Home

butterflies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am a linguist, a phonologist at that, and mostly interested in prosody in several domains, and whatever enters its computation, be it focus, syntax, or even phonology. Below some manuscripts and handouts.

Top

Syntax

 

(2003). Asymmetries in the Syntax and Phonology of (Pseudo-)Parentheticals. Paper presented at Console XII. University of Patras, Greece. [Abstract] [Handout]

Verb-initial (pseudo-)parentheticals in German are pseudo- in that they look like concealed matrix clauses. Reis (1995) challenges the received generative view (Thiersch 1978 et. seq.) that they indeed are matrix clauses, and get intraposed by fronting a constituent to their first position. Instead, Reis endorses the traditional parenthetical analysis. This paper presents new syntactic evidence for a transformational approach involving extraction, and contributes some new observations on the phonology/phonetics of these constructions. [Consider also related current work by Tim Stowell.]

 

(2003). Asymmetries in Prosodic Domain Formation. Paper to be published in the Proceedings of the Phase-Workshop at MIT in January 2003. [Paper]

The fact that modifiers contrast with arguments with respect to their prosody relative to a following predicate (Gussenhoven 1983, Krifka 1984, Truckenbrodt 1993) has proved to pose a challenge to syntactic approaches to sentence stress. This paper observes an asymmetry in the prosody of predicates and their arguments depending on linear order, and illustrates that this asymmetry finds an exact parallel in the prosodic relation between modifiers and modifiees---if modifiers are treated as the selectors and modifiees as the selectees, the parallels can be explained and the prosodic facts can be reconciled with a strictly syntactic approach to sentence stress.

 

(2003). Prosody as Diagonalization of Syntax. Evidence from Complex Predicates. Paper presented at NELS 34. SUNY Stony Brook. [Abstract] [Handout]

This paper proposes a way to project a bracketed metrical grid (Halle and Idsardi, 1995) directly from syntactic structure. The algorithm derives the correct stress in complex predicates in English, Dutch, and German, including several new observations about patterns in primary and secondary stress placement. Apparent prosodic differences between the three languages reduce to independently motivated syntactic differences.

 

(2002). Linearization and Holmberg's Generalization in an OV Language. Poster presented at NELS 33. MIT. [Handout] [Manuscript]

Paper which replicates Scandinavian Holmberg-Effects in German and Dutch, and contemplates possible accounts of the restriction. A crucial role in the argument is played by controling focus structure and establishing the neutral order of certain adverbials with respect to selected arguments, revealing some intricate facts about the order of constituents in the `Mittelfeld'.

 

(2002). Configurational Stress in Derivatives, Compounds and Phrases. Invited talk at the Workshop on Pertinactiy at the University of Konstanz. [Handout] [Manuscript] .

An attempt at formulating an algorithm that assigns prosody just based on the synactic asymmetry of Merge.

 

(2001). Indefinite Effects. Squib for a first year syntax class.

Looks at intervention effects (`Beck (1996)-Effects) and argues that they are in fact restrictions on the distribution of indefinites. Illustrates a contrast between `d-linked' and `non-d-linked' wh-expressions in German, and shows a number of `intervention' effects in the absence of interveners.

 

Miscellaneous Presentations:

 

(2003). Syntactic Asymmetries in Prosodic Domain Formation. Talk presented at TREND and at the Workshop for Phonology/Syntax at Stanford University. [Handout]
 
(2002). Linear order and Prosodic Structure. Presented at the MIT Workshop on the EPP and Phases. [Handout]

 

Top

Focus

 

(2003). (with Florian Jaeger). Association with Focus and Linear Order in German. Ms. Stanford University. [Manuscript]

Summarizes a number of observations on the distribution of nur `only' and other focus particles in German, mainly drawing on work by Altmann 1976, Jacobs 1984, and Büring 2001.

 

(2003). (with Florian Jaeger). [Handout].

In this paper we try to test whether broad an narrow focus in SVO sentences are or at least can be phonetically identical. The project is still going one, and the jury is still out.

 

Micellaneous presentations:

 

(2002). (with Jon Gajewski). Is there an unmarked stress pattern? LF-Reading Group Presentation. MIT. [Handout].

 

 

Top

Phonology

 

(2002). Opaque Complementation and German Word Stress. Paper presented at the meeting of Canadian Linguistic Society and the Roundtable for Comparative Germanic Linguistics in Berkeley. [Handout].

This paper looks at the distribution of the tense and lax vowel series in German, and illustrates that generalizations about the distribution of contrasts cannot be stated in phonetic terms---at least if one looks at prosodically defined environments. An account for the distribution is presented that shows that several nice generalizations about the segmental phonology of German emerge once one allows for abstract geminates. These can be independently motivated by facts about main word stress and syllable weight.

 

(2002). The role of prosody in laryngeal neutralization. [Paper]
Paper that takes a fresh look at the environment for final neutralization of the laryngeal contrast between obstruents in German. Arguments against a strictly phonetic approach are provided. The paper shows that while the distribution of the phonetic contrasts between fortis and lenis consonants may be guided by perceptual considerations, the distribution of the phonological contrasts is prosodically restricted. A counter-argument against the approach based on paradigm uniformity proposed in Steriade 1997 is presented.

 

(2001). The role of prosody in laryngeal neutralization. Paper presented at HILP in Berlin and at the Phonology Circle at the University of Torono [Handout]

Handout of the talk. The paper didn't appear the proceedings due to an editorial mistake. It was published in MITWPL instead (see entry above).

 

(2000). The role of prosody in laryngeal neutralization. Invited talk at the workshop on phonological features at the Univeristy of Konstanz. []

Longer Handout than at HILP, with some more material in it.

 

(2000). Who's your next of kin? Family Resemblance in West Germanic Laryngeal Contrasts. Paper presented at the Manchester Phonology Meeting. [Handout]

Argues that once the different phonetic realization is controlled for, the phonology of laryngeal contrasts in Dutch and German is essentially identical, and differs from that of English only in one parameter. The paper argues against approaches that tie phonological patterns closely to the phonetic realization of features: contrary to Iverson and Salmons 1995/1999 claim that aspiration vs. voicing languages have different phonological patterns, this paper illustrates that the phonetic realization of the laryngeal contrast in the obstruent series in West Germanic has zero predictive value for phonological patterns.

 

(2001). With Andrew Nevins. Backcopying Shmackcopying. [Manuscript]

Paper that points to some principles problems with correspondence based approaches to reduplication involving fixed segments in the reduplicant, both in generating existing patterns and ruling out seemingly non-existing patterns of fixed-segment reduplication.

 

Last updated December 30, 2003.