812:
1051:
not satisfy all constraints, as long as for any rival candidate that does better than the winner on some constraint, there is a higher-ranked constraint on which the winner does better than that rival. Within a language, a constraint may be ranked high enough that it is always obeyed; it may be ranked low enough that it has no observable effects; or, it may have some intermediate ranking. The term
43:
1110:
Some optimality theorists prefer the use of comparative tableaux, as described in Prince (2002b). Comparative tableaux display the same information as the classic or "flyspeck" tableaux, but the information is presented in such a way that it highlights the most crucial information. For instance, the
950:
marks the optimal candidate, and each cell displays an asterisk for each violation for a given candidate and constraint. Once a candidate does worse than another candidate on the highest ranking constraint distinguishing them, it incurs a fatal violation (marked in the tableau by an exclamation mark
1050:
means that a candidate which violates only a high-ranked constraint does worse on the hierarchy than one that does not, even if the second candidate fared worse on every other lower-ranked constraint. This also means that constraints are violable; the winning (i.e. the most harmonic) candidate need
882:
In the original proposal, given two candidates, A and B, A is better, or more "harmonic", than B on a constraint if A incurs fewer violations than B. Candidate A is more harmonic than B on an entire constraint hierarchy if A incurs fewer violations of the highest-ranked constraint distinguishing A
2440:
is used differently here than in physics, chemistry, and other sciences. Specific instantiations of OT may make falsifiable predictions, in the same way specific proposals within other linguistic frameworks can. What predictions are made, and whether they are testable, depends on the specifics of
2420:
Optimality theory is also criticized as being an impossible model of speech production/perception: computing and comparing an infinite number of possible candidates would take an infinitely long time to process. Idsardi (2006) argues this position, though other linguists dispute this claim on the
1021:
Other notational conventions include dotted lines separating columns of unranked or equally ranked constraints, a check mark ✔ in place of a finger in tentatively ranked tableaux (denoting harmonic but not conclusively optimal), and a circled asterisk ⊛ denoting a violation by a winner; in output
2389:
The opacity of such phenomena finds no straightforward explanation in OT, since theoretical intermediate forms are not accessible (constraints refer only to the surface form and/or the underlying form). There have been a number of proposals designed to account for it, but most of the proposals
1157:
Each row in a comparative tableau represents a winner–loser pair, rather than an individual candidate. In the cells where the constraints assess the winner–loser pairs, "W" is placed if the constraint in that column prefers the winner, "L" if the constraint prefers the loser, and "e" if the
438:
could generate the same range of input–output mappings, but differ in the relative ranking of two constraints which do not conflict with each other. Since there is no way to distinguish these two rankings they are said to belong to the same grammar. A grammar in OT is equivalent to an
2355:(see Idsardi 2000, for example). In derivational phonology, effects that are inexplicable at the surface level but are explainable through "opaque" rule ordering may be seen; but in OT, which has no intermediate levels for rules to operate on, these effects are difficult to explain.
1741:
tableau, there is a candidate which incurs no violations whatsoever. Within the constraint set of the problem, harmonically bounds all other possible candidates. This shows that a candidate does not need to be a winner in order to harmonically bound another candidate.
2133:, it can be observed that any ranking of these constraints will produce the observed output . Because there are no loser-preferring comparisons, wins under any ranking of these constraints; this means that no ranking can be established on the basis of this input.
934:), A beats B, or is more harmonic than B, if A has fewer violations than B on the highest ranking constraint which assigns them a different number of violations (A is "optimal" if A beats B and the candidate set comprises only A and B). If A and B tie on C
374:
is free to generate any number of output candidates, however much they deviate from the input. This is called "freedom of analysis". The grammar (ranking of constraints) of the language determines which of the candidates will be assessed as optimal by
2390:
significantly alter OT's basic architecture and therefore tend to be highly controversial. Frequently, such alterations add new types of constraints (which are not universal faithfulness or markedness constraints), or change the properties of
2378:" (i.e. preventing) affrication, it says that affrication applies before vowel syncope, so that the high vowel is removed and the environment destroyed which had triggered affrication. Such counterbleeding rule orderings are therefore termed
184:
arise from the optimal satisfaction of conflicting constraints. OT differs from other approaches to phonological analysis, which typically use rules rather than constraints. However, phonological models of representation, such as
548:, but differ in that they evaluate only the output and not the relation between the input and output, which is rather characteristic of markedness constraints. This stems from the model adopted by Prince and Smolensky known as
1026:
denote segments elided in phonetic realization, and □ and □́ denote an epenthetic consonant and vowel, respectively. The "much greater than" sign ≫ (sometimes the nested ⪢) denotes the domination of a constraint over another
2485:. Other theories within OT are concerned with issues like the need for derivational levels within the phonological domain, the possible formulations of constraints, and constraint interactions other than strict domination.
410:
Each plays a crucial role in the theory. Markedness constraints motivate changes from the underlying form, and faithfulness constraints prevent every input from being realized as some completely unmarked form (such as ).
398:
Faithfulness constraints require that the observed surface form (the output) match the underlying or lexical form (the input) in some particular way; that is, these constraints require identity between input and output
1737:. The violations incurred by the candidate are a subset of the violations incurred by ; specifically, if you epenthesize a vowel, changing the voicing of the morpheme is a gratuitous violation of constraints. In the
1166:
L's. Brasoveanu and Prince (2005) describe a process known as fusion and the various ways of presenting data in a comparative tableau in order to achieve the necessary and sufficient conditions for a given argument.
2182:
shows that several more rankings are necessary in order to predict the desired outcome. The third row says nothing; there is no loser-preferring comparison in the third row. The first row reveals that either *SS or
434:. However, it may not be possible to distinguish all of these potential grammars, since not every constraint is guaranteed to have an observable effect in every language. Two total orders on the constraints of
347:
Optimality theory supposes that there are no language-specific restrictions on the input. This is called "richness of the base". Every grammar can handle every possible input. For example, a language without
1055:
describes situations in which a markedness constraint has an intermediate ranking, so that it is violated in some forms, but nonetheless has observable effects when higher-ranked constraints are irrelevant.
2572:
Prince, Alan, and
Smolensky, Paul (1993) "Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar." Technical Report CU-CS-696-93, Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado at Boulder.
2425:(see Kornai (2006) and Heinz, Kobele and Riggle (2009)). Another common rebuttal to this criticism of OT is that the framework is purely representational. In this view, OT is taken to be a model of
422:, then the set of possible human languages is determined by the constraints that exist. Optimality theory predicts that there cannot be more grammars than there are permutations of the ranking of
532:
proposed by Prince and
Smolensky (1993), which stated "underlying segments must be parsed into syllable structure" and "syllable positions must be filled with underlying segments", respectively.
197:(SPE), are equally compatible with rule-based and constraint-based models. OT views grammars as systems that provide mappings from inputs to outputs; typically, the inputs are conceived of as
2331:
552:, which assumes the input segments unrealized by the output are not removed but rather "left unparsed" by a syllable. The model put forth by McCarthy and Prince (1995, 1999), known as
1279:
Output segments are dependent on having an input correspondent. One violation for each segment in the output that does not appear in the input. This constraint prevents insertion.
951:
and by shaded cells for the lower-ranked constraints). Once a candidate incurs a fatal violation, it cannot be optimal, even if it outperforms the other candidates on the rest of
1158:
constraint does not differentiate between the pair. Presenting the data in this way makes it easier to make generalizations. For instance, in order to have a consistent ranking
788:
Precise definitions in literature vary. Some constraints are sometimes used as a "cover constraint", standing in for a set of constraints that are not fully known or important.
