M and S: (morphology & syntax) or (morphology OR syntax?)

A real discussion has many faces.

The term ‘morphosyntax’ may be interpreted differently. A large number of generative grammarians believe that morphology and syntax constitute one and the same module of language, with no morphology-to-syntax interface, so terms like morphosyntax likely refer to things that belong either M or to S (agreement, case-marking etc). At the same time other grammarians, notably a group including computational linguists, stick to the need to distinguish morphology and syntax and describe them on the basis of different principles. So morphosyntax = things that  belong both to M and to S.

It may seem that people on the pictures taken during the conference ‘Typology of Morphosyntactic Parameters 2012’ (Moscow, SMSUH and Russian Academy of Sciences, November 14-16) are discussing this issue during the breaks. Not exactly this one. But they might be.

Small v and big theories:  Jim Lavine  and Leonid Iomdin.

Amazingly simple: just transitive impersonals.

In case you did not know: morphosyntax is fun. Andrei Sideltsev (r.) and Oleg Belyaev.

Morphosyntacticians can be open and friendly, if there is enough coffee: Jakov Testelets and James Lavine.

….but also really tough.

…But after all, they can be very convincing if they want to: Ekaterina Lyutikova.