Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T20:07:08.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Servigliano revisited: An examination from constraint-based serialism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2015

FRANCESC TORRES-TAMARIT
FRANCESC TORRES-TAMARIT*
Affiliation:
VU University Amsterdam
*
Author’s address: VU University, De Boelelaan (main building), 1105 Amsterdam, The Netherlands[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines a metaphonic chain shift in Servigliano (Italo-Romance), in which /ɛ, ɔ/ raise to [e, o] and /e, o/ raise to [i, u] when stressed and followed by inflectional /i, u/. The paper also explores pre-tonic metaphony, whereby /ɛ, ɔ/ raise all the way up to [i, u] when followed by a stressed high vowel. First, an analysis of the data is developed using Optimality Theory with Candidate Chains (OT-CC), taking as a starting point the parallel OT analysis developed in Mascaró (2011). Second, it is shown that OT-CC causes one analytical problem and no gain in terms of economy. On the one hand, the metaphony-triggering constraint Agree(+high,+ATR) proposed in Mascaró (2011) needs to be split into two different constraints, one of which needs a more complicated formulation that requires a conditional clause. On the other hand, positional faithfulness is needed, as in the parallel OT analysis by Mascaró (2011b), to explain the asymmetry between one-step metaphony and fell-swoop pre-tonic metaphony; OT-CC provides no inherent advantage in explaining this asymmetry.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , 01 November 2016 , pp. 689 - 708
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alderete, John. 1997. Dissimilation as local conjunction. In Kusumoto, Kiyomi et al. (eds.), The North East Linguistics Society (NELS) 27, 17–32. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Baković, Eric. 2007. A revised typology of opaque generalisations. Phonology 24.2, 217–259.Google Scholar
Baković, Eric. 2011. Opacity and ordering. In Goldsmith, John, Riggle, Jason & Yu, Alan C. L. (eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, 2nd edn., 40–67. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Becker, Michael. 2006. CCamelOT. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Amherst. [Java program. Accessed at http://becker.phonologist.org/CCamelOT/about.cgi].Google Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea. 2011. Romance metaphony. In van Oostendorp et al. (eds.), 1717–1735.Google Scholar
Camilli, Amerindo. 1929. Il dialetto di Servigliano. Archivum Romanicum 13, 220–251.Google Scholar
Dyck, Carrie. 1995. Constraining the phonology–phonetics interface with exemplification from Spanish and Italian dialects. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Gnanadesikan, Amalia E.1997. Phonology with ternary scales. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko & Mester, Armin. 2003. Japanese morphophonemics: Markedness and word structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kaze, Jeffrey W.1989. Metaphony in Italian and Spanish dialects revisited. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Kirchner, Robert. 1996. Synchronic chain shifts in Optimality Theory. Linguistic Inquiry 27.2, 341–350.Google Scholar
Łubowicz, Anna. 2000. Derived environement effects in Optimality Theory. Lingua 112.4, 243–280.Google Scholar
Łubowicz, Anna. 2005. Locality of conjunction. In Alderete, John, Han, Chung-hye & Kochetov, Alexei (eds.), Proceedings of the 24th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 254–262. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Łubowicz, Anna. 2011. Chain shifts. In van Oostendorp et al. (eds.), 1717–1735.Google Scholar
Łubowicz, Anna. 2012. The phonology of contrast. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 1991. Interactive morphonology: Metaphony in Italy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mascaró, Joan. 2011a. Rule ordering. In van Oostendorp et al. (eds.), 1736–1760.Google Scholar
Mascaró, Joan. 2011b. An analysis of stress-dependent harmony in Servigliano. Probus 23.1, 21–55.Google Scholar
Mascaró, Joan. 2013. A chain shift paradox for classic OT and Harmonic Serialism. Presented at the 10th Old World Conference in Phonology, Boğazic¸i University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2000. Harmonic Serialism and parallelism. In Hirotani, Masako, Coetzee, Andries, Hall, Nancy & Kim, Ji-yung (eds.), The North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 30, 501–524. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2003. Comparative markedness. Theoretical linguistics 29.1–2, 1–51.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2007. Hidden generalizations: Phonological opacity in Optimality Theory. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J.2009. Harmony in Harmonic Serialism. Ms., University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2010. An introduction to Harmonic Serialism. Language Linguistics Compass 4.10, 1001–1018.Google Scholar
Miglio, Viola. 2005. Markedness and Faithfulness in Vowel Systems. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Morén, Bruce T.1999. Distinctiveness, coercion and sonority: A unified theory of weight. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott & Smolensky, Paul. 2002. Typological consequences of local constraint conjunction. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 21, 306–319.Google Scholar
Nibert, Holly J. 1998. Processes of vowel harmony in the Servigliano dialect of Italian: A comparison of two non-linear proposals for the representation of vowel height. Probus 10.1, 67–101.Google Scholar
Parkinson, Frederick B.1996. The representation of vowel height in phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan. 2002. Arguing optimality. In Coetzee, Andries, Carpenter, Angela & de Lacy, Paul (eds.), Papers in Optimality Theory II, 1–33. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms., Rutgers University & University of Colorado, Boulder [Published 2004, Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.]Google Scholar
Smolensky, Paul. 1995. On the internal structure of the constraint component of UG. Presented at the University of California Los Angeles. [ROA-86]Google Scholar
Spaelti, Philip. 1997. Dimensions of variation in multi-pattern reduplication. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
van Oostendorp, Marc, Ewen, Colin, Hume, Beth & Rice, Keren (eds.). 2011. The Blackwell companion to phonology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Walker, Rachel. 2005. Weak triggers in vowel harmony. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23.4, 917–989.Google Scholar
Walker, Rachel. 2011. Vowel patterns in language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, Matthew. 2008. Optimal interleaving: Serial phonology–morphology interaction in a constraint-based model. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst. [ROA-996]Google Scholar