Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:42:36.400Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constraint conflict in cluster reduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2003

JOE PATER  and
JESSICA A. BARLOW
JOE PATER
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
JESSICA A. BARLOW
Affiliation:
San Diego State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When children reduce onset clusters to singletons, a common pattern is for the least sonorous member of the adult cluster to be produced. Within OPTIMALITY THEORY (Prince & Smolensky, 1993), this pattern has been accounted for in terms of a fixed ranking of onset constraints that evaluate a segment's degree of sonority, whereby onset glides violate the highest ranked constraint, and onset stops the lowest. Not all children follow the sonority pattern, however. In this paper, we apply two fundamental principles of optimality theory to yield predictions about other children's cluster reduction patterns. The first principle is that of FACTORIAL TYPOLOGY, according to which all rankings of constraints should yield possible languages. To produce the sonority pattern, all conflicting constraints must rank beneath the onset sonority constraints. If they rank above the onset sonority constraints, these other constraints will force deviations from the sonority pattern. In this paper, we show how divergences from the sonority pattern are caused by three well-motivated conflicting constraints: *FRICATIVE, *DORSAL, and MAX-LABIAL. This is documented in the speech of two normally developing children (about 1;6–2;3) and a child with a phonological delay (3;8). The second principle we appeal to is that of EMERGENT CONSTRAINT ACTIVITY, according to which the effects of violated constraints can be observed when higher ranked conflicting constraints are not at issue. We show that even when the onset sonority constraints are outranked by the conflicting constraints, under the right circumstances the sonority pattern does emerge in the forms produced by these children.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , August 2003 , pp. 487 - 526
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Selections of this material were presented in talks at Cornell University and McGill University; at the Child Phonology Conference, Boston; the Boston University Conference on Language Development; Generative Linguistics in Poland, Warsaw, and the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Santa Cruz. Thanks to participants at those events, as well as Daniel Dinnsen, Heather Goad, Paul de Lacy, John McCarthy, Brigit van der Pas and Carol Stoel-Gammon for helpful discussion. We also benefited from the insightful comments of three anonymous reviewers. Some of the data presented here were drawn from the archives of a large-scale longitudinal study of children with phonological delay which was supported in part by a grant from the National Institutes of Health to Indiana University, DC01694. We thank Daniel Dinnsen and Judith Gierut for sharing those data with us, as well as A. J. Compton for sharing the other data presented here. This research was also supported in part by a grant from the National Institutes of Health to San Diego State University, DC05754.