Re: Math/Phonological formulae

I thought I understood the notation used by sound change rules, but
there are a few areas I don't understand in this discussion.

On Feb 6, 2007, at 2:15 PM, David J. Peterson wrote:

> Roger wrote:
> <<
> Plan X is to continue writing things all on one line (OK for feature
> matrices e.g. [+XX +YY -ZZ], clear enough). Curly braces could if
> necessary
> be done like this:
>
> X --> Y / {1.abc, 2.def 3.mno} or this possibility--
What do braces mean? What is 1.abc, etc.?
>
>         /{abc}
> X --> Y /{def}
>         /{mno}
> (hope this transmits with the same spacing...)
>
> Since my Gwr work with these formats is not likely to be reviewed
> by Chomsky
> & Halle, I'm inclining toward the one-line approach; it's clear
> enough for
> my (our??) purposes.
>
> Any comments?
> >>
>
> For my own personal purposes, I've always found one line to
> be sufficient--especially if you condense stuff.  As long as you
> know what your features are, and can define them in terms of
> widely accepted features, you can do whatever you want.  So,
> for example, say you had a rule like this:
>
> C[+cons, -cont, +voice, +lateral] > [+cont, -voice] / #_
>
> This'd be a rule that changes an /l/ to a [K] at the beginning of
> a word.
Isn't /l/ also a continuant ([+cont])?

>   First, you can knock out the [-cont, +voice] from the
> first set (standard C&H),
What's C&H?

> and if there are no other laterals, you
> can knock out the [+cons].  Additionally, though, you could simply
> write /l/ > [K] / #_.
Does [+-cons] mean consonantal? (If so, I don't see how it would
disambiguate different laterals.)

>
> That, of course, only affects one segment.  If you have a class
> of segments, though, you can group them together and give
> them a symbol.  So languages of mine where all the stops are
> the same, I use S.  So, for example:
>
> S[+voice] > F / V_V
>
> This says that voiced stops become fricatives in between vowels.
>
> That's simple enough, but if you have several different context
> that keep occurring (say, #_, _#, V_V, or even something like
> _(syl +stress)), why not replace the whole string with a variable?
> I find this especially useful when talking about syllables or mora,
> so I don't have to go hunting for sigmas and mus.
>
> This can also be useful to help clarify the patterns in a given
> language.  For example, in my language Sidaan, there are labial,
> alveolar, palatal, velar, uvular and glottal consonants.  These
> can be neatly broken down into four categories: labial, alveolar-
> velar,
> palatal, and back.  Briefly, I'll explain why.
>
> There are various types of consonants at each place of articulation,
> but they all react the same way to "palatalizing vowels".  Labial
> consonants do nothing, so do the back consonants.  Both alveolar
> *and* velar consonants become palatal before a palatalizing vowel.
> To write that rule, I could do something like this:
>
> C[+COR, +ant/+DOR] > [(+COR) -ant] /_V[-back, +ATR]
a. Why are some of these features in caps and some not?
b. Is [+-COR] coronal, [+-ant] anterior, and [+-DOR] dorsal?
c. Does / mean "or"?
d. What do the parentheses mean?

>
> To be maximally clear, I'd have to write two rules, but it'd miss
> the generalization that the distinction between velar, alveolar
> and palatal consonants is lost before a palatalizing vowel.  Thus,
> the rule can be simplified as follows:
>
> X > P / _PV
>
> Where X is a consonant that's either alveolar or velar, P is a
> palatal consonant, and PV is a palatalizing vowel.
I suppose you could even say "X is a consonant that's alveolar,
palatal, or velar", which to me seems to better capture the "spirit"
of the change (by avoiding an unnatural separation between alveolar
and velar), but that would mean that it would posit a "change" where
the output equals the input in some cases.

>
> And another rule:
>
> PV > NV / B_
>
> A palatalizing vowel becomes a non-palatalizing vowel (NV)
> after a back consonant (B).
>
> Anyway, I guess this is kind of the idea behind XML, where you
> just come up with your own tags for simplicity and keep a file
> somewhere for how they should be translated.  I've found that,
> as long as I actually do write down what everything means (cause
> I'm bound to forget), it's very helpful, and saves a lot of space.
>
> (I hope this actually addresses what you were talking about.  I
> suspect it may not--certainly not in toto [I know nothing about
> non-Mac machines and programs].)
>
> -David
> *******************************************************************
> "sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
> "No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
>
> -Jim Morrison
>
> http://dedalvs.free.fr/

Replies