[音韻] Evolutionary Phonology

Evolutionary Phonology

1. Introduction
2. Content of《Evolutionary Phonology》
3. Review
4. Related Links
5. Reference

1. Introduction:
Evolutionary Phonology is a theory of sound patterns which synthesizes results in historical linguistics, phonetics and phonological theory. In this book, Juliette Blevins explores the nature of sounds patterns and sound change in human language over the past 7000–8000 years, the time depth for which the comparative method is reasonably reliable. This book presents an approach to the problem of how genetically unrelated languages, from families as far apart as Native American, Australian Aboriginal, Austronesian and Indo-European, can often show similar sound patterns, and also tackles the converse problem of why there are notable exceptions to most of the patterns that are often regarded as universal tendencies or constraints. It argues that in both cases, a formal model of sound change that integrates phonetic variation and patterns of misperception can account for attested sound systems without reference to markedness or naturalness within the synchronic grammar.
Copy from http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521804280
2. Content of《Evolutionary Phonology》:
Jason Brown, Department of Linguistics, University of British Columbia
This book is a study of the diachronic and synchronic patterns in phonology. The book consists of 11 chapters.
SUMMARY
This book is composed of 3 parts: Preliminaries, Sound Patterns, and Implications. The chapters in Part I: Preliminaries, lay out the general assumptions and outline the theoretical claims of the book. The chapters in Part II: Sound Patterns, address the issues of common and uncommon sound patterns, and how to account for them. The chapters in Part III: Implications, address the issues of Evolutionary Phonology, and what the implications are for synchronic and diachronic phonology, as well as other domains of linguistics.
Part I: PreliminariesChapter 1 What is Evolutionary Phonology?: In this chapter, the goals of the book and the notion of Evolutionary Phonology (EP) are outlined. The importance of diachronic studies compared to synchronic studies (which are emphasized more in present works) is stressed, as is the relationship between sound changes and synchronic processes. The different types of explanation in linguistics are discussed, along with the idea that a simpler grammar is one that accounts for more things with less duplication. The working hypothesis of the book is also laid out, namely that “recurrent synchronic sound patterns have their origins in recurrent phonetically motivated sound change” (pg. 8). The chapter then outlines the various possible approaches to explanation: synchronic vs. diachronic, and goal-oriented vs. not goal-oriented. EP is diachronic, and not goal-oriented.
Next, the evolutionary metaphor used in the book is explained. While central to EP is the concept that language change is a form of knowledge transmission across generations without biological change, and the concept of “parallel evolution” is also important, the author warns that EP is not a theory based on natural selection. Finally, the chapter ends on a discussion of markedness and the role of learning (in EP, everything is learned, including phonemic contrasts, phonetic detail, phonotactics, etc.).
Chapter 2 Evolution in Language and Elsewhere: The subject of chapter 2 mostly involves evolutionary metaphors from the biological sciences. The chapter discusses how “language evolution” is to be defined in this study, where it is only used to describe conditions within a 5/000-7,000 year time depth.
Variation is discussed, as well as the metaphor of natural selection and the sources of natural sound change. While biological evolution is generally conceptualized as things being passed down through DNA, it raises the question of how languages evolve. In this case, it is through individual to individual transmission (which can be noisy). One claim of this chapter is that most all sound patterns are phonetically motivated. This is where the CCC-model of sound change is introduced. The CCC-model consists of the three components Change, Chance, and Choice. The main goal is to account for patterns that repeat and that lots of languages have. The chapter also discusses the various reasons for similarities: direct genetic inheritance, characteristics that aren’t actually as similar as they look, parallel evolution, and physical constraints.
Chapter 3 Explanation in Phonology: A Brief History of Ideas: This chapter provides a brief history of 3 types of explanation in phonology: historical, teleological, and phonetic. Historical explanations aim to account for synchronic patterns in phonology by observing their diachronic origins and pathways. Teleological explanations view sound patterns as moving toward optimal targets, while phonetic explanations look to phonetic detail as underlying phonological structure.
This chapter shows how EP builds on the various existing explanations, including the neogrammarian school, the Kazan school, generative phonology and work in modern phonetics. While not merely a re-synthesis of these earlier traditions, the differences between these types of explanation and EP are also stressed in this chapter.
EP proposes historical, non-teleological, phonetic explanations for synchronic sound patterns. It integrates the neogrammarian view with the H & H (hypo- and hyper-articulation) model (Lindblom 1990) and Ohala’s (1981) model of sound change (i.e. no goal-directed sound change). It also eliminates notions of markedness in synchronic phonological descriptions. Finally, it finds no formal distinction between natural and unnatural patterns in synchronic grammar. These qualities are contrasted with other approaches to phonology, such as natural phonology, underspecification theories, grounded phonology, teleologically-based theories, Optimality Theory, etc.
Part II: Sound PatternsChapter 4 Laryngeal Features: The focus of this chapter is on sound patterns involving laryngeal features. The distinctive features involved include [voice], [spread glottis] and [constricted glottis] and their phonetic variation. The specific problem to be addressed is that “segments with identical phonological feature representations may have dramatically different patterns of distribution” (91), such as, for instance, pre- and post-vocalic aspiration. The chapter presents two alternative solutions to this problem. The first is to abandon phonological features by importing phonetics (Steriade 1993, 1997, Kirchner 2000, Flemming 2001). The second is the view of EP, and is to maintain the pure phonological approach, free of phonetic detail. Under the EP approach, phonology appears to be sensitive to phonetic detail because a phonological system is the transparent result of phonetically motivated sound change. Sound patterns that occur frequently (above chance) are due to parallel evolution; this explains their patterns of distribution.
The author notes that “phonological features show distinct patterns of distribution which appear to be dependent, at least in part, on their phonetic realization” (95). Laryngeal features are more perceptually salient in some contexts more than others. The overarching generalization is that “positions of contrast for a particular feature are those in which neutralizing sound change is unattested, while positions of neutralization are precisely those where phonetically motivated sound change is common” (97). Common sound changes, like neutralization, tend to occur in less salient positions. These types of changes make up the common distributional patterns of laryngeals (i.e. neutralization). Just as common patterns can be attributed to sound change, so can uncommon distributions.
Chapter 5 Place Features: The focus of Chapter 5 is on sound patterns involving place features. The first area of discussion is on the recurrent patterns that are found in the distributions of place features. The chapter deals with release features (such as the major place features [labial], [coronal], [dorsal]) and closure features (such as retroflexion). For instance, word final neutralization of major place features is common; however, word-initial neutralization of place is unattested (while the behavior of closure features such as retroflexion is the opposite, however). Some of the topics discussed are the patterns of place distribution, the status of coronal as just another place feature and not as the “unmarked” place, and neutralization (both in final position, and in consonant cluster simplification).
Chapter 6 Other Common Sound Patterns: Carrying on from where chapters 4 and 5 left off, chapter 6 is an overview of other common sound patterns. In each case, a sound pattern is identified, then examples are shown how the pattern can also be an example of a sound change in some language. A phonetic explanation is then provided for the sound change. Situations where both articulation or perception as the source for sound change are discussed, and in particular, sound patterns and changes that are not necessarily easily describable in articulatory terms are discussed, as well as all of the changes associated with each type. There is also a discussion of structural analogy, and the conclusion is reached that it is not a property of grammar, but a property of cognitive processes that give rise to grammars. The chapter concludes with some unexplained changes, such as the loss of utterance-initial consonants in Australian languages, the phenomenon of y-accretion, and low vowel dissimilation.
Chapter 7 The Evolution of Geminates: This chapter addresses the issue of how and why geminates evolve in phonological systems. The author identifies at least 7 pathways that result in a length contrast. These include assimilation in CC clusters, assimilation in VC or GC sequences, vowel syncope between identical consonants, lengthening under stress, boundary lengthening, the reinterpretation of an obstruent voicing contrast, and the reanalysis of identical C+C sequences. Also discussed are the issues of geminate inalterability and integrity, the moraic or non-moraic status of geminates and antigemination.
Chapter 8 Some Uncommon Sound Patterns: While the content of Chapter 6 was on common sound patterns, the focus of Chapter 8 is on uncommon patterns. Uncommon patterns are defined as those limited to few languages, families, or geographic regions (and they are typically patterns that push the articulatory or perceptual envelope). In particular, uncommon segment types (clicks and pharyngeals) and uncommon contrasts (voicing distinction on vowels, 3-way vowel and consonantal length contrasts, and 3-way nasality contrasts) are discussed, as well as uncommon syllable types and harmony/blocking patterns. This chapter shows how these uncommon sounds and sound patterns are typically the result of regular types of sound change, paradigmatic pressures, or random events in cultural evolution and world history.
Part III: ImplicationsChapter 9 Synchronic Phonology: This chapter discusses the implications of EP for the study of synchronic systems. As has been stressed in earlier chapters, much of the explanation is placed in diachronic terms. The first section deals with phonological acquisition and argues that much phonological knowledge is learned. The second deals with the relationship between sound patterns and phonetic content. In particular, it deals with some traditional ideas of generative phonology such as markedness constraints, structure preservation, and the elsewhere condition. After this, the chapter sets up what “pure phonology” is under EP (i.e. “what systematic aspects of synchronic phonology are left to be studied” (251), since most of explanation now lies in diachrony). The conclusion is reached that very little universal phonology remains. EP is then contrasted with other phonological models.
Chapter 10 Diachronic Phonology: This chapter discusses the role of EP and diachronic phonology. The CCC model is shown to be compatible with traditional views of sound change. Not only are the mechanisms of sound change regular (like neogrammarians), but “their formulation as part of a general learning algorithm results in typical regularity at the level of the individual” (259). The chapter considers typical “markedness” explanations, but points out that they rule out patterns that are attested, and also do a poor job of explaining why certain patterns are more marked than others.
Further claims of this chapter are that change is NOT teleological, and is NOT driven by markedness. Related to this is the notion of symmetry in phonological inventories. The claim of the chapter is that phonetically motivated sound change is blind to symmetry: symmetrical explanation is a post-hoc motivation for a symmetry-creating change. Changes appear to be functionally or structurally driven, but rather they are simply accidental or emergent phenomena.
Chapter 11 Beyond Phonology: This chapter expands the theory of evolutionary phonology and provides historical explanations for the distributional patterns of other linguistically significant units. These include sign language phonology, morphology, and syntax.
With regard to the differences in modality between sign and spoken language, the evolutionary approach has no problem in viewing the spoken features as being replaced by visual features. It is claimed that in other theories, such as Optimality Theory, there is a problem of innateness in that visual AND spoken markedness constraints are required.
In considering the prospects for an evolutionary view of morphology, phenomena such as morpheme order and scope, and paradigm leveling and markedness are discussed. In terms of a possible evolutionary syntax, the chapter focuses on cross-categorial harmony (specifically the relations between word order and pre- and postpositions) and the combinations of syntactic features that are more rare (such as the rarity of tense on nominals).
The evolutionary approach is then summarized, and the important observation is made that: “One general implication of the evolutionary approach is that most of the content of traditional descriptive grammar constitutes learned aspects of human behavior.” (312)
Copy from http://camba.ucsd.edu/phonoloblog/index.php/2006/03/11/evolutionary-phonology-review/

3. Review:

'The book contains everything that makes a linguistics book fascinating to read: an overview of the field, a provocative theory for explaining phonological facts, and numerous contemporary and historical examples from a wide sample of languages to support the new theory … As a whole, I think the book makes an interesting contribution to the field of phonology. The theory presented proposes that much of the complexity of human sound systems is due to historical processes that are set in motion by different kinds of misperception, while the actual learning and representations in the mind/brain are relatively simple and general … Blevins' theory does not propose strict formal rules and algorithms to process and learn sound system, but rather a number of mechanisms, heuristics and ways of looking at linguistic phenomena that can be adapted to particular instances … I consider this to be a practical perspective … all in all, I found this book easier to read and less formal than most books on phonological theory … this book is well worth reading for a new perspective on phonology that conforms to the trend towards more data-driven models of language.' Journal of Linguistics
Copy from http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521804280

4. Related Links:〈Result in Evolutionary Phonology〉2005 AAAS Meeting, Evolutionary Phonology Symposium
〈An Overview of Evolutionary Phonology〉 Juliette Blevins
Book comments

5. Reference:
《Evolutionary Phonology: The Emergence of Sound Patterns》

[音韻] Autosegmental Phonology

Autosegmental Phonology
-----------------------------------------------------------

1. Introduction
2. Theory
3. Theory(Cont’d)
4. Related Links
5. Reference

1. Introduction

Autosegmental phonology is the name of a framework of phonological analysis proposed by John Goldsmith in his PhD thesis in 1976 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
Copy from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autosegmental_phonology

2. Theory

Autosegmental phonology was initially developed in response to the challenge of developing an adequate theory of tone. Its immediate source of inspiration was the work of Williams 1971 and Leben 1973; these were the first to introduce non-linear structures into generative phonology in their treatments of tone systems in West African languages such as Margi, Igbo and Mende. In the model proposed by these writers, underlying tones were represented on separate tiers from the feature matrices representing vowels and consonants; they were subsequently merged with these matrices by Tone Mapping Rules that applied in the course of derivation, creating single-tiered representations in surface structure.
The principal innovation of autosegmental phonology, as presented in Goldsmith 1976, was the idea that tone mapping rules do not merge tonal and segmental representations, but associate their elements by means of formal entities known as Association Lines. In this framework, phonological representations consist of parallel tiers of phonological segments, both tonal and segmental.

Tonal Representation

t t t t


H L H L

H=high tone L=low tone t=any tone-bearing unit (vowels or syllables)

Elements of each tier, called AUTOSEGMENTALS, are sequentially ordered; elements of adjacent tiers are simultaneous if and only if they are linked by association lines. In this model, all tiers remain independent throughout derivations: at no point is the tonal tier merged with segmental tier.

A further innovation of autosegmental theory is the set of universal principles termed Well-Formedness Conditions, which govern the multi-tiered structure of the representation. These principles not only define the set of theoretically possible inter-tier configurations; they also trigger the operation of a set of universal repair mechanisms, often termed Association Conventions, whenever configurations that violate them arise.

In subsequent work, autosegmental phonology underwent further development; by the mid-1980s it could be considered a fully general theory of phonological representation, radically different from the linear representational systems of more traditional approaches. The primary innovation of the generalized model has been the view that not just tone and other so-called ‘prosodic’ features, but all phonological feature are arrayed on separate autosegmental tiers. In this conception, which draws upon earlier research in Metrical Phonology and Prosodic Phonology.

Autosegmental Representation

β
Structural
Tiers
α α


X X X X Skeletal Tiers


Y Y Y Y


Z Z Z Z Substantive Tiers


W W W

Further developments in autosegmental phonology include the grid-based theory of stress proposed by Halle & Vergnaud 1987, and the model of intonation and prosodic structure developed by Pierrehumbert & Beckman 1988. For a more recent overview and several new proposals, see Goldsmith 1990. As remarked by Van der Hulst & Smith 1982, progress in autosegmental phonology has owed much to its ‘problem-solving efficiency’- i.e., its success in finding solutions for previously unsolved representational problems, and integrating them into a consistent, over-all theoretical framework.

3. Theory(Cont’d)

As a theory of phonological representation, autosegmental phonology developed a formal account of ideas that had been sketched in earlier work by several linguists, notably Bernard Bloch (1948), Charles Hockett (1955) and J. R. Firth (1948). On such a view, phonological representations consist of more than one linear sequence of segments; each linear sequence constitutes a separate tier. The co-registration of elements (or autosegments) on one tier with those on another is represented by association lines. There is a close relationship between analysis of segments into distinctive features and an autosegmental analysis; each feature in a language appears on exactly one tier. The working hypothesis of autosegmental analysis is that a large part of phonological generalizations can be interpreted as a restructuring or reorganization of the autosegments in a representation. Clear examples of the usefulness of autosegmental analysis came in early work from the detailed study of African tone languages, as well as the study of vowel and nasal harmony systems. A few years later, John McCarthy proposed an important development by showing that the vocalism and consonantism of Arabic could be analyzed autosegmentally.
As a theory of the dynamic of phonological representations, autosegmental phonology includes a Well-formedness Condition on association lines (each element on one tier that "may" be associated to an element on another tier "must" be associated to such an element, and association lines do not cross) plus an instruction as to what to do in case of a violation of the Well-formedness Condition: add or delete the minimum number of association lines in order to maximally satisfy it. Many of the most interesting predictions of the autosegmental model derive from the automatic effects of the Well-formedness Condition and their independence of language-particular rules.
In the first decade of the development of the theory, G. N. Clements developed a number of influential aspects of the theory involving harmonic processes, especially vowel harmony and nasal harmony, and John McCarthy generalized the theory to deal with the conjugational system of classical Arabic, on the basis of an autosegmental account of vowel and consonant slots on a central timing tier (see also nonconcatenative morphology).
Copy from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autosegmental_phonology

4. Related Links
n Wikipedia
n Bloch, Bernard, 1948. A set of postulates for phonemic analysis. Language 24.
n Clements, G. N. 1976. Vowel harmony in nonlinear generative phonology: an autosegmental model. Indiana University Linguistics Club.
n Firth, J.R. 1948. "Sounds and Prosodies" Transactions of the Philological Society, pp 127-52.
n Goldsmith, John. 1990. Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Basil Blackwell.
n Hockett, Charles. 1955. A manual of phonology. Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics 11.
n McCarthy, John. 1981. A prosodic theory of non-concatenative morphology. Linguistic Inquiry 12(3): 373-418.
n Ogden, R. and Local,J. K. , 1994 Disentangling Autosegments from Prosodies: A Note on the Misrepresentation of a Research Tradition in Phonology.
n Copy from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ501527&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ501527
n "The Aims of Autosegmental Phonology" by John Goldsmith
n Autosegmental analysis of intonation (Lexicon of Linguistics)
n Autosegmental phonology (Doctoral dissertation by John Goldsmith)
n What is autosegmental phonology? (SIL)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autosegmental_phonology"

5. Reference

l EDLSTEIN JEFFEREY P. & MCGARY JANE etc. EDS. 1992. INTERNATIONAL ENCYCLOPEDIA OF LINGUISTICS. OXFORD UP.[ET1] [ET1]
l Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autosegmental_phonology
l 〈烏魯木齊化輕聲的語音性質與音系分析〉衛玉清
l 〈The Phoneics ans Phonology of High and Low Tones in Two Falling f0- contours in Standard German〉By Tamara Rathcke
l Tone Sandi from my Blogspot

[ET1]

[音韻] Atomic Phonology

ATOMIC PHONOLOGY　

I. Introduction
The Atomic Phonology (AP) School deposits that an atomic rule is a universal rule of grammar that incorporates the most restrictive conditions for the rule type in any language. An atomic rule specifies all the necessary conditions from which variants of the rule can be predicted. Its essential claim toward the full set of necessary phonological rules is as follows:
1. A relatively small finite set of rules (atomic rules) is highly restrictive and innately available.
2. Universal principles govern variation in the form of those rules.

II. Examples of Atomic Rules
1. Basic Word-final Devoicing (WFD) Rule: This rule occurs in many languages, e.g., German, Polish, and Russian.
[-sonorant] → [voice] /___# （All obstruents are voiceless word-finally.）
2. Variant (Restricted rule): This rule occurs in languages like Ferrarese Italian, Turkish, and certain Greek dialects.
[-sonorant, -continuant] → [voice] /___#（All obstruent stops are voiceless word-finally.）

III. Evaluation
The Atomic Phonology represents one particular approach to the
characterization of what a possible rule of grammar is.

IV. Related Books
l Atomic Phonology and Phonological Variation. By William D. Keel. （Out of Print）

V. References
l Asher. 1994. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics.
l Dinnsen, Daniel. A. 1979. Atomic phonology. In: Dinnsen D. A. (ed.) Current Approaches to Phonological Theory. Bloomington, IN: Indianan UP.
l 〈How to Explain Natural classes without universal distinctive feature〉By Jeff Michelke
l 〈Generative Phonology: Its Origins, its Principles, and its successors〉By John Goldsmith
l 〈 Declarative Lexical Phonology〉By John Coleman
l 〈At the Juncture of Prosody, Phonology, and Phonetics-The interaction of Phrasal and 〈Syallable Structure in Shaping the timing of consonant gesture〉by Dani Byrd
l 〈Lexical Phonology〉
n The syntactic (constituent structure) rules of the surface grammar. These are usually context free, or no more than mildly context sensitive, and the nodes are usually labelled with feature-structures, rather than atomic symbols.
copy from http://www.vanoostendorp.nl/pdf/051206.pdf

Government Phonology

1. Introduction
2. Content
3. Related Links
4. Reference

John Rennison
1. Introduction:
Government phonology (GP) is a theoretical framework of linguistics and more specifically of phonology. The framework aims to provide a non-arbitrary account for phonological phenomena by replacing the rule component of phonology with a restricted set of universal principles and parameters. As in Noam Chomsky’s Principles and Parameters approach to syntax, the differences in phonological systems across languages are captured through different combinations of parametric settings.
Resource from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_phonology

2. Content:
In GP, phonological representations consist of zero (e.g. vowel-zero in French) or more combinations of elements. These elements are the primitives of the theory and are deemed to be universally present in all human phonological systems. They are assumed to correspond to characteristic acoustic signatures in the signal, or hot features as previously referred to.
There are 6 elements believed to be existent across all languages, namely (A), (I), (U),(?),(L) and (H). They represent backness, frontness, roundness, stopness, a low tone and a high tone respectively.
As in French, it is possible to have empty nuclei, marked (_), which are subject to the phonological Empty Category Principle (ECP) . Unlike features, each element is a monovalent, and potentially interpretable phonological expression. Its actual interpretation depends on what phonological constituent dominates it, and whether it occupies a head or operator position within a phonological expression.
Resource from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_phonology

3. Related Links:
l Wikipedia
l 〈An X’bar Theory of Government Phonology〉
l By John Rennison
l 〈A Useful Guide to Government Phonology(GP)〉
l 〈A Government Phonology Analysis of Turkish Conconants〉
l By Ercan Balci
l 〈Consonants Ranking, Government Licensing and the Fate of Final Empty Nuclei〉 By Krisztina Polagáradi (French)

4. Reference:
l Markus Pöchtrager
l Charette, Monik (1991): Conditions on phonological government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
l 《A Lateral Theory of Phonology: What is Cvcv And Why should it be?(Studies in Generative Grammar)》By Tobias Scheer