2322:. Neither of these are truthful, which is a failing of writing out rankings in a linear fashion like this. These sorts of problems are the reason why most linguists utilize a
2370:), but the loss of high vowels (visible at the surface level) has left the affrication with no apparent source. Derivational phonology can explain this by stating that vowel
2436:
Another objection to OT is that it is not technically a theory, in that it does not make falsifiable predictions. The source of this issue may be in terminology: the term
2421:
grounds that
Idsardi makes unreasonable assumptions about the constraint set and candidates, and that more moderate instantiations of OT do not present such significant
2524:, OT is less commonly used. But constraint-based systems have been developed to provide a formal model of interpretation. OT has also been used as a framework for
2348:
Optimality theory has attracted substantial amounts of criticism, most of which is directed at its application to phonology (rather than syntax or other fields).
2156:; however, no ranking can be established between those constraints on the basis of this input. Based on this tableau, the following ranking has been established:
2441:
individual proposals (most commonly, this is a matter of the definitions of the constraints used in an analysis). Thus, OT as a framework is best described as a
1269:
Maximizes all input segments in the output. One violation for each segment in the input that does not appear in the output. This constraint prevents deletion.
3472:(2002). Technical Report, Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science and Computer Science Department, University of Colorado at Boulder (1993).
250:
Optimality theory assumes that these components are universal. Differences in grammars reflect different rankings of the universal constraint set,
851:, which gives only one violation each time both constraints are violated within a given domain, such as a segment, syllable or word. For example,
883:
and B. A is "optimal" in its candidate set if it is better on the constraint hierarchy than all other candidates. However, this definition of
3169:
2929:
2910:
2860:
2841:
2819:
2800:
2781:
2762:
2743:
2721:
2612:
2587:
1091:
is not copied. Under McCarthy and Prince's analysis, this is because faithfulness to the input does not apply to reduplicated material, and
1043:") while the "succeeds" operator ≻ denotes superior harmony in comparison of output candidates ("A ≻ B" = "A is more harmonic than B").
60:
126:
1290:
Maintains the identity of the specification. One violation for each segment that differs in voicing between the input and output.
2330:
107:
165:
147:
79:
3548:
64:
2453:
In practice, implementations of OT often make use of many concepts of phonological theories of representations, such as the
86:
2470:
335:. Variants of OT with connectionist-like weighted constraints continue to be pursued in more recent work (Pater 2009).
31:
2563:"Optimality". Proceedings of the talk given at Arizona Phonology Conference, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
2466:
239:) provides the criteria, in the form of strictly ranked violable constraints, used to decide between candidates, and
3533:
93:
418:
makes some immediate predictions about language typology. If grammars differ only by having different rankings of
53:
198:
2536:
2514:
2399:
579:
270:
2465:. Completely distinct from these, there are sub-theories which have been proposed entirely within OT, such as
75:
3518:
2547:. Constraints cover both the relations between sound and letter as well as preferences for spelling itself.
599:
186:
2430:
2414:
2410:
2367:
2363:
2208:
2179:
2137:
2130:
2106:
2084:
2062:
2040:
2010:
2003:
1979:
1957:
1935:
1913:
1883:
1876:
1852:
1830:
1808:
1786:
1756:
1749:
1738:
1714:
1692:
1671:
1649:
1627:
1594:
1587:
1567:
1545:
1524:
1503:
1482:
1449:
1442:
1422:
1400:
1379:
1357:
1337:
1304:
1297:
1199:
1189:
1179:
1088:
1076:
799:
N states that vowels must not be oral when preceding a tautosyllabic nasal and is thus context-sensitive.
365:
353:
161:
157:
143:
3543:
3455:
3240:
2426:
2422:
190:
324:
3553:
3437:
Pater, Joe. (2009). Weighted
Constraints in Generative Linguistics. "Cognitive Science" 33, 999–1035.
2474:
2352:
864:
589:
305:
297:
255:
2544:
2417:
maps to output . Many versions of OT predict this to be impossible (see
Moreton 2004, Prince 2007).
328:
3411:
3160:
Blutner, Reinhard; Bezuidenhout, Anne; Breheny, Richard; Glucksberg, Sam; Happé, Francesca (2003).
3143:
2442:
2374:(the loss of the vowel) "counterbled" affrication—that is, instead of vowel syncope occurring and "
2371:
1249:
507:
444:
301:
3382:
2540:
1733:
No matter how the constraints are re-ordered, the allomorph will always lose to . This is called
201:, and the outputs as their surface realizations. It is an approach within the larger framework of
3538:
3245:
3028:
2698:
2667:
2502:
2482:
2458:
746:
684:
293:
202:
3470:
3448:
3400:
3391:
2478:
859:
in a coda ("VOP" stands for "voiced obstruent prohibition"), and may be equivalently written as
3268:
100:
3425:
3165:
3020:
2659:
2618:
2608:
2306:
when writing out rankings linearly; neither is truly accurate. The first implies that *SS and
2256:
When the rankings from the tableaux are combined, the following ranking summary can be given:
888:
791:
Some markedness constraints are context-free and others are context-sensitive. For example, *V
349:
277:, the area to which OT was first applied, the theory is also applicable to other subfields of
3487:
572:, violated when a segment is inserted word- or morpheme-internally (from "output-contiguity")
356:. Languages without complex clusters differ on how they will resolve this problem; some will
3415:
3235:
3225:
3194:
3012:
2651:
2462:
892:
320:
194:
3494:
3345:
3309:
3047:
246:) chooses the optimal candidate based on the constraints, and this candidate is the output.
2323:
2253:, it is not necessary; the ranking given above is sufficient for the observed to emerge.
403:
3495:
Optimal
Interleaving: Serial Phonology-Morphology Interaction in a Constraint-Based Model
2685:
Ellison, T. Mark; Klein, Ewan (2001), "Review: The Best of All
Possible Words (review of
795:
states that vowels must not be nasal in any position and is thus context-free, whereas *V
566:, violated when a word- or morpheme-internal segment is deleted (from "input-contiguity")
2375:
727:
603:
332:
312:
266:
213:
811:
711:
Coda consonants cannot have place features that are not shared by an onset consonant.
3527:
3249:
2671:
2498:
2359:
2337:
1080:
495:
455:
McCarthy and Prince (1995) propose three basic families of faithfulness constraints:
316:
3282:
3032:
258:
can then be described as the process of adjusting the ranking of these constraints.
216:
in 1991 which was later developed in a book manuscript by the same authors in 1993.
2506:
2336:
A diagram that represents the necessary rankings of constraints in this style is a
1745:
The tableaux from above are repeated below using the comparative tableaux format.
1233:
Two successive sibilants are prohibited. One violation for every pair of adjacent
447:
rather than a factorial, allowing a significantly larger number of possibilities.
261:
Optimality theory as applied to language was originally proposed by the linguists
3320:
486:
Each of the constraints' names may be suffixed with "-IO" or "-BR", standing for
17:
3476:
2999:
2532:
2406:
868:
440:
278:
262:
209:
42:
3016:
2875:
1210:
Also consider the following constraint set, in descending order of domination:
3419:
3230:
3213:
2655:
2525:
699:
A syllable must not have more than one segment in its onset, nucleus or coda.
473:
357:
3024:
2663:
2622:
2638:
2521:
2494:
1253:
1234:
856:
443:. If rankings with ties are allowed, then the number of possibilities is an
427:
286:
274:
232:) takes an input, and generates the list of possible outputs, or candidates,
3291:
2, 1/2, January/February 1996, page 8 (a humorous introduction for novices)
2876:"Optimality theory and the generative complexity of constraint violability"
2689:, Archangeli, Diana & Langendoen, D. Terence, eds., Blackwell, 1997)",
1175:
As a simplified example, consider the manifestation of the
English plural:
598:, violated when a segment is realized as multiple segments (i.e. prohibits
3198:
2602:
1071:
is not ranked high enough to be always obeyed, as witnessed in roots like
1059:
An early example proposed by McCarthy and Prince (1994) is the constraint
619:
Markedness constraints introduced by Prince and
Smolensky (1993) include:
273:. Although much of the interest in OT has been associated with its use in
2454:
1064:
947:
588:, violated when two or more segments are realized as one (i.e. prohibits
394:
is the same in every language. There are two basic types of constraints:
181:
153:
3407:(Vol. 18, pp. 249–384). Amherst, Massachusetts: GLSA Publications.
2702:
863:. Local conjunctions are used as a way of circumventing the problem of
463:
361:
3513:
2535:, constraint-based analyses have also been proposed, among others, by
946:
than B does. This comparison is often illustrated with a tableau. The
777:
Heavy syllables must be stressed (from "weight-to-stress principle").
578:, violated when the order of some segments is changed (i.e. prohibits
482:(F) prohibits alteration to the value of feature F (from "identical").
3387:. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report 3.
2510:
282:
3321:
A Simple Proof that
Optimality Theory is Computationally Intractable
3214:"A formal account of the interaction of orthography and perception"
2513:. Optimality theoretic approaches are also relatively prominent in
2191:, based on the comparison between and . The fourth row shows that
3440:
Prince, Alan (2007). The Pursuit of Theory. In Paul de Lacy, ed.,
847:
Two constraints may be conjoined as a single constraint, called a
3369:
Hidden Generalizations: Phonological Opacity in Optimality Theory
430:
of the total number of constraints, thus giving rise to the term
3458:. In Coetzee, Andries, Angela Carpenter and Paul de Lacy (eds).
3393:
The Emergence of the Unmarked: Optimality in Prosodic Morphology
2997:
Heinz, Jeffrey; Kobele, Gregory M.; Riggle, Jason (April 2009).
2493:
Optimality theory is most commonly associated with the field of
2326:
to represent necessary and sufficient rankings, as shown below.
2226:
So far, the following rankings have been shown to be necessary:
1046:
Constraints are ranked in a hierarchy of strict domination. The
3467:
Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar
3078:
Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar
2639:"OT grammars, beyond partial orders: ERC sets and antimatroids"
2604:
Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar
2386:), because their effects are not visible at the surface level.
942:, A is optimal, even if A has however many more violations of C
3301:
Halle, Morris (1995). Feature Geometry and Feature Spreading.
2140:
contains rows with a single W and a single L. This shows that
806:
36:
3412:
OT grammars, beyond partial orders: ERC sets and antimatroids
402:
Markedness constraints impose requirements on the structural
180:) is a linguistic model proposing that the observed forms of
3405:
University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics
3384:
Prosodic Morphology: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction
3353:
Legendre, Géraldine, Jane Grimshaw and Sten Vikner. (2001).
2481:, and a number of theories of learnability, most notably by
3430:. Ms. from 1999, published 2004 in John J. McCarthy (ed.),
2831:
2829:
2497:, but has also been applied to other areas of linguistics.
3508:
3403:. In J. Beckman, L. W. Dickey, & S. Urbanczyk (Eds.),
2429:
and is therefore not intended to explain the specifics of
1075:(faithfulness to the input prevents deletion of the final
1063:, which prohibits syllables from ending in consonants. In
494:, respectively—the latter of which is used in analysis of
3497:. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts. ROA-996.
3284:
The Rise of Optimality Theory in First Century Palestine
2733:
2731:
2517:(and the morphology–phonology interface in particular).
823:
3308:
Heinz, Jeffrey, Greg Kobele, and Jason Riggle (2009).
3185:
Wiese, Richard (2004). "How to optimize orthography".
1111:
tableau above would be rendered in the following way.
390:
In optimality theory, every constraint is universal.
3080:. Section 10.1.1: Fear of Optimization, pp. 215–217.
315:
research. It arose in part as an alternative to the
208:
Optimality theory has its origin in a talk given by
152:. For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see
3465:Prince, Alan and Paul Smolensky. (1993/2002/2004):
2720:
sfnp error: no target: CITEREFPrinceSmolensky1993 (
2509:have developed instantiations of the theory within
556:, has since replaced it as the standard framework.
360:(e.g. , or if all codas are banned) and some will
67:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
2998:
2909:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFTesarSmolensky1998 (
2637:
426:. The number of possible rankings is equal to the
3514:Optimality Theory and the Three Laws of Robotics
3376:Doing Optimality Theory: Applying Theory to Data
3330:Idsardi, William J. (2000). Clarifying opacity.
3106:, Chapter 4: "Connections of Optimality Theory".
3000:"Evaluating the Complexity of Optimality Theory"
2402:'s sympathy theory and candidate chains theory.
224:There are three basic components of the theory:
166:IPA § Brackets and transcription delimiters
2715:
2636:Merchant, Nazarré; Riggle, Jason (2016-02-01).
3310:Evaluating the Complexity of Optimality Theory
2904:
2405:A relevant issue is the existence of circular
3427:Non-computable Functions in Optimality Theory
3410:Merchant, Nazarre & Jason Riggle. (2016)
3399:McCarthy, John J. & Alan Prince. (1995).
3067:. Section 1.4.4: Fear of infinity, pp. 25–27.
2607:. Paul Smolensky. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
2394:(such as allowing for serial derivations) or
2362:, high front vowels triggered affrication of
8:
3267:Brasoveanu, Adrian, and Alan Prince (2005).
3241:11245.1/bab74c16-4f58-4b1f-9507-cd51fbd6ae49
2928:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFMcCarthy2001 (
2859:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFMcCarthy2008 (
2799:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFMcCarthy2008 (
2761:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFMcCarthy2008 (
2742:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFMcCarthy2008 (
292:Optimality theory is like other theories of
1252:. One violation for every pair of adjacent
352:must be able to deal with an input such as
3519:OT Syntax: an interview with Jane Grimshaw
3278:. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
2199:. The second row shows that either *SS or
1248:Output segments agree in specification of
269:in 1991, and later expanded by Prince and
27:Linguistic model for phonological analysis
3239:
3229:
3076:Prince, Alan and Paul Smolensky. (2004):
2840:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFKager1999 (
2818:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFKager1999 (
2780:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFKager1999 (
2586:sfnp error: no target: CITEREFKager1999 (
2351:It is claimed that OT cannot account for
1256:in the output which disagree in voicing.
559:McCarthy and Prince (1995) also propose:
127:Learn how and when to remove this message
3490:. PhD dissertation, Universität Potsdam.
3475:Tesar, Bruce and Paul Smolensky (1998).
3364:. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3341:. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3218:Natural Language & Linguistic Theory
2923:
2854:
2794:
2756:
2737:
2644:Natural Language & Linguistic Theory
2001:
1874:
1747:
1585:
1440:
1295:
1212:
1113:
957:
687:than another (from "harmonic nucleus").
621:
540:serve essentially the same functions as
3401:Faithfulness and reduplicative identity
3390:McCarthy, John and Alan Prince (1994):
3381:McCarthy, John and Alan Prince (1993):
3212:Hamann, Silke; Colombo, Ilaria (2017).
2556:
1087:'repeatedly be left behind', the final
3294:Hale, Mark, and Charles Reiss (2008).
3115:Legendre, Grimshaw & Vikner (2001)
2874:Frank, Robert; Satta, Giorgio (1998).
1103:(which has an additional violation of
764:Light syllables must not be stressed.
3509:Rutgers University Optimality Archive
3414:. Nat Lang Linguist Theory, 34: 241.
3362:A Thematic Guide to Optimality Theory
3104:A Thematic Guide to Optimality Theory
2835:
2813:
2775:
2581:
2302:There are two possible places to put
296:in its focus on the investigation of
7:
3146:. "Optimality theoretic semantics".
2219:; this means that *SS must dominate
898:For example, given the constraints C
506:(F) is substituted by the name of a
311:Optimality theory also has roots in
156:. For the distinction between ,
65:adding citations to reliable sources
3091:The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology
25:
3477:Learnability in Optimality Theory
2449:Theories within optimality theory
2211:tableau, it was established that
2129:From the comparative tableau for
745:A foot must be two syllables (or
3462:. GLSA, UMass. Amherst. ROA-536.
3162:Optimality Theory and Pragmatics
2329:
810:
41:
3442:Cambridge Handbook of Phonology
1048:strictness of strict domination
1022:candidates, the angle brackets
938:, but A does better than B on C
683:A nuclear segment must be more
148:International Phonetic Alphabet
52:needs additional citations for
3469:. Blackwell Publishers (2004)
3460:Papers in Optimality Theory II
3432:Optimality Theory in Phonology
3281:Dresher, Bezalel Elan (1996):
2687:Optimality Theory: An Overview
2467:positional faithfulness theory
2314:, and the second implies that
653:Syllables must have no codas.
1:
3187:Written Language and Literacy
2716:Prince & Smolensky (1993)
1053:the emergence of the unmarked
3319:Idsardi, William J. (2006).
2905:Tesar & Smolensky (1998)
2473:(McCarthy and Prince 1995),
2398:. Examples of these include
855:is violated once per voiced
668:Syllables must have onsets.
641:Syllables must have nuclei.
3355:Optimality-theoretic Syntax
3296:The Phonological Enterprise
2413:maps to output , but input
867:that arises when analyzing
3570:
3449:Entailed Ranking Arguments
3298:. Oxford University Press.
3148:Linguistics and philosophy
3089:de Lacy (editor). (2007).
3017:10.1162/ling.2009.40.2.277
2245:While it is possible that
878:: definition of optimality
726:A word-final syllable (or
199:underlying representations
29:
3486:Trommer, Jochen. (2001).
3424:Moreton, Elliott (2004):
3420:10.1007/s11049-015-9297-5
3231:10.1007/s11049-017-9362-3
2880:Computational Linguistics
2656:10.1007/s11049-015-9297-5
2409:, i.e. cases where input
1593:
1448:
1303:
1260:
1226:
963:
2489:Use outside of phonology
730:) must not bear stress.
451:Faithfulness constraints
414:The universal nature of
176:(frequently abbreviated
3493:Wolf, Matthew. (2008).
3374:McCarthy, John (2008).
3367:McCarthy, John (2007).
3360:McCarthy, John (2001).
3344:Kornai, Andras (2006).
3269:Ranking & Necessity
3102:McCarthy, John (2001).
3046:Kornai, András (2006).
2960:Hale & Reiss (2008)
1095:is thus free to prefer
323:, developed in 1990 by
187:autosegmental phonology
144:phonetic transcriptions
3488:Distributed Optimality
3454:Prince, Alan (2002b).
3447:Prince, Alan (2002a).
3396:. Proceedings of NELS.
3276:The Minimalist Program
2907:, pp. 230–1, 239.
2691:Journal of Linguistics
2431:linguistic performance
2423:computational problems
1024:⟨ ⟩
615:Markedness constraints
235:Constraint component (
141:This article contains
3549:Phonological theories
3332:The Linguistic Review
3199:10.1075/wll.7.2.08wie
3142:Hendriks, Petra, and
2601:Prince, Alan (2004).
2471:correspondence theory
2427:linguistic competence
803:Alignment constraints
554:correspondence theory
3337:Kager, René (1999).
3063:Kager, René (1999).
2353:phonological opacity
1115:Comparative tableau
865:phonological opacity
386:: the constraint set
306:language acquisition
298:universal principles
256:language acquisition
61:improve this article
30:For other uses, see
2838:, pp. 392–400.
2443:scientific paradigm
2006:
1879:
1752:
1590:
1445:
1300:
1116:
960:
918:, which dominates C
508:distinctive feature
476:(from "dependent").
445:ordered Bell number
343:: the candidate set
302:linguistic typology
76:"Optimality theory"
3481:Linguistic Inquiry
3456:Arguing Optimality
3371:. London: Equinox.
3325:Linguistic Inquiry
3314:Linguistic Inquiry
3303:Linguistic Inquiry
3289:GLOT International
3150:24.1 (2001): 1-32.
3005:Linguistic Inquiry
2857:, pp. 214–20.
2778:, pp. 99–100.
2503:Geraldine Legendre
2152:must all dominate
2002:
1875:
1748:
1586:
1441:
1296:
1114:
1099:over hypothetical
958:
843:Local conjunctions
822:. You can help by
550:containment theory
432:factorial typology
325:Géraldine Legendre
294:generative grammar
203:generative grammar
191:prosodic phonology
3534:Optimality Theory
3339:Optimality Theory
3171:978-1-349-50764-1
3065:Optimality Theory
2816:, pp. 29–30.
2614:978-0-470-75940-0
2520:In the domain of
2127:
2126:
2000:
1999:
1873:
1872:
1735:harmonic bounding
1731:
1730:
1584:
1583:
1439:
1438:
1294:
1293:
1155:
1154:
1019:
1018:
887:is able to model
849:local conjunction
840:
839:
786:
785:
466:(from "maximal").
174:Optimality theory
137:
136:
129:
111:
18:Optimality Theory
16:(Redirected from
3561:
3274:Chomsky (1995).
3254:
3253:
3243:
3233:
3209:
3203:
3202:
3182:
3176:
3175:
3157:
3151:
3140:
3134:
3131:
3125:
3122:
3116:
3113:
3107:
3100:
3094:
3087:
3081:
3074:
3068:
3061:
3055:
3054:
3052:
3048:"Is OT NP-hard?"
3043:
3037:
3036:
3002:
2994:
2988:
2985:
2979:
2976:
2970:
2967:
2961:
2958:
2952:
2949:
2943:
2940:
2934:
2933:
2921:
2915:
2914:
2902:
2896:
2895:
2893:
2891:
2871:
2865:
2864:
2852:
2846:
2845:
2833:
2824:
2823:
2811:
2805:
2804:
2792:
2786:
2785:
2773:
2767:
2766:
2754:
2748:
2747:
2735:
2726:
2725:
2713:
2707:
2705:
2682:
2676:
2675:
2641:
2633:
2627:
2626:
2598:
2592:
2591:
2579:
2573:
2570:
2564:
2561:
2463:feature geometry
2416:
2412:
2400:John J. McCarthy
2397:
2393:
2369:
2365:
2358:For example, in
2333:
2321:
2317:
2313:
2309:
2305:
2298:
2294:
2290:
2286:
2275:
2271:
2267:
2263:
2252:
2248:
2241:
2237:
2233:
2222:
2218:
2214:
2210:
2206:
2202:
2198:
2194:
2190:
2186:
2181:
2178:The tableau for
2174:
2170:
2166:
2162:
2155:
2151:
2147:
2143:
2139:
2136:The tableau for
2132:
2108:
2086:
2064:
2042:
2035:
2030:
2025:
2020:
2012:
2007:
2005:
1981:
1959:
1937:
1915:
1908:
1903:
1898:
1893:
1885:
1880:
1878:
1854:
1832:
1810:
1788:
1781:
1776:
1771:
1766:
1758:
1753:
1751:
1740:
1716:
1694:
1673:
1651:
1629:
1619:
1614:
1609:
1604:
1596:
1591:
1589:
1569:
1547:
1526:
1505:
1484:
1474:
1469:
1464:
1459:
1451:
1446:
1444:
1424:
1402:
1381:
1359:
1339:
1329:
1324:
1319:
1314:
1306:
1301:
1299:
1286:
1276:
1266:
1250:[±voice]
1244:
1213:
1201:
1191:
1181:
1162:W must dominate
1136:
1130:
1124:
1117:
1106:
1101:ma-taynan-taynan
1094:
1090:
1078:
1070:
1062:
1025:
981:
975:
969:
961:
954:
886:
877:
862:
835:
832:
814:
807:
782:
781:Weight-to-Stress
769:
761:
754:
742:
735:
723:
716:
708:
696:
680:
673:
665:
658:
650:
638:
622:
609:
597:
587:
577:
571:
565:
547:
543:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
519:
513:
505:
492:base/reduplicant
481:
471:
461:
437:
425:
421:
417:
393:
385:
378:
373:
367:
355:
350:complex clusters
342:
321:harmonic grammar
271:John J. McCarthy
253:
245:
238:
231:
195:linear phonology
163:
159:
132:
125:
121:
118:
112:
110:
69:
45:
37:
21:
3569:
3568:
3564:
3563:
3562:
3560:
3559:
3558:
3524:
3523:
3505:
3500:
3483:29(2): 229–268.
3263:
3258:
3257:
3211:
3210:
3206:
3184:
3183:
3179:
3172:
3159:
3158:
3154:
3141:
3137:
3132:
3128:
3123:
3119:
3114:
3110:
3101:
3097:
3088:
3084:
3075:
3071:
3062:
3058:
3050:
3045:
3044:
3040:
2996:
2995:
2991:
2986:
2982:
2977:
2973:
2968:
2964:
2959:
2955:
2950:
2946:
2941:
2937:
2927:
2924:McCarthy (2001)
2922:
2918:
2908:
2903:
2899:
2889:
2887:
2873:
2872:
2868:
2858:
2855:McCarthy (2008)
2853:
2849:
2839:
2834:
2827:
2817:
2812:
2808:
2798:
2795:McCarthy (2008)
2793:
2789:
2779:
2774:
2770:
2760:
2757:McCarthy (2008)
2755:
2751:
2741:
2738:McCarthy (2008)
2736:
2729:
2719:
2714:
2710:
2684:
2683:
2679:
2635:
2634:
2630:
2615:
2600:
2599:
2595:
2585:
2580:
2576:
2571:
2567:
2562:
2558:
2553:
2491:
2475:sympathy theory
2451:
2395:
2391:
2382:(as opposed to
2346:
2319:
2315:
2311:
2307:
2303:
2296:
2292:
2288:
2284:
2273:
2269:
2265:
2261:
2250:
2246:
2239:
2235:
2231:
2220:
2216:
2212:
2204:
2200:
2196:
2192:
2188:
2184:
2172:
2168:
2164:
2160:
2153:
2149:
2145:
2141:
2033:
2028:
2023:
2018:
1906:
1901:
1896:
1891:
1779:
1774:
1769:
1764:
1668:c. ☞
1617:
1612:
1607:
1602:
1500:b. ☞
1472:
1467:
1462:
1457:
1334:a. ☞
1327:
1322:
1317:
1312:
1284:
1274:
1264:
1242:
1237:in the output.
1173:
1134:
1128:
1122:
1104:
1097:ma-tayna-taynan
1092:
1085:ma-tayna-taynan
1079:). But, in the
1068:
1060:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1023:
987:a. ☞
979:
973:
967:
952:
948:pointing finger
945:
941:
937:
933:
929:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
884:
880:
875:
860:
854:
845:
836:
830:
827:
820:needs expansion
805:
798:
794:
780:
767:
759:
752:
740:
733:
721:
714:
706:
694:
678:
671:
663:
656:
648:
636:
617:
607:
595:
585:
575:
569:
563:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
521:
517:
511:
503:
479:
469:
459:
453:
435:
423:
419:
415:
404:well-formedness
391:
388:
383:
376:
371:
345:
340:
251:
243:
236:
229:
222:
171:
170:
169:
133:
122:
116:
113:
70:
68:
58:
46:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
3567:
3565:
3557:
3556:
3551:
3546:
3541:
3536:
3526:
3525:
3522:
3521:
3516:
3511:
3504:
3503:External links
3501:
3499:
3498:
3491:
3484:
3473:
3463:
3452:
3445:
3438:
3435:
3422:
3408:
3397:
3388:
3379:
3372:
3365:
3358:
3351:
3347:Is OT NP-hard?
3342:
3335:
3328:
3317:
3306:
3299:
3292:
3279:
3272:
3264:
3262:
3259:
3256:
3255:
3224:(3): 683–714.
3204:
3193:(2): 305–331.
3177:
3170:
3152:
3135:
3126:
3124:Trommer (2001)
3117:
3108:
3095:
3082:
3069:
3056:
3038:
3011:(2): 277–288.
2989:
2987:Idsardi (2006)
2980:
2978:Idsardi (2000)
2971:
2962:
2953:
2951:Dresher (1996)
2944:
2942:Chomsky (1995)
2935:
2926:, p. 247.
2916:
2897:
2866:
2847:
2825:
2806:
2797:, p. 224.
2787:
2768:
2759:, p. 209.
2749:
2727:
2708:
2697:(1): 127–143,
2677:
2650:(1): 241–269.
