Struggle Resolution

Conflict resolution l.jpg
1 / 79
1066 days ago, 333 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Strife Resolution. Review: OT is a syntactic building design thatis limitation based.We examined the requirements/representation versus induction issue yesterday.The standards/imperatives are permitted to be in struggle with one another. An authentic point of view on this is today

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

Strife Resolution Plan of Today's Presentation 1. Examine struggle determination as govern requesting 2. Present sorts of contentions 3. Talk about the hidden clash determination part of the GB-hypothesis 4. Talk about the contention determination in the MP

Slide 2

Conflict Resolution Recall: OT is a linguistic engineering that is limitation based. We talked about the requirements/portrayal versus determination issue yesterday. The standards/limitations are permitted to be in strife with each other. A recorded point of view on this is today's theme.

Slide 3

Precursors and Background: strife determination The thought of contentions, integral to OT, has not by any means been distinguished in that capacity in more established speculations, however it is obvious that contentions and their determination played at all circumstances an essential part. More or less, derivational speculations utilize the gadget of administer requesting to settle potential clashes, and representational hypotheses detail requirements on the sort of phonological structures authorized by Universal Grammar.

Slide 4

Conflicts in determination and in portrayals Formulated from an alternate point of view : In an inference display, clashes between tenets emerge when two guidelines are appropriate in the meantime - with the goal that one needs to choose which lead applies, and which administer doesn't

Slide 5

The Import of Rule Ordering Recall the illustration we examined yesterday First lingo (Standard German) /lang/la ˜ g Assimilation of ˜ to g la ˜ g-cancellation – Final Devoicing [la ˜ ] Second vernacular (Northeren German) /lang/la ˜ g Assimilation of ˜ to g lank Final Devoicing – g-deletion [la ˜ k]

Slide 6

Rule Ordering in Syntax : Case A basic case for the requirement for control requesting originates from the association of Case hypothesis and different principles of sentence structure. Assume that Case is relegated to a thing expression at whatever point it remains in a specific nearby connection to a verb, a relational word, and so forth ....

Slide 7

Case & wh-Movement In German, Case must be doled out to a thing expression BEFORE it is moved to sentence starting position in a question ... Wen denkst du dass sie liebt who-acc think you that she adores ... Since the thing expression would be too far from the verb after it has been preposed

Slide 8

Case & wh-Movement This looks like inborn manage arrange in phonology ... Note however that thing phrases infrequently (need to) get Case after wh-development *je crois Jean être keen I trust John to be savvy qui crois-tu être insightful who to be wise or in Hungarian, in Quechua ...

Slide 9

Case & latent In German, accusative Case task must come later than passivization, in light of the fact that something else, the wrong Case example would be produced dass der Mann angerufen wird that the-nom man rang is *dass cave Mann angerufen wird that the-acc man rang is

Slide 10

Case & uninvolved In Ukrainian, Hebrew, North Russian and different dialects, accusative Case may, in any case, appear in passives. We in this way require extraneous run requesting, excessively German: passive > accusative Ukrainian: accusative > detached

Slide 11

Conflict Resolution: Pre-OT Models The main thought of generativism has dependably been to plan as express guidelines for dialect as conceivable The more unequivocal and nitty gritty principles are, the more improbable they are to keep running into clashes ... be that as it may, review the issues w.r.t. the loss of speculations, and so forth

Slide 12

Conflict Resolution Plan of Today's Presentation 1. Examine struggle determination as run requesting 2. Present sorts of contentions 3. Examine the hidden clash determination segment of the GB-hypothesis 4. Talk about the contention determination in the MP

Slide 13

Kind of contentions found in phonology 1. Notability versus loyalty Phonological yields are torn between the longing to be unmarked, thus satisfy the essential phonology of the dialect, and the yearning to be unwavering to their fundamental portrayals, which can be seriously stamped. These fundamentally clashing propensities is found in all areas of phonology.

Slide 14

Markedness is a somewhat dubious term, however critical in phonology. It has gotten a few distinct definitions : A stamped fragment is less regular, more mind boggling, less normal, not essential, it seems later in dialect securing, in less dialects, in less positions, it is not promptly subject to balance, harder to verbalize, perceptually more striking, and so on

Slide 15

Markedness Nasal vowels are more set apart than oral ones (all dialects that have nasal vowels likewise have oral ones) Voiced obstruents are more set apart than voiceless ones (obstruents tend to be voiceless). Voiced sonorants are less set apart than voiceless ones (sonorants tend to be voiced). Open syllables are less set apart than shut ones.

Slide 16

Markedness Some diagnostics for particularity: - Implication: the checked element or section suggests the unmarked one. - Frequency: unmarked elements are more regular than stamped ones. - Processes: the checked components develop just under exceptional conditions (generally rise of the unmarked), the unmarked element kills all the more effortlessly.

Slide 17

Markedness versus Faithfulness A further case for unmarkedness: the most unmarked syllable structure is an open syllable with an onset (CV). Dialects are gone up against with information sources which can't be syllabified clearly in a progression of CVs. A few dialects are loyal to their information sources (German Strumpfs 'sock, gen.'), Others incline toward unmarkedness ( Arbeit "work" in Japanese is aribaatu , and the expression cheerful Christmas in Hawaiian is mele kelikimaka ).

Slide 18

Markedness versus Faithfulness In an absolutely derivational model, guidelines are communicated which represent repair. Cases of standards in charge of the nonappearance of coda: C –> Ø/V _ C Ø –> V/C_C But recollect that guidelines can be detailed whose point is the invert of unmarkedness, in light of the fact that the arrangement of the principles does not demonstrate their point.

Slide 19

Markedness versus Faithfulness In a representational model, syllable layouts are proposed to which the individual sections dock to. Unsyllabifiable sections are either erased or authorized through production of another syllable (vowel epenthesis). Keep in mind Palestinian Arabic. s s/| \/|/| \ C V C –> C V C V C d a r s d a r i s

Slide 20

Markedness versus Faithfulness Representations don't generally escape rules. However the point of procedures has turned out to be much clearer, since now, the point of an administer is incorporated into its organization. A vowel is epenthesized with a specific end goal to permit the syllabification of a generally unsyllabifiable C. It is unrealistic to detail an administer which is not well framed w.r.t. a specific portrayal. Keep in mind the conceivable and unimaginable absorptions of last time.

Slide 21

Markedness versus Faithfulness Hiatus shirking is another case for notability versus reliability. Last time we just observed cases of dialects which maintain a strategic distance from break, in any event in a few conditions, in this manner of dialects favoring unmarkedness. A few dialects (Maori, Hawaiian) endure rest a great deal more effectively. These dialects support dedication.

Slide 22

Avoidance of rest The dialects of last time have cases in which break is not repaired, nonetheless. To begin with French and consonant erasure: L'ami versus elle an un enfant . On account of l'ami , schwa in the article is omitted. See that piece of the article is still present and articulated.

Slide 23

Avoidance of rest In elle an un enfant , an or un can not be omitted, since elision would prompt to finish cancellation of the morpheme. Elle un enfant or elle an enfant . The inclination to unmarkedness can be obstructed by a more essential propensity (here the propensity to acknowledge morphemes phonetically). (This is an instance of accomplish something aside from when … )

Slide 24

Avoidance of rest In lead requesting, the limitation against vowel erasure on the off chance that it remains for an entire morpheme is hard to express. It is a confinement on nature of the run application. V –> Ø/–V (with the exception of when … ) (It is not a somewhere else condition, since somewhere else condition concerns two run, the earth of one incorporates the earth of the other.)

Slide 25

Avoidance of rest In a representational model, it is again the propensity to unmarked syllable structure which triggers the procedure. s s/\ |/| C V –> C V l e ami l a mi

Slide 26

Avoidance of break Second case, consonant inclusion in German: Cha?ót versus Théo A consonant is embedded between two vowels in a rest position, aside from when the second syllable is unstressed. In one case notability wins (when a glottal stop is embedded), in the other case, reliability wins.

Slide 27

Avoidance of rest The instinct is that it is more vital for a focused on syllable than for an unstressed syllable in any case a consonant. In run requesting, we have push task to start with, then glottal stop inclusion. As such syllable structure, stretch task, on the other hand syllable structure (repair).

Slide 28

Avoidance of rest In a representational model, we have to require a consonant toward the start of a foot (since a focused on syllable starts a foot). F /\ s /| \/|\ ÷ A l pen

Slide 29

Avoidance of rest In Maori and Hawaiian (in a few settings, since Hawaiian has float arrangement in some different conditions), reliability wins. There is quite recently no govern repairing break. In a representational model, syllables needn't bother with onsets.

Slide 30

Avoidance of break Comparing F