Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T04:17:42.302Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A non-linear analysis of vowel-zero alternations in Polish1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Andrew Spencer
Andrew Spencer
Affiliation:
Speech Therapy Department, Central School of Speech and Drama, London and Engineering and Science Division, Polytechnic of Central London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Gussmann (1980) has presented an analysis of Polish morphophonemics within the framework of SPE (Chomsky & Halle, 1968). His treatment appeals extensively to underlying representations containing segments which never appear in surface representations. He justifies this use of absolute neutralization with the claim that other rules of Polish phonology appeal to such underlying forms. Rubach (1984) has reanalysed much of Gussmann's description within the framework of Kiparsky's (1982) Lexical Phonology, retaining the analysis of the neutralized segments and even adding to the inventory of abstract elements. The arguments presented by both scholars are a paradigm of elegance and ingenuity, representing generative phonological analysis at its best. However, the considerable reliance they put on abstract underlying representations, morphologically conditioned rules, extrinsic rule ordering and other devices which give rise to a high degree of opacity arouses suspicion. For this reason I have sought to re-examine some of their material within a more ‘concrete’ interpretation of Lexical Phonology, making use of recent ideas from theories of non-linear phonology and theories of allomorphy.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , September 1986 , pp. 249 - 280
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

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

References

REFERENCES

Archangeli, D. (1984). Underspecification in Yawelmani phonology and morphology. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Aronoff, M. (1976). Word formation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Carrier-Duncan, J. (1984). Some problems with prosodic accounts of reduplication. In Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. T. (eds.), Language sound structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 260–286.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: its nature, origins and use. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1981). Akan vowel harmony: a nonlinear analysis. In Clements, G. N. (ed.) Harvard Studies in Phonology, vol. 11. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, IN.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Keyser, S. J. (1983). CV phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Sezer, E. (1982). Vowel and consonant disharmony in Turkish. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. S. (eds.), The structure of phonological representations. Part II. Dordrecht: Foris. 213–255.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. E. (1981). On the learnability of abstract phonology. In Baker, C. L. & McCarthy, J. J. (ed), The logical problem of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gussmann, E. (1980). Studies in abstract phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halle, M. (1959). The sound pattern of Russian. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Halle, M. & Vergnaud, J. -R. (1981). Harmony processes. In Klein, W. & Levelt, W. (ed), Crossing the boundaries in linguistics: studies presented to Manfred Bierwisch. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Harris, J. W. (1980). Nonconcatenative morphology and Spanish plurals. Journal of Linguistic Research. 1. 15–31.Google Scholar
Hooper, J. B. (1976). An introduction to Natural Generative Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Keyser, S. J. & Kiparsky, P. (1984). Syllable structure in Finnish phonology. In Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. T. (eds), Language sound structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 7–31.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). From cyclical to lexical phonology. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. S. (eds), The structure of phonological representations, Part I. Dordrecht: Foris. 131–175.Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (1980). The organization of the lexicon. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, IN.Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (1982). Allomorphy. Linguistic Analysis. 10. 27–52.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1981). A prosodie theory of nonconcatenative morphology. LIn 12, 373–418.Google Scholar
Marantz, A. (1982). Re reduplication. LIn 13. 435–482.Google Scholar
Prince, A. S. (1984). Phonology with tiers. In Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. T. (eds), Language sound structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 234–244.Google Scholar
Rubach, J. (1984). Cyclic and lexical phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schane, A. (1973). Generative phonology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Šmilauer, V. (1966). Novočeska Skladba. Prague: Štatní Pedagogické Nakladatelství.Google Scholar
Smith, N. V. (1973). The acquisition of phonology. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Spencer, A. J. (1984a). A non-linear analysis of phonological disability. Journal of Communication Disorders 17. 325–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, A. J. (1984b). Allomorphy, morpholexical rules and Lexical Phonology. Unpublished ms. London.Google Scholar
Spencer, A. J. (1985). Morpholexical rules and lexical phonology. Talk given at the Spring Meeting, Linguistics Association of Great Britain, University of Salford.Google Scholar
Stemberger, J. (1985). CV phonology and French consonants: a concrete approach. JL 21. 453–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zonneveld, W. (1978). A formal theory of exceptions in generative phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar