- www.fb10.uni-bremen.de/linguistik/dpng
- 33 pages, 342kb
Dependency Phonology Papers
A collection of downloadable work in Dependency Phonology addressing meta-theoretical questions from DP's point of view and providing DP-analyses of concrete data.
- ms. — published as: Anderson, John M. 2006. Structural analogy and universal grammar. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo and Patrick Honeybone, eds. 2006. Linguistic knowledge: perspectives from phonology and from syntax. (Lingua 116.5 special issue). 601-633.
- This paper is concerned with the structural analogy assumption (SAA), the assumption that the same structural properties recur on the different grammatical planes, where a plane is characterised by its distinctive alphabet of basic elements. The discussion adopts the traditional biplanar assumption. Part of the interest of the SAA involves instances of failure of the prediction to be fulfilled: the SAA retains its interest only if such failures can be shown to be systematically related to independently established differences between the planes concerned. Similar considerations hold within planes, and prompt the question: to what extent do different structural properties, including in this instance parts of the alphabet, recur in domains which can be differentiated on other grounds? X-bar theory (Jackendoff 1977, etc.), for instance, is in the first instance a manifestation of intra-planar application of a particular analogy: if its implementation in different (nominal, verbal, adjectival, …) domains is imperfectly parallel, this raises interesting questions concerning what other differences there are between these categorially identified domains, differences which may explain discrepancies – and (at least in part) save the analogy. Some intra-planar manifestations of the SAA have also been applied trans-planarly, as with the constructional relation of dependency in Notional Grammar and Dependency Phonology or with the ‘transfer’ of X-bar and the government relation to phonology. Against this background the paper considers (a) some proposed analogies and (b) some failures of analogy, with a view to trying to illustrate its fruitfulness for our understanding of linguistic structure.
- 21 pages, 284kb
- revised version of the paper presented on 07/07/03 at the conference 'From representations to constraints' at the University of Toulouse-Le Mirail.
Published as: Anderson, John M. 2004. Contrast in phonology, structural analogy, and the interfaces. Studia Linguistica 58.3, 269–287. - This paper is concerned with (some of) the evidence for analogies in structure between phonology and syntax, and with (some of) the evidence for the basis for limitations on analogy. The first half of the paper (§§1–3) looks at syllable structure with a view to determining what aspects of syllable structure are contrastive, so basic. It is concluded that, particularly given the need to satisfy sonority, linearity within the syllable is minimally- or non-contrastive, but that the head-based structural relations of complementation and adjunction may be contrastive. §4 argues indeed that phonological (and specifically syllabic) structure displays the same distinctions among complement, adjunct and specifier that is evident in the syntax, and indicates that this analogy is not an isolated case by pointing to a further one involving harmony, a familiar notion from the phonology that can be applied to syntactic phenomena such as 'sequence of tenses'. The paper concludes (§5) with a brief survey of factors limiting structural analogy. These all have to do with the demands of the interfaces of the linguistic with the extra-linguistic: on the one hand, the need for the syntax to represent complex cognitively-based scenes; on the other, the restrictions imposed by the phoneticity of phonology, particularly the requirements of sonority discussed initially.
- 14 pages, 254kb
- unpublished ms.
- Structural analogy in language, and its limits is a heavily expanded version of the concepts and the material discussed in Anderson (2002) Structural analogy and universal grammar and Anderson (2003) Contrast in phonology... . §1 seeks to establish some of the fundamental properties of phonology and their role, if any, in contrast. §2 is concerned with the structural analogy assumption and considers to what extent the properties of phonology are replicated in the syntax, and tries to identify structural discrepancies between phonology and syntax. §3 then confronts apparent discrepancies in structure and tries to formulate a principled basis for them, and thus to sketch out some of the main limits to structural analogy.
- 111 pages, 568kb
- ms. — published as: Anderson, John M. 2005. Old English i-umlaut (for the umpteenth time). English Language and Linguistics 9, 195-224.
- The paper offers an account of i-umlaut in Old English based on lexical minimality: the elimination of redundancies from, in this case, the phonological sub-entry in the lexicon. The notation is that of Anderson & Ewen (1987) Principles of dependency phonology, which is based on simplex features which may combine in varying proportions. These assumptions combine to favour system-dependent underspecification. In accord with lexical minimality, the approach taken here is also polysystemic: thus, for instance, Old English vowels, even Old English accented vowels, do not enter into only one system of contrasts. The phonology is a system of systems sharing some but not all contrasts. The paper attempts to show that on this basis some of the many apparent anomalies that the evidence has been thought to suggest can be resolved in terms of a simple coherent formulation.
- 34 pages, 372kb
- ms. — published as: Durand, Jacques. 2006. Tense/lax, the vowel system of English and phonological theory. In: Carr, Ph., Durand, J., Ewen, C. (eds.). 2005. Headhood, elements, specification and contrastivity. Phonological papers in honour of John Anderson. 77-90. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- 28 pages, 155 kb
- ms. – published as: Hulst, Harry van der. 2006. Dependency Phonology. In: Brown, Keith, ed. 2006. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. [2nd edition]. Vol III. 451-458. Oxford: Elsevier.
- 16 pages, 126kb
- In: Language Sciences 25, 111-158.
- The object of this study is to compare two types of phonological representation model. The first is the feature geometrical type, exemplified by stricture-based feature geometry and articulator-based feature geometry, and the second is the component and dependency-based type exemplified by CV phonology and dependency phonology. More particularly, the object of the study is to attempt to establish which of these main types, and further which sub-type within the two main types of representation, is the more adequate. To this end the paper applies the two main types of model to two sets of data. Firstly to a set of material which involves vowel height, secondary articulation and vowel harmony, and secondly to a set of material which comprises dissimilation in English, Turkish vowel harmonisation and consonant constraints in Arabic.
- 48 pages, 488kb
- ms. — published as: Staun, Jørgen. 2013. Fission in component-based phonology. Language Sciences 40, 123-47.
- This paper advances a novel view of the interrelatedness of the ultimate phonological components. Accepting that these are unary, the paper hypothesises that the phonological components in the three segmental gestures, articulation, categorisation and initiation, can be seen as modulations of basic pulmonic pressure. The modulation is viewed as a result of fission processes splitting nuclei into fragment nuclei which again can undergo further fission at the same time as the nuclei undergoing fission are preserved. The fragment components arising from fission exhibit greater phonetic sophistication than their mother nuclei, because they appear as a result of a demand for more detailed phonological differentiation. Fissional fragment components are developed for all three gestures and the paper deals with a variety of phonological contrasts and attempts to calculate the markedness value of representations.
- 49 pages, 203kb
