15-1 101 2010:101-118

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality*

Choi, Sung-Ho (Chungbuk National University, Korea)

1. Introduction
Nouns in inflecting languages (including Slavic languages) show a variety of desinence allomorphy, which has been described in terms of "inflection class" (declension class). For example, Russian nouns inflect for case and number, whose features are realized as cumulative morphs;
STOL

'table', stol-om 'table-Ins.Sg', where the features of 'Instrumental' and 'Singular'

are realized as -om. However, -om is not the only morph expressing 'Ins' and 'Sg'; they are also expressed by -oj (e.g., knig-oj) and -ju.(e.g., kost'-ju) Traditional grammars of Russian handles this kind of desinence allomorphy by setting up a lexical class, elements of which select an identical set of case/number affixes. Thus, three lexical classes (called "I-declension", "II-declension", and "III-declension") and their corresponding affixal sets1) have been established for the singular inflection of Russian nouns. An essential assumption that this approach takes is that languages have a set of those case/number affixes with certain relationships among them, namely an affixal set which is selected by a class of nouns that can be characterized in terms of lexical characteristics such as gender, animacy, person, or some postulated features, etc. For example, Russian II-declension nouns that are characterized lexically as those nouns whose lexical funs (i.e., NomSg funs) ends in -a (e.g.,
VODA

'water',

KNIGA

'buok',

ENA

'wife',

DJADJA

'uncle',

SIROTA

'orphan', etc.) select the unifuns affixal set of {a/NomSg, u/AccSg, i/GenSg, e/LocSg, e/DatSg, oj/InsSg}. This set reveals a certain pattern among case affixes; (1) AccSgong cits own affixal funs, thus never syncret, ewith NomSg, and (2) LocSg is syncretic with DatSg. It is on the basis of these internal relationships that declension patterns are established.2)
* This work was supported by the research grant of the Chungbuk National University in 2008. 1) Nouns of, for example, "III-declension" (e.g., LJUBOV" 'love') select the following set of case/number affixes: {/Nom, /Acc, i/Gen, i/Loc, i/Dat, ju/Ins}. See the next paragraph. 2) This point, which I made explicit in my other paper (Choi 2008), will be again illustrated in this paper.

102 15-1

From the point of view of desinence distribution, all the case/number affixes constituting a same affixal set share the identical distribution; for the 2nd set of affixes above, each and every case/number affix occurs with those nouns that belong to II-declension nouns. One can say that the 2nd set of affixes are well-motivated in terms of its distribution. Or, the lexical characteristics of 'lexical form ending in -a' can be said to condition (or "motivate", "licence") occurrence of the 2nd set of affixes. It stands to reason that the three affixal sets in Russian are generally complementarily distributed, which makes them stable in the synchronic grammar of Russian. However, the real situation regarding desinence allomorphy is not so simple as the above description would suggest. First, there are affixal sets, whose distribution cannot be uniformly determined; in other words, a class of nouns selecting a certain affixal set is not characterized in terms of their lexical features; let us call this instance "a lexically non-characterized affixal set". Second, there are affixal sets, each of which does not display any relationship among case affixes; "a morphologically non-uniform affixal set". This paper deals with these "unusual" inflectional classes, and maintains that either an affixal set as a whole or allomorphs of a certain individual case tend to be distributionally motivated. This can be interpreted as an instance of functionalizing (or indexicalizing) allomorphy; namely, each allomorph tends to occur in a lexically specified class, thus the lexical feature being "indexed" by the very occurrence of the allomorph. The data is drawn mainly from Czech and Polish declensions, which, when necessary, are contrasted with East Slavic data. Section 2 discusses Czech III-declension,3) whose members are changing their declesional morphology. This paper discusses the reason for the change (section 2.1) and the innovational path (section 2.2). Section 3 describes Polish I-declension, whose internal complexity is interpreted from the traditional descriptive framework. I will criticize this descriptive model in terms of validity of generalizations that the framework would capture. Section 4 provides conclusion, where I suggest that two requirements (motivated distribution and formal relationship) must be met in order to establish affixal patterns in a given language.

2. Czech III-declension
2.1. Some facts

3) "III-declension" is used in this paper to refer to the later development of Common Slavic (=CS) feminine I-stem pattern.

