Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 www.elsevier.


Allomorph selection and lexical preferences: Two case studies§
` ´ Eulalia Bonet a,*, Maria-Rosa Lloret b,1, Joan Mascaro a,2

` Filologia Catalana, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain Filologia Catalana, Universitat de Barcelona, Gran Via de les Corts Catalanes, 585, 08007 Barcelona, Spain Received 15 March 2006; received in revised form 28 April 2006; accepted 28 April 2006 Available online 14 August 2006


Abstract Phonologically conditioned allomorphy is sometimes determined by universal marking conditions derived from low-ranked constraints, which is viewed as an effect of the emergence of the unmarked (TETU) in optimality theory. In this paper we present two case studies that make crucial use of allomorph selection as TETU but also of an additional property of the lexical representation of allomorphs, namely lexical ordering of allomorphs. The first case is the puzzling selection of definite marker in Haitian Creole (analyzed as an instance of anti-markedness in previous OT works), which yields to an appropriate analysis in terms of allomorph ordering. In the second case study, gender allomorph selection in Catalan, we propose a constraint RESPECT that ensures compliance with idiosyncratic lexical specifications, which further interacts with allomorph selection. # 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Allomorphy; Lexical representation; Markedness; Haitian Creole; Catalan

1. Introduction It is a well-known fact that languages show irregularities in the selection of certain morphs. In some cases the choice is indeterminate and leads to free variation, as in Spanish imperfect

§ Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the 26th GLOW Colloquium (Lund, April 2003) and the 3rd Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (Catania, September 2003). * Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 935812361; fax: +34 935812782. E-mail addresses: (E. Bonet), (M.-R. Lloret), ´ (J. Mascaro). 1 Tel.: +34 934035633; fax: +34 934035698. 2 Tel.: +34 935812352; fax: +34 935812782.

0024-3841/$ – see front matter # 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2006.04.009


E. Bonet et al. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927

subjunctive markers -ra, -se ([Qa]$[se]) in (1a) or German diminutive suffix -lein, -chen ([laIn]$[c3n]) in (1b)1: ¸ (1) a. 1sg.-3pl. of cantar ‘to sing’ canta-ra canta-se canta-ra-s canta-se-s canta-ra canta-se ´ ´ canta-ra-mos canta-se-mos canta-ra-is canta-se-is canta-ra-n canta-se-n b. Diminutives ¨ Stad-chen Jesuskind-lein ¨ Ros-chen ¨ Baum-chen ¨ Strass-chen ‘town’ ‘Baby Jesus’ ‘rose’ ‘tree’ ‘street’

¨ Ros-lein ¨ Baum-lein ¨ Strass-lein

We might refer to cases like (1) as free allomorphy. However, most cases have a tight distribution, each allomorph appearing in a given grammatical context (controlled allomorphy). The context can be of different sorts, often morphological, like in stem selection in irregular inflection or derivation (in English are is selected by 2sg.pres., 2pl.pres. and 3pl.pres., am by 1sg.pres., etc.). But the context can also be phonological ( phonologically conditioned allomorphy). Here two very different situations arise (although in many cases it is not clear beforehand to which one a given empirical case belongs). The phonological conditioning contexts can be arbitrary, unnatural. Under such a condition of arbitrary phonologically conditioned allomorphy the analysis must also incorporate arbitrary lexical listing of allomorphs and their contexts one by one, i.e. subcategorization of each allomorph for the contextual frames that select it. One such case is the Turkish causative suffix, which is -t after polisyllabic stems ending in V, l, or r, and -dir elsewhere. It is difficult to see any natural phonological connection between the shape of the allomorphs -t/-dir and their respective hosts. But in other cases there is regular (natural) phonologically conditioned allomorphy: the conditioning follows a natural phonological distribution. There is hence a generalization to be captured, which is missed by any analysis based on subcategorization, as has been noted long before; see, among others, Pullum and Zwicky (1988:262), Spencer (1991:229).2 We will concentrate on such cases and therefore we will not deal with arbitrary phonologically conditioned allomorphy, or other kinds of allomorphy. A typical case of regular phonologically conditioned allomorphy is allomorphic choice dictated by best satisfaction of better (less marked) syllable structure. We illustrate this with the Korean topic-focus marker, which has two allomorphs, -un (2a) and -nun (2b) (examples from Lapointe, 2001:267–269): (2) a. b. pap-un Kim-un ai-nun Cho-nun *pap-nun *Kim-nun *ai-un *Cho-un ‘cooked rice’ ‘child’

Notice that an analysis based on deletion of n or insertion of n is untenable, since in Korean forms like *pap-nun, *Cho-un are not phonologically ill formed, because the language allows codas,
Although there is in general free variation with respect to the German diminutive suffix, some specific contexts favor ¨ or demand a specific allomorph: xx, ll, and also gl, El are disfavored: *Bachchen ‘stream-dim.’, etc. (See, for instance, Fleischer et al., 1983:258). Examples are from 2 The idea that all allomorphy should be explained by the same mechanism seems to be assumed by some authors, either implicitly or explicitly (for instance, Paster, 2005: section 5, states that subcategorization ‘‘avoids the problem of having multiple theoretical mechanisms to model a single phenomenon’’). But ‘allomorphy’ is a (vague) descriptive concept that has no privileged theoretical status. An adequate theory should account for observable phonetic variation of morphs; concepts and mechanisms are justified to the extent that the theory is adequate.

/nun/ are listed in the lexical representation of the topic-focus morpheme they both satisfy DEP and MAX. 4 ´ ´ r-tensing. 2001). McCarthy and Prince. but the infinitive morpheme /Q/ exceptionally assimilates to a following pronominal clitic-initial consonant (4b)4: (4) a. competition being solved now by ONSET and NOCODA: In cases like Korean the idiosyncratic information supplied by the lexicon is minimal: it just states that there are two allomorphs. In this Catalan variety ´ infinitive marker selection in Baix Emporda r never assimilates to a following consonant.g. Bonet et al. namely lexical ´ ordering of allomorphs as proposed in Mascaro (2005).b. as shown in (4a). /un/ and /nun/. see section 3). [irCm] ‘name’.g. does not assimilate pe[r n]adal ‘by Christmas’ per[r m]olts ‘for many’ ma[r n]egre ‘black sea’ pe[r l]o bo ‘for the good things’ pe[r t]u ‘for you’ co[r s]a ‘healthy heart’ b. 1996. But when the allomorphs /un/. 2005:22–25) in many cases (but not all.. 1994). Mascaro.g. 1998. their distribution follows from universal marking conditions derived from low-ranked constraints. e. Rubach and Booij.3 This distribution can successfully be dealt with as an effect of the emergence of the unmarked (TETU./ / Non-assimilatory environments posa[Q-u] ‘to put it’ posa[Q-i] ‘to put there’ Assimilatory environments posa [n-n3] ‘to put some’ posa [l-l3] ‘to put it-fem. Tranel. Drachman et al. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 905 e. 1996a.’ posa [m-m3] ‘to put me’ posa[t-t3] ‘to put you’ posa[(s)-s3] ‘to put oneself’ The phonological similarity among allomorphs is of course due to the fact that external allomorphy originates through ´ morphologization of older phonological processes (Mascaro. (5a)). Perlmutter. Kager. but also of an additional property of the lexical representation of morphemes. ´ 2001. Lapointe. Since Korean allows codas.E. The two case studies we discuss in this paper make crucial use of allomorph selection as TETU. 2005:11–17). 1996. Exceptional behavior of inf. present in examples like [p3r-n3ðal] or *[puzar-l3] (cf. [n3t] ‘face’. as has been proposed by several authors (e. which occurs in coda position is an independent phenomenon irrelevant to the purposes of this paper. given that deletion or insertion are not used as repair strategies. 3 . DEP and MAX must dominate ONSET and NOCODA. Allomorphic ordering is illustrated with ` Catalan (Mascaro. 1996. and onsetless syllables.

i. The set of allomorphs must be viewed then as a partially ordered set: /Q> (n. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 If the infinitive contains the set of allomorphs Inf. But in a non-assimilatory environment.e.906 E. l. s and these are unordered with respect to each other. Bonet et al. s)/. l. e. s/. like posa[Q-u] in (4b). Since the correct output is [puza-Q-u]. mn. t. but with the additional drawback of listing irregularities in the ´ phonological component. m2. m. the allomorph /Q/ has to be given some priority over the rest: it is the lexically unmarked allomorph. [puza-m-u]. and a candidate containing in correspondence with mi. . PRIORITY assigns as many violation marks as the depth of ordering between mi and the highest dominating morph(s). ´ ´ [puza-s-u]). It might seem odd to list all the infinitive variants (Q. n. . ‘per’ for the prepositional clitic /p3Q/. The constraint PRIORITY demands faithfulness to this ordering. Given an input containing allomorphs m1.=/Q. t. l. low-ranked AGREE-C ´ will determine allomorphic choice correctly. since there is no allomorphy. In the cases in (4a). [puza-t-u]. favors the choice of the unmarked allomorph5: (6) PRIORITY: Respect lexical priority (ordering) of allomorphs. The alternative is the equivalent to a minor rule. ´ GEN-modified candidates like [p3n-n3ðal] from /p3Q-n3dal/ will be discarded by IDENT(F) in ´ favor of [p3r-n3ðal]. m. . 5 .. [puza-l-u]. n. This question is discussed in more detail in Mascaro (2005).e. AGREE-C will be vacuously ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ satisfied by all candidates ([puza-Q-u]. s). m. as shown in (5) for posar-la [puzal-l3]. i. [puza-n-u].g. Q precedes n. t. m. t. instead of listing them in the lexicon. l. with the same apparent loss of generalization.

that interacts with PRIORITY in a case in which a morpheme consists of a set of totally ordered three allomorphs. while in Baix Emporda Catalan the infinitive marker consists of the Vocabulary entry in (8b): (8) a. it will most often be the case that the CV allomorph is chosen after vowels (avoiding the appearance of a coda) and that the Vallomorph is chosen after consonants (avoiding a hiatus).E. The problem As illustrated in section 1 with the Korean example. which yields to an appropriate analysis in terms of morpheme ordering. section 6) propose an extension of their treatment of paradigmatic gaps (ineffability) to deal with cases similar to the ones analyzed here which is based on lexical ordering of allomorphs but resorts to MPARSE instead of PRIORITY. topic/focus $ {un. Determiner allomorphy in Haitian Creole 2. The example from Haitian Creole we discuss in this section seems to be a counterexample to this pattern because the CV allomorph appears after a consonant (creating a 6 McCarthy and Wolf (2005. in cases of phonologically conditioned allomorphy all allomorphs are inserted. e. m. In the second case study. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 907 Our approach to phonologically conditioned allomorphy is compatible with different theories of morphology. and the OT-phonology determines which one is the best choice. Contrary to cases of allomorphy conditioned by the morphology.g. Bonet et al. In such cases. nun} infinitive $ {Q > n. s} In the next section we examine an apparently puzzling case. gender allomorph selection in Catalan (section 3). 1993). l. . if a morpheme has a CV allomorph and a V allomorph (both suffixal). with Distributed Morphology (Halle and Marantz.1. b. in phonologically conditioned allomorphy a very common pattern is that the allomorph chosen is the one that best satisfies markedness constraints. t. we propose a constraint RESPECT that ensures compliance with idiosyncratic lexical specifications.6 2. where the choice of allomorph is determined by Vocabulary Insertion. definite marker selection in Haitian Creole. Under this view the ` Korean topic/focus marker consists of the Vocabulary entry in (8a).

908 E. the front glide [j] appears after a front vowel. and vowels can be nasalized. by Nikiema (1999) (see also Bhatt and Nikiema.2. (iii) the choice of the allomorph -a in (10b) causes a violation of DEP (there is epenthesis of a glide). and for both authors. Previous approaches The behavior of the definite determiner in Haitian Creole has been analyzed. absence of a hiatus. the determiner la surfaces as na. we ignore here stems with the mid-low vowels [e] and [&]. (9) -la chosen after a stem-final consonant /liv/ ‘book’ [livla] /Rat/ ‘cat’ [Ratla] /malad/ ‘sick’ [maladla] /bagaj/ ‘thing’ [bagajla] or glide ‘the book’ ‘the cat’ ‘the sick (person)’ ‘the thing’ (10) -a chosen after a stem-final vowel a. 7 . These accounts assume a single underlying morph -la (like previous approaches). with a stem-final [a] /papa/ ‘father’ [papaa] ‘the father’ b. presence of a hiatus.ja] versus *[pa. a stipulation) according to which the initial consonant of the suffix is associated only when preceded by a a violation that would have been avoided if the allomorph -la had been chosen (cf. and the back rounded glide [w] appears after a back rounded vowel. with other stem-final vowels /papje/ ‘paper’ [papjeja] ‘the paper’ /lapli/ ‘rain’ [laplija] ‘the rain’ /bato/ ‘boat’ [batowa] ‘the boat’ /tu/ ‘hole’ [tuwa] ‘the hole’ In (10b). which would be inexistent with the allomorph -la (cf.pje. These facts are illustrated in (9) and (10).pa. which show variation with respect to the presence or absence of an epenthetic glide before the determiner. see Cadely (2002). [liv. and -a is chosen after a stem ending in a vowel. though. rather than an emergence of the] versus *[li. the initial consonant of the suffix is underlyingly a floating segment. by Cadely (2002) and.pje.7 At first]). For a detailed description of nasalization in Haitian Creole. Nikiema (1999) proposes that the final consonant of the stem in examples like liv is the onset of a syllable with an For lack of relevance to the issue discussed in this paper. For the same reason. Unexpectedly. within Government]). -la is chosen after a stem ending in a consonant or a glide. because of the insertion of a glide. Bonet et al. [pa. for instance. Haitian Creole and other Antillean creoles exhibit allomorphy in the suffixal definite determiner: -la and -a. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 coda otherwise unnecessary) and the V allomorph appears after a vowel (creating an unnecessary hiatus). we ignore the facts concerning nasalization: after a nasal consonant. for the following reasons: (i) in the examples in (9) the allomorph -la forces a violation of the constraint]). This pattern led Klein (2003) to treat Haitian Creole as a case of anti-markedness. Cadely proposes a condition (rather.a] versus *[pa. (ii) in the example in (10a) the choice of the allomorph -a causes a violation of ONSET and even the Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP). a violation that could be absent with the choice of the allomorph -a (cf. these examples seem to illustrate an emergence of the marked. 2. [pa. more explicitly. In the latter case the output form surfaces with a hiatus after a stem-final a and with a glide when the stem ends in other vowels. 2000).

8 . Klein uses the term ‘alternating [la]’ to refer to the Haitian Creole case as opposed to other creoles where only one of the morphs exists. STEM-FINAL-NOCODA is violated by candidates like liv-la. the insertion of a glide is not at all related to the choice of allomorph but is suspiciously treated as a later phonetic operation to avoid hiatus. Klein (2003) assumes that the definite determiner has two underlying]. (11) STEM-FINAL-NOCODA: Stems must end in an open syllable. and constraints ensuring the right choice of epenthetic glide. under this configuration the initial consonant of the suffix (the floating l) needs to be associated in order to be licensed. the morphophonology of the definite determiner in Haitian Creole and other Antillean creoles has been analyzed in Klein (2003). / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 909 empty nucleus.9 For the allomorph -a the desideratum does not exist and. something unnecessary when the stem ends in a vowel. this candidate. Contrary to previous approaches. (13) R-ALIGN-STEM-SYLL: Stems must end in a syllable. Bonet et al. following Rubach and Booij (2001) and Tranel (1996). The crucial point of his analysis is the claim that the allomorph /la/ is lexically specified with a desideratum which formally expresses the need to appear after a consonant-final stem. Klein (2003) makes crucial use of the constraint R-ALIGN-STEM-SYLL (also crucial in our proposal. In order to account for all the facts other constraints are needed. 2003: (15)) : When this desideratum is not followed by a candidate (as in *papa-la). and is contained in the lexical representation of the allomorph /la/. In addition to the more common and accepted constraints ONSET and DEP. according to Klein (2003). at the output of the phonology. reproduced below ((11) corresponds to Klein. The desideratum itself expresses the will to violate STEM-FINAL-NOCODA. Align the right edge of the stem with the right edge of a syllable. For both authors. and. he further assumes that these two allomorphs are freely available as inputs. 9 Note that Klein’s interpretation of MAX is peculiar. 2003: (14)). namely ‘papjea’. which is also commonly accepted. with different names ((13) corresponds to Klein. In this way they try to avoid the possibility that the floating /l/ is associated in order to avoid hiatus. Within OT. 2003: (16)). In order to account for the alleged anti-markedness effect. therefore. /la/ and /a/. candidates with this allomorph do not violate MAX.E. Align the right edge of the stem with the right edge of a syllable nucleus. developed in Klein (2000) and inspired by ideas in Golston (1996). This constraint is violated by candidates like *liv-a with the syllabification [li. to be presented below). incurs a violation of the faithfulness constraint MAX (given that a specification in the input is not preserved in the output). [la] or [a]. The origin of this desideratum is the constraint STEM-FINAL-NOCODA. examples like [papjeja] have the same structure as [papaa]. because in OT MAX applies to representational elements that are interpreted phonetically when the constraint is satisfied. he resorts to the Lexical Representation as Pure Markedness (LRPM) approach. which has the form in (12): this allomorph requires a violation of STEM8 FINAL-NOCODA ((12) corresponds to Klein.

which incorporates the ideas of Klein (2003) in this respect. the only candidate with the -a allomorph appears with a heterosyllabic [a. controlled by highly ranked MAX. has a single morph /a/. Klein (2003) discusses these cases 10 In (14). for instance. Other creoles do not show allomorphy in the definite determiner. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 The tableaux in (14) and (15) illustrate the basics of Klein’s analysis with the examples papa-a and liv-la.a] (15d).la] (15a). Notice that the also highranked constraint R-ALIGN-STEM-SYLL rules out the candidate in (15c). . Long vowels are not allowed in Haitian Creole. candidates with a long vowel.10 In (15) the lexical desideratum. is chosen because the candidate *[papala]. Bonet et al. is satisfied by the candidate [liv. like [pa. (14a). this causes a violation of MAX. which moreover does not violate ONSET. Guyanese. *[li. while Guadeloupean has a single morph /la/. We postpone the discussion of examples with glide insertion until we present our proposal. The asterisk between angled brackets used by Klein (2003) (<*>) indicates that the input violation of STEM-FINAL-NOCODA has been cancelled. and (15) reproduces his (18)). cannot satisfy the desideratum for la (it wants to violate].paa].910 E. Recall that the representations at the end of the first row correspond to the lexical representation. respectively ((14) reproduces his (17). (14b). *[liv. which means that the relevant constraint must be highly ranked. violate R-ALIGN-STEM-SYLL. a constraint violated by its most immediate competitor. Moreover. In (14) the candidate [papaa]. which means that it wants to attach to a stem ending in a consonant).a] sequence.

1999) claim that there is a single underlying form /la/. it is the opposite to grounding). papa-a. This type of Alignment constraints have been widely used in OT (see Prince and Smolensky. [papjeja]. 2002. in order to avoid a coda. In our account. then. instead it wants to violate specific constraints (in a way. We claim. We follow the idea in Gouskova (2001. 2002 or Nikiema. the existing pattern follows naturally: if there are two or more allomorphs they can be ordered. *papa-la). The fact that some morphemes are restricted to certain phonological contexts has been known for a long time. the /l/ is dropped but a glide is inserted (cf. Choosing /a/ as the single underlying form would not improve matters. For instance. Bonet et al. for instance). there is no possible choice. Kager. 1983 and Clements. In order to keep a single underlying form one would have to resort to ad hoc constraints. a further observation on the number of allomorphs posited is in order. This is one of the constraints that demands coincidence between morphological and prosodic edges (here between the edge of the root or stem and the edge of a syllable). hence enriching the grammar unnecessarily (and dangerously). but we actually find liv-la. In these cases. which also plays a crucial role in our account is R-ALIGN-STEM-SYLL (henceforth R-ALIGN). the base has to meet some segmental or prosodic requirements. 2002) that there is a family of Syllable Contact relational . all the constraints are universal. Klein (2003) assumes that the determiner has two allomorphs. *[papjela]). Besides PRIORITY. the English comparative suffix -er attaches only to a base consisting of a foot. by definition. while previous approaches (Cadely.3. Within Optimality Theory it would be very difficult to assume a single underlying form /la/. not *liv-a. In the approach to be presented below. 2. McCarthy. that the lexical entry corresponding to the definite determiner is as follows: (16) Definite determiner: {a>la} One of the constraints proposed by Klein (2003). In this case the morpheme does not want to meet certain requirements. In the next section we show that an account with ordered allomorphs makes the use of negative desiderata unnecessary. as has been noticed. and the English suffix -al attaches only to oxytone bases. the type of lexical desiderata proposed by Klein (2003) are of a new sort and imply an important theoretical change. However. but does not explain why only a creole with allomorphy should have a lexical desideratum in the input of the type proposed for Haitian Creole. In addition.E. as noticed earlier in the text. This is a problem also for approaches framed in Government Phonology. but if there is only one morph. based on ordered allomorphs. McCarthy and Prince. [1993] 2004. then. 1993. ‘La’ and ‘a’ as ordered allomorphs Negative desiderata of the type proposed by Klein (2003) are not needed for Haitian Creole if one assumes that -la and -a are ordered allomorphs. after a V-final stem we would predict [la]. As we have seen. /la/ and /a/. because deletion of the l would cause a violation of ONSET and the OCP (cf. the only new constraint that has to be added is a constraint related to the Syllable Contact Law (see Murray and Vennemann. 1990. The change to [a] (through /l/ deletion) should be left to markedness constraints but. like liv. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 911 explicitly. and the distribution of [la] and [a] derive from allomorphy and the way allomorphs are listed in the lexicon. Before we move on. it would be very hard to explain why after stems ending in a non-low vowel. among others). This kind of negative desiderata gives an undesired increase of power to the theory. this type of constraints would predict the opposite distribution: markedness constraints could favor deletion after a consonant-final stem. 1999b.

and the systematicity is directly related to phonological information (being a consonant or a glide. Catalan and the other cases mentioned earlier because. in the case of Haitian Creole). In (10b) it was shown that when the stem ends in a non-low vowel. the choice is not random but systematic. (19) shows that R-ALIGN and *C. the alignment constraint. as argued at the beginning of section 1. violates neither. *C. and a would be the elsewhere case. The most highly ranked member of this family is the constraint *C. a typical pattern for glide insertion across languages. which impose preference of syllable contacts with higher decreasing sonority across syllable boundaries (the greater the fall.V: Avoid a syllable ending in a consonant followed by a syllable starting with a vowel (the worst syllable contact).V must be ranked above PRIORITY (R-ALIGN. (20) Glide insertion /papje/ ‘paper’ /lapli/ ‘rain’ /bato/ ‘boat’ /tu/ ‘hole’ [papjeja] [laplija] [batowa] [tuwa] ‘the ‘the ‘the ‘the paper’ rain’ boat’ hole’ An anonymous reviewer asks why the choice of allomorph could not be made in the lexicon (or by Vocabulary insertion): la would be specified as selecting stems ending in a consonant or glide. whereas the other allomorph. We reject this type of approach for Haitian Creole. The glide [j] is inserted after front vowels. /la/. the better). As can be observed in (18). the allomorph -a is chosen and a glide is inserted avoiding a hiatus. We examine resyllabification in normal conditions (i. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 constraints. This family is a fixed hierarchy of constraints.V >> PRIORITY). and [w] is inserted after back rounded vowels. when there is no allomorphy) later in this section.e. The examples in (10b) appear repeated in (20).V. 11 . PRIORITY must be ranked above ONSET (PRIORITY >> ONSET). The tableaux in (18) and (19) illustrate how the choice of allomorph is made. The facts concerning glide insertion will be incorporated later. if resyllabified.11 In (19) the candidate with the /a/ allomorph either violates the syllable contact constraint or. Bonet et al.912 E. just stating the distribution misses a phonological generalization. informally stated in (17): (17) *C.

like *[liv. (25) and (26). we showed how the choice of allomorph was made. A discussion of these types of issues can be found in Rubach (2000) or. in Uffmann (2005). When discussing such cases (see (19)). some details need to be commented on with regard to stems ending in a consonant. .vwa]. and candidates deriving from the /la/ allomorph are all harmonically bounded by those deriving from /a/. (21) Featural agreement constraints (a) AGR-FRONT: A vowel and a following glide must agree in [FRONT] (b) AGR-ROUND: A vowel and a following glide must agree in [ROUND] The tableaux in (22). cannot be inserted as epenthetic segments instead of glides. (23) and (24) correspond to Klein’s (24).12 Nevertheless. an inserted glide violates the constraint DEP. (23) and (24) illustrate the choice of epenthetic glide and the impossibility of glide epenthesis after a low vowel. Notice that the constraints that appear in the tableaux are all dominated by PRIORITY (not included). We adopt here the basics of Klein’s analysis for the choice of epenthetic glide. like liv. is why glottal stops. addressed neither in Klein (2003) nor here. more recently. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 913 In Klein (2003) the nature of the epenthetic glide is determined by the two featural agreement constraints reproduced below ((21) corresponds to his (22)).wa] or *[li. respectively. Needless to say. In Klein’s approach this type of candidates are not considered but would not suppose a problem for his analysis (they would be ruled out by DEP). (22). In our approach we cannot resort to 12 A different question. without including in the tableau candidates with the morph -a but with an epenthetic glide. Bonet et al. for instance. for example.E.

13 (25) *C. account readily for this effect. In Gouskova (2001. Haitian Creole has resyllabification across morphemes (see Valdman and Iskrova.wa] are ruled out.wa] (or *[liv. (22) and (23). Candidates like *[liv. while t.L >> etc. by one of the constraints related to the Syllable Contact Law referred to earlier. Bonet et al. PRIORITY would favor *[liv.wa].ja]) over [liv.Vand G. Does having a highly ranked R-ALIGN imply that all morphological edges and prosodic edges will coincide in the language? The obvious answer is no: it all depends on the relative ranking of the constraints. from underlying /bobin+e/ ‘to roll up’. a context not met in this case). 2003. and in these cases the right edge of the root does not coincide with the right edge of a syllable. in (26a).wa] is dispreferred in favor of [ instead.V. hence the latter contact is not as bad.l is a better syllable contact than v. for instance).n ]. we adopt the schematic constraints in (25) and earlier in the paper. One might wonder what the effects of R-ALIGN are in the rest of the language.w has a distance of +7. 2002) the syllable contact constraints are defined in terms of distance in the sonority scale: *DIST+7 >> *DIST+6 >> *DIST+5 >>.l would have a distance of +5.G >> *C.wa] are ruled out by *C. 13 . The candidate [liv. in (26e). *C. The tableau in (26) repeats the example in (19).G. We exclude from the tableau the constraints AGR[FRONT] and AGR[ROUND] because they are not relevant (they refer to a vowel and a following glide. now with additional candidates.L] because v.w.C are worse syllable contacts than C. PRIORITY >> ONSET >> DEP. The partial hierarchy of syllable contacts needed for Haitian Creole is given in (25). the corresponding tableau appears in (27). as shown by the example [bo. The constraints introduced so far. therefore. and. is the optimal candidate because it respects R-ALIGN-STEM-SYLL and has a less bad syllable contact than its immediate competitor. A candidate [liv. etc. A contact]. Candidates like *[liv. with the proposed ranking.]. *[liv. as shown in tableaux (18). For clarity and simplification.914 E. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 DEP because.

in some dialects the vowel inserted in masculine plurals is [o] instead of [u] due to differences with respect to vowel reduction). though. but morphemes introduced through constraints leave open the possibility of adding as many constraints as morphemes. 3.14 14 The data presented in this section are from the standard variety of Central Catalan (which includes the variety spoken in the Barcelona area). In our case this would entail the existence of the constraints ARTICLE = a and ARTICLE = la. and Klein (2003) accounts for it also in terms of desiderata in the LRPM model.E. /wa/ and /kwa/ are ordered allomorphs (/wa>kwa/). the nominal conjunctive suffix has the allomorphs /kwa/ and /wa/. . An alternative way of getting effects similar to PRIORITY that one might consider is the introduction of morphs via constraints. Bonet et al. see Kager (in press). that it can be dealt with in essentially the same fashion. For other arguments against morphemespecific constraints. Contrary to the cases of allomorphy discussed up to now. In Korean. We will see. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 915 The alignment constraint and the constraints related to syllable contact are unranked with respect to each other and leave all the relevant candidates even. which favor the candidate with resyllabification (27b). it predicts that contextual changes will be blocked (Bonet. There are two important reasons for rejecting such an approach. Thus a lexical element /la/ can undergo contextual changes like l assimilation. that the crucial facts concerning plural formation hold for all Catalan dialects except for some phonological differences that are irrelevant to the issue being dealt with here (e. i. and Lapointe (2001) proposes to simply list the conditions under which each allomorph appears (kwa after a consonant. on the other hand. because it does not give the impression of an anti-markedness effect. but a constraint stating ARTICLE = la forces a unique phonetic interpretation of this morpheme. while /wa/ attaches to stems ending in a vowel (cf.e. but unexpectedly some masculine plurals show up with the vowel [u] between the stem and the plural morph (28b). One is restrictivity: a universal grammar with PRIORITY adds one constraint to the set. Atypical gender allomorphy in Catalan 3. ai-wa ‘child’).G and PRIORITY will do the rest.. This is the contrary one would expect under normal circumstances. It is important to note. wa after a vowel). which gives further support to our analysis. however. There is another case of allomorphy mentioned by Klein (2003). plurals are regularly derived by adding the morph [s] to the singular (28a). as proposed by Hammond (1995) and Russell (1995). In the next section. and therefore the decision is left to the markedness constraint ONSET and the faithfulness constraint DEP. *C. a deletion. Under the present approach. /kwa/ appears after stems ending in a consonant (cf. a case of allomorphy in Catalan is discussed which seems to differ radically from Haitian Creole. increases the number of outputs of a grammar but leaves the class of grammars unchanged. among others. Enlarging the lexicon.g. The constraints R-ALIGN-STEM-SYLL. PRIORITY is not relevant. This case is discussed in Lapointe (2001). etc. Korean does not differ at all from Haitian Creole. and the ordering ARTICLE = a >> ONSET >> DEP >> ARTICLE = la. The second basic problem with introducing lexical material through constraints is that constraints are surface-oriented. 2004). The problem In Catalan.1. pap-kwa ‘rice’). namely with the idea that the different allomorphs (here three of them) are lexically ordered. from Korean. whereas inputs are lexical material.

Mascaro. and a more marked one Ø (see (30e)). /mos-u/: [mosu] ´ c. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 (28) a. appears in the masculine plural forms of (28b) is related to morphology as well. b. and Oltra-Massuet. Bonet et al. /paQ-3/: [paQ3] Feminine ´ d. *[pass] ´ ´ ´ [gQas] – [gQasus]. 1991. since in Catalan there is a masculine gender allomorph [u] in some cases. as in (30b). 1992. *[gQass] ‘glass(es) (masc. (See. Lloret and Viaplana.)’ ‘striptease’ (from English) The fact that [u].)’ The appearance of [u] in (28b) avoids the OCP problem posed by sequences of sibilants. The allomorph [u] is not the only marked masculine allomorph that Catalan has. whereas the morpho-phonologically conditioned [u] allomorph only appears in masculine plurals with an OCP-sibilant problem (cf.15 (30) Masculine a. (28b)). as illustrated in (30a). sg.)’ ‘stain(s) (fem. among others.)’ ‘tender (masc. as illustrated in (31). the feminine has an unmarked allomorph..)’ ‘fat (masc. 1994. 1997. [3] (see (30d)). (Note that. but in certain lexically marked nominals [u] appears instead. 1985. This is the case. and nominal markers with the same results. in verbal inflection (31a). as illustrated in (31b). /g&t-Ø/: [g t] ´ b. In Catalan the stastistically most common masculine allomorph.) 15 In this paper we use the more traditional term gender marks in a broad sense. Interestingly enough. However. as the examples in (29) illustrate. as illustrated in (30c). 2005 on Spanish. – pl. the allomorph [3] also appears in few marked masculine nominals. /sal-Ø/: [sal] /g&t-Ø-s/: [g ts] ´ /mos-u-s/: [mosus] ´ /paQ-3-s/: [paQ3s] ´ /mos-3-s/: [mos3s] ´ /sal-Ø-s/: [sals] ‘glass(es)’ ‘lad(s)’ ‘father(s)’ ‘lass(es)’ ‘salt(s)’ As shown by the examples in (30). 1998. [3]). work by Harris. in lexically determined forms the marked gender allomorphs show up both in the singular and in the plural related forms. /mos-3/: [mos3] ´ e.) . 1998. and not [3]. and in feminine forms with a marked Ø feminine allomorph and an OCP-sibilant problem (30c). other words with an OCP-sibilant problem do show regular [3] insertion.)’ ‘tender (masc. in Catalan the regular epenthetic vowel is [3] (underlined henceforth. word markers. ´ Aronoff. regular cases of proclisis show initial epenthesis when a vowel is needed for syllabification. In a parallel way. [g t] – [g ts] ´ ´ [tak3] – [tak3s] ´ ´ ´ [pas] – [pasus]. for example. 1985b. pl. Lloret.916 E. (29) /templ/: /templ-s/: /tendQ/: /tendQ-s/: /stQiptis/: ´ [templ3] ´ [templ3s] [t ndQ3] [t ndQ3s] [3st ptis] ‘temple (masc.)’ ‘temples (masc. the unmarked one. and that the masculine counterparts of (31c) with an OCP-problem show the [u] allomorph. is ‘zero’ (represented as ‘Ø’ henceforth). 1999 on Catalan. sg. We could use notions like class markers.)’ ‘step(s) (masc. and Oltra-Massuet and Arregi. in cliticization (31b). 1992.

E. sg. [3] masculine allomorphs or the Ø feminine allomorph. pl. the former being statistically more common than the second one. The unmarked masculine allomorph is Ø. Bonet et al. /sal-s/: [sals]‘salts’) but: /f3lis-Ø/: [f3l s] ‘happy (masc. /sal-Ø/: [sal] ‘salt (fem. The unmarked feminine allomorph is [3]. Previous approaches The appearance of inflectional endings other than [3] in the feminine forms and Ø in the masculines forms has always been considered exceptional and has been analyzed as an . Table 1 Gender allomorphs in Catalan Unmarked Masc. /indik3/: [ind k3] ‘s/he shows’. with the Ø masculine allomorph or the [3] feminine allomorph. pl. the marked one is Ø.)’ /f3lis-Ø-s/: [f3l sus] ‘happy (masc. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 917 (31) a. (c) unmarked cases with regular [3] epenthesis.2. sg. (d) marked cases with regular [3] epenthesis.)’. Ø 3 Marked u Ø Most marked 3 Table 2 illustrates the possible endings of nominal inflected forms in Catalan: (a) unmarked cases. Table 1 summarizes the facts of Catalan gender allomorphy.)’ ´ ´ (cf. f3l s ´ mos-u ´ paQ-3 ´ templ3 g t-s ´ mos-u-s ´ paQ-3-s ´ templ3-s ´ pas-u-s f3l s-u-s ´ tak-3 ´ mos-3 ´ sal f3l s Feminine ´ tak-3-s ´ mos-3-s ´ sal-s f3l s3-s 3. /s#pas3/: [3spas3] ‘one passes’) /f3lis-Ø/: [f3l s] ‘happy (fem. /d rm-s/: [d rms] ‘you sleep’) ´ /suQt/: [surt] ‘s/he exits’ ´ /s#suQt/: [s3surt] ‘one exits’ (cf. (b) marked cases.)’ /f3lis-Ø-s/: [f3l s3s] ‘happy (fem. c. /s#indik3/: [sind k3] ‘one shows’ ´ ´ /pas3/:[pas3] ‘s/he passes’. Fem. the marked masculine allomorphs are [u] and [3].)’ b. with the [u]. and (e) the special masculine forms with [u] in the plural only. Table 2 Nominal inflected forms under study Masculine (a) Unmarked cases (b) Marked cases (c) Unmarked cases with [3] epenthesis (d) Marked cases with [3] epenthesis (e) Special cases with [u] g t ´ pas. /d&Qm/: [d rm] ‘s/he sleeps’. ´ /tus/: [tus] ‘s/he coughs’ ´ /tus-s/: [tus3s] ‘you cough’ (cf.

in Romance languages each verbal stem subcategorizes for a specific conjugation). these added vowels are not epenthetic but inflectional allomorphs (a gender allomorph in our ´ terminology. Viaplana.e. like the [3] used in problematic syllabification contexts. 167. and resorted to the ordered use of purely phonological rules versus morphologically-conditioned rules to account for the insertion of one vowel or the other. There it is assumed that there is a general epenthesis phenomenon. 1979:20–30. Hence the lexical entries must show the idiosyncratic choice. which is now analyzed autosegmentally. 3. 1985a. Within OT. in unmarked cases (Table 2. Hence. that we note as follows: (33) Masculine: /mosu/. ´ A different view is taken in Mascaro (1985b). the choice of gender allomorph is lexically determined (as is the case. allomorph selection follows from the following ordering relations between allomorphs: (32) Masculine: /Ø>u>3/ Feminine: /3>Ø/ In marked cases (Table 2. the only reference to this atypical gender allomorphy appears in Wheeler (2005:263). Ordered allomorphs and lexical specifications Our claim is that.918 E. but he ends up leaving the analysis of the [u] plural forms open to further research on morphology. Wheeler (1987) also posits a unique [3]-epenthesis rule and assumes that [u] occurrences are morphological. in the plural form of pairs like scheme–schemata in English). There is a unique input gender representation (that is. That is. takes the same position as Wheeler (1987) and does not offer any specific analysis of the facts. the appearance of [u] in plurals with an OCP-sibilant problem has been interpreted in different ways.3. the specific allomorph is selected by the relevant constraints (see below). Mascaro. In sibilant nominal contexts.g. However. this empty V slot is later filled by default rules – a schwa in the case of the varieties of Catalan under discussion. /paQ3/ Feminine: /salØ/ The subscript we use for the marked cases is to be understood as a subcategorization requirement. as we will next prove. PRIORITY). the existence of lexical subcategorization requirements naturally demands a faithfulness constraint that favors compliance with these requirements. a vocalic (V) slot is inserted whenever a syllabification problem arises. /Ø>u>3/ for masculine and /3>Ø/ for feminine) and. however. a nominal marker in Mascaro’s terms). Bonet et al. like the ones used in syntax or morphology (e. . / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 idiosyncratic lexical characteristic of certain stems. the added empty V slot is subject to a rule of gender spelling. The author. for instance. For the same reason that the existence of lexical ordering of allomorphs entails the existence of a faithfulness constraint favoring the choice of the dominating allomorphs (i. however. 1991) considered that this vowel was epenthetic. Our claim is that we can capture the morpho-phonological regularity of [u] appearance in plurals through the use of ordered allomorphs. for each nominal. We define such constraint as follows: (34) RESPECT: Respect idiosyncratic lexical specifications. part a). which applies before the default rules and assigns [u] to masculine nominals and [3] to the feminine ones. part b). Standard generative ´ analyses (Wheeler.

d). An anonymous reviewer suggests that we could use subcategorization requirements similar to the one just proposed in the case of the determiner allomorphy in Haitian Creole. would be discarded by *P/C (‘‘C may not associate to Peak (Nuc) nodes’’. would be discarded by O-CONTIGUITY (‘‘The portion of S2 standing in correspondence forms a contiguous string (‘‘No intrusion’’)’’.17 Tableaux (37) and (38) illustrate a case of unmarked masculine gender selection (i. most marked [3]. Both constraints are high-ranked in Catalan. while in Haitian Creole the la allomorph appears with all and only the stems that end in a consonant. specifying for each C-final stem that it subcategorizes for the la allomorph would miss the generalization. The latter also provide evidence for the ranking of RESPECT above PRIORITY. c. like [temp3l]. in the previous section.18 Notice that in both tableaux candidates (a. Bonet et al. like [temp3l]. [1993] 2004). RESPECT >> PRIORITY >> DEP. candidates with intermediate [u].E. exemplified in (30b.16 The tableaux in (35) illustrate how the unmarked allomorphs are selected in the regular cases. d) obey PRIORITY. The tableaux in (36) illustrate how the marked allomorphs. exemplified in (30a. There is. These tableaux support the ranking SONORITY SEQUENCING. two violations. are discarded by the high-ranked SONORITY SEQUENCING constraint. Prince and Smolensky. [3]) for syllabic reasons. (37a) and (38a). it is worth noting that candidates with ´ morpheme-internal epenthesis. incur one violation. e) are selected in cases where they regularly appear in the singular and in the plural forms. Ø) with insertion of the regular epenthetic vowel (i.e. 1995:371). 18 Although we simplify the number of possible candidates for expository reasons. (b). since they contain the dominating allomorph Ø (recall that underlined 3 is epenthetic). (c). Candidates with syllabic ´ consonants. The candidates without the inserted vowel. 16 17 Note that the ordering PRIORITY >> RESPECT would overrule any lexical specification. and candidates with non-epenthetic. . Hence in the latter case there is a phonological generalization to be captured. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 919 The ranking of RESPECT above PRIORITY ensures that lexically marked forms select the marked allomorphs. McCarthy and Prince.e. a crucial difference between the two cases: in Catalan the set of words that select the [u] allomorph in the singular is totally random. however.

because this vowel is not associated to the gender morpheme. . Bonet et al. Feminine nominals that are lexically specified with the marked Ø gender morph and whose stem ends in a sibilant also show up with [3] epenthesis in the plural forms to solve the OCP problem created by the plural morph.g. These forms are accounted for by adding the constraint OCP-SIBILANT (‘‘Adjacent sibilant segments are forbidden’’). e.e. a position that is thus left without realization (i.920 E. which is never violated in Catalan. where the presence of epenthetic [3] does not entail a violation of RESPECT. like the SONORITY SEQUENCING constraint. (31c)). the stem /f3lisØ/ ‘happy’ has the feminine singular form [f3l s] and the feminine plural form [f3l s3s] (cf. outranks PRIORITY (40). These cases are accounted for by the high ranking of OCP-SIBILANT. Note that the presence of the [3] gender allomorph in candidate (40b) entails a violation of RESPECT. the Ø allomorph). / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 As was illustrated in (31). The situation is quite different in (40c). the regular epenthetic vowel [3] also shows up in non-masculine words with an OCP-sibilant problem due to the addition of a sibilant morph.e. which. Tableau (39) illustrates this case with the ´ evaluation of the verbal form [tus3s] ‘you cough’. because the form is lexically marked as requiring the allomorph with no realization (i. Ø) and instead surfaces with the [3] allomorph.

Singulars. Plurals are also semantically and morphologically compositionally related to singulars. 1997) and the concept of ‘‘base’’ put forward in Kager (1999a. we can establish a base-identity output-output correspondence relation between ` singulars and plurals a la Kager. pl.E. plural nominals are formed over their singular counterparts (plural = singular plus -s) and thus they are influenced by the surface phonology of the singular (singular ! plural).b). like plurals. Benua. (41b). / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 921 With the ordering put forward so far.e. the paradigmatic relation that holds between a plural word and its singular counterpart satisfies both criteria for base-hood. however. The feature [PLURAL] only adds the semantic notion of ‘more than one’ to singulars. /f3lis-{Ø>u>3}/: [f3l s] ‘happy (masc. i. the form that can influence the surface form of a derived related form) is a freestanding output form – a word – and it must contain a subset of the grammatical (morphological and semantic) features of the derived form. Our claim is that the reason for this asymmetry is paradigmatic. Under this view. is the acceptable form instead. the base (that is. According to Kager (1999b:281–282). masculine plurals that give rise to a sibilant contact are also expected to undergo [3] epenthesis (see the candidate that wins in tableau (41).e. are freestanding forms. 1995. in Catalan. (41d)). but in this case the candidate with the [u] masculine allomorph.)’). with the acceptable output [f3l sus] (cf. (The acceptable candidate is indicated with the symbol ‘ ’. This kind of directional surface resemblance effect involves the notion of output-output correspondence (cf. We claim that.) The same problem appears in the evaluation of the masculine plural form /f3lis-{Ø>u>3}-s/ ‘happy (masc. i. Bonet et al.)’. namely. For the purpose of this paper we restrict the effect of this . Singular forms never show overt number marking and thus can be analyzed as not being marked with respect to number while plurals are marked with the privative feature [PLURAL]. which reproduce in parallel terms Brame’s (1974) Natural Bracketing Hypothesis. sg.

the three remaining candidates (i. [u]. among others. 20 Note that if output candidates did not contain prosodic and morphological information. Therefore. (43c). illustrated in tableaux (43)–(45). for instance. Therefore. and (43d)) fare even. wins. or [3]. [templ3] – [templ3s]). 21 As noted by a reviewer. But candidates (43b) and (43c) are discarded in the next step because they violate PRIORITY. we could not evaluate them with respect to alignment requirements. 1993). among others. On the role of this constraint and its high-ranking in Catalan.922 E. while allowing (43b) and (43c) to survive and ultimately selecting candidate (43b) as optimal.e. see Bonet and Lloret (2002. [1993] 2004. ALIGN-MM >> PRIORITY >> DEP. regular [3]-epenthesis applies and this vowel is carried ´ ´ over into the plural form. and thus candidate (43d). [u]. like [templ3s].20 Candidate (43d) violates ALIGN-MM. Our correspondence-based perspective of the Catalan facts is the following. Alignment constraints account for the position of morphological and prosodic constituents in the utterance (see Prince and Smolensky. (43) shows that the ranking ALIGN-MM >> OO is not possible. [pas]). with [3]-epenthesis. The resulting plural form respects OO (singular ! plural) too because here all vowels of the singular also have a correspondent in the ´ ´ plural ([pas] ! [pasus]). it will be crucial in the evaluation of the [u] forms. McCarthy and Prince. which is satisfied in the case of ´ [pasus] because the singular does not have an extra final vowel to be carried over into the plural ´ (cf. (42) OO: Every vocalic segment in the base has a correspondent in the affixed form. ´ Jimenez (1999) and Wheeler (2005). as in (43c) – violate the highranked OO constraint. When the singular form needs a vowel for syllabification. For the present purposes we use the latter although the alternative would not change the results. We do not repeat here the evaluation of the singular forms because the constraint OO remains inactive there. for output-output (OO) effects on consonants see. 2005a. if only the plural needs a vowel for syllabification. one can assume either the fixed ranking OO >> ALIGN-MM or the crucial non-ranking OO. Note that candidate (43c).21 In parallel approaches to OT. the constraint ALIGN-MM does not play any role in the singular forms either. ALIGN-MM. (43b).e. since they have no base to resemble. is a morph too ([[pas][u][s]]). and. to solve the problem (as in [pas] – [pasus]). what forces the alignment ´ ´ violation in [templ3s] (versus *[templus]) is the OO requirement.19 In [templ3s]. Bonet et al. with the [3] allomorph. follows from the ranking SONORITYSEQUENCING >> OO. in (43). In the plural forms ´ derived from singulars with epenthesis. the candidates with the alternative masculine allomorphs – that is. as said. [u]. as in (43b). The constraint responsible for turning to morphology is ALIGN-MM (‘‘Align the left edge of a morph X with the right edge of a morph Y’’). since that would rule out the winning candidate (43d). ALIGN-MM is violated because the epenthetic vowel intervenes ´ ´ between the stem and the plural morph ([[templ]3[s]]). as far as the number morph (i. The role of ALIGN-MM is not determinant here but. ALIGN-MM is satisfied because ´ the added vowel. plural) is concerned. which requires adjacency ´ between morphs. the language turns to morphology and selects the second masculine ´ ´ allomorph. The analysis we are putting forward. 19 . At this point of the evaluation. violates OO because ´ the base it must resemble is an output candidate itself ([templ3]) and it thus contains prosodic and morphological information on the nature of the final vowel (epenthetic in our example). 2005b) and Wheeler (2005). However. The resulting plural form respects OO (singular ! plural) inasmuch as all vowels of the singular ´ ´ have a correspondent in the plural ([templ3] ! [templ3s]). / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 constraint to vowels. in [pasus]. which also shows a syllabification problem (cf.

namely the one with the [3] feminine allomorph. which discards candidate (44c) because it violates PRIORITY twice inasmuch as it contains the third allomorph. Candidate (44d) is discarded because it violates ALIGN-MM due to the fact that the intervening epenthetic vowel breaks morph adjacency (that is the adjacency between the ´ stem. and epenthesis takes place because the epenthetic schwa does not compete with inflective allomorphs. derived from a lexically marked input /f3lisØ/ ‘happy’. has no effect either. In this case. and the number morph. (40c)). no candidate violates OO. the ones previously analyzed in (39) and (40). as shown in (45). coincide both with the actual phonetic result. In the case of feminine plural forms like [f3l s3s] (cf. In verbal forms like ´ [tus3s] ‘you cough’. like [pasus]. With the addition of ALIGN-MM (which is obligatorily ranked above PRIORITY). the OO constraint has no effect. . The decisive constraint is PRIORITY. [3]. and the one with [3]-epenthesis. as in (44). / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 923 ´ Tableau (44) shows the evaluation of a masculine plural [u] form. from /tus-s/ (cf. (40)). the OO constraint. The candidates that are not ruled out by OCP-SIBILANT. [f3l s3s]. Now we should return to the evaluation of the forms with an intervening schwa that solves the OCP-sibilant problem. the candidate with schwa epenthesis was considered to be the winning candidate (cf. the ranking RESPECT >> ALIGN-MM gives the same result. Bonet et al. [s]). with the feminine singular counterpart [f3l s]. [pas].E. (39)). [f3l s3s]. Up to now.

however: if RESPECT and ALIGN-MM are unordered or have the opposite ranking (that is.e. Bonet et al. In some cases. the selected allomorph is the one that yields a less marked structure.22 As for masculine plural forms of adjectives like ‘happy’. one should be able to find cases in which some constraint crucially dominates RESPECT. the candidate with the gender allomorph will be the optimal one. *[pQu l3m t3] ‘small problem (masc. preference for the unmarked is combined with lexical preference for certain allomorphs. and a corresponding faithfulness constraint in the grammar that demands preference for dominating morphs. are obtained like [pasus] in (44). problema /pQublem3/ [pQu l m3] ‘problem (masc. ALIGN-MM >> RESPECT). This is in contrast to the situation in Castilian Spanish where the -a lexical specification of masculine roots is carried over to the diminutive form (cf. the candidate with epenthesis being ruled out by PRIORITY. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 There is another possibility. The study of other phonological phenomena from Catalan might help in determining the specific position of these constraints with respect to one another. . The ordering of these two constraints with respect to other constraints predicts a wide range of attested empirical results that depend on relative preferences of those requirements expressed via constraint ranking. Summary and conclusions Allomorph distribution follows. One such case might be diminutive formation for masculine nominals with lexical preference of the root.)’ versus problemita /pQoblema-it/ [pQo lem ta]. lexically encoded selectional restrictions among morphemes also entail a corresponding faithfulness constraint that ensures compliance with them. In Catalan this lexical preference is not transferred to the diminutive form (cf. 4. We have shown that two complex cases of allomorph selection can be naturally explained if we assume minimal lexical specifications: in some cases mere listing of allomorphs gives the right allomorphic selection (with no additional complication of the grammar) through TETU effects.924 E. with a singular base with the unmarked masculine Ø allomorph (i. these faithfulness constraints are relatively ordered with respect to other constraints. from /f3lis-{Ø>u>3}/) and a plural form with the ´ expected [u] shape (i.)’ versus problemet /pQublem3-et/ [pQu l3m t]. Finally. In other cases. from lexical specification of morphs and from grammar.)’). as other grammatical distributional properties. In a third set of cases. both are combined with the preference for selectional requirements regarding specific morphs. problema ´ /pQoblema/ [pQo lema] ‘problem (masc. 22 In any case. [f3l s]. In other cases the only additional property of lexical structure that is needed is partial ordering of allomorphs.e.)’). from/f3lis-{Ø>u>3}-s/). [f3l sus]. Crucially for our analysis. *[pQo lem to] ‘small problem (masc.

E. .. Lloret. The Main Session.). 111–176. Chicago. ´ ¨ Cadely. B.. S.. L. Lucia Creole.. Bonet. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. and by the Generalitat de Catalunya. 1990. ´ ` ` ` Jimenez. M.). Ph. In: Booij. L. (Ed. Exceptions to sonority generalizations. Le statut des voyelles nasales en Creole haıtien. Papers from the First Conference on Formal Approaches to South Slavic Languages. Language 72. 1303–1323. MA. P. Optimality Theory... Lloret.). The forms classes of Spanish substantives. The MIT Press. S. M. 33–54. Halle. CLS 38.. P. Kleine Enziklopedie. M.. Brame. 19–39. 61–73.. Kager. The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Garland. I. M. Walsh Dickey. Schildt.-R. R. E. Amherst. (Eds. Bonet.. We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. Morphology by Itself.. 2002. Gouskova. Bhatt. 1997.. 65–88. Indiana. 207– 245. IULC..). F. 1974. On affix allomorphy and syllable counting. pp. K. Published as Phonological Relations between Words.. Benua. Direct optimality theory: representation as pure markedness. International Journal of English Studies 4 (2). Urbanczyk. R. W. Chicago. Kager. 73– 104 (Available on ROA #734-0505). In: Kingston.. Institut Interuniversitari de Filologia Valenciana. dissertation.. 1991. Stems and Inflectional Classes... M.J. (Eds.W.-R.. Jr. Beckman. OCP effects in Catalan cliticization. Bonet et al. 1992.. Cambridge. 1985. and syllable contact. 77–136. pp. J. M. Jamaica. 1999a. R. Harris. Harris.). Nasality and the definite determiner in St.). (Eds. The exponence of gender in Spanish. Bonet. Cambridge University Press. J. Falling sonority onsets.. M. Clements. CLS 37: The Main Session. pp. Kager. The MIT Press. In: Beckman.E. 2005a. Dordrecht. 18.. Morph insertion and allomorphy in Optimality Theory. U. Bloomington. A. Hartung. 1995. Marantz. Linguistic Inquiry 5. MA.. 2000. In: Hale. Interfaces in Phonology. Cambridge University Press. R. Graduate Linguistic Student Association. Spanish word markers. pp. The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. J. More on Alignment as an alternative to domains: the syllabification of Catalan clitics. E. University of Chicago. M. The cycle in phonology: stress in Palestinian. Golston.. In: Nuessel.. 2000. 435–464. Leipzig. University of Massachusetts. 1995. pp. G. Current Issues in Spanish Phonology and Morphology. (Eds. Cambridge. Cambridge. 345–361 [University of Trondheim Working Papers in Linguistics 28]. The Derivational Residue in Phonological Optimality Theory. In: Kleinhenz. 2001. 2002.. J... There is no lexicon! Ms.. Kluwer. E. A. MA.. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 925 Acknowledgements ´ This work has been supported by the Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia and the FEDER BFF2003-06590 and HUM2004-01504/FILO. 175–185 (Available on ROA #491-0102). Keyser. Greek allomorphy: an optimality account. 1994. Bonet.. (Eds.H.N... Hellan.. 1999b.). van Oostendorp. Amherst.W. W. Harris. pp. 39–60.). Deutsche Sprache. 2005b.D. Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat.. (Ed.). M. Maltese and Spanish. Identity effects in morphological truncation. References Aronoff. Benua. J. M. Probus 17. research groups 2005SGR00753 and 2005SGR01046. Linguistic Inquiry 22. Akademie Verlag. Nikiema. Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech. L. 713–748. 1996. pp. J. 283–333. University of Arizona (Available on ROA #43-0195). Lloret. 27–62. C. G. Gouskova. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 1..-R. Fleischer. (Eds. Cambridge. University of Chicago. (Eds. New York. John Benjamins.. 37–78. Transderivational Identity: Phonological Relations between Words. Kager. Drachman. 155–171. L’estructura silÁlabica del catala. Lingua 112.Yearbook of Morphology 1991. Malikouti-Drachman. Barcelona. loanwords. E. VEB Bibliographisches Institut. Valencia. E. 1996. Hammond. M. L. Amsterdam. J. Berlin. van Marle. In: DimitrovaVulchanova. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics. 1999.. pp. Papers in Optimality Theory.W. 2002. Lingua 115. pp.Papers in Laboratory Phonology. G.. Surface opacity of metrical structure in Optimality Theory. 1996. MA.. Suchsland. In: Proceedings of the 13th Biennal Conference of the Society of Caribbean Linguistics.-R.. J. Against serial evaluation in Optimality Theory. vol.. J. M. 1983. 2004. pp. In: Hermans. 1993.

Niemeyer. ´ ` Mascaro. Papers in morphology and syntax. vol.). J. vol. (Ed. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.G. C.. MITWPL. 255–280. 279–322. (Ed. Allomorphy in optimality theory: Polish iotation.. C. ` Lloret. 1992. 307–338. The Nature of the Word: Essays in Honor of Paul Kiparsky. Urbanczyk. Language 59. S. J. A. Ms.K.. A. Bruening. Amherst. Prince. Arregi. Sobre l’estructura morfologica dels noms en catala i en castella. . 1998. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics. Kluwer. (Ed. Umlaut in Optimality Theory. Les vocals finals dels elements nominals en catala. In: Dressler. J. 263–297. Laks. Yearbook of Morphology 1999. MA..M. (Eds. G.. In: Rufino.. L..-R. 419–445. I. J. 326–333.B. Lexical irregularity and the typology of contrast. Proceedings of the 24th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics.). Viaplana. In: Hanson. 2005. Cambridge University Press. On the constituent structure of Catalan verbs.. UAB. Mouton de Gruyter. R. Berlin. Yearbook of Morphology 1993. Vennemann. Walsh Dickey. W. Models and Methods. Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics 7. 26–60. Booij. T. 1999. A comparative Analysis of German and Chamorro. McCarthy. Barcelona.. J... Current trends in Phonology. MIT Press. J. Generalized alignment. A. Catalan nominal markers and vowel insertion. J. In: Booij... Lingua 107. K. 1997. Pullum. In: Alderete.. Linguistic Inquiry 36. Hauf. Lloret. pp. Linguistic Inquiry 31. Tubingen. P. J. A. 2005. J. In: Durand. Atti del XXI ` Congresso Internazionale di Linguistica e Filologia Romanza (Universita di Palermo 18–24 settembre 1995). pp. G. I. MA. pp. Sound change and syllable structure in germanic phonology.. McCarthy. Less than zero: Correspondence and the null output. Cambridge.). pp. Verba 25. Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey.).. Stanford.).). (Eds.-H. Farrell. G. pp. Cascadilla.-R. CNRS-ESRI. 2002. The syntax-phonology interface. In: Booij.K.J.. Kluwer.). 1996b. Salford. 2001. Viaplana.. Advances in Morphology. Malden. 1993/2004. A.. (Eds. Oltra-Massuet. In: Beckman. Cambridge. van Marle. Brentari. MA.). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. M. Blackwell. (Eds. Ms. vol. A.J. Barcelona. Kochetov. El binarismo del genero gramatical en castellano y en catalan. External allomorphy and lexical representation. ´ Mascaro. J. J. vol. K.. Tubingen.R.B. Amherst. Ms.. Glide and glottal stop insertion in Slavic languages: a DOT analysis. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy. 1985b. Graduate Linguistic Student Association. F. Han. Stem selection in OT. Cambridge. (Eds. 473–483. ´ ´ Lloret. Wolf. Russell.. Smolensky. output optimization in syllable-counting allomorphy. 1995. 71–91. 1995. Interfaces: explanations of allomorphy and the architecture of grammars. 162–175. Zwicky.-R. MA... McCarthy. In: Plag. Cambridge. I... D. A. De la variation du determinant /la/ dans les creoles haıtien et st-lucien. 1994.J. Oltra-Massuet. University of Manitoba (Available on ROA #440195). K. Blackwell. Prince. 1993. Dordrecht. MIT. J. J. 24. In: Gonzalez. Krause.. Prince. pp. M. 209–228. 1998. in press..J. ` ` ` Lloret. 171–188. (Ed.). The emergence of the unmarked: optimality in prosodic morphology.. External allomorphy and contractions in Romance. T. Morfologia. 18. Rennison. pp. S.. ´ Mascaro. CSLI Publications. In: Arregi. V.. ¨ Niemeyer.. B. Syllable structure and lexical markedness in creole morphophonology: determiner allomorphy in ¨ Haitian and elsewhere. Morphological Theory: An Introduction to Word Structure in Generative Grammar.. 2001.. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 Kager.. 43–84.). G. Viaplana. ` McCarthy. 1999. Niemeyer.. (Eds. J. MA. External allomorphy as emergence of the unmarked. 1991. Morphology and its Relation to Phonology and Syntax.. Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. 181–205. Graduate Linguistic Student Association.. A Thematic Guide to Optimality Theory. On the morphological category of gender in Catalan and Spanish. In: Ferrando. J. ´ ´ ¨ Nikiema. Tubingen. J.G. Spencer. In: Newmeyer.. 2000. Oxford. 271–317. Language 77. 33. The Phonology and Morphology of Creole Languages. McCarthy. (Eds. 1998.U. M.. Somerville.. T. pp. MA.). Klein. E.. pp.). vol. J. Prince. A. Paster.).. pp. J. (Eds. vol. Rubach.. 2005. (Eds. J. B. ` MiscelÁlania Joan Fuster 5 (Estudis de Llengua i Literatura). Inkelas. D. University of Massachusetts.. Subcategorization vs. S. Cambridge. Dordrecht. P. M. 1996a.... 249–384.926 E. Bonet et al. Rubach. I. Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society. J. 1983. pp. Murray. M. ´ Mascaro. 2.M. M.. Stress-by-structure in Spanish. pp. 1985a.. 1988. Amherst (Available on ROA #722-0305). 79–153. 333–379. 2003. Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. Perlmutter. In: Lapointe.. A. ´ Mascaro. MA.. ¨ Klein. J. Probus 8 (2). pp.. 2. M. R. G. K.-R. (Eds. 514–528. Cambridge University Press. Lin. 2000. Papers in Optimality Theory. van Marle.. M... cycle one.. 69–93. Enciclopedia Catalana. Prinzhorn. Lapointe.. J. S.. Morphemes and candidates in Optimality Theory. 557–566. 2005.).

1987.). Tubingen. pp. Optimal epenthetic consonants. In: Estudis de Llengua i Literatura ` Catalanes 14 (Miscel lania Antoni M. (Eds. 235–264. Oxford. Basil Blackwell. Oxford University Press. B. A. Quicoli. 2005. DC.. Tromsø. Oxford. pp.W. 2005... M. 2003. 79–108. Phonology of Catalan. I. (Ed. 1991. Bonet et al. 1996. Georgetown University Press. Uffmann.). C. 433–455.. French liaison and elision revisited: a unified account within optimality theory. Washington. Niemeyer.. Barcelona. J. C. January 2005. Barcelona. Wheeler. 25–41. Handout of a talk presented at OCP 2. Aspects of Romance Linguistics. M. ` ´ ` Wheeler..W. Saltarelli. ´ ` ` Viaplana. M. 1979.. Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. In: Plag.. Badia i Margarit 6).L. Wheeler. A new look at nasalization in Haitian Creole. L’estructura fonologica de la sılÁlaba i del mot en catala.. I. C.W.. . pp. M. Phonology and Morphology ¨ of Creole Languages. In: Parodi.. Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Estudis de Llengua i Literatura Catalanes 23 (Miscel lania Jordi Carbonell 2). pp. M. Sobre la flexio nominal en catala. Valdman. Iskrova. Zubizarreta.E. / Lingua 117 (2007) 903–927 927 Tranel. The Phonology of Catalan.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful