Is Two level Morphology a Morphological Model?

(1)

Is Two-level Morphology a

Morphological Model?

A b stra ct

This paper contains a close look at Koskenniemi’s Two-level morphol ogy from a linguistic point o f view. The model will be compared to three other traditional, linguistic morphological models, lA , IP and W P. It will be shown that there are linguistic phenomena that can hardly be handled by some o f the just mentioned models, and not at all in a linguistically satisfactory manner by the Two-level morphology.

1

Introduction

K o s k e n n ie m i’s T w o -le v e l m o r p h o lo g y ( T M ) h as b e c o m e w ell k n o w n sin ce it w as d e v e lo p e d in 1983. O n e rea son fo r th is is p r o b a b ly th a t it is o n e o f th e fe w

m o d e ls w ith in c o m p u ta tio n a l lin g u is tics th a t h as taJten m o r p h o lo g y seriou sly . T o s to r e fu ll w o r d fo r m s , in fle cte d a n d d e r iv a te d , in th e le x ic o n m a y b e p o s s ib le fo r a la n g u a g e lik e E n g lish , w ith re la tiv e ly p o o r m o r p h o lo g y . B u t K o s k e n n ie m i sa w th a t fo r F in n ish , w h ere a sin g le v e r b c a n h a v e b e tw e e n 1 2 .0 0 0 a n d 1 8 .0 0 0

differen t g r a p h e m ic fo rm s (in c lu d e d c lit ic s ), su ch a s o lu tio n w o u ld n o t w o rk . I f th e A m e r ic a n c o m p u ta tio n a l lin g u ists h a d b e e n R e d In d ia n s s p e a k in g th e C h e ro k e e -la n g u a g e O n e id a , in stea d o f w h ite a n d E n g lis h -s p e a k in g , th e n th e y t o o w o u ld p r o b a b ly h a v e d e v e lo p e d a m o r p h o lo g ic a l m o d e l th a t c o u ld h a n d le th eir v e rb s w ith u p t o 1 0 0 .0 0 0 fo r m s ea ch .

I assu m e th e T w o -le v e l m o r p h o lo g y t o b e w e ll-k n o w n , a n d I w ill th u s o n ly g iv e a v e ry s h o r t d e s c r ip t io n o f it, b e fo r e I p r o c e d e t o th e m a in ta sk ; t o c o m p a r e th e T w o -le v e l m o r p h o lo g y w ith o th e r m o r p h o lo g ic a l m o d e ls , a n d t o see if th is m o d e l ca n b e sa id t o b e a m o r p h o lo g ic a l m o d e l.

2

A Short Description of Two-level

Morphology

T h e T w o -le v e l m o r p h o lo g y is d e sig n e d t o p e r fo r m b o t h a n a ly sis a n d sy n th esis o n th e ba sis o f m o r e o r less th e sa m e d a ta . It h as a t its d is p o s a l a ru le m o d u le a n d

(2)

a le x ic o n m o d u le . T h e ru le m o d u le ta k es ca re o f o n e -s e g m e n t c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s , m o s t ly p h o n o lo g ic a l o n e s. T h e le x ic o n m o d u le m a y co n s is t o f several le x ic o n s , o n e o r m o r e fo r ste m s a n d o th e r s fo r affixes. F rom e a ch le x ic o n th ere is a p o in te r t o th e n e x t p o s s ib le le x ic o n s . T h e en tries in th e le x ic o n m a y lo o k differen t fro m th e ir s u r fa c e r e p r e s e n ta tio n , w h ich th e ru le m o d u le ta k es ca re o f. (1 ) a n d (2 ) are e x a m p le s o f le x ic o n en tries in tw o s u b le x ic o n s fo r N orw eg ia n ;

(1) LEXICON Nouns

vintEr /MNoim Lexeme=WINTER

gutt

/MNoim Lexeme=WINTER

(

2

)

LEXICON /MNounSg

0

/Genitive

en

Num=sg/Def in=ind/Gender=m/.

