Spanish verbs inflect for the person and number of their subject: habla (she speaks) vs. hablamos (we speak). A non-lexicalist theorist would say this pattern is evidence that...
AThe lexicon stores all conjugated verb forms as separate entries, each linked to syntactic contexts
BAgreement features are assigned during syntactic derivation, driving the morphological realization of verb forms
CVerb forms are morphologically autonomous and only coincidentally reflect syntactic relationships
DSpanish syntax and morphology operate in entirely separate cognitive modules with no interaction
Non-lexicalist approaches (like Distributed Morphology) argue that agreement morphology is not a coincidence but a direct product of syntactic feature assignment: the syntactic relationship between verb and subject generates the agreement features that are then phonologically realized as inflectional endings. If morphology were truly separate and pre-syntactic (Strong Lexicalist view), agreement would have to be stipulated as an accidental mapping, not explained by grammar architecture. The non-lexicalist account makes agreement systematic rather than stipulated.
Question 2 Multiple Choice
The Strong Lexicalist Hypothesis claims that...
AInflectional morphology is handled by syntax, but derivational morphology occurs in the pre-syntactic lexicon
BBoth inflectional and derivational morphology are assembled in a pre-syntactic lexicon; syntax only sees completed words
CThe lexicon and syntax are the same module operating at different scales
DMorphological complexity is determined entirely by the phonological interface, not by underlying syntax
The Strong Lexicalist Hypothesis holds that all morphology — both inflectional (walked, walks) and derivational (unhappiness, re-read) — occurs in a pre-syntactic lexicon. Syntax then receives these completed words without any access to their internal morphological structure. This contrasts with the Weak Lexicalist Hypothesis (inflection is syntactic, derivation is lexical) and non-lexicalist approaches (all morphology is syntactic in origin). Knowing these positions is essential for evaluating which phenomena are problematic for each theory.
Question 3 True / False
In non-lexicalist approaches, agreement morphology on verbs is derived from the same computational system that builds syntactic phrases.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: True
This is the core non-lexicalist claim: morphology is not a separate pre-syntactic module but the phonological realization of features already present in the syntactic derivation. Agreement, case marking, and inflectional endings are the surface reflex of syntactic feature configurations. The 'interface' problem then becomes one of mapping between syntactic feature structures and phonological forms — which is what Distributed Morphology's Vocabulary Insertion operation handles.
Question 4 True / False
The Lexicalist and non-lexicalist frameworks make identical predictions about inflectional morphology; they differ primarily in how they treat derivational word formation.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: False
The frameworks diverge sharply on inflectional morphology. The Strong Lexicalist Hypothesis holds that inflectional forms are pre-syntactically assembled in the lexicon; non-lexicalist approaches like Distributed Morphology hold that inflection is directly derived by syntactic operations. These produce different predictions about mismatches between morphological form and syntactic structure, the behavior of portmanteau morphemes, and patterns of syncretism — which is why these phenomena are central battlegrounds in the debate.
Question 5 Short Answer
What is the central empirical question that decides between lexicalist and non-lexicalist accounts of morphology, and why can't it be resolved by looking at agreement in regular cases alone?
Think about your answer, then reveal below.
Model answer: The central question is whether morphological form tracks syntactic structure systematically enough that morphology must be derived from syntax, or whether the correlations can be treated as coincidental lexical specification. Regular agreement looks the same under both accounts — the Lexicalist can stipulate forms that happen to match syntax, while the non-lexicalist derives them. The decisive evidence comes from edge cases: morphological mismatches with syntax, the behavior of clitics (which seem syntactically active but morphologically word-like), phrasal idioms with non-compositional meaning, and the scope and productivity of different morphological operations.
This is why the debate has lasted decades: both frameworks can describe the core cases. The methodological lesson is that theoretical linguistics advances by identifying phenomena that one framework handles naturally and the other must stipulate — those are the revealing data points. Agreement in simple verb-subject pairs is not one of them.