Remarks and replies: (In)direct Reference in the Phonology-Syntax Interface under Phase Theory: A Response to “Modular PIC” (D'Alessandro and Scheer 2015)

Eulàlia Bonet, Lisa Lai Shen Cheng, Laura J. Downing, Joan Mascaró

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearch

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

© 2019 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology https://doi.or. Although in many interface theories, the domains of phrasal phonological processes are defined in terms of prosodic constituents, D’Alessandro and Scheer (2015) argue that their proposed modification of phase theory, Modular PIC, renders prosodic constituents superfluous. Phrasal phonological domains can instead be defined directly in the syntax. In this response, we argue that Modular PIC does not provide a convincing new approach to the syntax-phonology interface, as it is both too powerful and too restrictive. We show that the analysis offered of raddoppiamento fonosintattico in Eastern Abruzzese does not justify the loss of restrictiveness Modular PIC brings to phase theory. We also show that Modular PIC is too restrictive to account for phenomena, from Bantu languages and others, that have received satisfactory analyses within interface theories that appeal to prosodic constituents. We conclude that Modular PIC does not successfully replace prosodic constituent approaches to the interface.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)751-777
JournalLinguistic Inquiry
Volume50
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2019

Keywords

  • Bantu languages
  • Penult lengthening
  • Phase Impenetrability Condition
  • Phase theory
  • Pitch accent
  • Prosodic constituents
  • Raddoppiamento fonosintattico

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Remarks and replies: (In)direct Reference in the Phonology-Syntax Interface under Phase Theory: A Response to “Modular PIC” (D'Alessandro and Scheer 2015)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this