| ROA: | 378 |
|---|---|
| Title: | Segmental unmarkedness versus input preservation in reduplication |
| Authors: | Moira Yip |
| Comment: | 43pp. This paper will appear in Lombardi, Linda (ed.), Segmental Phonology in Optimality Theory. Cambridge University Press |
| Length: | 43 |
| Abstract: | Segmental unmarkedness versus input preservation in reduplication Moira Yip University of California, Irvine and University College London Reduplication in many Chinese languages differs in two ways from the types of reduplication that are most discussed in the literature. First, it is not obvious which piece of the output is the base and which is the affixed copy, and instead the outputs look more like compounds of a word with itself. Second, and the focus of this paper, the copies are imperfect, with various segments from the input being replaced by fixed segments, [l] in onsets, [i] in nuclei, and [ ] or [ ] in codas. I shall argue that these segmental replacements are the unmarked segments for these syllabic positions, an instance of the emergence of the unmarked (TETU), as discussed in Alderete et al. (1998). In non-reduplicative morphology, Faith-IO preserves marked input segments. In reduplication, I propose that each input segment has two output correspondents, one of which is thus free to succumb to markedness pressure so long as the other remains intact. All faithfulness relations hold between input and output, in line with a converging body of work including Sherrard 1997, Yip 1998, Inkelas and Zoll 1999, Struijke 2000. After a survey of the data, I begin by laying out the basic analysis of reduplication as a response to two constraints, Alliterate and Rhyme. I then show how the ranking of these with respect to segmental markedness constraints gives rise to the segmental changes. If Rhyme >> Markedness >> Alliterate, marked segments survive in the rhyme but onset segments become the unmarked [l]. If Alliterate >> Markedness >> Rhyme, onset segments survive but rhyme segments become unmarked [i] or glottal stop. I continue by discussing the particular choice of unmarked segments, and propose a set of markedness constraints. The final two sections discuss other reduplicative forms from secret languages where the replacement segments do not appear to be the most unmarked ones. In the first case the defining characteristic of secret languages, a high-ranked constraint requiring the output to be distinct from the input, forces an increase in markedness. In the second case, conflicting markedness constraints interact with the secret language constraint to produce surface marked segments. [This paper will appear in Lombardi, Linda (ed.), Segmental Phonology in Optimality Theory. Cambridge University Press.] |
| Type: | Paper/tech report |
| Area/Keywords: | |
| Article: | Version 1 |