Re: Metrical Stress, Feet, etc.

Thomas R. Wier wrote:

>Oh really.  What do you say about opacity?  Do you favor Sympathy
>Theory, or Comparative Markedness, or Targeted Constraints? All
>of these attempts to answer this problem have been incredibly
>convoluted.
>
>Don't get me wrong: I like the idea of a two-level mapping of input
>and ouput.  It's just that no one has yet been able to come up with
>a way to do that.  If you're going for OT, Stratal OT is probably
>your best bet.
>
>
Output-output Faithfulness.  I agree, all those other things you named
are ugly variations of the theory.  The OO-F ideas are still a little up
in the air, but they're dramatically more elegant than any of those
other strategies, and I've actually seen Burzio's brand work in cases of
weird English stressing, etc. (It has some other issues, but I'm
persuaded that it works as a proof that one can use OT as-is, without
any of the strange evaluative machinery of TCs or Sympathy, provided one
has sufficiently clever constraints.)

--
Sometimes, I stick my hand in a box full of spiders to remind myself
that I can do anything.
Shreyas