Dissertation - Michael Becker

3.6.1 The role of Universal Grammar in learning alternationsThe participants in both languages had to learn the same two new vowel mappings,from [o] to [i] and vice versa, with the difference being only in the selection of the pluralaffix that accompanies the change. Without a proper theory of affix selection, it might besurprising that a difference in affix selection between two languages is causing a differencein the ability to perform stem vowel changes between the two languages.In the “surface” language, the introduction of an [o] into a plural stem was alwaysaccompanied by the selection of –ot, so no violations of LOCAL(o) were introduced. Nounswith [o] in the singular were expected to change it to [i] and to select –im, in which caseleaving the singular [o] intact would have created a violation of LOCAL(o). Thus, in the“surface” language, LOCAL(o) allows the smooth alternation of [i] with [o] due to theselection of –ot, and encourages the alternations of [o] to [i] with the selection of –im. Theplurals in the “surface” language never violate LOCAL(o), making the changes from [i] to[o] and from [o] to [i] equally good from the markedness point of view, and indeed speakerswere equally successful with both changes.In the “deep” language, the introduction of an [o] in a plural stem was accompaniedby the selection of –im, thus introducing a violation of LOCAL(o). Singular [o]’s wereexpected to change to [i], thus eliminating the potential for a violation of LOCAL(o).Thus, in the “deep” language, only plurals that change [i] to [o] introduce a violationof LOCAL(o), and indeed speakers were less successful in changing [i] to [o] relative tochanging [o] to [i].Under my analysis of Hebrew, then, the greater success of the “surface” speakers atvowel alternations in the stem follows naturally from the distribution of the plural affixes inthe two language. Choosing –ot is compatible with changing a stem vowel to [o] and withretaining a singular [o], while chooing –im is compatible with neither retaining a singular[o] nor with introducing a plural [o].132