2. 1 Phonology → Phonetics Understanding Features

3. 2 Richness of the Base The source of all systematic cross-linguistic variation is constraint reranking. In particular, the set of inputs to the grammars of all languages is the same. The grammatical inventories of a language are the outputs which emerge from the grammar when it is fed the universal set of all possible inputs (Smolensky 1996).

4. 3 ROTB Constraint ranking is everything! Constraint ranking is everything! Simplistic view of features Simplistic view of features Have specific phonetic definitions. Have specific phonetic definitions. Features mapped to phonetics. Features mapped to phonetics.

5. 4 What about variability? Views on variability Views on variability Multiple grammars Multiple grammars Variable/unranked constraints/rules Variable/unranked constraints/rules Stochastic OT/processes Stochastic OT/processes

6. 5 Enter features View from the world of phonological contrast. View from the world of phonological contrast. Some featural alternation could be feature interpretation, i.e., phonology → phonetics mapping. Some featural alternation could be feature interpretation, i.e., phonology → phonetics mapping. Not all variation is in the phonology. Not all variation is in the phonology. Some might be allophonic (in the phonology). Some might be allophonic (in the phonology). Example: Voicing assimilation in English Example: Voicing assimilation in English Others might be allo-phonetic (in the phonetics). Others might be allo-phonetic (in the phonetics). Jeff and I coined the second term.. Jeff and I coined the second term.. Example: onset [ s ] might be diff. from a coda [ s ]. Example: onset [ s ] might be diff. from a coda [ s ].

7. 6 Laryngeal Features Classic view Classic view [+/- voiced] [+/- voiced] Any voicing distinction is to be interpreted in terms of this feature. Any voicing distinction is to be interpreted in terms of this feature. English/German -b - [+voiced] p h- [-voiced] French/Spanish -b - [+voiced] p - [-voiced]

8. 7 Simplified Phonetic Facts 1 English/German a. /orthographic-b/ [b] -fully voiced (or) [p] - voiceless unaspirated (utterance initially, variably) (utterance initially, variably) b. /orthographic-p/ [p h ] -aspirated voiceless (or) [p] - voiceless unaspirated (after ‘s’, other v.less. frics?) (after ‘s’, other v.less. frics?)

9. 8 Simplified Phonetic Facts 2 French/Spanish a. /orthographic-b/ [b] -fully voiced b. /orthographic-p/ [p] - voiceless unaspirated [p] - voiceless unaspirated (after ‘s’, other v.less. frics?) (after ‘s’, other v.less. frics?) -variable voicing -variable voicing

10. 9 Further simplified facts English/German - /b/ is variable /p h / is consistent French/Spanish -/b/ is consistent /p/ is variable

11. 10 Laryngeal Realism English/German English/German /orthographic-p/ is specified for aspiration. /orthographic-p/ is specified for aspiration. /orthographic-b/ is unspecified, so it varies (to some extent). /orthographic-b/ is unspecified, so it varies (to some extent). French/Spanish French/Spanish /orthographic-b/ is specified for voicing. /orthographic-b/ is specified for voicing. /orthographic-p/ is unspecified, so it varies (to some extent). /orthographic-p/ is unspecified, so it varies (to some extent).

12. 11 Laryngeal Realism English/German English/German p h vs. Ø p h vs. Ø French/Spanish French/Spanish bvs. Ø bvs. Ø

13. 12 Assumption in Laryngeal Realism Couched in underspecification theory Couched in underspecification theory Unspecified features do not play a role in phonology. Unspecified features do not play a role in phonology. No processes use them as triggers (in structural descriptions). No processes use them as triggers (in structural descriptions). Testable statement Testable statement Seems to be true of laryngeal features. Seems to be true of laryngeal features.

14. 13 However, we haven’t talked about features yet! English/German English/German p h vs. Ø p h vs. Ø If consistently aspirated, then must be specified for aspiration – [+ spread glottis] If consistently aspirated, then must be specified for aspiration – [+ spread glottis]

15. 14 However, we haven’t talked about features yet! French/Spanish French/Spanish bvs. Ø bvs. Ø If consistently voiced, then must be specified for voicing – [+ voiced] If consistently voiced, then must be specified for voicing – [+ voiced]

16. 15 What can be a possible feature? Theory of features Theory of features Avery-Idsardi (2001) Innovation Avery-Idsardi (2001) Innovation Articulators, Dimensions, Gestures. Articulators, Dimensions, Gestures. Articulators group dimensions. Articulators group dimensions. Dimensions group antagonistic gestures. Dimensions group antagonistic gestures.

17. 16 3D Larynx 3D Larynx 3D Larynx 3D Larynx 3D Larynx

18. 17 Dimensional Theory

19. 18 Essence of Dimensional Theory Phonology looks as far as Dimensions, no lower. Phonology looks as far as Dimensions, no lower. To be honest, there are exceptions to do with ‘headhood’ – we won’t go into that part of their theory. To be honest, there are exceptions to do with ‘headhood’ – we won’t go into that part of their theory.

20. 19 Dimensional Theory Phonological Features

21. 20 However, we haven’t talked about features yet! English/German English/German p h vs. Ø p h vs. Ø X vs. X | | | | GW Ø GW Ø If consistently aspirated, then must be specified for Glottal Width. If consistently aspirated, then must be specified for Glottal Width. Phonetics takes care of ‘aspiration’ or ‘glottal constriction’. Phonetics takes care of ‘aspiration’ or ‘glottal constriction’.

