Canonical Inflectional Classes

Inflectional classes are a basic notion in morphology, though occasionally their existence is challenged. In trying to get a new perspective on complex phenomena, like inflectional classes, we may take a ‘canonical’ approach. This means that we extrapolate from what there is to what there might be, in order to define the theoretical space. Within that scheme of theoretical possibilities we can situate the real instances we find. An effect of this approach is to separate out coincidental overlaps in the examples that exist; we may then start to ask which characteristics happen to be the way they are and which have to be the way they are (Corbett 2007). This approach has proved helpful in tackling a range of topics, particularly in syntax (for instance: Comrie 2003, Evans 2003, Polinsky 2003, Corbett 2006) and in morphology (Baerman et al. 2005: 27-35; Spencer 2005; Stump 2005; Corbett 2008a; Thornton 2008, and others).1 On one level we know what an inflectional class is. For example: ‘An inflectional class is a set of lexemes whose members each select the same set of inflectional realizations.’ (Aronoff 1994: 64). From the other perspective: ‘The lexical entry for the noun must therefore bear some sort of flag to assure that it will manifest the appropriate set of inflections. This flag is the inflectional class.’ (Aronoff 1994: 65). In this sense, inflectional class is equivalent to ‘morphological feature’, as for instance in Corbett & Baerman (2006). Yet on close examination the notion bears further clarification. Our aim therefore will be to specify canonical inflectional classes, through a fully convincing ideal. Given that canonical ideal we can see how close the real examples come to it. As we investigate a phenomenon as specific as inflectional class, we may introduce principles and criteria which follow from more general principles which should eventually be stated at a higher level of description. At this stage it is worth discussing them for the light they shed on the particular phenomenon under discussion, and on its less canonical instances. As Wurzel points out, in a relevant quote (1989: 63): ‘The constitution of inflectional classes is based on the uniformity and distinctiveness of paradigms, just as every classification is based on the common and distinct properties of the elements to be classified.’