Unformatted text preview: Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 346 Chapter 12: Phonology II —Optional Rules, Phonology/Morphology Interaction
1. Optional rules Phonological rules may be optional. When a phonological rule applies optionally, both the input and the output can be pronounced. 1.1 Preglottalization Here is an example of an optional rule. Preglottalization +stop –voiced [+glottal] / ___ ]word (optional) That is, a voiceless stop at the end of a word can optionally receive simultaneous glottal closure (thus, an alveolar stop stays alveolar, a velar stops stays velar, and a bilabial stops stays bilabial, but they receive a glottal closure in addition). Here are data: cat: hat: cut: [kæt] or [kæt] [hæt] or [hæt] [kt] or [kt] Additional data with other places of articulation are as follows: cup: hack: 1.2 Tapping [kp] or [kp] [hæk] or [hæk] allophone of /t/.129 The data look like this: Another optional rule (of North American English128) is Tapping, which derives  as an Tapping is unusual outside North America. It occurs natively in some Irish speech and is said to be appearing in other foreign dialects as a cultural import. Non-tapping dialects often have Glottaling instead: butter [ˈbʌʔə], [ˈbʊʔə].
129 128 And, as we’ll see later on, of /d/. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 347 Forms that can be tapped butter attic heritability motto [bɚ] [æk] [hɛəəbləi] [mo] Forms that cannot be tapped attain Tommy cat actor Atkins [əˈten] [ˈtmi] [kæt] [æktɚ] [ætknz] (*[əˈen]) (*[ˈmi]) (*[ˈkæ]) (*[ˈækɚ]) (*[æknz]) Inspection of these and similar data indicate a very particular environment for Tapping, namely: between two vowels (or other syllabic sounds; diphthongs and syllabic consonants), of which the second must stressless: Tapping (preliminary version)130 +syllabic t / [+syllabic] ___ –stress Now, different speakers will vary, but my impression is that most speakers of North American dialects can, in very slow and careful speech, “turn off” tapping and produce [t]’s in the relevant words: butter attic heritability motto [bɚ], [btɚ] [æk], [ætk] [hɛəəbləi], [hɛətəbləti] [mo], [mto] 1.3 /æ/ Diphthongization A third optional rule, which is found in the dialect of many but not all American English speakers, is a rule of /æ/ Diphthongization, which applies before nasals. Here are data: 130 To be generalized below. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 348 No diphthongization: cat pack lap lab pal [kæt] [pæk] [læp] [læb] [pæl] Diphthongization: can man Spanish dance spam tram [kɛən] [mɛən] [spɛənʃ] [dɛəns] [spɛəm] [tɛəm] Setting up the basic phoneme as /æ/, we can write the rule as follows: /æ/ Diphthongization /æ/ [ɛə] / ___ [+nasal] The pronunciations given above in the second group of forms are in fact only one option; these words can also be pronounced [kæn], [mæn], [spænʃ], [dæns], [tæm]. Thus /æ/ Diphthongization must be optional. 1.4 An obligatory rule Not all phonological rules are optional. The rule of Initial Aspiration derives the little puff of breath (aspiration, IPA ) heard on word-initial voiceless stops. Initial Aspiration +stop ___ –voiced [+aspirated] / [word Data: pie tie cat [pa] [ta] [kæt] Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 349 police collect but not spy sty scat upper tickle [pəlis] [kəlɛkt] [spa] [sta] [skæt] [pɚ] [tkl] This rule is obligatory; it is grossly unnatural to say words like cat without the aspiration. 1.5 Optional rules and derivations There is no standard way to write derivations for optional rules, but for clarity and gradability for the TA’s I’d like you to follow the format given here, which I will call a “branching derivation.” The format gives arrows indicating the two possibilities for when an optional rule does or does not apply; for example: /kæn/ — [kæn] kɛən [kɛən] phonemic form (“can”) /æ Diphthongization/ phonetic form Where there are multiple applicable rules, the branches will multiply, producing a tree of greater size. Some commercial speech recognition devices use rules to generate alternate forms of the words to be recognized; their derivations can culminate in hundreds or thousands of branches. 1.6 Optional rules and speaking style It seems that different optional rules tend to apply in differing speech styles. In most people’s speech, Tapping is very close to obligatory, and “turning it off” (as in pity [pti]) is appropriate only in the most formal of speaking styles. I find that /æ/ Diphthongization can be “turned off” in somewhat more casual contexts than Tapping can be; and Preglottalization can be turned off even in fairly relaxed contexts. On the other end of this continuum, there are rules that (for me at least), only get to apply in the most casual speech, for instance the rule that monophthongizes /a/ to [æ] (try for instance: Get out of here! [gɛɾˈæɾəhiɹ].) Research by sociolinguists indicates that when we speak, we constantly regulate the application of a great number of optional phonological rules. Presumably, we do this for purposes of making the appropriate impression on the people with whom we are speaking; there are contexts that call for colloquial speech and contexts that call for formal speech. Most people Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 350 command a range of styles,131 and the ability to turn optional rules off or on is part of this command. 2. Optional rules and phonemic analysis The existence of optional rules implies a slight change in how we determine the system of phonemes: we need to look not just for cases of complementary distribution (p. 335) but also for cases of free variation. Free variation occurs whenever you have this situation: in some particular context, wherever X occurs, so can Y, and vice versa. Thus in the example above, in the context / ___ [+nasal], wherever [æ] can occur, so can [ɛə], and vice versa. Two sounds occurring in free variation are treated as allophones of a single phoneme. The method of local environments can be adapted for free variation. The trick is to make separate columns for each variation pattern. Thus, for instance, if you were working on the data for /æ/ Diphthongization above, you would make a column headed “[æ] or [ɛə]”, like this: [æ] or [ɛə] can Sam etc. / k ___ n / s ___ m [æ] only cat lass etc. / k ___ t / l ___ s Phonemic analysis including free variation can be described as a “flow chart” of options, in the following way. By this I mean even monolingual, monodialectal people. Obviously, the ability to speak more than one dialect or language increases the range of impressions that a speaker can create. 131 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 351 START Consider two phonetically similar sounds [x] and [y] yes Are there any minimal pairs for [x] and [y]? no /x/ and /y/ are separate phonemes. END yes Check for free variation: Whenever [x] occurs, is it also possible say [y], and vice versa? no yes [x] and [y] are allophones of the same phoneme. Pick one (simplest choice) as the underlying form and write a rule or rules. END Check for complementary distribution: wherever [x] occurs, [y] does not, and vice versa. no You’re stuck. See footnote.132 END In such a case, [x] and [y] are normally separate phonemes, for which, by sheer bad luck, there happen to be no minimal pairs. This happens sometimes for rare phonemes, like English /ð/ and /ʒ/. The next step in such cases is to show that, if we treated [x] and [y] as allophones, we would not be able to write a phonological rule that could derive them. 132 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 352 Study Exercise #42 Target sounds: [s], [t͡s]. One phoneme or two? (a) Collect local environments. (b) Give the appropriate underlying forms and rules. (c) Give phonemic forms and derivations for dance, concert, and false. Hints: In your local environments, put the stress mark before the vowel; rather than before the syllable as IPA requires. Sorting local environments: make a list for “just [s]”, a list for “[s] and [t͡s] in free variation, and for “just [t͡s]”. dance mince hence concert cancer cancel cancel tonsil fancy insert [ˈdænt͡s] [ˈmɪnt͡s] [ˈhɛnt͡s] [ˈkɑnsɚt], [ˈkɑnt͡sɚt], [ˈkænsɚ], [ˈkænt͡sɚ] [ˈkænsəl], [ˈkænt͡səl] [kænsəˈleɪʃen], [kænt͡səˈleɪʃen] [ˈtɑnsəl], [ˈtɑnt͡səl] [ˈfænsi], [ˈfæntsi] ͡ [ɪnˈsɚt] Clarence [ˈklɛɹənt͡s] concede [kənˈsid] coincide [koʊɪnˈsaɪd] soup false farce miss fussy [ˈsup] [ˈfɑls] [ˈfɑɹs] [ˈmɪs] [ˈfʌsi] Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 353 3. Answer to Study Exercise #42 Local environments: [t͡s] only dance Clarence mince hence / n ___ ] / n ___] /n ___] / n ___] Environments for either [s] or [t͡s] in free variation concert cancer cancel cancel tonsil fancy / n ___ ɚ / n ___ ɚ / n ___ ə / n ___ ə / n ___ ə / n ___ i Environments with only [s] insert / n ___ ˈɚ concede / n ___ˈi coincide / n ___ ˈaɪ soup false farce miss fussy / [ ___ ˈu / l ___ ] / ɹ ___ ] / ˈɪ ___ ] / ˈʌ ___ i [s] and [t͡s] are sometimes in complementary distribution, sometimes in free variation. [t͡s] only: word-finally after [n]. Free variation: between [n] and a stressless vowel. [s] only: elsewhere We set up /s/ as the underlying form (it would be quite a mess to try to state all the environments for [s], but it works fine as the elsewhere allophone). Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 354 Rules: Obligatory /s/ Affrication –stop s +affricate / n ___ ]word “An s becomes [t͡s] if it comes between [n] and the end of a word.” Optional /s/ Affrication –stop +syllabic s +affricate / n ___ –stress (optional) “An s may become [t͡s] if it comes between [n] and a stressless vowel.” Derivations: dance /ˈdæns/ t͡s ˈkɑnt͡sɚt [ˈkɑnt͡sɚt] concert /ˈkɑnsɚt/ — false /fɑls/ — phonemic forms Obligatory /s/ Affrication — [ˈdænt͡s] — [kɑnsɚt] — [fɑls] Optional /s/ Affrication phonetic forms ______________________________________________________________________________ PHONOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY 4. Overview Phonology is a part of grammar, the part dealing with speech sounds and their realization. Phonology does not operate in isolation, but it tied to other components of the grammar, notably morphology. In what follows we will examine some of the phenomena involving in this relationship. 5. Alternation Alternation is the appearance of a single morpheme in different phonetic forms in different contexts. It is found in all languages of the world. It normally results from an interaction of morphological and phonological rules. To show how alternation arises, I will first have to present some background material on the morphology and phonology of American English. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 355 For morphology, we can very briefly review the format used here for derivational rules: -able Attachment [ X ]Verb [ [ X ]Verb əbəl ]Adj meaning: “able to be Verbed” This derives, for instance, lovable and wearable. -ation Attachment [ X ]Verb [ [ X ]Verb ˈeɪʃən ]Noun meaning: “process of Verbing” This derives, for instance, accusation, improvisation, and indentation. We will also use some phonological rules that interact with the morphological rules just given. Of these, the following one is new: Pre-Stress Aspiration +stop +syllabic [+aspirated] / [+syllabic] ___ –voice +stressed This is part of family of rules assigning aspiration; see also Initial Aspiration above. 133 This one is needed to cover that cases of aspiration that occur other than at the beginning of the word. Here are examples: appeal attend account [əˈpil] [əˈtɛnd] [əˈkaʊnt] In these examples the voiceless stop is between two syllabic sounds (vowel, diphthong, or syllabic consonant), of which the second is stressed. Note further that when the second is not stressed, the aspiration is absent (or at least quite weak): caper tickle [ˈkeɪpɚ] [tkəl]134 It’s odd to need two aspiration rules (one initial, the other pre-stress). Various proposals have been made to unify them. We can’t check /t/ here because it would undergo Tapping, which makes it not a stop at all and hence ineligible for aspiration.
134 133 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 356 The remaining phonological rules we’ll need were justified in the pages above; they are repeated below for convenience: Tapping +syllabic t / [+syllabic] ___ –stress as in butter, motto, vanity, etc. Preglottalization +stop –voiced [+glottal] / ___ ]word as in cat, cap, lack, etc. Both of these rules are optional, but for simplicity we will assume below that they apply obligatorily. This simplifying assumption will not change the analysis in any crucial way. 6. Testing for the relative ordering of morphology and phonology With this example in mind, we can now cover the crucial data: note [not] quote [kwot] notable [noəbl] quotable [kwoəbl] notation [notheʃən] quotation [kwotheʃən] (optional) The first three forms are, or are derived from, the stem note and the last three from quote. If we “peel away” the affixes -able and -ation, then we can look at what is “left over”; that is, the various versions of the stems: note [not] quote [kwot] notable [no] quotable [kwo] notation [noth] quotation [kwoth] These variant forms of the stems are called allomorphs. It can be seen that, following the definition given above of “alternation” (“Alternation is the appearance of a single morpheme in different phonetic forms in different contexts.”), both note and quote alternate. Most, but not all alternation, has a simple explanation, stated in the theory taught here as follows: Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 357 Morphological rules precede phonological rules. or to put it more specifically, the morphological component of grammar occupies a position before the phonological component. The scheme that results is this: morphological rules, by adding prefixes, suffixes, etc., change the environments in which the phonemes occur. Then, phonological rules sensitive to these environments apply differentially to different instances of the morpheme. This makes the morphemes show up differently in different contexts; that is to say, makes them alternate. Here is a grand derivation showing how the scheme works for the words and rules given so far. I’ll go through the derivations for the stem note; quote works identically. The first phase takes place in the morphological component, where rules of derivational morphology are applied. As noted a few weeks ago, derivational rules apply freely; they represent a choice made to derive a new word from an old one. Since this is essentially a form of optionality, we can again use the branching derivation formalism to show the various possible routes: [not]Verb [[not]Verb əbl]Adj [[not]Verb eʃən ]Noun [[not]Verb əbl]Adj [not]Verb [[()not]Verb eʃən ]Noun stem -able Attachment -ation Attachment output of morphological component The resulting forms [[not]Verb əbl]Adj, [not]Verb, and [[not]Verb eʃən ]Noun are submitted to the phonology, in order to convert the abstract schemata of phonemes to an overt, pronounceable string of sounds. There are reasons to think that the bracketed structure of the morphology is retained in the phonological component, but since this is not necessary here, and it is helpful to keep the representations maximally legible, I will discard the brackets. The phonological component thus starts with: notəbl not noteʃən135 These forms are in fact the phonemic (also called underlying) representations for these word, and would normally be shown surrounded by / /. These representations are of course “underlying” for purposes of phonology, where they form the “deepest” (most abstract) level of representations; they are actually output (“surface”) representations when considered from the viewpoint of morphology.
