<OT> New Posting: ROA-956

[roa at ruccs.rutgers.edu]

ROA 956-0308

Output-Driven Maps

Bruce Tesar <tesar at rutgers.edu>

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=956


Abstract:
A long-standing issue of interest is the extent to which
phonological maps from input (underlying) forms to output
(phonetic) forms can be characterized in terms of conditions
on the output forms. A traditional approach to this is found
in the notion of phonological opacity (Kiparsky 1971, 1973).
Here, opacity is a property of phonological processes relative
to phonological maps: a process is said to be opaque if
it contributes meaningfully to the analysis of a phonological
map (either by applying or by not applying), but the conditions
for its (non)application are not surface apparent. This
makes the 'output-orientedness' of a map dependent upon
the particular choice of processes used in the analysis.
The dependence on processes can be particularly awkward
in a theory like Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 1993/2004)
, in which processes are not primitives of the theory, but
are at best descriptive commentaries, subject to equivocation.

While the focus on phonological generalizations implicit
in the process-based view is reasonable, this paper argues
that there is benefit to exploring a more abstract characterizati
on of 'output-orientedness' in phonological maps, a characterizat
ion in terms of only the maps themselves. Such a characterization
is provided in this paper, in the form of the concept of
output-driven map. Once the definition of output-driven
map is established, it can be used to characterize different
phonological maps on their own terms. It can also be used
to evaluate different theoretical devices, whether process-based
or not, in terms of the capacity of those devices to generate
maps which are or are not output-driven.

The concept of output-driven map is dependent on a characterizati
on of similarity between input and output forms. Intuitively,
the more representational disparities there are between
an input and an output, the less similar they are. A map
is defined to be output-driven if, for every mapping from
an input IN1 to an output OUT in the map, each input IN-X
that has greater similarity to the output OUT than IN1 does
also maps to output OUT. If one input maps to an output,
that entails that every other input closer to the output
also maps to that output. The paper includes a detailed
specification of this notion under particular representational
assumptions, including a fully specified definition of similarity
in the relevant sense.

An analysis of Optimality Theory is then given with respect
to the definition of output-driven maps. Sufficient conditions
on OT systems are derived which ensure that all grammars
defined by such systems generate output-driven maps. The
conditions are of two types: conditions on GEN, and conditions
on the constraints of CON. The conditions on constraints
are of particular interest, and it is shown that from them
one can derive a set of three possible constraint behaviors
that can result in non-output-driven maps.

A variety of OT constraints are then examined. Several types
of constraints are not capable of exhibiting any of the
behaviors that can cause non-output-driven maps; this is
discussed, and formal proofs are provided in the appendix.
A number of constraints that have been proposed to analyze
phenomena traditionally interpreted as opaque are also examined.
The maps corresponding to the phenomena are shown to be
non-output-driven, and in every phenomenon examined the
key constraint is shown to exhibit one of the three key
behaviors in causing the map to be non-output-driven. The
constraint behaviors thus unify our understanding of a variety
of proposals within OT for handling such phenomena, including
constraint conjunction, antifaithfulness, positional faithfulness
, and sympathy theory.

The proposed definition of output-driven maps captures familiar
intuitions about output-orientedness in phonological maps.
While still requiring representational commitments, the
property of being output-driven stands apart from any particular
theory relating input representations to output representations.
It is likely that other properties of maps themselves wait
to be discovered, perhaps defining less restrictive classes
of maps, that are relevant for phonological theory. A better
understanding of the properties of phonological maps, and
their implications for specific theories, can only be of
benefit to an evaluation of the relative strengths of competing
theories.

Comments: 
Keywords: Phonology, opacity
Areas: Phonology,Formal Analysis
Type: Manuscript

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=956