Boris Harizanov will talk about his work on the syntax/phonology interface at P-interest today at noon in the Greenberg room.
Diagnosing phonological movement: Infixation in Chamorro
Syntactic movement relations can be established on the basis of reconstruction effects, whereby a syntactic object (e.g., a phrase) occurs in one position with respect to some criteria (e.g., surface position) but in one or more other positions with respect to other criteria (e.g., thematic interpretation, binding). Work on phenomena such as clitic noninitiality and infixation reveals that it might be possible to construe these phenomena as involving movement relations at the level of phonological/prosodic structure (e.g., Prosodic Inversion). If so, does phonological movement give rise to reconstruction effects, like its syntactic counterpart? I provide evidence from infixation in Chamorro that a morphophonological object can occur in more than one position with respect to different phonological/prosodic criteria. Specifically, morphemes that are infixes on the surface in this language also behave like prefixes with respect to a certain phonological alternation (umlaut). A key piece of evidence involves an opaque interaction between infixation and reduplication in Chamorro, which leads to an analysis of infixation in the language as movement of an underlying prefix to its infixal surface position.