Nonlinear Phonology: Further

ANNUAL
REVIEWS Further
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1989. 18:203-26
Quick links to online content
Copyright © 1989 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved
NONLINEAR PHONOLOGY
Douglas Pulleyblank
Department of Linguistics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KiN 6N5
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1989.18:203-226. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Access provided by 188.247.75.242 on 04/11/20. For personal use only.
INTRODUCTION
The production and perception of speech involve the interaction of a variety of

semi-independent grammatical modules. The MORPHOLOGICAL component
governs the structure of a well-formed word, licensing certain types of
morphemel combinations (for example, un+event+ful+ly, in
ter+nation+al+is+ation) and disallowing others (for instance. *un+abil+
ity. *inter+nation+ise2). The SYNTACTIC component governs the combina
tion of words into well-formed sentences, allowing, for example, an English
sentence like "Which student did John say the professor failed?" while
disallowing a sentence like "*Which student did John see the professor that
failed?". Of particular interest to the linguist are cases where ungrammatical
ity does not follow from some logically necessary property. In examples such
as those mentioned here, a word like *un+abil+ity is unacceptable in spite of
there being a straightforward interpretation, the expected meaning being
comparable to that ofin+abil+ity (note moreover the perfectly acceptable
un+able and abil+ity); similarly , the sentence "*Which student did John see
the professor that failed?" is ungrammatical in spite of there being a perfectly
straightforward (and unique) interpretation, namely "John saw the professor
that failed which student?" Because the ungrammaticality of such cases
cannot be attributed to some logically necessary property, they serve as
windows into the intrinsic structure of the language capacity (4, 5).
In addition to the morphology and syntax, one must distinguish "in
terpretive" components of a grammar, components including the SEMANTICS
and the PHONOLOGY. These components assign meanings and pronunciations,
respectively, to the structures generated by the combination of morphology
'Morphemes are linguistic units of which words are composed-typically, but not invariably,
the smallest fonnal units that can be assigned independent meanings (see 2). Boundaries between
morphemes are indicated here by the symbol "+".
2By standard linguistic convention, ungrammatical examples are preceded by an asterisk (*).
203
0084-6570/89/1015-0203$02.00
204 PULLEYBLANK
and syntax. In the discussion here, we consider certain properties of the

phonological component. The central concern is the same as that already
described for the morphology and the syntax, namely the establishment of
those properties of phonological representations that are not logically neces
sary and hence may provide information about the structure of the human
linguistic mechanism.
The Nature of the Phonological Component

A fundamental aspect of our linguistic capacity is the ability to be creative
both in terms of production and perception. When speaking we produce

utterances never previously encountered, and when being spoken to we
interpret such utterances effortlessly. Our linguistic abilities cannot, there

fore, be characterised as involving the simple matching of an input or output
sequence with some set of stored linguistic representations. This point is
important for an understanding of phonology because the actual pronunciation
of a word often depends on the other words appearing adjacent to it. For
example, the [y] of you can trigger palatalization of [t] in a phrase like "we
brough[t y]ou to the zoo"/"we brough[ch]ou to the zoo"; the same process is
impossible, however, if the [y] in the [t y] sequence comes from a word like
yak: "we brough[t y]aks to the zoo"/"*we brough[ch]aks to the zoo." Sim
ilarly, whether or not the sequence want to can be phonologically contracted
to wanna depends on the sentence in which the phrase finds itself. Contraction
is possible, for example, in "Who do you want to/wanna visit?", but impos
sible in "Who do you want to/*wanna visit your sick grandmother?"
The combination of creativity with contextually dependent phonological
processes has a straightforward, though far-reaching, implication for an
interpretative component of grammar like the phonology . Stored information
about words must include phonological information. The actual pronunciation
of words and phrases, however, can deviate from such stored representations
depending on the sequences within which such words are found.
Such simple observations suggest the following lines of enquiry: (a) the
determination of properties of the phonological representations that are stored
in a mental lexicon, and (b) the investigation of how such stored forms are
converted into actual speech. Here I discuss certain results that bear on these
issues. In particular, I address evidence that bears on properties of phonologi
cal representation, that is, on properties of the inherent structure of the
phonological objects that are stored and manipulated by the phonological
component.
LINEAR AND NONLINEAR THEORIES
In linear theories of phonology, notably that of Chomsky & Halle (6), a

phonological representation consists of a linear sequence of matrixes, each
NONLINEAR PHONOLOGY 205
matrix composed of an unstructured set of binary distinctive feature specifica

tions. In large measure, each matrix constitutes one segment, and each feature
represents one independently manipulable phonological property. For ex
ample, the initial segment [s] in a word like Sam has, among others, the
following properties:3 (a) it is not the peak of a syllable, hence [-syllabic];
(b) the passage of air is continuous through the oral cavity, hence
[+continuant]; (c) there is no passage of air through the nasal cavity, hence
[-nasal]; and (d) the vocal cords in the larynx ("Adam's apple") are spread
apart so as to allow free passage of air, hence [-voiced]. Moving our
consideration to the vowel [re] that follows [s], we see somewhat different
values for the same features: (a) unlike [s], ere] does constitute a syllable
peak, hence [+syllabic]; (b) like [s], the air passage through the oral tract is
continuous, and there is similarly no passage of air through the nasal cavity,
hence [+continuant, -nasal]; (c) unlike [s], the vocal cords are vibrating
during the production of ere], hence [+voiced].4 Looking at the same features
as involved in the final segment em] of Sam, we observe still different values:
(a) as with [s], em] is not a syllable peak, hence [-syllabic]; (b) unlike both
[s] and ere], air passage through the oral cavity is completely obstructed for
em], hence [-continuant]; (c) also unlike both [s] and ere], air is allowed to
pass through the nose, hence [+nasall; (d) finally, as with ere], the vocal
cords are in vibration, hence [+voiced]. The phonological representation of
Sam in a linear theory would therefore be (in part) as follows:
m
r ]r ]r ]
� �� ant
-nasal
-voiced
i
: ��;i��ant
-nasal
+voiced
= �� ant
+nasal
+ voiced
i
1.
.. . .
..
A large body of work over the last 15 or so years has demonstrated the
inadequacy of such linear representations. On the one hand, it has been
argued that the notion of "segment" does not correspond in a simple fashion
with discrete sets of binary feature specifications. In many cases, one or more
features may characterize a whole set of segments, and in others, a feature
3Here and throughout this paper, square brackets ("[]") are employed to indicate phonetic
transcriptions (of varying degrees of detail). Such transcriptions represent in a standardized
alphabet the actual sounds of an utterance. For example, the word "phlegm" would be represented
as [flem]: Orthographic "ph" represents a single sound [t]; the sound of orthographic "e" in this
word is represented phonetically as leI; orthographic "g" does not represent a phonetic segment,
hence is excluded from the transcription. Aspects of transcriptions that are crucial are commented
on in the text.
4For simple verification, place a finger on the outside of the larynx and produce first a
prolonged [a:], then a prolonged [s], comparing the presence vs absence of vibration in the two
segments.
206 PULLEYBLANK
value may change during the course of a single segment. (Examples of both
types are discussed below.) The result is that the notion of "segment" must be
separated conceptually from the notion of the features by which segments are
realized.5 In the example of Sam this necessitates the identification of three
segments (or SKELETAL units), namely eve. This move has immediate im
plications for a feature such as [±syllabic). Whereas a segment's value for
continuancy or nasality can be assigned independently, the determination of a
segment's syllabicity is in large measure a result of how the segment is
grouped together with other segments into constituents. For example, the
vowel [i] of a word like bee is featurally comparable to the semi-vowel [y] of
a word like yet. The crucial difference between the two segments is that the
former constitutes the peak of a syllable, while the latter constitutes a syllabic
margin. Hence [±syllabic] can be abandoned in favor of a direct representa
tion of syllable structure. And as a final step in the reorganization of the
features in Example I, there is considerable evidence that distinctive features
themselves are not an unorganized set of features, each with comparable
status. Instead, such features can be shown to be organized into various sets.
For example, the total set of features (the ROOT) can be divided into
LARYNGEAL and SUPRALARYNGEAL specifications, along with various sub
divisions. Such set structure can be graphically represented by assigning each

