On phonotactically motivated rules

Sommerstein, Alan H.

doi:10.1017/s0022226700004011

Cited by 40 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But over the last few decades it has become clear that much morphophonemics can be understood as accommodation to phonotactic requirements, e.g. Kisseberth (1970), Sommerstein (1974), Kiparsky (1980), Goldsmith (1993), etc. A German-like voice-neutralizing alternation system resolves rapidly when the phonotactics of obstruent voicing is recognized.…”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ecologically, it is reasonable to start the learning process with observations that can be made without extensive comparative analysis of words and their meanings; hence the overlap in assumptions with empirical work on early phonological acquisition in children, such as Gnanadesikan (1995), Levelt (1995), Demuth (1995), and others. Linguistically, it is clear from studies, such as those by Kisseberth (1970), Sommerstein (1974) and by now many others, that phonotactic knowledge is of significant benefit when the task of learning the morphophonology is taken up.…”

Section: The Learning Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning phonotactic distributions

Prince¹,

Tesar²

2004

Constraints in Phonological Acquisition

170

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The problemAll languages have distributional regularities: patterns which restrict what sounds can appear where, including nowhere, as determined by local syntagmatic factors independent of any particular morphemic alternations. Early generative phonology tended to slight the study of distributional relations in favor of morphophonemics, perhaps because word-relatedness phonology was thought to be more productive of theoretical depth, reliably leading the analyst beyond the merely observable. But over the last few decades it has become clear that much morphophonemics can be understood as accommodation to phonotactic requirements, e.g. Kisseberth (1970), Sommerstein (1974), Kiparsky (1980), Goldsmith (1993), etc. A German-like voice-neutralizing alternation system resolves rapidly when the phonotactics of obstruent voicing is recognized. And even as celebrated a problem in abstractness and opacity as Yawelmani Yokuts vocalic phonology turns on a surface-visible asymmetry in height-contrasts between long and short vowels. Distributions require nontrivial learning: the data itself does not explicitly indicate the nature, or even the presence, of distributional regularities, and every distributional statement goes beyond what can be observed as fact, the 'positive evidence'. From seeing X in this or that environment the learner must somehow conclude 'X can only appear under these conditions and never anywhere else' -when such a conclusion is warranted.A familiar learning hazard is immediately encountered. Multiple grammars can be consistent with the same data, grammars which are empirically distinct in that they make different predictions about other forms not represented in the data. If learning is based upon only positive evidence, then the simple consistency of a grammatical hypothesis with all the observed data will not guarantee that the hypothesis is correct, even when adequate data are provided. This problem is typically characterized in terms of relationships among grammars. If one grammar generates all the observable forms licensed by another grammar along with yet other forms, then it is tricky to tell them apart, though crucial to do so. All positive data that support the less-inclusive grammar 1 The authors names are given alphabetically. Prince would like to thank the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation for support. Thanks to Jane Grimshaw, John McCarthy, Paul Smolensky, and the Rutgers Optimality Research Group for helpful discussion.Hayes (1999, this volume) independently arrives at the same strategy for approaching the learning problems dealt with here, and he offers similar arguments for the utility and interest of the approach. We have tried to indicate by references in the text where the identities and similarities lie. Along with the overlap in basics, there are significant divergences in emphasis, analytical procedure, and development of the shared ideas; we suggest that readers interested in the issues discussed below should consult both papers.2 The nonexistence of long high vowels on t...

show abstract

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Learning Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning phonotactic distributions

Prince¹,

Tesar²

2004

Constraints in Phonological Acquisition

170

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within phonological theory, phonotactics has been analyzed using rules (e.g., Sommerstein 1974), constraints and repairs (e.g., Paradis 1987;Calabrese 1995), or constraint interactions as proposed by Optimality Theory (OT; Prince and Smolensky 2004). A phonotactic phenomenon that has been given considerable attention in recent years is vowel harmony, i.e., the agreement of particular vowel features within words.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuromagnetic reflections of harmony and constraint violations in Turkish

Scharinger

Idsardi

Poe

2011

Laboratory Phonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The difference between MSCs and our proposal is that our constraints are constraints on surface forms, not on underlying representations (though see Sommerstein 1974 for an early proposal for surface MSCs). There is also a theoretical question about whether…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Source-Oriented Generalizations as Grammar Inference in Russian Vowel Deletion

Becker

Gouskova

2016

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speakers learn detailed generalizations about the morphophonology of their language, and extend them to nonce words. We propose a theory of this morphophonological knowledge that partitions the lexicon into uniform and productive sublexicons. Each sublexicon has its own phonotactic grammar, which the speaker uses as an inference mechanism to determine the relative productivity of each sublexicon. We report the results of an experiment on the generalization of mid vowel deletion ("yer" deletion) in Russian, showing that speakers encode source-oriented generalizations about the shapes of words that can undergo vowel deletion, as well as product-oriented generalizations about words that result from vowel deletion. An implementation of our model learns the patterns of deletion and captures both source-oriented and productoriented generalizations.*For their insightful questions, comments, and suggestions, we wish to thank

show abstract

On phonotactically motivated rules

Cited by 40 publications

References 4 publications

Learning phonotactic distributions

Learning phonotactic distributions

Neuromagnetic reflections of harmony and constraint violations in Turkish

Source-Oriented Generalizations as Grammar Inference in Russian Vowel Deletion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About