|Title:||Understanding infixes as infixes|
|Abstract:||This is a handout of a talk given at NAPhC 2 (April, 2002, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada).
Recent infixation research has consistently recognized two types of infixation: Infixation via Prosodic Displacement (a.k.a. Displacement Theory) and Infixation via Affixation to a Prosodic Constituent (i.e. prosodic subcategorization). According the Displacement Theory of infixation, an infix is analyzed as underlyingly either a prefix or a suffix. It 'migrates' inward by acquiescing to prosody optimizing forces (e.g., coda minimization as in Tagalog -um- infixation (McCarthy & Prince 1993). Prosodic subcategorization, on the other hand, licenses an affix to subcategorize for a prosodic constituent (e.g., the stressed foot) as the base of affixation.
Arguments are presented here against the Displacement Theory of Infixation, based on both theory-internal evidence and the results of a cross-linguistic survey of infixation patterns. A unified account of infixation is then presented that advocates treating infixation as a matter of phonological subcategorization.
|Article:||This article has been withdrawn.|