Num=sg/Defin=def/Gender=m/.

T h e in fo r m a tio n th a t w e g e t a b o u t a w o r d -fo r m th a t is an8dyzed, is th e in for m a t io n th a t is a c c u m u la te d th r o u g h all th e le x ic o n s th a t h a v e b e e n co n su lte d . T h u s i f w e a n a ly z e v in te r e n , w e g e t th e in fo r m a tio n fro m b o t h th e s te m - a n d th e

s u ffix le x ic o n :

(3) vinteren: Lexeme=WINTER Num=sg/Defin=def/Gender=m/

(T h is a c c u m u la tio n is th e rea son fo r th e s eem in g z e r o -in fle c tio n a l m o rp h th a t is a p p a r e n t in (2 ) . It is n o t m e a n t as a su ffix , it is ju s t th ere t o en su re th a t th e in fo r m a tio n a b o u t sin g u la r a n d in d e fin ite is c o lle c te d . T h is in fo rm a tio n c o u ld n o t h a v e b e e n re p re s e n te d in th e s te m le x ic o n , ev en i f th e s te m is id e n tica l t o th e w o r d fo r m o f in d e fin ite sin g u la r, b e c a u s e th e stem le x ic o n a lso p o in ts t o le x ic o n s fo r p lu ra l a n d d e fin ite fo r m s . S in ce in fo r m a tio n is a c c u m u la te d o n its w a y th ro u g h

th e le x ic o n s , w e w o u ld , i f w e h a d g iv en th e sin g u la r in d efin ite in fo r m a tio n in th e ste m le x ic o n , h a v e g o tte n a b su rd resu lts lik e v in tr e n e = sin gu lar, plural, in d e fin ite , d efin ite. In o t h e r w o r d s : T h e s te m le x ic o n c a n o n ly in c lu d e in fo rm a tio n th a t is c o m m o n fo r all th e w o r d fo r m s b e lo n g in g t o o n e le x e m e .)

T h e le x ic a l fo r m o f th e e n tr y w e h a v e lo o k e d a t is v i n t E r (1 ) , b u t th e su rfa ce re p r e s e n ta tio n s h o u ld b e as in (4 ) , o f co u rs e :

(4 ) v in te r

T h e d e fa u lt a lp h a b e t th e n in c lu d e s a le x ic a l E th a t co r r e s p o n d s t o a su r fa c e e , ( E : e ) , (in a d d itio n t o th e u su al e : e ) . T h e rea son fo r this c u m b e r s o m e

re p r e s e n ta tio n is th a t v in t e r a n d m a n y o th e r N o rw e g ia n lex em es g o th r o u g h a m o r p h o p h o n e m ic c h a n g e th a t d ele te s th e e b e fo r e ce rta in m o r p h o lo g ic a l en d in g s:

(5 ) S in g u la r: v i n t e r - v i n t e r e n

P lu r a l: v i n t _ r e r - v i n t _ r e n e

(3)

(

6

)

vinter

vintr

/MNounSg

/MNounPl

Lexeme=WINTER

W e th en fo r m u la te a ru le th a t ov erru les th e le x ic a l d e fa u lt va lu es:

(7) "E-deletion in stem before plural"

E:0 <= _ Liquid PlSuffix ;

(T h e ru le c o n te x t co n s is ts o f n a m es th a t refer t o ce rta in sets a n d d e fin itio n s th a t w e h a v e p r e d e fin e d .)

3

How Can Two-level Morphology be

Characterized W hen Compared to Other

Linguistic Models for Morphological

Description?

In o u r c e n tu r y tr a d itio n a lly th ere h a v e b e e n th ree m o d e ls fo r m o r p h o lo g ic a l

an alysis; l A (Ite m a n d a r r a n g e m e n t), I P (It e m a n d P r o c e s s ) a n d W P ( W o r d a n d p a r a d ig m ). F or a d is cu ssio n o f th e se m o d e ls , see H o c k e tt 1 954, M a tth e w s 1972, 1974, R o b in s 1970. A fo u r th m o d e l c a n a ls o b e m e n tio n e d , w h ich I sh all n o t g o in to h ere; N M (N a tu r a l m o r p h o lo g y ), see W u rz e l 1982 o r B y b e e 1985. B e lo w I sh all c o m p a r e th e T w o -le v e l m o r p h o lo g y w ith e a ch o f th e th r e e m o d e ls . (T h e d iscu ssion w ill t o a la rg e d e g re e b e b u ilt o n J oh a n n essen 1 9 8 8 .) A s th e y h ave n o t e x is te d q u ite sim u lta n eou sly , I w ill s ta rt w ith th e o ld e s t o n e a n d th en e n d w ith th e n ew er o n e .

3.1 Ite m £md A rrangem ent

T h e m a in ch a ra cte ris tic o f th is m o d e l is th a t th ere a re m in im a l u n its, m o r p h em es, th a t c a n b e a rra n g ed in a n u m b e r o f w a y s t o fo r m b ig g e r u n its. T h e m o r p h e m e s a re a b s tr a c t u n its th a t a re re p re se n te d th r o u g h th e ir a llo m o r p h s . S in ce at th e tim e o f l A (a p p r o x im a te ly 1 9 3 0 -1 9 5 0 ) th e v ie w h eld th a t s y n ta x a n d m o r p h o lo g y s h o u ld b e d e s c r ib e d in th e sa m e w a y ; th a t th e re is id e a lly a o n e -t o -o n e r e la tio n s h ip b e tw een m o r p h e m e a n d a llo m o r p h , m o r e p re c is e ly a re la tio n s h ip w h ere o n e m o r p h e m e h as o n e su rfa ce r e a liz a tio n a n d v ic e versa:

(8 ) lA :

M o rp h e m e s : A llo m o r p h s : ‘ W o r d ’

f g u t t } + { i n d e f p i } g u t t - e r g u tte r ( = b o y s ) •{hus} + { i n d e f p i } h u s - 0 hus ( = h o u s e s)

(4)

(9 ) T M :

L e x ic a l (s t e m ) en tries: L e x ic a l (a ffix ) en tries: ‘ W o r d ’

g u t t h u s

e r

O (n o th in g )

g u tte r ( = b o y s ) b u s ( = h ou ses)

W e d o n o t see a n y m o r p h o s y n t a c t ic in fo r m a tio n h ere, sin ce it is irrelevant fo r th e m o d e l. T h e g r a m m a t ic a l fe a tu re s th a t a re presen t in th e le x ic o n en tries, c a n n o t b e m a d e u se o f b y th e ru les. T M d o e s n o t g et p a s t th e c o n c r e te level o f a llo m o r p h s , it c a n th u s n o t b e e q u iv a len t w ith th e lA - m o d e l.

3 .2

Ite m euid Process

T h e I P m o d e l w a s p o p u la r u n til th e 1960s. L ik e l A th is t o o is a m o d e l based o n th e m o r p h e m e -a llo m o r p h d is t in c tio n . T h e d ifferen ce fr o m th e l A m o d e l is th a t th e I P m o d e l a llo w s p r o c e s s e s , th a t is, it a llow s elem en ts t o u n d e r g o a m e t a m o r p h o s is t o g a in a s h a p e d ifferen t fr o m th e orig in a l o n e . T h is is p o s s ib le b o t h a t p h o n e m e a n d m o r p h e m e lev el. T h e m o d e l a llow s rules o f b o t h sorts.

