1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}
2:
3: \addtolength{\textwidth}{1.6in}
4: \addtolength{\textheight}{1.6in}
5: \setlength{\hoffset}{-.8in}
6: \setlength{\voffset}{-.8in}
7: \setlength{\parskip}{1ex}
8: \setlength{\parindent}{0ex}
9: \usepackage{times,epsfig,pictex,epic}
10: \usepackage{url}
11: \usepackage{examples}
12: \usepackage{avm}
13: \usepackage{ecltree}\setlength{\GapWidth}{1ex}\setlength{\GapDepth}{3ex}
14: \usepackage[T1]{tipa}
15: \usepackage{fancybox}\cornersize{1}
16: \def\colname#1{{\bf #1}}
17: \def\term#1{{\bfseries #1}}
18: \def\ling#1{{\itshape #1}}
19: \usepackage{natbib}
20: \bibliographystyle{plainnat}
21: \bibpunct[:]{(}{)}{;}{a}{,}{,}
22:
23: \def\bez#1#2#3{{\setlength{\unitlength}{.75mm}%
24: \begin{picture}(3,6)\bezier{#1}(0,#2)(2,#2)(3,#3)\end{picture}}}
25: \def\qbez#1#2{{\setlength{\unitlength}{.7mm}%
26: \begin{picture}(3,6)\qbezier(0,#1)(2,#1)(3,#2)\end{picture}}}
27:
28: \def\d#1#2{\bez{4}{#1}{#2}} % short dotted curve
29: \def\ld#1#2{\bez{4}{#1}{#2}} % long dotted curve - needs more dots
30: \def\l#1#2{\qbez{#1}{#2}} % line
31:
32: \title{Phonology}
33: \author{Steven Bird\\
34: University of Pennsylvania}
35: \date{2002}
36:
37: \begin{document}
38: \maketitle
39:
40: \abstract{
41: Phonology is the systematic study of the sounds used in language,
42: their internal structure, and their composition into syllables,
43: words and phrases.
44: Computational phonology is the application of formal and computational
45: techniques to the representation and processing of phonological
46: information. This chapter will present
47: the fundamentals of descriptive phonology along with a brief overview
48: of computational phonology.
49: }
50:
51: \section{Phonological contrast, the phoneme, and distinctive features}
52:
53: There is no limit to the number of distinct sounds that can be
54: produced by the human vocal apparatus. However, this infinite
55: variety is harnessed by human languages into \term{sound systems}
56: consisting of a few dozen language-specific categories, or
57: \term{phonemes}. An example of an English phoneme is \ling{t}.
58: English has a variety of \ling{t}-like sounds,
59: such as the aspirated \ling{t\textsuperscript{h}} of \ling{ten}
60: the unreleased \ling{t\textcorner} of \ling{net}, and
61: the flapped \ling{\textfishhookr} of \ling{water} (in some dialects).
62: In English, these distinctions are not used to differentiate
63: words, and so we do not find pairs of
64: English words which are identical but for their use of
65: \ling{t\textsuperscript{h}} versus \ling{t\textcorner}.
66: (By comparison, in some other languages, such as
67: Icelandic and Bengali, aspiration is contrastive.)
68: Nevertheless, since these sounds (or \term{phones}, or \term{segments})
69: are phonetically similar,
70: and since they occur in \term{complementary distribution}
71: (i.e. disjoint contexts) and cannot differentiate words in
72: English, they are all said
73: to be \term{allophones} of the English phoneme \ling{t}.
74:
75: Of course, setting up a few allophonic variants for each
76: of a finite set of phonemes does not account for the infinite
77: variety of sounds mentioned above. If one were to record
78: multiple instances of the same utterance by the single speaker,
79: many small variations could be observed in loudness, pitch, rate,
80: vowel quality, and so on. These variations arise because speech is a
81: motor activity involving coordination of many independent
82: articulators, and perfect repetition of any utterance
83: is simply impossible. Similar variations occur between different
84: speakers, since one person's vocal apparatus is different to the
85: next person's (and this is how we can distinguish people's voices).
86: So 10 people saying \ling{ten} 10 times each will produce 100
87: distinct acoustic records for the \ling{t} sound. This diversity
88: of tokens associated with a single type is sometimes referred to as
89: \term{free variation}.
90:
91: Above, the notion of phonetic similarity was used. The primary way
92: to judge the similarity of phones is in terms of their
93: \term{place} and \term{manner} of articulation. The consonant chart
94: of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) tabulates phones in
95: this way, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ipa}. The IPA provides symbols for all
96: sounds that are contrastive in at least one language.
97:
98: \begin{figure}[t]
99: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=pulmonic.ps,width=\linewidth}}
100: \caption{Pulmonic Consonants from the International Phonetic Alphabet}
101: \label{fig:ipa}
102: \end{figure}
103:
104: The major axes of this chart are for place of articulation (horizontal),
105: which is the location in the oral cavity of the primary constriction,
106: and manner of articulation (vertical), the nature and degree of that
107: constriction. Many cells of the chart contain two consonants, one
108: \term{voiced} and the other \term{unvoiced}. These complementary
109: properties are usually expressed as opposite values of a
110: \term{binary feature} [$\pm$voiced].
111:
112: A more elaborate model of the similarity of phones is provided by
113: the theory of \term{distinctive features}. Two phones are considered
114: more similar to the extent that they agree on the value of their
115: features. A set of distinctive features and their values for
116: five different phones is shown in (\ref{ex:distinctive}).
117: (Note that many of the features have an extended technical definition,
118: for which it is necessary to consult a textbook.)
119:
120: \begin{examples}
121: \item\label{ex:distinctive}
122: \begin{tabular}[t]{lccccc}
123: & t & z & m & l & i \\
124: anterior & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ & $-$ \\
125: coronal & $+$ & $+$ & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ \\
126: labial & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ & $-$ \\
127: distributed & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\
128: consonantal & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ & $-$ \\
129: sonorant & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ \\
130: voiced & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ \\
131: approximant & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ \\
132: continuant & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ \\
133: lateral & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ \\
134: nasal & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ & $-$ \\
135: strident & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$
136: \end{tabular}
137: \end{examples}
138:
139: Statements about the distribution of phonological information,
140: usually expressed with rules or constraints, often apply
141: to particular subsets of phones. Instead of listing these
142: sets, it is virtually always simpler to list two or three
143: feature values which pick out the required set.
144: For example [+labial,--continuant] picks out
145: \ling{b}, \ling{p}, and \ling{m}, shown in the top left
146: corner of Figure~\ref{fig:ipa}.
147: Sets of phones which can be picked out in this way
148: are called \term{natural classes}, and phonological
149: analyses can be evaluated in terms of their reliance
150: on natural classes. How can we express these analyses?
151: The rest of this chapter discusses some key approaches to
152: this question.
153:
154: Unfortunately, as with any introductory chapter like this one,
155: it will not be possible to cover many important topics of
156: interests to phonologists, such as
157: acquisition, diachrony, orthography, universals,
158: sign language phonology, the phonology/syntax interface,
159: systems of intonation and stress, and many others besides.
160: However, numerous bibliographic references are supplied at
161: the end of the chapter, and readers may wish to consult
162: these other works.
163:
164: \section{Early Generative Phonology}
165:
166: Some key concepts of phonology are best introduced by way
167: of simple examples involving real data. We begin with some
168: data from Russian in (\ref{ex:russian1}). The example shows
169: some nouns, in nominative and dative cases, transcribed using
170: the International Phonetic Alphabet. Note that \ling{x} is the symbol for
171: a voiceless velar fricative (e.g.\ the \ling{ch} of Scottish \ling{loch}).
172:
173: \begin{examples}
174: \item\label{ex:russian1}
175: \begin{tabular}[t]{lll}
176: \colname{Nominative} & \colname{Dative} & \colname{Gloss}\\
177: xlep & xlebu & `bread' \\
178: grop & grobu & `coffin' \\
179: sat & sadu & `garden' \\
180: prut & prudu & `pond'\\
181: rok & rogu & `horn' \\
182: ras & razu & `time'
183: \end{tabular}
184: \end{examples}
185:
186: Observe that the dative form involves suffixation of \ling{-u}, and
187: a change to the final consonant of the nominative form.
188: In (\ref{ex:russian1}) we see four changes: \ling{p} becomes \ling{b},
189: \ling{t} becomes \ling{d}, \ling{k} becomes \ling{g},
190: and \ling{s} becomes \ling{z}.
191:
192: Where they differ is in their \term{voicing}; for example,
193: \ling{b} is a \term{voiced} version of \ling{p}, since \ling{b}
194: involves periodic vibration of the vocal folds, while \ling{p} does not.
195: The same applies to the other pairs of sounds. Now we see
196: that the changes we observed in (\ref{ex:russian1}) are actually
197: quite systematic. Such systematic patterns are called
198: \term{alternations}, and this particular one is known as a
199: \term{voicing alternation}. We can formulate this alternation
200: using a \term{phonological rule} as follows:
201:
202: \begin{examples}
203: \item\label{ex:spe1}
204: \[
205: \left[
206: \begin{array}{c}
207: \mbox{C}\\
208: -\mbox{voiced}
209: \end{array}
210: \right]
211: \rightarrow
212: \left[
213: +\mbox{voiced}
214: \right]
215: {\Huge /}
216: \underline{\hspace*{3ex}} \mbox{V}
217: \]
218: {\it
219: A consonant becomes voiced in the presence of a following vowel
220: }
221: \end{examples}
222:
223: Rule (\ref{ex:spe1}) uses the format of early generative phonology.
224: In this notation, C represents any consonant and V represents any vowel.
225: The rule says that, if a voiceless consonant appears in the
226: \term{phonological environment} `\underline{\hspace*{3ex}} V'
227: (i.e. preceding a vowel), then the consonant becomes voiced.
228: By default, vowels have the feature
229: \(\left[+\mbox{voiced}\right]\), and so can make the observation
230: that the consonant \term{assimilates} the voicing feature of the following
231: vowel.
232:
233: One way to see if our analysis generalises is to check for
234: any nominative forms that end in a voiced consonant. We
235: expect this consonant to stay the same in the dative form.
236: However, it turns out that we do not find any nominative
237: forms ending in a voiced consonant. Rather, we see the
238: pattern in example (\ref{ex:russian2}).
239: (Note that \v{c} is an alternative symbol for IPA \textteshlig).
240:
241: \begin{examples}
242: \item\label{ex:russian2}
243: \begin{tabular}[t]{lll}
244: \colname{Nominative} & \colname{Dative} & \colname{Gloss}\\
245: \v{c}erep & \v{c}erepu & `skull'\\
246: xolop & xolopu & `bondman' \\
247: trup & trupu & `corpse' \\
248: cvet & cvetu & `colour'\\
249: les & lesu & `forest' \\
250: porok & poroku & `vice'
251: \end{tabular}
252: \end{examples}
253:
254: For these words, the voiceless consonants of the nominative
255: form are unchanged in the dative form, contrary to our
256: rule (\ref{ex:spe1}). These cannot be treated as exceptions,
257: since this second pattern is quite pervasive. A solution
258: is to construct an artificial form which is the dative wordform
259: minus the \ling{-u} suffix. We will call this the \term{underlying form}
260: of the word. Example (\ref{ex:russian3}) illustrates this for
261: two cases:
262:
263: \begin{examples}
264: \item\label{ex:russian3}
265: \begin{tabular}[t]{llll}
266: \colname{Underlying} &
267: \colname{Nominative} & \colname{Dative} & \colname{Gloss}\\
268: prud & prut & prudu & `pond'\\
269: cvet & cvet & cvetu & `colour'
270: \end{tabular}
271: \end{examples}
272:
273: Now we can account for the dative form simply by suffixing the
274: \ling{-u}. We account for the nominative form with the following
275: \term{devoicing rule}:
276:
277: \begin{examples}
278: \item\label{ex:spe2}
279: \[
280: \left[
281: \begin{array}{c}
282: \mbox{C}\\
283: +\mbox{voiced}
284: \end{array}
285: \right]
286: \rightarrow
287: \left[
288: -\mbox{voiced}
289: \right]
290: {\Huge /}
291: \underline{\hspace*{3ex}} \#
292: \]
293: {\it
294: A consonant becomes devoiced word-finally
295: }
296: \end{examples}
297:
298: This rule states that a voiced consonant is devoiced
299: (i.e. [+voiced] becomes [--voiced]) if the consonant is followed
300: by a word boundary (symbolised by \#).
301: It solves a problem with rule~\ref{ex:spe1} which only accounts for half of
302: the data. Rule~\ref{ex:spe2} is called
303: a \term{neutralisation} rule, because the \term{voicing contrast}
304: of the underlying form is removed in the nominative form.
305: Now the analysis
306: accounts for all the nominative and dative forms.
307: Typically, rules like (\ref{ex:spe2}) can simultaneously
308: employ several of the distinctive features from (\ref{ex:distinctive}).
309:
310: Observe that our analysis involves a certain degree of \term{abstractness}.
311: We have constructed a new \term{level of representation} and drawn
312: inferences about the \term{underlying forms} by inspecting the
313: observed \term{surface forms}.
314:
315: To conclude the development so far, we have seen a simple
316: kind of \term{phonological representation} (namely sequences
317: of alphabetic symbols, where each stands for a bundle of
318: distinctive features), a distinction between levels of
319: representation, and rules which account for the relationship
320: between the representations on various levels. One way or another,
321: most of phonology is concerned about these three things:
322: representations, levels, and rules.
323:
324: Finally, let us consider the plural forms shown in example
325: (\ref{ex:russian4}). The plural morpheme is either \ling{-a} or \ling{-y}.
326:
327: \begin{examples}
328: \item\label{ex:russian4}
329: \begin{tabular}[t]{llll}
330: \colname{Singular} & \colname{Plural} & \colname{Gloss}\\
331: xlep & xleba & `bread' \\
332: grop & groby & `coffin' \\
333: \v{c}erep & \v{c}erepa & `skull'\\
334: xolop & xolopy & `bondman' \\
335: trup & trupy & `corpse' \\
336: sat & sady & `garden' \\
337: prut & prudy & `pond'\\
338: cvet & cveta & `colour'\\
339: ras & razy & `time' \\
340: les & lesa & `forest' \\
341: rok & roga & `horn' \\
342: porok & poroky & `vice'
343: \end{tabular}
344: \end{examples}
345:
346: The phonological environment of the suffix provides us with no way of
347: predicting which allomorph is chosen. One solution would be to
348: enrich the underlying form once more (for example, we could include
349: the plural suffix in the underlying form, and then have rules to
350: delete it in all cases but the plural). A better approach in this
351: case is to distinguish two \term{morphological classes}, one for
352: nouns taking the \ling{-y} plural, and one for nouns taking the
353: \ling{-a} plural.
354: This information would then be an idiosyncratic property of each lexical
355: item, and a morphological rule would be responsible for the choice between
356: the \ling{-y} and \ling{-a} \term{allomorphs}.
357: A full account of this data, then, must involve phonological, morphological
358: and lexical modules of a grammar.
359:
360: As another example, let us consider the vowels of Turkish.
361: These vowels are tabulated below, along
362: with a decomposition into distinctive features: [high], [back] and [round].
363: The features [high] and [back] relate to the position of the tongue
364: body in the oral cavity. The feature [round] relates to the rounding
365: of the lips, as in the English \ling{w} sound.\footnote{Note
366: that there is a distinction made in the Turkish
367: alphabet between the dotted \ling{i} and the dotless \ling{\i}.
368: This \ling{\i} is a high, back, unrounded
369: vowel that does not occur in English.}
370:
371: \begin{examples}
372: \item\label{ex:turkish-vowels}
373: \begin{tabular}[t]{l|llllllll}
374: & u & o & \"u & \"o & \i & a & i & e \\ \hline
375: high & + & -- & + & -- & + & -- & + & -- \\
376: back & + & + & -- & -- & + & + & -- & -- \\
377: round& + & + & + & + & -- & -- & -- & -- \\
378: \end{tabular}
379: \end{examples}
380: %
381: Consider the following Turkish words, paying
382: particular attention to the four versions of the possessive
383: suffix. Note that similar data are discussed in chapter 2.
384:
385: \begin{examples}
386: \item\label{ex:turkish-words1}
387: \begin{tabular}[t]{llll}
388: ip & `rope' & ipin & `rope's' \\
389: k\i z & `girl' & k\i z\i n & `girl's' \\
390: y\"uz & `face' & y\"uz\"un & `face's' \\
391: pul & `stamp' & pulun & `stamp's' \\
392: el & `hand' & elin & `hand's' \\
393: \c{c}an & `bell' & \c{c}an\i n & `bell's' \\
394: k\"oy & `village' & k\"oy\"un & `village's' \\
395: son & `end' & sonun & `end's'
396: \end{tabular}
397: \end{examples}
398:
399: The possessive suffix has the forms \ling{in}, \ling{\i n},
400: \ling{\"un} and \ling{un}. In terms of the distinctive
401: feature chart in (\ref{ex:turkish-vowels}), we can observe
402: that the suffix vowel is always [+high]. The other features
403: of the suffix vowel are copied from the stem vowel.
404: This copying is called \term{vowel harmony}.
405: Let us see how this behaviour can be expressed using a
406: phonological rule. To do this, we assume that the vowel
407: of the possessive affix
408: is only specified as [+high] and is \term{underspecified}
409: for its other features. In the following rule,
410: \ling{C} denotes any consonant, and the Greek letter variables
411: range over the + and -- values of the feature.
412:
413: \begin{examples}
414: \item\label{ex:SPE-Turkish}
415: \[
416: \left[
417: \begin{array}{l}
418: V \\ \mbox{+high}
419: \end{array}
420: \right] \longrightarrow
421: \left[
422: \begin{array}{l}
423: \alpha\mbox{back} \\ \beta\mbox{round}
424: \end{array}
425: \right] \mbox{\Huge /}
426: \left[
427: \begin{array}{l}
428: \alpha\mbox{back} \\ \beta\mbox{round}
429: \end{array}
430: \right] C^* \mbox{\underline{\makebox[3ex]{}}}
431: \]
432: {\it
433: A high vowel assimilates to the backness and rounding of the preceding vowel
434: }
435: \end{examples}
436: %
437: So long as the stem vowel is specified for the
438: properties [high] and [back], this rule will make sure that they
439: are copied onto the affix vowel. However, there is nothing
440: in the rule formalism to stop the variables being used in
441: inappropriate ways (e.g. $\alpha$ back $\rightarrow$ $\alpha$ round).
442: So we can see that the rule formalism does not permit us to express
443: the notion that certain features are \term{shared}
444: by more than one segment. Instead, we would like to
445: be able to represent the sharing explicitly, as follows,
446: where $\pm$H abbreviates [$\pm$high], an underspecified vowel position:
447:
448: \begin{examples}
449: \item\label{ex:ap1}\hfil\\
450:
451: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth}
452: {\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
453: \begin{picture}(50,35)(5,0)
454: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \c{c}}}
455: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --H}}
456: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut n}}
457: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +H}}
458: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut n}}
459: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +back}}
460: \put(30,5){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --round}}
461: \put(30,15){\line(-1,1){10}}
462: \put(30,15){\line(1,1){10}}
463: \end{picture}
464: }
465: \end{minipage}
466: \hfil
467: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth}
468: {\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
469: \begin{picture}(50,35)(5,0)
470: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut k}}
471: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +H}}
472: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut y}}
473: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +H}}
474: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut n}}
475: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --back}}
476: \put(30,5){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +round}}
477: \put(30,15){\line(-1,1){10}}
478: \put(30,15){\line(1,1){10}}
479: \end{picture}
480: }
481: \end{minipage}
482: \end{examples}
483: %
484: The lines of this diagram indicate that the backness and roundness
485: properties are shared by both vowels in a word. A single
486: vowel property (or type) is manifested
487: on two separate vowels (tokens).
488:
489: Entities like [+back,--round] that function over extended regions
490: are often referred to as \term{prosodies}, and this kind of picture is
491: sometimes called a \term{non-linear} representation. Many
492: phonological models use non-linear representations of one sort
493: or another. Here we shall consider one particular model,
494: namely \term{autosegmental phonology}, since it is the most widely
495: used non-linear model. The term comes from `autonomous + segment',
496: and refers to the autonomous nature of segments (or certain groups of
497: features) once they have been liberated from one-dimensional strings.
498:
499: \section{Autosegmental Phonology}
500:
501: In autosegmental phonology, diagrams like those we saw above are known
502: as \term{charts}. A chart consists of two or more \term{tiers}, along with
503: some \term{association lines} drawn between the autosegments on those
504: tiers. The \term{no-crossing constraint} is a stipulation that
505: association lines are not allowed to cross, ensuring that association
506: lines can be interpreted as asserting some kind of temporal overlap or
507: inclusion. \term{Autosegmental rules} are procedures
508: for converting one representation into another, by adding or removing
509: association lines and autosegments. A rule for Turkish vowel harmony
510: is shown below on the left in (\ref{ex:harmony}),
511: where \ling{V} denotes any vowel, and the dashed line
512: indicates that a new association is created. This rule applies to the
513: representation in the middle, to yield the one on the right.
514:
515: \begin{examples}
516: \item\label{ex:harmony}\hfil\\
517:
518: {\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
519: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
520: \begin{picture}(25,35)(5,0)
521: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut V}}
522: \put(15,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut C$^*$}}
523: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut V}}
524: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +back}}
525: \put(10,5){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --round}}
526: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
527: \dashline{3}(10,15)(20,25)
528: \end{picture}
529: \end{minipage}}
530: \hfil
531: {\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
532: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
533: \begin{picture}(50,35)(5,0)
534: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \c{c}}}
535: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --H}}
536: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut n}}
537: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +H}}
538: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut n}}
539: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +back}}
540: \put(20,5){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --round}}
541: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
542: \end{picture}
543: \end{minipage}}
544: \hfil
545: {\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
546: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
547: \begin{picture}(50,35)(5,0)
548: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \c{c}}}
549: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --H}}
550: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut n}}
551: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +H}}
552: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut n}}
553: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut +back}}
554: \put(30,5){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut --round}}
555: \put(30,15){\line(-1,1){10}}
556: \put(30,15){\line(1,1){10}}
557: \end{picture}
558: \end{minipage}}
559: \end{examples}
560:
561: In order to fully appreciate the power of autosegmental phonology,
562: we will use it to analyse some data from an African tone language.
563: Consider the data in Table~\ref{tab:chakosi}. Twelve nouns are listed
564: down the left side, and the isolation form and five contextual forms
565: are provided across the table. The line segments indicate voice pitch
566: (the fundamental frequency of the voice);
567: dotted lines are for the syllables of the context words,
568: and full lines are for
569: the syllables of the target word, as it is pronounced in this context.
570: At first glace this data seems bewildering in its complexity.
571: However, we will see how autosegmental analysis reveals the simple
572: underlying structure of the data.
573: %
574: \def\slot{\underline{\hspace*{5mm}}}
575: \begin{table}[t]
576: {\small\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.5\tabcolsep}
577: \begin{tabular}[t]{l|l|l|l|l|l|l}
578: \colname{}
579: & A.
580: & B.
581: & C.
582: & D.
583: & E.
584: & F.
585: \\
586:
587: \colname{Wordform}
588: & \colname{\slot}
589: & \colname{i \slot}
590: & \colname{am \textg oro \slot}
591: & \colname{\slot\ k\~u}
592: & \colname{am \slot\ wo d\textopeno}
593: & \colname{jiine \slot\ ni}
594: \\
595:
596: & {\scriptsize isolation}
597: & {\scriptsize `his ...'}
598: & {\scriptsize `your (pl)}
599: & {\scriptsize `one ...'}
600: & {\scriptsize `your (pl) ...'}
601: & {\scriptsize `that ...'}
602: \\
603:
604: &
605: &
606: & {\scriptsize brother's ...'}
607: &
608: & {\scriptsize is there'}
609: &
610: \\ \hline
611:
612: 1. {\bf b\textscripta k\textscripta} `tree'
613: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3}
614: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2}
615: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2}
616: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
617: & \d{3}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
618: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
619: \\
620:
621: 2. {\bf s\textscripta k\textscripta} `comb'
622: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{1}
623: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2}
624: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{0}
625: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
626: & \d{3}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
627: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
628: \\
629:
630: 3. {\bf buri} `duck'
631: & \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
632: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
633: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}
634: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
635: &
636: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{0}{0}
637: \\
638:
639: 4. {\bf siri} `goat'
640: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{1}
641: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{1}
642: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{0}
643: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
644: & \d{3}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
645: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{0}{0}
646: \\
647:
648: 5. {\bf \textg\textscripta do} `bed'
649: & \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2}
650: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3}
651: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2}
652: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
653: &
654: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{0}{0}
655: \\
656:
657: 6. {\bf \textg\textopeno r\textopeno} `brother'
658: & \l{1}{1} \l{1}{1}
659: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
660: &
661: & \l{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \d{1}{1}
662: & \d{3}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
663: &
664: \\ \hline
665:
666: 7. {\bf c\textscripta} `dog'
667: & \l{1}{3}
668: & \d{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
669: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{1}{3}
670: & \l{1}{1} \d{1}{1}
671: & \d{3}{1} \l{1}{1} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
672: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{0}{0}
673: \\
674:
675: 8. {\bf ni} `mother'
676: & \l{1}{1}
677: & \d{1}{1} \l{1}{1}
678: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{2}{2}
679: & \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
680: &
681: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{0}{0}
682: \\ \hline
683:
684: 9. {\bf j\textopeno k\textopeno r\textopeno} `chain'
685: & \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3}
686: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2}
687: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2}
688: & \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
689: & \d{3}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
690: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
691: \\
692:
693: 10. {\bf tokoro} `window'
694: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3}
695: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3}
696: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2}
697: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
698: & \d{3}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
699: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
700: \\
701:
702: 11. {\bf bul\textscripta li} `iron'
703: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
704: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}
705: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}
706: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
707: & \d{4}{2} \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
708: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
709: \\
710:
711: 12. {\bf misini} `needle'
712: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
713: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
714: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}
715: & \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
716: & \d{3}{1} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
717: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
718:
719: \end{tabular}}
720: \caption{Tone Data from Chakosi (Ghana)}\label{tab:chakosi}
721: \end{table}
722:
723: Looking across the table, observe that the contextual forms of
724: a given noun are quite variable. For example
725: \ling{bul\textscripta li} appears as
726: \mbox{\l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}},
727: \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}},
728: \mbox{\l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3}}, and
729: \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2}}.
730:
731: We could begin the analysis by identifying all the levels (here there are
732: five), assigning a name or number to each, and looking for patterns.
733: However, this approach does not capture the relative nature of tone, where
734: \mbox{\l{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}} is not distinguished from
735: \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{4}{4} \l{2}{2}}. Instead, our approach just has to be
736: sensitive to \emph{differences} between adjacent tones. So these distinct tone
737: sequences could be represented identically as $+1$, $-2$, since we go
738: up a small amount from the first to the second tone ($+1$), and then
739: down a larger amount ($-2$).
740: In autosegmental analysis, we treat \term{contour tones} as being made up of
741: two or more \term{level tones} compressed into the space of a single syllable.
742: Therefore, we can treat \mbox{\l{1}{1} \l{2}{0}} as another instance
743: of $+1$, $-2$.
744: Given our autosegmental perspective, a sequence of two or more identical
745: tones corresponds
746: to a single spread tone. This means that
747: we can collapse sequences of like tones
748: to a single tone.\footnote{
749: This assumption cannot be maintained in more
750: sophisticated approaches involving lexical and prosodic domains.
751: However, it is a very useful simplifying assumption for the
752: purposes of this presentation.
753: }
754: When we retranscribe our data in this way, some interesting
755: patterns emerge.
756:
757: First, by observing the raw frequency of these
758: intertone intervals, we see that $-2$ and $+1$ are by
759: far the most common, occurring 63 and 39 times respectively.
760: A $-1$ difference occurs 8 times, while a $+2$ difference is very
761: rare (only occurring 3 times, and only in phrase-final contour tones).
762: This patterning is characteristic of a \term{terrace tone language}.
763: In analysing such a language, phonologists typically propose an inventory of
764: just two tones, H (high) and L (low), where these might be represented
765: featurally as [$\pm$hi]. In such a model, the tone sequence
766: HL corresponds to \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}}, a pitch difference of $-2$.
767:
768: In terrace tone languages, an H tone does not achieve its former level
769: after an L tone, so HLH is \term{phonetically realized} as
770: \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2}},
771: (instead of \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{1}{1} \l{3}{3}}).
772: This kind of H-lowering is called \term{automatic downstep}.
773: A pitch difference of $+1$ corresponds to an LH tone sequence.
774: With this model, we already account for the prevalence of
775: the $-2$ and $+1$ intervals. What about $-1$ and $+2$?
776:
777: As we will see later, the $-1$ difference arises when
778: the middle tone of \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2}} (HLH) is deleted,
779: leaving just \mbox{\l{3}{3} \l{2}{2}}. In this situation we
780: write H!H, where the exclamation mark indicates the lowering of
781: the following H due to a deleted (or \term{floating} low tone).
782: This kind of H-lowering is called
783: \term{conditioned downstep}. The rare $+2$ difference only occurs
784: for an LH contour; we can assume that
785: automatic downstep only applies when a LH sequence is linked
786: to two separate syllables (\mbox{\l{1}{1} \l{2}{2}}) and not when
787: the sequence is linked to a single syllable (\mbox{\l{1}{3}}).
788:
789: To summarise these conventions, we associate the pitch differences
790: to tone sequences as shown in (\ref{ex:simple-tone}). Syllable
791: boundaries are marked with a dot.
792:
793: \begin{examples}
794: \item\label{ex:simple-tone}
795: \begin{tabular}[t]{rrrrr}
796: \colname{Interval} & $-2$ & $-1$ & $+1$ & $+2$ \\
797: \colname{Pitches} & \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}
798: & \l{2}{2} \l{1}{1}
799: & \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2}
800: & \l{0}{2} \\
801: \colname{Tones} & H.L & H.!H & L.H & LH
802: \end{tabular}
803: \end{examples}
804:
805: Now we are in a position to provide tonal transcriptions
806: for the forms in Table~\ref{tab:chakosi}. Example (\ref{ex:trans})
807: gives the transcriptions for the forms involving \ling{bul\textscripta li}.
808: Tones corresponding to the noun are underlined.
809:
810: \begin{examples}
811: \item\label{ex:trans}
812: {\bf Transcriptions of bul\textscripta li `iron'}
813:
814: \begin{tabular}{llll}
815: bul\textscripta li
816: & `iron'
817: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{1}{1}
818: & \underline{L.H.L}
819: \\
820:
821: i bul\textscripta li
822: & `his iron'
823: & \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}
824: & H.\underline{H.!H.L}
825: \\
826:
827: am \textg oro bul\textscripta li
828: & `your (pl) brother's iron'
829: & \d{3}{1} \d{1}{1} \d{1}{1} \l{1}{1} \l{2}{2} \l{0}{0}
830: & HL.L.L.\underline{L.H.L}
831: \\
832:
833: bul\textscripta li k\~u
834: & `one iron'
835: & \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{1}{1}
836: & \underline{L.H.H}.L
837: \\
838:
839: am bul\textscripta li wo d\textopeno
840: & `your (pl) iron is there'
841: & \d{4}{2} \l{2}{2} \l{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \d{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
842: & HL.\underline{L.H.H}.!H.L
843: \\
844:
845: jiine bul\textscripta li ni
846: & `that iron'
847: & \d{2}{2} \d{3}{3} \l{3}{3} \l{2}{2} \l{2}{2} \d{0}{0}
848: & L.H.\underline{H.!H.H}.L
849: \end{tabular}
850: \end{examples}
851:
852: Looking down the right hand column of (\ref{ex:trans}) at the
853: underlined tones, observe again the diversity of \term{surface forms}
854: corresponding to the single lexical item. An autosegmental analysis
855: is able to account for all this variation with a single spreading
856: rule.
857:
858: \begin{examples}
859: \item\label{ex:hts}
860: {\bf High Tone Spread}\\
861:
862: {\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
863: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
864: \begin{picture}(25,35)(5,0)
865: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut $\sigma$}}
866: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut $\sigma$}}
867: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut $\sigma$}}
868: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
869: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
870: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
871: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
872: \put(20,20){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut =}}
873: \dashline{3}(10,15)(20,25)
874: \end{picture}
875: \end{minipage}}
876: {\it
877: A high tone spreads to the following (non-final) syllable, delinking the low tone
878: }
879: \end{examples}
880:
881: Rule (\ref{ex:hts}) applies to any sequence of three syllables ($\sigma$)
882: where the first is linked to an H tone and the second is linked to
883: an L tone. The rule spreads H to the right, delinking the L.
884: Crucially, the L itself is not deleted, but remains as a
885: \term{floating tone}, and continues to influence surface tone
886: as downstep. Example (\ref{ex:hts-app}) shows the
887: application of the H spread rule to forms involving
888: \ling{bul\textscripta li}. The first row of autosegmental diagrams
889: shows the underlying forms, where \ling{bul\textscripta li} is
890: assigned an LHL \term{tone melody}. In the second row, we see
891: the result of applying H spread. Following standard practice, the
892: floating low tones are circled. Where a floating L appears between
893: two H tones, it gives rise to downstep. The final assignment of tones
894: to syllables and the position of the downsteps are shown in the last
895: row of the table.
