# Constraint-based Phonology ### Will Styler - LIGN 111 --- ### Today's Plan - Conspiracies - Optimality Theory - Cats, Dogs, and Dishes - Strengths and Weaknesses of OT --- ### So far, we’ve been using SPE-style Generative Phonology - Underlying forms are transformed into surface forms by a series of ordered rules. - Variation is either conditioned (changes by rules) or speakers screwing up - We've expanded it a bit with a nice feature theory - ... and I've added dashes of laboratory phonology --- ### We define rules... - **Voicing Assimilation:** [-son] -> [-voice] / [-voice]__# - **Vowel Epenthesis:** ∅ -> [-front,-back] / [+coronal,+strident]__[+coronal,+strident]# --- ### Then we apply them...
Underlying Form
/kæt + z/
/dag + z/
/dɪʃ + z/
V Epenthesis
--
--
| dɪʃɪz |
Voicing Assim.
| kæts |
--
--
Surface Form
[kæts]
[dagz]
[dɪʃɪz]
--- ### This approach has a lot of benefits - It’s relatively simple - You find a UR, you make a rule, and you get a surface form - It’s been around for 50 years - It's been well studied and expanded upon - (Nearly) everybody still knows it and can use it - It’s the Phonological Lingua Franca - Folks in other fields are likely still using SPE-style phonology - Other theories are often based on its shortcomings - Even the haters have to respect - It's quick to deploy - Just write down a couple of rules --- ### It's the best way to start out in Phonology - There's not so much 'technology' to get to your first analysis - It often feels intuitive - "Huh, that sound changes there" - It exposes the elements of phonology that are most relevant for fieldwork/clinical work - **Nearly everybody started off learning this way!** --- ### ... but it's not the only approach --- ### We've been seeing a lot of coda-hatred - Some languages epenthesize vowels to create more syllables. (Yokuts!) - Many languages try very hard to remove codas using a variety of deletion rules. (Russian) - Some languages transform codas into other sounds. - Some languages force codas towards sonorance (see Dark vs. Light /l/, nasal-coda-only languages) - ... but all these processes are doing the same damned thing --- ### It's not just codas... - By and large, languages don’t like hiatus (two vowels next to one-another) - Most languages don’t care for huge consonant clusters - We don’t like violating the sonority hierarchy - Two adjacent stresses stress us out --- ### Over and over, a language will use multiple different rules to accomplish the same damned thing ---
--- ### "Why don't we just talk about the things we're trying to avoid, instead of creating crazy conspiracies of rules to deal with them?!" --- # Optimality Theory (OT) --- ## Optimality Theory A theory of phonology which relies on ranked constraints to solve phonological problems --- ### Optimality Theory - Developed by Prince and Smolensky in 1993. “Optimality Theory: Constraint Ranking in Generative Grammar” - “Don’t talk about the individual rules, just talk about the preferences!” --- ### We don't need a conspiracy of rules to solve problems - Don't worry about V Epenthesis, C Deletion and Forced Sonority - Just say "We don’t like codas. Don’t allow those." - "Let's find the form that's least worst" --- ### Three basic steps - **GEN** - GENerate a list of possible forms from the underlying form - **CON** - Rank the CONstraints which help you decide on the best ones - **EVAL** - EVALuate the possible forms, and choose the optimal candidate --- ### Let's indulge in a fantasy - Let's pretend I could afford to buy a house in La Jolla! --- ## We use OT when buying a house --- ### GEN in home-buying - "Generate a list of possible candidate houses" - Go online, or get a realtor - Find all the houses for sale in the area - Gather information about their characteristics --- ### CON in home-buying - "Let's find the constraints on our purchasing and rank them" - Everybody has the same set of possible things they *could* care about - You decide what you want - ... what you don't want - ... and what's a deal-breaker - Then rank them according to your desires --- ### Possible Constraints - “We need two bedrooms” - "Houses with turrets on the side look cool!" - “We want to have a public transit commute” - "We don't want a lawn" - “We don't want to pay more than $350,000” - 🤣😭 - “We don’t want an area with bad schools” --- ### * in OT means “Don’t allow this” - \*CC would mean “No consonant clusters” - \*VV would mean "No Hiatus" - \*$350K+ would mean "No houses over $350k" --- ### So, we have constraints TwoBedrooms HasTurret NoCommute NoLawn \*$350k+ GoodSchools --- ### For us... - \*$350k+ - TwoBedroom - NoCommute - NoLawn - HasTurret - GoodSchools --- ### For somebody else... TwoBedroom GoodSchools \*$350k+ NoLawn HasTurret NoCommute --- ### EVAL for Real Estate - Look at all the listings, and figure out which one will be best for us! ---
\*$350k+
TwoBedrooms
NoCommute
NoLawn
HasTurret
GoodSchools
House 1
\*
\*
\*
House 2
\*
House 3
\*
\*
House 4
\*
\*
House 5
\*
House 6
\*
\*
...
---
\*$350k+
TwoBedrooms
NoCommute
NoLawn
HasTurret
GoodSchools
House 1
!\*
\*
\*
House 2
!\*
House 3
!\*
\*
House 4
!\*
\*
House 5
\*
House 6
!\*
\*
...
--- ### We have a house! - ... at least, in this fantasy --- ### So, Optimality theory lets us pick the least-worst candidates from a massive set of possibilities --- ## So, uh, Phonology? --- ### GEN - Generate EVERY POSSIBLE SURFACE FORM from the URs given --- ### CON - *Every language shares the same set of constraints!* - ... but rank them differently - There are *markedness constraints* - "This thing sucks, don't do that" - ... and *faithfulness constraints* - "At least *try* to be similar to the UR --- ### EVAL - Count the number of times each form violates the constraints - Violating higher-ranked constraints is more important - When you violate a constraint which is higher ranked than another candidate's highest violation, it's a *fatal violation*. - The 'winner' is the candidate that has the lowest-ranked first violation --- ### (There's more to it, but that's the basics!) --- ### How does this work in practice? --- ## Back to Cats, Dogs, and Dishes --- # /kæt+z/ --- ### GEN - Let's create a list of every possible surface form - EVERY ONE OF THEM --- ### CON - Generate and rank the constraints - \*SS: "Don't put two strident sounds next to each other" - Agree: "Voicing should agree in adjacent consonants" - Max: "The segments in the UR should be there on the surface" - Dep: "Don't Epenthesize segments that weren't there" - Ident: "Don't change segments in the underlying form" - **Ranked in that order** --- ### EVAL - Evaluate the Candidates
/kæt+z/
\*SS
AgreeVoice
Max
Dep
Ident
[kætɪz]
\*
[kætɪs]
\*
\*
[kætz]
\*
[kæts]
\*
[kæt]
\*
[kæti]
!\*
--- ### EVAL - Evaluate the Candidates
/kæt+z/
\*SS
AgreeVoice
Max
Dep
Ident
[kætɪz]
!\*
[kætɪs]
!\*
\*
[kætz]
!\*
👉 [kæts]
\*
[kæt]
!\*
[kæti]
!\*
\*
--- ## Dogs --- ### GEN - Come up with every possible form - ... again --- ### CON - Generate and rank the constraints - You'll use the same constraints and rankings in all forms in the problem - In fact, you'll use the same rankings for every form in the language! --- ### EVAL - Evaluate the Candidates
/dag+z/
\*SS
AgreeVoice
Max
Dep
Ident
[dagɪz]
!\*
[dagɪs]
!\*
\*
👉 [dagz]
[dags]
!\*
\*
[dag]
!\*
[dagi]
!\*
\*
--- ## Dishes --- ### GEN and CON work the same - New surface candidates, same constraints --- ### EVAL
/dɪʃ+z/
\*SS
AgreeVoice
Max
Dep
Ident
👉 [dɪʃɪz]
\*
[dɪʃɪs]
!\*
\*
[dɪʃz]
!\*
\*
[dɪʃs]
!\*
\*
[dɪʃ]
!\*
[dɪʃi]
!\*
\*
--- ## OT's Strengths and Weaknesses --- ### Optimality Theory Strengths - Magnificent for handling “conspiracies” of rules in languages - Amazing for phonotactics - Some types of analysis get very simple, very quickly - It handles cross-linguistic patterns, and “rules” that show up over and over again - Sometimes, it’s just more graceful to do it with OT --- ### Optimality Theory Weaknesses - GEN makes us examine EVERY POSSIBLE CHOICE - "Penguin" is a valid candidate for /kæt+z/ - This may be cognitively nutty - Constraints (but not their rankings) are generally considered innate - Acquisition gets dicey without innate constraints - OT is rekt by counter-bleeding phenomena - Out of the box, it’s just as bad at handling variation as SPE-style phonology - ... but there are some interesting hacks --- ### Optimality Theory has been expanded and improved - 'Harmonic Grammar' is a broader approach - Quantitative and computational approaches to OT - Doing 'Old School OT' like I've taught you is SO 1993 --- ### ... but constraint-based approaches are everywhere, and with good reason! --- ### Wrapping up - (Some) Conspiracies are real! - Optimality Theory is amazing at handling them - Cats, Dogs, and Dishes can be handled with constraints too - Constraint-based phonology is a powerful tool! --- ### For Next Time We'll work with an OT analysis! ---
Thanks!