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 103

Czech III-declension continues Common Slavic (=CS) I-stem affixal pattern, and shows many archaic features. Nouns taking III-declension are all feminine and have a stem-final (historically) "soft" consonant. See the following: (1) CS I-stem pattern & Czech III-declension4) CS I-stem pattern NS kost- AS kost- GS kost-i LS kost-i DS kost-i IS kost-j Czech III-declension ("III-a")5) kost- kost- kost'-i kost'-i kost'-i kost'- kost'-i kost'-i kost'- kost-ech kost-em kost'-mi

---------------------------------------------------------------NP kost-i AP kost-i GP kost-j LP kost-x DP kost-m IP kost-mi

The shift of the two reduced vowels, which took place in the late CS period, resulted in their vocalization and elimination, depending on the well-known phonological environment (i.e., "Havlk's law"); hence, LP kost'-ech, DP kost'-em, and IP kost'-mi (compare this with Russian kost'-ax, kost'-am, and kost'-am'i, respectively, which were reformulated analogically from the feminine A-stem pattern). This affixal set is taken productively for those feminine nouns with suffix -ost and for isolated feminine nouns (e.g., 'thing'). As many Czech grammars describe, III-declension shows variation. This variant is mixed in its affixal constituency; its affixal inventory includes affixes of II-declension "soft" sub-pattern.
HRST

'palm',

ELIST

'jaw',

'speech',

V C

4) Czech has the following phonemic system (Comrie & Corbett 1993:456-7): p b t d t' d' k g h i, u, ( ) f v s z ch e, o, c a, r j m n 5) Cf. Russian. kost'-, -, -i, -i, -i, -ju; kost'-i, -i, -ej, -ax, -am, -am'i.

104 15-1

Let us call this variant-pattern "III-b" (the affixal pattern given in (1), "III-a"). (2) Czech III-a Czech III-b NS kost- AS kost- GS kost'-i LS kost'-i DS kost'-i IS kost'- NP kost'-i AP kost'-i GP kost'- LP kost-ech DP kost-em IP kost'-mi dlan'- dlan'- dlan'-e dlan'-i dlan'-i dlan'- dlan'-e dlan'-e dlan'- dlan'-ch dlan'-m dlan'-emi Czech II-declension, "Soft" r -e r -i r -e r -i r -i r - r -e r -e r - r -ch r -m r -emi

The underlined affixes of III-b are from the "Soft" variant pattern of II-declension. Note that words like dlan' used to have kost pattern (cf. Russian ladon' 'palm' inflects like kost', which is a III-declension noun), which means that III-b is a result of later developmentcf. e q wsrn ( is, what motivates such acfhange? . Rusis an interwsrnng q wsrn (, ase kmpared wish the fact that Russian III-declension nouns do not ex Rbis such acvariarn (, and thwse two variant cfhange?spms are engmples of what was termalm' ithe introductory remark "lexically non-characterized affixal sets". In other words, their distributions cannot be completely predicted. As I discussed elsewhere (Choi 2008), the main reason for the non-merger between II declension and III-declension in Russian is because they are different from each other in their lexical form, even though they share the same gender; namely, /kost'/ (III-declension) vs. /pesn'a/ (II-declension). Nouns of III-declension have lexical forms ending in a (sharped) consonant, while nouns of II-declension always end in /a/ in their lexical form (i.e., NS form). This lexical feature that II-declension nouns have is so pervasive and unexceptional that even masculine nouns (e.g., /papa/ 'daddy', /sud'ja/ 'judge') or common gender nouns (e.g., /s'irota/ 'orphan', /kollega/ 'colleage') ending in /a/ take II-declension pattern. It was argued there that this difference primarily motivates non-merger between these two patterns in Russian.

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 105

2.2. Why variation in Czech III-declension?

Now, turn our attention to the Czech situation. Note first that in Czech the "Palatal(=Soft)" feature plays a pivotal role in structuring affixal patterns, which is not the case with Russian. Czech I-declension and II-declension both have two variants: unmarked "Hard" sub-pattern vs. marked "Soft" sub-pattern. This is, of course, continuation of Common Slavic dichotomy found within O-stem and A-stem patterns ("hard variant" vs. "soft variant"; cf. Borkovskij & Kuznecov 1965:191-). See the following, where "a" means Hard sub-pattern, while "b", Soft sub-pattern: (3) Comparison between Russian and Czech I- (for inanimate nouns) & II-declensions (singular only) NS Russian I Czech I-a I-b Russian II Czech II-a II-b a a e AS u u i GS a a~u e i i e LS e e~u i e e i DS u u i e e i IS om em em oj ou nouns
STOL ROZBOR KO ENA ENA R E

The two Soft variants are taken by those nouns whose stem ends in a palatal consonant such as / c t' d' n' j/.6) Note also the morphophonemic reduction that observes in the Soft variants: /a/, /e/, /u/, and /ou/ of the Hard sub-pattern corresponds to /e/, /i/, /i/. and // of the Soft sub-pattern, respectively. Secondly, for Russian, the lexical feature that motivates choice of II-declension pattern, as mentioned before, is phonological characteristics of the lexical form: nouns ending in /a/ select the II-pattern.7) Note that gender is not the decisive factor, since not only feminine gender nouns, but masculine and commone gender nouns (see section 2.1) select II-pattern. In contrast, in Czech, the phonological feature does not appear to be the primary factor; rather,

