Re: THEORY: phonemes and Optimality Theory tutorial

Marcus Smith sikayal:

> dirk elzinga wrote:
>
> >A way of thinking about the phoneme is to consider it to be the
> >minimal unit of sound which serves contrastive function. Thus any
> >feature or property of a sound which does not function contrastively
> >may not be part of the phoneme. This actually allows quite a bit of
> >latitude. In Shoshoni for example, the 'phoneme' /p/ is realized
> >variously as [p], [b], [B], and [F] (the last two voiced and voiceless
> >bilabial fricatives, respectively). So what is necessary for the
> >Shoshoni speaker? Not the fact that /p/ is voiceless, since there is
> >no /b/ which contrasts. Not the fact that it is a stop, since there
> >are no /B/ or /F/ which contrast. Only the fact that it is bilabial
> >and oral (rather than nasal; there is a contrasting /m/) seems to be
> >relevant.
>
> I'd like to point out another example of this involving free variation. In
> Japanese, the moraic nasal word finally can be realized as absolutly any
> nasal at all. The consultant I used for my phonetics work pronounced _hon_
> 'book' as [ho~], [hoN], [hom], and [hon]. She really didn't care as long as
> the last sound was nasal. This kind of thing is difficult for a phoneme
> based approach to phonology, which says that there must be an underlying
> form. Deriving all the difference by a whole bunch of rules seems to miss
> the point that they freely vary.
Indeed.  Optimality theory also avoids the silly "rule conspiracies" that
generativists invoke to explain prohibited surface forms.  On the other
hand, OT doesn't very well deal with other kinds of phonological
alternations.  Perhaps the real problem lies in formality--surely there
must be a way to design a system to include both positive transformations
and negative prohibitions?

>
> >Optimality Theory is a current phonological theory
>
> As a syntactician I take offense to you claiming it is a "phonological
> theory". :) It works quite well for syntax too.
I don't know any OT related to syntax.  Please share.

>
>
>
> ===============================
> Marcus Smith
> AIM:  Anaakoot
> "When you lose a language, it's like
> dropping a bomb on a museum."
>    -- Kenneth Hale
> ===============================
>
Jesse S. Bangs jaspax@u.washington.edu
"It is of the new things that men tire--of fashions and proposals and
improvements and change.  It is the old things that startle and
intoxicate.  It is the old things that are young."
-G.K. Chesterton _The Napoleon of Notting Hill_