The contrastive hierarchy in phonology 2009 Dresher.pdf - CUNY ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

tS S Z k kJ g x j r rJ l lJ vocalic – – – – – – – – + + + + consonantal + + + + + + + – + + + + diffuse 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 compact + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 low tonality – – – + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 strident 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nasal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 continuant – + + – – – + 0 – – + + voiced 0 – + – – + 0 0 0 0 0 0 sharped 0 0 0 – + 0 0 0 – + – + accented 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e e@ o o@ a a@ i i@ u u@ vocalic + + + + + + + + + + consonantal – – – – – – – – – – diffuse – – – – – – + + + + compact – – – – + + 0 0 0 0 low tonality – – + + 0 0 – – + + strident 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nasal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 continuant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 voiced 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sharped 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 accented – + – + – + – + – + As can be seen from the charts, voicing is a contrastive feature in Russian that distinguishes pairs of obstruent phonemes: /t/ and /d/ have opposite specifications for the feature [voiced], as do /k/ and /g/, /s/ and /z/, and so on. Of special interest are the Russian obstruents that do not have voiced counterparts, /ts, tS, x/. Halle (1959: 22–23) observes that these phonemes 142
participate in voicing alternations just the way other obstruents do. In particular, there is a rule of regressive voicing assimilation (RVA) that assimilates all obstruents in a cluster to the voicing of the final obstruent in the cluster. Halle’s formulation (1959: 64) is given in (4.13). (4.13) Regressive voicing assimilation (Halle 1959) Rule P 3a. If an obstruent cluster is followed by a [phrase] boundary or by a sonorant, then with regard to voicing the cluster conforms to the last segment… Halle observes that in the prevailing neo-Bloomfieldian theory the rule of RVA would have to apply twice: once in the morphophonemic component, where the result is an existing phoneme (4.14a); and again at the phonemic level to create voiced allophones of the unpaired phonemes /ts, tS, x/ (4.14b). (4.14) Russian regressive voicing assimilation applying twice a. Morphophonemic voicing Morphophonemes //mo@k bi// //Ze@tS bi// RVA mo@g bi --- (Taxonomic) phonemes /mo@g bi/ /Ze@tS bi/ b. Allophonic voicing (Taxonomic) phonemes /mo@g bi/ /Ze@tS bi/ RVA --- Ze@dZ bi Systematic phonetic form [mo@g bˆ] [Ze@dZ bˆ] We find [mo@g bˆ] ‘were (he) getting wet’, where k voices to g before voiced obstruent b (compare [mo@k lJi] ‘was (he) getting wet?’, with a k preceding 143
Page 1:
The Contrastive Hierarchy in Phonol
Page 4 and 5:
course with Keren Rice at the Cente
Page 7 and 8:
Table of Contents Acknowledgements
Page 9:
6.7. Underspecified inputs.........
Page 12 and 13:
(Chen 1972). In final open syllable
Page 14 and 15:
For example, given a language in wh
Page 16 and 17:
difficulty Czech speakers have in r
Page 18 and 19:
four-vowel system /i, e, a, u/. Eve
Page 20 and 21:
sonority (say, /a/) and one of less
Page 22 and 23:
Halle (1959) against the structural
Page 24 and 25:
former approach, pairwise compariso
Page 26 and 27:
Chapter 7 presents a series of case
Page 28 and 29:
these features. And yet, none of th
Page 30 and 31:
2.2. Contrastive specification by p
Page 32 and 33:
to /p/, that is, a voiceless nasal
Page 34 and 35:
collaborators. Rather than make pai
Page 36 and 37:
. If the set is found to consist of
Page 38 and 39:
This kind of reasoning, which I wil
Page 40 and 41:
edundancy, and this conflation of t
Page 42 and 43:
in (2.13). /p/ is characterized as
Page 44 and 45:
voiced, and the same holds for [nas
Page 46 and 47:
The problem of too many features do
Page 48 and 49:
(2.21) Three-vowel system, features
Page 50 and 51:
[+back]. The addition of the featur
Page 52 and 53:
. Specifications according to the p
Page 54 and 55:
pairwise method. One might reason t
Page 56 and 57:
the program generated up to 52 colu
Page 58 and 59:
properly contrastive specifications
Page 60 and 61:
discussion here, because they inter
Page 62 and 63:
There are different kinds of binary
Page 64 and 65:
(2.30) Contrastive specifications:
Page 66 and 67:
algorithm that assigns feature valu
Page 68 and 69:
feature ordering, for there is empi
Page 70 and 71:
contrastive in a given language; th
Page 72 and 73:
(3.1) Different phonetics, similar
Page 74 and 75:
the wrong place in the pattern of D
Page 76 and 77:
c. Consonants obstruent sonorant vo
Page 78 and 79:
proposing certain contrastive relat
Page 80 and 81:
The phonologically relevant marks o
Page 82 and 83:
1. First, divide the inventory by t
Page 84 and 85:
[T]he opposition d-n (as in French)
Page 86 and 87:
that these features are contrastive
Page 88 and 89:
a contrastive hierarchy, but not in
Page 90 and 91:
only the fact that lips and tip of
Page 92 and 93:
ts, s, z/ and /k, x, ƒ/, respectiv
Page 94 and 95:
3.3.3.2. Vowel systems Polabian In
Page 96 and 97:
(3.14) Triangular system with schwa
Page 98 and 99:
three vertical sets, as in (3.18).
Page 100 and 101:
Though the above analysis is the ty
Page 102 and 103: In these examples there appears to
Page 104 and 105: classify them according to their fu
Page 106 and 107: Trubetzkoy’s criteria, variation
Page 108 and 109: o o^ O O^ a) e) o) O) ´ Vocality +
Page 110 and 111: Subtree (3.28b) depicts the contras
Page 112 and 113: Twaddell (1935)…’ 16 Second, th
Page 114 and 115: After considering the merits of eac
Page 116 and 117: 3.6.2. Hockett’s approach in prac
Page 118 and 119: decisions here are not arbitrary (t
Page 120 and 121: obstruent and sonorant coming secon
Page 122 and 123: chapter). I have argued that issues
Page 124 and 125: (3.39) Diagnostics used in identify
Page 126 and 127: (3.41) Contrast and phonological ac
Page 128 and 129: and (2) contrastive features are as
Page 130 and 131: emphasis on dichotomies as a fundam
Page 132 and 133: implication’ that are ‘universa
Page 134 and 135: in the low vowels (0.11121). These
Page 136 and 137: they observe that a set of eight ph
Page 138 and 139: illustrates that the concept of the
Page 140 and 141: esult in all phonemes receiving a v
Page 142 and 143: n m n@ r l l’ i u e o a Vocality
Page 144 and 145: approach. Perhaps because of this J
Page 146 and 147: (4.10) Contrastive hierarchy: Stand
Page 148 and 149: acoustics. Halle sets out a number
Page 150 and 151: allophonic realizations of phonemes
Page 154 and 155: the sonorant l). The rule that chan
Page 156 and 157: and redundant features: only the fo
Page 158 and 159: Phonological theory, however, did n
Page 160 and 161: . Phonological rules i. [ ] [-g] i
Page 162 and 163: Stanley (1967: 416) considers the c
Page 164 and 165: edundant features. This argument wo
Page 166 and 167: equire a different tree in which [s
Page 168 and 169: 158
Page 170 and 171: c. Consonants: velopalatal vs. labi
Page 172 and 173: arguments of Bloomfield 1933). Inst
Page 174 and 175: ules to which a purely formal evalu
Page 176 and 177: nevertheless interact with the phon
Page 178 and 179: the rule replacing [m F] as the com
Page 180 and 181: (5.4) Markedness matrices for vowel
Page 182 and 183: emains /a, i, u/. The vowels /i, u/
Page 184 and 185: d. XI [u high] [-high] / Kean prop
Page 186 and 187: capture co-occurrence restrictions
Page 188 and 189: distinguish between contrastive and
Page 190 and 191: manipulates only +/- values, not m/
Page 192 and 193: Linking crucially depends on the fe
Page 194 and 195: of underspecification theory and le
Page 196 and 197: marked on sonorants in the lexicon
Page 198 and 199: Kiparsky’s analysis thus mirrors
Page 200 and 201: constrain this process by a hierarc
Page 202 and 203:
RU does not fully adopt the Contras
Page 204 and 205:
minimality. This leaves us with the
Page 206 and 207:
Similar results can be shown to be
Page 208 and 209:
for example, the underlying vowel s
Page 210 and 211:
5.3.3. Contrastive Specification St
Page 212 and 213:
(5.31) Pasiego Spanish vowels: Poss
Page 214 and 215:
all logical redundancies, nor does
Page 216 and 217:
Hume 1995, Halle 1995), Government
Page 218 and 219:
.Vocoids laryngeal [spread] [constr
Page 220 and 221:
5.4.2. Terminal features and the co
Page 222 and 223:
A fourth difference is that the var
Page 224 and 225:
Intuitively, the two segments diffe
Page 226 and 227:
epresentations beyond the needs of
Page 228 and 229:
218
Page 230 and 231:
6.2. Optimality Theory OT (Prince a
Page 232 and 233:
convert the coda into an onset, and
Page 234 and 235:
eing equal, this implies that a son
Page 236 and 237:
6.3.2. Contrast as an emergent Kirc
Page 238 and 239:
6.4. The contrastive hierarchy in O
Page 240 and 241:
6.4.2. Inputs What should be the in
Page 242 and 243:
(6.12) Contrastive hierarchy for Cl
Page 244 and 245:
(6.14) Classical Manchu constraint
Page 246 and 247:
epresentation because it, too, viol
Page 248 and 249:
We can mimic the effect of the Pair
Page 250 and 251:
limiting specifications to those th
Page 252 and 253:
and the rest of the features are re
Page 254 and 255:
to adopt privative features, where
Page 256 and 257:
6.7. Underspecified inputs The noti
Page 258 and 259:
(6.29) Implicational constraints fo
Page 260 and 261:
In (6.31), these constraints are ad
Page 262 and 263:
252
Page 264 and 265:
(6.17) Full specification of all fe
Page 266 and 267:
(6.21) Underspecification by means
Page 268 and 269:
(6.24) Illicit fully specified inpu
Page 270 and 271:
(6.27) Underspecified input Input:
Page 272 and 273:
262
Page 274 and 275:
value: the fact that all the alloph
Page 276 and 277:
7.2.1. Contrast and markedness MCS
Page 278 and 279:
(7.2) Contrastive features for dial
Page 280 and 281:
analysis is ‘abstract’ with res
Page 282 and 283:
universal; we will see in §7.4 tha
Page 284 and 285:
feature [high], the contrastively [
Page 286 and 287:
phonological analysis. This should
Page 288 and 289:
7.3.2. Implicit feature hierarchies
Page 290 and 291:
elations among features. This is no
Page 292 and 293:
dialects with similar-looking inven
Page 294 and 295:
this burden exists independently of
Page 296 and 297:
(7.12) Classical Manchu vowel syste
Page 298 and 299:
7.4.1.1. ATR harmony All vowels in
Page 300 and 301:
(7.17) Stems with only /i/: Suffixe
Page 302 and 303:
no surprise, therefore, to see this
Page 304 and 305:
[coronal] is contributed by /i/, bu
Page 306 and 307:
296 c. Xibe: [low] > [coronal] > [l
Page 308 and 309:
(7.24) Turkish vowel system coronal
Page 310 and 311:
(7.26) ATR harmony: /Q/ alternates
Page 312 and 313:
ordered before one based on place (
Page 314 and 315:
hierarchy we arrived at earlier; in
Page 316 and 317:
(7.37) Role of IO-IDENT[back] (adap
Page 318 and 319:
contrastive features to the stem-fi
Page 320 and 321:
(7.40) Pasiego metaphony does not a
Page 322 and 323:
O/, but its scope is limited to the
Page 324 and 325:
one step further, arguing that the
Page 326 and 327:
spreading [high] to a mid vowel uns
Page 328 and 329:
(7.47) Bumo Izon labial and alveola
Page 330 and 331:
and, in the framework of generative
Page 332 and 333:
French contrastive feature hierarch
Page 334 and 335:
(7.54) NZ Ma#ori adaptation of Engl
Page 336 and 337:
obstruent, not /k/: /h/ is not sono
Page 338 and 339:
While the contrastive hierarchy has
Page 340 and 341:
fundamental perceptual-cognitive bu
Page 342 and 343:
their perceptual system to the cont
Page 344 and 345:
figure in the phonology. I conclude
Page 346 and 347:
the postlexical or phonetic compone
Page 348 and 349:
However, when /r&/ devoices it does
Page 350 and 351:
340
Page 352 and 353:
342
Page 354 and 355:
theory is indirectly sensitive to t
Page 356 and 357:
Constraint (8.1a) provokes labial h
Page 358 and 359:
8.3. Dispersion-theoretic approache
Page 360 and 361:
evaluation of phonetic distance app
Page 362 and 363:
specified [+back]. The vowels /i/ a
Page 364 and 365:
change, traditionally known as the
Page 366 and 367:
primarily signalled by the second v
Page 368 and 369:
fronting. To implement this idea fo
Page 370 and 371:
allophone of /i/, as shown in (8.13
Page 372 and 373:
In the analysis sketched above what
Page 374 and 375:
emerge as one of the five contrasti
Page 376 and 377:
give the correct results for any ar
Page 378 and 379:
vowel [ˆ] as having 100% of the co
Page 380 and 381:
as noncontrastive for [back], the a
Page 382 and 383:
on). Of the possible potential clas
Page 384 and 385:
symmetrical. The choice of a featur
Page 386 and 387:
(Broe 1993, Frisch 1996), I have gi
Page 388 and 389:
(8.23) Features for Bumo Izon stops
Page 390 and 391:
(8.26) Similarity measures for Hawa
Page 392 and 393:
essentially the same as the one ass
Page 394 and 395:
Clements argues that the robustness
Page 396 and 397:
feature specifications, a major wea
Page 398 and 399:
observed by Stevens, Keyser & Kawas
Page 400 and 401:
there are vowels that are [+high, -
Page 402 and 403:
. Features that make each other log
Page 404 and 405:
[round] > [back] (8.38b). This may
Page 406 and 407:
and contradicts the intuition, shar
Page 408 and 409:
Thus, the lack of voiced sonorants
Page 410 and 411:
uniting phonologists who do not oth
Page 412 and 413:
short back (or central) low vowel i
Page 414 and 415:
In a hierarchical conception of con
Page 416 and 417:
406
Page 418 and 419:
These two concepts have not always
Page 420 and 421:
410
Page 422 and 423:
Archangeli, Diana and Douglas Pulle
Page 424 and 425:
Bolognesi, Roberto (1998). The phon
Page 426 and 427:
Cherry, E. Colin, Morris Halle and
Page 428 and 429:
Linguistics (Special Issue on Contr
Page 430 and 431:
Association, 82-93. Département de
Page 432 and 433:
Fikkert, Paula (1994). On the Acqui
Page 434 and 435:
Hall, Beatrice L. and R. M. R. Hall
Page 436 and 437:
Heffernan, Kevin (2007). The role o
Page 438 and 439:
Itô, Junko and Armin Mester (1986)
Page 440 and 441:
Kaisse, Ellen M. and Patricia A. Sh
Page 442 and 443:
Kuhl, Patricia, K. A. Williams, Fra
Page 444 and 445:
Martinet, André (1960). Éléments
Page 446 and 447:
Paradis, Carole (1988). On constrai
Page 448 and 449:
Radis&ic@, Milica (2007). Velar /g/
Page 450 and 451:
Rose, Sharon (1993). Coronality and
Page 452 and 453:
Steriade, Donca (1995). Underspecif
Page 454 and 455:
Walker, Rachel (2001). Round licens
show all

The contrastive hierarchy in phonology 2009 Dresher.pdf - CUNY ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?