6) In Russian, where the phonetic feature of 'sharping' serves as phonemic, nouns of both hard and soft stems take an identical affixal set, which is I-declension for masculine and neuter gender nouns and II-declension for (mostly) feminine gender nouns. 7) One may view that the phonological form of a lexeme (lexical form) is defined in terms of stem, not of NS form. On the stem-based view, the selectional criteria would be NS form itself, thus making the morphological feature a lexical one, which is tentamount to saying that each lexeme must include arbitrarily postulated morphological feature. For example, lexemes like kniga include as their lexical feature [-a, NS], which then allows kniga to select II-pattern.

106 15-1

gender plays a decisive role. Masculine nouns ending in /a/ are mixed; for example, p ednosta 'chief', NS p ednost-a, AS p ednost-u, GS p ednost-i, LS p ednost-ovi, DS p ednost-ovi, IS p ednost-ou; NP p ednost-ov, ednost-i.8) AP p ednost-i, GP p ednost- , LP p ednost-ech, DP p ednost- m, IP p Nouns of this class inflect exactly like normal 'virile' masculine

nouns in the plural and in DS and LS. Further, just like feminine nouns like r e, there are neuter nouns that have /e/ in their lexical form; e.g., mo e 'sea', etc. These all facts point to the claim that Czech utilizes primarily gender in selecting the appropriate affixal set. The discussion up to now lays foundation for understanding the reason for the variation within the III-declension pattern, mentioned in sementioned. The former III-declension nouns such as dlan' 'palm' are feminine and stem-finally palatal, which are shared with II-b nouns such as r e. The difference with respect to lexical form (or NS form), as discussed hin tlaimed hbovedece femiconsidered as a motnsating atal, in determining distribution of affixal patternseclension nunlikely cleRussiane forother words nouns art of Czech grammar that takes chargnsof the distribution of nheinal allomorphyece forced to describe the distribution of III-pattern hin II-b pattern hrbitrarilye siving dlan'-istribwords the morphological feature of [III] hin r e-istribwords, that of [II-b]ornamelye they are lexically non-chartalerized hin thus femimotnsated. Thiibwould gns smuch burden y non-cgrammar, since it would contain arbitrary specifications on inflectional pattern in their lexicon. We contend that it is due to this arbitrariness that the dlan'-class words abandon their previous affixes and acquire new affixes from the II-b pattern, which the r e-class words select. Once they are completely assimilated to the II-b pattern, which means that the two would be combined into a single class, the grammar would not have any arbitrary specifications, since the two lexical features of [feminine] and [stem-final palatality], which are already provided for the two classes, would successfully predict their distribution. This would obviate the arbitrary morphological features like [+III] and [+II-b], which distinguished the two classes for the purpose of inflection. Now the grammar would be simplified, and the combined class would be distributionally motivated. The complete assimilation of the dlan'-class to the r e-class has not yet take place, though. This non-completion brings about variation within the III-declension, namely, III-a vs. III-b. To see (3), III-b pattern, which the dlan'-class now selects, show the same affixal set as II-b pattern, except for NS and AS. The underlined affixes are innovated ones.9) This part of Czech grammar still contains some degree of arbitrariness, but it seems a matter of time for the dlan'-class to be completely adapted to the r e-class.10)
8) Russian congener, starosta, selects II-declension pattern. 9) The name "III-b" is a little misleading; rather, "I-b" is more appropriate for obvious reasons. 10) But, Czech might retain the difference in NS and AS between III-b and II-b, which are anyway

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 107

2.3. Innovative path

The discussion in section 2.2 makes it clear that the III-b pattern underwent a change, by which many III-declension nouns took the II-b pattern. Czech data shows that the change is a living process that is still taking place at the present moment. Furthermore, the data provides some clue about the innovative trajectory, which some case affixes of III-pattern take. A careful description of the trajectory reveals that affixal innovations take place not randomly, but, rather, in a systematic way. This is the topic that this section discuss. As pointed out in section 2.2, there are six loci where III-a and III-b differ from each other in affixal shape. See the following: (4) Affixal differences between III-a and III-b NS AS GS LS DS IS III-a III-b i e i i i i NP AP GP LP DP IP i e i e ech em mi ch m emi

