The article discusses the decline and reappearance of morphology in the development of generative grammar, particularly in the early years (1955-1970s). Initially, morphology was overshadowed by phonology and syntax, with the discovery that phonological processes could reduce morphological variation to a single underlying form. Similarly, syntactic principles seemed to encompass morphological elements. However, recent years have seen a resurgence of interest in morphology, driven by the recognition that morphological and syntactic processes interact in complex ways. The article explores the interaction between morphology and syntax, focusing on the Lexicalist Hypothesis, which posits that syntax and word structure are independent. This hypothesis has been challenged by empirical evidence showing that morphological properties are often dependent on syntactic structures. For example, configurational properties, agreement properties, and inherent properties of words are influenced by their position in larger syntactic structures. A specific example from Breton verb morphology illustrates these interactions. Verbal agreement morphology in Breton has properties similar to pronominal elements, such as binding properties and distribution in subject and object positions. This suggests that morphological material within a word can be referred to by syntactic rules, challenging the traditional view that morphological elements are independent of word structure. The article also discusses the distinction between inflection and derivation, noting that attempts to define this difference have been unsuccessful. Inflectional processes are typically highly productive and specify elements within the same word class, while derivational processes often change word class membership. However, this distinction is not always clear-cut, as seen in languages like Fula, where certain processes are both inflectional and derivational depending on the context. Overall, the article argues that morphology is an essential part of grammar, interacting with both phonology and syntax in complex ways, and that understanding these interactions is crucial for a comprehensive theory of language.The article discusses the decline and reappearance of morphology in the development of generative grammar, particularly in the early years (1955-1970s). Initially, morphology was overshadowed by phonology and syntax, with the discovery that phonological processes could reduce morphological variation to a single underlying form. Similarly, syntactic principles seemed to encompass morphological elements. However, recent years have seen a resurgence of interest in morphology, driven by the recognition that morphological and syntactic processes interact in complex ways. The article explores the interaction between morphology and syntax, focusing on the Lexicalist Hypothesis, which posits that syntax and word structure are independent. This hypothesis has been challenged by empirical evidence showing that morphological properties are often dependent on syntactic structures. For example, configurational properties, agreement properties, and inherent properties of words are influenced by their position in larger syntactic structures. A specific example from Breton verb morphology illustrates these interactions. Verbal agreement morphology in Breton has properties similar to pronominal elements, such as binding properties and distribution in subject and object positions. This suggests that morphological material within a word can be referred to by syntactic rules, challenging the traditional view that morphological elements are independent of word structure. The article also discusses the distinction between inflection and derivation, noting that attempts to define this difference have been unsuccessful. Inflectional processes are typically highly productive and specify elements within the same word class, while derivational processes often change word class membership. However, this distinction is not always clear-cut, as seen in languages like Fula, where certain processes are both inflectional and derivational depending on the context. Overall, the article argues that morphology is an essential part of grammar, interacting with both phonology and syntax in complex ways, and that understanding these interactions is crucial for a comprehensive theory of language.