Ch 7 – Phonological Alternation II

Rule ordering – when there are multiple rules in the data, we have to

decide if these rules interact with each other and how to order those rules

to arrive at the correct outcome (surface forms as presented by the data).

Consider the following English data.

Liquid devoicing: Liquids become voiceless after a voiceless stop at the beginning of a syllable.

Schwa deletion: Schwa is deleted in an open syllable followed by a stressed syllable.

What are the two rules observed in these data?

Rule application and derivation and order:

Feeding = Two rules are said to be in a feeding order if the earlier rule creates environments in which the later rule can apply.

Bleeding = If two rules, A and B, are in a bleeding order, the application of rule A causes a decrease in the number of forms to which rule B can apply. An

example: suppose rule A changes some consonants from voiceless to voiced in some environments and rule B only applies to voiceless consonants. The

application of rule A before rule B would mean that fewer forms are available for rule B to apply to.

Counter Feeding = The ordering of two phonological rules so that Rule A, which could provide contexts for the operation of Rule B, is prevented from doing so by being ordered after Rule B

Counter Bleeding = The ordering of two phonological rules so that Rule A,

which could remove contexts in which Rule B operates, is prevented from

doing so by being ordered after Rule B.

Rule application and derivation:

The predictable processes applying to the UR forms to derive the PR

Output (PR) does not match data!

Rule application and derivation:

The predictable processes applying to the UR forms to derive the PR

With respect to order of these rules and the actual outcome, what relationship must they occur in?

Feeding

 Canadian Raising

Rule ordering:

Canadian raising - which rule applies is important for the outcome

flapping = tapping

Rule ordering:

Canadian raising - which rule applies is important for the outcome

This order predicts the actual speech correctly – what relationship are these rules in?

Bleeding

If the output shows surface forms below for some dialects (although as far as I know this is not attested!) then we seem to have a minimal pair.

Hayes argues that this does not prove separate phonemes, but rather a displaced contrast. Basically, since the underlying forms of the tap show 2 phonemes (their distinction has been neutralized), and since the minimal pair only shows up before a tap, then the forms do not show a minimal pair at the phoneme level. Kinda

circular, but hey that’s phonological theory! 

Also, are oral and nasal vowels allophones of the same phoneme or separate phonemes?

Assume that [d] in this

language is actually a

dental sound, not

alveolar

all between vowels before [r], [a];

after [m], [n];

word initially, etc

elsewhere

#_ y

#_ i

i_ a

What 2 rules can you identify applying in the data?

Voiced stops become voiced fricatives between vowels.

Vowels become nasalized before nasal.

What are the phonemes?

/b/ /d/ and /g/ and oral vowels

What is the phonemic forms of the following:

Provide derivations for the following:

Does it matter what order these words apply in?

No, there is no feeding or bleeding relationship

But then we have the form And then we have the form And then

We should expect

So what happened to the long vowel???

Terms:

ultimate = final // penultimate = 2

to last // antepenultimate = 3

to last preantepenultimate = anything before 3

to last

We can explain by following rule:

Preantepenultimate shortening = Shorten a vowel when at least 3 vowels

follow it: [+syllabic]  [–long] / __ C

V C

V C

V

Rule applies generally to vowels more than 3 syllables from end regardless of what affixes are used

How do we justify underlying form?

of phrase so we need 2 rules.

PFS WFL

Since phrase final is ALSO word final, we need to order the rules so that

PFS applies after WFL so that we don’t end up with a long vowel at

end of phrase. How do we know this order? Try it both ways and see

which gives us the grammatical surface form

Preantepenultimate shortening (PAS) [+syllabic]  [–long] / __ C0 V C0 V C0 V

WFL

One lengthens a vowel and one shortens it so they could interact. We need proof

so here are some more data

What about interaction between WFL and Preantepenultimate Shortening (PAS)

Preantepenultimate shortening (PAS) [+syllabic]  [–long] / __ C0 V C0 V C0 V

WFL

According to WFL, the final vowel of [kuna] should be long but it isn’t. Why?

Because it is more than 3 syllables from end so PAS blocks it. So we need to order them like this:

Not like this :

Preantepenultimate shortening (PAS) [+syllabic]  [–long] / __ C0 V C0 V C0 V

More proof

Therefore:

Now we have this:

To explain, we need this: _PLS

Since all these rules deal with long and short vowels at different places in the word, then these rules need to apply in the correct order to arrive at the correct surface forms. Also, need to apply after morphology and after syntax since they refer to the domains of word final and phrase final!

Ch 7 Exercises 1-3 ask to prove what order these various rules apply. You need to show multiple derivations for each form to show when the rules are in a certain order, they will derive the correct output or not.

Hayes gives you a hint by showing how the rules must be ordered

Look at fake Greek data and discuss.