Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Computationally, tone is different*

  • Adam Jardine (a1)

Abstract

This paper establishes that unbounded circumambient processes, phonological processes for which crucial information in the environment may appear unboundedly far away on both sides of a target, are common in tonal phonology, but rare in segmental phonology. It then argues that this typological asymmetry is best characterised by positing that tone is more computationally complex than segmental phonology. The evidence for the asymmetry is based around attestations of unbounded tonal plateauing, but it is also shown how the ‘sour-grapes’ harmony pathology is unbounded circumambient. The paper argues that such processes are not weakly deterministic, which contrasts with previous typological work on segmental phonology. Positing that weak determinism bounds segmental phonology but not tonal phonology thus captures the typological asymmetry. It is also discussed why this explanation is superior to any offered by Optimality Theory.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Computationally, tone is different*
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Computationally, tone is different*
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Computationally, tone is different*
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

Footnotes

Hide All
*

I would first like to thank Jeff Heinz for going over countless versions of this paper, as well as three anonymous reviewers who provided thoughtful and detailed critique and advice. Thanks also go to Larry Hyman, Bill Idsardi, Kevin Ryan, the computational linguistics group at the University of Delaware, the members of Jeff Heinz's 2012 phonology seminar, and an inquisitive audience at NECPhon 7, all of whom provided valuable feedback over the course of the project. Although many helped with this paper, all errors are my own.

Mathematical definitions and a proof are available as online supplementary materials at http://www.journals.cambridge.org/issue_Phonology/Vol33No02.