W h e n it c o m e s t o th e p r o c e s s p a r t, w e c a n sa y th a t IP a n d T M h a v e so m e th in g in c o m m o n . W e h a v e seen th e ru le p a rt o f T M , a n d ev en if th e re w e d eal w ith p a irs o f se g m e n ts th a t c o r r e s p o n d w ith e a ch o th e r in certa in c ir c u m s ta n c e s ,

th e id e a c o u ld b e th a t th e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e lo o k s lik e a p ro ce s s . (In fa c t : T h e ru le fo r m a lis m is d e s ig n e d t o ta k e c a r e o f m o r p h o p h o n e m ic ch a n g es th a t a re a b u n d a n t in F in n ish (v o w e l h a r m o n y a n d c o n s o n a n t g r a d a t io n )) . I ca n a lso c it e K axlsson eind K o s k e n n ie m i (1 9 8 5 :1 2 7 ): W h a t is d e s c r ib e d b y ru les is “ fa irly n a tu ra l o n e - s e g m e n t m o d ific a tio n s ; m o s t ly a u t o m a t ic , tra n sp a re n t, p r o d u c tiv e , e x c e p tio n le s s a lte r n a tio n s b e tw e e n p h o n o lo g ic a lly c lo s e ly rela ted sin g le p h o n e m e s in p r e d o m i n a n tly p h o n o lo g ic a l c o n t e x t s .” P h o n o lo g ic a l ru les axe th en ta k en ca x e o f in T M .

M o r p h o lo g ic a l ru les, o n th e o th e r h a n d , i.e. p ro ce s s e s th a t fo r m e .g . p lu ra l w o rd - fo r m s fr o m s te m s, a re n o t p o s s ib le in T M , w h ich h a n d les all fo r m a tiv e s in th e le x ic o n p a rt.

M o r p h o p h o n e m ic ch a n g e s c a n th u s b e d e s c r ib e d in T M in a m a n n er sim ilar t o I P (w h e n w e ig n o r e th e la c k o f m o r p h e m ic le v e l in T M ) :

( 1 0 ) IP :

M o r p h e m e s : A llo m o r p h s : M o r p h o p h o n e m ic rule: ‘ W o r d ’

{ b o k } + { i n d e f p i } b o k - e r

(1 1 ) T M : L e x ic a l (s t e m )

e n try :

L e x ic a l (a ffix )

e n try :

o - > 0 / - C e r

T w o -le v e l ru le: ‘ W o r d :’

b ø k e r

b o k 0 / - C e r b øk er

T h e tw o m o d e ls a re sim ila r s o fa r, b u t o n ly as lo n g as th e r u le -c o n te x t is p u r e ly p h o n o lo g ic a l (g r a p h e m ic a l). M o r p h o lo g ic a l c o n te x t is im p o s s ib le in T M ,

b u t p o s s ib le in I P :

( 1 2 ) IP :

(5)

T h e o n ly w a y T M c a n u se m o r p h o lo g ic a l in fo r m a tio n , is t o m a k e th e m o r p h o lo g ic a l in fo r m a tio n ‘ p h o n o lo g ic a l’ b y a d d in g e x t r a c h a r a c te r s in th e ru le c o n t e x t . T h e e x tr a ch a r a c te r w ill th e n s y m b o liz e th e m o r p h o lo g ic a l c la s s o r fe a tu re . E .g . ca n w e p u t a d o lla r sig n in fr o n t o f th e a ffix (w h ic h m u st o f c o u r s e a ls o b e p resen t in th e le x ic o n w h ere th e a ffix h as its e n tr y ) o r th e m o r p h o lo g ic a l e n d in g m a y its e lf g et a d ifferen t le x ic a l sh a p e , t o sa tis fy th e n eed fo r a c o n t e x t th a t c a n b e m o r p h o lo g ic a lly u n iq u e:

(1 3 ) T M :

+ morphophonemic rule: o -> 0 / _ C $er

or

+ morphophonemic rule: o -> 0 / _ C Er

N o w o n e m ig h t w an t t o re p ly th a t it is n o t im p o r ta n t. B u t in n a tu ra l la n g u a g e it is o fte n n e cessa ry t o d istin g u ish b e tw e e n p h o n o lo g ic a l a n d m o r p h o lo g ic a l c o n

d itio n in g . A n u m b e r o f N o rw e g ia n d ia le c ts h a v e p r o d u c t iv e p a la ta liz a tio n o f / k / a n d / g / in fr o n t o f n o u n su ffix es, b u t n o t o th e rw is e :

