Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T12:15:43.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

No transposition in Harmonic Serialism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2020

Chikako Takahashi
Chikako Takahashi*
Affiliation:
Stony Brook University
*
*E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents a Harmonic Serialism analysis of synchronic metathesis, and proposes to eliminate transposition as an atomic operation, instead analysing metathesis as a result of the sequential application of simpler operations. The analysis of phase alternations in Rotuman offers a unified account of metathesis, deletion and umlaut as all undergoing splitting followed by fusion. A non-transposition analysis of multiple metathesis in Kwara'ae shows that a prosodically motivated locality restriction on the splitting domain is crucial in deriving the attested patterns. CC metathesis in Balangao is analysed as fusion followed by splitting. Eliminating transposition has several benefits: (a) it simplifies the inventory of operations in Harmonic Serialism, (b) it correctly predicts the locality restrictions on metathesis patterns with smaller constraint sets and (c) it accounts for the differences observed in the segment types involved in CV(VC) vs. CC metathesis.

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , November 2019 , pp. 695 - 726
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

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 first like to thank Michael Becker for his helpful feedback and advice. I would also like to thank Jeffrey Heinz, Christina Bethin and Ellen Broselow, as well as audiences at Phonology in the North East (PhoNE), the 5th Annual Meeting on Phonology and the 2018 Old World Conference on Phonology for their questions and comments. This work has additionally benefited from comments and questions from three anonymous reviewers and the associate editor, and I greatly appreciate everyone's helpful feedback. A preliminary version of this paper appeared as Takahashi (2018).

