Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:50:07.039Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Coronal epenthesis and markedness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2003

Linda Lombardi
Linda Lombardi
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Coronals have been claimed to behave as unmarked consonants in epenthesis. However, it is well known that the glottal consonants ([h ʔ]) are frequently epenthetic, and the empirical basis for the claim about coronal epenthesis has been weak, with only a single example commonly cited. I will show that coronals can in fact occur as epenthetic segments, but only in specific situations showing the classic signs of constraint conflict. I will argue that these patterns can be accounted for in Optimality Theory using fully specified Place in the representations and extending Smolensky's (1993) universally ranked *PLACE hierarchy so that the glottals have the least marked Place. The result will be that when all other things are equal, glottals will be the ideal epenthetic consonant, but when some higher-ranked requirement makes epenthesising a glottal impossible, the still relatively low-ranked position of *COR means that coronals will be the next best way to satisfy Place markedness.

Type
Research Article
Information
Phonology , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , August 2002 , pp. 219 - 251
Copyright
© 2002 Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank audiences at the UMass Amherst, Rutgers, Johns Hopkins and the 1997 Maryland Mayfest/Hopkins OT workshop for comments on earlier versions of this work, and to them and Keren Rice for directing me to some of the data. Thanks also to Diamandis Gafos, Paul Smolensky and especially John McCarthy, to Michael Cahill and Pete Unseth for discussion of some of the data and to the reviewers at Phonology. The usual disclaimers apply; also deepest apologies to anyone else I've forgotten.