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

order and feature ordering with respect to the markedness conventions for the
vowels.
The conventions for the main vowel features [low], [high], [back], and
[round], apply in this order, which might at first suggest that this is their order in
the hierarchy. The conventions depart from a branching tree in that the
convention for [low] (VI) mentions [u back] and [u round]; in particular, the
unmarked value of [low] is + for a vowel that is unmarked for [back] and
[round]. This statement is inconsistent with a contrastive hierarchy, in that a
higher-order feature refers to one ordered later. Nevertheless, the vowel
conventions V–XII correspond most closely to a hierarchy in which [low] is
higher than [back] and [round]. The convention for [back] (X) presupposes
specification of [+low], and the convention for [round] (XI) presupposes +/–
values of both [low] and [back]. The relationship between [low] and [high] also
departs from a consistent hierarchy: [+low] leads to the specification of [–high]
(VII), presupposing that [low] is specified first, but IX states that [+high] implies
[–low], presupposing the opposite.
Chomsky and Halle perceive a hierarchy among the features, though they
modify the markedness theory for vowels somewhat to achieve it. The
immediate reason for modifying the results of the markedness conventions is
their dissatisfaction with the predicted vowel inventories that emerge from these
conventions. Assigning a cost of 0 to a u and 1 to m, +, or –, with the total cost of
each segment being its complexity, the theory assigns the feature representations
of some typical vowels the complexity measure shown in (5.4).
169