Outputoutput correspondence

1
Output-output correspondence

• Phonology-morphology interface
• Level-related affixation
• Reduplication
• Hypochoristics
• Gradient attraction
• Syntax-morphology interface
• Case
• Passive morphology
• ECM constructions
• Coordinate structures

2
Output-output correspondence

• Output-output correspondence was introduced by
  McCarthy Prince (1995) to account for
  morphologically-based phonological effects.
• Instead of taking an input as a reference, a
  morphological operation applies to a ready
  output, a form which has already been through
  phonology.
• Faithfulness to input is ranked differently than
  correspondence between two outputs.

3
Output-output correspondence

• Definition of Correspondence (McCarthy Prince
  1995262)
• Given two strings S1 and S2, correspondence is
  a relation R between the elements of S1 and those
  of S2. When a R b, the elements a of S1 and b
  of S2 are called correspondents of each other.

4

• The notion of correspondence is vague. The
  correspon-dence relation takes its substance from
  a series of constraints implementing the kind of
  relation needed in each case
• MAX (no deletion), DEP (no epenthesis)
• Additional constraints are
• IDENT(F), LINEARITY (saying something about the
  ordering of the elements) CONTIGUITY (saying
  something about the adjacency of elements),
  ANCHOR-Edge (about the edges of the corresponding
  elements), HEAD-MATCH (if one of the
  correspondent has a head, its correspondent has
  the same head), etc.

5
Input-Output faithfulness and Output-Output
correspondence

• Input
• (full model)
• F C
• Output1 Output2
• Prediction of the Correspondence Theory
• IO-Faith gtgt Prosodic Constraints gtgt OO-Faith/Corr
  
• or
• OO-Faith/Corr gtgt Prosodic Constraints gtgt IO-Faith
  
• Relations betw. Input and Output2 are assumed to
  be rare.

6
Correspondence
7
1. Reduplication

• Reduplication is a morphological operation (often
  plural, iterative, habituative, intensifier )
  consisting in copying (reduplicating part or
  whole of a stem). According to McCarthy Prince,
  only authentic prosodic constituents
  (syllables, feet, prosodic words) can be
  reduplicants.
• Ilokano Reduplicant Template Heavy syllable
  (McCarthy Prince 1995)
• s
• / \
• m m

8
Reduplication in Ilokano

• Reduplicant consists of a closed syllable
• tra.ba.ho trab - tra.ba.ho work
• Red Stem
• Reduplicant consists of a syllable with a long
  vowel
• róot ro - róot litter
• Red Stem

9
Reduplication

• Lardil Reduplicant Templates (McCarthy Prince
  1995) Binary feet
• F F
• / \
• s s s
• / \
• m m

10
Reduplication in Lardil

• Reduplicant consists of two syllables
• kele-th kele kele-kele to cut
• pareli-th pareli parel-pareli to gather
• Reduplicant consists of a heavy syllable
• la-th latha laa-la to guide
• aali-th aali aal-aali to be
  thirsty

11
Why does reduplication needs OO-correspondence?

• In some languages, the segmental make-up
  (so-called melody, a misnomer) of the reduplicant
  copies the segmental make-up of the full form,
  rather than taking its raw material from the
  input. Two cases
• - overapplication a phonological process has
  seemed to apply, though its context of
  application is not visible at the surface
  (non-surface apparent)
• - underapplication a phonological process does
  not apply, though its context of application is
  present at the surface (non-surface true)

12
Overapplication

• In Javanese, there is a process of h-deletion
  taking place intervocally
• Javanese h-deletion
• Root Rootmy RootDem.
• anh anh-ku an-e strange
• arah arah-ku ara-e direction

13
Overapplication

• In reduplication this process takes also place in
  environements other than intervocalic. The
  phonological result of h-deletion is copied from
  the base to the reduplicant.
• Reduplication Overapplication of h-deletion
• bedah bedah-bedah beda-beda-e broken
• dajøh dajøh-dajøh dajø-dajø-e guest

14
Underapplication

• In Akan, there is a process of palatalization.
  Coronals are affricated before a front vowel, and
  /h/ is realized as a palatal fricative.
• Palatalization in Akan
• t? k divide
• d?e de receive
• çi hi border

15
Underapplication

• In reduplication, though the vowel of the
  reduplicant is always i, no palatalization
  takes place. The consonant of the base is
  faithfully copied.
• Reduplication
• ki-ka t?i-ka bite
• hi-haw çi-haw trouble

16
2. Different levels of affixation

• It has been observed that affixes appear in a
  certain order, and that they behave as classes of
  affixes w.r.t. this property.
• In English, besides other morphological
  operations like compounding and inflection, two
  levels of derivational affixation have been
  described.
• - Level I affixes which influence the phonology
  of the stem -ic, -ation, -al
• - Level II affixes which do not -less, -ness,
  -y, -ing

17

• - Level II affixes are peripheral to Level I
  affixes.
• (but see Fabb 1988 who showed that more
  restrictions are at play than just ordering)
• To account for this, Kiparsky, Mohanan and others
  developed a model of Lexical Phonology, in which
  morphology and phonology are interleaved
• Some morphology applies (level I affixation),
  then phonology. Phonology consists of a set of
  ordered rules.
• After completion of phonology, some more
  morphology applies (level II affixation), then
  the whole phonology applies again.

18

• Level II phonology has no access to morphological
  information provided at earlier levels (and
  vice-versa) we thus have a cyclic model of the
  morphology-phonology interactions (but see
  Mohanan who allows loops in Malayalam).
• When all levels have been completed (there may be
  more than two), the so-called post-lexical
  phonology applies, which is the sentence-level
  phonology. This phonology is automatic, applies
  in all contexts, and doesnt care about levels.
  Final Devoicing in German is an example of this
  type.

19
Why does affixation needs OO-correspondence?

• OT has problems with the results of Lexical
  Phonology.
• It can replace the set of ordered rules inside of
  each level, but the levels themselves are more
  difficult to account for.
• Some examples

20
Why does affixation needs OO-correspondence?

• Level ordering of affixes (Benua 1995) New
  York-Philadelphia dialects (æ-tensing E is
  tense)
• Unaffixed Class 1 Affix Class 2 Affix
• class klEs classic klæ.sik classy klE.si
• mass mEs massive mæ.sv massable mæ.s-
• pass pEs passive pæ.sv passing pæ.s

21
Why does affixation needs OO-correspondence?

• A standard kind of OT cannot account for the
  different vowel in the stem of these words, due
  to the different kind of affixation.
• The alternation between the two kinds of vowels
  is due to syllabification Benua has the
  following constraint
• æ-tensing (æCs)
• This constraint cannot be ranked as to deliver
  all forms properly.

22

• Benua (1995) proposes to account for level II
  affixes with correspondence to related outputs,
  in the examples above class, pass, and so on.
• Level I affixes take the input as input, and
  level II affixes take the output of class and
  pass as inputs.
• The faithfulness to the output, when relevant, is
  assumed to be greater than the faithfulness to
  the input. This explains why level II affixes do
  not trigger much phonological changes in the
  stem.

23

24

• A second example of Benua
• condemn/ condemnation / condemning
• -ation is a class 1 suffix and takes the input as
  base
• -ing is a class 2 suffix and takes the output as
  base

25

26

27

28
3. Hypochoristics

• A third kind of morphological process for which
  OO-correspondence has been assumed is
  hypochoristic formation.
• A first example comes from the i-formation in
  German which consist of a syllabic trochee, the
  unmarked (but not the minimal foot) of German
• Prosodic Constraint on German i-formations
• i-formations F s's

29

• Katharína gt Káthi Tóm gtTómmi
• Bénjamin gt Bénni Úlrich gt Úlli
• Klínsmann gt Klínsi Hirn gt Hirni
• Andréas gt Ándi Gabriéle gt Gábi
• Mánfred gt Mánni Wáltraud gt Wálli
• Wílhelm gt Wílli Cornélia gt Cónni
• Wést/Ostdeutscher gt Wéssi / Óssi

30

• Many languages build hypochoristics in a similar
  way.
• Prosodic Constraint in French
• Hypocoristics F s or ss'
• True hypochoristics
• Véronique Véro
• Dominique Domi, Dom, Do
• Bénédicte Béné
• Elisabeth Zabeth, Babé, Babette, Beth

31

• French also has
• Reduplications (Echo-words) s s'
• /\
• (C)V
• père gt pépère, ours gt nounours, main gt
  main-main
• The input to these reduplications is a
  monosyllabic word.
• But the syllabification is not part of the input
  it is an added structure pointing to the fact
  that these reduplications are faithful to an
  output rather than to an input.

