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 ...
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 />
Tableau 6: Application <strong>of</strong> Cumulativity to CG<br />
Strong *Cmplx ❀SYM ✮MAX<br />
ONSET<br />
I-O C<br />
❀omor.fca *<br />
/omorf-Ia/<br />
? ☞omor.ca * *<br />
*rca<br />
? omor.ka * *<br />
omor.fa * * *<br />
IDENT<br />
I-O(pal)<br />
In the above tableau all possible candidates would be <strong>in</strong> a relation <strong>of</strong><br />
cumulativity with the sympathetic one, as the latter does not violate any<br />
faithfulness constra<strong>in</strong>ts at all. <strong>The</strong> problem here has to do with the fact<br />
that no candidates are discarded <strong>in</strong> the first round. Even though<br />
omor.ca can be said to be ‘closer’ to the sympathetic one, as it violates<br />
fewer faithfulness constra<strong>in</strong>ts than *omor.ka, nevertheless this cannot be<br />
formally demonstrated <strong>in</strong> tableau 6, where both omor.ca and omor.ka<br />
have scored 3 non-violations <strong>of</strong> the three highest ranked constra<strong>in</strong>ts.<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ally, cumulativity (a dynamic notion, which effectively implies<br />
time), does break parallelism aga<strong>in</strong>. <strong>The</strong> presence <strong>of</strong> the constra<strong>in</strong>t<br />
❀SYM implies a non-parallel process, where ❀SYM aga<strong>in</strong> acts as though<br />
it is the highest ranked/undom<strong>in</strong>ated constra<strong>in</strong>t <strong>in</strong> the first step <strong>of</strong> the<br />
algorithm:<br />
Tableau 7: Application <strong>of</strong> Cumulativity to CG<br />
Demonstration <strong>of</strong> steps / stages<br />
/omorf-Ia/<br />
Strong<br />
ONSET<br />
*Cmplx ❀SYM ✮MAX<br />
I-O C<br />
*rca<br />
❀omor.fca 1 0 1 1 1 1<br />
☞omor.ca 1 1 1 0 0 1<br />
omor.ka 1 1 1 0 1 0<br />
omor.fa 0 1 1 0 1 0<br />
IDENT<br />
I-O (pal)<br />
9. Conclusions<br />
Cumulativity considerably restricts the power <strong>of</strong> the theory by<br />
decreas<strong>in</strong>g the power <strong>of</strong> the sympathetic constra<strong>in</strong>t (❀SYM) and its<br />
<strong>in</strong>fluence on the candidate set. It appears however, that this has been done<br />
44