Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons

Maria Gouskova, Luiza Newlin-Łukowicz, Sofya Kasyanenko

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Affixation and allomorphy are often phonologically predictable: thus, the English indefinite "a" appears before consonants, and "an" before vowels. We propose a theory of phonological selection that separates rules of morpheme realization from phonological knowledge about the bases and the derived words. This phonological knowledge is encoded in miniature phonotactic grammars, which are learned over sublexicons defined by morphological generalizations. Each sublexical phonotactic grammar determines the likelihood that a new word will follow the associated rule. We examine a complex case of suppletive allomorphy in Russian, whose diminutive suffixes define sublexicons differing in constraints on final consonant place and manner, presence and location of consonant clusters, vowel hiatus, and stress. In elicitation, Russians choose allomorphs for words without diminutives based on how these words and the derived diminutives fare in the sublexical phonotactic grammars. In a nonce word study, Russians also chose allomorphs based on sublexical phonotactic well-formedness, even when the phonotactic violations were non-local to the affix itself. These patterns are missed by alternative approaches such as emergence of the unmarked, insertion rules that refer directly to phonological information, and the Minimal Generalization Learner.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)41-81
    Number of pages41
    JournalLingua
    Volume167
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Nov 1 2015

    Fingerprint

    grammar
    pricing
    Phonotactics
    Selectional Restrictions
    Grammar
    Consonant
    Diminutives
    Allomorphy

    Keywords

    • Diminutives
    • Morphology
    • Phonology
    • Russian
    • Selectional restrictions
    • Suppletion

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Language and Linguistics
    • Linguistics and Language

    Cite this

    Gouskova, M., Newlin-Łukowicz, L., & Kasyanenko, S. (2015). Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons. Lingua, 167, 41-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.014

    Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons. / Gouskova, Maria; Newlin-Łukowicz, Luiza; Kasyanenko, Sofya.

    In: Lingua, Vol. 167, 01.11.2015, p. 41-81.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Gouskova, M, Newlin-Łukowicz, L & Kasyanenko, S 2015, 'Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons', Lingua, vol. 167, pp. 41-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.014
    Gouskova M, Newlin-Łukowicz L, Kasyanenko S. Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons. Lingua. 2015 Nov 1;167:41-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.014
    Gouskova, Maria ; Newlin-Łukowicz, Luiza ; Kasyanenko, Sofya. / Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons. In: Lingua. 2015 ; Vol. 167. pp. 41-81.
    @article{2818d381478042bc96fd94c9b01f106f,
    title = "Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons",
    abstract = "Affixation and allomorphy are often phonologically predictable: thus, the English indefinite {"}a{"} appears before consonants, and {"}an{"} before vowels. We propose a theory of phonological selection that separates rules of morpheme realization from phonological knowledge about the bases and the derived words. This phonological knowledge is encoded in miniature phonotactic grammars, which are learned over sublexicons defined by morphological generalizations. Each sublexical phonotactic grammar determines the likelihood that a new word will follow the associated rule. We examine a complex case of suppletive allomorphy in Russian, whose diminutive suffixes define sublexicons differing in constraints on final consonant place and manner, presence and location of consonant clusters, vowel hiatus, and stress. In elicitation, Russians choose allomorphs for words without diminutives based on how these words and the derived diminutives fare in the sublexical phonotactic grammars. In a nonce word study, Russians also chose allomorphs based on sublexical phonotactic well-formedness, even when the phonotactic violations were non-local to the affix itself. These patterns are missed by alternative approaches such as emergence of the unmarked, insertion rules that refer directly to phonological information, and the Minimal Generalization Learner.",
    keywords = "Diminutives, Morphology, Phonology, Russian, Selectional restrictions, Suppletion",
    author = "Maria Gouskova and Luiza Newlin-Łukowicz and Sofya Kasyanenko",
    year = "2015",
    month = "11",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.014",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "167",
    pages = "41--81",
    journal = "Lingua",
    issn = "0024-3841",
    publisher = "Elsevier",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Selectional restrictions as phonotactics over sublexicons

    AU - Gouskova, Maria

    AU - Newlin-Łukowicz, Luiza

    AU - Kasyanenko, Sofya

    PY - 2015/11/1

    Y1 - 2015/11/1

    N2 - Affixation and allomorphy are often phonologically predictable: thus, the English indefinite "a" appears before consonants, and "an" before vowels. We propose a theory of phonological selection that separates rules of morpheme realization from phonological knowledge about the bases and the derived words. This phonological knowledge is encoded in miniature phonotactic grammars, which are learned over sublexicons defined by morphological generalizations. Each sublexical phonotactic grammar determines the likelihood that a new word will follow the associated rule. We examine a complex case of suppletive allomorphy in Russian, whose diminutive suffixes define sublexicons differing in constraints on final consonant place and manner, presence and location of consonant clusters, vowel hiatus, and stress. In elicitation, Russians choose allomorphs for words without diminutives based on how these words and the derived diminutives fare in the sublexical phonotactic grammars. In a nonce word study, Russians also chose allomorphs based on sublexical phonotactic well-formedness, even when the phonotactic violations were non-local to the affix itself. These patterns are missed by alternative approaches such as emergence of the unmarked, insertion rules that refer directly to phonological information, and the Minimal Generalization Learner.

    AB - Affixation and allomorphy are often phonologically predictable: thus, the English indefinite "a" appears before consonants, and "an" before vowels. We propose a theory of phonological selection that separates rules of morpheme realization from phonological knowledge about the bases and the derived words. This phonological knowledge is encoded in miniature phonotactic grammars, which are learned over sublexicons defined by morphological generalizations. Each sublexical phonotactic grammar determines the likelihood that a new word will follow the associated rule. We examine a complex case of suppletive allomorphy in Russian, whose diminutive suffixes define sublexicons differing in constraints on final consonant place and manner, presence and location of consonant clusters, vowel hiatus, and stress. In elicitation, Russians choose allomorphs for words without diminutives based on how these words and the derived diminutives fare in the sublexical phonotactic grammars. In a nonce word study, Russians also chose allomorphs based on sublexical phonotactic well-formedness, even when the phonotactic violations were non-local to the affix itself. These patterns are missed by alternative approaches such as emergence of the unmarked, insertion rules that refer directly to phonological information, and the Minimal Generalization Learner.

    KW - Diminutives

    KW - Morphology

    KW - Phonology

    KW - Russian

    KW - Selectional restrictions

    KW - Suppletion

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946725114&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84946725114&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.014

    DO - 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.014

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:84946725114

    VL - 167

    SP - 41

    EP - 81

    JO - Lingua

    JF - Lingua

    SN - 0024-3841

    ER -