Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Unexceptional segments

  • Published:
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A famous perennial problem in Slavic phonology is yers: vowels that idiosyncratically alternate with zero (e.g., [mox] vs. [mx-a] ‘moss (nom/gen sg)’ alongside [nos] vs. [nos-a] ‘nose (nom/gen sg)’). The widely accepted analysis of these “ghost vowels” is that they must be underlyingly marked as exceptional on a segment-by-segment basis. Moreover, usually they are assumed to be underlyingly representationally defective—either nonmoraic or lacking features (Kenstowicz and Rubach 1987, inter alia). In this paper, I revisit yers from a different perspective. Instead of treating the segments as special, I argue that exceptionality is a property of whole morphemes. This theory of exceptionality has many incarnations (Chomsky and Halle 1968 et seq.), but my version is formalized as Lexically Indexed Constraints in Optimality Theory: in any given language, a universal constraint can be indexed to individual morphemes in the lexicon and ranked in two different positions in the language’s hierarchy (Pater 2000, 2006). In Russian, the relevant indexed constraint is *Mid, which penalizes the peripheral mid vowels [e] and [o]. The general, non-indexed constraint is independently needed to explain vowel reduction in unstressed syllables. The indexed version explains why only mid vowels alternate with zero in Russian. This generalization about yer quality is lost in representational accounts, since any vowel can be labeled as nonmoraic underlyingly. Another unsolved mystery about Russian yers is that only vowels in the final syllable of a morpheme can alternate with zero. This requires a phonological explanation—labeling only the alternating vowels as underlyingly special does not address the position problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adam, Galit. 2002. From variable to optimal grammar: Evidence from language acquisition and language change. Doctoral dissertation, University of Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel.

  • Albright, Adam. 2002. The identification of bases in morphological paradigms. PhD diss, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.

  • Anttila, Arto. 2002. Morphologically conditioned phonological alternations. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20 (1): 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avanesov, R. I. 1968. Russkoe literaturnoe proiznoshenie [Literary pronunciation of Russian], 6th (1984) edn. Moscow: Izdatelstvo Prosvescenie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bach, Emmon, and Robert T. Harms. 1972. How do languages get crazy rules? In Linguistic change and generative theory, eds. Robert P. Stockwell and Ronald K. S. Macaulay, 1–21. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakovic, Eric. 2000. Harmony, dominance, and control. PhD diss, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.

  • Barnes, Jonathan. 2004. Vowel reduction in Russian: The categorical and the gradient. Boston, MA. Handout from LSA 78.

  • Becker, Michael, Nihan Ketrez, and Andrew Nevins. 2011. The surfeit of the stimulus: Analytic biases filter lexical statistics in Turkish devoicing neutralization. Language, 87(1): 84–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, Jill. 1997. Positional faithfulness, positional neutralization, and Shona vowel harmony. Phonology 14 (1): 1–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, Jill 1998. Positional faithfulness. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benua, Laura. 1997. Transderivational identity: Phonological relations between words. PhD diss, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Available on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, ROA-259, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Bethin, Christina. 1992. Polish syllables: The role of prosody in phonology and morphology. Columbus: Slavica Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bethin, Christina. 2006. Stress and tone in East Slavic dialects. Phonology 23 (3): 125–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake, Susan. 2001. On the distribution and representation of schwa in Sliammon Salish: Descriptive and theoretical perspectives. PhD diss, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.

  • Blumenfeld, Lev. 2006. Constraints on phonological interactions. PhD diss, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

  • Bobaljik, Jonathan. 1997. Mostly predictable: Cyclicity and the distribution of schwa in Itelmen. Manuscript, Available as ROA-208 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2008. Paradigms (Optimal and otherwise): A case for scepticism. In Inflectional identity, eds. Asaf Bachrach and Andrew Nevins, 29–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borowsky, Toni. 1989. Structure preservation and the Syllable Coda in English. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 7 (2): 145–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brame, Michael. 1974. The cycle in phonology: Stress in Palestinian, Maltese and Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry 5 (1): 39–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cable, Seth. 2006. Syncope in the verbal prefixes of Tlingit: Meter and surface phonotactics. Lincom studies in native American linguistics. Muenchen: Lincom Europa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casali, Roderic F. 1997. Vowel elision in hiatus contexts: Which vowel goes? Language 73: 493–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam, and Morris Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, George N. 1990. The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Papers in laboratory phonology 1: Between the grammar and physics of speech, eds. John Kingston and Mary Beckman, 283–333. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosswhite, Katherine. 1999. Vowel reduction in Optimality Theory. PhD diss, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.

  • Crothers, John 1978. Typology and universals of vowel systems. In Vol. 2 of Phonology. Universals of human language, ed. J. Greenberg. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa. 1988. Investigations into Polish morphology and phonology. PhD diss, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

  • de Lacy, Paul. 2002. The formal expression of markedness. PhD diss, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA.

  • Dell, Francois, and Elisabeth Selkirk. 1978. On a morphologically governed vowel alternation in French. In Recent transformational studies in European languages. Vol. 3 of Linguistic Inquiry monograph series, ed. Samuel Jay Keyser. 1–51. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farina, Donna. 1991. Palatalization and yers in modern Russian phonology: An underspecification approach. PhD diss, University of Illinois, Urbana.

  • Flack, Kathryn. 2007. Templatic morphology and indexed markedness constraints. Linguistic Inquiry 38 (4): 749–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukazawa, Haruka. 1999. Theoretical implications of OCP effects on features in Optimality Theory. PhD diss, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

  • Gouskova, Maria. 2003. Deriving economy: Syncope in Optimality Theory. PhD diss, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA. Available as ROA-610 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Gouskova, Maria. 2007. The reduplicative template in Tonkawa. Phonology 24 (3): 367–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouskova, Maria. 2010. The phonology of boundaries and secondary stress in Russian compounds. The Linguistic Review, 17(4): 387–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouskova, Maria, and Michael Becker. 2011. Wug-testing Russian yers. Manuscript, NYU and UMass Amherst.

  • Greenberg, Joseph. 1950. The patterning of root morphemes in Semitic. Word 6: 162–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribanova, Vera. 2008. Russian prefixes, prepositions and palatalization in stratal OT. In Proceedings of WCCFL 26, eds. Charles B. Change and Hannah J. Haynie, 217–225. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribanova, Vera. 2009a. 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 Zybatow, Uwe Junghanns, Denisa Lenertová, and Petr Biskup, 383–396. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribanova, Vera. 2009b. The phonology and syntax of sub-words. Presented at GLOW 32, 16 April 2009.

  • Gussmann, Edmund. 1980. Studies in abstract phonology. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halle, Morris. 1973. The accentuation of Russian words. Language 49 (2): 312–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halle, Morris, and Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed Morphology. In The view from building 20. Essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, eds. Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halle, Morris, and Ora Matushansky. 2006. The morphophonology of Russian adjectival inflection. Linguistic Inquiry 37 (3): 351–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermans, Ben. 2002. Overapplication of yer vocalization in Russian. Linguistics in the Netherlands.

  • Horwood, Graham. 1999. Anti-faithfulness and subtractive morphology. Manuscript, New Brunswick, NJ. Available as ROA-466 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Howe, Darin, and Douglas Pulleyblank. 2004. Harmonic scales as faithfulness. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 49 (1): 1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkelas, Sharon, and C. Orhan Orgun. 1995. Level ordering and economy in the lexical phonology of Turkish. Language 71 (4): 763–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inkelas, Sharon, and Cheryl Zoll. 2007. Is grammar dependence real? A comparison between cophonological and indexed constraint approaches to morphologically conditioned phonology. Linguistics 45 (1): 133–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inkelas, Sharon, Orhan Orgun, and Cheryl Zoll. 1997. The implications of lexical exceptions for the nature of grammar. In Derivations and constraints in phonology, ed. Iggy Roca, 393–418. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iosad, Pavel, and Bruce Morén-Duolljá. 2010. Russian palatalization: The true(r) story. Presented at Old World Conference in Phonology 7.

  • Ito, Junko, and Armin Mester. 1995a. The core-periphery structure of the lexicon and constraints on reranking. In Papers in optimality theory, eds. Jill Beckman, Laura Walsh Dickey, and Suzanne Urbanczyk, 181–210. Amherst: GLSA Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, Junko, and Armin Mester. 1995b. Japanese phonology. In Handbook of phonological theory, ed. John Goldsmith, 817–838. Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, Junko, and Armin Mester. 1999. The phonological lexicon. In The handbook of Japanese linguistics, ed. Natsuko Tsujimura, 62–100. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarosz, Gaja. 2005. Polish yers and the finer structure of output-output correspondence. In Proceedings of BLS 31. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarosz, Gaja. 2008. Partial ranking and alternating vowels in Polish. In Proceedings of CLS 43, Vol. 41, 193–206. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Daniel, and Dennis Ward. 1969. The phonetics of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jurgec, Peter. 2010. Disjunctive lexical stratification. Linguistic Inquiry 41 (1): 149–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kager, René. 1997. Rhythmic vowel deletion in optimality theory. In Derivations and constraints in phonology, ed. Iggy Roca, 463–499. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallestinova, Elena. 2004. Voice and aspiration in Turkish stops. In Folia linguistica 38: Special issue on voice, ed. Grzegorz Dogil, Vol. 38, 117–143. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, Jonah. 2005. Russian consonant Cvljusters. MIT, Cambridge, MA, Manuscript. http://web.mit.edu/jikatz/www/KatzPhonSquib.pdf, last accessed 09 July 2010.

  • Kawahara, Shigeto. 2007. On the proper treatment of non-crisp edges. In Vol. 13 of Japanese/Korean linguistics, eds. Mutsuko Hudson Endo, Peter Sells, and Sun-Ah Jun, 55–67. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenstowicz, Michael, and Jerzy Rubach. 1987. The phonology of syllabic nuclei in Slovak. Language 63 (3): 463–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinkade, Dale. 1997. How much does a schwa weigh? In Salish languages and linguistics: Theoretical and descriptive perspectives, eds. Ewa Czaykowska-Higgins and Dale Kinkade. Vol. 107 of Trends in linguistics, 197–218. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kiparsky, Paul. 1982. Lexical phonology and morphology. In Linguistics in the morning calm, ed. In-Seok Yang, Vol. 2, 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiparsky, Valentin. 1979. Russian historical grammar, Vol. 1. Ann Arbor: Ardis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchner, Robert. 1993. Turkish vowel harmony and disharmony: An Optimality Theoretic account. Los Angeles, Manuscript. Available as ROA-4 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Kopkalli, Handan. 1993. A phonetic and phonological analysis of final devoicing in Turkish. PhD diss, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

  • Kraska-Szlenk, Iwona. 1995. The phonology of stress in Polish. PhD diss, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL.

  • Lees, Robert. 1961. The phonology of modern standard Turkish. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi, Susannah V. 2004. The representation of underlying glides: a cross-linguistic study. PhD diss, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

  • Lieber, Rochelle. 1980. On the organization of the lexicon. PhD diss, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

  • Lightner, Theodore. 1965. Segmental phonology of Modern Standard Russian. PhD diss, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

  • Lightner, Theodore. 1972. Problems in the theory of phonology. Edmonton: Linguistic Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlett, S., and Joseph P. Stemberger. 1983. Empty consonants in Seri. Linguistic Inquiry 5: 617–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, Michal T. 2008. Exceptions encoded at the segmental level. In Proceedings of WCCFL 26, eds. Charles B. Chang and Hannah J. Haynie, 463–470. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matushansky, Ora. 2002. On formal identity of Russian prefixes and prepositions. In MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 42, 217–253. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. Available as ROA-485 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John. 2007. Slouching towards optimality: Coda reduction in OT-CC. Phonological Studies (Journal of the Phonological Society of Japan), 7: 89–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John J. 2008. The serial interaction of stress and syncope. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 26 (3): 499–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John J., and Alan Prince. 1993a. Generalized alignment. In Yearbook of morphology, eds. Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle, 79–153. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John J., and Alan Prince. 1993b. Prosodic morphology I: Constraint interaction and satisfaction. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science. Available on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, ROA-482, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John J., and Alan Prince. 1995. Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics 18, eds. Jill Beckman, Laura Walsh Dickey, and Suzanne Urbanczyk, 249–384. Amherst: GLSA Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melvold, Janis. 1990. Structure and stress in the phonology of Russian. PhD diss, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

  • Mohanan, K. P. 1982. Lexical phonology. PhD diss, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Distributed by IULC Publications.

  • Morén, Bruce. 1999. Distinctiveness, coercion and sonority: A unified theory of weight. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

  • Padgett, Jaye. 2003. Contrast and postvelar fronting in Russian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21 (1): 39–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padgett, Jaye. 2008. Glides, vowels, and features. Lingua 118 (12): 1937–1955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padgett, Jaye. 2010. Russian consonant-vowel interactions and derivational opacity. In Proceedings of FASL 18. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padgett, Jaye, and Marija Tabain. 2005. Adaptive dispersion theory and phonological vowel reduction in Russian. Phonetica 62 (1): 14–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pater, Joe. 2000. Nonuniformity in English secondary stress: The role of ranked and lexically specific constraints. Phonology 17 (2): 237–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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: GLSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pater, Joe. 2008. Morpheme-specific phonology: Constraint indexation and inconsistency resolution. In Phonological argumentation: Essays on evidence and motivation, ed. Steve Parker. London: Equinox.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesetsky, David. 1979. Russian morphology and lexical theory. Manuscript, MIT. http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/people/faculty/pesetsky/russmorph.pdf (accessed on June 30, 2010).

  • Petrova, Olga, Rosemary Plapp, Catherine O. Ringen, and Szilárd Szentgyörgyi. 2006. Voice and aspiration: Evidence from Russian, Hungarian, German, Swedish, and Turkish. The Linguistic Review 23 (1): 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prince, Alan. 2000. Comparative tableaux. Manuscript, New Brunswick, NJ. Available as ROA-376 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Prince, Alan, and Paul Smolensky. 1993/2004. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Malden, Oxford: Blackwell. Distributed in 1993 and as ROA-537 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, Ditmar, and Margarita Telenkova. 2003. Slovarj trudnostej russkogo jazyka, 3rd edn. Moscow: Ajris Press (Iris Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthall, Sam. 1994. Vowel/glide alternation in a theory of constraint interaction. PhD diss, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA.

  • Rowicka, Grazyna. 1999. Prosodic optimality and prefixation in Polish. In The prosody-morphology interface, eds. René Kager, Harry van der Hulst, and Wim Zonneveld, 367–389. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rowicka, Grazyna. 2002. Lateral deletion and more or less excrescent schwa in Upper Chehalis. In Vol. 19 of Linguistics in the Netherlands, eds. Hans Broekhuis and Paula Fikkert, 139–149. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubach, Jerzy. 1986. Abstract vowels in three-dimensional phonology: The yers. The Linguistic Review 5 (3): 247–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubach, Jerzy. 2000. Backness switch in Russian. Phonology 17 (1): 39–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubach, Jerzy. 2002. Against subsegmental glides. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 672–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheer, Tobias. 2006. How yers made Lightner, Gussman, Rubach, Spencer and others invent CVCV. In Studies in constraint-based phonology, eds. Piotr Banski, Beata Lukaszewicz, and Monika Opalinska, 133–207. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth, and Jean-Roger Vergnaud. 1973. How abstract is French phonology? Foundations of Language 10: 249–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, Patricia A. 2002. On the edge: Obstruent clusters in Salish. In Vol. 10 of Proceedings of the workshop on the structure and constituency of the languages of the Americas 7, eds. Leora Bar-el, Linda Tamburri Watt, and Ian Wilson, 119–136. Vancouver: UBC Working Papers in Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siptár, Péter, and Miklós Törkenczy. 2000. The phonology of Hungarian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Jennifer. 2000. Lexical category and phonological contrast. In Papers in experimental and theoretical linguistics: Proceedings of the workshop on the lexicon in phonetics and phonology, eds. Robert Kirchner, Joe Pater, and Wolf Wikely. Edmonton: Department of Linguistics, University of Alberta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steriade, Donca. 1982. Greek prosodies and the nature of syllabification. PhD diss, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