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Al Khatib, Sam (2008). On the directionality of emphasis spread. In Susie Jones (ed.) 2008 Canadian Linguistic Association Conference Proceedings. Available (May 2016) at http://cla-acl.ca/actes-2008-proceedings.
Baković, Eric (2000). Harmony, dominance, and control. PhD dissertation, Rutgers University.
Beesley, Kenneth R. & Karttunen, Lauri (2003). Finite state morphology. Stanford: CSLI.
Bennett, William (2013). Dissimilation, consonant harmony, and surface correspondence. PhD dissertation, Rutgers University.
Beros, Achilles & Higuera, Colin de la (2014). A canonical semi-deterministic transducer. In Alexander Clark, Makoto Kanazawa & Ryo Yoshinaka (eds.) JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings. Vol. 34: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Grammatical Inference. 33–48. Available (May 2016) at http://jmlr.org/proceedings/papers/v34.
Bickmore, Lee S. & Kula, Nancy C. (2013). Ternary spreading and the OCP in Copperbelt Bemba. Studies in African Linguistics 42. 101132.
Bird, Steven & Ellison, T. Mark (1994). One-level phonology: autosegmental representations and rules as finite automata. Computational Linguistics 20. 5590.
Cassimjee, Farida & Kisseberth, Charles W. (2001). Zulu tonology and its relationship to other Nguni languages. In Kaji, Shigeki (ed.) Cross-linguistic studies of tonal phenomena: tonogenesis, Japanese accentology, and other topics. Tokyo: ILCAA. 327359.
Chandlee, Jane (2014). Strictly local phonological processes. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware.
Chandlee, Jane, Athanasopoulou, Angeliki & Heinz, Jeffrey (2012). Evidence for classifying metathesis patterns as subsequential. WCCFL 29. 303309.
Chomsky, Noam (1956). Three models for the description of language. IRE Transactions on Information Theory 2. 113124.
Clements, G. N. (1976). Vowel harmony in nonlinear generative phonology: an autosegmental model. Distributed 1980, Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Clements, G. N. (1977). Neutral vowels in Hungarian vowel harmony: an autosegmental interpretation. NELS 7. 4964.
Clements, G. N. & Goldsmith, John A. (eds.) (1984). Autosegmental studies in Bantu tone. Dordrecht: Foris.
Do, Young Ah & Kenstowicz, Michael (2011). A note on phonological phrasing in South Kyungsang. Ms, MIT. Available (May 2016) at http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/people/faculty/kenstowicz/do-kens.pdf.
Downing, Laura J. (2001). How ambiguity of analysis motivates stem tone change in Durban Zulu. UBC Working Papers in Linguistics 4. 3955.
Elgot, C. C. & Mezei, J. E. (1965). On relations defined by generalized finite automata. IBM Journal of Research and Development 9. 4768.
Folia, Vasiliki, Uddén, Julia, Vries, Meinou de, Forkstam, Christian & Petersson, Karl Magnus (2010). Artificial language learning in adults and children. Language Learning 60. Suppl. 2. 188220.
Gafos, Adamantios I. (1999). The articulatory basis of locality in phonology. New York: Garland.
Gainor, Brian, Lai, Regine & Heinz, Jeffrey (2012). Computational characterizations of vowel harmony patterns and pathologies. WCCFL 29. 6371.
Goldsmith, John A. (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford & Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
Good, Jeff (2004). Tone and accent in Saramaccan: charting a deep split in the phonology of a language. Lingua 114. 575619.
Graf, Thomas (2010). Logics of phonological reasoning. MA dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Hale, Kenneth & Selkirk, Elisabeth (1987). Government and tonal phrasing in Papago. Phonology Yearbook 4. 151183.
Hansson, Gunnar Ólafur (2001). Theoretical and typological issues in consonant harmony. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Hansson, Gunnar Ólafur (2010). Consonant harmony: long-distance interaction in phonology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Heinz, Jeffrey (2011). Computational phonology. Part 1: Foundations. Language and Linguistics Compass 5. 140152.
Heinz, Jeffrey & Idsardi, William J. (2011). Sentence and word complexity. Science 333. 295297.
Heinz, Jeffrey & Idsardi, William J. (2013). What complexity differences reveal about domains in language. Topics in Cognitive Science 5. 111131.
Heinz, Jeffrey & Lai, Regine (2013). Vowel harmony and subsequentiality. In Kornai, András & Kuhlmann, Marco (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th Meeting on the Mathematics of Language. Sofia: Association for Computational Linguistics. 5263.
Hyman, Larry M. (1998). Positional prominence and the ‘prosodic trough’ in Yaka. Phonology 15. 4175.
Hyman, Larry M. (2011). Tone: is it different? In Goldsmith, John A., Riggle, Jason & Yu, Alan C. L. (eds.) The handbook of phonological theory. 2nd edn. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. 197239.
Hyman, Larry M. & Katamba, Francis (2010). Tone, syntax and prosodic domains in Luganda. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 53. 6998.
Hyman, Larry M., Katamba, Francis & Walusimbi, Livingstone (1987). Luganda and the strict layer hypothesis. Phonology Yearbook 4. 87108.
Inkelas, Sharon (1995). The consequences of optimization for underspecification. NELS 25:1. 287302.
Itô, Junko, Mester, Armin & Padgett, Jaye (1995). Licensing and underspecification in Optimality Theory. LI 26. 571613.
Johnson, C. Douglas (1972). Formal aspects of phonological description. The Hague: Mouton.
Kaplan, Ronald & Kay, Martin (1994). Regular models of phonological rule systems. Computational Linguistics 20. 331378.
Kenstowicz, Michael (1994). Phonology in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass. & Oxford: Blackwell.
Kidima, Lukowa (1991). Tone and accent in Kiyaka. PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Kisseberth, Charles W. (1970). On the functional unity of phonological rules. LI 1. 291306.
Kisseberth, Charles W. (1984). Digo tonology. In Clements, & Goldsmith, (1984). 105182.
