Re: THEORY: phonemes and Optimality Theory tutorial

Carlos Thompson sikayal:

> > Not, of course, that I think the 8 phoneme analysis is satisfactory.
> > But it is better than the orthodox 5 phoneme analysis.
> >
> > This is of course just one example. But it's not exotic. --In
> English,
> > the contrasts in stressable and unstressable syllables are
> different,
> > and the contrasts in onsets and codas are different.
Of course.

> >
> > FWIW, I would analyse the above system along the following lines:
> > * Primitives of segmental content are A, I, U.
> > * E and O are made by simultaneous A+I and A+U.
> > * The ability of A to combine with I/U is a property only of
> >   stressed syllables. ["Tier separation"]
>
> Well, as a non-linguist I could analize this as
>   * Primitives: /a/, /e/, /i/, /o/, /u/
>   * In unstressed syllables there are neutralization and /i/ and /e/
> will both be realized as [i] and /o/ and /u/ as [u].  Wouldn't this be
> a correct approximation.
This is okay according to neutralization theory, but I think this sort of
ambiguity is just the problem that causes the objection.  In the
underlying phonemic system, which is the phoneme in neutralized
positions?  Is it /i/ or /e/ or an archephoneme (sp?) /I/ ?

>
> In my conlags I have different contrast for stressed and unstressed
> vowels.  In Chleweyish both /a/ and /e/ become [@] in unstressed
> position... but this is something that is mostly seen from orthography
> (except for monosyllabics) so it can be discuted if /@/ is another
> phonem that is written <e> in verbs and <a> in nouns...
Does [@] ever alternate with [e] or [a]?

>
> In Biwa I had described the phonology in these lines (SAMPA):
>   vowels in open syllables:   i  e  9Y A  @\ ow }
>   vowels in closed syllables: 1  E  y  V  9  O  U
>   unstressed vowels:  I  @  M
>
> Well, unstressed vowels follow vowel harmony patterns: if closest
> stressed vowell is open or mid-open the unstressed vowel will be /@/,
> and so.
>
> In Biwa syllables could become de-stressed due to composition.  In
> Chleweyish some monosyllabics can be stressed or unstressed and the
> /A:/ <-> /@/ and /e:/ <-> /@/ changes can be appreciated.
>
> Probably looking in your hipotetical language what happen when /'e/
> and /'o/ lose stress it can be seen as a reduction: /'e/ <-> /i/ and
> /'i/ <-> /i/, or a combination: /'e/ <-> either /a/ or /i/ or /aj/ or
> /ja/ according to some rules.
Here, of course, syllables alternate between being stressed and
unstressed, so it's determinable which phoneme is
underlying.  Unfortunately, not all cases are analyzable this way.

>
> About consonants contrast in codas or onsets, it is posible to look
> what happens when a consonant changes from one position to another.
>
> In Spanish, flapped /r/ and trilled /rr/ only contrast in intervocalic
> positions not begining a word.  In codas the consonant is always
> trilled.  In the begining of a word is trilled as well.  In consonant
> clusters it is flapped.  When deriving, word inicial /rr/ remind /rr/:
> real /rre.al/ -> irreal /i.rre.al/, but [rr] in codas becomes a
> flapped onset when suffix adds a vowel: amor /a.morr/ -> amores
> /a.mo.res/.
In Mexico I hear word-final flaps of /r/.  Is this correct?

>
> -- Carlos Th
>
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_