DISSERTAÇÃO DE LACY

7/28/2019 DISSERTAO DE LACY

1/281

THE FORMAL EXPRESSION OF MARKEDNESS

A Dissertation Presented

by

PAUL V. DE LACY

Submitted to the Graduate School of theUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

September 2002

Department of Linguistics

Copyright by Paul V. de Lacy 2002

All Rights Reserved


2/281

THE FORMAL EXPRESSION OF MARKEDNESS

A Dissertation Presented

by

PAUL V. DE LACY

Approved as to style and content by:

______________________________________________Prof. John J. McCarthy, Chair

______________________________________________Prof. Mark H. Feinstein (Hampshire College)

______________________________________________Prof. John C. Kingston

______________________________________________Prof. Alan S. Prince (Rutgers University)

______________________________________________Prof. Elisabeth O. Selkirk

______________________________________________

Prof. Elisabeth O. Selkirk, Department HeadLinguistics Department

DEDICATION

In memory of my brother.


3/281


4/281


5/281


6/281


7/281


8/281


9/281


10/281

xix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

1. Symbols in tableaux

The winning formA incorrect/unattested winning form

A form that never wins in any grammar

2. Feature classes

K dorsal (velar, uvular, pharyngeal)P labial (bilabial, labio-dental)T coronal (dental, alveolar, postalveolar, retroflex, (palatal))

glottal [ h N]

[vd] The feature [voice][N] The placeless (glottal) nasal (Trigo 1988, see ch.55.3)

3. Prosodic Categories

MoraFt Foot SyllablePrWd Prosodic Word

MiP Minor PhraseMaP Major PhrasePPh Phonological Phrase

IP Intonational Phrase

UttP Utterance

4. Other symbols

| | encloses a scale (e.g. | dorsal coronal |)|| || encloses a ranking (e.g. || ONSET MAX || )

x y constraint x outranks constraintyx,y the ranking of constraintx andy is indeterminatex refers to all elements on a scale that are equally or more marked thanxx refers to all elements on a scale that are equally or less marked thanx{} in a constraint, encloses a set of scale elements (e.g. IDENT{KP})

/ / Encloses an input form

[ ] Encloses an output form

1 subscript numerals mark correspondence relations: /a1/[i1] indicates that input /a/corresponds to output [i].

M(x>y) a markedness constraint that favoursx overy (i.e. assigns fewer marks tox thany).M(t>k) stands for a markedness constraint that favours [t] over [k]

F(x>y) a faithfulness constraint that preservesx without preservingy. F(t>k) preserves /t/but not /k/.

M(x) a markedness constraint that assigns a violation to [x]F(x) a faithfulness constraint that preserves the mapping /x/[x].

xx

Designated Terminal Element of. The terminal element that is associated to byan unbroken path of prosodic heads.

- non-Designated Terminal E lements of. All elements in that are not s DTE.


11/281


12/281


13/281


14/281


15/281


16/281


17/281


18/281


19/281


20/281


21/281


22/281


23/281


24/281

PART I

THEORY

28

CHAPTER 2

THEORY

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents a theory of scale-referring markedness and faithfulnessconstraints and discusses its relation to previous proposals. Three relatively independentissues provide the organization for the presentation for this theory.

(1) Issues(a) Markedness

(i) In what way do scale-referring markedness constraints assign violations?(ii) What are the structural descriptions of scale-referring markedness

constraints?(b) Faithfulness

(i) In what way do scale-referring faithfulness constraints assign violations?(ii) What are the structural descriptions of scale-referring faithfulness

constraints?(c) Structure

(i) Which scales can/cannot combine with structural elements?

(ii) With which structural elements may scales combine?

Section 2.2 deals with the way in which scale-referring constraints assign violations

their violation profiles (1ai, 1bi).Section 2.3 deals with the structural description of scale-referring constraints i.e.

their symbolic form (1aii, 1bii). This section deals with the representation of scales as

multi-valued features.Section 2.4 deals with constraints that combine scales and structural elements. This

section claims that only prosodic scales ones that refer to non-subsegmental properties

like tone may combine with structural elements to form constraints (1ci). A precisecharacterization of the structural elements with which scales combine is also provided(1cii).

