Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T15:41:25.672Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Direct Optimality Theory: Representation as Pure Markedness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Chris Golston
Chris Golston*
Affiliation:
California State University Fresno
*
Department of Linguistics, California State University Fresno, Fresno, CA 93740 [chrisg@csufresno.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I present a model of phonological representation which represents morphemes in terms of constraint violations rather than strings of segments or root nodes. The formalism allows representation to be uniform throughout the phonology, mandates permanent underspecification of unmarked structure, derives the linear order of segments within a morpheme, and allows representation and evaluation to be conflated. Marked types of morphology (infixes, circumfixes, zero affixes; subtractive, reduplicative and templatic morphology) are represented in exactly the same way as roots. The markedness of such morphology is argued to follow from the high ranking of the violated constraints in question.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 72 , Issue 4 , December 1996 , pp. 713 - 748
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, Stephen R. 1992. A-morphous morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana. 1984. Underspecification in Yawelmani phonology and morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. [Published, New York: Garland, 1988.]Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana. 1991. Syllabification and prosodic templates in Yawelmani. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9. 231–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana, and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1994. Grounded phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word formation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1988. A descriptive gap in morphology. Yearbook of Morphology 1. 17–28.Google Scholar
Beckman, Jill N., Walsh, Laura; and Urbanczyk, Suzanne (eds.) 1995. Papers in optimality theory. (University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 18.) Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association.Google Scholar
Benua, Laura. 1995. Identity effects in morphological truncation. In Beckman, et al. 1995, 77–136.Google Scholar
Bird, Steven. 1990. Constraint-based phonology. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh dissertation.Google Scholar
Bird, Steven. 1995. Computational phonology: A constraint-based approach. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 1995. The syllable in phonological theory. In Goldsmith 1995, 206–244.Google Scholar
Cairns, Charles E. 1988. Phonotactics, markedness and lexical representation. Phonology 5. 209–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, John. 1991. Phonological representations. York: University of York dissertation.Google Scholar
Corbin, Danielle. 1987. Morphologie dérivationelle et structuration du lexique. (Linguistische Arbeiten, 193–4.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Dobrin, Lise M. 1993. On the prosodic integrity of underlying forms: In support of a word-based lexicon. Paper presented at LASSO 22.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, Colleen, and Fountain, Amy. 1995. The optimal account of Tohono O'odham truncation. Paper presented at 1995 annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, New Orleans.Google Scholar
Fudge, Erik C. 1969. Syllables. Journal of Linguistics 5. 253–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujimura, Osamu. 1992. Phonology and phonetics: A syllable-based model of articulatory organization. Journal of the Acoustical Society of Japan (English series) 13. 13–48.Google Scholar
Fujimura, Osamu, and Lovins, Julie B.. 1978. Syllables as concatenative units. Syllables and segments, ed. by Bell, Allan and Hooper, Joan, 107–120. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Gnanadesikan, Amalia. 1995. Markedness and faithfulness constraints in child phonology. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, ms.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 1979. Autosegmental phonology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 1990. Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 1991. Phonology as an intelligent system. Bridges between psychology and linguistics: A Swarthmore Festschrift for Lila Gleitman ed. by Napoli, Donna Jo and Kegl, Judy, 247–67 Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. (ed.) 1993. The last phonological rule. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. (ed.) 1995. The handbook of phonological theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Golston, Chris. 1996. Prosodic constraints on roots, stems and words. Interfaces in phonology, ed. by Bierwisch, Manfred and Kleinhenz, Ursula, 172–93. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Golston, Chris, and van, Harry Hulst, der. 1996. Stricture is structure. The derivational residue in phonology, ed. by Hermans, Ben and Oostendorp, Marc van. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1960. The patterning of root morphemes in Semitic. Word 6. 162–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacken, Pius ten. 1994. Defining morphology: A principled approach to determining the boundaries of compounding, derivation and inflection. Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth. 1965. Some preliminary observations on Papago morphophonemics. International Journal of American Linguistics 31. 295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, Michael. 1993. Heavy trochees in Choctaw morphology. Phonology 10. 325–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, Michael. 1995. There is no lexicon! Tucson: University of Arizona, ms.Google Scholar
Hill, Jane H., and Zepeda, Ofelia. 1992. Derived words in Tohono O'odham. International Journal of American Linguistics 58. 355–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holes, Clive. 1995. Modern Arabic: Structure, function and varieties. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon. 1994. The consequences of optimization for underspecification. North Eastern Linguistic Society 24. 287–302.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon; Orgun, Orhan; and Zoll, Cheryl. 1994. Subregularities as cogrammars: The theoretical status of nonproductive patterns in grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, ms.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko. 1990. Prosodic minimality in Japanese. Chicago Linguistic Society 26(2). 213–39.Google Scholar
Kager, René. 1993. On defining complex templates. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 12. 19–34.Google Scholar
Kálmán, B. 1965. Das reduzierte Vokal-Phonem in Wogulischen. Proceedings of the 5th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, ed. by Zwirner, Eberhard and Bethge, Wolfgang, 278–380. Basel: S. Karger.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982. Lexical phonology and morphology. Linguistics in the morning calm, ed. by Yang, I. S., 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1993. Blocking in non-derived environments. Phonetics and phonology 4: Studies in lexical phonology, ed. by Hargus, Sharon and Kaisse, Ellen, 277–314. San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1993. Cognitive phonology. In Goldsmith 1993, 117–145.Google Scholar
Lamontagne, Greg, and Rice, Keren. 1995. A correspondence account of coalescence. In Beckmàn, et al. 1995, 211–23.Google Scholar
Leben, William. 1973. Suprasegmental phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. [Published, New York: Garland, 1979.]Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle. 1981. On the organization of the lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle. 1992. Deconstructing morphology: Word formation in syntactic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda, and McCarthy, John. 1991. Prosodic circumscription in Choctaw morphology. Phonology 8. 37–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1982. Re: reduplication. Linguistic Inquiry 13. 435–82.Google Scholar
Martin, Jack. 1988. Subtractive morphology as disassociation. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 7. 229–40.Google Scholar
Mathiot, Madeleine. 1973. A dictionary of Papago usage. Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1979. Formal problems in Semitic phonology and morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. (Reproduced 1982 by Indiana University Linguistics Club.)Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J.. 1982. Prosodic structure and Expletive Infixation. Language 58. 574–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J.. 1995. Extensions of faithfulness: Rotuman revisited. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, ms.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., and Prince, Alan S.. 1986. Prosodic morphology. Amherst, MA and Waltham, MA: University of Massachusetts, and Brandeis University, ms.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., Prince, Alan S.. 1988. Quantitative transfer in reduplicative and templatic morphology. Linguistics in the morning calm 2, ed. by Linguistic Society of Korea. 13–35. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., Prince, Alan S.. 1990. Foot and word in prosodic morphology: The Arabic broken plurals. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8. 209–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J., Prince, Alan S.. 1993a. Prosodic morphology I: Constraint interaction and satisfaction. Amherst, MA and New Brunswick, NJ: University of Massachusetts and Rutgers University, MS.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., Prince, Alan S.. 1993b. The emergence of the unmarked: Optimality in Prosodic morphology. North Eastern Linguistic Society 23. 333–79.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., Prince, Alan S.. 1993c. Generalized alignment. Yearbook of Morphology 1993. 79–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J., Prince, Alan S.. 1994. Prosodic morphology: An overview. Talk presented at the OTS/HIL Workshop of Prosodic Morphology, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J., Prince, Alan S.. 1995. Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In Beckman, et al. 1995, 249–384.Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. 1993. Fields of attraction in phonology. In Goldsmith 1993, 61–116.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Edith. 1977. On rules of infixing. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Neef, Martin. 1996. Wortdesign. Eine deklarative Analyse der deutschen Verbflexion. Studien zur deutschen Grammatik. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Newman, S. 1944. Yokuts language of California. (Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, no. 2.) New York: Viking Fund.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carole. 1988. On constraints and repair strategies. Linguistic Review 6. 6–97.Google Scholar
Pater, Joe. 1995. Austronesian nasal substitution and other NC effects. Proceedings of the OTS/HIL Workshop on Prosodic Morphology, ed. by Kager, René, Harry van der Hulst and Wim Zonneveld.Google Scholar
Poppe, Nicholas. 1962. Bashkir manual. (Indiana University Publications, Uralic and Altaic Series, vol 36.) Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan, and Smolensky, Paul. 1993. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. New Brunswick, NJ and Boulder, CO: Rutgers University and University of Colorado, ms.Google Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1986. Tone in lexical phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1988. Underspecification, the feature hierarchy and Tiv vowels. Phonology 5. 299–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, Kevin. 1995. Morphemes and candidates in Optimality Theory. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba, ms.Google Scholar
Scalise, Sergio. 1984. Generative morphology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Schachter, Paul, and Otanes, Fe T.. 1972. Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultink, Henk. 1987. Discontinuity and multiple branching in morphology. Aspects of language, vol 2, ed. by Arhammar, N., 481–91. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Scobbie, James. 1991. Attribute value phonology. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh dissertation.Google Scholar
Scobbie, James. 1992. Towards Declarative Phonology. Edinburgh working papers in cognitive science 7. 1–26.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elizabeth O. 1982. The syllable. The structure of phonological representations, part 2, ed. by van, Harry Hulst, der and Smith, Norval, 337–83. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Siegel, Dorothy C. 1974. Topics in English morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1979. Vowel harmony in Khalkha Mongolian. MIT Papers in Linguistics 1. 25–50.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1982. Greek prosodies and the nature of syllabification. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1987. Redundant values. Chicago Linguistic Society 23(2). 339–62.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1988. Reduplication and syllable transfer in Sanskrit and elsewhere. Phonology 5. 73–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1995. Underspecification and markedness. In Goldsmith 1995, 114–74.Google Scholar
Stonham, John. 1990. Current issues in morphological theory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Troubetzkoy, N. S. [1939] 1949. Principes de phonologie, trans, by Cantineau, J.. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Ulrich, Charles H. 1994. A unified account of Choctaw intensives. Phonology 11. 325–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vago, Robert M. 1980. Sound pattern of Hungarian. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo. 1972. On the theory of syllabic phonology. Linguistische Berichte 18. 1–18.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo. 1973. Phonological concreteness in natural generative grammar. Towards tomorrow's linguistics, ed. by Shuy, Roger and Bailey, C. J., 202–19. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Weeda, Donald Stanton. 1992. Word truncation in prosodic morphology. University of Texas, Austin dissertation.Google Scholar
Wiese, Richard. 1995. The phonology of German. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zepeda, Ofelia. 1983. A Papago grammar. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar