Constraint Interaction II: OT

• Strict domination
• “Grammars can’t count”
Candidates STRESSHEAVY MAINSTRESSRIGHT Harmony
a. σHσ…σσ **…* n(sMAINSTRESSRIGHT)
n n
b. σHσ…σσ * sSTRESSHEAVY
n

 Stress is on the initial heavy syllable iff

the number of light syllables n obeys
sSTRESSHEAVY
n  any number No way
sMAINSTRESSRIGHT

May 7, 2003 1 University of Amsterdam

 Constraint Interaction II: OT

• Constraint interaction: Strict domination

• Constraints are universal
• Human grammars differ only in how
these constraints are ranked
– ‘factorial typology’
– NOCODA, ONSET, …  syllable typology
• First true contender for a formal theory
of cross-linguistic typology
May 7, 2003 2 University of Amsterdam
 Optimality Theory
• Applied to many linguistic phenomena
– Phonology
(Prince & Smolensky ‘93/ ‘02, Boersma ‘98, Kager ‘99, McCarthy ‘02, …)
– Syntax
(Legendre, Vikner & Grimshaw ‘01; Ackema, Aissen, Bresnan,, …)
– Semantics/Pragmatics
(Hendriks, de Hoop & de Swart ‘00, Blutner, Zeevat, …)
– Learning
(Tesar & Smolensky 00, Boersma, Prince; Fikkert, Levelt, …)
– http://rutgers.roa.edu

May 7, 2003 3 University of Amsterdam

 OT’s Faithfulness / Markedness
Dialectic
• ‘cat’: /kat/  kæt *NOCODA — why?
– FAITHFULNESS requires identity
– MARKEDNESS often opposes it
• Markedness-Faithfulness dialectic  diversity
– English: FAITH ≫ NOCODA
– Polynesian: NOCODA ≫ FAITH (~French)
– Learning?
• Another markedness constraint M:
– Nasal Place Agreement [‘Assimilation’] (NPA):
mb ≻ nb, ŋb nd ≻ md, ŋd ŋg ≻ ŋb, ŋd
labial coronal velar
May 7, 2003 4 University of Amsterdam
 OT from Markedness Theory

• MARKEDNESS constraints: *α: No α

• FAITHFULNESS constraints
– Fα demands that /input/  [output] leave α
unchanged (McCarthy & Prince ’95)
– Fα controls when α is avoided (and how)
• Interaction of violable constraints: Ranking
– α is avoided when *α ≫ Fα
– α is tolerated when Fα ≫ *α
– M1 ≫ M2: combines multiple markedness dimensions

May 7, 2003 5 University of Amsterdam

 OT from Markedness Theory

• MARKEDNESS constraints: *α
• FAITHFULNESS constraints: Fα
• Interaction of violable constraints: Ranking
– α is avoided when *α ≫ Fα
– α is tolerated when Fα ≫ *α
– M1 ≫ M2: combines multiple markedness dimensions
• Typology: All cross-linguistic variation results from
differences in ranking – in how the dialectic is
resolved (and in how multiple markedness
dimensions are combined)

May 7, 2003 6 University of Amsterdam