Locality in Phonology Long-Distance Interactions in Phonology ⋆ Lecture 1

Home , Assibilation, Consonant harmony, Locality (linguistics), Vowel harmony

Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Locality in Phonology Long-distance interactions in phonology ⋆ Lecture 1

Peter Jurgec

University of Toronto

LOT Summer School ⋆ Leuven ⋆ June 22, 2015

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Highlights

This course will look at long-distance interactions in phonology. We ﬁrst look at locality in phonology: 1 What is it? ⋆ local, adjacent, absolute and relativized locality, long-distance 2 Where does it come from? ⋆ phonetic and phonological grounding 3 How to capture it? ⋆ rules, features, constraints, derivations

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Preview: Main claims

Most sound patterns are local. ≡ If two distant sounds interact, the more closer ones will as well, all other things being equal. Local interactions make phonetic sense (articulation, perception). Some locality eﬀects are less clearly phonetically grounded. Phonological representations and/or operations must be able to capture the locality bias.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Roadmap

1 Introduction

2 What?

3 Why?

4 How?

5 Conclusions

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency What is local?

Most sound patterns are local. In the strictest of senses, local means adjacent: Def A sequence of segments ab is local if the segments a and b are adjacent. Let’s look at some frequent patterns.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Metathesis

Lithuanian velar metathesizes with an adjacent coronal fricative when followed by another stop. 3rd.past imper.sg infinitive breSko brekSk brekSti ‘break (of dawn)’ brizgo briksk briksti ‘fray’ Most, if not all, cases of metathesis involve adjacent segments (Metathesis in Language Database, http://metathesisinlanguage.osu.edu). Non-adjacent metathesis is diachronic or can be analyzed as allomorphy (e.g. Turkana, Akkadian).

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency CV interactions

Tawala assibilation applies whenever /t/ immediately precedes /i/. The coronal stop [t] can be followed by most vowels, but when the ﬁnal vowel is variantly raised, the fricative [s] surfaces instead. Tawala assibilation (Ezard 1997:30) variant a variant b emote emosi *emoti ‘one’ hota hosi *hoti ‘only’ Local CV interactions are extremely common.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Nasal harmony

Nasality spreads rightwards (and leftwards within the syllable) from a stressed nasal vowel. Stops block spreading. Nasal harmony in Applecross Gaelic (Ternes 1973) "ãh˜u˜ç˜ ‘neck’ "˜sÕh˜ı˜ ‘tame’ ˜f˜r˜ıã;˜v ‘root.pl.’ khO"˜v˜ıã;t ‘how much/many?’ tã˜v ‘ox, stag.pl’ st˜rã˜ı;˜G˚ ‘to be luxurious’ "khÕ˜ı˜spaxk˚ ‘wasp’ "thãh˜u˜sk˜ ‘fool’ Nasal harmony is very common.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Dissimilation

Given an underlying cluster /rr/ in Ainu, the ﬁrst /r/ dissimilates to [n]. Ainu r-dissimilation (Shibatani 1990) kukor kur ‘my husband’ kukon rusuj ‘I want to have (sth)’ kor mat ‘his wife’ kon rametok ‘his bravery’ Local dissimilation is very common (but other kinds are also possible).

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Deletion

Pali simpliﬁes certain clusters which are licit in the related Sanskrit. Cluster simpliﬁcation via deletion in Pali (Zec 1995) Sanskrit Pali prati paúi ‘against’ traana taana ‘protection’ kramati kamati ‘walks’ Deletion is often conditioned by adjacent consonants. Other kinds of deletion (e.g. at the edge, vowel deletion next to another vowel) are also frequent.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Epenthesis

Lebanese Arabic epenthesizes vowels into many CC codas to break up undesirable coda clusters. Epenthesis is obligatory in coda clusters of an obstruent followed by a sonorant and optional in other clusters. Epenthesis in Lebanese Arabic (Abdul-Karim 1980: 32–33) a. /Pism/ Pisim ‘name’ /Pibn Pibin ‘son’ /SiGl/ SiGil ‘work’ b. /kibS/ kibS ∼ kibiS ‘ram’ /sabt/ sabt ∼ sabit ‘Saturday’ /nafs/ nafs ∼ nafis ‘self’ Epenthesis often breaks a consonant cluster, but other causes are also frequent.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Stress

Stress often alternates, creating rhythmic patterns. In Pintupi, stress falls on every odd-numbered syllable (except for the final one): "tji.íi.ri.Nu.lam.pa.tju ‘the fire for our benefit flared up’ "ju.ma.õIN.ka.ma.ra.tja.õa.ka ‘because of mother-in-law’ In Warao, stress fall on every even-numbered syllable counting from the end of the word: ja.pu.ru.ki.ta.ne."ha.se ‘verily to climb’ e.na.ho.ro.a.ha.ku."ta.i ‘the one who caused him to eat’ Stressing every third syllable is rare, and no language has stress on every fourth.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Stress

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Stress

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Interim summary

Disc What other local/adjacent patterns do you know?

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Adjacency Interim summary

Disc What other local/adjacent patterns do you know? Many common sound patterns apply to adjacent segments. Locality a key concept in phonological theory. Next: Are all sound patterns local?

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Relativized locality

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Relativized locality

While most sound patterns are local, not all of them are. We have already seen one example: stress patterns. Yet even the non-local patterns still exhibit locality biases: closer is better than further apart. Locality can be relativized: Def If two distant segments interact, all intervening identical segments must also interact, all other things being equal. Let’s look what this means on a few examples.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Vowel harmony

In Finnish, front root vowels come with front suffix vowels, while back root vowels come with back suffix vowels. Front/back harmony in Finnish (Ringen 1975/1988; Ringen & Heinämäki 1999) næh-kø:n ‘see-direct.sg’ tul-ko:n ‘come-direct.sg’ næk-ø ‘sight’ tul-o ‘coming’ pøytæ-næ ‘table-essive’ poutA-nA ‘fine weather-essive’ Consonants are unaffected (and also some vowels, we will talk about that next time). Vowel harmony is a common pattern. Only vowels are involved, consonants do not count*.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Consonant harmony

Consonant harmony involves alternation of consonants across vowels, often several syllables away. In Aari, posterior fricatives {S, Z} follow posterior coronal fricatives or aﬀricates in the root, while anterior fricatives {s, z} surface in all other cases. Aari sibilant harmony (Hayward 1990) giP-sis- ‘hit’ naS-SiS- ‘like, love’ duuk-sis- ‘bury’ tS’a¨ aq-SiS- ‘curse, swear’ sug-zis- ‘push’ Sen-SiS-¨¨ ‘buy’ mer-sis- ‘forbid’ Za:q-SiS- ‘throw’ giP-s-it ‘hit’ qa¨Z-Z-it ‘get cold’ duuk-s-it ‘bury’ tS’a¨ aq-S-it ‘curse, swear’ giP-er-s-it ‘be hit’ Zaq-er-S-it¨¨ ‘be thrown’ ¨ Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Dissimilation

Tashlhiyt Berber (henceforth, Tashlhiyt) has a dissimilatory pattern in which no more than one labial consonant is possible per word. A prefix containing a labial nasal surfaces as coronal when followed by labial consonant within the root. Labial dissimilation in Tashlhiyt Berber (El Medlaoui 1995:46–47) m-xazar ‘scowl.refl’ n-fara ‘disintengle.refl’ m-saggal ‘look for.relf’ n-èaSSam ‘be shy.relf’ mm-Zla ‘lose.refl’ n-kaddab ‘consider a liar.refl’ am-las ‘shear.agent’ an-bur ‘remain celibate.agent’ am-krz ‘plow.agent’ an-AZUM ‘fast.agent’ Dissimilation acts at a distance: any root labial affects the prefix. Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Tone shift

Tone can shift several syllables away, typically targeting a prominent position (edge, stressed syllable). In Chizigula, tone shifts to the penultimate syllable. Chizigula tone shift (Kenstowicz & Kisseberth 1990) /ku-lómbez-a/ → [ku-lombéz-a] ‘to request’ /ku-lómbez-ez-a/ → [ku-lombez-éz-a] ‘to request for’ /ku-lómbez-ez-an-a/ → [ku-lombez-ez-án-a] ‘to request for each other’ Tone shifting is a common pattern and can often skips several syllables. Segmental shift is also observed and typically targets the stressed vowel (Esimbi, Halkomelem).

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Oprah eﬀect

Some speakers of Dutch can pronounce [ô] in recent loanwords from English, as long as they lack a suffix. In suffixed words, the rhotic is replaced by the native [ö]. Dutch affixation: ô → ö bare root ô derived ö Op[ô]ah ‘Oprah’ Op[ö]ah-tje *Op[ô]ah-tje ‘dimin’ Ba[ô]ack ‘Barack’ Ba[ö]ack-se *Ba[ô]ack-se ‘adj’ [ô]eading ‘Reading’ [ö]eading-je *[ô]eading-je ‘dimin’ Flo[ô]ida ‘Florida’ Flo[ö]ida-tje *Flo[ô]ida-tje ‘dimin’ All r’s in the root are affected, regardless of their distance from the suffix. This pattern has been in native words (e.g. Russian) and well-integrated loanwords (Tagalog) as well.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Variable aﬃxes

In Chaha, the 3rd person masculine object aﬃx is realized as labialization on the rightmost non-coronal consonant. Chaha labialization (Johnson 1975) a. Final C is non-coronal no object 3m.sg.object dænæg dænægw ‘hit’ nækæb nækæbw ‘ﬁnd’ b. Final C is coronal, medial is non-coronal nækæs nækwæs ‘bite’ bækær bækwær ‘lack’ c. Only initial C is non-coronal mæsær mwæsær ‘seem’ qætær qwætær ‘kill’

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Interim summary

Many sound patterns involve strictly adjacent sounds, but others do not. Even non-adjacent patterns are local in some sense: closer targets are preferred to distant targets (e.g. Chaha labialization) more distant targets imply closer targets (e.g. Finnish vowel harmony) interacting sounds are restricted to a domain (e.g. Berber dissimilation)

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Discussion questions

1 What kind of (segmental) patterns are unattested? Provide examples. 2 What kind of (segmental) patterns would you expect to be rare but not attested, given the generalizations about locality? Provide examples.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Unattested patterns

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Non-adjacent locality Unattested patterns

Distant targets are preferred to closer identical targets. A process that applies regardless of domain boundaries. A process that applies to non-adjacent, but not to adjacent segments.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Why?

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Phonetics Why do sound patterns local?

The majority of sound patterns are adjacent and the remaining ones are still local in some sense. Why is locality favored? Two answers: 1 phonetics 2 phonology Case study ⋆ assimilation

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Phonetics Articulatory locality (Gafos 1996/1999)

Adjacent segments are likely to interact because articulatory gestures often aren’t perfectly aligned with segmental boundaries. Articulatory gestures can extend beyond a single segment. Nasality corresponds to lowered velum, which can extend from nasal segments to adjacent segments. Lip rounding can extend from one vowel/syllable to a preceding/following syllable. Phonologization of these articulatory tendencies can lead to stable sound patterns/alternations.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Phonetics Perceptual locality

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Phonetics Perceptual locality

Perception of one segment is aﬀected by a nearby segment, but this relationship is sometimes indirect. Example 1 ⋆ Voicing assimilation /ap-da/ → [abda] Perception of obstruent voicing is most strong before vowels, less before sonorants, followed by other obstruents, and prepausal position (Steriade 2008). Voicing of obstruents before other obstruents is hard to perceive. Example 2 ⋆ Consonant harmony Contrast between two words is easier to perceive if all consonants are identical/harmonized in each of the two words, and this eﬀect is stronger the more similar the consonants are (Gallagher 2010).

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Phonetics Mismatch between production and perception

Vowel harmony typically does not affect intervening consonants. Vowel place cues are difficult to perceive on consonants. Even in consonants had the relevant vocalic feature, it would likely to be imperceptible. Perceptual effects may blur the articulatory facts.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Phonology Phonological locality

A large body of work points out that phonological locality is quite different than phonetic adjacency. Often, segments that are several syllables away interact, and this cannot be due to articulatory reasons. Nevins (2010): Phonological locality is formally different from phonetic locality. Phonology, like syntax, works differently than phonetics. His idea is that some segments need to get a feature from a nearby segment. Hansson (2001); Rose & Walker (2004): Consonant harmony is due to agreement/matching between consonants, which is a formal phonological relationship, not necessarily grounded in phonetics.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Phonology Interim summary

Phonological locality has clear grounds in phonetics (articulation, perception). This is particularly the case for some kinds of local/adjacent patterns. Some kinds of locality are harder to explain, and may need a non-phonetic explanation. This course is not geared at examining the phonetic grounds of locality, but rather focus on various phonological factors (descriptive generalizations, typologies, and theoretical accounts).

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

How?

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations How to capture locality in phonology?

Throughout this course, we will look at a variety of theoretical frameworks. To illustrate, I will discuss locality within the following four approaches: 1 rules ⋆ SPE rules 2 representations ⋆ Autosegmental Phonology 3 constraints ⋆ Optimality Theory 4 serialism ⋆ Harmonic Serialism

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Rules

Locality is built into the standard rule template (Chomsky & Halle 1968). Rule A → B/C—D C → ∅ /V—# Structural Description: CAD VC# Structural Change: A → B C → ∅

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Rules

Locality is built into the standard rule template (Chomsky & Halle 1968). Rule A → B/C—D C → ∅ /V—# Structural Description: CAD VC# Structural Change: A → B C → ∅ Optional intervening material: V → [−low] / [−high −low] C0 — V → [−low] / [−high −low] (C) — V → [−low] / [−high −low] σ0 — Disc What are the implications of these notations? (What can be the intervening material?)

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Autosegmental Phonology

Autosegmental Phonology (Goldsmith 1976) is well-equipped to capture locality: features and root nodes are represented on separate tiers association lines link features and nodes a segment has a feature if it is associated with that feature

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Autosegmental Phonology

× ××× Some observations: association lines establish linearity relationships adjacency preferred distant targets imply closer targets

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Locality in Autosegmental Phonology

Skipping is generally not allowed (no gapped conﬁgurations): [+f]

× ×××

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Locality in Autosegmental Phonology

Skipping is generally not allowed (no gapped conﬁgurations): [+f]

× ××× Association lines can never cross: [+f] [+f]

×××× These are powerful devices that signiﬁcantly restrict locality in spreading (and other processes). Locality is a core element of Autosegmental Phonology.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Feature Geometry

Autosegmental Phonology has been originally built for tone. Feature Geometry presents an theory that extends autosegments to segmental features (Clements 1985; Steriade 1987; McCarthy 1988; Odden 1991) Key idea: features do not link to the root node, but instead to feature nodes, which group similar features together (e.g. place, manner, laryngeal): × A B c f d g e H i j Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Rules and representations Example: Parallel Structure Model (Mor´en 2006)

One feature geometric approach is the Parallel Structures Model (PSM) which has diﬀerent levels of feature nodes. Manner and Place features in PSM [Root]

C-manner C-place [open] [cor] [closed] [lab] [dor] V-manner V-place [open] [cor] [closed] [dor] [lab]

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Feature geometry predicts an asymmetry between V and C

Spreading across Vs impossible p i k

C-place C-place C-place

V-place

[labial] [coronal] [dorsal]

X Prediction conﬁrmed X No C place harmony

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Feature geometry predicts an asymmetry between V and C

Spreading across Vs impossible Spreading across Cs possible p i k u t a

C-place C-place C-place C-place C-place C-place

V-place V-place [coronal] V-place

[labial] [coronal] [dorsal] [labial] [dorsal]

X Prediction conﬁrmed X X Prediction conﬁrmed X No C place harmony Vowel harmony

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Optimality Theory

Optimality Theory is theory of constraint interaction (Prince & Smolensky 1993/2004). Locality is part of both faithfulness and markedness constraints: Faithfulness ∼ Linearity (≡ No metathesis) /axb/ → [bxa] has violations ...but /axb/ → [xab] has only one.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Optimality Theory

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Some eﬀects of local constraints in OT

p+a okay if non-adjacent /pa/ *pa Linearity a. pa * b. pal * c. pla d. ap *

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Some eﬀects of local constraints in OT

p+a okay if non-adjacent Limited metathesis /pa/ *pa Linearity /pal/ *pa Linearity a. pa * a. pal * b. pal * b. pla * c. pla c. lap *** d. ap *

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Harmonic Serialism

The ﬁnal step is once we consider constraints and serial derivations. We will consider Harmonic Serialism (HS). HS is a variant of OT that combines constraint ranking with serial derivations: Gen in HS generates only those candidates that diﬀer from the input by one single operation. The winning candidate is then fed back to Gen as a new input for another round of evaluation. This loop is then repeated until the fully faithful parse of the latest input wins.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Metathesis in HS

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Metathesis in HS

Gen in HS generates only those candidates that diﬀer from the input by one single operation. For sequence of segments, Gen creates only those candidates in which two segments switch places, but not candidates in which three or more segments switch places. Consider this example: Input: /axb/ Candidates: [xab], [abx] Not generated: **[bxa], **[bax], **[bxa] Crucial insight: Locality in HS works diﬀerently than in OT.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Metathesis ruled out in HS Metathesis in parallel OT can be pathological /pla/ *pa *Complex Linearity a. pla *! b. pal *! c. / ☞ lap ***

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Constraints and operations Metathesis ruled out in HS Metathesis in parallel OT can be pathological /pla/ *pa *Complex Linearity a. pla *! b. pal *! c. / ☞ lap *** Metathesis in HS /pla/ *pa *Complex Linearity a. ☞ pla *! b. ☞ pal *! c. lap , Not Generated

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Conclusions

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

This lecture Summary

We have looked at diﬀerent concepts of locality in phonological theory. We attributed the bias to local patterns to phonetics (but not in all cases). We discussed 4 theories and their predictions about locality. Locality is central to any phonological theory.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

This course Aims of this course

Locality is a central phonological concept. We will look at descriptive generalizations about locality in phonology, with the focus on long-distance patterns. We will discuss the theories of locality. We will try to understand the predictions (advantages, challenges) of these theories.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

This course Topics

Lecture 2 ⋆ Vowel patterns Lecture 3 ⋆ Consonant harmony Lecture 4 ⋆ Floating features and aﬃxes Lecture 5 ⋆ Derived environment eﬀects

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

This course Your output

No homework assignments. It would be great if you could do the readings. I would like this course to have a lot of discussion. Participate. Ask questions , Want to write a paper for credit? → [email protected] ←

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

This course

Locality in Phonology Long-distance interactions in phonology ⋆ Lecture 1

Peter Jurgec

University of Toronto

LOT Summer School ⋆ Leuven ⋆ June 22, 2015

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle (1968). The Sound Pattern of English. New York, Evanston, London: Harper & Row. Clements, George N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology 2. 225–252. El Medlaoui, Mohamed (1995). Aspects des representations phonologiques dans certaines langues Chamito-Semitiques. Rabat: Universit´eMohammed V. Ezard, Bryan (1997). A grammar of Tawala: an Austronesian language of the Milne Bay area, Papua New Guinea. Canberra: Paciﬁc linguistics. Gafos, Adamantios I. (1996/1999). The articulatory basis of locality in phonology. New York: Garland. Gallagher, Gillian (2010). Perceptual distinctness and long-distance laryngeal restrictions. Phonology 27. 435–480. Goldsmith, John A. (1976). Autosegmental Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Hansson, Gunnar Olafur´ (2001). Theoretical and typological issues in consonant harmony. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. Hayward, Richard J. (1990). Notes on the Aari language. In Richard Hayward (ed.) Omotic language studies, London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. 425–493. Kenstowicz, Michael & Charles Kisseberth (1990). Chizigula tonology: The word and beyond. In Sharon Inkelas & Draga Zec (eds.) The Phonology-Syntax Connection, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 163–194. McCarthy, John J. (1988). Feature geometry and dependency. Phonetica 43. 84–108. Mor´en, Bruce (2006). Consonant-vowel interactions in Serbian: features, representations and constraint interactions. Lingua 116. 1198–1244.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

Nevins, Andrew (2010). Locality in Vowel Harmony. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Odden, David (1991). Vowel geometry. Phonology 8. 261–289. Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky (1993/2004). Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in Generative Grammar. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Available on Rutgers Optimality Archive, ROA 537, http://roa.rutgers.edu. Ringen, Catherine (1975/1988). Vowel harmony: Theoretical Implications. New York: Garland. Ringen, Catherine & Orvokki Hein¨am¨aki (1999). Variation in Finnish vowel harmony: An OT account. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17. 303–337. Rose, Sharon & Rachel Walker (2004). A typology of consonant agreement as correspondence. Language 80. 475–531.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology Introduction What? Why? How? Conclusions References

This course Steriade, Donca (1987). Locality conditions and feature geometry. In Proceedings of NELS 17, Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts. 595–618. Steriade, Donca (2008). The phonology of perceptibility eﬀects: the P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. In Kristin Hanson & Sharon Inkelas (eds.) The nature of the word: essays in honor of Paul Kiparsky, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 151–180. Ternes, Elmar (1973). The phonemic analysis of Scottish Gaelic: based on the dialect of Applecross, Ross-shire. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.

Peter Jurgec University of Toronto Locality in Phonology