Kisseberth, Charles W. & Odden, David (2003). Tone. In Nurse, Derek & Philippson, Gérard (eds.) The Bantu languages. London & New York: Routledge. 5970.
Kornai, András (1995). Formal phonology. New York: Garland.
Kula, Nancy & Bickmore, Lee (2015). Phrasal phonology in Copperbelt Bemba. Phonology 32. 147176.
Lai, Regine (2015). Learnable vs. unlearnable harmony patterns. LI 46. 425451.
Laughren, Mary (1984). Tone in Zulu nouns. In Clements, & Goldsmith, (1984). 183234.
Leben, William R. (1973). Suprasegmental phonology . PhD dissertation, MIT.
McCarthy, John J. (1986). OCP effects: gemination and antigemination. LI 17. 207263.
McCarthy, John J. (2010). Autosegmental spreading in Optimality Theory. In Goldsmith, John A., Hume, Elizabeth & Wetzels, W. Leo (eds.) Tones and features. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 195222.
Macdonell, A. A. (1910). Vedic grammar. Strasbourg: Trübner.
McMullin, Kevin & Hansson, Gunnar Ólafur (2014). Locality in long-distance phonotactics: evidence for modular learning. NELS 44:2. 114.
McWhorter, John H. & Good, Jeff (2012). A grammar of Saramaccan Creole. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Medvedev, Yu. T. (1964). On the class of events representable in a finite automaton. In Moore, Edward F. (ed.) Sequential machines: selected papers. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. 215227.
Mohri, Mehryar (1997). Finite-state transducers in language and speech processing. Computational Linguistics 23. 269311.
Monier-Williams, Monier (1899). A Sanskrit–English dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon. Maintained at http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de.
Moreton, Elliott (2008). Analytic bias and phonological typology. Phonology 25. 83127.
Moreton, Elliott & Pater, Joe (2012). Structure and substance in artificial-phonology learning. Part 1: Structure. Language and Linguistics Compass 6. 686701.
Myers, Scott (1997). OCP effects in Optimality Theory. NLLT 15. 847892.
Nevins, Andrew (2010). Locality in vowel harmony. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Odden, David (1986). On the role of the Obligatory Contour Principle in phonology. Lg 62. 353383.
Padgett, Jaye (1995). Partial class behavior and nasal place assimilation. In Suzuki, Keiichiro & Elzinga, Dirk (eds.) Proceedings of the 1995 Southwestern Workshop on Optimality Theory (SWOT) . Tucson: Department of Linguistics, University of Arizona. 145183.
Pater, Joe (2004). Austronesian nasal substitution and other NC˳ effects. In McCarthy, John J. (ed.) Optimality Theory in phonology: a reader. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell. 271289.
Payne, Amanda (2014). Dissimilation as a subsequential process. NELS 44:2. 7990.
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul (1993). Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms, Rutgers University & University of Colorado, Boulder. Published 2004, Malden, Mass. & Oxford: Blackwell.
Rogers, James & Hauser, Marc D. (2010). The use of formal language theory in studies of artificial language learning: a proposal for distinguishing the differences between human and nonhuman animal learners. In Hulst, Harry van der (ed.) Recursion and human language. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 213231.
Rogers, James, Heinz, Jeffrey, Fero, Margaret, Hurst, Jeremy, Lambert, Dakotah & Wibel, Sean (2013). Cognitive and sub-regular complexity. In Morrill, Glyn & Nederhof, Mark-Jan (eds.) Formal grammar. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer. 90108.
Rogers, James & Pullum, Geoffrey K. (2011). Aural pattern recognition experiments and the subregular hierarchy. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 20. 329342.
Rose, Sharon & Walker, Rachel (2004). A typology of consonant agreement as correspondence. Lg 80. 475531.
Roundtree, S. Catherine (1972). Saramaccan tone in relation to intonation and grammar. Lingua 29. 308325.
Ryan, Kevin M. (forthcoming). Attenuated spreading in Sanskrit retroflex harmony. LI.
Safir, Ken (1982). Nasal spreading in Capanahua. LI 13. 689694.
Schein, Barry & Steriade, Donca (1986). On geminates. LI 17. 691744.
Shih, Stephanie & Inkelas, Sharon (2014). A subsegmental correspondence approach to contour tone (dis)harmony patterns. In Kingston, John, Moore-Cantwell, Claire, Pater, Joe & Staubs, Robert (eds.) Proceedings of the 2013 Meeting on Phonology. Available (May 2016) at http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/amphonology.
Staubs, Robert (2014). Computational modeling of learning biases in stress typology. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Suzuki, Keiichiro (1998). A typological investigation of dissimilation. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona.
Whitney, William Dwight (1889). A Sanskrit grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Wilson, Colin (2003). Analyzing unbounded spreading with constraints: marks, targets, and derivations. Ms, University of California, Los Angeles.
Wilson, Colin (2006a). Learning phonology with substantive bias: an experimental and computational study of velar palatalization. Cognitive Science 30. 945982.
Wilson, Colin (2006b). Unbounded spreading is myopic. Paper presented at the Phonology Fest Workshop on Current Perspectives on Phonology, Indiana University.
Yip, Moira (2002). Tone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yli-Jyrä, Anssi (2013). On finite-state tonology with autosegmental representations. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Finite State Methods and Natural Language Processing. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics. 9098.
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Jardine supplementary material
Jardine supplementary material 1

 PDF (80 KB)
80 KB

Computationally, tone is different*

  • Adam Jardine (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed