Gen for clitics at different levels

[nkalivoda]

It would be cool to have a Gen option that allowed us to explore Selkirk's distinctions among clitics. For every clitic σ in the output, Gen would either

1. parse it directly into ι (assuming [–Exh])
2. parse it directly into φ (assuming [–Exh])
3. right-adjoin it to a preceding ω (assuming [–NonRec])
4. left-adjoin it to a following ω (assuming [–NonRec])
5. parse it as part of a minimal ω with the terminal to its left (violating Match(X⁰,ω))
6. or parse it as part of a minimal ω with the terminal to its right (violating Match(X⁰,ω))

Assuming an input [x C.clitic y], this would give us:

1. {...C.syll...}
2. (...C.syll...)
3. ...[x C.syll]...
4. ...[C.syll y]...
5. ...xC...
6. ...Cy...

5 and 6 here are not like anything we've dealt with before. And we'd have to think a bit more about how this would work in structures with multiple clitics.

[jbellik]

This would be very cool but I'm afraid to think about what the implementation would be like! Could it be useful as a distinct GEN that only handled clitics?

…

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 7:57 AM Nick Kalivoda ***@***.***> wrote: It would be cool to have a Gen option that allowed us to explore Selkirk's distinctions among clitics. For every clitic σ in the output, Gen would either 1. parse it directly into ι (assuming [–Exh]) 2. parse it directly into φ (assuming [–Exh]) 3. right-adjoin it to a preceding ω (assuming [–NonRec]) 4. left-adjoin it to a following ω (assuming [–NonRec]) 5. parse it as part of a minimal ω with the terminal to its left (violating Match(X⁰,ω)) 6. or parse it as part of a minimal ω with the terminal to its right (violating Match(X⁰,ω)) Assuming an input [x C.clitic y], this would give us: 1. {...C.syll...} 2. (...C.syll...) 3. ...[x C.syll]... 4. ...[C.syll y]... 5. ...xC... 6. ...Cy... 5 and 6 here are not like anything we've dealt with before. And we'd have to think a bit more about how this would work in structures with multiple clitics. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#532>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC7ROKXIXGDZ4MSK77MKF4LSTT3NDANCNFSM4UQU37TQ> .

--

-- Jennifer Bellik, PhD Post-doctoral researcher & lecturer UC Santa Cruz https://people.ucsc.edu/~jbellik/

[nkalivoda]

Yes, I think any version of it, even highly specific, could be useful. What do you mean by "that only handled clitics"? I think the interest would be in seeing how a clitic terminal interacted with words on either side. I've been thinking about trying to define systems based on Selkirk (1996) where the input terminal strings are just "x0 C.clitic", "C.clitic x0", and "x0 C.clitic x0", with different syntaxes on top, to see which way the clitic leans and at which level. (If I ever do this, it would be easy to generate the candidates by hand.)

[nkalivoda]

To throw in yet another complication, it would also be interesting if the clitic itself could be promoted to an independent ω: [C.syl].