Section 2.5 summarizes the theoretical proposals and outlines how the rest of thisdissertation provides evidence for them.


25/281


26/281


27/281


28/281


29/281


30/281


31/281


32/281


33/281


34/281


35/281


36/281

Paul de Lacy

51

Proposal: Prosodic scales must combine with structural elements in constraints;Featural scales cannot do so (2.4).Related Proposal:

Scale-referring constraints may only refer to the structural elements DTE andnon-DTE.

Proposal: Scale-reference is consistent across constraint types. (2.5)Leads to:

Faithfulness to the Marked: If a faithfulness constraint preserves a scale element,then it also preserves every more marked scale element.

The following chapters examine the empirical consequences of the proposals presentedabove.

Chapter 3 is devoted to showing that the ranking of scale-referring markednessconstraints is freely permutable. This result necessitates that they be in a local harmonicbounding relation. Chapter 4 aims to show that reference to both DTEs and non-DTEs is necessary. Chapter 5 provides an extended discussion of scale-referring faithfulness constraints. Chapters 6 and 7 present evidence for the Marked Reference hypothesis, showing that a llscale-referring faithfulness constraints preserve the most marked element. Chapter 8 provides evidence that faithfulness constraints must be freely rankable. Chapter 9 presents a summary of the proposals and their empirical consequences.

PART II

MARKEDNESS


37/281


38/281


39/281


40/281


41/281


42/281


43/281


44/281


45/281


46/281


47/281


48/281


49/281


50/281


51/281


52/281


53/281


54/281


55/281


56/281


57/281


58/281


59/281


60/281


61/281


62/281


63/281


64/281


65/281


66/281


67/281


68/281


69/281


70/281


71/281


72/281


73/281


74/281


75/281


76/281


77/281


78/281


79/281


80/281


81/281


82/281


83/281


84/281


85/281


86/281


87/281


88/281


89/281


90/281

Paul de Lacy

high tone, while non-heads attract low tone. For example, Kim (1997) shows that every

Major Phrase in Korean must contain at least one high tone, and that no other high tones

are permitted. The constraints *'MaP/L and *-'MaP/H must outrank tone-faithfulness to


91/281

161

pachieve this result. Similarly, the phonologically assigned (i.e. default) intonational tune in

the Polynesian language Maori is H*L- on every Major Phrase (Bauer 1993).80 This can be

explained if *'MaP/L and *-'MaP/H are employed in this language. See de Lacy

(1999a5.2, 2003) for related discussion.

80If declarative intonation is assumed to be the phonological default (phonologically assigned) tonal melody,

the tone-prominence constraints explain why the most common pattern is H*L%, with a high tone on thehead of a MajorP/IntonationalP.

PART III

FAITHFULNESS


92/281


93/281


94/281


95/281


96/281


97/281


98/281


99/281


100/281


101/281


102/281


103/281


104/281


105/281


106/281


107/281


108/281


109/281


110/281


111/281


112/281


113/281


114/281


115/281


116/281


117/281


118/281


119/281


120/281


121/281


122/281


123/281


124/281


125/281


126/281


127/281


128/281


129/281


130/281


131/281


132/281


133/281


134/281


135/281


136/281


137/281


138/281


139/281


140/281


141/281


142/281


143/281


144/281


145/281


146/281


147/281


148/281


149/281


150/281


151/281


152/281


153/281


154/281


155/281


156/281


157/281


158/281


159/281


160/281


161/281


162/281


163/281


164/281


165/281


166/281


167/281


168/281


169/281


170/281


171/281


172/281


173/281


174/281


175/281


176/281


177/281


178/281


179/281


180/281


181/281


182/281


183/281


184/281


185/281


186/281


187/281


188/281


189/281


190/281


191/281


192/281


193/281


194/281


195/281


196/281


197/281


198/281


199/281


200/281


201/281


202/281


203/281


204/281


205/281


206/281


207/281


208/281


209/281


210/281


211/281


212/281


213/281


214/281


215/281


216/281


217/281


218/281


219/281


220/281


221/281


222/281


223/281


224/281


225/281


226/281


227/281


228/281


229/281


230/281


231/281


232/281


233/281


234/281


235/281


236/281


237/281


238/281


239/281


240/281


241/281


242/281


243/281


244/281


245/281


246/281


247/281


248/281


249/281


250/281


251/281


252/281


253/281


254/281


255/281


256/281


257/281


258/281


259/281

The formal expression of markedness Appendices

(4) Voiced stops: Harmonically complete inventories

b d Onset Inventory

DiyariNambiquara

Sioux Valley (Santee)Xavant Macro-J

JurunaLueEfik

NhandaCatalanHarar OromoKewa

(5) Voiced stops: Gapped inventories

b d Onset Inventory

CherokeeWapishana

Ayutla Mixtec

(6) Voiced fricatives: Harmonically complete inventories without Glottal Elimination

x f s h Coda Inventory Onset Inventory

Peninsular Sp. dialects [x fs h]Fox [h]~[s h]ons

Rapanui [h]Kapingamarangi [h]Boror Macro-Je

Chiracahua Apache [s

h]~[s x h]ONS

Chipewyan

[s h]~[s xh]ons

Chamicuro [s]ONS

Cayapa [f s h]ONS

Stoney [ s h]Gujarati [s h]

Attic Greek [s h]

Tunica [s h]

Sikaiana

Kipe Macro-JeK h [ h]

Paul de Lacy

(7) Voiceless fricatives: Harmonically complete inventories with Glottal Elimination


Lamani [s h]ONS

Apatani [x s h]ONSSouth GreenlandicNambiquara [f in loans]ForeJuruna

English[f s ]~[f s (h)]ONS4

Catalan [f s ]East Futuna [f s]Asmat [f s]Samoan [f s]Boazi [f s]

Seri [ w x f s ] Mordvin (Erzya) [x f sj s]

(8) Voiceless fricatives: Gapped inventories


Peninsular Spanish (Coria)[x f s h]

Lakkia [x f h]

- Tsishaath Nootka [ x s h]

Teton [x s h]Sentani [x s h]Yokuts (Yawelmani)Masset HaidaMongorSuiMataco-Noctenes [xw s h]Apatani

- MaoriEast UveaTokelauGuat Macro-Je

Sentani


260/281

498

Kashaya [s h]

Abau

Florentine Italian SpirantsMaltese [f s h]

Yte Macro-Je [f s h]

Yanomam [f s h]

Finnish

Egyptian Arabic [ f s h] Harar Oromo [x f s h]BretonGermanSomaliKarok

499

- -

Tshishaath Nootka

[ xs ]~[ h xs ]

Mataco-Noctenes [xw sh]ons

Yuma [xw x s ]

Mansi [x s sj]

KhalkaAtayalKwaioFuzhouKhanty [x s sj]

4 [h] appears PrWd-initially (e.g. [ri{h b l teit}] rehabilitate) and in stressed syllable onsets ([vih kj l ]

vehicular), but not elsewhere (cf [vi kl] vehicle).


261/281


(11) Nasals: Harmonically complete inventories with Glottal Elimination

m n N Coda Inventory Onset Inventory

Tzutujil [m n]Lardil [n or homorg]~[ m

n]Castilian Spanish [ m n]

Uradhi [ m n n]ONS

Ngawun Mayi [n ]~[m

Nambiquara [m in loans]Konkani

-9 Harar Oromo [m n ]

Tsishaath Nootka [m n]

Gujarati [m n] (cod=[m n N])

Jununa TupSikaianaFore

NZ English [m n]ONS

Tol (Jicaque) [m n]ONSNunggubuyuNhandaWalmatjari

Maori

(12) Nasals: Gapped inventories

m n N Coda Inventory Onset Inventory

{See entry for [ m n N]}


Caribbean Spanish


Nunggubuyu [ m n ]

Cayapa [ m n ]ons10

Cantonese secret language

Paul de Lacy

(13) Glides: inventoriesNote: [G] is the velar glide

G w j Coda Inventory Onset InventoryNunggubuyu [w j]ONS Mordvin (Erza)

NunggubuyuTenango Otomi

Mansi [j w]ONS Aguaruna

Axininca Campa- -

- MaoriKaraj


262/281

502

9The rarity of onset [ ] is probably responsible for the lack of examples with onset [ m n] and coda [m n].