32

• IO-Faithfulness gtgt Prosodic Constraints gtgt
  BT-Faithfulness
• The emergence of the unmarked (TETU) is a
  landmark of this pattern. The prosodic
  constraints in the middle are responsible for the
  unmarked pattern of the language bisyllabic
  foot, trochaic pattern, open syllables

33

• If the relation between input and output is
  active, the unmarked form has no chance to
  emerge, since all kinds of inputs are there, and
  faithfulness is high.
• But the forms entering the relation OO have a
  chance to emerge as unmarked, since the prosodic
  constraints are higher.
• Trochaic feet (iambic in the case of French, open
  syllables and the like) emerge.

34

• Conclusion and open problems
• 1. Since correspondence is a vague notion, all
  kinds of forms should be able to enter into a
  correspondence relation. How can we delimit the
  desirable correspondence relations from the
  undesirable ones?
• 2. OO-constraints lead to an explosion of the
  constraints.
• 3. OO-correspondence needs an existing output in
  order to be workable. In some cases, surface
  forms seem to be faithful to a form which is
  never realized as an output. In those cases, we
  have opacity.

35

• Conclusion and open problems
• 4. Lexical Phonology, as well as all models using
  ordered rules have no problems with opacity. The
  existence of intermediate forms, neither inputs
  nor outputs, is a natural consequence of rule
  ordering.
• 5. OT has big problems with those. Since no
  derivation enters phonology, no intermediate step
  should ever be needed.
• 6. We will see later on that alternative
  solutions have been offered to the opacity
  problem.

36
Gradient attraction

• If output output correspondence is needed anyway,
  why not treat all kinds of morphological
  relationships as output-output correpondences?
• This is the step taken by Burzio (to appear) in
  his Gradient Attraction theory.
• Burzio claims that similar (output)
  representations attract each other and that they
  do so gradiently. The more similar they are, the
  greater the attraction.

37

• Modified OT (Burzio, to appear)
• other representations
• Input gt Grammar gt Output
• The other representations are forms which are
  related in terms of morphemic parenthood or of
  analogy.

38

• Gradient attraction
• Allomorphs consist to a large extent of the same
  segmental material and have (partly) the same
  semantic representation.
• But they also contrast with each other in order
  to keep their distinctness (Flemmings dispersion
  theory)
• Gradient attraction is different from
  output-output correspondence. One of the reasons
  os that allophonic variations of complex words
  can be triggered not only by the stem but also by
  the affix(es).

39

• Examples
• Stress position 1 titánic is attracted not only
  by títan but also by barbáric and dynámic
• Stress position 2 módernist is influenced by
  módern and not by the one of modérnity, because
  -ist adjoins only to adjectival bases.

40

• Segmental alternation allophony of french gros,
  grosse and gros fat with liaison.
• According to Burzio, the third form is attracted
  by both other forms, takes its vowel quality from
  the feminine form and its consonant from the
  masculine (both facts are unfortunately wrong!
  The vowel quality is always the same, and the
  liaison consonant is voiced.)
• Steriade cites a much better example also from
  French an adjective like ancien old has three
  allomorphs ãsj, ãsjn and ãsjn. The
  liaison case takes ist vowel quality from the
  masculine and ist vowel from the feminine.

41
OO-Correspondence in Syntax?

• With syntax, there seems to be little compelling
  evidence for the need for output-output
  correspondence.
• Possible evidence for OO-correspondence in the
  syntax comes from at least two domains
• the syntax-morphology interaction
• coordinate structures

42
Syntax-Morphology Interaction

• Alternations that affect grammatical functions
  tend to minimize differences among the various
  construction types
• In a representational model, this suggests an
  influence of OO-correspondence.
• One case in point is the rule for Case marking in
  the German passive

43
Case rules for the active clause

• Nom NPs bear nominative case
• Acc NPs that are not the highest argument
  bear accusative case
• Dat NPs that are neither the highest nor the
  lowest argument bear dative case
• Uniqueness, etc.

44
Case rules for the active clause

• Er kommt nom
• he comes
• er sieht ihn nom acc
• he sees him
• er gibt ihr es nom dat acc
• he gives it to her

45
Case rules in the passive

• What we find
• Es wird ihr gegeben
• it-nom is her-dat given
• What we should get
• sie wird es gegeben
• she-nom is it given

46
Case rules in the passive

• A possible account
• Maximize faithfulness between the active and the
  corresponding passive!
• (00-correspondence)
• The Alternative Rule Ordering
• 1. Case potential is determined
• e.g. by a lexical rule
• 2. Absorption of the accusative
• e.g. late in the syntax

47
Case rules in other constructions

• Similar ideas can be applied to
• Complex predicates (retaining the Case of the
  preposition)
• jemanden anwinken
• someone.acc at-wave
• jemandem zuwinken
• someone.dat to-wave
• but ... is this OO?

48
Case agreement 1

• ECM-constructions and Case Agreement interact in
  a fashion that may also be understood in terms of
  OO-correspondence
• Case Agreement of some predicate nominals
• Ich bin ein Esel
• I-nom am a-nom donkey
• ich bleibe ein Esel
• I-nom remain a-nom donkey

49
Case agreement 2

• Case Agreement of adverbials
• er grüsst die Männer einen nach dem anderen
• he greets the-acc men one-acc after the other
• die Männer grüssen ihn einer nach dem anderen
• the men greet him one-nom after the other

50
Case agreement 3

• Predicates and some adverbs may take over the
  Case of the noun phrase they are linked to in
  terms of semantics ...
• For ECM-constructions, we expect Case agreeing
  expressions to always take over the Case of the
  NP they are linked to.

51
Case agreement in ECM-contexts

• But there seem to be two dialects
• 1. Ich lasse ihn einen Helden sein
• I let him-acc an-acc hero be
• 2. Ich lasse ihn ein Held sein
• I let him-acc an-nom hero-nom be
• 1. Agreement maintained
• 2. Nominative maintained

52
Case agreement in ECM-contexts

• 1. Ich lasse die Männer einen nach dem anderen
  ankommen
• I have the men one-acc after the other arrive
• 2. Ich lasse die Männer einer nach dem anderen
  ankommen
• I have the men one-nom after the other arrive

53
Case agreement in ECM-contexts

• Solution 1
• OO-Correspondence between the finite clause and
  the infinitive
• Solution 2
• Case determination before nom gt acc change in the
  subject position of the infinitive

54
Summary

• The Case effects described so far may either be
  interpreted as being due to
• OO-correspondence
• lexical determination of Case, followed by a
  syntax-triggered change
• more complex Case rules

55
Parallelism in coordinate structures

• It may thus make more sense to look at a
  construction type that bears some vague
  resemblance to reduplication --- conjunctions.
• In principle, the two parts of a coordination
  construction are fairly independent of each other
  ...
• .... this changes when they are affected by a
  reduction operation.

56
Parallelism in coordinate structures

• Scope is a very interesting example for this.
• Independent
• I introduced one of the boys to every teacher
• is scope-ambiguous
• ONE gt EVERY
• EVERY gt ONE

57
Parallelism in coordinate structures

• I introduced one of the boys to every teacher,
  and Bill did, too
• involving a reducing coordination, is
• two-ways ambiguous, NOT four ways, as one might
  expect!

58
Parallelism in coordinate structures

• More examples
• an American runner seems to have won a gold
  medal, and a Russian athlete does, too
• the two indefinite NPs agree w.r.t. specificity
• one guard was seen in front of every building,
  and a policeman was, too.

59
Parallelism in coordinate structures

• In an ellipsis/coordination reduction
  construction, the scope relations among the
  elements in clause A must be identical to the
  ones in clause B.
• In the Y-model of grammar, in which
• phonology and semantics do not communicate, this
  is difficult to account for.

60
Parallelism in coordinate structures

• Across-the-board rule application was invented in
  order to account for such facts.
• Who did you meet t and invite t
• The parallelism facts fit neatly into
  OO-correspondence, however.

61
A special form of OO-correspondence

• Perhaps, quite a different concept of
  OO-correspondence is called for in syntax ...
• Many syntactic approaches assume more than one
  level of representation ...
• Surface structure
• Logical Form
• Argument Structure

62
A special form of OO-correspondence

• It has been observed that UG tries to minimize
  differences between these levels.
• This economy of derivation may reflect
  OO-correspondence between different levels.

63
A special form of OO-correspondence

• From a single input, two, three or more of such
  representations are generated.
• Minimal Link (superiority) effects may reflect
  the attempt to minimize structural differences
  between lor.s (Müller, Williams)

64
MLC 1

• Who do you expect to say what
• what do you expect who to say
• More relations of the pre-movement/declarative
  structure are preserved in the former example
• koj kogo mili who what saw

65
MLC 2

• In the clitic (Wackernagel) position
• weil er es ihr gibt
• because he it her gives
• pronoun order has been claimed to be identical to
  base order ...