2628:
2613:
2593:
2574:
2565:
2555:
2554:
2552:
2549:
2545:Ilaria Colombo
2490:
2487:
2450:
2447:
2345:
2342:
2318:must dominate
2310:must dominate
2300:
2299:
2281:
2280:
2279:
2243:
2242:
2203:must dominate
2195:must dominate
2187:must dominate
2176:
2175:
2125:
2124:
2121:
2118:
2115:
2112:
2109:
2103:
2102:
2099:
2096:
2093:
2090:
2087:
2081:
2080:
2077:
2074:
2071:
2068:
2065:
2059:
2058:
2055:
2052:
2049:
2046:
2043:
2037:
2036:
2031:
2026:
2021:
2016:
2013:
1998:
1997:
1994:
1991:
1988:
1985:
1982:
1976:
1975:
1972:
1969:
1966:
1963:
1960:
1954:
1953:
1950:
1947:
1944:
1941:
1938:
1932:
1931:
1928:
1925:
1922:
1919:
1916:
1910:
1909:
1904:
1899:
1894:
1889:
1886:
1871:
1870:
1867:
1864:
1861:
1858:
1855:
1849:
1848:
1845:
1842:
1839:
1836:
1833:
1827:
1826:
1823:
1820:
1817:
1814:
1811:
1805:
1804:
1801:
1798:
1795:
1792:
1789:
1783:
1782:
1777:
1772:
1767:
1762:
1759:
1729:
1728:
1726:
1724:
1721:
1719:
1717:
1712:
1708:
1707:
1704:
1701:
1699:
1697:
1695:
1690:
1686:
1685:
1683:
1680:
1678:
1676:
1674:
1669:
1665:
1664:
1661:
1659:
1657:
1655:
1652:
1647:
1643:
1642:
1640:
1638:
1636:
1633:
1630:
1625:
1621:
1620:
1615:
1610:
1605:
1600:
1597:
1582:
1581:
1579:
1577:
1574:
1572:
1570:
1565:
1561:
1560:
1557:
1554:
1552:
1550:
1548:
1543:
1539:
1538:
1536:
1533:
1531:
1529:
1527:
1522:
1518:
1517:
1514:
1512:
1510:
1508:
1506:
1501:
1497:
1496:
1494:
1492:
1490:
1487:
1485:
1480:
1476:
1475:
1470:
1465:
1460:
1455:
1452:
1437:
1436:
1434:
1432:
1429:
1427:
1425:
1420:
1416:
1415:
1412:
1409:
1407:
1405:
1403:
1398:
1394:
1393:
1391:
1388:
1386:
1384:
1382:
1377:
1373:
1372:
1369:
1367:
1365:
1362:
1360:
1355:
1351:
1350:
1348:
1346:
1344:
1342:
1340:
1335:
1331:
1330:
1325:
1320:
1315:
1310:
1307:
1292:
1291:
1288:
1281:
1280:
1277:
1271:
1270:
1267:
1262:
1258:
1257:
1246:
1239:
1238:
1231:
1228:
1224:
1223:
1220:
1217:
1208:
1207:
1197:
1187:
1172:
1169:
1153:
1152:
1149:
1146:
1143:
1139:
1138:
1132:
1126:
1120:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1017:
1016:
1014:
1011:
1008:
1005:
1001:
1000:
997:
994:
991:
988:
984:
983:
977:
971:
965:
943:
939:
935:
931:
927:
923:
919:
915:
911:
907:
903:
899:
879:
873:
852:
844:
841:
838:
837:
817:
815:
804:
801:
796:
792:
784:
783:
778:
775:
771:
770:
768:PeakProminence
765:
762:
756:
755:
750:
743:
737:
736:
731:
724:
718:
717:
712:
709:
703:
702:
700:
697:
691:
690:
688:
681:
675:
674:
669:
666:
660:
659:
654:
651:
645:
644:
642:
639:
633:
632:
629:
626:
616:
613:
612:
611:
604:vowel breaking
593:
583:
573:
567:
484:
483:
477:
467:
452:
449:
408:
407:
406:of the output.
400:
387:
381:
344:
337:
333:Paul Smolensky
329:Yoshiro Miyata
313:neural network
267:Paul Smolensky
248:
247:
240:
233:
221:
218:
214:Paul Smolensky
164:⟩, see
140:
139:
138:
135:
134:
49:
47:
40:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3566:
3555:
3552:
3550:
3547:
3545:
3542:
3540:
3537:
3535:
3532:
3531:
3529:
3520:
3517:
3515:
3512:
3510:
3507:
3506:
3502:
3496:
3492:
3489:
3485:
3482:
3478:
3474:
3471:
3468:
3464:
3461:
3457:
3453:
3450:
3446:
3443:
3439:
3436:
3433:
3429:
3428:
3423:
3421:
3417:
3413:
3409:
3406:
3402:
3398:
3395:
3394:
3389:
3386:
3385:
3380:
3377:
3373:
3370:
3366:
3363:
3359:
3356:
3352:
3349:
3348:
3343:
3340:
3336:
3333:
3329:
3326:
3322:
3318:
3315:
3311:
3307:
3304:
3300:
3297:
3293:
3290:
3286:
3285:
3280:
3277:
3273:
3270:
3266:
3265:
3260:
3251:
3247:
3242:
3237:
3232:
3227:
3223:
3219:
3215:
3208:
3205:
3200:
3196:
3192:
3188:
3181:
3178:
3173:
3167:
3163:
3156:
3153:
3149:
3145:
3144:Helen De Hoop
3139:
3136:
3130:
3127:
3121:
3118:
3112:
3109:
3105:
3099:
3096:
3092:
3086:
3083:
3079:
3073:
3070:
3066:
3060:
3057:
3049:
3042:
3039:
3034:
3030:
3026:
3022:
3018:
3014:
3010:
3006:
3001:
2993:
2990:
2984:
2981:
2975:
2972:
2966:
2963:
2957:
2954:
2948:
2945:
2939:
2936:
2931:
2925:
2920:
2917:
2912:
2906:
2901:
2898:
2885:
2881:
2877:
2870:
2867:
2862:
2856:
2851:
2848:
2843:
2837:
2832:
2830:
2826:
2821:
2815:
2810:
2807:
2802:
2796:
2791:
2788:
2783:
2777:
2772:
2769:
2764:
2758:
2753:
2750:
2745:
2740:, p. 27.
2739:
2734:
2732:
2728:
2723:
2718:, p. 94.
2717:
2712:
2709:
2704:
2700:
2696:
2692:
2688:
2681:
2678:
2673:
2669:
2665:
2661:
2657:
2653:
2649:
2645:
2640:
2632:
2629:
2624:
2620:
2616:
2610:
2606:
2605:
2597:
2594:
2589:
2584:, p. 20.
2583:
2578:
2575:
2569:
2566:
2560:
2557:
2550:
2548:
2546:
2542:
2538:
2537:Richard Wiese
2534:
2529:
2527:
2523:
2518:
2516:
2512:
2508:
2504:
2500:
2499:Jane Grimshaw
2496:
2488:
2486:
2484:
2480:
2476:
2472:
2468:
2464:
2460:
2456:
2448:
2446:
2444:
2439:
2434:
2432:
2428:
2424:
2418:
2408:
2403:
2401:
2387:
2385:
2381:
2377:
2373:
2361:
2360:Quebec French
2356:
2354:
2349:
2343:
2341:
2339:
2338:Hasse diagram
2334:
2332:
2327:
2325:
2324:lattice graph
2282:
2277:
2276:
2259:
2258:
2257:
2254:
2249:can dominate
2229:
2228:
2227:
2224:
2159:
2158:
2157:
2134:
2122:
2119:
2116:
2113:
2110:
2105:
2104:
2100:
2097:
2094:
2091:
2088:
2083:
2082:
2078:
2075:
2072:
2069:
2066:
2061:
2060:
2056:
2053:
2050:
2047:
2044:
2039:
2038:
2032:
2027:
2022:
2017:
2014:
2009:
2008:
1995:
1992:
1989:
1986:
1983:
1978:
1977:
1973:
1970:
1967:
1964:
1961:
1956:
1955:
1951:
1948:
1945:
1942:
1939:
1934:
1933:
1929:
1926:
1923:
1920:
1917:
1912:
1911:
1905:
1900:
1895:
1890:
1887:
1882:
1881:
1868:
1865:
1862:
1859:
1856:
1851:
1850:
1846:
1843:
1840:
1837:
1834:
1829:
1828:
1824:
1821:
1818:
1815:
1812:
1807:
1806:
1802:
1799:
1796:
1793:
1790:
1785:
1784:
1778:
1773:
1768:
1763:
1760:
1755:
1754:
1746:
1743:
1736:
1727:
1725:
1722:
1720:
1718:
1713:
1710:
1709:
1705:
1702:
1700:
1698:
1696:
1691:
1688:
1687:
1684:
1681:
1679:
1677:
1675:
1670:
1667:
1666:
1662:
1660:
1658:
1656:
1653:
1648:
1645:
1644:
1641:
1639:
1637:
1634:
1631:
1626:
1623:
1622:
1616:
1611:
1606:
1601:
1598:
1592:
1580:
1578:
1575:
1573:
1571:
1566:
1563:
1562:
1558:
1555:
1553:
1551:
1549:
1544:
1541:
1540:
1537:
1534:
1532:
1530:
1528:
1523:
1520:
1519:
1515:
1513:
1511:
1509:
1507:
1502:
1499:
1498:
1495:
1493:
1491:
1488:
1486:
1481:
1478:
1477:
1471:
1466:
1461:
1456:
1453:
1447:
1435:
1433:
1430:
1428:
1426:
1421:
1418:
1417:
1413:
1410:
1408:
1406:
1404:
1399:
1396:
1395:
1392:
1389:
1387:
1385:
1383:
1378:
1375:
1374:
1370:
1368:
1366:
1363:
1361:
1356:
1353:
1352:
1349:
1347:
1345:
1343:
1341:
1336:
1333:
1332:
1326:
1321:
1316:
1311:
1308:
1302:
1289:
1283:
1282:
1278:
1273:
1272:
1268:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1241:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1218:
1215:
1214:
1211:
1205:
1198:
1195:
1188:
1185:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1170:
1168:
1165:
1161:
1150:
1147:
1144:
1141:
1140:
1133:
1127:
1121:
1119:
1118:
1112:
1108:
1102:
1098:
1086:
1082:
1074:
1066:
1057:
1054:
1049:
1044:
1015:
1012:
1009:
1006:
1003:
1002:
998:
995:
992:
989:
986:
985:
978:
972:
966:
962:
956:
949:
896:
894:
890:
874:
872:
870:
866:
858:
850:
842:
834:
825:
821:
818:This section
816:
813:
809:
808:
802:
800:
789:
779:
776:
773:
772:
766:
763:
758:
757:
751:
748:
744:
739:
738:
732:
729:
725:
720:
719:
715:CodaCondition
713:
710:
705:
704:
701:
698:
693:
692:
689:
686:
682:
677:
676:
670:
667:
662:
661:
655:
652:
647:
646:
643:
640:
635:
634:
630:
627:
624:
623:
620:
614:
606:—opposite of
605:
601:
594:
591:
584:
581:
574:
568:
562:
561:
560:
557:
555:
551:
515:
509:
501:
498:—if desired.
497:
496:reduplication
493:
489:
478:
475:
468:
465:
458:
457:
456:
450:
448:
446:
442:
433:
429:
412:
405:
401:
397:
396:
395:
382:
380:
369:
363:
359:
351:
338:
336:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
317:connectionist
314:
309:
307:
303:
299:
295:
290:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
259:
257:
241:
234:
227:
226:
225:
219:
217:
215:
211:
206:
204:
200:
196:
192:
188:
183:
179:
175:
167:
155:
151:
149:
145:
131:
128:
120:
109:
106:
102:
99:
95:
92:
88:
85:
81:
78: –
77:
73:
72:Find sources:
66:
62:
56:
55:
50:This article
48:
44:
39:
38:
33:
19:
3544:Phonotactics
3480:
3466:
3459:
3441:
3431:
3426:
3404:
3392:
3383:
3378:. Blackwell.
3375:
3368:
3361:
3357:. MIT Press.
3354:
3346:
3338:
3331:
3324:
3316:40, 277–288.
3313:
3302:
3295:
3288:
3283:
3275:
3221:
3217:
3207:
3190:
3186:
3180:
3164:. Springer.
3161:
3155:
3147:
3138:
3129:
3120:
3111:
3103:
3098:
3090:
3085:
3077:
3072:
3064:
3059:
3041:
3008:
3004:
2992:
2983:
2974:
2969:Halle (1995)
2965:
2956:
2947:
2938:
2919:
2900:
2888:. Retrieved
2886:(2): 307–315
2883:
2879:
2869:
2850:
2836:Kager (1999)
2814:Kager (1999)
2809:
2790:
2776:Kager (1999)
2771:
2752:
2711:
2694:
2690:
2686:
2680:
2647:
2643:
2631:
2603:
2596:
2582:Kager (1999)
2577:
2568:
2559:
2541:Silke Hamann
2530:
2519:
2507:Joan Bresnan
2492:
2452:
2437:
2435:
2419:
2407:chain shifts
2404:
2388:
2383:
2379:
2357:
2350:
2347:
2335:
2328:
2301:
2255:
2244:
2225:
2177:
2135:
2128:
1744:
1734:
1732:
1261:Faithfulness
1222:Description
1209:
1203:
1193:
1183:
1174:
1163:
1159:
1156:
1109:
1100:
1096:
1084:
1081:reduplicated
1072:
1058:
1052:
1047:
1045:
1020:
1007:Candidate B
990:Candidate A
897:
891:that exceed
881:
869:chain shifts
848:
846:
828:
824:adding to it
819:
790:
787:
753:FootBinarity
631:Other names
618:
558:
553:
549:
516:
499:
491:
488:input/output
487:
485:
454:
431:
413:
409:
389:
370:
346:
310:
291:
260:
249:
223:
207:
177:
173:
172:
160:and ⟨
142:
123:
114:
104:
97:
90:
83:
71:
59:Please help
54:verification
51:
3554:Linguistics
3327:37:271-275.
3133:Wolf (2008)
2890:5 September
2533:orthography
2483:Bruce Tesar
2384:transparent
2207:. From the
2085:dɪʃɪz~dɪʃɪs
1039:dominates C
914:dominates C
861:*VoicedCoda
722:NonFinality
649:−Coda
441:antimatroid
358:epenthesize
279:linguistics
263:Alan Prince
242:Evaluator (
228:Generator (
210:Alan Prince
3528:Categories
3451:. ROA-500.
3350:. ROA-838.
3334:17:337-50.
3271:. ROA-794.
3261:References
2526:pragmatics
2515:morphology
2479:stratal OT
2215:dominates
2063:dɪʃɪz~dɪʃs
2041:dɪʃɪz~dɪʃz
2004:/dɪʃ/+/z/→
1958:kæts~kætɪs
1936:kæts~kætɪz
1877:/kæt/+/z/→
1831:dɒɡz~dɒɡɪs
1809:dɒɡz~dɒɡɪz
1750:/dɒɡ/+/z/→
1588:/dɪʃ/+/z/→
1443:/kæt/+/z/→
1298:/dɒɡ/+/z/→
1254:obstruents
1227:Markedness
1200:/dɪʃ/+/z/→
1190:/kæt/+/z/→
1180:/dɒɡ/+/z/→
1135:Constraint
1129:Constraint
1123:Constraint
980:Constraint
974:Constraint
968:Constraint
893:regularity
628:Statement
608:Uniformity
586:Uniformity
580:metathesis
474:epenthesis
472:prohibits
462:prohibits
339:Input and
319:theory of
254:. Part of
87:newspapers
32:Optimality
3539:Phonology
3305:26, 1-46.
3250:254872721
3025:0024-3892
2672:254861452
2664:1573-0859
2623:214281882
2522:semantics
2495:phonology
2344:Criticism
2209:/kæt/+/z/
2180:/dɪʃ/+/z/
2138:/kæt/+/z/
2131:/dɒɡ/+/z/
2107:dɪʃɪz~dɪʃ
2011:/dɪʃ/+/z/
1914:kæts~kætz
1884:/kæt/+/z/
1787:dɒɡz~dɒɡs
1757:/dɒɡ/+/z/
1739:/dɒɡ/+/z/
1595:/dɪʃ/+/z/
1450:/kæt/+/z/
1305:/dɒɡ/+/z/
1235:sibilants
910:, where C
889:relations
857:obstruent
831:June 2018
600:unpacking
596:Integrity
576:Linearity
514:(voice).
428:factorial
287:semantics
275:phonology
117:June 2018
3033:14131378
2455:syllable
2376:bleeding
2368:/tipik/→
2366:, (e.g.
1980:kæts~kæt
1853:dɒɡz~dɒɡ
1065:Balangao
959:Tableau
707:CodaCond
695:*Complex
685:sonorous
570:O-Contig
564:I-Contig
524:replace
512:Ident-IO
510:, as in
464:deletion
220:Overview
182:language
158:/ /
154:Help:IPA
3093:, p. 1.
2703:4176645
2372:syncope
1287:(Voice)
1245:(Voice)
1171:Example
906:, and C
853:segment
760:Pk-Prom
354:/flask/
146:in the
101:scholar
3248:
3168:
3031:
3023:
2701:
2670:
2662:
2621:
2611:
2511:syntax
2457:, the
2438:theory
2380:opaque
2148:, and
1204:dishes
1142:A ~ B
1105:NoCoda
1093:NoCoda
1073:taynan
1069:NoCoda
1061:NoCoda
1035:" = "C
734:NonFin
657:NoCoda
590:fusion
399:forms.
364:(e.g.
362:delete
283:syntax
281:(e.g.
193:, and
162:
103:
96:
89:
82:
74:
3246:S2CID
3051:(PDF)
3029:S2CID
2699:JSTOR
2668:S2CID
2551:Notes
2461:, or
2316:Agree
2312:Agree
2304:Agree
2297:Ident
2289:Agree
2283:*SS,
2274:Ident
2266:Agree
2260:*SS,
2247:Agree
2240:Ident
2230:*SS,
2217:Ident
2201:Ident
2185:Agree
2173:Ident
2161:Agree
2154:Ident
2142:Agree
2034:Ident
2019:Agree
1907:Ident
1892:Agree
1780:Ident
1765:Agree
1693:dɪʃɪs
1672:dɪʃɪz
1618:Ident
1603:Agree
1546:kætɪs
1525:kætɪz
1473:Ident
1458:Agree
1401:dɒɡɪs
1380:dɒɡɪz
1328:Ident
1313:Agree
1285:Ident
1243:Agree
1083:form
964:Input
793:nasal
747:moras
741:FtBin
672:Onset
625:Name
534:Parse
526:Parse
504:Ident
480:Ident
150:(IPA)
108:JSTOR
94:books
3166:ISBN
3021:ISSN
2930:help
2911:help
2892:2021
2861:help
2842:help
2820:help
2801:help
2782:help
2763:help
2744:help
2722:help
2660:ISSN
2619:OCLC
2609:ISBN
2588:help
2539:and
2531:For
2505:and
2459:mora
2396:Eval
1650:dɪʃs
1628:dɪʃz
1504:kæts
1483:kætz
1358:dɒɡs
1338:dɒɡz
1219:Name
1216:Type
1194:cats
1184:dogs
1160:some
999:***
885:Eval
876:Eval
797:oral
774:WSP
728:foot
679:HNuc
544:and
538:Fill
536:and
530:Fill
528:and
520:and
490:and
377:Eval
331:and
304:and
285:and
265:and
244:Eval
212:and
80:news
3416:doi
3236:hdl
3226:doi
3195:doi
3013:doi
2652:doi
2415:/Y/
2411:/X/
2392:Gen
2364:/t/
2320:Dep
2308:Max
2293:Dep
2285:Max
2270:Dep
2262:Max
2251:Dep
2236:Dep
2232:Max
2221:Dep
2213:Dep
2205:Dep
2197:Dep
2193:Max
2189:Dep
2169:Dep
2165:Max
2150:Dep
2146:Max
2029:Dep
2024:Max
2015:*SS
1902:Dep
1897:Max
1888:*SS
1775:Dep
1770:Max
1761:*SS
1715:dɪʃ
1706:*!
1613:Dep
1608:Max
1599:*SS
1568:kæt
1468:Dep
1463:Max
1454:*SS
1423:dɒɡ
1323:Dep
1318:Max
1309:*SS
1275:Dep
1265:Max
1230:*SS
1164:all
1107:).
1089:/n/
1077:/n/
1031:≫ C
1027:("C
1013:**!
953:Con
930:≫ C
926:≫ C
902:, C
826:.
749:).
664:Ons
637:Nuc
602:or
546:Dep
542:Max
522:Dep
518:Max
502:in
470:Dep
460:Max
436:Con
424:Con
420:Con
416:Con
392:Con
384:Con
372:Gen
368:).
366:,,,
341:Gen
289:).
252:Con
237:Con
230:Gen
63:by
3530::
3479:.
3323:.
3312:.
3287:.
3244:.
3234:.
3222:35
3220:.
3216:.
3189:.
3027:.
3019:.
3009:40
3007:.
3003:.
2884:24
2882:.
2878:.
2828:^
2730:^
2695:37
2693:,
2666:.
2658:.
2648:34
2646:.
2642:.
2617:.
2528:.
2501:,
2477:,
2469:,
2445:.
2433:.
2340:.
2295:≫
2291:≫
2287:,
2278:or
2272:≫
2268:,
2264:≫
2238:≫
2234:≫
2223:.
2171:≫
2167:,
2163:,
2144:,
2123:e
2101:W
2079:W
2057:e
1996:L
1974:e
1952:L
1930:L
1869:e
1847:W
1825:e
1803:W
1723:*!
1711:e.
1689:d.
1663:*
1654:*!
1646:b.
1632:*!
1624:a.
1576:*!
1564:e.
1559:*
1556:*!
1542:d.
1535:*!
1521:c.
1516:*
1489:*!
1479:a.
1431:*!
1419:e.
1414:*
1411:*!
1397:d.
1390:*!
1376:c.
1371:*
1364:*!
1354:b.
1151:L
1137:3
1067:,
1004:b.
982:3
955:.
922:(C
895:.
871:.
379:.
327:,
308:.
300:,
205:.
189:,
178:OT
3444:.
3434:.
3418::
3252:.
3238::
3228::
3201:.
3197::
3191:7
3174:.
3053:.
3035:.
3015::
2932:)
2913:)
2894:.
2863:)
2844:)
2822:)
2803:)
2784:)
2765:)
2746:)
2724:)
2706:.
2674:.
2654::
2625:.
2590:)
2543:/
2120:L
2117:W
2114:e
2111:e
2098:e
2095:e
2092:e
2089:e
2076:L
2073:e
2070:e
2067:W
2054:L
2051:e
2048:W
2045:W
1993:e
1990:W
1987:e
1984:e
1971:W
1968:e
1965:e
1962:e
1949:W
1946:e
1943:e
1940:e
1927:e
1924:e
1921:W
1918:e
1866:e
1863:W
1860:e
1857:e
1844:W
1841:e
1838:e
1835:e
1822:W
1819:e
1816:e
1813:e
1800:e
1797:e
1794:W
1791:e
1703:*
1682:*
1635:*
1206:)
1202:(
1196:)
1192:(
1186:)
1182:(
1148:W
1145:e
1131:2
1125:1
1041:2
1037:1
1033:2
1029:1
1010:*
996:*
993:*
976:2
970:1
944:3
940:2
936:1
932:3
928:2
924:1
920:3
916:2
912:1
908:3
904:2
900:1
833:)
829:(
610:)
592:)
582:)
500:F
168:.
130:)
124:(
119:)
115:(
105:·
98:·
91:·
84:·
57:.
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