set to a different half-plane in a hierarchical representation. Hence the net
result of such developments is that the (partial) linear representation of a word
like Sam given in Example I can be replaced by a much more highly
articulated, nonlinear representation as in Example 2 below (u = syllable; C
consonant; V = vowel):
u ...... syllabic level
�
e v e .. .... segmental level
I I I ...... root features
o -.0
'\.
'��\�-
(±c = [±continuantJ) 2.
( ...... laryngeal features
+ - � - - - � _ - - -
: . : I (:!: V [:!: voiced])
-,,'/
=
-v _ _ _ _ v _ _ _ .....J
c
0--0 0-___-\ . ... supralaryngeal features
V I
+
(±n = [± nasal])
L-______-n_ +n ____
5 m
In the following sections, we consider representative properties that moti

vate the type of departure from linear representations just illustrated.
5For various proposals concerning the nature of the "segmental" level of representation, see,
for example, McCarthy (26), Clements & Keyser (9), and Levin (24). Recently, even the notion
of "segment" itself has been abandoned in certain proposals in favor of different conceptions of
coordinating prosodic units such as the mora. See, for example, McCarthy & Prince (27) and
Hayes (17).
Constituency
In a linear theory such as that illustrated in Example 1, the only constituents
into which phonological segments are grouped are defined morphologically or
syntactically. That is, phonological segments are grouped together to make up
morphemes, to make up words, to make up phrases, and so on. But an
examination of data from a wide array of languages makes it clear that
segments can also be grouped into constituents on purely phonological
grounds.
For example, Clements & Keyser (9: 59-60) discuss five independent
phonological rules of Turkish, all of which involve an environment crucially

referring to a consonant that is either word-final or followed by another
consonant. Such a systematic disjunction is problematic for a linear theory

because the two environments share no formal properties.
To illustrate, consonants in Turkish may be long (geminate) or short .When
a geminate consonant occurs before a vowel, it is retained; but when the same
consonant occurs either word-finally or before a consonant (the disjunction
under consideration), the geminate consonant is shortened:
Accusative Nominative Ablative

"feeling" hiss+ i his his +ten 3.
"right" hakk+ i hale hak+tan
"price increase" zamm+ i zam zam+dan
If this constellation of environments were an idiosyncracy of degemination

only, then there would be no particular problem in formulating the rule so as
to refer explicitly to a disjunctive class. In fact, however, work like that of
Clements & Keyser has shown this not to be the case. First, the disjunction
recurs in the phonology of Turkish. As already mentioned, the same environ
ment is important for at least five independent processes. Second, the same
disjunction appears as an environment in the processes of numerous other
languages.
The nonlinear solution to this problem is to organize the phonological
representation into syllables, as shown below for the forms of "right" in
Example 3 (a = syllable):
0'
Itk 4.
In the case of hakk+i, the geminate consonant is retained because it can be

syllabified; in hak and hak+ tan, on the other hand, the geminate would occur
in syllable-final position, and it is precisely in that case that it is shortened.
Crucially, because of the establishment of syllabic constituents, the dis-
208 PULLEYBLANK
junctive reference to "word-final or followed by a consonant" can be replaced

by the single condition: "syllable-final position."
A wide variety of phonological phenomena have been demonstrated to
involve syllable structure.6 In addition, METRICAL constituents larger than the
syllable have been shown to play a major role in a wide range of phenomena.
The establishment of FEET-a particular type of grouping of syllables-is the
central aspect of stress determination, for example.7 The central idea is that
sequences of syllables are organized into feet according to an algorithm
established by making a small number of parametrically determined choices.
Within the foot, a "head" syllable (ultimately the stressed syllable) is located
at either the right or left periphery (depending on the language) and "nonhead"
syllables (ultimately unstressed) are distinguished by rules that assign phonet

ic prominence to the head (for example, increased duration or amplitude,
changes in pitch or vowel quality). Feet in tum can be grouped into larger
constituents (such as the WORD) to determine the relative prominence of
different stressed syllables. For illustration, consider the metrical structure of
words like kangaroo and onomatopoeia:8
W W
� ��
�a � �a �"'x�a 5.
k
11\ 11 !1
a n g a r 00 o
I 11 /1
n o m a t
11
/ oI poeI a
I
kAngaROO OnomAtoPOEIa
These structures are interpreted as follows: Main stress is assigned to the final
foot in each word (roo in the first case, poeia in the second). Within the
stressed foot, prominence falls on the leftmost syllable. In feet that do receive
main stress, a secondary stress falls on the head-again, the leftmost syllable
of the foot.
Apart from syllables and constituents established for purposes of stress,
various larger phonological constituents constitute the domain of application
6See, for example, Kahn(21), Clements & Keyser(9), Steriade (37), Levin(24), McCarthy &
Prince (27), Ito (19, 20), and Hayes (17).
7See, for example, Liberman & Prince (25), Hayes (14, 15), Hammond ( 1 3), Halle &
Vergnaud ( 1 2); for a contrary view about the role of constituency, see Prince (30).
8Keep in mind that phonological constituents are actually erected over phonological segments,
not orthographical symbols. For example, the sequence "oei" in onomatopoeia represents a single
vowel, not three separate vowels. The structures here are slightly simplified, and the reader is
referred to already cited work for details. Heads of foot ("�") and word ("W") level constituents
are indicated by a small circle. Main stress is indicated by capital letters, secondary stress by
small capitals.
of a large class of phrase-level phonological processes. For discussion, see

Zwicky & Kaisse (39) and the many papers and references there.
Segment Structure
In the remainder of this article, I discuss a rather different aspect of the move
away from linear phonological representations. In addition to the grouping
together of segments into phonological constituents, much recent work in
phonological theory has demonstrated the need to establish a fairly high
degree of segment-internal structure.
CONTOUR SEGMENTS Let us begin by considering the class of segments

referred to as contour segments. These are segments whose value for some
feature changes during the course of the segment. For example, affricates are
segments that begin with a complete stoppage of air (as in the stops [p] and
[t]) and that finish with friction (as in the fricatives [f] and [s]). Examples of
affricates are the initial consonants of the German words Pferd [pfe:rt] "horse"
and Zeit [tSayt] "time". A second type of contour segment involves pre
nasalization, a situation where the first portion of a segment is nasal but the
latter portion is oral, as in the segments [mb] and ["d] of Tiv: imbor "spring of
water", vende "refused". A third example is that of a contour tone. In many
languages, the pitch values on vowels serve a contrastive function. In Yoruba,
for example, the consonant vowel sequence [kJ] produces three completely
different words depending on thc pitch of thc voicc: on a high pitch, [k:S]
"build"; on a mid pitch, [kj] "write"; on a low pitCh, [k3] "refuse". Two types
of tones can be distinguished, level tones and contour tones, level tones
corresponding to a steady pitch and contour tones to a changing pitch. The
rising ( ) and falling tones ("''') of the following examples from Yoruba
"V"
constitute examples of contour tones: z'we "book", dburo "younger sibling".

At issue is how to represent such contour segments. The nonlinear (AUTO
SEGMENTAL) proposal (for which some evidence is provided below) is to adopt
a representation that in essence reflects traditional phonetic observations.

Contour segments are analyzed as bearing two (or sometimes more) values for
the same feature:9
a. Affricate: b. Prenasalization: c. Rising & falling tones:

C C V V
/ \ /\ /\ / \ 6.
-c +c +n -n L H H L
Such a solution, which is supported by a large body of evidence, is

inherently impossible within a linear theory of the type illustrated in Example
9In Example 6, ":!:c" = [:!:continuantl, ":!:n" = [±nasal], "L" = low tone, "H" = high tone.
210 PULLEYBLANK
1. In such an approach, segments consist of matrixes of unordered features. If

a single segment had two feature specifications, this would simply provide
conflicting values to the segment ( 11). As a result, linear theories must adopt
additional, essentially ad hoc distinctive features to describe such segment
types. For example, Chomsky & Halle (6) propose the special feature
[±delayed release] for affricates: simple stops would be [-delayed release]
while affricates would be [+delayed release]. Comparable proposals have
also been made for prenasalization and tonal contours.
But consider the following data from Kukuya (18, 28). There are exactly
five tonal possibilities for a stem in Kukuya, regardless of the number of

tone-bearing vowels actually present in the stem. 10
L stem: bi! "grasshopper killer"

baa "jealousy"
bala "build"
bilala "c1eavc"
biilaga "change a route"
H stem: hoi "oil palms"

baa "cheeks"
baga "show knives"
Mama "Iiana"
Mlaga Hfence"
7.
LH stem: saa "seed necklace"
sami "conversation"
saabi "roofing"
mWar�gf "younger brother"
HL stem: kaa "grill"

kiira "paralytic"
kaara "be just right"
karaga "be entangled"
LHL stem: baamI "wakes up"

kal:;(gi "turns around"
In Example 7, the five tonal possibilities are illustrated with stems contain
ing enough vowels to realize every tone of a melody individually. Land H
stems are realized by aSSigning the single tone of the melody to all vowels of
the stem:
IOpor purposes of the discussion here, stem can be interpreted as "uninflected verb or noun,"
the precise definition being unimportant. For detailed discussion, see Hyman (18). The examples
that follow abstract away from any pre-stem prefix that might occur on the surface, and give tonal
forms appropriate for a stem occurring immediately preceding another stem.
L stems: b a b a I a b � a
I
L
V
L L
H stems: b a b a g a b a � a
8.
I
H
V
H H
LH and HL stems are realized by distributing the two tones of the melody over
the available vowels of the stem. In the case of the sequence H L, the Hand L
are assigned by a left-to-right convention, the final Lsubsequently assigned to
any leftover vowels to its right: II
HL stems; k a a k a r a k a r a g a
I I
H L H
I I
L
I V
L
9.
H
LH stems are comparable except that in examples with three vowels, the
associations are modified in such a way that the initial Ltone of the melody is
linked to the first two vowels:
LH stems: s a a s a mI g I
I I I I I 10.
L H L H H
Of particular interest, however, are the cases where there are not enough
vowels for the tones of a particular melody to be assigned to individual
vowels. It is precisely in such cases that contour tones appear�that is, tones
with a changing pitch curve. Corresponding to the HL cases of Example 9, a
falling tone is observed on a monosyllable; and corresponding to the LH cases
of Example 10, monosyllables exhibit a rising tone:
HL stems: LH stems: s a
1\
LH 11.
kii "pick" sa "weaving knot"
Similarly, monosyllables with the LHL pattcrn surface with a complex tonal
contour that first rises then falls, and disyllables with the LHL pattern surface
with a L tone on the first syllable and a falling contour on the second:
II
See Hyman (18) for a discussion of Kukuya and Pulleyblank (31) for a general discussion of
the conventions by which tones are associated.
212 PULLEYBLANK
LHL stems: bv I
;1\
LH L
k Li HAL Y 12.
bvI "falls" kaiiy "loses weight"
All such contours are the expected result of an account with the following
properties: (a) five tonal melodies are posited for Kukuya: L, H, LH, HL,
LHL; (b) these melodies are freely combined with stems of any number of
vowels; (c) combinations of tones on a single vowel are permitted, resulting in
surface contours. All three properties constitute arguments against a strictly

linear theory of phonology. Within a segmental theory of the type seen in
Example 1, it would not be expected that some single feature or set of features
would have a status completely independent of the others. That is, since all
features are simply components o{unordered feature matrixes, there would be
no reason to expect the existence of melodic units composed of some subset of
such unstructured features. In a nonlinear model, however, the existence of
melodic sequences (such as the tonal melodies of Kukuya) is completely
un surprising since particular feature classes can be assigned a status that is
independent of both other features and their assignment to particular seg
ments.
In addition, since sequences of features cannot be assigned to a single
segment within a segmental model, the cases in Examples 11 and 12 would
require the postulation of additional, intrinsically contoured tone features.
The immediate problem raised by such an approach concerns the distribution
of such tones. A rising-falling tone must be restricted to monosyllabic stems;
rising and falling tones must be restricted to monosyllabic or disyllabic stems,
with the additional restriction on a disyllabic stem that such contours appear
only on the second vowel. Such clearly ad hoc restrictions are unnecessary if
contours are formally analyzed as consisting of a sequence of simple L and H
tones assigned to a single vowel-the nonlinear analysis.
This analysis can also explain contextual conditions on the creation of
contours even in languages that do not exhibit any evidence for tonal melo
dies. For example in Yoruba (31), a rising contour is created when a H tone
immediately follows a L tone-a simple assimilation of the H toned vowel to
the preceding L toned vowel. Although the three lexical tones of Yoruba are
all level (high, mid, low), rising contours appear on the final syllable of words
like the following:
a. lwe "book"
h. eke "Lagos" 13.
c. likpii "scar"
For a linear theory, such cases present the same type of problem seen above.
Some intrinsically contoured tone feature would have to be posited, with a

contextually dependent value assigned here. In a nonlinear approach, the case
is straightforwardly accounted for by spreading the L tone of the first syllable
onto the second syllable-thereby representing formally the assimilatory
nature of the process:
a. i w e � i w e c. a kp a � a kp a 14.
I I V1 I I V1H
L H L H L H L
Expressed in autosegmental terms, a linear model of

MULTIPLE LIN KINGS
phonology makes the claim that all associations of features to segments are
one-to-one. In the last section, we saw evidence in favor of allowing linkings

of a different type, namely many-to-one (multiple tones to a single segment).
It was also suggested that one-to-many associations exist (one tone to multiple
segments) in cases where a single melodic element links to more than one
vowel. There is straightforward evidence in favor of this hypothesis.
Returning to Kukuya, it was mentioned in Footnote 10 that the forms given
in Example 7 were forms appropriate for a context where a stem immediately
precedes another stem. In other contexts, the tonal forms of Example 7
undergo certain modifications. Of interest here is a rule that lowers a H tone to
M (mid) when an appropriate stem appears before a pause:
Pre-pausal forms:
H stem: bii "oil palms"
baa "cheeks"
baga "show knives" 15.
biiiimii "liana"
balaga "fence"
As seen in Example 15, all H tones of a stem are affected by this rule. In an
autosegmental approach, this is straightforwardly represented by the follow
ing rule (18):
H - M I _ II 16.
This rule is interpreted as changing a H tone into a M when such a H occurs in

pre-pausal ("II") position. Assuming one-to-many linkings, its effect is illus
trated in Example 17:
a. ba ba b. baga
I I
H�M H �
V
M H � M
17.
214 PULLEYBLANK
Precisely as a result of the one-to-many linkings posited, the entire sequence

of H tones present on any given stem is affected as a unit by the pre-pausal
lowering rule.
Compare this analysis with the treatment that would be required in a linear
theory. Since each segmental matrix would require an individual tonal
specification, the rule as formulated would affect only the rightmost H tone,
correctly deriving bii "oil palms", but incorrectly deriving forms like *Mgii
"show knives" and *bdtagii "fence". To correct this situation, the rule of
lowering would have to be complicated somewhat by adding an additional
triggering environment (where the curly brackets "U" indicate a disjunctive
environment):
18.
According to this rule, a pre-pausal H tone would be lowered to M; sub

sequently, any additional H tones preceding the derived M tone would
iteratively undergo lowering. The derivation of a form like biiliigii "fence"
would therefore proceed as follows: Mtagd � Mtagii � Mliigii � biiliigii.
Such a linear approach to lowering poses immediate problems, however. It
is possible to combine a stem with a prefix, and such a prefix may bear a H
tone-as in Example 19 , where the H tone prefix indicates a copular construc
tion:
ma+ba ma+ba II maba "they are oil-palms"

I I I I 19.
H H � H M
As seen, it is only the second H-the pre-pausal H-that undergoes lowering.

As pointed out by Hyman, this is precisely the expected result in the nonlinear
approach adopting the rule in Example 16: Only a prepausal H lowers. In
Example 17 , this affects all stem vowels; and in Example 19, the rule affects
the stem vowel only-not affecting a prefix bearing its own independent H
tone.
For a linear account, however, such cases present a problem. Since such an
approach is forced to posit a lowering rule as in Example 18, a rule that affects
a H tone preceding a M tone, it incorrectly predicts that the H of a prefix
should also undergo lowering: *miibii. To correct this situation, the linear
account would be forced to incorporate some otherwise unmotivated restric
tion on the application of lowering.
In conclusion, we see that the nonlinear approach to such data explains a
wide range of properties. The range of tonal possibilities observed on stems is

explained by the free combination of five tonal melodies to stems of any
length. The restricted distribution of tonal contours is predicted to occur in
precisely the manner attested. And the manner in which a rule such as
lowering affects sequences of stem vowels is similarly predicted from a rule
formulation of the simplest type.
GEMINATES In the last section, I argued that different nonlinear con

figurations of features manifest themselves in the way that phonological rules
apply to them. In Kukuya, mciba "they are oil palms" behaves differently
from biigii "show knives" with respect to the tonal lowering rule discussed,
because the former has two (morphologically motivated) H tones while the
latter has a single H tone. This type of representational distinction is crucial in
understanding the often rather special behavior of geminate (long) segments.
Geminates often present something of a paradox. On the one hand, such long
segments can behave as though they are a sequence of short segments; on the
other hand, they can behave as though they are a single, inherently long
segment. Within linear models of phonology, such ambiguity results in
serious problems of representation. Within nonlinear models, on the other
hand, there is no ambiguity per se: Sequential behavior results from a rule
applying to the skeletal level of representation; single segment behavior
results from a rule applying to the melodic level.
Geminate
vowels:
[1
1\
Geminate
consonants:
[1
/\
Melodic level 20.
vv C C Skeletal level
Sequential behavior Consider, for example, a rule from Ojibwa, which

deletes a vowel at the end of a word, as observable in the following pairs of
examples where the final vowel of the stem deletes in the singular forms but is
retained in the plural forms owing to the presence of the suffix min (29).
a. ni-gitlm "I am lazy"

ni-gftiml-mln "we are lazy"
b. ni-migllm "I sing"
ni-nagamo-mln "we sing" 21.
c. ni-mimadllp "I sit"
ni-namadllbi-mln "we sit"
Formulated as a rule affecting the skeletal level of representation (12), a

nonlinear theory accounts straightforwardly for the additional fact that long
vowels (represented as a vowel followed by a colon) are shortened-not
deleted-in examples such as 22:
216 PULLEYBLANK
a. ni-bimose "I walk"