896:
897: \begin{examples}
898: \item\label{ex:hts-app}
899:
900: {\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.9\tabcolsep}
901: \begin{tabular}[t]{llll}
902: B. `his iron'
903: & D. `one iron'
904: & E. `your (pl) iron'
905: & F. `that iron'
906: \\
907:
908: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
909: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
910: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
911: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut i}}
912: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
913: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
914: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
915: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
916: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
917: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
918: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
919: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
920: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
921: \put(30,15){\line(0,1){10}}
922: \put(40,15){\line(0,1){10}}
923: \end{picture}
924: \end{minipage}}
925: &
926: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
927: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
928: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
929: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
930: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
931: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
932: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut k\~u}}
933: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
934: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
935: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
936: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
937: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
938: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
939: \put(30,15){\line(0,1){10}}
940: \put(40,15){\line(0,1){10}}
941: \end{picture}
942: \end{minipage}}
943: &
944: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
945: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
946: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
947: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \textscripta m}}
948: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
949: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
950: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
951: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut wo}}
952: \put(60,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut d\textopeno}}
953: \put( 7,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
954: \put(13,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
955: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
956: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
957: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
958: \put(50,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
959: \put(60,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
960: \put(8,15){\line(1,5){2}}
961: \put(12,15){\line(-1,5){2}}
962: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
963: \put(30,15){\line(0,1){10}}
964: \put(40,15){\line(0,1){10}}
965: \put(50,15){\line(0,1){10}}
966: \put(60,15){\line(0,1){10}}
967: \end{picture}
968: \end{minipage}}
969: &
970: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
971: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
972: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
973: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut jii}}
974: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut ni}}
975: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
976: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
977: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
978: \put(60,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut ni}}
979: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
980: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
981: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
982: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
983: \put(50,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
984: \put(60,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
985: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
986: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
987: \put(30,15){\line(0,1){10}}
988: \put(40,15){\line(0,1){10}}
989: \put(50,15){\line(0,1){10}}
990: \put(60,15){\line(0,1){10}}
991: \end{picture}
992: \end{minipage}}
993: \\
994:
995: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
996: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
997: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
998: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut i}}
999: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
1000: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
1001: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
1002: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1003: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \ovalbox{L}}}
1004: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1005: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1006: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1007: \put(10,15){\line(1,1){10}}
1008: \put(30,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1009: \put(40,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1010: \end{picture}
1011: \end{minipage}}
1012: &
1013: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
1014: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
1015: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
1016: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
1017: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
1018: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
1019: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut k\~u}}
1020: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1021: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1022: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \ovalbox{L}}}
1023: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1024: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1025: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1026: \put(20,15){\line(1,1){10}}
1027: \put(40,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1028: \end{picture}
1029: \end{minipage}}
1030: &
1031: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
1032: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
1033: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
1034: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \textscripta m}}
1035: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
1036: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
1037: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
1038: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut wo}}
1039: \put(60,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut d\textopeno}}
1040: \put( 7,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1041: \put(13,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1042: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1043: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1044: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \ovalbox{L}}}
1045: \put(50,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1046: \put(60,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1047: \put(8,15){\line(1,5){2}}
1048: \put(12,15){\line(-1,5){2}}
1049: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1050: \put(30,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1051: \put(30,15){\line(1,1){10}}
1052: \put(50,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1053: \put(60,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1054: \end{picture}
1055: \end{minipage}}
1056: &
1057: {\setlength{\unitlength}{.6mm}
1058: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\textwidth}
1059: \begin{picture}(45,35)(5,0)
1060: \put(10,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut jii}}
1061: \put(20,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut ni}}
1062: \put(30,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut bu}}
1063: \put(40,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut l\textscripta}}
1064: \put(50,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut li}}
1065: \put(60,30){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut ni}}
1066: \put(10,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1067: \put(20,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1068: \put(30,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \ovalbox{L}}}
1069: \put(40,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut H}}
1070: \put(50,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut \ovalbox{L}}}
1071: \put(60,10){\makebox(0,0)[c]{\strut L}}
1072: \put(10,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1073: \put(20,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1074: \put(20,15){\line(1,1){10}}
1075: \put(40,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1076: \put(40,15){\line(1,1){10}}
1077: \put(60,15){\line(0,1){10}}
1078: \end{picture}
1079: \end{minipage}}
1080: \\
1081:
1082: {\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.5\tabcolsep}
1083: \begin{tabular}{llll}
1084: i & bu & l\textscripta & li \\
1085: H & H & !H & L \\
1086: \d{3}{3} &\l{3}{3} &\l{2}{2} &\l{0}{0}
1087: \end{tabular}}
1088: &
1089: {\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.5\tabcolsep}
1090: \begin{tabular}{llll}
1091: bu & l\textscripta & li & k\~u \\
1092: L & H & H & L \\
1093: \l{2}{2} &\l{3}{3} &\l{3}{3} &\d{1}{1}
1094: \end{tabular}}
1095: &
1096: {\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.5\tabcolsep}
1097: \begin{tabular}{llllll}
1098: \textscripta m & bu & l\textscripta & li & wo & d\textopeno \\
1099: HL & L & H & H & !H & L\\
1100: \d{4}{2} &\l{2}{2} &\l{3}{3} &\l{3}{3} &\d{2}{2} &\d{0}{0}
1101: \end{tabular}}
1102: &
1103: {\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.5\tabcolsep}
1104: \begin{tabular}{llllll}
1105: jii & ni & bu & l\textscripta & li & ni \\
1106: L & H & H & !H & H & L \\
1107: \d{2}{2} & \d{3}{3} & \l{3}{3} & \l{2}{2} & \l{2}{2} & \d{0}{0}
1108: \end{tabular}}
1109: \\
1110:
1111: \end{tabular}}
1112: \end{examples}
1113:
1114: Example (\ref{ex:hts-app}) shows the power of autosegmental phonology --
1115: together with suitable underlying forms and
1116: appropriate principles of phonetic interpretation --
1117: in analysing complex patterns with simple rules.
1118: Space precludes a full analysis of the data; interested readers
1119: can try hypothesising underlying forms for the other words, along
1120: with new rules, to account for the rest of the data in
1121: Table~\ref{tab:chakosi}.
1122:
1123: The preceding discussion of segmental and autosegmental phonology
1124: highlights the multi-linear organisation of phonological representations,
1125: which derives from the temporal nature of the speech stream.
1126: Phonological representations are also organised hierarchically.
1127: We already know that phonological information comprises words,
1128: and words, phrases. This is one kind of hierarchical organisation
1129: of phonological information. But phonological analysis has also
1130: demonstrated the need for other kinds of hierarchy, such as
1131: the \term{prosodic hierarchy},
1132: which builds structure involving syllables, feet
1133: and intonational phrases above the segment level, and
1134: \term{feature geometry}, which involves hierarchical organisation beneath
1135: the level of the segment.
1136: Phonological rules and constraints can refer to the prosodic hierarchy in
1137: order to account for the observed \term{distribution} of phonological
1138: information across the linear sequence of segments. Feature geometry
1139: serves the dual purpose of accounting for the inventory of contrastive
1140: sounds available to a language, and for the alternations we can observe.
1141: Here we will consider just one level of phonological hierarchy, namely
1142: the syllable.
1143:
1144: \section{Syllable Structure}
1145:
1146: Syllables are a fundamental organisational unit in phonology.
1147: In many languages, phonological alternations are sensitive to syllable
1148: structure. For example, \ling{t} has several \term{allophones} in
1149: English, and the choice of allophone depends on phonological context.
1150: For example, in many English dialects, \ling{t} is pronounced as
1151: the flap [\textfishhookr] between vowels, as in \ling{water}.
1152: Two other variants are shown in (\ref{ex:t}), where the phonetic
1153: transcription is given in brackets, and syllable boundaries are
1154: marked with a dot.
1155:
1156: \begin{examples}
1157: \item\label{ex:t}
1158: \begin{subexamples}
1159: \item
1160: atlas [\ae t\textsuperscript{\textglotstop}.l\textschwa s]
1161: \item
1162: cactus [k\ae k.t\textsuperscript{h}\textschwa s]
1163: \end{subexamples}
1164: \end{examples}
1165:
1166: Native English syllables cannot begin with \ling{tl}, and so
1167: the \ling{t} of \ling{atlas} is syllabified with the preceding
1168: vowel. Syllable final \ling{t} is regularly glottalised or unreleased
1169: in English, while syllable initial \ling{t} is regularly aspirated.
1170: Thus we have a natural explanation for the patterning of
1171: these allophones in terms of syllable structure.
1172:
1173: Other evidence for the syllable comes from loanwords. When words are
1174: borrowed into one language from another, they must be adjusted so as
1175: to conform to the legal sound patterns (or \term{phonotactics}) of the
1176: host language. For example, consider the following borrowings from
1177: English into Dschang, a language of Cameroon \citep{Bird99syl}.
1178:
1179: \begin{examples}
1180: \item\label{ex:dschang}
1181: afruwa {\it flower},
1182: akalatusi {\it eucalyptus},
1183: al{\textepsilon}sa {\it razor},
1184: al{\textopeno}ba {\it rubber},
1185: apl{\textepsilon}\textipa{\ng}g{\textepsilon} {\it blanket},
1186: as{\textschwa}kuu {\it school},
1187: c{\textepsilon}{\textepsilon}n {\it chain},
1188: d{\textschwa}{\textschwa}k {\it debt},
1189: kapinda {\it carpenter},
1190: k{\textepsilon}si\textipa{\ng} {\it kitchen},
1191: kuum {\it comb},
1192: laam {\it lamp},
1193: l{\textepsilon}si {\it rice},
1194: luum {\it room},
1195: mbas{\textschwa}ku {\it bicycle},
1196: mbrusi {\it brush},
1197: mb{\textschwa}r{\textschwa}{\textschwa}k {\it brick},
1198: m{\textepsilon}ta {\it mat},
1199: m{\textepsilon}t{\textschwa}rasi {\it mattress},
1200: \textipa{\ng}glasi {\it glass},
1201: {\textltailn}jakasi {\it jackass},
1202: m{\textepsilon}tisi {\it match}
1203: nubatisi {\it rheumatism},
1204: p{\textopeno}k{\textepsilon} {\it pocket}
1205: \textipa{\ng}gal{\textepsilon} {\it garden},
1206: s{\textschwa}sa {\it scissors},
1207: t{\textepsilon}w{\textepsilon}l{\textepsilon} {\it towel},
1208: wasi {\it watch},
1209: zii\textipa{\ng} {\it zinc},
1210: \end{examples}
1211:
1212: In Dschang, the \term{syllable canon} is much more restricted
1213: than in English. Consider the patterning of \ling{t}. This
1214: segment is illegal in syllable-final position.
1215: In technical language, we would say that alveolars are not
1216: \term{licensed} in the syllable coda.
1217: In m{\textepsilon}ta {\it mat}, a vowel is inserted,
1218: making the \ling{t} into the initial segment of the next syllable.
1219: For d{\textschwa}{\textschwa}k {\it debt}, the place of articulation
1220: of the \ling{t} is changed to velar, making it a legal syllable-final
1221: consonant.
1222: For apl{\textepsilon}\textipa{\ng}g{\textepsilon} {\it blanket}, the
1223: final \ling{t} is deleted. Many other adjustments
1224: can be seen in (\ref{ex:dschang}), and most of them can be explained
1225: with reference to syllable structure.
1226:
1227: A third source of evidence for syllable structure comes from
1228: morphology. In Ulwa, a Nicaraguan language, the position of
1229: the possessive \term{infix} is sensitive to syllable structure.
