Dominance-as-markedness
This paper examines a formal consequence of the assumption that dominance is equivalent to markedness (Casali 2016): if dominant ATR values are marked and therefore specified, while recessive values are unmarked and unspecified, then no phonological process in a language with ATR dominance should r...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN FR |
| Publicado: |
LibraryPress@UF
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/7dee6b20a19a4d1dac4250b190fabea2 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | This paper examines a formal consequence of the assumption that dominance is equivalent to markedness (Casali 2016): if dominant ATR values are marked and therefore specified, while recessive values are unmarked and unspecified, then no phonological process in a language with ATR dominance should require reference to the recessive value. This claim is examined in light of new data and analyses of ATR harmony and three other vowel assimilation patterns in Bari (Eastern Nilotic; BFA). I demonstrate that all four of these processes are analyzable without reference to the recessive value of ATR, supporting the characterization of dominance as markedness, and markedness as specification
|
|---|