No abstract
I show that a consequence of Correspondence Theory in Optimality Theory is that, for processes such as cluster reduction, if MAX outranks UNIFORMITY, candidates displaying coalescence are preferred to those displaying true deletion. It is thus incumbent on the analyst to identify the constraints that select appropriate coalescence candidates, even for apparent deletion cases. I show how Lamontagne and Rice's (1995) account of the D-effect in Navajo must be modified to ensure the correct outcome in a language where both coalescence and apparent deletion are repairs to cluster constraint violations. If, for other reasons, it is necessary that UNIFORMITY outrank MAX, the admission of MAX(Feature) constraints becomes unavoidable. An analysis of certain cluster reduction phenomena in Ibiza Catalan shows how complex coda constraints, perceptual markedness constraints for clusters, Paradigm Uniformity, and featural faithfulness interact to derive a pattern of contextual variation. The paper includes a review of Correspondence Theory focusing on its effects in cluster reduction.
1. This article proposes a criticism and elaboration of the theory of Natural Morphology as it relates to inflection and to inflectional change. The theoretical framework I start from is that set out at length in Mayerthaler (1981/1988), Wurzel (1984/1989), Dressler (1987) and Kilani-Schoch (1988). The concept of naturalness involved here combines Prague School notions of markedness (see Andersen, 1989) with more recent typological approaches and a semiotic framework which derives from the work of C. S. Peirce. The goal of naturalness theories in historical linguistics is to identify some constraints on language change (for example, on sound change, analogy and grammaticalization) which are, broadly speaking, functionally motivated, that is, motivated by the nature of human psychology or of human communication. Naturalness theories offer an approach to explanation of Weinreich, Labov & Herzog's (1968; 102, 186) actuation problem. Among other things, Natural Morphology proposes explanatory principles and constraints for analogy.
1. I want in this paper to draw attention again to the theoretical basis of the use of distinctive features in generative phonology, and with that in mind, to consider what improvements can be made. One function of distinctive features is to provide a formal means of expressing the notion of a NATURAL CLASS (cf. Harms, 1968: 26), such that a phonological rule which applies to a natural class of segments may be expressed in a simpler way than a rule applying to some other class of segments. Distinctive features, and notational devices and conventions, are intended to capture this notion of simplicity so that by examining a formalized rule one may discover, counting the symbols in it according to a set of values provided, at least whether the rule is simpler than a comparable rule, if not its simplicity in any absolute sense. It is also intended that the set of features should be a substantive universal of language, though, as Harms' examples (1968: 23–38), drawn from various people's analyses of various languages, show, it cannot yet be seen that there is a tendency towards agreement on which these might be, as Harms himself (38) is aware. He sees the problem, however, in these terms:The basic set of features can be viewed as a hypothesis about language, subject to empirical validation. Arguments for adding new features to the list or for altering the basic features must demonstrate the inadequacy of the basic hypothesis. Such arguments, however, cannot be based upon an appeal to the simplicity metric, for the features themselves are elements in the simplicity metric. Phonemic solutions that do not assume the same set of features cannot be compared in terms of simplicity. The claim must be that one solution provides a more reasonable hypothesis of the phonological structure of the language in question.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.