I did a hand-waving change here, removing the stress on the stem before the stressed suffix -ation. This can be done by rule ([+syllabic] [−stress] / ___ X [+stress]), but we’ll not deal with this here.
135 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 358 The phonological derivation consists of applying the rules in order. In many cases, it is crucial to order the rules in a particular way (we will examine such cases later on), but here the order does not matter, and I picked one order arbitrarily. /notəbl/ — — [noəbl] /not/ — — t [no t] /noteʃən/ t — — [nouteʃən] underlying representations Pre-Stress Aspiration Tapping Preglottalization phonetic forms We have now produced an explanation for alternation: -able Attachment placed the /t/ of /not/ in an environment where Tapping could apply to it; -ation Attachment placed the /t/ of /not/ in an environment where Pre-Stress Aspiration could apply to it; and the lack of any morphological affixation left the /t/ in word-final position, where Preglottalization could apply to it. The end result is three allomorphs, [nou], [not], and [not]. This pattern is very general in languages: morphology changes environments, phonology “sees” these environments and accommodates the phonemes to them by assigning the appropriate allophone. The theoretical conclusion is that, at least in the normal case, morphology precedes phonology.136 7. Phonology so far Here is a quick summary of what we have so far in phonology. Phonemes: Every language can be analyzed as consisting phonologically of a smallish set of phonemes (usually a few dozen), which form the building blocks for the pronunciation of words. Allophones: The phonemes often vary according to their context; that is, they have allophones. Sometimes the appearance of particular allophones is obligatory; one must use a particular allophone in a certain context (and if you don’t, the result is phonologically ungrammatical, and “sounds funny”). Sometime we instead get free variation: two or more allophones are possible in one particular context. Theory: morphemes are assumed to have an underlying representation consisting of a string of phonemes. Phonological rules apply to these underlying representations to create the actually observed pronunciations. Such rules make use of features, which are the phonologically relevant phonetic properties of sounds. They often apply to whole classes of phonemes (definable using the features), and they usually change just one or two feature values.
It is certainly a consensus among linguists that at least some phonology follows morphology. Linguists have also experimented with theories in which some phonological rules are premorphological, some postmorphological; we won’t try to cover such theories here in a first course.
136 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 359 Analytic method: you can prove two sounds are different phonemes by presenting a minimal pair (this is: two sounds, identical environment, eliminating the possibility of a rule to predict the difference). You can prove two sounds are part of the same phoneme by collecting their environments in a sample of words, scanning these environments for the crucial generalization,137 and formalizing what you find with rules. The same method works for free variation, if you collect each variation pattern as a separate batch of environments. Alternation: morphology, which works with phonemic forms, puts morphemes in different locations. This makes the phonemes of these morphemes vulnerable to different phonological rules in different locations. As a result, the morphemes get different pronunciations in different contexts, which is what we call alternation. 8. The ordering of syntax and phonology Last time, we covered the principle reviewed in the last paragraph above: that because morphology puts phonemes in different environments, we get phonological alternation. At the theoretical level, the conclusion we drew was a very general one: in the architecture of linguistic theory, we must arrange the components so that the output of the morphological component feeds into the phonological component. This will guarantee that morphological rules always apply before phonological rules. If phonological rules in general apply after morphological rules, then it is worth asking if phonological rules are always ordered in a particular way with respect to syntactic rules. The way to test this is the same as before. We set up a situation in which the ability of the syntax to combine two words into a phrase would alter which phonological rules are able to apply. Here is the background. Just as English has two aspiration rules, it also has two Tapping rules. To review, the original Tapping rule looked like this: Tapping +syllabic t / [+syllabic] ___ –stress utter [ɚ] batting [bæɾɪŋ] It is crucial that the second vowel be [−stress], otherwise we get aspiration instead of Tapping. However, there is a particular situation in English where we get Tapping even when the second vowel is stressed; namely, when the second vowel is in a separate word. This is usually the hardest step. In office hours I have suggested to people that memorizing the phonetic symbols and feature chart might be helpful here; that is, while I won’t give you test questions for doing this memorization, it probably would help you in finding environments and applying rules. 137 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 360 Here are Tapping examples across word boundary, shown here with the brackets ]w [ Phonemic [ æt ]w [ ɛd ] Phonetic [ æ ]w [ ɛd ] [ gɛɾ ]w [ æls ]w [ n ]w [ æɾəm ]w at Ed get Alice [ gɛt ]w [ æls ]w not Adam [ nt ]w [ ædəm ]w To handle these facts, we need to adopt an additional Tapping rule, which could be written like this: Phrasal Tapping t / [+syllabic] ___ ]w [+syllabic] In words, this says “make /t/ a flap when it is immediately preceded by a vowel and immediately followed by a vowel which is in the next word.” Phrasal Tapping has been a source of puzzlement to phonologists: why should stress matter for tapping within a word, but not across word boundaries? Various theories have been proposed, which we will lack time for… Phrasal Tapping is the phonological rule that we will need to test out the ordering between syntactic and phonological rules. For syntax, we will use the following rules; others could be used as well. PP P NP NP (Art) (AP)* N (PP) (S) ¯ (plus: lexical insertion) Consider now the pronunciation of the PP at Ed. If the syntactic rules apply first, then we will derive the correct output as follows: SYNTACTIC COMPONENT: PP NP | N PP NP | N | ɛd Lexical insertion PP P NP NP (Art) (A)* N (PP) (S) ¯ P P | æt Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 361 PHONOLOGICAL COMPONENT: [ æt ]word [ ɛd ] [ æɾ ]word [ ɛd ] [æɾˈɛd] (same as above, but tree omitted, and word boundaries made explicit) Phrasal Tapping phonetic form It is easy to see that, had we applied Phrasal Tapping before the syntactic rules joined at and Ed together, we would have derived the wrong result. What about languages in general? Certainly it is very common for phonological rules to be sensitive to phrasal environments, so at the very least we can say that some phonological rules are postsyntactic. Linguists differ on the question of whether there exists in addition a class of presyntactic phonological rules. 138 9. Neutralization “Neutralization” is defined as the phonetically identical realization of distinct phoneme forms. That is, two forms that differ phonemically undergo their phonological derivation, and emerge as identical. The rule of Tapping is, at least in many dialects, a neutralization rule. The following data show that Tapping can apply to /d/ as well as to /t/ (plus sign is a notation for morpheme break): Cases of Tapping with /t/ write writer white whiter /at/ /at+ɚ/ /wat/ /wat+ɚ/ [at] [aɚ] [wat] [waɚ] [pæt] [pæɾɪŋ] Cases of Tapping with /d/ ride rider wide wider pad padding /ad/ /ad+ɚ/ /wad/ /wad+ɚ/ /pæd/ /pæd+/ [ad] [aɚ] [wad] [waɚ] [pæd] [pæɾɪŋ] pat /pæt/ patting /pæt/ Reformalizing the rule with features, it now reads: In fact, the issue gets pretty complicated; there’s good reason to believe that some phonological rules apply in tandem with the morphology, so each new affixation triggers another cascade of phonological rule application. Again, this is something we’ll have to skip in an intro course. 138 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 362 Tapping +alveolar +syllabic / [+syllabic] ___ +stop –stress The neutralization here takes the form /t/  Neutralization is a source of ambiguity that is purely phonological. In the dialect under description here, the listener hearing [aɚ] must infer from context, or just guess, whether the speaker meant /atɚ/ writer or /atɚ/ rider. Usually, context suffices, but the particular ambiguity kitty/kiddie does seem to create some real-life confusion. The case of Tapping is somewhat unusual in that two phonemes are realized identically by converting them into an allophone that happens to be different from either of them. More typically, the neutralized output is identical to one or the other phoneme. Here is an instance; consider the following data: We live in Pittsburgh Wouldja hand me the phone book? I gotta make a phone call. It’s all a con game. [m ptsbɚg] [fom bk] [foŋ kl] [k gem] /d/ If one says these casually enough, the /n/’s at the end of phone, in, and con turn into either [m] or . The patterning is as follows: n n n n m m / ___ p / ___ b / ___ k / ___ g Informally, we can write the rule as follows: Nasal Place Assimilation n [same place] / ___ [−syllabic] where “same place” is an inexplicit shorthand for changing all of the place features to match those of the following sound. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 363 Nasal Place Assimilation is clearly a neutralizing rule; it neutralizes the difference between /n/ and /m/ in some cases, and between /n/ and // in others. For example, the following sentence is ambiguous: “They were [s glæsəz]” The readings are the sensible “They were sunglasses”, and the phonetically literal but nonsensical “They were sung glasses”.139 /sn glæsəz/ /s glæsəz/ phonemic forms [s glæsəz] 10. Rule ordering phonetic forms The final topic to be covered in phonology is the ordering of phonological rules. We will find that there are cases in which it makes a difference just which order one applies the rules in, and that “ordering statements” must therefore form part of the phonologies of human languages. To develop our argument for ordering, we will need two phonological rules of American English. Our first rule is based on the following data. IPA symbol: / ̆/ is the diacritic meaning “extra short”. cat pot cop cup batch pasta beat Bruce [kæ̆ t] [pɑ̆t] [k̆p] [k̆p] [bæ̆ tʃ] [p̆stə] [bĭt] [bŭs] cad pod cob cub badge Mazda bead bruise [kæd] [pd] [kb] [kb] [bædʒ] [mzdə] [bid] [buz] Normal-length and extra-short vowels in English are allophones of the same phoneme. There are no minimal pairs, and it is not hard to establish complementary distribution. In the data above, long vowels occurs before voiced consonants, and the short vowels occur before voiceless consonants. Context: magical world in which singing by trained experts gives the lenses a bluish tint; speaking, in contrast, makes them slightly pinker. 139 Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 364 To decide what is the basic variant of the vowel phonemes, one needs to know what occurs when neither a voiced consonant nor a voiceless consonant follows. Forms like Pa [p], bee [bi], and brew [bu] indicate that the longer versions of the vowels are the elsewhere allophones, and we should set them up as the underlying representations. We also need a feature to write the rule with; for present purposes we can simply add the feature [short]. With these assumptions, then, the rule of Vowel Shortening would be as follows. Vowel Shortening [+syllabic] [+short] / ___ [−voice] “Realize a vowel as extra short before a voiceless sound.” Here are derivations: Bruce /bus/ ŭ bruise /buz/ — brew /bu/ — [bu] phonemic forms Vowel Shortening phonetic forms [bŭs] [buz] The other rule we will need is the familiar rule of Tapping (that is, word-internal Tapping). Thus far, we have improved the rule to the point that it looks like this: Tapping +alveolar +syllabic / [+syllabic] ___ +stop –stress Here, it will be useful to use a fully formalized version of the rule, using features instead of the symbol . We need to know, then, just what features must be changed in order to turn both /t/ and /d/ into . First of all, a flap is voiced, so that the rule should add [+voiced] on the right side of the arrow. This will correctly voice /t/, and it will do no harm for /d/. Flap also differs from the alveolar stops in manner of articulation, being a tap and not a stop. Thus, assuming [tap] is a feature, we have: Tapping +voiced +syllabic +alveolar –stop / [+syllabic] ___ –stress +stop +tap Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 365 With these two rules in hand, we can now see how they might interact. The crux of the matter is this: Tapping changes the voicing of a /t/; Vowel Shortening depends on the voicing of the following consonant. Because of this, we will get different outputs depending on which order we apply the rules in. Here are derivations of pertinent examples, using both orderings: A. Tapping precedes Vowel Shortening patting /pæt/ pæɾɪŋ — [pæɾɪ] padding /pæd/ ˈpæɾɪ — [pæ] Phonemic forms Tapping Vowel Shortening Phonetic forms B. Vowel Shortening precedes Tapping patting /pæt/ æ̆ ɾ [pæ̆ɾɪ] padding /pæd/ — ɾ [pæ] Phonemic forms Vowel Shortening Tapping Phonetic forms The predictions that the derivations make are clear: if Tapping precedes Lengthening, then patting and padding should be pronounced identically. If Lengthening precedes Tapping, then patting and padding should be pronounced differently; that is, padding should have the longer vowel. These observations should hold not just for these two words, but for all the words in which both rules can apply (e.g. latter-ladder, writer-rider, Patty-Paddy, etc.). What are the facts? There is actually no single outcome. Instead, different dialects of American English use different orderings. Speakers from Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin typically order Lengthening before Tapping; thus they pronounce pairs like patting-padding differently. Speakers from other areas tend to have the opposite ordering, and the pronounce such pairs identically. Notice that this requires a small correction to something I said earlier: it actually is possible to tell writer and rider apart, provided both speaker and hearer speak a dialect in which Lengthening precedes Tapping. However, they will use the vowel length, not the voicing, to tell the difference. The neutralization is complete only for dialects that order Tapping before Lengthening. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 366 The crucial point here is not the details of the two dialects, but the very fact that they differ. This implies that when one learns a language, and hence its phonology, part of what one learns is ordering restrictions that must be imposed on its phonological rules. Depending on what dialect of English you speak, you implicitly learned a particular ordering for two of the phonological rules. 10.1 Analyzing rule order To establish the ordering of two rules A and B, the simplest procedure is simply to find a relevant form — a form where A and B are both applicable — and try both orders. Either you will find that only the order A-B produces the right output, only B-A produces the right output, or they both work (in which case the order doesn’t matter). All that’s really needed to do this test is to match up the rules with the forms with care, so you know that you’ve found exactly what the rule predicts. A slightly less mechanical skill here is to explain what you’ve found in words. There are Here is an example description, for the example in the preceding section: “In the dialect where patting is [pæ̆ɾɪ] and padding is [pæ], Vowel Shortening must be applied before Tapping. The reason is that Vowel Shortening depends on the phonemic value of [voice] for the following consonant, before that value is neutralized to [+voice] by Tapping.” Here is a description of the ordering argument for the other dialect: “In the dialect where both patting and padding are both pronounced [pæ], Tapping must be applied before Vowel Shortening. If we applied Tapping first, it would “see” the underlying /t/ of patting and wrongly shorten the vowel.” Notice that this description is of the “counterfactual” type, which tells us what would go wrong if we ordered the rules incorrectly. Study Exercise #43 This involves the case forms of nouns in Hungarian. Please ignore the vowel changes in suffixes, which are due to a phonological rule of vowel harmony. Phonetic symbols: [ɟ] is a voiced palatal stop. [c] is a voiceless palatal stop. [ɲ] is a voiced palatal nasal. [ː] means that the preceding vowel is long. [ø] mid front rounded, as in German Goethe or French Chartreuse. [y] high front rounded, as in German Führer or French tu a. What stems alternate, and what are their allomorphs? b. State a phonological rule that correctly derives the alternation, in both formalism and words. Give your rule a name. c. Give underlying forms and derivations for pɔd, pɔdnɔk, and pɔttoːl. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 367 d. Is your rule neutralizing? Explain your answer. Hungarian Data Nominative ɾøgbi ipʃɛ kɔlɔp kuːt juk sɛm r ɔb ʒɛb kaːd pɔd aːɟ mɛl ɛg hɛrtsɛg ͡ tɛmplom byːn toɾoɲ fal øːɾ Dative ɾøgbinɔk ipʃɛnɛk kɔlɔpnɔk kuːtnɔk juknɔk sɛmnɛk rɔbnɔk ʒɛbnɛk kaːdnɔk pɔdnɔk aːɟnɔk mɛlɛgnɛk hɛrtsɛgnɛk ͡ Ablative140 ɾøgbitøːl ipʃɛtøːl kɔlɔptoːl kuːttoːl juktoːl sɛmtøːl rɔptoːl ʒɛptøːl kaːttoːl pɔttoːl aːctoːl mɛlɛktøːl hɛrtsɛktøːl ͡ Essive141 ɾøgbikeːnt ipʃɛkeːnt kɔlɔpkeːnt kuːtkeːnt jukkeːnt sɛmkeːnt rɔpkeːnt ʒɛpkeːnt kaːtkeːnt pɔtkeːnt aːckeːnt mɛlɛkkeːnt hɛrtsɛkkeːnt ͡ Allative142 ɾøgbihɛz ipʃɛhɛz kɔlɔphoz kuːthoz jukhoz sɛmhɛz rɔphoz ʒɛphɛz kaːthoz pɔthoz aːchoz mɛlɛkhɛz hɛrtsɛkhɛz ͡ Gloss ‘rugby’ ‘fellow’ ‘hat’ ‘well’ ‘hole’ ‘eye’ ‘prisoner’ ‘pocket’ ‘bathtub’ ‘bench’ ‘bed’ ‘heat’ ‘duke’ tɛmplomnɔk tɛmplomtoːl tɛmplomkeːnt tɛmplomhoz ‘house of worship’ ‘sin’ byːnnɛk byːntøːl byːnkeːnt byːnhøz toɾoɲnɔk fɔlnɔk øːɾnɔk toɾoɲtoːl fɔltoːl øːɾtøːl toɾoɲkeːnt fɔlkeːnt øːɾkeːnt toɾoɲhoz fɔlhoz øːɾhøz ‘tower’ ‘wall’ ‘guard’ e. Ponder next the paradigm of ‘emerald’ below and suggest a minimal change for your analysis to derive it. f. Give a derivation for [smɔɾɔktkeːnt]. Nominative smɔɾɔgd Dative smɔɾɔgdnɔk Ablative smɔɾɔkttoːl Essive Allative smɔɾɔktkeːnt smɔɾɔkthoz Gloss ‘emerald’ 140 141 142 Ablative case means, roughly, “from”. More accurately: essive formal. Essive case means, roughly, “as”. My Hungarian grammar says: “used with expressions of attaching something to, adding to, or communicating to someone or something” (Carol Rounds, Hungarian: An Essential Grammar, p. 109). Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 368 11. Answer to Study Exercise #43 a. What stems alternate, and what are their allomorphs? Stem rɔb ʒɛb kaːd pɔd aːɟ mɛl ɛg hɛrtsɛg ͡ Allomorph 1 rɔb ʒɛb kaːd pɔd aːɟ mɛl ɛg hɛrtsɛg ͡ Allomorph 2 rɔp ʒɛp kaːt pɔt aː c mɛl ɛk hɛrtsɛk ͡ b. State a phonological rule that correctly derives the alternation, in both formalism and words. Give your rule a name. Voicing Assimilation [+stop] [−voice] / ___ [−voice] ‘A stop becomes voiceless when it precedes a voiceless sound.’ c. Give underlying forms and derivations for pɔd, pɔdnɔk, and pɔttoːl. /pɔd/ — [pɔd] /pɔdnɔk/ — [pɔdnɔk] /pɔdtoːl/ t [pɔdtoːl] underlying forms Voicing Assimilation underlying forms d. Is your rule neutralizing? Explain your answer. Yes. Look at this quadruplet, focusing on the underlined sounds: kuːt pɔd kuːttoːl pɔttoːl There is a /t/-/d/ distinction, but it gets wiped out before a voiceless sound. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 369 e. Ponder next this paradigm and suggest a minimal change for your analysis to derive it. The crucial forms are forms like [smɔɾɔktkeːnt]. It looks like Voicing Assimilation has to be allowed to apply to its own output (the standard term for this is “iterative”). The rightmost /k/ turns a /d/ into a [t], and then this [t] turns the preceding /g/ into a [k]. f. Give a derivation for [smɔɾɔktkeːnt]. /smɔrɔgdkeːnt/ underlying form t Voicing Assimilation: first time k Voicing Assimilation: second time [smɔrɔktkeːnt] surface form ____________________________________________________________________________ 12. The organization of grammar We have now covered (however briefly) most of the central areas of linguistic analysis: syntax, semantics, morphology, and phonology. At this point, we can amplify the “boxological” diagram, covering the organization of grammar, given earlier in xxx Readings 8. How do these different theories fit together into a coherent whole? This is very much an open question, one that linguists continue to debate. For concreteness, I will give one particular view here. I hope this will at least help you integrate the material of the course and get a sense of the breadth of the system. The following chart shows the components and the direction of information flow. Components (modules of the grammar) are shown in dotted boxes; level of representation (linguistic forms) are shown in solid boxes. Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 370 S, etc. (initial symbol fed to the grammar) Phrase structure rules (bare tree) lexicon Lexical insertion Deep structure Constraints (acting as filter) Transformations Surface structure Derivational morphology syntactic component Inflectional morphology semantic component Phonemic form Logical form Phonological component: Rule 1 Rule 2 ... Rule n [phonetic form] Hayes Introductory Linguistics p. 371 The syntax is the primary generative component, creating an infinite number of possible sentences.143 The number is infinite because the phrase structure rules can apply recursively, in loops. Deep structure is created by filling the trees created by phrase structure rules with words (lexical insertion). Deep structures are modified by transformations, which have the power to copy and move, generating more elaborate structures that could not be formed by phrase structure rules alone. Constraints on transformations sometimes filter out sentences that the syntactic component would otherwise generate. The words that undergo lexical insertion into the syntactic tree are sometimes singlemorpheme stems like cat, and sometimes the result of rules of word formation. Following the view of many linguists, I have made the morphology of word formation a kind of adjunct to the lexicon. It extracts words from the lexicon and forms new words from them, which are added back to the lexical stock. Word formation rules string together morphemes, which are assumed at this stage to be composed of phonemes, since the rules of the phonology have yet to apply. Particular syntactic rules (transformations of agreement, case marking, etc.) build up a morphosyntactic representation for each inflected word, which specifies the values of features like [Number], [Case], [Tense], and so on. In a postsyntactic component, the inflectional morphology, the features of the morphosyntactic representation trigger rules of affixation, which manifest the inflectional categories in audible form. Again, the morphological rules are assumed to manipulate morphemes in their phonemic form, since phonology has not applied yet. At the bottom of the grammar, the rules of the phonology provide a phonetic realization for the syntactic structure; thus they relate it to the physical reality of articulation. They apply (in the theory shown here) after syntax and morphology; an ordering which accounts for the fact that the morphemes alternate according to the environments in which they occur, environments that were created by morphological and syntactic combination. The role of semantics in this scheme, is rather speculative; I have placed it in the diagram as applying to syntactic surface structure, and creating a level of logical form, in which the aspects of meaning most closely related to syntax, such as predicate-argument structure, pronoun reference, and scope, are derived. Derivational morphology is also generative, and in most languages can likewise create an infinite variety of structures (recall: eggplant plant plant…), though typically less elaborate. 143 ...
View Full Document
- Fall '08
- Phoneme, Phonological rules, Introductory Linguistics