19.05.2014 Views

Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

P. COUTSOUGERA<br />

6.1 Selection <strong>of</strong> the ❀candidate<br />

With regard to the selection <strong>of</strong> the ❀candidate, McCarthy’s (1998) bases<br />

his proposal on the notion <strong>of</strong> harmonic evaluation, which is central <strong>in</strong><br />

OT:<br />

“<strong>The</strong>re are three ma<strong>in</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> the choice <strong>of</strong> the sympathetic<br />

candidate:<br />

(1) Harmonic Evaluation<br />

<strong>The</strong> sympathetic candidate is the most harmonic member <strong>of</strong> the subset <strong>of</strong><br />

candidates available under (2) (among the candidates which obey the<br />

selector constra<strong>in</strong>t, <strong>in</strong>curs the fewest violations <strong>of</strong> Faithfulness<br />

constra<strong>in</strong>ts)<br />

(2) Conf<strong>in</strong>ement to C (+F)<br />

Selection <strong>of</strong> the sympathetic candidate ℵ F is conf<strong>in</strong>ed to C (+F), the subset<br />

<strong>of</strong> candidates that obey the I-O faithfulness constra<strong>in</strong>t F.<br />

(3) Invisibility <strong>of</strong> Sympathy Constra<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

Selection <strong>of</strong> sympathetic candidates is done without reference to<br />

Sympathy Constra<strong>in</strong>ts” [McCarthy 98: 8].<br />

As far as <strong>in</strong>visibility <strong>in</strong> (3) is concerned, McCarthy claims that<br />

“…the choice <strong>of</strong> ℵ F can’t depend on performance on a constra<strong>in</strong>t that<br />

needs to know what ℵ F is <strong>in</strong> order to be evaluated. … It also restricts the<br />

descriptive power <strong>of</strong> the theory <strong>in</strong> an important way, and this helps to<br />

sharpen the differences between sympathy and standard rule-based<br />

serialism.” [McCarthy 98: 12].<br />

6.2 Status <strong>of</strong> ❀candidate and ❀constra<strong>in</strong>t<br />

<strong>The</strong> ❀candidate is almost always identical to an <strong>in</strong>termediate stage <strong>of</strong> a<br />

serial derivation. Although the ❀candidate is selected <strong>in</strong> a valid fashion<br />

and accord<strong>in</strong>g to specific conditions, the fact that another level <strong>of</strong><br />

representation is <strong>in</strong>deed needed for the correct output to be chosen, could<br />

be used <strong>in</strong> favour <strong>of</strong> Serialism.<br />

<strong>The</strong> connection therefore between classic Serialism and ST is that<br />

the ❀candidate has the same status as the output <strong>of</strong> an <strong>in</strong>termediate stage<br />

rule <strong>in</strong> a serial derivation (apart from some cases <strong>of</strong> multiple-opacity,<br />

34

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!