Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:56:47.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Model theory and the content of OT constraints

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2003

Christopher Potts
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Cruz
Geoffrey K. Pullum
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Cruz

Abstract

We develop an extensible description logic for stating the content of optimality-theoretic constraints in phonology, and specify a class of structures for interpreting it. The aim is a transparent formalisation of OT. We show how to state a wide range of constraints, including markedness, input–output faithfulness and base–reduplicant faithfulness. However, output–output correspondence and ‘intercandidate’ sympathy are revealed to be problematic: it is unclear that any reasonable class of structures can reconstruct their proponents' intentions. But our contribution is positive. Proponents of both output–output correspondence and sympathy have offered alternatives that fit into the general OT picture. We show how to state these in a reasonable extension of our formalism. The problematic constraint types were developed to deal with opaque phenomena. We hope to shed new light on the debate about how to handle opacity, by subjecting some common responses to it within OT to critical investigation.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2002 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

We owe a huge thanks to an associate editor and four anonymous referees at Phonology, whose comments and insights substantially improved every aspect of this paper. Our thanks also to Ash Asudeh, David Beaver, Sandy Chung, Edward Flemming, Line Mikkelsen, Nathan Sanders, Barbara Scholz, Bruce Tesar and an audience at the Stanford Phonology Workshop, where we presented an early version of this paper (October 2002). Potts's work was supported by a UCSC Teaching Assistant Sabbatical Fellowship. We are responsible for any remaining errors.