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

Clause (i) defines as noncontrastive those feature specifications that are
logically redundant in pairs of features. For example, given a constraint *[+low,
+round], it is predictable that a low vowel must be [–round]; by the same token,
any vowel that is [+round] must be [–low]. If we compare this with a contrastive
hierarchy where [low] > [round], then the first conclusion is consistent with that
derived by the contrastive hierarchy: [round] is not contrastive in the domain of
[low]. The second conclusion allows the lower feature to make the higher one
noncontrastive.
The danger of the procedure in clause (i) is that features can make each
other noncontrastive, thereby failing to distinguish between phonemes. This is
one of the characteristic shortcomings of identifying system redundancy with
logical redundancy (see §2.5). For such cases, clause (ii) stipulates that one
chooses the feature that is higher in the ordering as contrastive.
Consider how this procedure will apply to the high-vowel inventory /i, y,
u/. To simplify the discussion, we will assume that [+high] is contrastive and
focus on [back], [round], and [ATR].
(8.37) Assigning contrastive specifications (Calabrese 2005)
a. Begin with full specifications
i y u
high + + +
back – – +
round – + +
ATR + + +
391