(1 4 ) / s t o k / ( = s tick )

/ s t o c - e n / ( = th e s tick ( n o m .) ) / d r e k - e / ( = ( t o ) d r in k )

/ s t o c - a / ( = th e s tick ( d a t iv e )) / t a k - a / ( = th a n k e d )

It w o u ld b e a m ista k e t o p h o n o lo g iz e th is t y p e o f m o r p h o p h o n o lo g ic a l p r o c e s s . It is th e m o r p h o lo g ic a l c a t e g o r y o f th e su ffix th a t c o n d it io n s th e a lte r n a tio n o f th e ste m , a n d n o t th e p h o n o lo g ic a l sh a p e.

3 .3

Prelim inary Sum m ary

W e h a v e lo o k e d a t tw o lin g u istic m o d e ls fo r m o r p h o lo g ic a l a n a ly sis w h ich b o t h h ave th e d is t in c tio n m o r p h e m e -a llo m o r p h , i.e. w h ich ta k e th e s e g m e n ta l s id e o f n a tu ra l la n g u a g e s v e r y seriou sly . O n e o f th e m , IP , is a little m o r e fle x ib le in th a t it a c c e p ts se g m e n ta l ch a n g e s trig g e re d b y s o m e p h o n o lo g ic a l o r m o r p h o lo g ic a l fea tu re.

W h e n w e c o m p a r e d T M t o th ese m o d e ls , w e sa w th a t it seem s t o b e in sp ire d b y th e m . It t o o e m p h a size s th e se g m e n ta l sid e, th r o u g h th e lin k ed le x ic o n s . A ls o it seem s t o b e in sp ire d b y th e ru le m o d u le o f IP , a lth o u g h T M o n ly a llo w s “ p h o n o lo g ic a l” c o n d itio n in g fo r th e tr ig g e rin g o f ru les.

T h e seriou s d e fe c t o f T M , h o w ev er, is th a t it la ck s a c o n c e p t u a l, m o r p h o lo g ica l level. It o p e r a te s o n ly a t th e c o n c r e te , p h o n o lo g ic a l (g r a p h e m ic ) o n e , w h ich is o f co u r s e th e rea son fo r th e ju s t m e n tio n e d p h o n o lo g ic a l trig g e rin g .

(6)

(i.e . w a y s o f e x p r e s s in g m o r p h o lo g ic a l c h a r a c te r is tic s ) w h ere h e in clu d e d th in gs lik e “ in te rn a l m o d ific a t io n o f th e r a d ic a l o r g r a m m a tic a l e lem en t” , re d u p lic a tio n , a c c e n tu a l a n d q u a n t ita t iv e p ro ce s s e s .

It is th is k n o w le d g e th a t led t o a re v isio n o f m o r p h o lo g y b y M a tth e w s in 1972.

3 .4

W o r d and P aradigm

T h e W P is a m o d e l th a t a tt e m p ts t o ta k e m o r p h o lo g y se rio u sly in th a t a g ra m m a t ic a l fe a tu r e c a n b e re a liz e d in m a n y d ifferen t w a y s, lik e S a p ir su g g ested . In th is m o d e l th e u n d e r ly in g re p re s e n ta tio n is ev en m o r e a b s tr a c t th a n in th e tw o

p r e c e d in g m o r p h e m e m o d e ls . A n y w o r d fo r m is rep resen ted th ro u g h its lex em e (a n in v a ria n t re p r e s e n ta tio n o f th e w o r d ) w ith th e g r a m m a tic a l (m o r p h o s y n ta c - t i c ) in fo r m a tio n re p re se n te d as a n u n o r d e d set:

