Search

Highlights: [•] I discuss the question whether particular phonological units are innate or acquired. [•] I show that both markedness and faithfulness constraints can be acquired. [•] I integrate generative and usage-based approaches to language. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article is about the relationship between Dependency Phonology and Government Phonology in general, and the more specific question how exactly a dependency relation may incarnate. The latter issue is raised by the genuine contribution of Government Phonology to phonological theory, i.e. lateral relations among syllabic constituents. Government and licensing describe a dependency relationship between a head and a dependent, but are non-arboreal. Their application therefore mechanically leads to the elimination of trees (deforestation). Arboreal syllable structure, however, is the spine of Structural Analogy, since it parallels syntactic arboreal structure. The question is thus whether arboreal and lateral descriptions of syllable structure are just notational variants (in which case Structural Analogy with syntactic trees can be maintained), or whether they are really different. It is shown that the latter is the case, and that the different expression of dependency relations in syntax and phonology is due to two things: a design property of syntax, concatenation (which is absent from phonology), and an input condition to phonological computation, linearity (which is absent from syntax). Hierarchical structure is thus implemented in module-specific ways: concatenation in syntax (the minimalist device Merge) produces trees (while invalidating the lateral option). It is therefore argued that the arboreal means of expressing dependency relations is the result of concatenation, and of nothing else: no concatenation, no trees. It thus follows from the fact that phonology does not concatenate anything that there cannot be any tree-building device in this module. An appreciable side-effect of this perspective is an explanation of a long-standing observation, i.e. the absence of recursion in phonology: no trees, no recursion. On the other hand, linearity in phonology produces lateral relations (and makes trees unworkable). A related issue discussed is what kinds of third factor explanation are desirable, given that everybody is after “more general, language-unspecific” motivations for the workings of grammar: Chomskian minimalism/biolinguistics as much as anti-chomskian “Cognitive” Grammar and the work by John Anderson. Candidates are global notions such as cognitive salience on the one hand, or more concrete things such as linearity and concatenation on the other. It appears that the current striving for the former is an attempt at turning back the clocks: the evolution of Cognitive Science since Franz-Joseph Gall’s 19th century phrenology was in the opposite direction. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Chomskyan generative grammar has long been committed to the ‘double-interface’ assumption that the faculty of language (FL) serves two interfaces, PF and LF, and correlatively that expressions have phonological and semantic properties. The paper argues this gives rise to (a) a grounding problem for syntax – i.e. for the interpretable content of syntax – and (b) a problem for the assumption that FL is a generative computation. It is argued these problems are resolved if we think of syntax as grounded exclusively in semantic/conceptual properties. Since this implies that FL is phonology-free, it is argued that FL should not be distinguished from a generative computation describable as ‘the language of thought’ (LOT). The paper explores to what extent this (FL=LOT) thesis is consistent with Chomsky''s thinking. Chomsky''s recent work can be seen as pointing in that direction but it is not consistent with the double-interface assumption, which he continues to regard as conceptually necessary. In the light of discussion of the issues, the paper concludes with a speculation on the role of phonology in human cognition and its evolution. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Experimental evidence suggests that syllable-final devoicing is often ‘incomplete’: devoiced obstruents are phonetically subtly different from underlyingly voiceless ones, and speakers are sensitive to these differences. While it has been suggested in the literature that these results cause severe problems to formal theories of phonology, this article argues that we only need a three-way distinction at the end of the phonological derivation between voiced, voiceless and devoiced. It is shown how this distinction follows naturally from a Containment-based view of input–output relations within the framework of Optimality Theory. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article investigates the learnability filter (LF) hypothesis, according to which the set of logically possible grammars predicted by linguistic theory is reduced to a proper subset of learnable grammars by external principles of language learning. Antifaithfulness constraints (Alderete, 2001a) provide a linguistic theory that predicts the existence of circular chain shifts of two segment types, including purely phonological exchanges that are unattested cross-linguistically (Anderson and Browne, 1973). Overt data representing such systems are fed into a standard OT learning model in which learners have IO-antifaithfulness constraints at their disposal. Despite this evidence and these constraints, learners always select grammars in which segmental exchanges are restricted to morphologically defined environments, consistent with typological findings. These results are shown to have implications for the nature of constraints in Optimality Theory, the correct analysis of morpho-phonological alternations, and a host of representational assumptions in phonology and morphology. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper examines morphophonological alternations involving apicoalveolar tap-consonant clusters in Urban East Norwegian from the framework of gestural Optimality Theory. Articulatory Phonology provides an insightful explanation of patterns of vowel intrusion, coalescence, and rhotic deletion in terms of the temporal coordination of consonantal gestures, which interacts with both prosodic and morphological structure. An alignment-based account of derived-environment effects is proposed in which complete overlap in rhotic-consonant clusters is blocked within morphemes but not across morpheme or word boundaries. Alignment constraints on gestural coordination also play a role in phonologically conditioned allomorphy. The gestural analysis is contrasted with alternative Optimality-theoretic accounts. Furthermore, it is argued that models of the phonetics–phonology interface which view timing as a low-level detail of phonetic implementation incorrectly predict that input morphological structure should have no effect on gestural coordination. The patterning of rhotic-consonant clusters in Norwegian is consistent with a model that includes gestural representations and constraints directly in the phonological grammar, where underlying morphological structure is still visible. On the assumption that Universal Grammar lacks faithfulness constraints on input timing, the phonology is free to include non-contrastive phonetic detail such as intersegmental gestural coordination without the danger of overgenerating impossible contrasts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper investigates the nature of the substitutions used for the dental fricatives (/θ/ and /ð/) by Dutch learners of English as a second language. By means of an OT analysis, the underlying reasons for the difficulties encountered with these sounds are brought to light. The present data reveal that phonetics (or acoustics) rather than phonology plays a major role in the selection of the phonemes used to substitute the dental fricatives. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper argues against the view of intrusive [r] as a synchronically arbitrary insertion process. Instead, it is seen as a phonologically natural process, which can be modelled within the framework of Optimality Theory (OT). Insertion of [r] in phonologically restricted environments is a consequence of a more general theory of consonant epenthesis outlined here. This theory ties epenthesis in with the notion of prominence and strives to formalize a general theory of epenthesis which explains why glottal stops and glides are crosslinguistically frequently found epenthetic consonants, although in different prosodic contexts. I argue that glottal stops are optimal margin consonants and thus inserted in margin positions (e.g. word-initially) while glides are optimal peak consonants, inserted in peak positions (e.g. as hiatus breakers). This hypothesis is derived from sonority-based prominence scales [Prince, A., Smolensky, P., 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Ms. Rutgers University and the University of Colorado at Boulder]. Intrusive [r] can then be understood as the optimal consonant in a peak position when glide formation is blocked, because [r] is the most sonorous possible element in this position. Spreading-based or perceptually grounded accounts of intrusive [r] are consequently rejected under this approach. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: One of the most important insights of Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky, 1993) is that phonological processes can be reduced to the interaction between faithfulness and universal markedness principles. In the most constrained version of the theory, all phonological processes should be thus reducible. This hypothesis is tested by alternations that appear to be phonological but in which universal markedness principles appear to play no role. If we are to pursue the claim that all phonological processes depend on the interaction of faithfulness and markedness, then processes that are not dependent on markedness must lie outside phonology. In this paper I will examine a group of such processes, the initial consonant mutations of the Celtic languages, and argue that they belong entirely to the morphology of the languages, not the phonology. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper provides a representational and constraint-based analysis of the segment inventory and consonant–vowel interactions of Standard Serbian. It shows that the phonological and morpho-phonological patterns of this language pose several challenges to the more traditional feature theories, which assume that consonants and vowels use (for the most part) different features. To capture all the Serbian facts (including velar fronting, velar palatalization, iotization and lateral vocalization), I make use of the Parallel Structures Model of feature geometry and Optimality Theory. The advantage of using the Parallel Structures Model is that it representationally captures quite complex consonant–vowel and place-manner alternations using a limited set of privative features applicable to both consonants and vowels. OT is employed to explain the inventory, the morphological specificity of the consonant–vowel interactions, and the context specificity of lateral vocalization, as well as other “soft constraint” effects. However, this analysis differs from most constraint-based approaches in assuming segment-internal representations, providing an explicit mechanism to explain the inventory (including justifying particular feature specifications), and providing a unified account of both the inventory and phonological process facts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article adopts the perspective of Optimality Theory (OT) to address the question whether phonology and syntax are equally autonomous. We show that OT enjoys the same advantages and encounters the same problems in syntax as in phonology; this suggests that markedness plays an equally important rôle in both components of language. Most markedness constraints, however, are clearly grounded: although they refer to specifically linguistic categories (self-containment), they typically display some degree of functional adaptation to the demands of performance (nonarbitrariness). In consequence, phonology and syntax should be expected to be grounded to a similar degree. Pace, however, the postulation of grounded markedness constraints in the theory of grammar does not violate Ockham''s Razor. In particular, we show that markedness cannot be equated with performance difficulty, and we demonstrate that infants require knowledge of markedness during language acquisition in order to transcend the limitations of inductive generalization. However, this does not necessarily imply that knowledge of markedness is innate; we argue, rather, that most markedness constraints may in fact emerge in the course of linguistic development through the child''s monitoring of her own performance. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

0It is one of the most basic generalizations in phonology that only certain sets of sounds pattern together in phonological processes. These sets are referred to as natural classes. This paper develops a new analysis of the natural class generalization, formulated in terms of Optimality Theory. It is shown that natural classes derive from the nature of the set of markedness constraints. For example, sounds can pattern together as a natural class if they violate markedness constraints in the same environment, so given constraints *XA and *XB A and B can form a natural class. As a result the range of possible natural classes depends on the inventory of constraints, not on the feature set. This analysis is shown to have empirical advantages over the standard account according to which natural classes are characterized purely in terms of features. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]