10 Word-initial [ ] is banned, but can appear in medial onsets.

503


263/281


Mataco-Noctenes Claesson 1994

Mordvin Uralic Zaicz 1998Nambiquara Nambiquaran Kroeker 1972

Nancowryreduplicants

Mon-Khmer Rhadakrishnan 1981, Alderete et al.1999

Nantong Chinese Sino-Tibetan Ao 1993

Nganasan Uralic Helimski 1998, Olga Vaysman (p.c.)

Nhanda Pama-Nyungan Blevins 2001Nunggubuyu Gunwingguan Heath 1984:17ffPendau Indonesian Quick 20002.4.1

Peninsular Spanish Romance Morris 2000

Pichis Asheninca Arawakan J.Payne 1990

Piro Arawakan Matteson 1965Samoan Polynesian Mosel & Hovdhaugen 1992

Sentani Trans-NewGuinea

Foley 1986:59, Hargus 1988

Seri Hokan Marlett 1981

Sioux Valley(Santee)

Siouan Shaw 1980:17

Slave (Hare) Athapaskan Rice 1989South Greenlandic Eskimo Swadesh 1946

Stoney Siouan Shaw 1980:21

Tahitian Polynesian Coppenrath & Prevost 1974

Taiwanese (secretlanguage)

Sino-Tibetan Li 1985

Tamil Dravidian Vasanthakumari 1989

Tenango Otomo Aztecan Blight & Pike 1976

Teton Siouan Shaw 1980:16

Tigre Semitic Raz 1983

Tiriy (Trio) Carib Parker 2001

Tongan Polynesian Churchward 1954

Tshishaath Nootka Wakashan Stonham 1999

Tbatulabalreduplicants

Uto-Aztecan Voegelin 1935, Alderete et al. 1999

Paul de Lacy

Yanomam - Aikhenvald & Dixon 1999

Yokuts(Yawelmani)

Penutian Newman 1944, 1946

Yucatec Mayan Mayan Lombardi 1991

Yuma Hokan Halpern 1946


264/281

506

reduplicantsTunica - Haas 1946

Tup Tupi Rodrigues 1999b

Tzutujil Mayan Dayley 1985:38

Uradhi Pama-Nyungan Hale 1976, Crowley 1983

Vanimo Sko Ross 1980:78ff

Walmatjari Pama-Nyungan Hudson 1978

Wayana Carib Jackson 1972Wichita Caddoan Garvin 1950

Yamphu Tibeto-Burman Rutgers 1998

507


265/281


266/281


267/281


268/281


269/281


270/281


271/281


272/281


273/281


274/281


275/281


276/281


277/281


278/281


279/281


280/281

Paul de Lacy

Zec, Draga (2000). Multiple sonority thresholds. In T.H. King and I.A. Sekerina (eds.)The 8th Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics. Ann Arbor:Michigan Slavic Publications, pp.382-413.

Zec, Draga (to appear). Prosodic weight. In Caroline Fry and Ruben van de Vijver(eds.) The syllable in Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zee, Eric (1985). Sound change in syllable-final nasal consonants in Chinese.Journal ofChinese Linguistics 13.2: 291-330.

Zhang, Jie (2000). The effects of duration and sonority on contour tone distribution -

typological survey and formal analysis. Doctoral dissertation, University ofCalifornia at Los Angeles.

Zoll, Cheryl (1998). Positional asymmetries and licensing. Rutgers Optimality Archive#282.

Zonneveld, R.M. van (1985). Word rhythm and the Janus syllable. In Harry van derHulst and Norval Smith (eds.) The structure of phonological representations.Dordrecht: Foris, pp.133-140.


281/281

540

DISSERTAÇÃO DE LACY

Documents

Transcript of DISSERTAÇÃO DE LACY