflection', in K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 111–176.Google Scholar
  37. Haugen, Einar: 1982, Scandinavian Language Structures, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  38. Holmberg, Anders: 1986, Word Order and Syntactic Features in the Scandinavian Languages and English, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Stockholm.Google Scholar
  39. Holmberg, Anders: 1988, 'The Head of S in Scandinavian and English', in D. Fekete and Z. Laubitz (eds.), Special Issue on Comparative Germanic Syntax: McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, pp. 123–155.Google Scholar
  40. Holmberg, Anders and Christer Platzack: 1990, 'On the Role of Inflection in Scandinavian Syntax', in W. Abraham, W. Kosmeijer, and E. Reuland (eds.), Issues in Germanic Syntax, Mouton/Walter de Gruyter, New York/Berlin, pp. 93–118.Google Scholar
  41. Holmberg, Anders and Christer Platzack: 1995, The Role of Inflection in the Syntax of the Scandinavian Languages, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  42. Iatridou, Sabine: 1990, 'About Agr(P)', Linguistic Inquiry 21, 551–577.Google Scholar
  43. Iversen, Ragnvald: 1918, Syntaksen i Tromsø Bymaal [The Syntax of the Tromsø Dialect], Bymaals-Lagets Forlag, Kristiania.Google Scholar
  44. Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Kenneth Safir (eds.): 1989, The Null Subject Parameter, Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  45. Jakobson, Roman: 1932/1984, 'Zur Struktur des russichen Verbums', in Charisteria Gvilelmo Mathesio qvinqvagenario a discipulis et Circuli Lingvistici Pragensis soladibus oblata, Prague [published in English as 'structure of the Russian verb', in L. R. Waugh and M. Halle (eds.), Roman Jakobson: Russian and Slavic Grammar Studies 1931-1981, Mouton, Berlin, pp. 1–14].Google Scholar
  46. Johnson, Kyle: 1990, 'On the Syntax of Inflectional Paradigms', ms., University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
  47. Johnson, Kyle and Sten Vikner: 1994, 'The Position of the Verb in Scandinavian Infinitives: In V°or C°but not in I°', in Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax {vn 53}, pp. 61–84.Google Scholar
  48. Jonas, Dianne: 1992, 'Checking Theory and Nominative Case in Icelandic', in Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics 1, pp. 175–195.Google Scholar
  49. Jonas, Dianne: 1996a, Clause Structure and Verb Syntax in Scandinavian and English, unpublished PhD dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  50. Jonas, Dianne: 1996b, 'Clause Structure, Expletives and Verb Movement', in W. Abraham, S. D. Epstein, H. Thráinsson and C. J.-W. Zwart (eds.), Minimal Ideas: Syntactic Studies in the Minimalist Framework, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 167–188.Google Scholar
  51. Jonas, Dianne: 2001, 'Residual V-to-I', ms., Yale University.Google Scholar
  52. Koeneman, Olaf: 1997, 'On V to I Movement in Flexible Syntax', in T. Cambier-Langeveld, J. Costa, R. Goedemans, and R. van de Vijver (eds.), Proceedings of ConSole V, SOLE, Leiden, pp. 183–198.Google Scholar
  53. Koeneman, Olaf: 2000, The Flexible Nature of Verb Movement, PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  54. Kosmeijer, Wim: 1986, 'The Status of the Finite Inflection in Icelandic and Swedish', in Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 26, pp. 1–41.Google Scholar
  55. Kratzer, Angelika: 1984, 'On Deriving Syntactic Differences between English and German', ms., Technical University, Berlin.Google Scholar
  56. Lardiere, Donna: 2000, 'Mapping Features to Forms in Second Language Acquisition', in J. Archibald (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 102–129.Google Scholar
  57. Levander, Lars: 1909, Älvdalsmålet i Dalarna. Ordböjning och syntax [The Älvdal en Dialect of Dalarna: Morphology and Syntax], PhD dissertation, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  58. Lightfoot, David: 1993, 'Why UG Needs a Learning Theory: Triggering Verb Movement', in C. Jones (ed.), Historical Linguistics: Problems and Perspectives, Longman, London, pp. 190–214.Google Scholar
  59. Lockwood, W. B.: 1964, An Introduction to Modern Faroese, Munksgaard, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  60. Magnússon, Friðrik: 1990, Kjarnafærsla og það-innskot í aukasetningum í íslensku [Topicalization and það-insertion in Subordinate Clauses in Icelandic], Linguistic Institute University of Iceland.Google Scholar
  61. Marklund, Thorsten: 1976, Skelleftemålet: grammatik och ordlista [The Skellefte dialect: grammar and word list], Norrlands-Tryck i Umeå, Umeå.Google Scholar
  62. Meisel, Jürgen M.: 1993, 'Getting FAT: Finiteness, Agreement and Tense in Early Grammars', in J. M. Meisel (ed.), Bilingual First Language Acquisition, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 89–129.Google Scholar
  63. Newmeyer, Frederick J.: 1998, 'The Irrelevance of Typology for Grammatical Theory', Syntaxis 1, 161–197.Google Scholar
  64. Noyer, Rolf: 1997, Features, Positions and Affixes in Autonomous Morphological Structure, Garland Press, New York.Google Scholar
  65. Petersen, Hjalmar P.: 2000, 'IP or TP in Modern Faroese', in Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 66, pp. 75–83.Google Scholar
  66. Platzack, Christer: 1986, 'COMP, INFL, and Germanic Word Order', in L. Hellan and K. Koch Christensen (eds.), Topics in Scandinavian Syntax, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 185–234.Google Scholar
  67. Platzack, Christer: 1988, 'The Emergence of a Word Order Difference in Scandinavian Subordinate Clauses', in Special Issue on Comparative Germanic Syntax: McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, pp. 215–238.Google Scholar
  68. Platzack, Christer and Anders Holmberg: 1989, 'The Role of AGR and Finiteness', in Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 43, pp. 51–76.Google Scholar
  69. Pollock, Jean-Yves: 1989. 'Verb Movement, Universal Grammar and the Structure of IP', Linguistic Inquiry 20, pp. 365–424.Google Scholar
  70. Roberts, Ian: 1985, 'Agreement Parameters and the Development of English Auxiliaries', Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, 21–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Roberts, Ian: 1993, Verbs in Diachronic Syntax, Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  72. Roberts, Ian: 1999, 'Verb Movement and Markedness', in M. DeGraff (ed.), Language creation and Language Change: Creolization, Diachrony and Development, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 287–327.Google Scholar
  73. Roeper, Thomas and Jürgen Weissenborn: 1990, 'How to Make Parameters Work', in L. Frazier and J. de Villiers (eds.), Language Processing and Language Acquisition, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 147–162.Google Scholar
  74. Rohrbacher, Bernhard: 1994, The Germanic VO Languages and the Full Paradigm: A Theory of V to I Raising, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  75. Rohrbacher, Bernhard: 1999, Morphology-Driven Syntax: A Theory of V to I Raising and Pro-drop, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  76. Schagerström, August: 1949, Grammatik över Gräsömålet i Uppland, P. A. Nordstedt och söner, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  77. Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann: 1989, Verbal Syntax and Case in Icelandic in a Comparative GB Approach, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Lund.Google Scholar
  78. Spencer, Andrew: 1991, Morphological Theory, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  79. Thráinsson, Höskuldur: 1984, 'Different Types of Infinitival Complements in Icelandic', in W. de Geest and Y. Putsey (eds.), Sentential Complementation: Proceedings of the International Conference, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 247–255.Google Scholar
  80. Thráinsson, Höskuldur: 1993, 'On the Structure of Infinitival Complements', in H. Thráinsson, S. D. Epstein, and S. Kuno (eds.), Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics 3, pp. 181–213.Google Scholar
  81. Thráinsson, Höskuldur: 1996, 'On the (Non)-Universality of Functional Projections', in W. Abraham, S. D. Epstein, H. Thráinsson, and C. J.-W. Zwart (eds.), Minimal Ideas: Syntactic Studies in the Minimalist Framework, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 253–281.Google Scholar
  82. Thráinsson, Höskuldur, Hjalmar Petersen, Jógvan í Lon Jacobsen and Zakaris Hansen In preparation, 'Faroese: Overview and Reference Grammar', ms., Tórshavn and Reykjavík.Google Scholar
  83. Travis, Lisa: 1984, Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation, unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  84. Trosterud, Trond: 1989, 'The Null Subject Parameter and the New Mainland Scandinavian Word Order: A Possible Counter Example from a Norwegian Dialect', in Studies in Language, University of Joensuu, Vols. 14-15.Google Scholar
  85. Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan: 1994, On Economizing the Theory of A-Dependencies, unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  86. Vangsnes, Øystein Alexander: 2002, 'Icelandic Expletive Constructions and the Distribution of Subject Types', in P. Svenonius (ed.), Subjects, Expletives, and the Extended Projection Principle, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 43–69.Google Scholar
  87. Vikner, Sten: 1990, Verb Movement and the Licensing of NP-positions in the Germanic Languages, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Geneva.Google Scholar
  88. Vikner, Sten: 1995a, Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  89. Vikner, Sten: 1995b, 'V°-to-I°Movement and Inflection for Person in All Tenses', in Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 55, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
  90. Vikner, Sten: 1997, 'V°-to-I°Movement and Inflection for Person in All Tenses', in L. Haegeman (ed.), The New Comparative Syntax, Longman, London, pp. 189–213.Google Scholar
  91. Williams, Edwin: 1994, 'Remarks on Lexical Knowledge', Lingua 92, 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wunderlich, Dieter: 1995, 'Minimalist Morphology: The Role of Paradigms', in G. Booij and J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1995, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 93–114.Google Scholar
  93. Wurmbrand, Susi: 1999, 'Modal Verbs must be Raising Verbs', in S. Bird, A. Carnie, J. D. Haugen, and P. Norquest (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 18), Cascadilla Press, Somerville, MA, pp. 599–612.Google Scholar
  94. Wurmbrand, Susi: 2001, Infinitives: Restructuring and Clause Structure, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan David Bobaljik
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsMcGill UniversityMontréalCanada, E-mail

Personalised recommendations