Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T10:20:10.630Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological Features and Markedness in the Old French Noun Declension

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Douglas C. Walker
Douglas C. Walker*
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the evolution of morphological studies, morphological features and markedness have come to play increasingly important rôles. Feature notation in morphology allows the development of the notion of natural morphological class, renders explicit much of the internal structure of paradigms and permits the exploitation, suitably adapted, of many of the results obtained in phonology. Markedness considerations, particularly when linked to general theories of morphology, again highlight morphological structure, constrain the variety of permitted analyses, and indicate, at least in part, the expected direction of historical change. In the sections to follow, I will present an analysis of Old French nominal and adjectival inflection which makes key use of morphological features and the differences between the marked and unmarked values of these features. This study will be particularly concerned with constraining the morphological analysis of Old French and conversely, with using Old French data to investigate more general properties of morphological systems.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 143 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, Henning 1973 Abductive and Deductive Change. Language 49:765–793.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen 1982 Where’s Morphology? Linguistic Inquiry 13:571–612.Google Scholar
Bierwisch, Manfred 1967 Syntactic Features in Morphology: General Problems of So-Called Pronominal Inflection in German. Pp. 239–270 in To Honor Roman Jakobson. Vol. I. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan 1985 Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville 1981 Syntactic Features. Journal of Linguistics 17:55–76.Google Scholar
de Gorog, Ralph 1982 Dictionnaire inverse de l’ancien français. Binghamton: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies.Google Scholar
Dressier, Wolfgang 1985 On the Predictiveness of Natural Morphology. Journal of Linguistics 21:321–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubois, Jean, ed. 1973 Lexis. Dictionnaire de la langue française. Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar
Foulet, Lucien 1930 Petite syntaxe de l’ancien français. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Garey, Howard 1959 Verte, grande and longue. Three Types of Analogy in Old French. Language 35:605–611.Google Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald, Klein, Ewan, Pullum, Geoffrey, and Sag, Ivan 1985 Generalized Phrase-Structure Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph 1966 Language Universals. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Harris, Martin 1978 The Evolution of French Syntax: A Comparative Approach. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman 1971a Beitrag zur allgemeinen Kasuslehre. Gesamtbedeutungen der russischen Kasus. Pp. 23–71 in Selected Writings II. Word and Language. The Hague: Mouton. [Originally published 1936].Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman 1971b Signe zéro. Pp. 211–219 in Selected Writings II. Word and Language. The Hague: Mouton. [Originally published 1939].Google Scholar
Jensen, John 1983 Markedness and Morphological Features. Ms.Google Scholar
Jensen, John, and Stong-Jensen, Margaret 1984 Morphology is in the Lexicon! Linguistic Inquiry 15:474–498.Google Scholar
Klausenburger, Jurgen 1970 French Prosodics and Phonotactics. An Historical Typology. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy 1949 La nature des procès dits ‘analogiques’. Acta Linguistica 5:15–37.Google Scholar
Laubscher, Gustave 1921 The Syntactical Causes of Case Reduction in Old French. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Linell, Per 1979 Psychological Reality in Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mańczak, Witold 1958 Tendances générales des changements analogiques. Lingua 7:298–325, 387–420.Google Scholar
Matthews, Peter 1972 Inflectional Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mayerthaler, Willi 1981 Morphologische Natürlichkeit. Wiesbaden: Athenaion.Google Scholar
Ménard, Philippe 1973 Manuel du français du moyen âge. 1. Syntaxe de l’ancien français. Bordeaux: Sobodi.Google Scholar
Moignet, Gérard 1973 Grammaire de l’ancien français. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Nyrop, Kristoffer 1924 Grammaire historique de la langue française. Tome 2: Morphologie. Copenhagen: Gyldendals.Google Scholar
Pensado, Carmen 1986 Inversion de marquage et perte du système casuel en ancien français. Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 102:271–296.Google Scholar
Pope, Mildred 1934 From Latin to Modern French with Especial Consideration of Anglo-Norman. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul 1968 Aspects of Phonological Theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Schosler, Lene 1984 La déclinaison bicasuelle de l’ancien français. Odense: Odense University Press.Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi 1973 The Role of Surface Phonetic Constraints in Generative Phonology. Language 49:87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, Nicol 1962 La survivance en français moderne des formes du nominatif latin. Pp. 231–243 in Actes du Xe congrès international de linguistique et philologie romanes. Straka, Georges, ed. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Stanley, Richard 1967 Redundancy Rules in Phonology. Language 43:393–436.Google Scholar
Tiersma, Peter 1982 Local and General Markedness. Language 58:832–849.Google Scholar
Togeby, Knud 1974 Précis historique de grammaire française. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Tucker, Richard, Lambert, Wallace, and Rigault, André 1977 The French Speaker’s Skill with Grammatical Gender: An Example of Rule-Governed Behavior. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Tuttle, Edward 1982 Relative Chronology as the Key to a French Morphological Crux: verte versus grande. Romance Philology 35:484–489.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo 1972 Phonetic Analogy and Conceptual Analogy. Pp. 181–204 in Schuchardt, the Neogrammarians and the Transformational Theory of Language Change. Vennemann, Theo and Wilbur, T., eds. Frankfurt: Athenäum.Google Scholar
Vincent, Nigel 1974 Analogy Reconsidered. Pp. 427–445 in Historical Linguistics II. Theory and Description in Phonology, Anderson, John and Jones, Charles, eds. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Vincent, Nigel 1985 The Interaction of Periphrasis and Inflection: Some Romance Examples. Paper presented at ICHL VII, Pavia.Google Scholar
Wagner, Robert-Lon 1974 L’ancien français; points de vue, programmes. Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar
Walker, Douglas 1981 An Introduction to Old French Morphophonology. Ottawa: Didier.Google Scholar
Walker, Douglas 1982 Dictionnaire inverse de l’ancien français. Ottawa: Editions de l’Université d’Ottawa.Google Scholar
Wetzels, Leo 1981 Analogie et lexique. Le problème de l’opacité en phonologie generative. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Wetzels, Leo 1984 Paradigm Levelling in Latin and Old French: A Critical View of Rule Inversion. Pp. 579–599 in Papers from the XIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Baldi, Philip, ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Witkowski, Stanley, and Brown, Cecil 1983 Marking Reversals and Cultural Importance. Language 59:569–582.Google Scholar
Wurzel, Wolfgang 1984 Flexionsmorphologie und Natürlichkeit. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold 1978 On Markedness in Morphology. Die Sprache 24:129–143.Google Scholar