22. 21 Dimesional Invariance Consistently “Glottal Width” or GW

23. 22 Dimensional Theory

24. 23 French/Spanish – quick look French/Spanish French/Spanish bvs. Ø bvs. Ø X vs. X | | | | GT Ø GT Ø If consistently voiced, then must be specified for voicing – [Glottal Tension] If consistently voiced, then must be specified for voicing – [Glottal Tension]

25. 24 Dimensional Theory

26. 25 Grand Vision for phonological features

27. 26 What does this mean for nasality? [+/nasal] are under the dimension of ‘soft palate’. [+/nasal] are under the dimension of ‘soft palate’.

28. 27 Grand Vision for phonological features

29. 28 SP and its gestures Antagonistic gestures. One Dimension – Soft Palate (SP) Oral segment Nasal segment

30. 29 The Dimension SP Soft Palate. Soft Palate. Root:X | Dimension:SP / \ / \ Gesture:[nasal] [oral]

31. 30 However Phonology (usually) looks as low as dimensions, and no lower! Phonology (usually) looks as low as dimensions, and no lower!

32. 31 The Dimension SP Soft Palate in the phonology. Soft Palate in the phonology. Root:X | Dimension:SP / \ / \ Gesture:[nasal] [oral] Purview of Phonology

33. 32 Implications A segment can be marked for the dimension SP in the phonology, but no more! A segment can be marked for the dimension SP in the phonology, but no more! X |SP ([nasal] or [oral] gestures are part of the phonetic implementation)

34. 33 The Dimension SP You can’t mark [nasal] or [oral] in the phonology! You can’t mark [nasal] or [oral] in the phonology! Coolest prediction ever! Coolest prediction ever! If specified for ‘phonological nasality’, segments can surface with (phonetic) non-nasal variants cos the phonetic gesture isn’t specified! If specified for ‘phonological nasality’, segments can surface with (phonetic) non-nasal variants cos the phonetic gesture isn’t specified! Because: Because: X → X(or) X(or) X X → X(or) X(or) X || | | || | | || | | || | | SPSPSPSP | | || | || | || | | [nasal] [oral] Ø [nasal] [oral] Ø

35. 34 Partially-nasal stops What are they? What are they? Segments with both a nasal and an oral portion. Segments with both a nasal and an oral portion. Recording Recording Whole phrase Word kapan: sounds like [kapa d n]

36. 35 Partially-nasal stops At least 2 kinds At least 2 kinds Nasal-based Nasal-based No different from simple nasals in the phonology. No different from simple nasals in the phonology. Behave like nasals; spread nasality… Behave like nasals; spread nasality… Voiced-based Voiced-based Simple voiced stops in the phonology, unmarked for phonological nasality. Simple voiced stops in the phonology, unmarked for phonological nasality. Nasal on the surface for phonetic reasons (enhancement…). Nasal on the surface for phonetic reasons (enhancement…).

37. 36 Categorical Phonology All types of Partially Nasal Stops (can) show surface variability. All types of Partially Nasal Stops (can) show surface variability. Nasal-based - [m] or [m b ] or [b] Nasal-based - [m] or [m b ] or [b] Voice-based - [ m b] or [b] (or [m] ??) Voice-based - [ m b] or [b] (or [m] ??) But, they NEVER trigger nasalization variably. But, they NEVER trigger nasalization variably.

38. 37 Logical Possibilities Because Nasal-based PNS show surface variation, it is logically possible that Because Nasal-based PNS show surface variation, it is logically possible that If the surface alternant is [m], If the surface alternant is [m], aham  a ̃ h ̃ a ̃ m (nasalization occurs) aham  a ̃ h ̃ a ̃ m (nasalization occurs) If the surface alternant is [b], If the surface alternant is [b], aham  ahab (no nasalization occurs) aham  ahab (no nasalization occurs) If the surface alternant is [ b m], If the surface alternant is [ b m], aham  aha b m (no nasalization) aham  aha b m (no nasalization)

39. 38 Therefore, expected variation for the same word Therefore, expected variation for the same word aham  a ̃ h ̃ a ̃ m aham  a ̃ h ̃ a ̃ m (or)ahab (or)aha b m

40. 39 Observed fact: There is NEVER any such variation. There is NEVER any such variation. (If they nasalize adjacent segments, they always do!) (If they nasalize adjacent segments, they always do!) Jambi Malay (Tadmor & Yanti 2004) Jambi Malay (Tadmor & Yanti 2004) (i)ayam  aya (b) m ‘chicken’ (ii)ayam-e  ayame ̃ ‘his chicken’

41. 40 In the phonology In the phonology, a nasal-based PNS is a simple nasal. In the phonology, a nasal-based PNS is a simple nasal. So, it always triggers nasalisation, if the language has a nasalisation process. So, it always triggers nasalisation, if the language has a nasalisation process. Surface variation is a result of the phonetic mapping, NOT phonology. Surface variation is a result of the phonetic mapping, NOT phonology.

42. 41 What about Voice-based PNS? Observed Variation Observed Variation [ m b] or [b] (or [m] ??) [ m b] or [b] (or [m] ??) However, in the phonology, they are not specified for nasality. However, in the phonology, they are not specified for nasality. They NEVER spread nasality. They NEVER spread nasality.

43. 42 Conclusion Contra the claims of Classic OT architecture (ROTB), not all the predictable facts are in the phonology! Contra the claims of Classic OT architecture (ROTB), not all the predictable facts are in the phonology! At least some are to be captured at the phonology-phonetics interface. At least some are to be captured at the phonology-phonetics interface.