  • Steriopolo, Olga. 2007. Jer vowels in Russian prepositions. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics. The Toronto meeting 2006, 365–385. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svenonius, Peter. 2004. Slavic prefixes inside and outside the VP. Nordlyd 32 (2): 205–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szpyra, Jolanta. 1992. Ghost segments in nonlinear phonology: Polish yers. Language 68 (2): 277–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tranel, Bernard. 1999. Optional schwa deletion: On syllable economy in French. In Formal perspectives on Romance linguistics, eds. J. Marc Authier, Barbara E. Bullock, and Lisa A. Reed, 271–288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ukiah, Nick. 1998. Stress retraction in phrases of the type na den’, za sorok, ne byl in Modern Russian. Russian Linguistics 22 (3): 287–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbanczyk, Suzanne. 1996. Patterns of Reduplication in Lushootseed. PhD diss, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.

  • van Eijk, Jan. 1997. The Lillooet language: Phonology, morphology, syntax. Vancouver: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasmer, Max. 1958. Russisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg: C. Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlasto, A. P. 1986. A linguistic history of Russia at the end of the eighteenth century. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, Terence. 1992. A comprehensive Russian grammar. Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, Matthew. 2007. For an autosegmental theory of mutation. In UMOP 32: Papers in optimality theory III, eds. Leah Bateman, Michael O’Keefe, Ehren Reilly, and Adam Werle, 239–258. Amherst: GLSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, Matthew. 2008. Optimal interleaving: Serial phonology-morphology interaction in a constraint-based model. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA.

  • Yearley, Jennifer. 1995. Jer vowels in Russian. In Papers in Optimality Theory II (University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics), eds. Jill Beckman, Laura Walsh Dickey, and Suzanne Urbanczyk, 533–571. Amherst: GLSA Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaliznjak, Andrej Anatoljevich. 1977. Grammatičeskij slovar’ russkogo jazyka [a grammatical dictionary of the Russian language]. Moscow: Russkij Jazyk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaliznjak, Andrej Anatoljevich. 1985. Ot praslavjanskoj akcentuacii k russkoj [from Proto-Slavic to Russian accentuation]. Moscow: Nauka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zec, Draga. 2002. The role of prosody in morphologically governed phonotactic regularities. In Working papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 14, 250–277. Ithaca: Cornell Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoll, Cheryl. 1996. Parsing below the Segment in a Constraint-based Framework. PhD diss, University of California, Berkeley. Available on the Rutgers Optimality Archive as ROA-143, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Zoll, Cheryl. 1998. Positional asymmetries and licensing. Manuscript, Cambridge, MA. Available as ROA-282 on the Rutgers Optimality Archive, http://roa.rutgers.edu.

  • Zonneveld, Wim. 1978. A formal theory of exceptions in generative phonology. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. New York University, 10 Washington Place, New York, NY, 10003, USA

    Maria Gouskova

Authors
  1. Maria Gouskova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Gouskova.

Additional information

I would like to thank Christina Bethin, Andrew Canariato, Peter Jurgec, Shigeto Kawahara, Wendell Kimper, John Kingston, Martin Krämer, John McCarthy, Bruce Morén-Duolljá, Tore Nesset, Joe Pater, Kathryn Pruitt, Amanda Rysling, Dragana Šurkalovič, Lisa Selkirk, Peter Svenonius, Igor Yanovich, Chris Wolfe, Draga Zec, the audiences at the UMass PhiG, CASTL-Tromsø, MIT, and Eastern Michigan University, and three anonymous NLLT reviewers and Junko Ito for helpful feedback on this work. I owe special thanks to Michael Becker for extensive discussion of various issues in the paper. The errors are all mine.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gouskova, M. Unexceptional segments. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 30, 79–133 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9142-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9142-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation