Complex constraints and linguistic typology in Optimality Theory

Haruka Fukazawa, Linda Lombardi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In Optimality Theory it is possible to construct complex constraints from simpler elements. The question arises as to how far we can simplify the content of UG by decomposing complex constraints in this way. In this paper we argue that although the goal of a simple UG without overproliferation of constraints may be valid, it should not come at the expense of correct typological predictions. We show that incorrect cross-linguistic predictions are made if certain constraints are considered to be constructed from primitive elements. These incorrect predictions can be eliminated if we place certain restrictions on constraint conjunction and therefore must assume that the constraints in question are part of UG in their complex form. We will discuss the issues of the phonetic motivation for complex constraints and of distinguishing the universal from the language-specific.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)195-215
Number of pages21
JournalLinguistic Review
Volume20
Issue number2-4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2003 Nov 19
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

typology
linguistics
Linguistic Typology
Prediction
Optimality Theory
phonetics
language
Language

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Complex constraints and linguistic typology in Optimality Theory. / Fukazawa, Haruka; Lombardi, Linda.

In: Linguistic Review, Vol. 20, No. 2-4, 19.11.2003, p. 195-215.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fukazawa, Haruka ; Lombardi, Linda. / Complex constraints and linguistic typology in Optimality Theory. In: Linguistic Review. 2003 ; Vol. 20, No. 2-4. pp. 195-215.
@article{a0554f43baea4728ac3efa0fa27c2da8,
title = "Complex constraints and linguistic typology in Optimality Theory",
abstract = "In Optimality Theory it is possible to construct complex constraints from simpler elements. The question arises as to how far we can simplify the content of UG by decomposing complex constraints in this way. In this paper we argue that although the goal of a simple UG without overproliferation of constraints may be valid, it should not come at the expense of correct typological predictions. We show that incorrect cross-linguistic predictions are made if certain constraints are considered to be constructed from primitive elements. These incorrect predictions can be eliminated if we place certain restrictions on constraint conjunction and therefore must assume that the constraints in question are part of UG in their complex form. We will discuss the issues of the phonetic motivation for complex constraints and of distinguishing the universal from the language-specific.",
author = "Haruka Fukazawa and Linda Lombardi",
year = "2003",
month = "11",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1515/tlir.2003.008",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "195--215",
journal = "Linguistic Review",
issn = "0167-6318",
publisher = "Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG",
number = "2-4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Complex constraints and linguistic typology in Optimality Theory

AU - Fukazawa, Haruka

AU - Lombardi, Linda

PY - 2003/11/19

Y1 - 2003/11/19

N2 - In Optimality Theory it is possible to construct complex constraints from simpler elements. The question arises as to how far we can simplify the content of UG by decomposing complex constraints in this way. In this paper we argue that although the goal of a simple UG without overproliferation of constraints may be valid, it should not come at the expense of correct typological predictions. We show that incorrect cross-linguistic predictions are made if certain constraints are considered to be constructed from primitive elements. These incorrect predictions can be eliminated if we place certain restrictions on constraint conjunction and therefore must assume that the constraints in question are part of UG in their complex form. We will discuss the issues of the phonetic motivation for complex constraints and of distinguishing the universal from the language-specific.

AB - In Optimality Theory it is possible to construct complex constraints from simpler elements. The question arises as to how far we can simplify the content of UG by decomposing complex constraints in this way. In this paper we argue that although the goal of a simple UG without overproliferation of constraints may be valid, it should not come at the expense of correct typological predictions. We show that incorrect cross-linguistic predictions are made if certain constraints are considered to be constructed from primitive elements. These incorrect predictions can be eliminated if we place certain restrictions on constraint conjunction and therefore must assume that the constraints in question are part of UG in their complex form. We will discuss the issues of the phonetic motivation for complex constraints and of distinguishing the universal from the language-specific.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34248716517&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34248716517&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1515/tlir.2003.008

DO - 10.1515/tlir.2003.008

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:34248716517

VL - 20

SP - 195

EP - 215

JO - Linguistic Review

JF - Linguistic Review

SN - 0167-6318

IS - 2-4

ER -