Dependency phonology?

Discussion of natural languages, or language in general.
Post Reply
User avatar
alice
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 707
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Three of them

Dependency phonology?

Post by alice »

What do you people think about dependency phonology, as set forth in Anderson & Ewen 1987 et al?
Zompist's Markov generator wrote:it was labelled" orange marmalade," but that is unutterably hideous.

User avatar
clawgrip
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1723
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:21 am
Location: Tokyo

Re: Dependency phonology?

Post by clawgrip »

Can you provide a brief overview?

User avatar
alice
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 707
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Three of them

Re: Dependency phonology?

Post by alice »

Well, there's this for a full-length treatment, or chapter 11 of this for something less detailed. If you have a short attention span, however, this should do the job.
Zompist's Markov generator wrote:it was labelled" orange marmalade," but that is unutterably hideous.

User avatar
kodé
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:25 pm
Location: Trojan Country

Re: Dependency phonology?

Post by kodé »

I'm ABD in phonology, and I've never heard of "Dependency Phonology" (though I do know that Colin Ewen is the co-editor of Phonology, so that has to count for something). And I'm familiar with mainstream North American OT theories (including Stratal OT (heir to Lexical Phonology), Cophonology Theory and Harmonic Serialism), as well as various recent models of Rule-Based Phonology (stuff by, e.g., Bert Vaux, Eric Raimy, Charles Reiss), the phonological side of Distributed Morphology, Evolutionary Phonology, Government Phonology, Articulatory Phonology, and whatever other weird stuff happens in Europe. So my guess is that ... Dependency Phonology never caught on?

User avatar
kodé
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:25 pm
Location: Trojan Country

Re: Dependency phonology?

Post by kodé »

A quick perusal of what you've linked to is that Dependency Phonology is within the family of contemporary European-style phonology (i.e., non-OT). It seems really close to Government Phonology and Elementary Phonology, and reminds me of work by Tobias Scheer and the late, great Jean-Roger Vergnaud. It seems more concerned with representations than rules/constraints, and follows the impulse that people often have to make phonology look like syntax. Interesting stuff, though kinda different than what I or my colleagues do.

Post Reply