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

The example in (5.1c) looks a bit different, but ultimately falls under the
same heading in Chomsky and Halle’s analysis. They point to an asymmetry in
the direction of a rule: whereas the change of /k/ to [tS] before a front vowel is
quite common, 2 the converse change of /tS/ to [k] before a back vowel is not.
Since the two rules are formally very similar, once again the formal simplicity
criterion fails to distinguish the common rule from the rare one.
Contrast by itself does not account for why [u] and [s] are more common
than [ˆ] and [T], respectively; but contrast is relevant to the observations in (5.1).
Thus, rule (i) in (5.1a) is more common than rule (ii) only in vowel systems that
lack a three-way contrast between /i, ˆ, u/. In inventories with all three vowels,
the result of simply backing /i/ would indeed be ˆ; to arrive at u, it would be
necessary to change not just [back], but also [round]. In such inventories, in other
words, the formal simplicity measure gives the right answer. Similar
considerations hold for the change of /t/ to [s]: rule (i) in (5.1b) is only more
common than rule (ii) in inventories that lack a phoneme /T/.
To address these problems Chomsky and Halle (1968) appeal to a
modified version of the Prague School notion of markedness. The SPE
markedness theory classifies segments as either unmarked (u) or marked (m) for
particular features. A set of marking conventions convert markedness values into
+/– values before the phonology proper begins. Markedness conventions can
2 Actually, the fronting of /k/ to [tS] most usually occurs before /i/ and sometimes also /e/, but
rarely before the low front vowel /æ/.
165