Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T08:08:55.673Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Constraint-based Approach to Finnish CV Spoonerisms1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2010

Heli Harrikari
Heli Harrikari
Affiliation:
Department of General Linguistics, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 4 (Fabianinkatu 28), FIN-00014 Finland. E-mail: harrikar@ling.helsinki.fi
Get access

Extract

This paper provides a comprehensive Optimality Theoretic formalization of a Finnish language game. In opposition to earlier rule-based studies, the present analysis motivates the sometimes arbitrary-looking patterns of the game and brings together various phenomena under a unified set of universal constraints. The paper also demonstrates the close relationship between language games and natural languages by showing how the patterns of the game are analysable with the help of constraints of ordinary languages, or constraints that deviate only minimally from the original ones. The analysis of the game offers valuable external evidence for the phonology of Finnish with respect to the internal structure of long segments, vowel harmony, syllable markedness and the integrity of diphthongs.

Type
Review Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , December 1999 , pp. 111 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anttila, R. 1989. Sananmuunnoksista ja spoonerismeista (About Word Games and Spoonerisms). Virittäjä 93, 370–379.Google Scholar
Bagemihl, B. 1988. Alternate Phonologies and Morphologies. Ph.D. dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
Bagemihl, B. 1989. The Crossing Constraint and “Backward Languages”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7, 481–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagemihl, B. 1995. Language Games and Related Areas. In Goldsmith, J. (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 697–712.Google Scholar
Beckman, J. 1998. Positional Faithfulness. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Benua, L. 1995. Identity Effects in Morphological Truncation. In Beckman, J., Walsh Dickey, L. & Urbanczyk, S. (eds), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory. Amherst, Mass.: GLSA, pp. 77–136.Google Scholar
Benua, L. 1997. Transderivational Identity: Phonological Relations between Words. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P. 1988. Felicity and Poverty of Experimental Phonology. Quaderni del Laboratorio di Linguistica della SNS 2.Google Scholar
Cairns, C. E., Feinstein, M. H. 1982. Markedness and the Theory of Syllable Structure. Linguistic Inquiry 13, 193–225.Google Scholar
Campbell, L. 1977. Generative Phonology versus Finnish Phonology: Retrospect and Prospect. In Harms, R. & Karttunen, F. (eds), Texas Linguistic Forum 5. Austin: University of Texas, 21–58.Google Scholar
Campbell, L. 1980. The Psychological and Sociological Reality of Finnish Vowel Harmony. In Vago, R. M. (ed.), Issues in Vowel Harmony. Studies in Language Companion Series 6. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins, 245–270.Google Scholar
Campbell, L. 1981. Generative Phonology and Finnish, Theoretical Contributions. In Goyvaerts, D. L. (ed.), Phonology in the 1980's. Ghent: E. Story Scientia, 147–182.Google Scholar
Campbell, L. 1986. Testing Phonology in the Field. In Ohala, J. J. & Jaeger, J. J. (eds), Experimental Phonology. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, 163–173.Google Scholar
Cutler, A. (ed.) 1982. Slips of the Tongue and Language Production. Berlin: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, S. 1988. Topics in Syllable Geometry. (Published in Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics). New York: Garland Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
Fromkin, V. 1971. The Non-Anomalous Nature of Anomalous Utterances. Language 47, 27–52.Google Scholar
Fromkin, V. (ed.) 1973. Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Fromkin, V. (ed.) 1980. Errors in Linguistic Performance: Slips of the Tongue, Ear, Pen and Hand. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Harrikari, H. 1999. Epenthesis, Geminates and the OCP in Finnish. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 22, 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrikari, H. (forthcoming a). At-will Spoonerisms and Vowel Length in Finnish. Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference of Formal Linguistics. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Harrikari, H. (forthcoming b). The Inalterability of Long Vowels in Finnish. Proceedings of Asian GLOW 99, Nanzan University, Japan.Google Scholar
Harrikari, H. (forthcoming c).Google Scholar
Hayes, B. 1989. Compensatory Lengthening in Morale Phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 20, 253–296.Google Scholar
Hombert, J. 1973. Speaking Backwards in Bakwiri. Studies in African Linguistics 4, 227–236.Google Scholar
Hume, E. 1997. Metathesis in Phonological Theory: The Case of Leti. Ms. Ohio State University. [Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://raccs.rutgers.edu/roa.html.]Google Scholar
