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

(7.5) Contrastive features for dialects distinguishing 3 vowels
[labial]
i u
a [low]
Many other examples of contrast-driven markedness asymmetries have
been adduced. Studies in the general MCS framework include, among others:
Avery and Rice 1989, Rice and Avery 1993, Avery 1996, Rice 1996, and Radis&ic@
2007 on asymmetries in the markedness of consonants; and Rice and Avery 1993,
Rose 1993, Causley 1999, Frigeni 2003, forthcoming, Rice 2002, 2003, D’Arcy
2003a, and Rohany Rahbar 2006, 2008 on vowel systems. 9
7.2.2. Variation in the contrastive hierarchy
Analyses of many languages in MCS suggest a certain amount of variation in the
feature hierarchy. We observed such variation in chapters 3 and 4, and more
examples will be presented in the course of this and the following chapter. To
name but one example here, we have seen immediately above that Inuit vowel
systems have the order [labial] > [coronal]. Many languages show a similar
pattern of /i/ being unmarked in relation to /u/. But this pattern is not
9 For a concise review of this issue, see Rice 2007. Not all activity-based diagnostics that have
been proposed in the literature are equally reliable. See Rice 2003, 2007, forthcoming, for further
discussion of markedness. Rice argues that asymmetries in assimilation provide the most
revealing test of markedness. If we found, for example, that /t/ assimilates to /k/ but /k/ does
not assimilate to /t/, that would be evidence that /k/is marked relative to /t/.
271