4

Tense affixes used to be analysed to have moved downwards from T to V in English.

Is this analysis still current? Do minimalists still analyse it like this?

3
  • No, it is very "passé" - when I was in grad school in 2006-2009, we didn't even talk about it, I read about it later myself in the Fromkin textbook - quite dated now. In MP, tense is an uninterpretable feature on v [uInfl:] that gets its value via Agree from T iff v is the head of T's sister (see e.g. Adger 2003, 5.5.4 Tense chains, pp. 192-194.
    – Alex B.
    Jul 24 at 0:49
  • 2
    Affix hopping is now a TECO macro in the Smithsonian.
    – jlawler
    Jul 24 at 13:55
  • I think a specialist in Distributed Morphology should comment or answer here. I know something similar to affix hopping, i.e. lowering, exists in that framework. Jul 27 at 14:23
2

Chomsky’s original formulation is obsolete, if only because lexical integrity of some sort is usually assumed. But there are many languages in which suffixes or clitics are part of a constituent that doesn’t contain their governor (in the sense of dependency grammar). In some languages a more appropriate term would be clitic hopping but the principle is the same. In fact this is where the mismatch between phrase structure grammar and dependency grammar becomes clearly apparent.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.