<OT> New Posting: ROA-623

[roa at ruccs.rutgers.edu]

ROA 623-1003

Sympathy Theory and the set of possible winners

Andries W Coetzee <awc at linguist.umass.edu>

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=623


Abstract:
In a recent paper Samek-Lodovici and Prince (1999) show:
(i) that all the potential winners (harmonically unbounded
candidates) can be determined in a ranking independent way,
and (ii) that this set of potential winners is finite in
number. However, they did not consider the influence of
sympathetic constraints (McCarthy, 1999, 2003) on their
results. These constraints can promote perpetual losers
to the set of potential winners. With sympathetic constraints,
the finiteness of the set of potential winners is therefore
in question. Also, the violations assigned by sympathetic
constraints are indirectly ranking dependent (via the choice
of the sympathetic candidate). This paper shows that: (i)
the set of potential winners is still finite even in a version
of OT with sympathetic constraints, and (ii) that the harmonicall
y bounded candidates that sympathetic constraints can promote
to the set of potential winners, can be determined in a
ranking independent way. It follows that Samek-Lodovici
and Prince’s results are also valid in an OT grammar with
sympathy constraints.

This is an important result for two reasons: (i) If for
any given input the set of potential winners were to be
infinite, then an infinite typology would be predicted—there
will be infinitely many possible languages. However, if
the set of potential winners is finite, then only a finite
typology is predicted—i.e. it results in a much more restrictive
theory. (ii) If the set of potential winners can only be
determined in a ranking dependent manner, then the grammar
of every language (a ranking of CON) has to consider the
full infinite candidate set. However, if the finite set
of potential winners can be determined without recourse
to a specific grammar (a specific ranking of CON), then
it is in principle possible to weed out the perpetual losers
before the grammar of a specific language comes into play.
The grammar of any given language then needs to consider
only the finite set of potential winners.

Comments: 
Keywords: Sympathy Theory, opacity, formal analysis, infinite candidate set
Areas: Phonology,Formal Analysis
Type: Manuscript

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=623