Cover not available

Article published In: Linguistics in the Netherlands 2022
Edited by Jorrig Vogels and Sterre Leufkens
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 39] 2022
► pp. 263–278

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB

There is more to the morphology of -š/ -iš

The comparative in Ukrainian

 | KU Leuven
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with KU Leuven.

Published online: 4 November 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00073.vys
Abstract
There are two comparative suffixes in Ukrainian: the productive -iš, and the non-productive -š. Following Caha, Pavel, Karen De Clercq & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd. 2019. “The fine structure of the comparative.” Studia Linguistica 73(3): 470–521. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar I show that just like in Czech, the distribution of these two suffixes in Ukrainian is regulated not by phonology, but by morphosyntax. The theory of Nanosyntax (Starke, Michal. 2009. “Nanosyntax: A short primer to a new approach to language.” Nordlyd 361: 1–6.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) is used in order to account for the data. The comparative meaning is represented in syntax not by one but by two functional heads. To be more precise, I propose that in Ukrainian -iš is decomposed into two morphemes -i and -š, where -i spells out the lower head and -š spells out the higher one. The issue of suppletive adjectives is discussed as well. I argue that suppletion can be accounted for using the nanosyntactic concept of pointers. As a result, this approach helps to explain the mechanism behind allomorphy of the comparative suffix in regular and suppletive adjectives in Ukrainian.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background: DegP and Nanosyntax
    • 2.1DegP
    • 2.2Nanosyntax
  • 3.The choice between -š and -iš is morphologically conditioned
    • 3.1Regular Ukrainian adjectives
    • 3.2Suppletive Ukrainian adjectives
    • 3.3Disuppletion: Possible solutions
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (13)
References
Arregi, Karlos & Andrew Nevins. 2014. “A monoradical approach to some cases of disupple-tion.” Theoretical Linguistics 40(3–4): 311–330. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baunaz, Lena & Eric Lander. 2018. “Nanosyntax: the basics.” Exploring Nanosyntax, ed. by Lena Baunaz, Karen De Clercq, Liliane Haegeman & Eric Lander. 3–56. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bevzenko, Stepan Pylypovyč. 1960. Istoryčna morfolohia ukrajin’skoji movy. ‘the historical morphology of the ukrainian language”. Uzhhorod: Zakarpats’ke Oblastne Vydavnytstvo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2012. Universals In Comparative Morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caha, Pavel, Karen De Clercq & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd. 2019. “The fine structure of the comparative.” Studia Linguistica 73(3): 470–521. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corver, Norbert. 1997. “Much-support as a last resort.” Linguistic Inquiry 281: 119–164.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Clercq, Karen, Pavel Caha, Michal Starke & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd. 2022. “Degree morphology.” The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Morphology, ed. by Peter Ackema, Eulàlia Bonet, Sabrina Bendjaballah & Antonio Fábregas. Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Clercq, Karen & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd. 2017. “*ABA revisited: evidence from Czech and Latin degree morphology.” Glossa 2(1): 691: 1–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Despić, Miloje. 2019. “(non-)intersective adjectives and root suppletion.” The Linguistic Review 361: 507–530. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Embick, David. 2010. Localism versus Globalism in Morphology and Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Starke, Michal. 2009. “Nanosyntax: A short primer to a new approach to language.” Nordlyd 361: 1–6.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “Cleaning up the lexicon.” Linguistic Analysis 391: 245–256.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanden Wyngaerd, Guido, Michal Starke, Karen De Clercq & Pavel Caha. 2020. “How to be positive.” Glossa 5(1): 23. 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

De Clercq, Karen, Pavel Caha, Michal Starke & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd
2025. Nanosyntax. In Nanosyntax and the Lexicalization Algorithm, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Pancheva, Roumyana
2025. 653 Two types of synthetic comparatives in Old Slavic. In Generative Perspectives on Degrees, ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Vyshnevska, Anastasiia
2025. Comparing Slavic comparatives. In Nanosyntax and the Lexicalization Algorithm, ► pp. 45 ff. DOI logo
Vyshnevska, Anastasiia
2025. 412 Degrees in Ukrainian deadjectival verbs. In Generative Perspectives on Degrees, ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue