<OT> New Posting: ROA-687

[Rutgers Optimality Archive]

ROA 687-0904

What it Means to be a Loser: Non-optimal Candidates in Optimality Theory

Andries W Coetzee <coetzee at umich.edu>

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=687


Abstract:
In this dissertation I propose a rank-ordering model of EVAL. This 
model differs from classic OT as follows: In classic OT, EVAL 
distinguishes the best candidate from the losers, but does not 
distinguish between different losers. I argue that EVAL imposes a 
harmonic rank-ordering on the complete candidate set, so that also the 
losers are ordered relative to each other. I show how this model of 
EVAL can account for non-categorical phenomena such as variation and 
phonological processing.

  Variation. In variation there is more than one pronunciation for a 
single input. Grammar determines the possible variants and the relative 
frequency of the variants. I argue that EVAL imposes a harmonic 
rank-ordering on the entire candidate set, and that language users can 
access more than the best candidate from this rank-ordering. However, 
the accessibility of a candidate depends on its position in the 
rank-ordering. The higher a candidate appears, the more often it will 
be selected as output. The best candidate is then the most frequent 
variant, the second best candidate the second most frequent variant, 
etc. I apply this model to vowel deletion in Latvian and Portuguese, 
and  to [t, d]-deletion in English.

Phonological processing. Language users rely on grammar in 
word-likeness judgments and lexical decision tasks. The more 
well-formed a non-word, the more wordlike language users will judge it 
to be. A more well-formed a non-word is considered more seriously as a 
possible word, and language users will be slower to reject it in a 
lexical decision task. The rank-ordering model of EVAL accounts for 
this as follows: EVAL compares non-words and imposes a rank-ordering on 
them. The higher a non-word occurs in this rank-ordering, the more 
well-formed it is. Therefore, the higher a non-word occurs, the more 
word-like it will be judged to be, and the more slowly it will be 
rejected in lexical  decision tasks. I illustrate this by discussing 
two sets of experiments on how grammar influences phonological 
processing. The first set investigates the influence of the OCP on 
processing in Hebrew, and the second the influence of a constraint on 
[sCvC]-words in English.


Comments: Ph.D. Dissertation, UMass
Keywords:  variation, processing, EVAL, lexical decision, wordlikeness, 
vowel deletion
Areas: Phonology, Formal Analysis, Psycholinguistics
Type: PhD Dissertation

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=687