Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Substance matters: a reply to Jardine (2016)

  • Joe Pater (a1)
Abstract

Jardine (2016) claims that tonal phonology is more formally complex than the phonology of other segmental features, in that only tonal phonology goes beyond the class of weakly deterministic maps. He then goes on to argue that this formal distinction is superior to any available treatment in Optimality Theory. This reply points out that Jardine's formal distinction conflates attested and unattested tonal patterns, which can be distinguished in Optimality Theory, given a substantively defined constraint set.

  • 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.

      Substance matters: a reply to Jardine (2016)
      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.

      Substance matters: a reply to Jardine (2016)
      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.

      Substance matters: a reply to Jardine (2016)
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
E-mail: pater@linguist.umass.edu.
Footnotes
Hide All

Thank you to the participants in UMass Ling 751 Spring 2016, in which this material was developed: Ivy Hauser, Coral Hughto, Leland Kusmer, Brandon Prickett and Amanda Rysling. Thanks also to Andrew Lamont for extensive discussion of related issues, and to Adam Jardine for his comments on the paper. This research was supported by NSF grant BCS-424077 to the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Bakovi«, Eric (2000). Harmony, dominance, and control. PhD dissertation, Rutgers University.
Chandlee, Jane (2014). Strictly local phonological processes. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware.
Goldsmith, John A., Riggle, Jason & Yu, Alan C. L. (eds.) (2011). The handbook of phonological theory. 2nd edn. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.
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.
Hulden, Mans (2017). Formal and computational verification of phonological analyses. Phonology 34. 407435.
Hyman, Larry M. (2011). Tone: is it different? In Goldsmith, et al. (2011). 197239.
Hyman, Larry M. (2013). Enlarging the scope of phonologization. In Yu, Alan C. L. (ed.) Origins of sound change: approaches to phonologization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 328.
Jardine, Adam (2016). Computationally, tone is different. Phonology 33. 247283.
Kimper, Wendell (2012). Harmony is myopic: reply to Walker 2010. LI 43. 301309.
Kula, Nancy C. & Bickmore, Lee S. (2015). Phrasal phonology in Copperbelt Bemba. Phonology 32. 147176.
McCarthy, John J. (2010). Autosegmental spreading in Optimality Theory. In Goldsmith, John A., Hume, Elizabeth & Wetzels, W. Leo (eds.) Tones and features: phonetic and phonological perspectives. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 195222.
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul (2004). Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Malden, Mass. & Oxford: Blackwell.
Rose, Sharon & Walker, Rachel (2011). Harmony systems. In Goldsmith, et al. (2011). 240–290.
Vergnaud, Jean-Roger (1980). A formal theory of vowel harmony. In Vago, Robert M. (ed.) Issues in vowel harmony. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 4961.
Walker, Rachel (2005). Weak triggers in vowel harmony. NLLT 23. 917989.
Walker, Rachel (2010). Nonmyopic harmony and the nature of derivations. LI 41. 169179.
Wilson, Colin (2003). Analyzing unbounded spreading with constraints: marks, targets, and derivations. Ms, University of California, Los Angeles.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Phonology
  • ISSN: 0952-6757
  • EISSN: 1469-8188
  • URL: /core/journals/phonology
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

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