References

REFERENCES

Aoki, Paul K. (1974). An observation of vowel contraction in Xhosa. Studies in African Linguistics 5. 223–241.Google Scholar
Bat-El, Outi (1988). Remarks on tier conflation. LI 19. 477–485.Google Scholar
Beckman, Jill N., Dickey, Laura Walsh & Urbanczyk, Suzanne (eds.) (1995). Papers in Optimality Theory. Amherst: GLSA.Google Scholar
Besnier, Niko (1987). An autosegmental approach to metathesis in Rotuman. Lingua 73. 201–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette (1994). The bimoraic foot in Rotuman phonology and morphology, Oceanic Linguistics 33. 491–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette & Garrett, Andrew (1998). The origins of consonant–vowel metathesis. Lg 74. 508–556.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette & Garrett, Andrew (2004). The evolution of metathesis. In Hayes, Bruce, Kirchner, Robert & Steriade, Donca (eds.) Phonetically based phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 117–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blust, Robert (2012). Hawu vowel metathesis. Oceanic Linguistics 51. 207–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Hayes, Bruce (2001). Empirical tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm. LI 32. 45–86.Google Scholar
Bolozky, Shmuel (1980). On the monophonematic interpretation of modern Hebrew affricates. LI 11. 793–799.Google Scholar
Bradfield, Julian (2014). Clicks, concurrency and Khoisan. Phonology 31. 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broselow, Ellen (2015). The typology of position-quality interactions in loanword vowel insertion. In Hsiao, Yuchau E. & Wee, Lian-Hee (eds.) Capturing phonological shades within and across languages. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 292–319.Google Scholar
Buckley, Eugene (2011). Metathesis. In van Oostendorp, Marc, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth & Rice, Keren (eds.) The Blackwell companion to phonology. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell. 1380–1407.Google Scholar
Canfield, Tracy A. (2015). Metathesis is real, and it is a regular relation. PhD dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Carpenter, Angela C. (2002). Noncontiguous metathesis and Adjacency. In Carpenter, Angela C., Coetzee, Andries W. & de Lacy, Paul (eds.) Papers in Optimality Theory II. Amherst: GLSA. 1–25.Google Scholar
Chandlee, Jane (2014). Strictly local phonological processes. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Churchward, C. Maxwell (1940). Rotuman grammar and dictionary. Sydney: Methodist Church of Australasia.Google Scholar
Engelenhoven, Aone van (1995). A description of the Leti language (as spoken in Tutukei). PhD dissertation, University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Fallon, Paul D. (1998). The synchronic and diachronic phonology of ejectives. PhD dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Finley, Sara (2017). Learning metathesis: evidence for syllable structure constraints. Journal of Memory and Language 92. 142–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleischhacker, Heidi (2001). Cluster-dependent epenthesis asymmetries. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 7: Papers in Phonology 5. 71–116.Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew & Blevins, Juliette (2009). Analogical morphophonology. In Hanson, Kristin & Inkelas, Sharon (eds.) The nature of the word: studies in honor of Paul Kiparsky. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 527–545.Google Scholar
Hale, Mark & Kissock, Madelyn (1998). The phonology–syntax interface in Rotuman. UCLA Occasional Papers in Linguistics 21. 115–128.Google Scholar
Hauser, Ivy, Hughto, Coral & Somerday, Megan (2015). Faith-UO: counterfeeding in Harmonic Serialism. In Adam Albright & Michelle A. Fullwood (eds.) Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Meeting on Phonology. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/amp.v2i0.3764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heimisdóttir, Linda Ösp (2014). Phonological opacity and Icelandic preaspiration. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20. Available (August 2019) at http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol20/iss1/16.Google Scholar
Heinz, Jeffrey (2004). CV metathesis in Kwara'ae. MA thesis, University of California, Los Angeles. Available (August 2019) at http://jeffreyheinz.net/papers/heinz_papers.html.Google Scholar
Heinz, Jeffrey (2005a). Reconsidering linearity: evidence from CV metathesis. WCCFL 24. 200–208.Google Scholar
Heinz, Jeffrey (2005b). Optional partial metathesis in Kwara'ae. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 12. 91–102.Google Scholar
Hughto, Coral & Davis, Stuart (2014). Metathesis in Highland East Cushitic. Paper presented at the 24th Manchester Phonology Meeting.Google Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth (1998). Metathesis in phonological theory: the case of Leti. Lingua 104. 147–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth (2001). Metathesis: formal and functional considerations. In Hume et al. (2001). 1–25.Google Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth (2004). The indeterminacy/attestation model of metathesis. Lg 80. 203–237.Google Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth & Seo, Misun (2004). Metathesis in Faroese and Lithuanian: from speech perception to Optimality Theory. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 27. 35–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth & Seyfarth, Scott (2019). Metathesis in language 2.0. Columbus: Ohio State University. https://metathesisinlanguage.osu.edu.Google Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth, Smith, Norval & van de Weijer, Jeroen (eds.) (2001). Surface syllable structure and segment sequencing. Leiden: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon (1999). Exceptional stress-attracting suffixes in Turkish: representations versus the grammar. In Kager, René, van der Hulst, Harry & Zonneveld, Wim (eds.) The prosody–morphology interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 134–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itô, Junko & Mester, Armin (1994). Reflections on CodaCond and Alignment. In Merchant, Jason, Padgett, Jaye & Walker, Rachel (eds.) Phonology at Santa Cruz 3. Santa Cruz: Linguistics Research Center. 27–46.Google Scholar
Jakobi, Angelika (1990). A Fur grammar: phonology, morphophonology and morphology. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Jurgec, Peter (2011). Feature spreading 2.0: a unified theory of assimilation. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael J. (1972). Lithuanian phonology. PhD dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Kim, Chin-Wu (1977). Rule ordering in Korean phonology. Korean Studies 1. 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1991). Semitic gutturals and distinctive feature theory. In Comrie, Bernard & Eid, Mushira (eds.) Perspectives on Arabic linguistics III. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. 63–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1995). Faithfulness in prosodic morphology and phonology: Rotuman revisited. Ms, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (2000). The prosody of phase in Rotuman. NLLT 18. 147–197.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (2007a). Hidden generalizations: phonological opacity in Optimality Theory. Sheffield & Bristol, Conn.: Equinox.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (2007b). Restraint of analysis. In Blaho, Sylvia, Bye, Patrik & Krämer, Martin (eds.) Freedom of analysis? Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 203–231.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (2010). An introduction to Harmonic Serialism. Language and Linguistics Compass 4. 1001–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (2016). The theory and practice of Harmonic Serialism. In McCarthy & Pater (2016). 47–87.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Pater, Joe (eds.) (2016). Harmonic Grammar and Harmonic Serialism. Sheffield & Bristol, Conn.: Equinox.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan (1995). Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In Beckman et al. (1995). 249–384.Google Scholar
Michelson, Karin (1988). A comparative study of Lake-Iroquoian accent. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mielke, Jeff & Hume, Elizabeth (2001). Consequences of word recognition for metathesis. In Hume et al. (2001). 135–158.Google Scholar
Montreuil, Jean-Pierre (1981). The Romansch ‘brat’. Papers in Romance 3:1. 67–76.Google Scholar
Norquest, Peter (2001). The collapse of the foot in Oceanic. In Lesley Carmichael, Chia-Hui Huang & Vida Samiian (eds.) Proceedings of the 30th Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL 2001). Fresno: Department of Linguistics, California State University, Fresno. 273–277.Google Scholar
Padgett, Jaye (1995). Feature classes. In Beckman et al. (1995). 385–420.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M. (1969). Mohawk vowel doubling. IJAL 35. 291–298.Google Scholar
Powell, J. V. (1985). An occurrence of metathesis in Chimakuan. In Acson, Veneeta Z. & Leed, Richard L. (eds.) For Gordon H. Fairbanks. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 105–110.Google Scholar
Pruitt, Kathryn (2012). Stress in Harmonic Serialism. PhD dissertation. University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
Rose, Sharon & Walker, Rachel (2004). A typology of consonant agreement as correspondence. Lg 80. 475–531.Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy (1993). The lexical phonology of Slovak. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Sagey, Elizabeth (1986). The representation of features and relations in nonlinear phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Shetler, Joanna (1976). Notes on Balangao grammar. Huntington Beach: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Stanton, Juliet & Zukoff, Sam (2016). Prosodic effects of segmental correspondence. CLS 51. 501–515.Google Scholar
Stanton, Juliet & Zukoff, Sam (2018). Prosodic identity in copy epenthesis: evidence for a correspondence-based approach. NLLT 36. 637–684.Google Scholar
Staroverov, Petr (2014). Splitting theory and consonant epenthesis. PhD dissertation, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Staubs, Robert, Becker, Michael, Potts, Christopher, Pratt, Patrick, McCarthy, John J. & Pater, Joe (2010). OT-Help 2.0. Software package. http://people.umass.edu/othelp.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (1993). Closure, release, and nasal contours. In Huffman, Marie K. & Krakow, Rena A. (eds.) Nasals, nasalization, and the velum. Orlando: Academic Press. 401–470.Google Scholar
Stonham, John T. (1994). Combinatorial morphology. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Struijke, Caro (2000). Why constraint conflict can disappear in reduplication. NELS 30. 613–626.Google Scholar
Takahashi, Chikako (2018). No metathesis in Harmonic Serialism. In Gillian Gallagher, Maria Gouskova & Sora Heng Yin (eds.) Proceedings of the 2017 Annual Meeting on Phonology. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/amp.v5i0.4232.Google Scholar
Thompson, Laurence C. & Terry Thompson, M. (1969). Metathesis as a grammatical device. IJAL 35. 213–219.Google Scholar
Weijer, Jeroen van de (1996). Segmental structure and complex segments. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamane, Noriko (2001). sC clusters as complex segments: evidence from the contrastive phonology of English and Japanese. In van de Weijer, Jeroen & Nishihara, Tetsuo (eds.) Issues in Japanese phonology and morphology. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 357–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanagawa, Mariko (2003). Metathesis in modern Hebrew: an analysis in Articulatory Phonology. In Solé, M. J., Recasens, D. & Romero, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Barcelona: Causal Productions. 1671–1674.Google Scholar
Zuraw, Kie (2007). The role of phonetic knowledge in phonological patterning: corpus and survey evidence from Tagalog infixation. Lg 83. 277–316.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Takahashi supplementary material

Takahashi supplementary material

Download Takahashi supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 95.4 KB