Match Theory: An overview

Ishihara, Shinichiro; Kalivoda, Nick

doi:10.1111/lnc3.12446

Cited by 2 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If asymmetric phrasing can be explained by effects of prosodic well-formedness constraints instead of ALIGN-XP, as proposed here, Alignment-based mapping constraints (such as ALIGN-XP) can possibly be eliminated. In addition to that, there have been claims that other constraints referring to syntactic constituents, such as WRAP-XP and STRESS-XP (Truckenbrodt 1999), can also be eliminated within Match Theory (Selkirk 2011;Myrberg 2013;Ishihara 2014). Elimination of all these syntax-prosody mapping constraints (except Match constraints) would lead us to a highly parsimonious theory of mapping between syntactic and prosodic structure.…”

Section: The Minimal Interface Hypothesis (Mih)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As pointed out by Bellik et al (2022), neither Match constraints nor other relevant prosodic well-formedness constraints (BINMAX and BINMIN) used in Ishihara's (2014) analysis distinguish between left or right edges of ϕ. As a result, Ishihara's analysis incorrectly predicts that not only the left-branching structure such as (18a)/(19a) but also the right-branching structure such as (18b)/(19b) undergo rephrasing that deviates from the Match-compliant prosodic pattern.…”

Section: Asymmetry Problem In Japanesementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to examine whether the MIH can be extended to other cases of prosodic asymmetry, we discuss the mapping of syntactic phrases (XPs) to phonological phrases (henceforth ϕ) in Japanese. Bellik et al (2022) point out that the previous Match-based analysis by Ishihara (2014) cannot account for the asymmetric mapping of left-branching and right-branching structures in Japanese, and accordingly, argue that both Match and Alignment constraints are needed to account for the data. We revisit the data and suggest an alternative analysis which does not rely on Alignment-based mapping constraints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This outer φ is unexpected in the MATCH-based analysis proposed by Selkirk (2011) because a BINARITY constraint outranks the MATCH constraint and is hence expected to suppress all prosodic recursion. Ishihara (2014) called this issue the Recursivity Problem. See Ishihara (2014) and Bellik et al (2022) for a discussion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ishihara (2014) called this issue the Recursivity Problem. See Ishihara (2014) and Bellik et al (2022) for a discussion. 9.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Match Theory and the Asymmetry Problem: An Example from Stockholm Swedish

Ishihara

Myrberg

2023

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses what we call the Asymmetry Problem, a theoretical question of how asymmetric properties of prosodic phrasing should generally be accounted for within the framework of Match Theory. Unlike Alignment Theory, in which phrasing asymmetry can be derived by mapping constraints (e.g., Align-XP), Match Theory cannot derive any phrasing asymmetry from mapping (i.e., Match) constraints. Thus, Match Theory may seem to face empirical problems when data appear to call for an asymmetric ranking of mapping constraints. This article starts with the discussion of one such case in Stockholm Swedish, where asymmetric ranking of Alignment constraints has been proposed to account for the data. It will be argued that prosodic asymmetry arises from the directionality of prosodic heads (i.e., right- or left-headedness) rather than asymmetric syntax–prosody mapping, and that asymmetry can be explained through the interaction of Match constraints with markedness constraints that determine the distribution of prosodic heads. Furthermore, it will be proposed that such an analysis reduces the need of Alignment-based mapping constraints and therefore follows the Minimal Interface Hypothesis, which assumes Match constraints as the sole syntax–prosody mapping constraints. To support this line of analysis, it will be shown that the Asymmetry Problem in Japanese, for which it had previously been argued that both Match and Alignment constraints are needed, can also be accounted for under this hypothesis.

show abstract

Section: The Minimal Interface Hypothesis (Mih)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Asymmetry Problem In Japanesementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ishihara (2014) called this issue the Recursivity Problem. See Ishihara (2014) and Bellik et al (2022) for a discussion. 9.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Match Theory and the Asymmetry Problem: An Example from Stockholm Swedish

Ishihara

Myrberg

2023

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Prosodic phrasing of the parenthetical <i>palun</i> ‘please’ in Estonian requests

Asu,

Sahkai,

Lippus

2023

ESUKA-JEFUL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the prosody of the Estonian parenthetical palun ‘please’ in imperative requests. The occurrence of prosodic phrase boundary cues such as pauses, pre-boundary lengthening, and creaky voice as well as pitch characteristics and accentuation are analysed. The analysis is based on 753 utterances, where palun appears in three different positions: initial, medial or final. The requests were elicited using context descriptions from 21 female speakers of Estonian. The results show that palun is not phrased as a separate intonation phrase and that its intonation and accentuation vary depending on its position in the host utterance. Utterance-initially, palun always receives an intonational pitch accent while utterance-finally it is unaccented. It is concluded that the integrated prosody of palun may derive from its discourse marker-like function. Its prosody may be representative of certain other categories of parentheticals with similar functional properties such as comment clauses and reporting verbs, but different from functionally more independent parentheticals that express a proposition or speech act of their own. Kokkuvõte. Eva Liina Asu, Heete Sahkai, Pärtel Lippus: Kiilu palun prosoodiline fraseerimine eesti palvetes. Käesolev artikkel uurib kiilu palun prosoodiat eesti keele käsklausena vormistatud palvetes. Vaadeldakse prosoodilise fraasipiiri tunnuste (pausid, lõpupikenemine ja kärisev häälelaad) esinemist ning põhitooni ja aktsentueerimist. Materjaliks on 753 lausungit, kus palun esineb kolmes eri positsioonis: lause alguses, keskel ja lõpus. Materjal salvestati 21 eesti emakeelega naiskõnelejalt katses, kus osalejad pidid palveid esitama nii, nagu nad kontekstikirjelduse põhjal vastavas olukorras seda teeksid. Tulemused näitavad, et sõna palun ei fraseerita eraldi intonatsioonifraasina ja selle intonatsioon ja aktsentueeritus varieeruvad sõltuvalt lausepositsioonist. Lause alguses saab palun alati intonatsioonilise tooniaktsendi, aga lause lõpus on see aktsentueerimata. Kokkuvõtvalt võib palun’i integreeritud prosoodia tuleneda tema diskursusemarkeri-laadsest funktsioonist. Sellisena võib ta sarnaneda prosoodiliselt ka mõningate teiste sarnaselt funktsioneerivate kiiludega, nagu episteemilised või evidentsiaalsed kiilud (nt ma arvan, ütles ta), aga erineda funktsionaalselt iseseisvamatest kiiludest, mis väljendavad eraldiseisvat propositsiooni või kõneakti.

show abstract

Match Theory: An overview

Cited by 2 publications

References 62 publications

Match Theory and the Asymmetry Problem: An Example from Stockholm Swedish

Match Theory and the Asymmetry Problem: An Example from Stockholm Swedish

Prosodic phrasing of the parenthetical <i>palun</i> ‘please’ in Estonian requests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About