Complex phrase structures within morphological words: Evidence from English and Indonesian Yosuke Sato Department of Linguistics, University of British Columbia, Totem Field Studios, 2613 West Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z4 Received 19 March 2007; received in revised form 20 May 2009; accepted 20 May 2009 Available online 16 June 2009 Abstract In this paper, I explore the issue of the division of labor between syntax and morphology within the context of the lexicalist vs. non- lexicalist debate on the basis of case studies of phrasal compounds in English and ber–constructions in Indonesian. I first show what challenges these phenomena raise for various existing versions of the lexicalist theory to have a clear grasp of what aspect(s) of the theory must be dropped or improved upon. I then propose (non-lexicalist) alternative accounts of the two phenomena. I show that phrasal compounds can be explained on a par with regular compounding of two simplex roots as a natural consequence of the Multiple Spell-Out model of the Minimalist Program. I provide evidence that ber–constructions in Indonesian are derived via head movement, rejecting potential alternative lexicalist accounts in terms of lexical compounding. I also briefly discuss several architectural design specifications that any model of the morphology–syntax interface must meet. I conclude that the firewall theory of the interface, which determines the degree of the interpenetration between syntax and morphology on a language-particular basis, not only meets these specifications, but also serves as an explanatory model within which the syntax–morphology interaction can be productively pursued. Crown Copyright # 2009 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: English; Indonesian; Lexicalist Hypothesis; Phrasal compound; ber–construction; Firewall theory 1. Introduction In this paper, I explore the issue of the proper division of labor between syntax and morphology within the theoretical context of the lexicalist vs. non-lexicalist debate on the basis of detailed case studies of phrasal compounds in English and ber–constructions in Indonesian. 1 I analyze these two phenomena and their implications for the interface in detail with respect to (a) the identity of the grammatical module(s) and operation(s) responsible for their formation and (b) the proper division of labor between the modules. The so-called Lexicalist Hypothesis has taken such a bewildering variety of forms in the literature in tandem with the development and sophistication of a wide range of theories of syntax, morphology, the Lexicon, and their interfaces that it is by now quite difficult to engage in the lexicalist vs. non-lexicalist debate without fully understanding each of these theories within which the www.elsevier.com/locate/lingua Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Lingua 120 (2010) 379–407 E-mail address: yosukes@interchange.ubc.ca. 1 Abbreviations used in the glosses include the following: AV, activevoice morpheme; APPL, applicative; DIST, distributive; RED, reduplicant; IND, indicative mood; INSTR, instrumental case; NEG, negation; NOM, nominative case; PAST, past tense; PRE, prefix; PROG, progressive; SUF, suffix; 1s, first person singular; 1S, first person subject; 3O, third person object; 3N, third person neuter; 3s, third person singular; 3sS, third person singular subject agreement; 3S, third person subject. 0024-3841/$ – see front matter. Crown Copyright # 2009 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2009.05.008