Certainly, it is not the case that the change of III-a to III-b for dlan'-class nouns took place "overnight" and simultaneuously in all those loci. Non-abruptness and non-simultaneousness of the affixal innovation is evidenced by the data which will be discussed later in this section. If not abrupt and simultaneous, then what way would the innovation take place?11) If the innovation occurred in a non-systematic way, then there would be 64 possible sets that are mixed between III-a and III-b; each set would select one of two alternatives for each case/number ({i~e} for GS, NP and GP, {ech~ch} for LP, {em~m} for DP, and {emi~mi} for IP, thus 2*2*2*2*2*2=64). Then, does Czech declension data actually exhibit those 64 possible sets? The answer is clearly no and the number of attested patterns are very small. Now the question is, why are there restrictions on the patterning? Let us examine the following data on III-declension nouns:

differentiated from each other in their lexical forms (/dlan'/ vs. /r e/), one ending in a palatal consonant, but the other ending in a vowel. In this case, it would be more appropriate to say that these two classes are variants of feminine "Soft" class (e.g., "II-b-1" vs. "II-b-2") 11) Wurzel's (1984) theory of declension change provides some explanatory hypothesis, which, however, I will not discuss in this paper. His proposal differs from mine in both spirit and form (cf. Choi 2008).

108 15-1

(5) Czech mixed III-declension patterns III-a kost NS AS GS LS DS IS VS NP AP GP LP DP IP Gloss. kost- kost- kost'-i kost'-i kost'-i kost'- kost'-i kost'-i kost'-i kost'- Mixed I ob t' ob t'- ob t'- ob t'-i ob t'-i ob t'-i ob t'- ob t'-i ob t'-i ob t'-i ob t'- II hn d' hn d'- hn d'- hn d'-i hn d'-i hn d'-i hn d'- hn d'-i hn d'-i hn d'-i hn d'- III noc noc- noc- noc-i noc-i noc-i noc- noc-i noc-i noc-i noc- noc-ch noc-m noc-emi 'night' IV hut' hut'- hut'- hut'-i/-e hut'-i hut'-i hut'- hut'-i hut'-i/-e hut'-i/-e hut'- hut'-ch hut'-m hut'-emi 'iron works' dla dla - dla - dla -e dla -i dla -i dla - dla -i dla -e dla -e dla - dla -ch dla -m dla -emi 'palm' III-b

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kost-ech ob t-ech/t'-ch hn d'-ch kost-em ob t-em/t'-m hn d'-m kost-mi ob t/t'-mi 'bone' 'victim' hn d'-mi 'brown'

As seen in (5), Czech declensional morphology tolerates only four mixed patterns, substantially reduced from theoretically possible 64 sets, showing clearly that there must be something that constrains proliferation of affixal sets. Let us point out several facts on each mixed pattern. Ob t'-pattern. First, the ob t'-pattern shows varying affixes in LP and DP, and the remaining all other cases follow the kost-pattern. Second, the variants (/ch/ and /m/), which are LP and DP affixes of II-b (=III-b) pattern, do not cause stem alternation, thus the stem-final consonant remaining intact as sharped. Third, even though IP itself does not show affixal variation, the stem-final consonant does show variation. This suggests that the innovation starts from marginal cases and marked number, which are LP and DP. Hn d'-pattern. First, LP and DP have new fixed II-b (=III-b) affixes, -ch and m, respectively. Second, IP retains the III-a affix, /mi/, but does not allow stem alternation, which as such is an innovation. And it lies in elimination of stem alternation in IP. Third, all the remaining cases still retain III-a affixes. Noc-pattern. First, all marginal cases in the plural take II-b (=III-b) affixes. Second, all the remaining cases take III-a affixes.12)

