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

the rule replacing [m F] as the complement of the rule replacing [u F] in the same
context. 3
(5.3) Interpretive convention for marking statements
168
Each schema [u F] [α F] / X _____ Y, where α = + or – ,and X and
Y may be null, is interpreted as a pair of rules, the first of which
replaces [u F] by [α F] in the context X _____ Y and the second of
which replaces [m F] by [–α F] in the context X _____ Y.
Of special interest to our topic is the relationship of the markedness
conventions to feature hierarchies. Though not completely ordered, we find that
the markedness conventions do encode a partial ordering of features.
At the top of the hierarchy are the major class features [consonantal] and
[vocalic]. They are at the top of the list because their markedness conventions
(not shown here) apply first. These conventions are different from most of the
others in that they apply recursively. Also, there is no hierarchical relation
between these two features: sometimes [vocalic] presupposes [consonantal] and
sometimes the opposite is the case. Thus, no well-formed branching tree can
model these markedness conventions.
The recursive manner of application is limited to the conventions for these
features. Chomsky and Halle propose (1968: 408) that the remaining conventions
apply only once and in order. We will investigate the relationship between this
3 Kean’s (1980) Complement Convention subsumes more than this, however. See the next section
for further discussion.