(1 5 ) G U T T jy j m a scu lin e , in d e fin ite , p lu ra l

T o rea ch th e c o r r e c t w o r d fo r m , th e ste m , w h ich is th e s ta rtin g p o in t, ca n g o th r o u g h v a rio u s p ro ce s s e s :

(1 6 ) G U T T j^ m a s cu lin e , in d e fin ite , p lu ra l: S te m : g u tt

+ o p e r a t io n : suflSx -e r = W o r d g u tte r

T h e n u m b e r o f p r o c e s s e s is p o te n tia lly in fin ite, th e rea son f o r th is is th a t it is th e w o r d w h ich is th e b a s ic u n it in th is m o d e l: I f a w o r d fo r m differs in m o r e th a n o n e w a y fr o m .any o th e r w o r d fo r m in th e sa m e p a r a d ig m , th en it g o e s

t h r o u g h m o r e th a n o n e p r o c e s s t o rea ch its fin a l sh a p e . A n d a ll th e p rocesses w ill b e e x p o n e n t s o f th e s a m e g r a m m a t ic a l (m o r p h o s y n t a c t ic ) fea tu re. W e sh all lo o k m o r e c lo s e ly a t th re e lin g u is tic p h e n o m e n a th a t a re p r o b le m a tic fo r th e tw o o th e r lin g u is tic m o d e ls a n d fo r T M , b u t n o t fo r W P .

T h e first a n d m o s t im p o r ta n t d iffe re n ce b e tw e e n th e W P m o d e l a n d th e m o r p h e m e m o d e ls is th a t w h ile th e m o r p h e m e m o d e ls n eed a o n e -to -o n e rela tio n s h ip b e tw e e n m o r p h o lo g ic a l c o n te n ts a n d its re a liz a tio n , W P a c c e p ts a m a n y t o o n e /o n e t o m a n y -r e la tio n s h ip :

(1 7 ) B O K jq fe m in in e , in d e fin ite , p lu ra l S te m : b o k

-I- operation:

suffix -er

-I- operation:

change stem vowel

= W o r d : b ø k e r

A s w e h a v e seen p re v io u s ly , th e m o r p h e m e m o d e ls a n d T M n ecessa rily m ust

(7)

A s e c o n d p r o b le m is th a t w h ile th ere still m ig h t b e s o m e u n iv ersa l c la im s a b o u t th e p r io r ity o f aflSxes t o ‘ in tern a l m o d ific a t io n s ’ , s o th a t th e first p r o b le m m a y lo o k sm a ller, a w o rs e c a s e o c c u r s w h en th e re a re m o r e th a n o n e a ffix th a t represen ts a g r a m m a tic a l fe a tu re . T h is is th e ca se in G e r m a n p a st p a r tic ip le s :

(1 8 ) g e -s a g -t

In th e G e r m a n c a s e w e m ig h t still a rg u e t o g iv e p r io r ity t o th e su ffix , t h o u g h , sin ce th e o th e r v e r b a l fe a tu re s in th e la n g u a g e axe m a rk ed b y su ffix es, b u t c o n sid er th e K u b a c h i d ia le c t o f D a r g w a fr o m th e N o r th e a s t C a u c a s u s , w h e r e ea ch a d je c tiv e a g re e s w ith th e n o u n ’s g e n d e r a n d n u m b e r b o t h in itia lly a n d fin a lly,

in a d d itio n t o a g re e in g w ith n u m b e r p e n u ltim a te ly :

(1 9 ) K u b a c h i (d ia le c t o f D a r g w a , N o r th e a s t C a u c a s u s ):

b-Tk’a rzi-b qalC’e ‘ little b ir d ’ d - l k ’a rzu -d qulC’-n e ‘ little b ir d s ’

( T h e e x a m p le is fr o m A n d e r s o n 1 9 8 8 :3 2 )

T h e m o r p h e m e m o d e ls th a t w e c o n s id e r e d p r e v io u s ly w o u ld h a v e t o g iv e o n e afiSx p r io r ity o v e r th e o th e r , o r m a k e u se o f th e c o n c e p t c ir c u m fix . T h e T M o n th e o th e r h a n d , d o e s n o t p resen t a s a tis fa c to r y s o lu tio n .

