In Anderson [Anderson, S.R., 1982, Where’s morphology? “Linguistic Inquiry”, 13, pp. 571-612], I cite several sorts of properties that appear to call for a non-null interaction of syntax and word structure, which I repeat (slightly aumented) in (4): 4) a. CONFIGURATIONAL PROPERTIES: assigned on the basis of the larger structure aword appears in (e.g. case in NP; special forms of verbs in relative clauses); b. AGREEMENT PROPERTIES: aspects of the exact form of a word which are determined by reference to the properties of some other word in the same structure; c. INHERENT PROPERTIES: properties of a word which must be accessible to whatever rule assigns agreement properties to other words in agreement with it (e.g. gender of noun); d. PHRASAL PROPERTIES: properties of larger phrasal domains which determine the way these domains behave syntactically but which are realized on particular words within the structure (e.g., the effect of tense in defining the scope of binding relations). All of these fall under (an appropriate interpretation of) the notion of inflectional morphology, when this is construed as exactly what is relevant to the syntax.
- Anderson (2004), a pag.29