ROA 687-0904



What it Means to be a Loser: Non-optimal Candidates in Optimality Theory
 

Andries W Coetzee 



Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=687
 



Abstract:

In this dissertation I propose a rank-ordering model of EVAL. This 
 model differs from classic OT as follows: In classic OT, EVAL 
 distinguishes the best candidate from the losers, but does not 
 distinguish between different losers. I argue that EVAL imposes a 
 harmonic rank-ordering on the complete candidate set, so that also the 
 losers are ordered relative to each other. I show how this model of 
 EVAL can account for non-categorical phenomena such as variation and 
 phonological processing.



  Variation. In variation there is more than one pronunciation for a 
 single input. Grammar determines the possible variants and the relative 
 frequency of the variants. I argue that EVAL imposes a harmonic 
 rank-ordering on the entire candidate set, and that language users can 
 access more than the best candidate from this rank-ordering. However, 
 the accessibility of a candidate depends on its position in the 
 rank-ordering. The higher a candidate appears, the more often it will 
 be selected as output. The best candidate is then the most frequent 
 variant, the second best candidate the second most frequent variant, 
 etc. I apply this model to vowel deletion in Latvian and Portuguese, 
 and  to [t, d]-deletion in English.



Phonological processing. Language users rely on grammar in 
 word-likeness judgments and lexical decision tasks. The more 
 well-formed a non-word, the more wordlike language users will judge it 
 to be. A more well-formed a non-word is considered more seriously as a 
 possible word, and language users will be slower to reject it in a 
 lexical decision task. The rank-ordering model of EVAL accounts for 
 this as follows: EVAL compares non-words and imposes a rank-ordering on 
 them. The higher a non-word occurs in this rank-ordering, the more 
 well-formed it is. Therefore, the higher a non-word occurs, the more 
 word-like it will be judged to be, and the more slowly it will be 
 rejected in lexical  decision tasks. I illustrate this by discussing 
 two sets of experiments on how grammar influences phonological 
 processing. The first set investigates the influence of the OCP on 
 processing in Hebrew, and the second the influence of a constraint on 
 [sCvC]-words in English.





Comments: Ph.D. Dissertation, UMass

Keywords:  variation, processing, EVAL, lexical decision, wordlikeness, vowel deletion
 Areas: Phonology, Formal Analysis, Psycholinguistics
 Type: PhD Dissertation