10.04.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

than the Manchu type. <strong>The</strong> differences (directional harmony <strong>in</strong> Manchu versus a<br />

dom<strong>in</strong>ant harmony <strong>in</strong> Nez Perce) do not change our expectation that [ATR]<br />

should be a <strong>contrastive</strong> feature. An analysis by Bakovic@ (2000) seems to put this<br />

assumption <strong>in</strong> doubt. It is <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g, therefore, that this analysis does not<br />

appear to be as empirically adequate as an alternative <strong>in</strong> which [ATR] is a<br />

<strong>contrastive</strong> feature.<br />

7.4.4.1. <strong>The</strong> Nez Perce vowel system<br />

<strong>The</strong> surface vowels of Nez Perce (Aoki 1966, 1970) are shown <strong>in</strong> (7.25).<br />

(7.25) Nez Perce surface vowels (Aoki 1966, 1970)<br />

i u<br />

Q A<br />

ç<br />

Nez Perce has dom<strong>in</strong>ant-recessive ATR harmony (Hall and Hall 1980). All<br />

vowels <strong>in</strong> a word apart from /i/ must agree with respect to [ATR], and the value<br />

[–ATR] is dom<strong>in</strong>ant. That is, a [–ATR] specification anywhere <strong>in</strong> the word causes<br />

all [+ATR] vowels <strong>in</strong> the word to become [–ATR]. /Q/ alternates with /A/ (7.26)<br />

and /u/ alternates with /ç/ (7.27).<br />

299

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!