Тарқалған Морфология: Сөз және сөйлем құрылысының біртұтас моделі

In generative linguistics, Distributed Morphology is a theoretical framework introduced in 1993 by Morris Halle and Alec Marantz. The central claim of Distributed Morphology is that there is no divide between the construction of words and sentences. The syntax is the single generative engine that forms sound meaning correspondences, both complex phrases and complex words. This approach challenges the traditional notion of the Lexicon as the unit where derived words are formed and idiosyncratic word meaning correspondences are stored. In Distributed Morphology there is no unified Lexicon as in earlier generative treatments of word formation. Rather, the functions that other theories ascribe to the Lexicon are distributed among other components of the grammar.

The basic principle of Distributed Morphology is that there is a single generative engine for the formation of both complex words and complex phrases: there is no division between syntax and morphology and there is no Lexicon in the sense it has in traditional generative grammar. Distributed Morphology rejects the notion of a lexicon in the way it had been used. Any operation that would occur in the 'lexicon' according to lexicalist approaches is considered too vague in Distributed Morphology, which instead distributes these operations over various steps and lists. The term Distributed Morphology is used because the morphology of an utterance is the product of operations distributed over more than one step, with content from more than one list. In contrast to lexicalist models of morphosyntax, Distributed Morphology posits three components in building an utterance:
The Formative List provides the input for syntax. The Exponent List (the list of Vocabulary Items) is consulted to provide the utterance with post syntactic phonological content. Syntactic operations (such as Merge, Move or Agree in the Minimalist framework) apply to formatives. There are three relevant lists in Distributed Morphology: the Formative List, the Exponent List (Vocabulary Items), and the Encyclopedia. Roots have no grammatical categories in and of themselves, and merely represent the bundle of semantic features to be exponed. The notation for roots in Distributed Morphology generally uses a square root symbol, with an arbitrary number or with the orthographic representation of the root. For example, love, without a grammatical category, could be expressed as √362 or as √LOVE. Researchers adopting the Distributed Morphology approach agree that roots must be categorized by functional elements. There are multiple ways that this can be done. The following lists four possible routes. Roots are merged as modifiers to the functional elements that categorize them. Some roots are merged as modifiers and others as complements to the function elements that categorize them. Roots are inserted post syntactically and do not merge with complements or modifiers. As of 2020, there is no consensus on which approach most accurately describes the structural configuration of root categorization.

The Encyclopedia associates syntactic units with special, non compositional aspects of meaning. argue that Lowering applies before Vocabulary insertion, while Local Dislocation applies afterwards. Apart from the operations described above, some researchers (Embick 1997 among others) have suggested that there are morphemes that represent purely formal features and are inserted post syntactically but before spell out: these morphemes are called "dissociated morphemes".

Fission refers to the splitting of one terminal node into two distinct terminal nodes prior to Vocabulary Insertion. Some of the most well known cases of fission involve the imperfect conjugations of Semitic, in which agreement morphology is split into a prefixal and suffixal part, as investigated in the work of Noyer (1992). Fission may also occur where insertion of a Vocabulary item discharges the intrinsic features of the Vocabulary item from the terminal node, leaving others features available for possible insertion; if fission applies, then other Vocabulary items can be inserted to discharge the remaining features. When Fission occurs, the order of morphemes is influenced by the featural complexity of Vocabulary items.

Impoverishment (a term introduced into the theory in Bonet 1991) refers to a change in the feature content on a terminal node prior to Vocabulary Insertion, resulting in a less marked feature content. Feature deletion: This is accomplished by deleting a feature or by changing it from a marked to an unmarked value (e. g. [+plural] to [ plural]). Impoverishment accounts for cases in which spell out of a terminal node by a featurally specific Vocabulary Item is blocked by a less specific Vocabulary Item. Feature obliteration: Impoverishment can target an entire terminal node (rather than just one of its features), in which case it is referred to as 'obliteration'. This results in the complete absence of the morpheme from the structure of the word.

Lowering is sensitive to syntactic headedness and operates on abstract feature bundles, after syntactic movement but prior to vocabulary insertion.

In Distributed Morphology morphological paradigms are seen as epiphenomena. Irregular forms or gaps associated with paradigms are explained via competition for vocabulary insertion.

In Distributed Morphology there are two different types of meaning: the meaning associated with the bundles of features of the Lexicon and the idiosyncratic meaning listed in the Encyclopedia. It is believed that encyclopedic meaning is associated with lexical roots, rather than with complete phrases.

Since the model of Distributed Morphology consists of three lists (Formative List, Exponent List, Encyclopedia), we expect crosslinguistic variation to be located in all three of them. The feature bundles and their structure might be different from language to language (Formative List), which could affect both syntactic and post syntactic operations. Vocabulary Items (Exponent List) can also be different crosslinguistically. Finally, the interpretation of roots (Encyclopedia) is also expected to show variation.