Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp 1139–1162 | Cite as

Exceptional segments in Polish

  • Jerzy Rubach


In a recent paper “Unexceptional Segments” (2012), published in this journal, Gouskova proposes a new analysis of Russian yers, the renowned Slavic vowels that show an alternation with zero. This paper investigates the question of whether Gouskova’s analysis can be extended to Polish yers. Section 1 introduces the basic data. Section 2 analyzes Polish yers in terms of the framework proposed by Gouskova (2012) and argues that the analysis falls short of accounting for the full range of the attested facts. The conclusion is that it is segments rather than morphemes that need to be treated as special or exceptional.


Phonology Lexical exceptions Indexed constraints Yers Slavic languages Polish 



I would like to thank three anonymous NLLT reviewers and Michael Kenstowicz for their discussion and criticism, which have led to considerable improvement of both the content and the presentation of my analysis. However, let me add that the responsibility for this paper is solely mine.


  1. Baković, Eric and Bożena Pająk. 2010. Assimilation, antigemination, and contingent optionality: The phonology of monoconsonantal proclitics in Polish. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 28: 643–680. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beckman, Jill N. 1997. Positional faithfulness, positional neutralisation and Shona vowel harmony. Phonology 14: 1–46. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bethin, Christina Y. 1992. Polish syllables. The role of prosody in phonology and morphology. Columbus: Slavica Publishers. Google Scholar
  4. Bethin, Christina Y. 1998. Slavic prosody: Language change and phonological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blumenfeld, Lev A. 2006. Constraints on phonological interactions. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford CA. Google Scholar
  6. Casali, Roderic. 1997. Vowel elision in hiatus contexts: Which vowel goes? Language 73: 493–533. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clements, George N. 1990. The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Papers in laboratory phonology. Between the grammar and the physics of speech, eds. John Kingston and Mary Beckman, 283–333. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  8. Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa. 1988. Investigations into Polish morphology and phonology. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
  9. Gorecka, Alicja. 1988. Epenthesis and the coda constraints in Polish. Ms., MIT. Google Scholar
  10. Gouskova, Maria. 2012. Unexceptional segments. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30: 79–133. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gribanova, Vera. 2008. Russian prefixes, prepositions and palatalization in Stratal OT. In Proceedings of the 26th West coast conference on formal linguistics, eds. Charles B. Chang and Hannah J. Haynie, 217–225. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Google Scholar
  12. Gribanova, Vera. 2009. Phonological evidence for a distinction between Russian prepositions and prefixes. In Studies in formal Slavic phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and information structure: Proceedings of the 7th European conference on formal description of Slavic languages, eds. Gerhild Zybatov, Uwe Junghanns, Denisa Lenartová, and Petr Biskup, 338–396. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang. Google Scholar
  13. Gussmann, Edmund. 1980. Studies in abstract phonology. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  14. Gussmann, Edmund. 2007. The phonology of Polish. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  15. Halle, Morris and Ora Matushansky. 2006. The morphophonology of Russian adjectival inflection. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 351–404. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hermans, Ben. 1999. Yer-triggered lengthening in Slovak. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 1999, ed. René Kager, 67–79. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar
  17. Hermans, Ben. 2002. Overapplication of yer vocalization in Russian. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 2002, eds. Hans Broekhuis and Paula Fikkert, 85–95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar
  18. Jarosz, Gaja. 2005. Polish yers and the finer structure of output–output correspondence. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 31: 181–192. Google Scholar
  19. Jarosz, Gaja. 2008. Partial ranking and alternating vowels in Polish. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 41: 193–206. Google Scholar
  20. Jespersen, Otto. 1904. Lehrbuch der Phonetik. Leipzig und Berlin: B.G. Teubner. Google Scholar
  21. Kenstowicz, Michael and Jerzy Rubach. 1987. The phonology of syllabic nuclei in Slovak. Language 63: 463–497. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kraska-Szlenk, Iwona. 2007. Analogy. The relation between lexicon and grammar. Munich: Lincom Europa. Google Scholar
  23. Laskowski, Roman. 1975. Studia nad morfonologią współczesnego języka polskiego. Wrocław: Ossolineum. Google Scholar
  24. Lightner, Theodore M. 1963. Preliminary remarks on the morphophonemic component of Polish. Quarterly Progress Report 71: 220–235. Google Scholar
  25. Lightner, Theodore M. 1972. Problems in the theory of phonology. Edmonton: Linguistic Research. Google Scholar
  26. Lightner, Theodore M. 1965. Segmental phonology of Modern Standard Russian. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
  27. McCarthy, John J. 2005. Optimal paradigms. In Paradigms in phonological theory, eds. Laura Downing, T. A. Hall, and Renate Raffelsiefen, 170–210. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  28. Melvold, Janice. 1990. Structure and stress in the phonology of Russian. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge MA. Google Scholar
  29. Pater, Joe. 2000. Non-uniformity in English secondary stress: The role of ranked and lexically specific constraints. Phonology 17: 237–274. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pater, Joe. 2006. The locus of exceptionality: Morpheme-specific phonology as constraint indexation. In Papers in optimality theory III, eds. Leah Bateman, Michael O’Keefe, Ehren Reilly, and Adam Werle, 259–296. Amherst: Graduate Linguistic Student Association. Google Scholar
  31. Pater, Joe. 2008. Morpheme-specific phonology: Constraint indexation and inconsistency resolution. In Phonological argumentation: Essays on evidence and motivation, ed. Steve Parker, 123–154. London: Equinox. Google Scholar
  32. Pesetsky, David. 1979. Russian morphology and lexical theory. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
  33. Piotrowski, Marek, Iggy Roca, and Andy Spencer. 1992. Polish yers and lexical syllabicity. The Linguistic Review 9: 27–67. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Prince, Alan and Paul Smolensky. 2004. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. [Revision of 1993, technical report, Rutgers University Center for Cognitive, Sciences. Available on Rutgers Optimality Archive, ROA-537]. Google Scholar
  35. Rowicka, Grażyna. 1999. On ghost vowels. A strict CV approach. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics. Google Scholar
  36. Rubach, Jerzy. 1977. Changes of consonants in English and Polish. A generative account. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich. Google Scholar
  37. Rubach, Jerzy. 1984. Cyclic and Lexical Phonology. The structure of Polish. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rubach, Jerzy. 1985. Lexical phonology: Lexical and postlexical derivations. Phonology Yearbook 2: 157–172. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rubach, Jerzy. 1986. Abstract vowels in three-dimensional phonology: The yers. The Linguistic Review 5: 247–280. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rubach, Jerzy. 1993. The Lexical Phonology of Slovak. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  41. Rubach, Jerzy. 1997. Extrasyllabic consonants in Polish: Derivational Optimality Theory. In Derivations and constraints in phonology, ed. Iggy Roca, 551–581. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  42. Rubach, Jerzy. 2007. A conspiracy of gliding processes in Polish. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 15: 325–357. Google Scholar
  43. Rubach, Jerzy. 2011. Syllabic repairs in Macedonian. Lingua 121: 237–268. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rubach, Jerzy and Geert E. Booij. 1990a. Syllable structure assignment in Polish. Phonology 7: 121–158. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rubach, Jerzy and Geert E. Booij. 1990b. Edge of constituent effects in Polish. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 8: 427–463. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Selkirk, Elizabeth O. 1982. On the major class features and syllable theory. In Language sound structure, eds. Mark Aronoff and Richard T. Oehrle, 107–136. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  47. Spencer, Andrew. 1985. A non-linear analysis of vowel–zero alternations in Polish. Journal of Linguistics 22: 249–280. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Steele, Richard D. 1973. The segmental phonology of Contemporary Standard Polish. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
  49. Steriopolo, Olga. 2007. Jer vowels in Russian prepositions. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics 15, eds. Richard Compton, Magdalena Goledzinowska, and Ulyana Savchenko, 365–385. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. Google Scholar
  50. Szpyra, Jolanta. 1989. The phonology–morphology interface: Cycles, levels, and words. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
  51. Szpyra, Jolanta. 1992. Ghost segments in non-linear phonology: Polish yers. Language 68: 277–312. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Trubetzkoy, Nikolai S. 1939. Principles of phonology. Berkeley: University of California. Translated by Christiane A. M. Baltaxe. Reprinted in 1969. Google Scholar
  53. Yearley, Jennifer. 1995. Jer vowels in Russian. In Papers in Optimality Theory. University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics 18, eds. Jill N. Beckman, Laura W. Dickey, and Suzanne Urbanczyk, 249–384. Amherst: Graduate Linguistic Student Association. Google Scholar
  54. Zec, Draga. 1988. Sonority constraints on prosodic structure. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Google Scholar
  55. Zec, Draga. 2002. The role of prosody in morphologically governed phonotactic regularities. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 14: 250–277. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of IowaIowaUSA
  2. 2.University of WarsawWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations