Rhythmic Vowel Deletion in Optimality Theory

Abstract

Abstract A challenge to any theory of phonology is to reconcile two radically different kinds of interaction: conspiracy and opacity. A conspiracy is a situation in which independent processes interact in such a way that they create a uniform pattern in surface forms. In contrast, opacity is an interaction by which one process obscures the context of application of another process—resulting in a loss of transparency in the surface form. One of the principal reasons for which rule-based theory has recently come under attack is that it offers no satisfactory explanation for conspiracies. Rule-based theory fails in this respect, since it states generalizations in the form of structural descriptions, which are checked against representations at various steps during a serial derivation. All that is relevant for rule application is that some representation matches the context of a rule at the point in the derivation at which that rule applies. In this view the level of the output is no more privileged than any intermediary level. In contrast, Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky, 1993; McCarthy and Prince, 1993b) defines grammatical well-formedness as the result of an interaction of conflicting constraints on surface forms, thus abandoning the concept of ordered rules. Focusing on the output allows a more principled explanation of conspiracies. In OT, a convergence to surface patterns is the expected situation, since the output is the single level at which generalizations can be stated.