Abstract
All changes to the internal structure of phonological segments arise from combinations of rules based on two set-theoretic operations: feature deletion by set subtraction and feature insertion by unification. Apparent cases of rules targeting underspecified segments reflect two kinds of vacuous rule application, one due to unification failure and the other due to vacuous unification. Despite this reduction of all segment-internal changes to two basic mechanisms we can account for a wide variety of patterns, including the reciprocal neutralization and apparent exceptional behavior seen in Hungarian voicing assimilation.
Highlights
Background on Logical PhonologyI provide more details concerning the list of assumptions given in the previous section
Logical Phonology is an approach that is consistent with the notion of Substance Free phonology introduced by Hale & Reiss (2000; 2008); Reiss (2017b), that term has come to be applied to a variety of often inconsistent perspectives. (Substance Free) Logical Phonology attempts to characterize the formal nature of phonological computation without reference to any notion of markedness or functionalist concepts like contrast, ease of articulation or the idea that phonological computation ‘repairs’ illformed structures
The processes discussed at level three are not part of the model of Logical Phonology: they are just a way to relate our results to the kinds of data and problems that phonologists have traditionally discussed
Summary
(Ontological) proliferation is the enemy of (theoretical) elegance. In contrast, combinatorics is our friend: when we try to model some aspect of the world, we want to account for lots of phenomena with just a few building blocks that can be put together to allow for superficial variety and complexity. I propose that a complete account of changes within segments uses only the two primitive mechanisms: deletion of valued features like +Nasal via an operation of set subtraction, and insertion of valued features via an operation of set unification.. Recent work (Bale et al 2014; Bale & Reiss 2018; Bale et al 2020) has proposed these operations as elements of a basic inventory of computations for phonology: the novelty of this paper is the stronger claim that just these two operations are necessary and sufficient to model all intrasegmental changes This claim is embedded in the larger framework of assumptions in (1) that my co-authors and I adopt and justify (or at least acknowledge as temporary idealizations). The enviroments and conditions for processes such as long-distance vowel harmony are not treated, but the intention is that the accounts of segment internal changes developed here will be part of a full analysis of such processes
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
