| Term | Definition |
|---|
| 1968 | Year of publication of SPE |
| Noam Chomsky and Morris Halle | Authors of SPE |
| 1. Pushed as many phenomena as possible into phonology and syntax, at the cost of extremely complex analysis | Why did SPE have such an impact on morphology? |
| 2. Readjustment rules proposed for irregular alternations such as suppletion and vowel mutation, but no procedure given for distinguishing these exceptions | SPE Readjustment rules |
| Proposed underlying forms for words such as condemn and damn | SPE and abstract analysis |
| phonological rules too complicated and too powerful | Problem with SPE abstract analysis |
| proposed limits on both phonological representations and rules | Natural Generative Phonology |
| abandon idea that condemnation and condemn are derived from same underlying form (no way to prove -n exists in underlying form of condemn) | NGP Approach 1 for dealing with condemn & condemnation |
| account for alternation with rules not strictly phonological | NGP Approach 2 |
| phonetically triggered, natural in nature, and fully regular in their application (rules determining aspiration in English) | P-Rules |
| morpho-syntactically triggered, but phonological in their application, e.g. voicing of final consonants in plurals like wives, knives | MP-Rules |
| morpho-syntactically triggered, non-productive, more irregular than MP-rules, things like damn-damnation, syntax-syntactic | Via-Rules |
| syntax and phonology are relatively regular, systematic and predictable | syntax and phonology regularity |
| irregular, messy, and subject to lexical and other idiosyncratic restrictions | morphology irregularity |
| has proposed a number of constraints on the abstractness of phonology (so as to keep it simple and clean) | Paul Kiparsky |
| obligatory neutralization rules cannot apply to all occurrences of a morpheme | Alternation Condition |
| voiced consonants are devoiced in syllable-final position | alternation condition and German final devoicing |
| alternations are analyzed in terms of neutralization of an underlying contrast, because the contrast shows up on the surface in some forms (such as with voicing) | Alternation Condition Translation |
| 1. Class I affixation 2. Phonological rules (including stress assignment) 3. Class II affixiation | Ordering of affixation operations |
| cannot affect stress, cannot be applied before class I affixes, class II after class II | Class II affixes |
| affect stress, cannot be applied after class II affixes, class I after class I | Class I affixes |
| -ise, -able, don't change the phonology of the base they attach to | Class I Exceptions |
| -ation, -ity, do change the phonology, but can come after class II | Class I Exceptions 2 |
| formation of words is organized into cycles | Lexical Phonology and Morphology |
| only attaches to stems with stress on the final syllable | Noun-forming -al |
| attaches to adjectives ending in a single obstruent, but not ones ending in a consonant cluster (tighten, stiffen, but not crispen, laxen) | Verb-forming -en |
| If two morphological processes could potentially serve the same function in a given context, the more specific one applies. | Elsewhere Principle |
| English plural -s BUT if one of the other rules can apply to a noun, it ALWAYS will. | elsewhere or default form of English plural |
| proposed limits on both phonological representations and phonological rules | Natural Generative Phonology |
Combine with other sets
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace