Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cadre!pitt!unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu!jmast From: jmast@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (John M Allen) Newsgroups: sci.lang,comp.cog-eng,sci.psychology Subject: Re: Regional accents (was: Spelling and Perceptual Mode) Keywords: GB Shaw, orthography Message-ID: <18156@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu> Date: 23 May 89 03:19:36 GMT References: <2763@puff.cs.wisc.edu> <60340@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> <11726@bcsaic.UUCP> <5@minya.UUCP> <3368@tank.uchicago.edu> Reply-To: jmast@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (John M Allen) Distribution: na Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh, Comp & Info Sys Lines: 87 Xref: utzoo sci.lang:4599 comp.cog-eng:1143 sci.psychology:1968 In article <3368@tank.uchicago.edu> goer@sophist.UUCP (Richard Goerwitz) writes: >The assumption here seems to be, e.g.: > > /bar/ [ba:] > >because the /r/ is realized as [r] in forms like "barring." > [...] > How do we know that "bar" and "barring" >represent divergent hypostases of a single underlying form (in the >Platonic sense)? Why not have speakers simply lexicalize the relation- >ship? There are several reasons that a single common base form is prefered over several forms related by rules, but the most important one is memory size. Humans have a large but finite amount of memory. If you assume that humans store a single lexical form for regualar words and all of the spoken forms are derived by a small number of rules then you have a fairly small memory load. On the other hand if you store all possible forms that a word might have the memory load is dramatically increased because each morpheme may have several different morphophonemic shapes. Consider the following data from Russian verbs. According to one analysis, there are several rules that operate on verbs. 1) vocalization. A nasal between two consonants will change to "a". z^m + t' ==> z^at' z^m + u ==> z^mu 2) sonorant deletion. A sonorant, [n,m,j,v], at the end of a root is deleted when the suffix begins with a consonant. znaj + t' ==> znat' znaj + u ==> znaju 3) palatalization. Some of the verbal endings palatalize the preceding consonant. z^m + u ==> z^mu z^m + om ==> z^m'om Now comparing the two hypotheses. Base+Rules Lexicalization Cumulative Cumulative Forms Total Forms Total --------------------------------------------------------------------- Rules 3 0 z^m z^m 4 z^a,z^m,z^m' 3 `press' znaj znaj 5 zna,znaj 5 `know' nac^n nac^n 6 nac^a,nac^n,nac^n' 8 `learn' z^iv z^iv 7 z^i,z^iv,z^iv' 11 `live' As you can see with only four words, the lexical approach takes more space than derivations from a base. Furthermore, every Russian verb has as least two different morphophonemic shape under this analysis, so the difference will continue to increase as you add more verbs to the lexicon. Another reason that the single form is preferred is that many alternations are automatic. If you give a person a new word in some form and ask for the same word in another form, they will apply all the appropriate rules. This is very difficult to explain using a lexical approach because the person could not have heard the form before and thus could not have stored it. The rule based approach has no problem explaining this. Finally, lexicalized items tend to resist change. If every word had all of its forms lexicalized, then we would expect many more exceptions to the morphophonemic rules than there are. The rule based approach simply changes the rule in the appropriate way. > -Richard L. Goerwitz \ | | John Allen \ \ || allen@mercutio.lcl.cmu.edu / \ formerly allen@mercurio.lcl.cmu.edu jmast@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu "The bond that links your true family is not one of blood, but of respect and joy in each other's life. Rarely do members of one family grow up under the same roof." -Richard Bach, _Illusions_