(Sentani Hayes, P.330 , Has Heavy CVC
DISTINCTIVENESS, COERCION AND SONORITY:
A UNIFIED THEORY OF WEIGHT
by
Bruce Timothy Morén
Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Maryland at College Park in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
1999
Advisory Committee:
Professor Linda Lombardi, Chair/Advisor
Professor Laura Benua
Professor Rose-Marie Oster
Professor Paul Smolensky
Professor Amy Weinberg
ABSTRACT
Title of dissertation: DISTINCTIVENESS, COERCION AND SONORITY:
A UNIFIED THEORY OF WEIGHT
Bruce Timothy Morén, Doctor of Philosophy, 1999
Dissertation directed by: Professor Linda Lombardi
Department of Linguistics
The two main goals of this dissertation are:
1) to examine and review the nature and patterns of segment weight, including: inventories, processes, and dependencies; and
2) to provide a simple and economical account for the observed descriptive generalizations within the framework of Optimality Theory and Moraic Theory.
A thorough inspection of data from a large number of languages leads to the conclusion that a unified theory and mechanism of moraicity across segment types (i.e. both consonants and vowels) is warranted. This work provides such a unified theory.
Chapter 1 reviews evidence for different degrees of weight, presents the syllable representations assumed throughout this work, and demonstrates that there are two sources of weight – coerced and distinctive. Coerced weight is a restriction on surface moraicity in some phonological context (e.g. weight by position and foot binarity), and is subject to distributional restrictions based on sonority. In contrast, distinctive weight is an underlying moraicity reflected in a surface contrast (e.g. geminate versus non-geminate intervocalic consonants), and is not bounded by sonority.
Chapter 2 is a brief review of Optimality Theory and Correspondence Theory, and discusses the factorial rankings (permutations) of three types of constraints:
1) General moraic markedness constraints against moraic segments of different types – ranked in a universal hierarchy based on sonority;
2) Coercive moraic markedness constraints; and
3) Faithfulness constraints on underlying moraic affiliation with segments of different sonorities.
Chapter 3 uses data from a number of languages to show that the descriptive generalizations discussed in chapter 1 emerge naturally as the result of constraint interactions.
Chapter 4 expands on chapter 3, and provides in-depth case studies of segment moraicity and other phenomena in Hawaiian, Modern Standard Italian, Kashmiri, two Hungarian dialects, two Icelandic dialects, and Metropolitan New York English. This chapter gives detailed descriptions of different weight patterns; reveals that the constraints proposed in this work can be integrated into more complete grammars; and shows that different dialects can arise from a minimal re-ranking of constraints.
Chapter 5 is a repository for discussions of miscellaneous issues, as well as the general conclusions.
DISTINCTIVENESS, COERCION AND SONORITY:
A UNIFIED THEORY OF WEIGHT
by
Bruce Timothy Morén
Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Maryland at College Park in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
1999
Advisory Committee:
Professor Linda Lombardi, Chair/Advisor
Professor Laura Benua
Professor Rose-Marie Oster
Professor Paul Smolensky
Professor Amy Weinberg
©Copyright by
Bruce Timothy Morén
1999
Bruce Morén
DEDICATION
To my mother, Barbara Louise Tellefsen,
for teaching me that all things are possible – in spite of the odds
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It has been my good fortune to have Linda Lombardi, Paul Smolensky, Laura Benua, Amy Weinberg, and Rose-Marie Oster as members of my committee. Each of these people has provided invaluable encouragement, support, insights and enthusiasm not only throughout the preparation of this dissertation, but also through my graduate studies.
I am particularly indebted to Linda Lombardi, my advisor, for encouraging me to delve into the mysteries of phonology despite my initial apprehension. From her, I have learned to love abstraction, formalism AND data. She has shown me a world of linguistic analysis derived from simple and well-grounded tools, and her consistency and formidable knowledge of both data and theory have led me directly to this point.
Anyone who has worked with Paul Smolensky must understand how truly fortunate I feel to have had the honor of working with him. I appreciate his sharp intellect and approachable demeanor, his mental prowess and personal charm (qualities too rarely found together). I thank him for being an incredible role model, and for his amazingly haiku-like way of making a seemingly difficult concept clear.
Laura Benua has many qualities that I admire and hope to emulate. I believe that the most important thing she has taught me is to challenge my own and others’ assumptions. She has also encouraged me to stretch my imagination to look for the seeds of an analysis, and then to carefully reign in to a more reasoned and reasonable solution.
I thank Amy Weinberg for her continued support and encouragement after my defection from syntax to phonology. She has always shown an interest in my work, and her unique perspective has certainly led to insights I would otherwise not have made.
Rose-Marie Oster has instilled in me an appreciation of all things Scandinavian, and has awakened in me a love of the traditions and language of my Swedish heritage. She is an outstanding teacher and a truly kind and generous person.
I would also like to thank the other faculty members at the University of Maryland at College Park with whom I have had the pleasure to work. Over the years they have become dear colleagues, and I will sorely miss having daily contact with them. David Lightfoot has instilled in me an appreciation of the relationship among diachronic change, language acquisition, and dialect difference. He has also helped me to see beyond the formalism du jour to the important language issues beyond. Norbert Hornstein and Juan Uriagereka have impressed me with their incredible grasp of syntactic data and the facility with which they manipulate the tools of analysis. I have certainly benefited greatly from their instruction and attention. Although no longer at the University of Maryland, I owe quite a bit of my love of linguistics to David Lebeaux. It was his encouragement and kind remarks regarding my early work that gave me the courage to pursue graduate school. Finally, I must thank all the syntacticians for their infinite patience as I challenged almost every bit of English data ever presented to my non-standard (non-human?) grammar.
What can one say to show appreciation for classmates? My friends Juan Carlos Castillo, Haruka Fukazawa, Patricia Hironymous, Viola Miglio, Frida Morelli, Julien Mussolino, Akemi Matsuya, Mits Ota (Georgetown infiltrator), Tuomo Neuvonen, and Caro Struijke have each enriched my life in ways they cannot imagine. We learned together, laughed together, pulled our hair out together, and inspected pencil points at dangerously close range together. For my closest friends, the Funologists, I am completely without words to describe my deepest regard, affection, and respect. It seems that this is a case where silent mutual understanding is the optimal candidate…
I would like to acknowledge the financial support of the Johns Hopkins University Center for Communication Programs, which allowed me a very flexible work schedule over the past six years. Specifically, I would like to thank Phyllis T. Piotrow, Gary Lewis, Young Mi Kim and the rest of the Research and Evaluation Division for hiring me, keeping me busy and engaged, and providing me with invaluable research skills. I would also like to thank my CCP friends Opal Francis, Susie Hackman, Sarah Landon, Janet McLean, Robin McDonald, Andrew Plumer, Tina Samson, and Harry Susser for making my stay at CCP fun. It has been a true blessing to have worked with people dedicated to altruistic work aimed at improving the quality of life of people in developing countries.
Finally, without the consistent love and devotion of my family, I would not have made it to this point. I am indebted to my parents Roger and Barbara, my grandparents Cora, Bernice, and Carl, and my sister Leigh-Ann for molding me into the person that I am, and for teaching me that love and life are of paramount importance – all else is icing. I am especially grateful to my partner David Kidd, who encouraged me to follow my dreams and to study linguistics despite the many pressures to pursue a more practical profession. He has been unflinchingly understanding and supportive through three degrees and many incomprehensible mini-lectures on garden path sentences, parasitic gaps, prosody, and other arcane linguistic topics. I owe him much more than I can ever possibly repay.
ix
Bruce Morén
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 Syllable Weight Descriptive Generalizations 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.1.1 What is syllable weight? 3
1.1.2 Moraic Theory 7
1.1.3 Superheavy and Extra-light Syllables 8
1.1.4 Summary 12
1.2 Two Sources of Weight – Coerced and Distinctive 13
1.2.1 Coerced Weight 14
1.2.2 Coerced Weight Summary 20
1.2.3 Distinctive Weight 20
1.2.4 Distinctive Weight Summary 27
1.3 Summary of Weight Descriptive Generalizations 27
Chapter 2 Optimality Theory, Typology and Constraints 29
2.1 Optimality Theory and Typology 29
2.2 Constraints 31
2.2.1 General Moraic Markedness Constraints and Sonority 31
2.2.2 Coercive Moraic Markedness Constraints 34
2.2.3 Correspondence Theory and Moraic Faithfulness Constraints 36
2.2.4 MaxLink and DepLink versus Max and Dep 42
2.3 Constraint Interactions and Weight Patterns 46
2.3.1 Factorial Ranking and “Pure” Coerced Weight 47
2.3.2 Factorial Ranking and “Pure” Distinctive Weight 50
2.3.3 Interactions between Distinctive and Coerced Weight 55
2.4 Summary 59
Chapter 3 Segment Weight Typology 61
3.1 Introduction 61
3.2 Coerced Weight 61
3.2.1 Coerced Vowel Length 63
3.2.1.1 No Coerced Vowel Length 64
3.2.1.2 Coerced Length for All Vowels 67
3.2.1.3 Coerced More-sonorous Vowel Length 69
3.2.2 Summary of Coerced Vowel Length 70
3.2.3 Coerced Consonant Weight 70
3.2.3.1 No Coerced Consonant Weight 71
3.2.3.2 Coerced Weight for All Consonants 74
3.2.3.3 Coerced More-sonorous Consonant Weight 76
3.2.4 Summary of Coerced Consonant Weight 79
3.2.5 Coerced Consonant and Vowel Weight 80
3.2.6 Summary of Coercive Weight Patterns 88
3.3 Distinctive Weight 88
3.3.1 Distinctiveness of Vowel Length 90
3.3.1.1 No Distinctive Vowel Length 91
3.3.1.2 Distinctive Vowel Length for All Vowels 96 3.3.1.3 Distinctive Length for Less-sonorous Vowels Only 101
3.3.1.4 Distinctive Length for More-sonorous Vowels Only 105
3.3.2 Distinctiveness of Consonant Weight 109
3.3.2.1 No Distinctive Consonant Weight 111
3.3.2.2 Distinctive Consonant Weight for All Consonants 114 3.3.2.3 Distinctive Weight for Less-sonorous Consonants Only 118
3.3.2.4 Distinctive Weight for More-sonorous Consonants Only 124
3.3.3 Distinctive Consonant and Vowel Weight 127
3.3.4 Summary of Distinctive Weight Patterns 129
3.4 Interactions between Coerced and Distinctive Weight 130
3.4.1 Distinctive Vowel Length Neutralization 131
3.4.2 Distinctive Consonant Weight Neutralization 147
3.4.3 Distinctive Consonant Weight and Vowel Length Neutralization 158
3.5 Summary 159
Chapter 4 Case Studies 161
4.1 Hawaiian Syllable Weight 161
4.1.1 Data 162
4.1.2 Analysis 163
4.1.3 Summary 168
4.2 Italian Syllable Weight and Stress Assignment 169
4.2.1 Data - Vowel Length, Consonant Weight, and Syllabification 170
4.2.2 Analysis 173
4.2.2.1 Core Syllable Weight 173
4.2.2.2 Penultimate Stress and Vowel Lengthening 179
4.2.2.3 Antepenultimate Stress 185
4.2.2.4 Weight by Position 186
4.2.2.5 Weight Sensitivity 188
4.2.2.6 Exceptional Stress 190
4.2.4 Raddoppiamento Sintattico (Syntactic Doubling) 196
4.2.5 Summary 198
4.3 Kashmiri Syllable Weight and Stress Assignment 200
4.3.1 Background and Data 201
4.3.1.1 Distinctive Weight 203
4.3.1.2 Stress and Representations 205
4.3.2 Analysis 209
4.3.2.1 Distinctive Vowel Weight 211
4.3.2.2 Stress 214
4.3.2.3 Closed Syllables 220
4.3.2.4 Heavy Syllable Interactions 223
4.3.2.5 Summary of the Analysis of Kashmiri 227
4.3.3 Theoretical Issues 228
4.3.3.1 Peak Prominence 228
4.3.3.2 Unattested Stress Patterns 232
4.3.4 Summary 236
4.4 Moraicity in Two Hungarian Dialects 236
4.4.1 Description and Data (Standard Literary Hungarian) 237
4.4.2 Analysis 251
4.4.2.1 Vowel Length 251
4.4.2.2 Consequence 264
4.4.2.3 Consonant Weight 267
4.4.3 Summary 281
4.5 Icelandic Phonology: A Unified Account 283
4.5.1 Background Data 284
4.5.1.1 Medial Syllabification 284
4.5.1.2 Syllable Weight and Stress 285
4.5.1.3 Sonorant Devoicing 285
4.5.1.4 Stop Deaspiration 287
4.5.1.5 Preaspiration 287
4.5.2 Analysis 289
4.5.2.1 Canonical Weight 289
4.5.2.2 Syllabification 296
4.5.2.3 Distinctive Aspiration in Stressed Syllables - all dialects 299 4.5.2.4 Unstressed Syllable Aspiration 301
4.5.2.5 Medial Sonorant Devoicing 303
4.5.2.6 Preaspiration 306
4.5.3 Why No Moraic Aspirated Stops? 312
4.5.4 Summary 313
4.6 Metropolitan New York English 313
4.6.1 English Vowels (General) 315
4.6.2 New York English Vowels 318
4.6.3 Analysis 323
4.6.3.1 Bimoraic Monosyllables 325
4.6.3.2 Distinctive Non-Low Vowel Length in Closed Monosyllables 328
4.6.3.3 Long Low Back Vowels in Closed Monosyllables 333
4.6.3.4 Distinctive LowFront Vowel Length in Closed Monosyllables 334
4.6.3.5 Long Low Back Vowels in Closed Monosyllables 336
4.6.3.6 Disyllables 339
4.6.4 Summary 346
4.7 Summary 347
Chapter 5 Miscellaneous Issues and General Conclusions 349
5.1 No Need for *Long-Vowel and *Geminate Constraints 350
5.1.1 Holt (1997) 351
5.1.2 No *Long-Vowel Constraint 354
5.1.3 No *Geminate Constraint 357
5.1.4 Summary 358
5.2 Shared Morae and Phonetic Correlations (Broselow et al 1998) 359
5.2.1 Hindi 363
5.2.2 Malayalam 366
5.2.3 Levantine Arabic 368
5.2.4 Summary 372
5.3 Positive Versus Negative Moraic Markedness Constraints 372
5.3.1 Ease of Formulation and Evaluation 372
5.3.2 Distinctive Moraicity 378
5.3.3 Summary 381
5.4 Heavy Geminates and Light Codas (Tranel 1991) 382
5.4.1 Modern Standard Swedish 392
5.4.2 Summary 395
5.5 General Conclusions 396
BIBLIOGRAPHY 398
ix
Bruce Morén
Chapter 1 Syllable Weight Descriptive Generalizations
1.1 Introduction
There are two main goals of this dissertation. The first is to make a descriptive contribution by providing an in-depth review of segment moraicity patterns, including: segment weight inventories, segment weight processes, and segment weight dependencies covering both well-known and lesser-known systems. The second goal is make contribution to phonological theory by providing a system to explain the observed descriptive generalizations using as economical and elegant system as possible.