ni-bfmose:-mln "we walk"
b. ni-nibil "I sleep"
ni-nibil:-mln "we sleep" 22.
c. ni-bimibato "I run"
"
ni-blmiba:-mln Hwe run
A single rule of skeletal deletion accounts for both the examples with short
vowels (Example 21) and the examples with long vowels (Example 22);12
�
a. n a g a m 0 b. b m 0 s e
I I I I I
C V C V
J� C V J �� v Deletion 23.
¢ ¢
n a g a m b m 0 s e
I I I I I I I I I \ \
c V C V C C V C V C V
Processes of this type that affect solely the skeletal level of representation are
entirely consistent with a sequential analysis of long vowels.
Single segment behavior Such behavior contrasts, however, with the results
of rules that affect the actual' feature make-up of a geminate segment. Consid
er, for example, a rule of palatalization in LuGanda. Velar consonants [k, g)
are optionally pronounced as palatal [c, j] when they precede either the vowel
[i) or the semi-vowel [y] (7). For example, both velar and palatal variants are
possible for words such as the following:
a. kiintu ciintu "thing"

b. bwoogi bwooji "sharpness" 24.
This rule, which affects not the skeletal level of representation but the actual
melodic composition of a segment, applies in a manner so as to affect an
entire geminate:
oluggi � olujji "door" 25.
Note specifically that the geminate does not exhibit sequential properties. A
form like *oiugji is not a possible variant. In addition, note that even the
conditioning environment is melodic rather than skeletal in nature: The
121 am simplifying the process somewhat here. For details, see Piggott (29) and Halle &
Vergnaud ( 1 2).
features of [i]/[y] trigger palatalization, whether assigned to a V-slot ([iD or to

a C-slot ([yD.
Ci) nt u
Cff)
a. b. o I u
\ I /\ V I I I I
c vv c v v c v ccv
Rvr H
o I u J 1 a atarlzatlOn
PI ' 26.
I I I
c vv c v V C V CC V
In conclusion, we see that a nonlinear theory straightforwardly accounts for

both the sequential and the single-segment behavior of geminate segments,

predicting sequential behavior in rules affecting the skeleton, and single
segment behavior in rules affecting the melodic representation.
Inalterability There is another way in which a nonlinear theory can provide

an interesting account of properties exhibited by geminates. Consider the
behavior of certain geminate consonants in Tigrinya with respect to a rule of
spirantization that causes velar stops to become fricatives immediately after a
vowel (3, 16, 23, 35, 36) . That is, when following a vowel , the closure
observed in segments like [k, k'] is released sufficiently to allow friction,
thereby creating [x, X']. l3 For example, the initial consonant of a suffix like
ka "your (masculine singular)" appears as a stop when attached to a con
sonant-final stem:
m"isar-ka "your (masc. sg.) axe" 27.
If the same suffix is attached to a vowel-final stem, then spirantization

changes the initial lkJ of the suffix into [x]:
sant'a-xa "your (masc. sg.) bag" 28.
But while spirantization applies to a nongeminate consonant as in Example

28 , it fails to apply to a post-vocalic geminate:
akkat "kind of fruit" * axkat * axxat 29.
To understand the inapplicability of spirantization in such cases, it is
13There is dialectal variation as to the segments affected by spirantization. See, for example,
Bagemihl (3).
218 PULLEYBLANK
important to consider both the conditioning environment for the rule and the
change the rule brings about. First, since the rule refers to a post-vocalic
consonant, reference is being made to the skeletal level of representation;
second, because the change effected by the rule involves the feature of
continuancy, the rule also involves the melodic level of representation.
k � x Melodic level
I 30.
v c Skeletal Level
Given the structure assigned to a geminate consonant within a nonlinear

theory, a paradox is created as far as spirantization is concerned.
[k] Melodic level

31.
/\
v ee Skeletal Level
Since there is indeed a post-vocalic velar stop, spirantization would be

expected to create a velar fricative; but if the [k] of Example 31 is changed to
[x], then the entire geminate is affected-resulting in a rule application where
a post-consonantal velar (the second half of the geminate) is affected by a rule
targeting only post vocalic segments. Work such as that of Hayes (16) and
-
Schein & Steriade (36) has argued that it is such structural incompatibility
with the potential results of rule application that brings about the rule's failure
to apply. A rule referring only to the skeletal level (as in the Ojibwa case
above) can affect part of a geminate; a rule referring only to the melodic level
(as in the LuGanda case above) can affect the entire geminate; but a rule
referring to both skeletal and melodic levels is blocked unless all the require
ments for rule application are met by both halves of the geminate (a condition
not met in Tigrinya spirantization).
As a final note, consider the predictions of a linear theory with respect to
cases like spirantization. A geminate consonant might either be analyzed as a
sequence of simple consonants (Example 32a), or as a single consonant
bearing an ad hoc feature such as "[+ long]" (Example 32b):
32.
a k k a kk
Under the sequential analysis of Example 32a, a linear theory would in
correctly predict the application of spirantization, producing forms such as
*axkat for "kind of fruit". Under the feature-based analysis of Example 32b, a
linear theory makes no predictions whatsoever: The rule could stipulate that
application is restricted to "[-long]" consonants, or the rule could apply
freely to all consonants without taking into consideration their length.
Clearly the sequential analysis is inadequate since it derives incorrect
surface forms. It can be argued, moreover, that the feature-based analysis is
equally inadequate. It predicts that a cross-linguistic survey of geminates
should produce roughly equal numbers of cases where geminates do and do
not undergo rules such as spirantization. Both Hayes (16) and Schein &
Steriade (36) argue, however, that the true cross-linguistic generalization is
that geminates fail to undergo such rules ("geminate inalterability")-a result

that is explained in a nonlinear theory but that can only be stipulated in a

linear account.
As a final point, recall from earlier discussion of Kukuya (Example 19) that
two melodic elements appear in the representation of any case where features
originate in distinct morphemes. That is, a surface "geminate" may have two
possible structures depending on the morphological origin of the segments:
a. "True" geminate: k b. "Fake" geminate: k + k 33.

/\ I I
c c c c
As seen above, true geminates exhibit inalterability effects, blocking the

application of rules such as spirantization. A fake geminate, on the other
hand, would be expected to undergo such a rule, the rule affecting only the
first half of the apparent geminate. Hence the surface sequence [ .. . xk . . . ]
can be derived in Tigrinya when the two velar consonants originate in
different morphemes:
mlrax-ka "your (masc. sg.) calf " *mlrakka 34.

