Abstract
The Slot and Structure Model of morphology (SSM: Benavides 2022) presents itself as an extension of the Parallel Architecture (PA: Jackendoff 1997, 2002). The present article compares SSM to Relational Morphology (Jackendoff and Audring 2020) and Construction Morphology (Booij 2010), which also claim allegiance to the Parallel Architecture. It is shown that (a) SSM does not segregate semantic structure from syntactic structure, violating the fundamental premise of the PA; (b) SSM is concerned primarily with deriving productive morphology, while the PA is stated in terms of declarative schemas that license nonproductive as well as productive morphology; (c) SSM enforces a strict division between morphology and syntax, while the PA allows a degree of interpenetration. Finally, Benavides accuses RM of lacking a direct connection between semantics and syntax. It is shown that this is based on a misunderstanding of the RA formalism.