It c o u ld rep resen t th e p re fix e d a ffixes in a s e p a r a te le x ic o n , a n d h a v e p o in t ers fr o m th ere t o th e fu r th e r le x ic o n s . T h is h o w e v e r w o u ld m ea n th a t th e ste m w o u ld o c c u r as m a n y tim e s in th e s te m le x ic o n as th e re a re p re fix e s in th e la n g u a g e, sin ce th e suflSxes h a v e t o a g re e w ith th e p refix es. O t h e r e q u a lly in eleg a n t so lu tio n s a re a ls o p o ssib le .

B u t ev en i f T M h as p r o b le m s in re p re se n tin g p h e n o m e n a lik e th e a b o v e , it ca u d o it in a n in elega n t w ay. T h e th ird p r o b le m is m o r e s eriou s, h ow ev er:

T h e th ird a rea is p h e n o m e n a th a t a re n o t ‘ s e g m e n ta l’ in th eir n a tu re. W e re ca ll S ap ir w h o a llow ed in tern a l m o d ific a tio n as a m ea n s fo r r e p re s e n tin g m o r

p h o lo g ic a l fea tu res. A ty p ic a l e x a m p le o f th is is th e G e r m a n ic u m la u t a n d a b la u t, w h ich in m a n y cases is th e sole d is tin g u is h in g fa c t o r b e tw e e n t w o w o r d fo r m s o f

th e sa m e lex em e:

(2 0 ) m a n n (in d e f s g )- m e n n (in d e f p i) (m a n - m e n ) se ( i n f i n i t i v e ) - s i (p r e te r ite ) (s e e - s a w ) m o u s e ( s g ) - m i c e (p i)

B o t h th e m o r p h e m e m o d e ls th a t w e lo o k e d a t a n d T M h a v e p r o b le m s in d e s c r ib in g su ch p h e n o m e n a as v o w e l a lte r n a tio n , w h en it is n o t th e b ip r o d u c t o f

s o m e o th e r seg m en ta l, m o r p h o lo g ic a l p r o c e s s , b u t ra th e r th e m a in e x p o n e n t o f th a t m o r p h o lo g ic a l fe a tu re.

(8)

(2 1 ) T M : L e x ic a l (s t e m ) e n try :

L e x ic a l (a ffix ) e n try :

T w o -le v e l ru le: ‘ W o r d ’ :

mann

-0

a : e <=> _ C* - 0 m en n

4

Conclusion

T h e q u e s tio n w h ic h is th e title o f th is p a p e r , ‘Is T w o -le v e l m o r p h o lo g y a m o r p h o lo g ic a l m o d e l ? ’ , c a n fr o m th e p r e v io u s d iscu ssio n b e a n sw ered q u ick ly an d

c le a r ly n e g a tiv e ly . T h e re a s o n fo r th is is th a t a m in im u m t o b e d e m a n d e d fro m a m o r p h o lo g ic a l m o d e l, is f o r it t o a c c e p t m o r p h o lo g ic a l fe a tu re s a n d c a te g o rie s as p r im itiv e s . In th a t w a y it c o u ld a llo w m o r p h o lo g ic a l c o n d itio n in g o n stem v a ria tio n . B u t T M h a s t o m a k e u se o f a rtificia l n u ll-seg m en ts a n d o th e r trig g ers, i.e. it h as t o m a k e th e o r ig in a lly m o r p h o lo g ic a l c o n te x t ‘ p h o n o lo g ic a l’ , seg m en ta l. A n y t h in g th a t is m o r p h o lo g ic a l— lik e th e in fo r m a tio n in th e le x ic o n s — can b e u sed o n ly b y th e lin g u ist, n o t b y th e m o d e l. In th is w a y it d o e s n o t h a v e an y p o s s ib ility o f m a k in g g e n e r a liz a tio n s in d e p e n d e n tly o f p h o n o lo g ic a l sh a p e. It is e v e n w o r s e th a n th e m o r p h e m e m o d e ls , as it c a n n o t sa y th a t b o t h a su ffix a n d a v o w e l a lte r n a tio n c o u ld rep resen t ‘ p lu r a l’ , e .g ..

It th e r e fo r e seem s fa ir t o sa y th a t T M is n o t a m o r p h o lo g ic a l m o d e l. T h e r e a re, h o w e v e r, la n g u a g e s th a t c a n b e w ell d e s c r ib e d b y it, v iz. th e la n g u a g es th a t a re u s u a lly c a lle d a g g lu tin a tiv e in tr a d itio n a l ty p o lo g y . T h e s e a re la n g u a g es lik e F in n is h , w h o s e m o r p h o lo g y co n s is ts o f ea sily se p a ra b le affixes th a t each c o r r e s p o n d s t o o n e m o r p h o lo g ic a l u n it. T h e p h o n o lo g ic a l a lte rn a tio n s in F in n ish

a re n o t re a liz a tio n s o f m o r p h o lo g ic a l fe a tu re s, o n ly p h o n o lo g ic a lly d e te rm in e d a u t o m a t ic a lte r n a tio n s , w h ich th e tw o -le v e l rules h a n d les w ell. T h e im port^lnt

ru le-p a x t o f th e m o d e l m a k es th e T M m o r e p h o n o lo g ic a l th a n m o r p h o lo g ic a l. W e m a y a sk a la st q u e s tio n : Is it im p o r ta n t th a t a c o m p u ta tio n a l m o d e l

h as lin g u is tic q u a litie s ? F r o m th e a b o v e d is cu ssio n I th in k th e a n sw er sh o u ld b e p o s it iv e .

References

Anderson, S.R. 1988. Inflection. In Hammond, M. & M. Noonan (eds.). Theoretical

Morphology, 23—44. Academic Press Inc., San Diego.

Bybee, J. L. 1985. Morphology. A Study o f the Relation between Meaning and Form. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam.

Hockett, C.F. 1954. Tw o Models o f Grammatical Description. Word, 10, 210-231. New York.

Johannessen, J. 1988. Automatisk morfologisk analyse og syntese. Lingvistisk institutt. Universitetet i Oslo, Oslo. Hovedoppgave.

(9)

Källgren, G. 1983. Computerized Analysis and Synthesis o f Finnish Nominals. In Pa

pers from the Seventh Scandinavian Conference o f Linguistics, 433-444. Publ. no.

10, Department o f General Linguistics, University o f Helsinki, Helsinki.

Karlsson, F. and K. Koskenniemi. 1985. A Process Model o f Morphology and Lexicon.

Folia Linguistica, 207-231, Haag.

Matthews, P.H. 1972. Inflectional Morphology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

---1974. Morphology. An Introduction to the Theory o f Word-structure. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Rankin, I. 1986. SM ORF— An Implementation o f Hellberg’s Morphology System. In

Papers from the Fifth Scandinavian Conference o f Computational Linguistics,

161-172. Publ. no. 15, Department o f General Linguistics, University o f Helsinki, Helsinki.

Robins, R.H. (ed.) 1970. Diversions o f Bloomsbury. Selected Writings o f Linguistics. North-HoUand Publishing Company, Amsterdam.

Sapir, E. 1921. Language. Harcourt, Brace &c W orld, New York.

Wurzel, W . U. 1982. Phonologie - Morphonologie - Morphologie. In Linguistische Stu

dien, 93, Reihe A, Arbeitsberichte. Akademie der Wissenschaften der D D R , Zen-

tralinstitut fiir Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin.