Li6 Phonology and Morphology

1. Li6 Phonology and Morphology Representation of segments

2. Today’s topics • feature geometry • autosegments • the skeleton

3. Fundamental points about FG • All features are not created equal: certain sets of features pattern together, certain features never interact, and so on. • Not all rule types allowed by the formal machinery of traditional linear phonology are attested/possible. • Our hypothesis to account for these generalizations: • features are organized in an invariant hierarchical tree structure provided by UG.

4. Traditional feature theory

5. Traditional segmental representation +coronal -voice -cont = /t/ +ant +dist

6. “Formal elegance” • Consider the widespread phenomenon of nasal place assimilation. • inept, impossible, incomplete • How does a traditional linear model (i.e. pre-1976) account for this process? • Rules of this type (and in fact assimilation rules in general) have no special status in a linear model of phonology.

7. A stronger hypothesis X X | [F] X | [F] • Phonol. has only two basic operations at its disposal: • spreading • delinking • Phonol. has only two basic constraints at its disposal: • the Line-Crossing Constraint • the OCP (Obligatory Contour Principle) • Desiderata/postulates: • common rule types involve simple machinery • phonological rules perform single operations only • feature organization is universally determined *X X X | | [F] [F] *X X | | [F] [F]

8. The Place Node • Assume that assimilation and dissimilation/OCP, which are extremely common, operate only on single elements. • If this is true, then natural classes (sets of sounds that pattern together with respect to phonological rules) should be reflected in representations. • What implication does nasal place assimilation have for our representation of segments, then? • It suggests that the places of articulation are grouped under a common node within the tree structure that makes up a segment. • We call this particular node the Place node.

9. The feature tree back to laryngeal neutralisation

10. Evidence for the Place node • English nasal assimilation • Sanskrit s-assimilation

11. How do we represent Place assim? The Sanskrit case X X | | [+cons] [+cons] [+cont] Place

12. Laryngeal spreading • Sanskrit coda neutralization (cf. Korean) nominative accusative gloss • marut marutam wind god • suhrt suhrdam friend • agnimat agnimatham near the fire • kakup kakubham region

13. Laryngeal delinking:New Julfa future marker a. kERtHAm I will go ktAm I will give kkiEnAm I will exist b. gbzAm I will buzz glAm I will cry gzrAm I will bray c. kHtHoniEm I will allow kHtSHApHiEm I will measure kHXndAm I will laugh kHsAvoRiEmI will grow accustomed to d. gHbHiERiEm I will carry gHgHom I will come gHdHniEm I will put gHdzHiEviEm I will form

14. Autosegments • phonemes are not simply lists of feature specifications: • features and segments are not necessarily in a one-to-one relationship (the relationship is nonlinear) • individual features enjoy a certain amount of autonomy with respect to other features characterizing the segments to which they are associated (they behave as autosegments) • Today we’ll focus on tone; vowel harmony in lecture 8 (round, back, and ATR as autosegments)

15. Typology of autosegmental relationships • a. one to one X X | | F F • b. one to many X X F • c. many to one X F F • d. bare anchor X • e. floating feature F

16. 1:1 and many:1 • Margi (Kenstowicz 1994:312) base form definite gloss a. sál sál-árì man kùm kùm-árì meat b. ?ímí ?ímy-árì water kú kw-árì goat tágú tágw-árì horse c. tì ty-ǎrì morning hù hw-ǎrì grave ú?ù ú?w-ǎrì fire ´ = H ` = L ˆ = HL (= falling) ˇ = LH (=rising)

17. More Margi a. à sá gU you go astray à tsú gU you beat b. á wì gU you run á dlà gU you fall c. á vl gU you fly

18. 1:many • Margi (Kenstowicz 1994:319) a. tSU speak tSí-bá tell ghà reach ghà-bá reach f swell fì-bá make swell b. sá go astray sá-ná lead astray dlà fall dlà-nà overthrow bdlU forge bdl-ná forge

19. Universal Association Convention • Match tones and tone-bearing units one-to-one, {LR or RL}.

20. RL mapping: Kikuyu subject marker object marker root tense suffix tò ‘we’ mò ‘him’ ròr ‘look at’ íré má ‘they’ má ‘them’ tóm ‘send’ tò ròr ìré má rór ìré tò mò ròr ìré má mó ròr ìré tò mà rór ìré má má rór ìré tò tòm íré má tóm íré tò mò tòm íré má mó tòm íré tò mà tóm íré má má tóm íré • How do these forms illustrate the following? • RL mapping • one-to-many association • The OCP

21. Floating features • Japanese mimetic palatalization • palatalization targets the rightmost non-r coronal consonant • If there are none, the palatalizing feature links to the leftmost segment

22. 1:many pt 2: the skeleton • Bakwiri syllable reversing language game (Hombert 1986) • kwélì ‘falling’ → líkwè

23. Geminates • Patient LB’s errors when spelling geminates (Caramazza and Miceli 1990)

24. Conclusions • Nonlinear, autosegmental representation of segmental material enables us to account satisfyingly for a wide range of phenomena that would be difficult or impossible to account for with non-autonomous linear representations.