,
FEATURE GEOMETRY To conclude this introduction to segment structure, I

discuss a rather different type of problem for a purely linear phonological
theory. Rules of phonology often involve more than a single feature. For
example, a nasal in Yoruba assimilates to the entire set of place features of an
immediately following consonant. Consider the various realisations of the
progressive marker:
a. m-b:'l "be coming"

b. 0-15 "be going"
c. �-j6 "be dancing" 35.
d. ,,-koja "be passing"
e. "m-kpa "be killing"
220 PULLEYBLANK
The nasal is labial before a labial consonant (Example 35a), alveolar before an
alveolar consonant (Example 35b), palatal before a palatal consonant (Ex
ample 35c), velar before a velar consonant (Example 35d), labial-velar before
a labial-velar consonant (Example 35e).
Within a linear theory, this means that the values of a set of distinctive
features must be affected by a single rule. Assuming the relevant features for
Yoruba to be [coronal] (articulated with the tip or blade of the tongue),
[anterior] (articulated at or in front of the alveolar ridge), and [labial] (involv
ing an articulation at the lips), a linearly formulated rule could be expressed as
follows:
[+nasal � �acoronalJ / - �-SYllabiCJ
l3antenor
81abial
acoronal
l3anterior
36.
81abial
This rule is to be read, "a nasal has the same values for [coronal], [anterior],
and [labial] as a following consonant," the Greek variables cr, f3 and 8
indicating dependencies between feature values.
As pointed out by K. P. Mohanan, and developed in numerous papers since
then (e.g. I, 8, 33), there are a variety of problems with such a linear
approach. Consider two examples.
The first problem is that of feature dependency. In a linear theory, the
formal notation employed to express dependencies between feature values is
that of variables with interdependent values, as just seen. This notation,
however, allows the expression of a wide number of unattested dependencies.
For example, although it is common to have the value of a feature [F] on one
segment be dependent on a value of the same feature [F] on another segment,
it is undesirable to allow a general mechanism whereby both + and - values
of [F] depend on the values of some second feature [G]. For example, a rule
identical to Example 36 but with revised feature dependencies as in Example
37 is impossible:
[+nasall �[acoro�aIJ
l3antenor
/ - [-SYllabic]
J3coronal 37.
81abial 8anterior
alabial
Although formally just as simple as Example 36, with the Yoruba data just
cited this rule would have bizarre effects like (a) deriving a bilabial nasal [m]
before an alveolar [d] (that is, a [+anterior, -coronal, +labial] nasal before a
[+anterior, + coronal, -labial] consonant), and (b) deriving a palatal nasal
before a doubly articulated labial-velar as well as otherwise unattested con-
sonants before labials and palatals. Even the rule's only plausible result (the
derivation of a velar nasal before a velar consonant) must presumably be
considered accidental.
Although this problem might be solved by some form of condition on
interfeature dependencies, an additional shortcoming of linear theories of
assimilation is the problem of natural classes. Rules such as Example 36
clearly demonstrate that a single rule can affect more than one feature. But if
this is the case, then what are the feature combinations capable of functioning
as sets in phonological rules? If one adopts for the sake of concreteness a set
of 20 features [note Chomsky & Halle (6)], then there would in principle be
190 distinct combinations of two features, 1140 distinct combinations of three

features , and so on. But allowing such free combination of features vastly
overgenerates the types of sets actually attested in phonological processes.
Problems such as these receive straightforward solutions within an appro
priate nonlinear framework. Let us begin by assuming that features do not
constitute unordered sets, but that they are intrinsically structured so as to
reflect certain articulatory properties. Following work by Clements (7) and
Sagey (33), let us assume that the overall set of features (which is labelled the
ROOT, following a proposal by K. P. Mohanan) is divided into LARYNGEAL and
SUPRALARYNGEAL sets. If we think of the vocal tract as essentially a system of
tubes through which air passes to produce speech, then one can think of the
laryngeal features as determining whether, among other things, the column of
air passing through the system is vibrating or not; the supralaryngeal features,
on the other hand, determine the shape and volume of the vocal tract, thereby
determining the quality of the resulting sound . Within the set of supralaryn
geal featurcs, a further subset is the class of PLACE features, with further
subsets under place consisting of the features related to individual articula
tors-for example, LABIAL for the movements of the lower lip, CORONAL for
the tip or blade of the tongue, and DORSAL for the body of the tongue. The set
structure so far described can be represented by a tree as follows:
...... root node
51\ '
I ,
I ,
_ __ 0 _ _ _ --" · ..... laryngeal node
· ..... supralaryngeal node

T ...... place node 38.
�. I •
- �\-
- - - - - - o� - : -- -- - _ .. / : · . . . .. labial node
. ;
___ � _ ___ J · . .... coronal node
0-- ... dorsal node
Such a structure constitutes a substantive proposal concerning the sets of

222 PULLEYBLANK
features that can function as classes in the formulation of phonological rules,

responding to the natural classes problem discussed in relation to linear
theories. The claim is that 'it is precisely those groups of features dominated
by a class node in the appropriate set structure that constitute natural classes in
phonological processes. In the forms of the Yoruba progressive marker seen
in Example 35, for example, the set of features that undergoes assimilation is
the set of PLACE features.
The proposal in Example 38 also provides a simple solution to the feature
dependency problem. By adopting the autosegmental proposal that each node
of such a tree representation constitutes an independent level, nodes can

extend their domains independent of other nodes. Illustrating with the Yoruba
instance seen in Example 35, the place features of the relevant consonants can
extend their domain so as to characterize both the supralaryngeal nodes of the
consonants and the supralaryngeal nodes of a preceding nasal (illustrated here
with the partial trees appropriate for bilabial and alveolar places of articula
tion, and with assimilation indicated by an arrow):
m - b n - d
C-4: . . . . . . skeleton
I
o
,
o· ... . . . root node
laryngeal . . . . . .
\ \ . . . . . . supralaryngeal node 39.
�------�O."l\
node
k-____ . . . . . . place node
...()- . . . coronal node

labial node . .....
Each consonant has a skeletal level of representation, as well as a root node

and a supralaryngeal node. The two pairs of consonants share place nodes as a
result of the assimilation rule illustrated in Example 35. Because of assimila
tion, the labial specifications of [b] are shared by the progressive marker,
deriving [m]; the coronal specifications of [d] cause the progressive marker to
be realized as [n] in a similar fashion.
The important point with respect to the feature dependency problem is that
the relation between the place values of the two consonants does not formally
require any type of variable notation. The domain of the relevant place
features is simply increased from one segment to two. An assimilatory
process such as that under discussion is therefore straightforwardly accounted
for, while an impossible process such as that seen in Example 37 is impossible
to express.
Opacity To conclude this discussion of hierarchical feature structure, I

demonstrate one additional type of result obtained within such a framework.
Consider the following observation concerning sequences of vowels in verbs

of Tiv: The second of a sequence of vowels is identical to the first vowel if (a)
the two vowels are adjacent, or (b) the consonant intervening between the two
vowels is [h] . As illustration, consider the following sequences of [a] and [e],
[ )] and [0] . 14
VCV VhV VV
- -
a.. e kase "surround"
-
a. . a kaha "hoe" vaa "weep, cry" 40.
- -
:l . . 0 n :lndo "drip"
- bh:l "summon"
:l . . :l y») "make proclamation"
As can be seen from this table. the sequences [a . . e] and [) . . 0] are possible
only with an intervening consonant other than [h]; the sequences [a. . a] and
[ ).. )] , on the other hand, are possible with adjacent vowels, or when an
intervening consonant is [h].
Putting aside the problem of the cases involving [h], the pattern in Example
40 is straightforwardly derived by positing a rule that assimilates a vowel to
an immediately preceding vowel. Assuming that the sequences [a.. a] and
[ J.. J] do not appear underlyingly in Tiv [as can indeed be argued (32)] , vaa
and yJJ are therefore derived by the application of assimilation to prior forms
Ivael and Iy Jol. The problem is how to account for the applicability of this
rule of vocalic assimilation to sequences of vowels with an intervening [h] .
To achieve this end, let us assume that the required rule is one that spreads
the supralaryngeal set of specifications, that is, a rule along the following
lines:
v v
I I 41.
V
root node
o supralaryngeal node
This rule extends the domain of the supralaryngeal specifications of the first
vowel to include the second vowel.
An account of the applicability of assimilation over [h] is now available.
An examination of the consonant inventory of Tiv reveals that [h) is the only
'''The vowels [a, e] (both produced without lip-rounding) cannot co-occur with [=>, 0] (both
produced with lip-rounding) because of a rule causing agreement in rounding in such forms (32).
The surface tonal patterns of verbal forms depend on how a verb is inflected. Since this is
irrelevant here, tone is not indicated below (but see 31).
224 PULLEYBLANK
consonant lacking supralaryngeal specifications. In producing an [h], the

vocal cords in the larynx are spread, but the remainder of the vocal tract is
unaffected. All other consonants ([s] is used here for illustration) involve a
supralaryngeal constriction of some kind. As a consequence, the relevant
configurations for sequences of vowels with or without consonants are as
follows:
a. a e b. a h e c. a s e
V V V C V V C V
I 0I I 0I 0I I 0I 0I 42.
o 0 0 root node
I 0I I
0
I
0
I I I
0 0 0 supraJaryngeaJ node
Assimilation is applicable in the first two cases but blocked in the third case
by the supralaryngeal specification of the intervening consonant:
a. a a b. a h a c. a s e
V V V C V V C V
I 0I
o 0
I oI 0I I aI 0I
a root node 43.
ll'
0
V
0
bi- I I
0 0 0 supraJaryngeaJ node
Hence a hierarchical representation of segment-internal structure provides

more than just a characterization of the natural classes that undergo rules. In
addition, such an approach provides an account of why particular classes of
segments are transparent to certain types of assimilatory processes (as with [h]
in the Tiv example) or opaque to such processes (as with all other consonants
in this example).
To close this section , it is important to note two things. First, the Tiv case
just discussed is typical of a fair number of examples of translaryngeal
assimilation. The hierarchical analysis presented for Tiv is adopted from a
general proposal developed in a cross-linguistic survey of such cases by
Steriade (38). Second, a linear theory such as that of Chomsky & Halle (6)
can provide no insightful account of the special property of laryngeal con
sonants like [h] with respect to supralaryngeal assimilation. While such
consonants could by stipulation be excluded from the class of segments that
block assimilation, there is no principled reason for such exclusion in a linear
account.
CONCLUSION
The approach to phonology presented here is one that crucially involves a

number of semi-independent subtheories. Segments are externally organized
into constituents according to theories of syllabification, metrical (stress)

structure, and prosodic domains; segments are internally organized into a
highly articulated set structure. Crucial use is made of two types of con
straints. On the one hand, certain "internal" constraints are built into the
architecture of the theory. For example, the set of place features can assimi
late as a unit because it is assigned to a single node in the hierarchical feature
structure; a set of features like [round], [nasal], and [High tone], on the other
hand, cannot function as a unit because no node in the feature hierarchy
corresponds to such a grouping. In addition, certain "external" conditions
further constrain the operation of phonological rules. For example, the condi
tion on rule application discussed in the context of Tigrinya spirantization
prevents a particular class of rules from applying to representations with a

geminate structure.
Many of the more important results in the theory of phonology over the past
several years have developed from a concentrated investigation of the struc
ture of phonological representations. As representations have been enriched,
so have previously complex rule systems been simplified . In this paper, I have
concentrated on developments within the theory of autosegmental phonology.
Other important bodies of research such as dependency phonology (e. g. 10) ,
particle phonology (e. g . 34), and charm and government theory (e.g. 22)
have not been touched on. In all such work, however, important results can
often be directly traced to the abandonment of linear models of phonology in
favor of some version of nonlinear theory.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank Alan Bell and Larry Hyman for discussion of certain parts of this
paper.
Literature Cited
1 . Archangeli, D . , PuUeyblank, D. 1989. Lengthening and Consonant Gemination

The Content and Structure ofPhonologi in LuGanda. In Studies in Compensatory
cal Representations. Cambridge, MA: Lengthening, ed. L. Wetzels, E. Sezer,
MIT Press. To appear pp. 37-77. Dordrecht: Foris
2. Aronoff, M. 1976. Word Formation in 8. Clements, G. N . 1985. The geometry of
Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: phonological features. Phonol. Yearb.
MIT Press 2:225-52
3. Bagemihl, B. 1988. Alternate phonolo 9. Clements, G. N . , Keyser, S. J. 1983.
gies and morphologies. PhD thesis. CV Phonology: A Generative Theory of
Univ. British Columbia the Syllable. Cambridge, MA: MIT
4. Chomsky, N. 1 980. Rules and Repre Press
sentations. New York: Columbia Univ. 10. Durand, 1. 1 986. Dependency and Non
Press Linear Phonology. London: Croom
5. ChomSky, N. 1 98 1 . Lectures on Gov Helm
ernment and Binding: The Pisa Lec 1 1 . Goldsmith, J. 1979'. Autosegmental
tures. Dordrecht: Foris Phonology. New York: Garland Press
6. Chomsky , N . , Halle, M. 1968 . . The 1 2 . Halle, M . , Vergnaud, J.-R. 1987. An
Sound Pattern of English. New York: Essay on Stress. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Harper & Row Press
7. Clements, G. N . 1 985. Compensatory 1 3 . Hammond, M. 1984 . Constraining Met-
226 PULLEYBLANK
rica I Theory. Bloomington: Indiana 26. McCarthy, J. 1 98 1 . A prosodic theory of

Univ. Linguist. Club nonconcatenative morphology. Linguist.
14. Hayes, B. 1 98 1 . A Metrical Theory of Inq. 12:373-418
Stress Rules. Bloomington: Indiana 27. McCarthy, J., Prince, A . 1989. Prosod
Univ. Lingu ist . Club ic Morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT
15. Hayes, B. 1982. Extrametricality and Press. To appear
English stress. Linguist. Inq. 1 3 : 227-76 28. Paulian, C. 1 974. Le Kukuya: langue
16. Hayes, B. 1 986. Inalterability in CV teke du Congo. Paris: S . E.L.A.F.
phonology. Language 62:2, 321-5 1 29. Piggott, G. L. 1 983. Extrametricality
1 7. Hayes, B. 1989. Compensatory and Ojibwa Stress. McGill Work. Pap.
lengthening in moraic phonology. Lin Linguist. 1 : 80-1 1 7
guist. Inq. To appear 30. Prince, A . 1 983. Relating t o the grid.
18. Hyman, L. M. 1 987. Prosodic domains Linguist. Inq. 14: 1 9-100
in Kukuya. Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 3 1 . Pulleyblank, D. G. 1986. Tone in Lexi

5 : 3 1 1-33 cal Phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel
1 9. Ito, J. 1 986. Syllable theory in prosodic 32. Pulleyblank, D. G. 1988. Underspecifi
phonology. PhD thesis. Univ. Mass. , cation, the feature hierarchy and Tiv
Amherst vowels. Phonology 5:299-326
20. Ito, J. 1989. A prosodic theory of 33. Sagey, E. 1986. The representation of
epenthesis . Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory features and relations in non-linear
7 : In press phonology. PhD thesis. MIT
2 1 . Kahn, D. 1980. Syllable-Based Gener 34. Schane, S. A. 1984. The fundamentals
alizations in English Phonology. New of particle phonology. Phonol. Yearb.
York: Garland 1 : 1 29-55
22. Kaye, J . , Lowenstamm, J . , Vergnaud, 35. Schein, B. 1 98 1 . Spirantization in Tig
J.-R. 1985. The internal structure of rinya. MIT Work. Pap. Linguist. 3:32-
phonological elements: a theory of 42
charm and government. Phonol. Yearb. 36. Schein, B . , Steriade, D. 1986. On
2:305-28 geminates. Linguist. Inq. 1 7:69 1-744
23. Kenstowicz, M. 1982. Gemination and 37. Steriade, D. 1982. Greek prosodies and
spirantization in Tigrinya. Stud. Lin the theory of syllabification. PhD thesis.
guist. Sci. (Univ. III . , Urbana) 1 2: 1 , MIT, Cambridge, MA
103-22 38. Steriade , D. 1 987. Locality conditions
24. Levin, J. 1 985. A metrical theory of and feature geometry. NELS 1 7:595-
syllabicity. PhD thesis. MIT 617
25. Libennan, M . , Prince, A. 1977. On 39. Zwicky, A . M . , Kaisse, E. M . , eds.
stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguist. 1987. Phonol. Yearb. 4 (whole volume)
Inq. 8:249-336

Nonlinear Phonology: Further

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nonlinear Phonology: Further

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANNUAL

The production and perception of speech involve the interaction of a variety of

and syntax. In the discussion here, we consider certain properties of the

The Nature of the Phonological Component

both in terms of production and perception. When speaking we produce

interpret such utterances effortlessly. Our linguistic abilities cannot, there­

LINEAR AND NONLINEAR THEORIES

In linear theories of phonology, notably that of Chomsky & Halle (6), a

matrix composed of an unstructured set of binary distinctive feature specifica­

divisions. Such set structure can be graphically represented by assigning each

In the following sections, we consider representative properties that moti­

phonological rules of Turkish, all of which involve an environment crucially

consonant. Such a systematic disjunction is problematic for a linear theory

Accusative Nominative Ablative

If this constellation of environments were an idiosyncracy of degemination

In the case of hakk+i, the geminate consonant is retained because it can be

junctive reference to "word-final or followed by a consonant" can be replaced

syllables (ultimately unstressed) are distinguished by rules that assign phonet­

of a large class of phrase-level phonological processes. For discussion, see

CONTOUR SEGMENTS Let us begin by considering the class of segments

constitute examples of contour tones: z'we "book", dburo "younger sibling".

a representation that in essence reflects traditional phonetic observations.

a. Affricate: b. Prenasalization: c. Rising & falling tones:

Such a solution, which is supported by a large body of evidence, is

1. In such an approach, segments consist of matrixes of unordered features. If

five tonal possibilities for a stem in Kukuya, regardless of the number of

L stem: bi! "grasshopper killer"

H stem: hoi "oil palms"

HL stem: kaa "grill"

LHL stem: baamI "wakes up"

any leftover vowels to its right: II

bvI "falls" kaiiy "loses weight"

surface contours. All three properties constitute arguments against a strictly

Some intrinsically contoured tone feature would have to be posited, with a

Expressed in autosegmental terms, a linear model of

MULTIPLE LIN KINGS

one-to-one. In the last section, we saw evidence in favor of allowing linkings

This rule is interpreted as changing a H tone into a M when such a H occurs in

Precisely as a result of the one-to-many linkings posited, the entire sequence

According to this rule, a pre-pausal H tone would be lowered to M; sub­

ma+ba ma+ba II maba "they are oil-palms"

As seen, it is only the second H-the pre-pausal H-that undergoes lowering.

wide range of properties. The range of tonal possibilities observed on stems is

GEMINATES In the last section, I argued that different nonlinear con­

Sequential behavior Consider, for example, a rule from Ojibwa, which

a. ni-gitlm "I am lazy"

Formulated as a rule affecting the skeletal level of representation (12), a

a. ni-bimose "I walk"

a. kiintu ciintu "thing"

oluggi � olujji "door" 25.

features of [i]/[y] trigger palatalization, whether assigned to a V-slot ([iD or to

In conclusion, we see that a nonlinear theory straightforwardly accounts for

both the sequential and the single-segment behavior of geminate segments,

Inalterability There is another way in which a nonlinear theory can provide

m"isar-ka "your (masc. sg.) axe" 27.

If the same suffix is attached to a vowel-final stem, then spirantization

sant'a-xa "your (masc. sg.) bag" 28.

But while spirantization applies to a nongeminate consonant as in Example

akkat "kind of fruit" * axkat * axxat 29.

To understand the inapplicability of spirantization in such cases, it is

Given the structure assigned to a geminate consonant within a nonlinear

[k] Melodic level

Since there is indeed a post-vocalic velar stop, spirantization would be

interpret such utterances effortlessly. Our linguistic abilities cannot, there

matrix composed of an unstructured set of binary distinctive feature specifica

In the following sections, we consider representative properties that moti

syllables (ultimately unstressed) are distinguished by rules that assign phonet

According to this rule, a pre-pausal H tone would be lowered to M; sub

GEMINATES In the last section, I argued that different nonlinear con

in Kukuya. Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 3 1 . Pulleyblank, D. G. 1986. Tone in Lexi