1 / 25

Li6 Phonology and Morphology

Li6 Phonology and Morphology. Lexical phonology. Today’s topics. Two types of rules Some are cyclic, some aren’t Some have exceptions/refer to morphology, some don’t Some are structure-preserving, some aren’t

ady
Download Presentation

Li6 Phonology and Morphology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Li6 Phonology and Morphology Lexical phonology

  2. Today’s topics • Two types of rules • Some are cyclic, some aren’t • Some have exceptions/refer to morphology, some don’t • Some are structure-preserving, some aren’t • LPM: theory that attempts to account for all of these patterns by interleaving morphology and phonology. • Some key data: • singer vs younger • damn vs damnation • mice catcher vs *rats catcher • atómic vs. átomy • innate vs unnatural • militaristic vs capitalistic

  3. M-P interactions I • We have already seen several cases where morphological rules make reference to phonological information: • Comparative and superlative formation • Ass-affixation • Indefinite article allomorphy • Definite article allomorphy? • Is there a larger system governing these interactions? • Can phonological processes refer to morphological structure? • Can any morphological process refer to any phonological structure, or are there limits?

  4. M-P interactions II • In order to address these questions, let’s look at a number of striking properties of M-P interactions in English: • Phonological influence of affixes on stems • Morpheme order

  5. P effects in affixation • Affixes fall into two categories wrt their phonological effects on the stem to which they’re added: • Those which influence the phonology of the stem (“Level I affixes”) • -ic, -al, -ate, -ion, -ity; sub-, de-, in- • Typically Latinate • Those which do not (“Level II affixes”) • -less, -ness, -y, -ing, -ly, -ful, -some; re-, un-, non- • Typically Germanic

  6. Levels of affixation • We have already seen that affixes appear in a certain order: • [inflection[derivation[root]derivation]inflection] • nation-al-s, not *nation-s-al • Note also that Level II affixes occur outside Level I affixes: • linguist-ic(k)-y, refus-al-less… • Does this follow from some principle of grammar, or is it chance? • Probably not chance—all languages seem to act this way

  7. LPM • To account for these patterns, Paul Kiparsky developed a model of Lexical Phonology and Morphology (LPM), in which morphology and phonology are interleaved: • Some morphology applies (level I affixation), then lexical phonological rules get a chance to apply to these structures. • After this some more morphology applies (level II affixation), then the phonological rules get another chance to apply. • After all of these levels of affixation + phonology have been completed (there may be more than two), the post-lexical phonology applies • Applies to whole words and phrases • Automatic • Regular

  8. LPM model of English lexicon Underlying Representation Level 1 derivation, irregular inflection stress, shortening… Level 2 secondary derivation and compounding cpd stress… Level 3 regular inflection laxing… Syntax post-lexical phonological rules Kiparsky’s current (2000) levels: Stem, Word, Phrase

  9. Properties of lexical and post-lexical rules cf Aspiration cf Velar Softening

  10. Post-nasal drop I • singer : younger (vs. young) • URs: /sIng/, /jng/ • comparative -er: Level 1 • agent -er: Level 2 • is post-nasal drop lexical or postlexical? • Lexical (has exceptions) • Which lexical level, though?...

  11. Post-nasal drop II UR /jng/ /sIng/ Level 1 cpv. -erjng-r— nasal place assim. jNg-rsINg post-nasal drop —sIN Level 2 agent -er—sIN-r SR [jNgr] [sINr]

  12. The cycle • SPE on condensation vs compensation • They say some dialects disallow *cond[ə]nsation but allow comp[ə]nsation • The Withgott effect • capitalistic vs militaristic • Parallel to syntax • Guy, cyclic application of variable rules

  13. The Derived Environment Constraint/ Non-Derived Environment Blocking • Finnish e-raising and sibilation • e-raising e  i / _ # • sibilation t  s / _ i (cyclic) • Polish vowel raising vs final devoicing • [grup] ‘grave’ vs [grobı] ‘graves’ • snop ‘snob’ (*snup) • pagoda : pagut

  14. Other interesting results • Latinate vs Germanic • r-insertion • Trisyllabic laxing • Nasal place assimilation • Stress shift • n-deletion • Irregular plurals in compounds

  15. Latinate vs Germanic • Recall that Latinate affixation is normally Level I, whereas Germanic affixation is Level II. • Now consider un-natur-al vs in-nate. • Are un- and in- Latinate, or Germanic? • How do these words behave wrt the English rule of degemination? • Is degemination lexical or postlexical?

  16. Latinate vs Germanic UR /nate/ /natur/ Level 1in-, -al in-nate natur-al degemination inate — Level 2un- — un-natur-al SR i[n]ate [u[n:]atural]

  17. r-insertion • algebraic (*algebraric) vs Homeric • drawring, pizzarish, data-r-y, Brendar and Eddie) • Rule  insert r / {aA} _ V • Assume that r-insertion is post-lexical • Reasonable, since it has no exceptions for many speakers (pizza-y?)

  18. r-insertion UR /algebra/ /pizza/ Level 1-ic, stress, lengthalgebrá:ic pízza Level 2-ish, -y, -ing, — pízza-y unstressed V reduction — pízzə-y Post-lex r-insertion— pízzə[r]-y SR algebrá:ic pízzəry • NB transfer in L2 French, Spanish (Wells 1982): j’étais déjà[r] ici, viva[r] España

  19. Trisyllabic Laxing • vile : vilify; profane : profanity • V:  V / _ CV1CV2 • where V1 is unstressed • might : mightily; brave : bravery

  20. Nasal place assimilation • impotent, illegal • unpopular, unlawful • *umpopular, *ullawful • Which level is each affix? • Which level is the assimilation rule?

  21. Stress shift • pyramidal, homonymous, atomic • partisanship, atomy • Which level is each affix? • Which level is the stress rule?

  22. n-deletion • condemn : condemnation : condemning • Which level is each affix? • Which level is the rule of n-deletion?

  23. Compounds lexicon Underlying Representation Level 1 derivation, irregular inflection stress, shortening… Level 2 secondary derivation and compounding cpd stress… Level 3 regular inflection laxing… Syntax post-lexical phonological rules mice mice catch-er, rat catch-er can’t insert -s inside cpd rat catch-er

  24. Conclusions • A large number of surprising properties of phonology, morphology, and their interactions can be accounted for by postulating a model of the grammar in which affixation and phonology apply outward from the root of a word.

  25. References Borowsky, Toni. 1991. Topics in the Lexical Phonology of English. New York: Garland. Kiparsky, Paul. 1982. Lexical morphology and phonology. In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, I. Yang, ed., 3-91. Seoul: Hanshin. Kiparsky, Paul. 1985. Some consequences of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2:85-138. Kiparsky, Paul. 2000. Opacity and cyclicity. The Linguistic Review 17:351-367. Rubach, Jerzy. 1984. Rule typology and phonological interference. In Theoretical issues in contrastive phonology, Stig Elliason, ed., 37-50. Heidelberg, Julius Groos Verlag. Wells, John. 1982. Accents of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

More Related