Hyman, L. 1985. A Theory of Phonological Weight. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itô, J., Kitagawa, Y., Mester, A. 1996. Prosodic Faithfulness and Correspondence: Evidence from a Japanese Argot. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 5, 217–294.Google Scholar
Karlsson, F. 1970. Det finska högspråkets diftonger och vokalkombinationer. Publications of the Phonetics Department of the University of Turku 9.Google Scholar
Karlsson, F. 1983. Suomen kielen äänne- ja muotorakenne (The Structure of Finnish Phonology and Morphology). Juva: WSOY.Google Scholar
Laycock, D. 1972. Towards a Typology of Ludlings or Play-Languages. Linguistic Communications 65 61–113.Google Scholar
Leben, W. R. 1973. Suprasegmental Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Leben, W. R. 1980. A Metrical Analysis of Length. Linguistic Inquiry 11, 497–509.Google Scholar
Lehiste, I. 1985. An Estonian Word Game and the Phonematic Status of Long Vowels. Linguistic Inquiry 16, 490–492.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1979. Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. (Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club). New York: Garland Press, 1985.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1982. Prosodic Templates, Morphemic Templates and Morphemic Tiers. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds), The Structure of Phonological Representations I. Dordrecht: Foris, 191–223.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1986. OCP Effects: Gemination and Antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17, 207–264.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1995. Faithfulness in Prosodic Morphology and Phonology: Rotuman Revisited. Ms. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1997. Sympathy & Phonological Opacity. Handout distributed at Hopkins Optimality Workshop / Maryland, Mayfest 1997.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1998. Sympathy & Phonological Opacity. Ms. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://raccs.rutgers.edu/roa.html.]Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1999. Sympathy, Cumulativity, and the Duke-of-York Gambit. Ms. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/roa.html.]Google Scholar
McCarthy, J., Prince, A. 1993. Prosodic Morphology I: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction. Ms. University of Massachusetts, Amherst and Rutgers University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J., Prince, A. 1994. The Emergence of the Unmarked. Optimality in Prosodic Morphology. In Gonzàlez, M. (ed.), Proceedings of the North-East Linguistics Society 24. Amherst, Massachusetts: GLSA, pp. 333–379. [Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://raccs.ratgers.edu/roa.html.]Google Scholar
McCarthy, J., Prince, A. 1995. Faithfulness and Reduplicative Identity. In Beckman, J., Walsh Dickey, L. & Urbanczyk, S. (eds), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory. Amherst, Massachusetts: GLSA, pp. 249–384. [Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://raccs.ratgers.edu/roa.html.]Google Scholar
Niemi, J., Laine, M. 1997. Slips of the Tongue as Linguistic Evidence: Finnish Word Initial Segments and Vowel Harmony. Folia Linguistica 31. Societas Linguistica Europaea. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 161–175.Google Scholar
Prince, A. 1984. Phonology with Tiers. In Aronoff, M. & Oerhle, R. (eds), Language Sound Structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 234–244.Google Scholar
Prince, A., Smolensky, P. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Ms. Rutgers University, New Brunswick, and University of Colorado, Boulder, RuCCS-TR-2.Google Scholar
Ringen, C. O., Heinämäki, O. 1999. Variation in Finnish Vowel Harmony: An OT Account. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17, 303–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seppänen, J. 1981. Sananmuodostus leikki- ja salakielissä (Word Formation in Word Games and Secret Languages). Publications of Finnish Linguistic Society 7, 143–163.Google Scholar
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. 1980. Speech Error Units Smaller than the Syllable. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 68, suppl. 1, 32.Google Scholar
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. 1982. Three Kinds of Speech Error Evidence for the Role of Grammatical Elements in Processing. In Obler, L. & Menn, L. (eds), Exceptional Language and Linguistics. New York: Academic Press, pp. 133–142.Google Scholar
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. 1983. Sublexical Units and Suprasegmental Structure in Speech Production Planning. In MacNeilage, P. (ed.), The Production of Speech. New York: Springer-Verlag, 109–136.Google Scholar
Sherzer, L. 1982. Play Languages: with a Note on Ritual Languages. In Obler, L. & Menn, L. (eds), Exceptional Language and Linguistics. New York: Academic Press, 175–199.Google Scholar
Stemberger, J. 1983. Speech Errors and Theoretical Phonology: A Review. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistic Club.Google Scholar
Vago, R. 1985. The Treatment of Long Vowels in Word Games. Phonology Yearbook 2, 329–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yip, M. 1982. Reduplication and C-V Skeleta in Chinese Secret Languages. Linguistic Inquiry 13, 637–661.Google Scholar