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

P. COUTSOUGERA
/alevr-I-a/
Tableau 4: Over-application of velarisation
Strong
ONSET
*Cmplx ICC-
Obstr
(voi)
❀IDENT
-O (vel)
✮MAX
I-O C
*rca
❀alev.rka * ✓ *
☞alef.ka * *
alef.ca * *
ale.ca * *
ale.fa * * * *
alev.ka * * *
IDENT-
I-O(pal)
Note that the sympathetic constraints ❀IDENT-O (vel) / ❀IDENT-O (vel), are
crucially ranked before *rca.
Malikouti-Drachman proposes a syllabification 10 with nonbranching
codas and maximal consonants (voiceless stops) in the onset
position of the syllable. Branching onsets are permitted, too. Codas may
not be maximal, so that they will not be less sonorant (or more complex)
than following onsets (also supported in Drachman & Malikouti-
Drachman 1996). By strong onset it is meant maximal onset. Finally,
according to Malikouti-Drachman (with the exception of ICC Obstr
(voi)= voicing agreement in obstruent clusters), the constraint hierarchy
in CG is the following: Onset > Rising Sonority > Strong Onset >
*Complex > ICC Obstr (voi) > *rca > IDENT I-O (pal) > Weak Coda.
Rising sonority applies to branching onsets. Let me also note that
irrelevant constraints are not mentioned in the tableaux when not
necessary.
McCarthy (1998) maintains that by making faithfulness constraints
as selectors of the sympathetic candidate, opacity contributes to the
notion of recoverability of underlying representations. This notion was
first introduced by Kaye [1974: 146], who maintained that cases of
derivations resulting in recoverability should not be considered unnatural
and that “…languages show a positive predilection towards evolving
recoverable derivations”.
McCarthy uses recoverability to say that if an opaque interaction
gives a segment, which does not occur anywhere else, the derivation can
be invertable: e.g. /alevria/ is recoverable from [alefka] as the presence of
10 Alternative syllabifications can be proposed here, too.
36