The phonological word (henceforth pword) differs from lower units of the prosodic hierarchy (e.g. foot, syllable) in that its boundaries must align with morphological boundaries. While languages are claimed to differ w.r.t. the questions of whether and which word-internal constituents (e.g. stems, prefixes, Suffixes, members of Compounds) form a pword there is no Consensus regarding the question of which diagnostics are relevant for determining pword structure. In this paper it is argued that systematic correlations between various suprasegmental properties (e.g. stress patterns, syllable structure) motivate the existence of word-internal pwords in German. The prosodic structure of CompoundsThe words in la , b illustrate several prosodic regularities of German Simplexes. The last branching foot is most prominent (e.g. S chökoldde, but *Schökoläde). Certain endings including -at, -an, attract main stress in polysyllabic words (cf. lb ). Tense vowels are long if stressed unless they occur in pretonic position (e.g. The compounds in lc , d violate the prosodic wellformedness conditions listed above. The rightmost foot is not the most prominent one in spite of branching. Endings like 3 The LOI requires some modification since the syllabification of word-internal clusters also depends on stress and on the degree of sonority increase within the cluster. The cluster pr forms a complex onset in April but the cluster kn is heterosyllabic in Akne, even though both clusters occur word-initially.
According to Wells (1990b) the n in minus is simply a coda consonant whereas the n in shyness forms an onset. 6 The citation marks are used here because the precise meaning o f 'surface' is the hone o f contention here. main concern o f this chapter is to develop criteria for recognizing boundary effects (cf. s. 9.2). The application o f the relevant criteria to English in s. 9.3 is the basis for the discussion o f major empirical differences between PU effects and boundary effects in s. 9.4. In s. 9.5 I discuss some descriptions that I consider marred by the failure to properly distinguish PU effects from boundary effects, focusing on poorly motivated use o f PU constraints. In s. 9.6 I conclude. 9 .2 GENERAL CRITERIA FOR RECOGNIZING BOUNDARY EFFECTS A brief review o f Dixon's (1977) work on pwords in Yidip in s. 9.2.1 will serve as a basis for developing criteria for recognizing boundary phenomena in s. 9.2.2. In s. 9.2.3 it is shown that these criteria are not met in the work o f Aronoff and Sridhar (1983), Szpyra (1989) and Hammond (1999), arguably as a result o f failing to distinguish boundary effects from PU effects. The question o f which phonological diagnostics are relevant for recognizing boundary effects in English is discussed in s. 9.2.4. 9 .2 .1 The pword in Yidip It is a commonplace observation that morphologically complex words may violate constraints which are satisfied in Simplexes. Dixon (1977) cites the Yidip words in (5): (5) Constraint violated: wäpal#gimba:l#du *La ps e 'boomerang-without-ERc' Adjacent unstressed syllables are prohibited bigu:n#gfmbal *Clash 'shield-without-ABs' Adjacent stressed syllables are prohibited Dixon argues that stress patterns in (5) are explained by the prosodic structure in (6), in that the relevant constraints are satisfied within each pword. (6) (wäpa)^ (gimbäddu),,, (bigu.:n)" (gimbal),,, Dixon shows that the pwords in (6) account for clusters o f correlating prosodic properties besides stress. Moreover, he discovers that for affixes the number o f syllables determines prosodic Integration into the stem: monosyllabic affixes are coherenf, that is, they form a single pword together with the stem, whereas disyllabic affixes are 'non-coherent' , that is, they form separate pwords. By contrast, postinflectional affixes, which syntactically function as modffiers (e.g.-di 'seif',-la 'now',-budyun 'still'), always form separate pwords, regardless o f the number o f syllables. Those affixes are referred to as 'M O D ' for 'modifiers' in table (7), where Dixon's rule is illustrated with some abstract examples. 7 Peperkamp (1997: 37) describes the second clause o f the original Strict Layer Hypothesis by a constraint 'P r o p e r N e s t i n g ', defined in terms o f alignment. 8 These assumptions are not accepted by all linguists. Szpyra (1989) and Hall (1998) propose descriptions in which H e a d e d n e s s is violated. In Hannahs's (1995) description o f French, C o n t a i n m e n t is violated (cf. s. 9.6.3). 9 The constraint in (10d) says: 'For any G C at in t...
In this paper I explore the theoretical significance of phonologically conditioned gaps in word formation. The data support the original approach to gaps in Optimality Theory proposed by Prince & Smolensky (1993), which crucially involves MPARSE as a ranked and violable constraint. The alternative CONTROL model proposed by Orgun & Sprouse (1999) is found to be inadequate because of lost generalisations and technical flaws. It is shown that a careful distinction between various morphophonological effects (e.g. paradigm uniformity effects, phonological repair and ‘stem selection’) is necessary to shed light on the morphology–phonology interface. The data investigated here support affix-specific constraint rankings, but argue against any stratal organisation of morphology.
In this paper I investigate the significance of stability of the semantic relation between etymologically related words over historical time. Such semantic stability can be shown to be determined by certain aspects of phonological transparency exhibited by the cognates (cf. Raffelsiefen 1993). These transparency conditions refer to the surface phonological form of words, which argues against abstract underlying forms and phonological rule Systems based on "altemations". 2. Semantic stability as a window on the acquisition of word meaning The notion of "semantic stability" refers to a relation between words as is shown in (1): (1) OHG faran 'to move along' (e.g. walk, swim, fly, etc.) 4 NHG fahren 'to ride (in) a vehicle (with wheels)' OHG fort 'moving along' (e.g. walking, swimming, flying, etc.) 4 NHG Fahrt 'riding (in) a vehicle (with wheels)'
This paper expands on the description o f English prefixed words presented in section 4 of Raffelsiefen (1993). Earlier versions o f this paper were presented at the Inaugural FAS Conference in Berlin in March, 1994 and at the IWCP in Durham in September, 1994. I thank the audiences there for helpful criticisms. I am especially grateful to Mike Davenport, T. A. Hall, S. J. Hannahs, Ursula Kleinhenz, Roger Schwarzschild, George Smith, and an anonymous reviewer for comments and discussion.
Optimality theory (henceforth OT) models natural language competence in terms of interactions of universal constraints, notably markedness and faithfulness constraints.This article illustrates some of the major advances in the understanding of word-formation phenomena originating from this theory, including the prosodic organization of morphologically complex words, neutralization patterns in derivational affixes, allomorphy, and infixation.
I would call' 'I would admonish' 'I would push' 'I were' Matthews (1991: 195), who cites the Latin grammarian Priscian as an inspiration for positing the type of rule (1), comments as follows:1 "On the semantic plane, the transformation cuts across the paradigm. But it is justified because the rule is formally both simple and absolute."
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.