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 109

Hut'-pattern. First, all marginal cases in the plural take II-b (=III-b) affixes. Second, NP, AP and GS show variation, old /i/ from III-a and new /e/ from II-b (=III-b). Note that these three cases are direct cases. Dla -pattern (III-b). This is the pattern that eliminates the variation of the hut'-pattern. If the NS and AS took affixes of II-b pattern (r e-pattern), then III-b would be completely merged with II-b. This would mean that many previous III-declension nouns, except ASr nouns with the derivative -xes and some lexically specified nouns (le 'lie', zed' 'wall', 'honSr', lees 'ruse', ve 'louse'), has shifted their affxal pattern from III to II-b. The following points are drawn from these facts. First, Nouns that undergo the shift are III-declension nouns, which means that the direction of the shift is unidirectional; from III-a to III-b (and II-b) and not the other way around. Second, the III-pattern has not yet died out, but its lexical domain is continuously shrinking and is limited to {ost}-suffixed nouns and a few isolated nouns. Third, the innovation from III-a to III-b starts from the plural number and from the marginal cases, both of which are marked. There are no mixed patterns that would have II-b affixes in the singular and III affixes in the plural; also, no mixed patterns that would have II-b affixes in the directive cases (such as Nominative, accusative, and/or genitiv e13)) and III affixes in the marginal cases. On the basis of these points, I claim that these asymmetrical behaviors between two numbers, on the one hand, and between directive and marginal cases, on the other, put constraints on possible mixed patterns. In terms of "markedness" (Andersen 2001:30-), the III-declension pattern, which clearly is marked as opposed to the unmarked II-b pattern, is reducing their distributional domain. In other words, the marked pattern is associated with the more marked environment. Further, when nouns of the marked pattern loses their previous affixal pattern, the elimination takes place in the more marked grammatical properties (namely, the plural number and the oblique cases). This is only natural, since affixes of these marked properties (e.g., IP, DP, LP) are less likely to be supported by their infrequent token frequency; the singular number and the direct cases are more likely to be used, so that they are more resistant to the innovation. This explains the reason why III-b nouns (dla -pattern nouns) still retain the two direct singular case-affixes (NS and AS) of the III-a pattern (kost-pattern nouns). In fact, this innvational path takes mirror image as compared with other, more general, cases. Andersen (2001:31-2) exemplifies the principle of "markedness agreement," citing Timberlake's (1977) findings on case marking of direct objects in negative sentences: "... the
12) Czech academy dictionary describes nemoc 'illness' as having variations in LP (/ech/~/ch/) and DP (/em/~/m/), but not in IP (/emi/) and lod' 'boat' as having variations in GS, NP and AP, just like hut'-pattern and also in IP (/d'emi/~/d'mi/). 13) The genitive case in Slavic can be assigned to the subject and the object in certain syntactic environments, which allows one to view it as a directive case.

ees

110 15-1

older use of the genitive is giving way to the use of the accusative (which is regular in affirmative sentences) in an ordered progression such that the accusative occurs earlier and more widely in proper nouns than in common nouns, earlier in nouns denoting humans than in other nouns, earlier than in animates than in animates...". In other words, the new, innovative use of the accusative progressively replaces the older, traditional use of the genitive in negative sentences. In short, markedness agreement principle predicts that replacement occurs earlier in unmarked categories than in marked ones. In contrast, the innovation under our discussion takes place earlier in marked categories than in unmarked ones. How should we understand this case of "markedness reversal"? Note that the Czech change is essentially an elimination of the arbitrariness ([III-declension]) from the grammar, as compared to the Russian change cited above, which is an introduction of a new motivated semantic feature ("definiteness") to the grammar. It stands to reason that the arbitrariness is mt the arbitrarineeliminated in morinearked categories, since, as mentioned above, they are less likely to be used and thus are easy to be replaced. It is no wonder that unmarked categories, which are more likely to be used, are more resistant to the replacement; it is supported by its frequent usage. In contrast, an introduction of a new semantic feature, which brings about a noble opposition in the grammar, is more likely to take place in unmarked categories, since they constitute contexts that allow more oppositions (cf. Brndal's principle of complementation14)). This consideration offers a good reason for the principle of "markedness assimilation" to be modified: namely, a change that eliminates arbitrariness from the grammar progresses from marked categories to unmarked ones, while a change that introduces a noble feature to the grammar takes place earlier in unmarked categories than in marked categories.

2.4. Comparison with Polish III-declension

There are two sub-patterns in Polish III-declension, just like in Czech III-declension. (6) Comparison between Polish and Czech in III-declension and II-b III-a Polish NS AS GS i Czech i III-b Polish i Czech e i II-b Polish a Czech e i e

14) As an example, consider the fact that the imperfective in Russian, which is unmarked as opposed to the marked perfective, allows the further division between "unidirectional" (idti, exat', etc.) and "multidirectional" (xodit', ezdit', etc.).

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 111

LS DS IS NP AP GP LP DP IP Exx.

i i i i i ach om ami mysz 'mouse'

i i i i ech em mi kost 'bone'

i i e e i ach om ami noc 'night'

i i e e ach am ami dlan' 'palm'

i i e e ach om ami praca 'work

i i e e ach am ami r e 'roze'

The Polish III-b share the same affixal set with III-a, except for NP and AP, which take II-b affixes. This adoption might be viewed as another example that shows elimination of III-a affixes in NP and AP in favor of II-b affixes. However, this is only apparent; the replacement is part of general innovative tendency of unification that has taken place in the whole plural inflection. Besides the marginal cases (LP, DP and IP) that do not have any desinence allomorphy, NP (=AP) took -e, which is the affix for all the "Soft-stem" nouns (except for Neuter nouns, which is -a, irrespective of stem-final softness); NP prac-e 'work; feminine', stacj-e 'station; feminine', wo nic-e 'coachman; masculine', kraj-e 'country; masculine', pisarz-e 'author; virile', etc. In other words, -e of III-b NP noc-e is not something taken from the II-b NP affix -e. Note also that III-b GP retains the old one, -i, while II-b pattern has - for G P.15) In fact, Polish declension, like Russian declension, shows that there is only one single affixal pattern for the plural inflection. In the oblique cases, affixal unification has already been completed; thus, LP -ach, DP -om and IP -ami are selected for all nouns, irrespective of gender and declension class. It is true that each direct case (NP, AP, or GP) reveals its own variant-affixes, but conditioning factors are different not only among the three cases, but from its singular counterpart (cf. Schenker 1964, Szober 1969). For example, 'virility (masculine & person)', which never serves as a conditioning factor in the singular, becomes an important factor in NP. In the plural, the accusative is syncretic with the nominative for all nouns, except for masculine animate nouns (including virile nouns), which has Acc=Gen syncretism,

15) It is interesting to note that Slavic languages exhibit different distributional facts in GP allomorphs. Since this is a topic beyond this paper, I will not dwell on this, except for mentioning that the dichotomy between "Neutral" and "Palatal" sub-patterns in Czech feminine nouns is still operative, which, it would seem, motivates the retention of - (<CS *-j).

112 15-1

but in the singular, this syncretism does not apply for feminine II-declension nouns. The distribution of genitive affixes in the singular is stated in terms of declension class and lexico-semantic features such as animacy, countability etc., but in the plural, the genitive affixes are distributed in terms of morphonological features of lexemes such as 'stem-final palatality' and phonological characteristics of the NS form. In other others, in Polish plural inflection, desinence allomorphy cannot be captured in terms of declension class, and must be described case by case.

3. Masculine I-declension in Polish

Polish I-declension pattern, which continues the common Slavic O-stem pattern, is distributed in both masculine and neuter nouns, as is the I-declension of other Slavic languages, and is divided accordingly into two sub-patterns, M(asculine)-pattern and N(euter)-pattern.16) On one hand, The conflation of two sub-patterns into a global I-declension

pattern is based upon affixal identity and relation in many cases; their IS affix is /em/, the non-distinction between NS and AS, their GS, DS, and LS affixes are partially identical, /a/, /u/, and /e/, respectively. On the other, their distinction is supported by the difference between affixal constituency: each sub-pattern exhibits different implicational relation (no animacy syncretism in AS in N-pattern) and different allomorphy in some cases (fewer number of allomorphs in GS in N-pattern). In this article, I will discuss M-pattern only, since this pattern exhibits case allomorphy sufficient to exemplify the points that are made in the introductory remark, namely an example of "morphologically non-uniform affixal set". Polish M-pattern exhibits the following sets of case allomorphy: (7) Case allomorphy displayed in Polish M-pattern NS17) AS , a GS a, u LS e, u DS owi, u IS em

16) In Polish, as in East slavic languages, affixal patterns among cases are established only for the singular inflection. In the plural inflection, as mentioned in the previous section, only one pattern must be set up, which can be called "Plural" pattern. This means that case allomorphy has different distributional factors between the two numbers. This paper deals with case allomorphy only in the singular inflection. For Polish consonant phonemes, see Comrie & Corbett (1993:688). 17) Those Masculine nouns ending in -a (e.g., kolega 'colleague') or -o (e.g., tato 'dad') are excluded from our discussion, which however does not influence the main point made in this paper in any way.

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 113

Aside from AS, which does not have its own affix, Polish M-pattern is subdivided into several classes/sets, if one take inflection-class approach. Thus, Schenker (1964:50) suggests three inflectional sets on the basis of syncretism; two "four-case" systems in which the LS affix (-u) is syncretized with either the DS affix or the GS affix, and one "five-case" system. The "five-case" system is further sub-divided with respect to GS, LS, and DS affixal arrangement: (a) -u, -owi, -e, (b) -a, -owi, -e, (c) -a, -owi, -u, and (d) -a, -u, -e. Thus, what he actually suggests is that there are six inflectional sets within Polish M-pattern: (8) Polish Masculine inflectional sets (Schenker 1964)18) Set NS GS LS DS IS ex. gloss. 1 a u u em pan mister 2 u u owi em kraj 3 u e owi em dwr 4 a e owi em 5 a u owi em 6 a e u em pies

profesor kupiec

country manor

professor merchant dog

There are several points to be discussed in this treatment of Polish M-pattern. First, these sets display a different degree of productivity among themselves; thus, sets 1 and 6 are used for a small number of masculine nouns, since the DS affix -u is losing its productivity (cf. Cameron-Faulkner & Carstairs-McCarthy (=CF & CM) 2000:819). Second, this way of presenting M-pattern misses several important generalizations on affixal distribution. (A) The lexico-semantic category of "animacy" allows M-pattern to be subdivided into two major classes (namely, "animate" sub-pattern vs. "inanimate" sub-pattern) according to AS=NS or GS syncretism. (B) It has expanded its conditioning force beyond the accusative case, and has reached the GS; all animate nouns (except for a single word, vow 'ox') having
18) The essentially ssss classification is given in Teslar (1957), cited in Csssron-Fsulkner & Csrstairs-McCsrthy (2000:818). The only difference lies in rthy act that they include VS affixes, -e and -u, due to which seven, rather thlassix, classes are suggested. The (2000, 81tabatiis provided only for comparison: Schenker 4 5 6 1 5 3 2 CF & CM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NS GS a a a a a u u LS e u e u u e u DS owi owi u u owi owi owi IS em em em em em em em VS e u e e e e u

114 15-1

M-pattern take -a, and never -u, for GS, while inanimate nouns take either -a or -u. (C) The choice of GS -a vs. -u for inanimate nouns depends on a variety of lexico-semantic criteria, on which I will not touch in this paper (cf. Schenker 1964, Janda 1996, etc.). (D) The choice of LS -u vs. -e has nothing to do with "animacy", but rather, it depends on phonological characteristics of the stem-final consonant; that is, nouns with stem-final velars (/k g ch/19); e.g., rak-u 'crab; LS', targ-u 'fair; LS', brzuch-u 'belly; LS') or "soft" consonants (e.g., kraj-u 'country; LS', n -u 'knife; LS') take -u, but otherwise, -e. In short, affixal distributions are determined differently from case to case, which cannot be captured by such classifications as given in (8). Of course, each lexical class (i.e., inflection class) that is associated with each affixal set can be characterized in terms of lexical features that are shared by its members; for example, nouns of sub-pattern (4) are characterized as having the lexical features of [animate] and [non-velar], but this as such does not explicitly state that [animate] is responsible for GS affix -a, and [non-velar] motivates LS -e. Third, most importantly for our aim, the Polish M-pattern shows no indication of innovation that would induce migration from a certain sub-pattern to another,20) which IS observed in Czech III-declensional sub-patterns (cf. mixed patterns in (5)). Recall that no lexical features could characterize each of them, due to which they are all lexically arbitrary. My claim was that precisely this arbitrariness motivates the innovation in Czech from III-a to III-b. However, Polish Masculine I-declension does not exhibit this sort of innovation. The reason for this is non-arbitrariness in affixal distribution, as mentioned in the foregoing paragraph. If one attempts to establish an affixal pattern as a sort of desinence allomorphy, he must find certain sorts of implicational relation in affixal choice among cases such as syncretism, mutual implication, etc. For example, in Russian II-declension, there is a syncretism between DS and LS (-e), and mutual relation between NS, AS, and IS (i.e., -a, -u, and -oj, respectively). In short, affixal pattern (or desinence pattern) is a set of affixes, among which certain formal relations hold. From this perspective, we can establish, as mentioned above, two sub-patterns within M-pattern in Polish, namely, Animate sub-pattern and Inanimate sub-pattern. For animate masculine nouns, there is a syncretic relation between AS and GS, and GS must be -a, never -u; for inanimate masculine nouns, there is a syncretic relation between AS and NS, but GS allows either -a or -u. On the other, affixal choice in LS has nothing to do with animacy, and no formal relation between these directive cases and LS is possibly established in Animate or Inanimate sub-pattern. This leads us to maintain that desinence allomorphy in LS
19) Nouns with -ec also take -u (e.g., chopec 'boy' chopc-u 'LS'). 20) Of course, a DS affix -u is dying out, being replaced by the productive -owi, but this is not an example of class-movement.

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 115

should be described as a specific feature of the case itself, just as in GS of the Inanimate sub-pattern. I propose the following organization in Polish M-pattern: (9) Sub-patterns in Polish M-pattern Inanimate sub-pattern NS AS GS LS DS IS Thus, =NS u~a u~e owi em both Inanimate and Animate Animate sub-pattern =GS a u~e owi em sub-patterns are examples of "morphologically

non-uniform affixal set". Some cases (here, GS and LS) allow more than one allomorphs, each of which has its own distribution, determined by different factors.

4. Conclusion
This paper discusses "unusal" inflection classes that are shown in Czech III declension and Polish Masculine I-declension. The Czech one illustrates inflection classes that are not lexically characterized, while the Polish masculine I-declension exhibits morphologically non-uniform affixal sets. The abnormality lies in the fact that affixal sets postulated in these two languages are either distributionally arbitrary or internally unrelated in affixal choice among cases. In discussing the Czech example, I argued that lexically non-characterized inflection classes tend to be eliminated in favor of the most unmarked inflection class among them. The elimination of such arbitrary classes simplify the grammar, since the previously postulated morphology-based lexical features (e.g. [III-a], [III-b], etc.) is now obviated. I suggested that the innovational path takes the orders of "marked plural number" and then "unmarked singular number" and of "marked oblique cases" and then "unmarked directive cases" (see section 2.2). What this means for the synchronic grammar is that inflection classes are motivated; in other words, they are lexically characterized. The transfer of previous III-a declension nouns to current III-b (and II-b) declension nouns is abandonment of their old III-a pattern and (incomplete) acquisition of a new II-b pattern, thereby being motivated. While the III-a pattern reduces its distributional domain, it becomes motivated, too.

116 15-1

On the discussion of the Polish example, I suggested that the M-pattern should be subdivided into "Inanimate" and "Animate" subpatterns, since the semantico-lexical feature of Animacy is extending its selectional force beyond AS onto GS. In other words, affixal choice in GS depends on animacy opposition, just like in AS. This expansion brings about an implicational relation in affixal choice within the M-pattern: if AS shows GS syncretism, then GS selects -a. For DS, one of the two allomorphs, namely -u, is dying out, which means that nouns selecting it must be lexically so specified, thus augmenting arbitrary specification in the lexicon. This dooms to be eliminated, and that is exactly what is happening now: the productive and dominating DS affix is -owi. As for LS, its competing variants show quite different distributional statements from GS variants (cf. section 3). This entails that there is no implicational relation between GS affixal choice and other cases' affixal choice: their distributions are independent from one another. If no implicational relation is established, no affixal pattern will be established. Of course, it is possible to set up affixal sets, as in FM & CM (2000), but they are only for the sake of classification, lacking any significant generalization on affixal allomorphy. In conclusion, I claim that the notion of "inflection class" or "affixal pattern" serves a valid analytical tool, in so far as it satisfies the two requirements: namely, "motivated distribution" and "internal implicational relation".

R e f e re n c e
Andersen Henning(2001), Markedness and The Theory of Linguistic Change, in his (ed.) Actualization: Linguistic Change in Progress, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 21-57. Borkovskij V. I. & P. S. Kuznecov(1965), Istori eskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka, Nauka, Moskva. Cameron-Faulkner and Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy(2000), Stem Alternants as Morphological Signata: Evidence From Blur Avoidance in Polish Nouns, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18, 813-835. Choi Sung-ho(2008), Structure and Innovation of Declension Patterns in Inflecting Languages: Motivated Distribution and Markedness Principle, Eoneohag 51, 43-72. ________(2009), Declensions in East Slavic Languages: Typology and Theory, Rusistika 30, Korean Association of Russianists, 283-313. Comrie Bernard and Greville G. Corbett (eds.) (1993), The Slavonic Languages, London and New York, Routledge.

Nominal Declension in West Slavic: Variation and Abnormality 117

de Bray R. G. A.(1980), Guide to the West Slavonic Languages, Slavica, Ohio. Havrnek Bohuslav & Alois Jedli ka(1963), Praha. Janda Laura A.(1996), Back from the brink: a study of how relic forms in languages serve as source material for analogical extension, Lincom Europa, Mnchen. Komrek Miroslav et. al.(1986), Mluvnice Hague. Stypua Ryszard and Slin Kowalowa(1989), Podr czny Sownik Polsko-Rosyjski, Pa stwowe Wydawnictwo, Wiedza Powszechna. Szober Stanisaw(1969), Gramatyka j zyka polskiego, Warszawa, Pa stwowe wydawnictwo naukowe. e tiny. Tvaroslov, Academia, Praha. Schenker Alexander M.(1964), Polish Declension: A Descriptive Analysis, Mouton & Co., The esk Mluvnice, Sttn Pedagogick Nakladatelstv,

<>

:
I- O 3 1 . 3 , , . , . , 1 , . , 3 , , . (indexicality) , . , syncretism , -a , syncretism , -a -u , . .

118 15-1

<Key words> West Slavic languages, Czech, Polish, nominal declension, declension class, declension pattern, allomorphy, distribution, case, gender, animacy, innovation, dynamic synchrony <>
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

(Submitted): 2009.12.30. (Reviewed): 2010.1.4.~1.30. (Accepted): 2010.2.5.

choish@chungbuk.ac.kr