1230: The Ulwa syllable canon is (C)V(V|C)(C), and any \term{intervocalic}
1231: consonant (i.e.\ consonant between two vowels) is syllabified with
1232: the following syllable, a universal principle known as
1233: \term{onset maximisation}.
1234: Consider the Ulwa data in (\ref{ex:ulwa}).
1235:
1236: \begin{examples}
1237: \item\label{ex:ulwa}
1238: \begin{tabular}[t]{lll|lll}
1239: \colname{Word} & \colname{Possessive} & \colname{Gloss} &
1240: \colname{Word} & \colname{Possessive} & \colname{Gloss} \\ \hline
1241:
1242: b\textscripta\textscripta
1243: & b\textscripta\textscripta.{\bf k\textscripta}
1244: & `excrement' &
1245:
1246: bi.l\textscripta m
1247: & bi.l\textscripta m.{\bf k\textscripta}
1248: & `fish' \\
1249:
1250: dii.muih
1251: & dii.{\bf k\textscripta}.muih
1252: & `snake' &
1253:
1254: g\textscripta\textscripta d
1255: & g\textscripta\textscripta d.{\bf k\textscripta}
1256: & `god' \\
1257:
1258: ii.bin
1259: & ii.{\bf k\textscripta}.bin
1260: & `heaven' &
1261:
1262: ii.li.lih
1263: & ii.{\bf k\textscripta}.li.lih
1264: & `shark' \\
1265:
1266: k\textscripta h.m\textscripta
1267: & k\textscripta h.{\bf k\textscripta}.m\textscripta
1268: & `iguana' &
1269:
1270: k\textscripta.p\textscripta k
1271: & k\textscripta.p\textscripta k.{\bf k\textscripta}
1272: & `manner' \\
1273:
1274: lii.m\textscripta
1275: & lii.{\bf k\textscripta}.m\textscripta
1276: & `lemon' &
1277:
1278: mis.tu
1279: & mis.{\bf k\textscripta}.tu
1280: & `cat' \\
1281:
1282: on.y\textscripta n
1283: & on.{\bf k\textscripta}.y\textscripta n
1284: & `onion' &
1285:
1286: p\textscripta u.m\textscripta k
1287: & p\textscripta u.{\bf k\textscripta}.m\textscripta k
1288: & `tomato' \\
1289:
1290: sik.bilh
1291: & sik.{\bf k\textscripta}.bilh
1292: & `horsefly' &
1293:
1294: t\textscripta im
1295: & t\textscripta im.{\bf k\textscripta}
1296: & `time' \\
1297:
1298: t\textscripta i.t\textscripta i
1299: & t\textscripta i.{\bf k\textscripta}.t\textscripta i
1300: & `grey squirrel' &
1301:
1302: uu.m\textscripta k
1303: & uu.{\bf k\textscripta}.m\textscripta k
1304: & `window' \\
1305:
1306: w\textscripta i.ku
1307: & w\textscripta i.{\bf k\textscripta}.ku
1308: & `moon, month' &
1309:
1310: w\textscripta.s\textscripta.l\textscripta
1311: & w\textscripta.s\textscripta.{\bf k\textscripta}.l\textscripta
1312: & `possum'
1313: \end{tabular}
1314: \end{examples}
1315:
1316: Observe that the infix appears at a syllable boundary, and so we
1317: can already state that the infix position is sensitive to syllable
1318: structure. Any analysis of the infix position must take
1319: \term{syllable weight} into consideration.
1320: Syllables having a single short vowel and no following consonants
1321: are defined to be \term{light}. (The presence of onset consonants
1322: is irrelevant to syllable weight.)
1323: All other syllables, i.e. those which have two
1324: vowels, or a single long vowel, or a final consonant, are defined
1325: to be \term{heavy};
1326: e.g.\ \ling{kah}, \ling{kaa}, \ling{muih}, \ling{bilh}, \ling{ii},
1327: \ling{on}.
1328: Two common phonological representations for this syllable structure
1329: are the onset-rhyme model, and the moraic model. Representations
1330: for the syllables just listed are shown in (\ref{ex:syl}).
1331: In these diagrams, $\sigma$ denotes a syllable,
1332: O onset, R rhyme, N nucleus, C coda and $\mu$ \ling{mora}
1333: (the traditional, minimal unit of syllable weight).
1334:
1335: \begin{examples}
1336: \item\label{ex:syl}
1337: \begin{subexamples}
1338: \item {\bf The Onset-Rhyme Model of Syllable Structure}\\
1339:
1340: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1341: \chunk{
1342: \begin{bundle}{O}\chunk{k}\end{bundle}
1343: }
1344: \chunk{
1345: \begin{bundle}{R}
1346: \chunk{
1347: \begin{bundle}{N}\chunk{a}\end{bundle}
1348: }
1349: \end{bundle}
1350: }
1351: \end{bundle}
1352: \hfil
1353: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1354: \chunk{
1355: \begin{bundle}{O}\chunk{k}\end{bundle}
1356: }
1357: \chunk{
1358: \begin{bundle}{R}
1359: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{N}\chunk{a}\end{bundle}}
1360: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{C}\chunk{h}\end{bundle}}
1361: \end{bundle}
1362: }
1363: \end{bundle}
1364: \hfil
1365: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1366: \chunk{
1367: \begin{bundle}{O}\chunk{k}\end{bundle}
1368: }
1369: \chunk{
1370: \begin{bundle}{R}
1371: \chunk{
1372: \begin{bundle}{N}\chunk{a}\chunk{a}\end{bundle}
1373: }
1374: \end{bundle}
1375: }
1376: \end{bundle}
1377: \hfil
1378: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1379: \chunk{
1380: \begin{bundle}{O}\chunk{m}\end{bundle}
1381: }
1382: \chunk{
1383: \begin{bundle}{R}
1384: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{N}\chunk{u}\chunk{i}\end{bundle}}
1385: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{C}\chunk{h}\end{bundle}}
1386: \end{bundle}
1387: }
1388: \end{bundle}
1389: \hfil
1390: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1391: \chunk{
1392: \begin{bundle}{O}\chunk{b}\end{bundle}
1393: }
1394: \chunk{
1395: \begin{bundle}{R}
1396: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{N}\chunk{i}\end{bundle}}
1397: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{C}\chunk{l}\chunk{h}\end{bundle}}
1398: \end{bundle}
1399: }
1400: \end{bundle}
1401: \hfil
1402: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1403: \chunk{
1404: \begin{bundle}{R}
1405: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{N}\chunk{i}\chunk{i}\end{bundle}}
1406: \end{bundle}
1407: }
1408: \end{bundle}
1409: \hfil
1410: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1411: \chunk{
1412: \begin{bundle}{R}
1413: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{N}\chunk{o}\end{bundle}}
1414: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{C}\chunk{n}\end{bundle}}
1415: \end{bundle}
1416: }
1417: \end{bundle}
1418: \vspace{2ex}
1419:
1420: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1421:
1422: \item {\bf The Moraic Model of Syllable Structure}\\
1423:
1424: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1425: \chunk{k}
1426: \chunk{
1427: \begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{a}\end{bundle}
1428: }
1429: \end{bundle}
1430: \hfil
1431: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1432: \chunk{k}
1433: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{a}\end{bundle}}
1434: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{h}\end{bundle}}
1435: \end{bundle}
1436: \hfil
1437: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1438: \chunk{k}
1439: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{a}\end{bundle}}
1440: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{a}\end{bundle}}
1441: \end{bundle}
1442: \hfil
1443: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1444: \chunk{m}
1445: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{u}\end{bundle}}
1446: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{i}\chunk{h}\end{bundle}}
1447: \end{bundle}
1448: \hfil
1449: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1450: \chunk{b}
1451: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{i}\end{bundle}}
1452: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{l}\chunk{h}\end{bundle}}
1453: \end{bundle}
1454: \hfil
1455: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1456: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{i}\end{bundle}}
1457: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{i}\end{bundle}}
1458: \end{bundle}
1459: \hfil
1460: \begin{bundle}{$\sigma$}
1461: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{o}\end{bundle}}
1462: \chunk{\begin{bundle}{$\mu$}\chunk{n}\end{bundle}}
1463: \end{bundle}
1464: \end{subexamples}
1465: \end{examples}
1466:
1467: In the onset-rhyme model (\ref{ex:syl}a),
1468: consonants coming before the first vowel are
1469: linked to the onset node, and the rest of the material comes under
1470: the rhyme node.\footnote{Two syllables usually have to agree on the
1471: material in their rhyme constituents in order for them to be
1472: considered rhyming, hence the name.}
1473: A rhyme contains an obligatory nucleus and an optional coda.
1474: In this model, a syllable is said to be heavy if and only if its
1475: rhyme or its nucleus are branching.
1476:
1477: In the moraic mode (\ref{ex:syl}b),
1478: any consonants that appear before the first vowel are linked
1479: directly to the syllable node. The first vowel is linked to
1480: its own mora node (symbolised by $\mu$), and any remaining material is
1481: linked to the second mora node. A syllable is said to be heavy
1482: if and only if it has more than one mora.
1483:
1484: These are just two of several ways that have been proposed for
1485: representing syllable structure. Now the syllables
1486: constituting a word can now be linked to higher levels of
1487: structure, such as the \ling{foot} and the \ling{prosodic word}.
1488: For now, it is sufficient to know that such higher levels
1489: exist, and that we have a way to
1490: represent the binary distinction of
1491: syllable weight.
1492:
1493: Now we can return to the Ulwa data, from example (\ref{ex:ulwa}).
1494: A relatively standard way to account for the infix position is
1495: to stipulate that the first light syllable, if present, is
1496: actually invisible to the rules which assign syllables to
1497: higher levels; such syllables are said to be \term{extra-metrical}.
1498: They are a sort of `upbeat' to the word, and are often associated
1499: with the preceding word in continuous speech.
1500: Given these general principles concerning hierarchical structure,
1501: we can simply state that the Ulwa possessive affix is infixed after the
1502: first syllable.\footnote{
1503: A better analysis of the Ulwa infixation data involves reference to
1504: \term{metrical feet}, phonological units above the level of the syllable.
1505: This is beyond the scope of the current chapter however.
1506: }
1507:
1508: In the foregoing discussion, I hope to have revealed many interesting
1509: issues which are confronted by phonological analysis, without delving
1510: too deeply into the abstract theoretical constructs which phonologists
1511: have proposed.
1512: Theories differ enormously in their organisation of phonological
1513: information and the ways in which they permit this information to be
1514: subjected to rules and constraints, and the way the information is used
1515: in a \term{lexicon} and an overarching \term{grammatical framework}.
1516: Some of these theoretical frameworks include:
1517: lexical phonology, underspecification phonology, government phonology,
1518: declarative phonology, and optimality theory.
1519: For more information about these, please
1520: see \S\ref{sec:reading} for literature references.
1521:
1522: \section{Computational phonology}
1523:
1524: When phonological information is treated as a string
1525: of atomic symbols, it is immediately amenable to processing
1526: using existing models. A particularly successful example
1527: is the work on finite state transducers (see chapter 21). However,
1528: phonologists abandoned linear representations in the 1970s,
1529: and so we will consider some computational models that have been
1530: proposed for multi-linear, hierarchical, phonological representations.
1531: It turns out that these pose some interesting challenges.
1532:
1533: Early models of generative phonology, like that of the Sound Pattern of
1534: English (SPE), were sufficiently explicit that they
1535: could be implemented directly. A necessary first step
1536: in implementing many of the more recent theoretical models is to formalise
1537: them, and to discover the intended semantics of some subtle, graphical
1538: notations. A practical approach to this problem has been to try to express
1539: phonological information using existing, well-understood computational models.
1540: The principal models are finite state devices and attribute-value matrices.
1541:
1542: \subsection{Finite state models of non-linear phonology}
1543:
1544: Finite state machines cannot process structured data, only strings, so special
1545: methods are required for these devices to process complex phonological
1546: representations. All approaches involve a many-to-one mapping from the
1547: parallel layers of representation to a single machine. There are
1548: essentially three places where this many-to-one mapping can be situated.
1549: The first approach is to employ multi-tape machines \citep{Kay87}.
1550: Each tier is represented as a string, and the set of strings is processed
1551: simultaneously by a single machine. The second approach
1552: is to map the multiple layers into a single string, and to process that
1553: with a conventional single-tape machine \citep{Kornai95}. The third approach
1554: is to encode each layer itself as a finite state
1555: machine, and to combine the machines using automaton intersection
1556: \citep{BirdEllison94}.
1557:
1558: This work demonstrates how representations can be compiled into a form that
1559: can be directly manipulated by finite state machines. Independently
1560: of this, we also need to provide a means for phonological
1561: generalisations (such as rules and constraints) to be given a
1562: finite state interpretation. This problem is well studied for
1563: the linear case, and compilers exist that will take a rule
1564: formatted somewhat like the SPE style and produce an equivalent
1565: finite state transducer. Whole constellations of ordered rules or
1566: optimality-theoretic constraints can also be compiled in this way.
1567: However, the compilation of rules and constraints involving
1568: autosegmental structures is still largely un-addressed.
1569:
1570: The finite state approaches emphasise the temporal (or left-to-right)
1571: ordering of phonological representations. In contrast, attribute-value
1572: models emphasise the hierarchical nature of phonological representations.
1573:
1574: \subsection{Attribute-value matrices}
1575:
1576: The success of attribute-value matrices (AVMs) as a convenient
1577: formal representation for constraint-based approaches to syntax
1578: (see chapter 3),
1579: and concerns about the formal properties of non-linear
1580: phonological information, led some researchers to
1581: apply AVMs to phonology. Hierarchical structures can be
1582: represented using AVM nesting, as shown in
1583: (\ref{ex:avm}a), and autosegmental diagrams can be
1584: encoded using AVM indexes, as shown in (\ref{ex:avm}b).
1585:
1586: \begin{examples}
1587: \item\label{ex:avm}
1588: \begin{subexamples}
1589: \item
1590: \begin{avm}
1591: \[ onset & \< k \> \\
1592: rhyme & \[ nucleus & \< u, i \>\\
1593: coda & \< h \> \] \]
1594: \end{avm}
1595: \item
1596: \begin{avm}
1597: \[ syllable & \< i$_{\@1}$, bu$_{\@2}$, l\textscripta$_{\@3}$, li$_{\@4}$ \> \\
1598: tone & \< H$_{\@5}$, L$_{\@6}$, H$_{\@7}$, L$_{\@8}$ \> \\
1599: associations
1600: & \{ \<\@1, \@5\>, \<\@2, \@5\>, \<\@3, \@7\>, \<\@4, \@8\> \}
1601: \]
1602: \end{avm}
1603: \end{subexamples}
1604: \end{examples}
1605:
1606: AVMs permit re-entrancy by virtue of the numbered indexes, and so
1607: parts of a hierarchical structure can be shared. For example,
1608: (\ref{ex:sharing}a) illustrates a consonant shared between
1609: two adjacent syllables, for the word \ling{cousin} (this kind
1610: of double affiliation is called \term{ambisyllabicity}).
1611: Example (\ref{ex:sharing}b) illustrates shared structure within
1612: a single syllable \ling{full}, to represent the \term{coarticulation} of
1613: the onset consonant with the vowel.
1614:
1615: \begin{examples}
1616: \item\label{ex:sharing}
1617: \begin{subexamples}
1618: \item
1619: \begin{avm}
1620: \[ syllable & \<
1621: \[ onset & \< k \> \\
1622: rhyme &
1623: \[ nucleus & \< \textturnv \>\\
1624: coda & \< z$_{\@1}$ \> \] \]
1625: \[ onset & \< \@1 \> \\
1626: rhyme &
1627: \[ nucleus & \< \textschwa \>\\
1628: coda & \< n \> \] \]
1629: \> \]
1630: \end{avm}
1631: \item
1632: \begin{avm}
1633: \[
1634: onset & \[
1635: consonantal & \[ grave & + \\ compact & -- \] \\
1636: source & \[ voice & -- \\ continuant & + \] \\
1637: vocalic & \@1\[ grave & + \\ height & close \] \] \\
1638: rhyme & \[
1639: nucleus \| vocalic & \@1 \\
1640: coda & \[
1641: consonantal & \[ grave & -- \\ compact & -- \] \\
1642: vocalic & \[ grave & + \\ compact & + \] \\
1643: source \| nasal & 1 \\
1644: \]
1645: \]
1646: \]
1647: \end{avm}
1648: \end{subexamples}
1649: \end{examples}
1650:
1651: Given such flexible and extensible representations,
1652: rules and constraints can manipulate and enrich the
1653: phonological information. Computational implementations
1654: of these AVM models have been used in speech synthesis systems.
1655:
1656: \subsection{Computational Tools for Phonological Research}
1657:
1658: Once a phonological model is implemented, it ought to be possible
1659: to use the implementation to evaluate theories against data sets.
1660: A phonologist's workbench should help people to `debug' their
1661: analyses and spot errors before going to press with an analysis.
1662: Developing such tools is much more difficult than it might appear.
1663:
1664: First, there is no agreed method for modelling non-linear
1665: representations, and each proposal has shortcomings.
1666: Second, processing data sets presents its own set of problems,
1667: having to do with tokenisation, symbols which are ambiguous as
1668: to their featural decomposition, symbols marked as uncertain
1669: or optional, and so on.
1670: Third, some innocuous looking rules and constraints
1671: may be surprisingly difficult to model, and it might only be
1672: possible to approximate the desired behaviour. Additionally,
1673: certain universal principles and tendencies may be hard to
1674: express in a formal manner.
1675: A final, pervasive problem is that symbolic transcriptions may fail to
1676: adequately reflect linguistically significant
1677: acoustic differences in the speech signal.
1678:
1679: Nevertheless, whether the phonologist is
1680: sorting data, or generating helpful tabulations, or
1681: gathering statistics, or searching for a (counter-)example, or
1682: verifying the transcriptions used in a manuscript,
1683: the principal challenge remains a computational one.
1684: Recently, new directed-graph models
1685: (e.g.\ Emu, MATE, Annotation Graphs)
1686: appear to provide good solutions to the first two problems,
1687: while new advances on finite-state models of phonology
1688: are addressing the third problem.
1689: Therefore, we have grounds for confidence that there
1690: will be significant advances on these problems in the near future.
1691:
1692: \section*{Further reading and relevant resources}
1693: \label{sec:reading}
1694:
1695: The phonology community is served by an excellent journal
1696: {\it Phonology}, published by Cambridge University Press.
1697: Useful textbooks and collections include:
1698: \citep{Katamba89,FrostKatz92,Kenstowicz94,Goldsmith95,ClarkYallop95,Gussenhoven98,Goldsmith99,Roca99,JurafskyMartin00,HarringtonCassidy00}.
1699: Oxford University Press publishes a series
1700: {\it The Phonology of the World's Languages},
1701: including monographs on
1702: Armenian \citep{Vaux98},
1703: Dutch \citep{Booij95},
1704: English \citep{Hammond99},
1705: German \citep{Wiese96},
1706: Hungarian \citep{Siptar00}.
1707: Kimatuumbi \citep{Odden96},
1708: Norwegian \citep{Kristoffersen96},
1709: Portuguese \citep{Mateus00}, and
1710: Slovak \citep{Rubach93}.
1711: An important forthcoming survey of phonological variation is
1712: the Atlas of North American English \citep{Labov01}.
1713:
1714: Phonology is the oldest discipline in linguistics and has a rich
1715: history. Some historically important works include:
1716: \citep{Joos57,Pike47,Firth48,Bloch48,Hockett55,ChomskyHalle68}.
1717: The most comprehensive history of phonology is \citep{Anderson85}.
1718:
1719: Useful resources for phonetics include:
1720: \citep{Catford88,Laver94,Ladefoged96,Stevens99,IPA99,Ladefoged00,Handke01}, and
1721: the homepage of the International Phonetic Association
1722: \url{http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA/ipa.html}.
1723: The phonology/phonetics interface is an area of vigorous research,
1724: and the main focus of the {\it Laboratory Phonology} series published by
1725: Cambridge:
1726: \citep{LabPhon1,LabPhon2,LabPhon3,LabPhon4,LabPhon5}.
1727: Two interesting essays on the relationship between phonetics and phonology
1728: are \citep{Pierrehumbert90,Fleming00}. Coleman has shown that in
1729: Tashlhiyt Berber (Morocco), where many words appear to have no vowels,
1730: careful phonetic analysis dramatically simplifies the phonological analysis
1731: of syllable structure \citep{Coleman01}.
1732:
1733: Important works on the syllable, stress, intonation and tone include
1734: the following:
1735: \citep{PikePike47,LibermanPrince77,Burzio94,Hayes94,Blevins95,Ladd96,Hirst98,HymanKisseberth98,HulstRitter99}.
1736: Studies of partial specification and redundancy include:
1737: \citep{Archangeli88,Broe93,Archangeli94}.
1738:
1739: Attribute-value and directed graph models for phonological representations
1740: and constraints are described in the following papers and monographs:
1741: \citep{BirdKlein94,Bird95,Coleman98,Scobbie98,BirdLiberman01,CassidyHarrington01}.
1742:
1743: The last decade has seen two major developments in phonology, both falling
1744: outside the scope of this limited chapter. On the theoretical side, Alan
1745: Prince, Paul Smolensky, John McCarthy and many others have developed a
1746: model of constraint interaction called
1747: {\it Optimality Theory} (OT)
1748: \citep{Archangeli97,Kager99,Tesar00}.
1749: The Rutgers Optimality Archive houses an extensive collection of
1750: OT papers [\url{http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/roa.html}].
1751: On the computational side, the Association for Computational Linguistics
1752: (ACL) has a special interest group in computational phonology (SIGPHON) with
1753: a homepage at \url{http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/sigphon/}.
1754: The organization has held five meetings to date, with proceedings published
1755: by the ACL and many papers available online from the SIGPHON site:
1756: \citep{SIGPHON-1,SIGPHON-2,SIGPHON-3,SIGPHON-4,SIGPHON-5}.
1757: Another collection of papers was published as a special issue of the
1758: journal {\it Computational Linguistics} in 1994 \citep{Bird94}.
1759: Several PhD theses on computational phonology have appeared:
1760: \citep{Bird95,Kornai95,Tesar95,CarsonBerndsen97,Walther97,Boersma98,Wareham99,Kiraz00}.
1761: Key contributions to computational OT include the proceedings of the
1762: fourth and fifth SIGPHON meetings, and
1763: \citep{Ellison94b,Tesar95,Eisner97,Karttunen98}.
1764:
1765: The sources of data published in this chapter are as follows:
1766: Russian \citep{Kenstowicz79};
1767: Chakosi (Ghana: Language Data Series, ms);
1768: Ulwa \citep[49]{Sproat92}.
1769:
1770: \section{Acknowledgements}
1771:
1772: I am grateful to D.\ Robert Ladd and Eugene Buckley for comments on an earlier
1773: version of this chapter, and to James Roberts for furnishing me with the
1774: Chakosi data.
1775:
1776: \begin{thebibliography}{84}
1777: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
1778: \expandafter\ifx\csname url\endcsname\relax
1779: \def\url#1{{\tt #1}}\fi
1780:
1781: \bibitem[Anderson(1985)]{Anderson85}
1782: Stephen~R. Anderson.
1783: \newblock {\em Phonology in the Twentieth Century: Theories of Rules and
1784: Theories of Representations}.
1785: \newblock The University of Chicago Press, 1985.
1786:
1787: \bibitem[Archangeli(1988)]{Archangeli88}
1788: Diana Archangeli.
1789: \newblock Aspects of underspecification theory.
1790: \newblock {\em Phonology}, 5:\penalty0 183--207, 1988.
1791:
1792: \bibitem[Archangeli and Langendoen(1997)]{Archangeli97}
1793: Diana Archangeli and D.~Terence Langendoen, editors.
1794: \newblock {\em Optimality Theory: An Overview}.
1795: \newblock Oxford: Blackwell, 1997.
1796:
1797: \bibitem[Archangeli and Pulleyblank(1994)]{Archangeli94}
1798: Diana Archangeli and Douglas Pulleyblank.
1799: \newblock {\em Grounded Phonology}.
1800: \newblock MIT Press, 1994.
1801:
1802: \bibitem[Bird(1994{\natexlab{a}})]{Bird94}
1803: Steven Bird, editor.
1804: \newblock {\em Computational Linguistics: Special Issue on Computational
1805: Phonology}, volume 20(3).
1806: \newblock MIT Press, 1994{\natexlab{a}}.
1807:
1808: \bibitem[Bird(1994{\natexlab{b}})]{SIGPHON-1}
1809: Steven Bird, editor.
1810: \newblock {\em Proceedings of the First Meeting of the ACL Special Interest
1811: Group in Computational Phonology}.
1812: \newblock Somerset, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics,
1813: 1994{\natexlab{b}}.
1814:
1815: \bibitem[Bird(1995)]{Bird95}
1816: Steven Bird.
1817: \newblock {\em Computational Phonology: A Constraint-Based Approach}.
1818: \newblock Studies in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge University Press,
1819: 1995.
1820:
1821: \bibitem[Bird(1999)]{Bird99syl}
1822: Steven Bird.
1823: \newblock Dschang syllable structure.
1824: \newblock In Harry {van der Hulst} and Nancy Ritter, editors, {\em The
1825: Syllable: Views and Facts}, Studies in Generative Grammar, pages 447--476.
1826: Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1999.
1827:
1828: \bibitem[Bird and Ellison(1994)]{BirdEllison94}
1829: Steven Bird and T.~Mark Ellison.
1830: \newblock One level phonology: autosegmental representations and rules as
1831: finite automata.
1832: \newblock {\em Computational Linguistics}, 20:\penalty0 55--90, 1994.
1833:
1834: \bibitem[Bird and Klein(1994)]{BirdKlein94}
1835: Steven Bird and Ewan Klein.
1836: \newblock Phonological analysis in typed feature systems.
1837: \newblock {\em Computational Linguistics}, 20:\penalty0 455--91, 1994.
1838:
1839: \bibitem[Bird and Liberman(2001)]{BirdLiberman01}
1840: Steven Bird and Mark Liberman.
1841: \newblock A formal framework for linguistic annotation.
1842: \newblock {\em Speech Communication}, 33:\penalty0 23--60, 2001.
1843:
1844: \bibitem[Blevins(1995)]{Blevins95}
1845: Juliette Blevins.
1846: \newblock The syllable in phonological theory.
1847: \newblock In John~A. Goldsmith, editor, {\em The Handbook of Phonological
1848: Theory}, pages 206--44. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995.
1849:
1850: \bibitem[Bloch(1948)]{Bloch48}
1851: Bernard Bloch.
1852: \newblock A set of postulates for phonemic analysis.
1853: \newblock {\em Language}, 24:\penalty0 3--46, 1948.
1854:
1855: \bibitem[Boersma(1998)]{Boersma98}
1856: Paul Boersma.
1857: \newblock {\em Functional Phonology: Formalizing the Interactions Between
1858: Articulatory and Perceptual Drives}.
1859: \newblock PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 1998.
1860:
1861: \bibitem[Booij(1995)]{Booij95}
1862: Geert Booij.
1863: \newblock {\em The Phonology of Dutch}.
1864: \newblock The Phonology of the World's Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1865: 1995.
1866:
1867: \bibitem[Broe(1993)]{Broe93}
1868: Michael Broe.
1869: \newblock {\em Specification Theory: the Treatment of Redundancy in Generative
1870: Phonology}.
1871: \newblock PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1993.
1872:
1873: \bibitem[Broe and Pierrehumbert(2000)]{LabPhon5}
1874: Michael Broe and Janet Pierrehumbert, editors.
1875: \newblock {\em Papers in Laboratory Phonology V: Language Acquisition and the
1876: Lexicon}.
1877: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 2000.
1878:
1879: \bibitem[Burzio(1994)]{Burzio94}
1880: Luigi Burzio.
1881: \newblock {\em Principles of English Stress}.
1882: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1994.
1883:
1884: \bibitem[Carson-Berndsen(1997)]{CarsonBerndsen97}
1885: Julie Carson-Berndsen.
1886: \newblock {\em Time Map Phonology: Finite State Models and Event Logics in
1887: Speech Recognition}, volume~5 of {\em Text, Speech and Language Technology}.
1888: \newblock Kluwer, 1997.
1889:
1890: \bibitem[Cassidy and Harrington(2001)]{CassidyHarrington01}
1891: Steve Cassidy and Jonathan Harrington.
1892: \newblock Multi-level annotation of speech: An overview of the emu speech
1893: database management system.
1894: \newblock {\em Speech Communication}, 33:\penalty0 61--77, 2001.
1895:
1896: \bibitem[Catford(1988)]{Catford88}
1897: J.~C. Catford.
1898: \newblock {\em Practical Introduction to Phonetics}.
1899: \newblock Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.
1900:
1901: \bibitem[Chomsky and Halle(1968)]{ChomskyHalle68}
1902: N.~Chomsky and M.~Halle.
1903: \newblock {\em The Sound Pattern of English}.
1904: \newblock New York: Harper and Row, 1968.
1905:
1906: \bibitem[Clark and Yallop(1995)]{ClarkYallop95}
1907: John Clark and Colin Yallop.
1908: \newblock {\em An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology}.
1909: \newblock Oxford: Blackwell, 1995.
1910:
1911: \bibitem[Coleman(1997)]{SIGPHON-3}
1912: John Coleman, editor.
1913: \newblock {\em Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the ACL Special Interest
1914: Group in Computational Phonology}.
1915: \newblock Somerset, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics, 1997.
1916:
1917: \bibitem[Coleman(2001)]{Coleman01}
1918: John Coleman.
1919: \newblock The phonetics and phonology of tashlhiyt berber syllabic consonants.
1920: \newblock {\em Transactions of the Philological Society}, 99:\penalty0 29--64,
1921: 2001.
1922: \newblock \url{http://www.phon.ox.ac.uk/~jcoleman/TPS.html}.
1923:
1924: \bibitem[Coleman(1998)]{Coleman98}
1925: John~S. Coleman.
1926: \newblock {\em Phonological Representations --- their Names, Forms and Powers}.
1927: \newblock Cambridge Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
1928:
1929: \bibitem[Connell and Arvaniti(1995)]{LabPhon4}
1930: Bruce Connell and Amalia Arvaniti.
1931: \newblock {\em Papers in Laboratory Phonology IV: Phonology and Phonetic
1932: Evidence}.
1933: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1995.
1934:
1935: \bibitem[Docherty and Ladd(1992)]{LabPhon2}
1936: Gerard~J. Docherty and D.~Robert Ladd, editors.
1937: \newblock {\em Papers in Laboratory Phonology II: Gesture, Segment, Prosody}.
1938: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1992.
1939:
1940: \bibitem[Eisner(1997)]{Eisner97}
1941: Jason Eisner.
1942: \newblock Efficient generation in primitive optimality theory.
1943: \newblock In {\em Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for
1944: Computational Linguistics}, pages 313--320. Somerset, NJ: Association for
1945: Computational Linguistics, 1997.
1946:
1947: \bibitem[Eisner et~al.(2000)Eisner, Karttunen, and Th\'eriault]{SIGPHON-5}
1948: Jason Eisner, Lauri Karttunen, and Alain Th\'eriault, editors.
1949: \newblock {\em Proceedings of the Fifth Meeting of the ACL Special Interest
1950: Group in Computational Phonology}.
1951: \newblock Somerset, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2000.
1952:
1953: \bibitem[Ellison(1998)]{SIGPHON-4}
1954: Mark Ellison, editor.
1955: \newblock {\em Proceedings of the Fourth Meeting of the ACL Special Interest
1956: Group in Computational Phonology}.
1957: \newblock Somerset, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics, 1998.
1958:
1959: \bibitem[Ellison(1994)]{Ellison94b}
1960: T.~Mark Ellison.
1961: \newblock Phonological derivation in optimality theory.
1962: \newblock In {\em Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on
1963: Computational Linguistics}, pages 1007--13. International Committee on
1964: Computational Linguistics, 1994.
1965:
1966: \bibitem[Firth(1948)]{Firth48}
1967: John~Rupert Firth.
1968: \newblock Sounds and prosodies.
1969: \newblock In {\em Papers in Linguistics 1934--1951}, pages 121--138. London:
1970: Oxford: Clarendon Press (1957), 1948.
1971: \newblock Originally published in Transactions of the Philological Society,
1972: 1948:127--52.
1973:
1974: \bibitem[Fleming(2000)]{Fleming00}
1975: Edward Fleming.
1976: \newblock Scalar and categorical phenomena in a unified model of phonetics and
1977: phonology.
1978: \newblock {\em Phonology}, 17, 2000.
1979:
1980: \bibitem[Frost and Katz(1992)]{FrostKatz92}
1981: Ram Frost and Leonard Katz, editors.
1982: \newblock {\em Orthography, Phonology, Morphology and Meaning}, volume~94 of
1983: {\em Advances in Psychology}.
1984: \newblock Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1992.
1985:
1986: \bibitem[Goldsmith(1995)]{Goldsmith95}
1987: John~A. Goldsmith, editor.
1988: \newblock {\em The Handbook of Phonological Theory}.
1989: \newblock Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995.
1990:
1991: \bibitem[Goldsmith(1999)]{Goldsmith99}
1992: John~A. Goldsmith, editor.
1993: \newblock {\em Phonological Theory: The Essential Readings}.
1994: \newblock Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1999.
1995:
1996: \bibitem[Gussenhoven and Jacobs(1998)]{Gussenhoven98}
1997: Carlos Gussenhoven and Haike Jacobs.
1998: \newblock {\em Understanding Phonology}.
1999: \newblock Edward Arnold, 1998.
2000:
2001: \bibitem[Hammond(1999)]{Hammond99}
2002: Michael Hammond.
2003: \newblock {\em The Phonology of {English}: A Prosodic Optimality-Theoretic
2004: Approach}.
2005: \newblock Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999.
2006:
2007: \bibitem[Handke(2001)]{Handke01}
2008: J\"urgen Handke.
2009: \newblock {\em The Mouton Interactive Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology}.
2010: \newblock Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2001.
2011:
2012: \bibitem[Harrington and Cassidy(2000)]{HarringtonCassidy00}
2013: Jonathan Harrington and Steve Cassidy.
2014: \newblock {\em Techniques in Speech Acoustics}.
2015: \newblock Kluwer, 2000.
2016:
2017: \bibitem[Hayes(1994)]{Hayes94}
2018: Bruce Hayes.
2019: \newblock {\em Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies}.
2020: \newblock University of Chicago Press, 1994.
2021:
2022: \bibitem[Hirst and {Di Cristo}(1998)]{Hirst98}
2023: Daniel Hirst and Albert {Di Cristo}, editors.
2024: \newblock {\em Intonation Systems: A Survey of Twenty Languages}.
2025: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1998.
2026:
2027: \bibitem[Hockett(1955)]{Hockett55}
2028: Charles~F. Hockett.
2029: \newblock {\em A Manual of Phonology}.
2030: \newblock Baltimore: Waverly Press, 1955.
2031:
2032: \bibitem[Hyman and Kisseberth(1998)]{HymanKisseberth98}
2033: Larry~M. Hyman and Charles Kisseberth, editors.
2034: \newblock {\em Theoretical Aspects of Bantu Tone}.
2035: \newblock CSLI Publications / Cambridge University Press, 1998.
2036:
2037: \bibitem[{International Phonetic Association}(1999)]{IPA99}
2038: {International Phonetic Association}.
2039: \newblock {\em Handbook of the {International Phonetic Association}: A Guide to
2040: the Use of the {International Phonetic Alphabet}}.
2041: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1999.
2042:
2043: \bibitem[Joos(1957)]{Joos57}
2044: Martin Joos, editor.
2045: \newblock {\em Readings in Linguistics I: The Development of Descriptive
2046: Linguistics in America, 1925--56}.
2047: \newblock The University of Chicago Press, 1957.
2048:
2049: \bibitem[Jurafsky and Martin(2000)]{JurafskyMartin00}
2050: Daniel Jurafsky and James~H. Martin.
2051: \newblock {\em Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural
2052: Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition}.
2053: \newblock Prentice Hall, 2000.
2054:
2055: \bibitem[Kager(1999)]{Kager99}
2056: Ren\'e Kager.
2057: \newblock {\em Optimality Theory}.
2058: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1999.
2059:
2060: \bibitem[Karttunen(1998)]{Karttunen98}
2061: Lauri Karttunen.
2062: \newblock The proper treatment of optimality in computational phonology.
2063: \newblock xxx.lanl.gov/abs/cmp-lg/9804002, 1998.
2064:
2065: \bibitem[Katamba(1989)]{Katamba89}
2066: Francis Katamba.
2067: \newblock {\em An Introduction to Phonology}.
2068: \newblock Addison Wesley, 1989.
2069:
2070: \bibitem[Kay(1987)]{Kay87}
2071: Martin Kay.
2072: \newblock Nonconcatenative finite-state morphology.
2073: \newblock In {\em Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the European Chapter of
2074: the Association for Computational Linguistics}, pages 2--10. Somerset, NJ:
2075: Association for Computational Linguistics, 1987.
2076:
2077: \bibitem[Keating(1994)]{LabPhon3}
2078: Patricia~A. Keating.
2079: \newblock {\em Papers in Laboratory Phonology III: Phonological Structure and
2080: Phonetic Form}.
2081: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1994.
2082:
2083: \bibitem[Kenstowicz(1994)]{Kenstowicz94}
2084: Michael Kenstowicz.
2085: \newblock {\em Phonology in Generative Grammar}.
2086: \newblock Blackwell, 1994.
2087:
2088: \bibitem[Kenstowicz and Kisseberth(1979)]{Kenstowicz79}
2089: Michael Kenstowicz and Charles Kisseberth.
2090: \newblock {\em Generative Phonology: Description and Theory}.
2091: \newblock Academic Press, 1979.
2092:
2093: \bibitem[Kingston and Beckman(1991)]{LabPhon1}
2094: John Kingston and Mary~E. Beckman, editors.
2095: \newblock {\em Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and the
2096: Physics of Speech}.
2097: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1991.
2098:
2099: \bibitem[Kiraz(2000)]{Kiraz00}
2100: George Kiraz.
2101: \newblock {\em Computational Approach to Non-linear Morphology}.
2102: \newblock Studies in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge University Press,
2103: 2000.
2104:
2105: \bibitem[Kornai(1995)]{Kornai95}
2106: Andr\'as Kornai.
2107: \newblock {\em Formal Phonology}.
2108: \newblock New York: Garland Publishing, 1995.
2109:
2110: \bibitem[Kristoffersen(1996)]{Kristoffersen96}
2111: Gjert Kristoffersen.
2112: \newblock {\em The Phonology of Norwegian}.
2113: \newblock The Phonology of the World's Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
2114: 1996.
2115:
2116: \bibitem[Labov et~al.(2001)Labov, Ash, and Boberg]{Labov01}
2117: William Labov, Sharon Ash, and Charles Boberg.
2118: \newblock {\em Atlas of North American English}.
2119: \newblock Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2001.
2120:
2121: \bibitem[Ladd(1996)]{Ladd96}
2122: D.~Robert Ladd.
2123: \newblock {\em Intonational Phonology}.
2124: \newblock Cambridge University Press, 1996.
2125:
2126: \bibitem[Ladefoged(2000)]{Ladefoged00}
2127: Peter Ladefoged.
2128: \newblock {\em Vowels and Consonants: An Introduction to the Sounds of
2129: Languages}.
2130: \newblock Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 2000.
2131:
2132: \bibitem[Ladefoged and Maddieson(1996)]{Ladefoged96}
2133: Peter Ladefoged and Ian Maddieson.
2134: \newblock {\em The Sounds of the World's Languages}.
2135: \newblock Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1996.
2136:
2137: \bibitem[Laver(1994)]{Laver94}
2138: John Laver.
2139: \newblock {\em Principles of Phonetics}.
2140: \newblock Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press, 1994.
2141:
2142: \bibitem[Liberman and Prince(1977)]{LibermanPrince77}
2143: Mark~Y. Liberman and Alan~S. Prince.
2144: \newblock On stress and linguistic rhythm.
2145: \newblock {\em Linguistic Inquiry}, 8:\penalty0 249--336, 1977.
2146:
2147: \bibitem[Mateus and d'Andrade(2000)]{Mateus00}
2148: Helena Mateus and Ernesto d'Andrade.
2149: \newblock {\em The Phonology of Portuguese}.
2150: \newblock The Phonology of the World's Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
2151: 2000.
2152:
2153: \bibitem[Odden(1996)]{Odden96}
2154: David Odden.
2155: \newblock {\em The Phonology and Morphology of Kimatuumbi}.
2156: \newblock The Phonology of the World's Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
2157: 1996.
2158:
2159: \bibitem[Pierrehumbert(1990)]{Pierrehumbert90}
2160: Janet Pierrehumbert.
2161: \newblock Phonological and phonetic representation.
2162: \newblock {\em Journal of Phonetics}, 18:\penalty0 375--94, 1990.
2163:
2164: \bibitem[Pike(1947)]{Pike47}
2165: Kenneth~L. Pike.
2166: \newblock {\em Phonemics: A Technique for Reducing Language to Writing}.
2167: \newblock Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1947.
2168:
2169: \bibitem[Pike and Pike(1947)]{PikePike47}
2170: Kenneth~L. Pike and E.~V. Pike.
2171: \newblock Immediate constituents of {Mazateco} syllables.
2172: \newblock {\em International Journal of American Linguistics}, 13:\penalty0
2173: 78--91, 1947.
2174:
2175: \bibitem[Roca et~al.(1999)Roca, Johnson, and Roca]{Roca99}
2176: Iggy Roca, Wyn Johnson, and Aggy Roca.
2177: \newblock {\em A Course in Phonology}.
2178: \newblock Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1999.
2179:
2180: \bibitem[Rubach(1993)]{Rubach93}
2181: Jerzy Rubach.
2182: \newblock {\em The Lexical Phonology of Slovak}.
2183: \newblock Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.
2184:
2185: \bibitem[Scobbie(1998)]{Scobbie98}
2186: James Scobbie.
2187: \newblock {\em Attribute-Value Phonology}.
2188: \newblock New York: Garland Publishing, 1998.
2189:
2190: \bibitem[Sipt\'ar and T\"orkenczy(2000)]{Siptar00}
2191: P\'eter Sipt\'ar and Mikl\'os T\"orkenczy.
2192: \newblock {\em The Phonology of Hungarian}.
2193: \newblock The Phonology of the World's Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
2194: 2000.
2195:
2196: \bibitem[Sproat(1992)]{Sproat92}
2197: Richard Sproat.
2198: \newblock {\em Morphology and Computation}.
2199: \newblock Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992.
2200:
2201: \bibitem[Sproat(1996)]{SIGPHON-2}
2202: Richard Sproat, editor.
2203: \newblock {\em Computational Phonology in Speech Technology: Proceedings of the
2204: Second Meeting of the ACL Special Interest Group in Computational Phonology}.
2205: \newblock Somerset, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics, 1996.
2206:
2207: \bibitem[Stevens(1999)]{Stevens99}
2208: Kenneth~N. Stevens.
2209: \newblock {\em Acoustic Phonetics}.
2210: \newblock MIT Press, 1999.
2211:
2212: \bibitem[Tesar(1995)]{Tesar95}
2213: Bruce Tesar.
2214: \newblock {\em Computational Optimality Theory}.
2215: \newblock PhD thesis, Rutgers University, 1995.
2216:
2217: \bibitem[Tesar and Smolensky(2000)]{Tesar00}
2218: Bruce Tesar and Paul Smolensky.
2219: \newblock {\em Learnability in Optimality Theory}.
2220: \newblock MIT Press, 2000.
2221:
2222: \bibitem[{van der Hulst} and Ritter(1999)]{HulstRitter99}
2223: Harry {van der Hulst} and Nancy Ritter, editors.
2224: \newblock {\em The Syllable: Views and Facts}.
2225: \newblock Studies in Generative Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1999.
2226:
2227: \bibitem[Vaux(1998)]{Vaux98}
2228: Bert Vaux.
2229: \newblock {\em The Phonology of Armenian}.
2230: \newblock The Phonology of the World's Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
2231: 1998.
2232:
2233: \bibitem[Walther(1997)]{Walther97}
2234: Markus Walther.
2235: \newblock {\em Declarative prosodic morphology - constraint-based analyses and
2236: computational models of Finnish and Tigrinya}.
2237: \newblock PhD thesis, Heinrich-Heine-Universit\"at, D\"usseldorf, 1997.
2238: \newblock thesis in German.
2239:
2240: \bibitem[Wareham(1999)]{Wareham99}
2241: Todd Wareham.
2242: \newblock {\em Systematic Parameterized Complexity Analysis in Computational
2243: Phonology}.
2244: \newblock PhD thesis, University of Victoria, 1999.
2245:
2246: \bibitem[Wiese(1996)]{Wiese96}
2247: Richard Wiese.
2248: \newblock {\em The Phonology of German}.
2249: \newblock The Phonology of the World's Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
2250: 1996.
2251:
2252: \end{thebibliography}
2253:
2254:
2255: \end{document}
2256: