Derivational restrictions on dorsals in Tundra Nenets Peter - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
derivational restrictions on dorsals in tundra nenets
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Derivational restrictions on dorsals in Tundra Nenets Peter - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 05, 2023 164 likes •830 views

Derivational restrictions on dorsals in Tundra Nenets Peter Staroverov Wayne State University September 30, 2017 Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 1 / 46 Overview Overview 1 Background on Tundra Nenets 2 Problem 3

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Derivational restrictions on dorsals in Tundra Nenets

Peter Staroverov

Wayne State University

September 30, 2017

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 1 / 46

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Overview

1

Overview

2

Background on Tundra Nenets

3

Problem

4

Analysis

5

Conclusion

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 2 / 46

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Overview

Overview

Input restrictions are inherently problematic for OT

(Prince & Smolensky, 2004) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 3 / 46

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Overview

Overview

Input restrictions are inherently problematic for OT

(Prince & Smolensky, 2004)

But input restrictions are necessary

(Rasin & Katzir, 2017) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 3 / 46

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Overview

Overview

Input restrictions are inherently problematic for OT

(Prince & Smolensky, 2004)

But input restrictions are necessary

(Rasin & Katzir, 2017)

They provide insight into two problems with Tundra Nenets dorsals

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 3 / 46

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Overview

Overview

Input restrictions are inherently problematic for OT

(Prince & Smolensky, 2004)

But input restrictions are necessary

(Rasin & Katzir, 2017)

They provide insight into two problems with Tundra Nenets dorsals Derivational solution within Stratal OT

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 3 / 46

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Overview

Overview

Input restrictions are inherently problematic for OT

(Prince & Smolensky, 2004)

But input restrictions are necessary

(Rasin & Katzir, 2017)

They provide insight into two problems with Tundra Nenets dorsals Derivational solution within Stratal OT Opaque distributional generalizations as stem-level output constraints

(Kiparsky, 2000; Bermúdez-Otero, 2001) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 3 / 46

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Background on Tundra Nenets

1

Overview

2

Background on Tundra Nenets

3

Problem

4

Analysis

5

Conclusion

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 4 / 46

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Background on Tundra Nenets

Two data sources

Fieldwork on a Western dialect of TN (joint with Darya Kavitskaya) Corpus of recorded texts

Nikolaeva (2014) and larkpie.net/siberianlanguages/

The patterns we identify match what’s reported in the published sources

(Janhunen, 1986; Salminen, 1997, 2012; Nikolaeva, 2014) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 5 / 46

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Background on Tundra Nenets

Surface vowel inventory

i i; u u; e

  • 2

a ‘Null vowel’ written as < ◦ > Realized as an over-short reduced vowel or release of a consonant (or not at all) Results from a vowel reduction process, roughly: /2/ → ◦ in unstressed syllables

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 6 / 46

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Background on Tundra Nenets

Surface consonant inventory

labial coronal dorsal glottal stop p pj b bj t tj d dj k g P fricative s sjz zj x xj nasal m mj n nj N affricate ts tsj liquid l lj r rj glide w wj j

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 7 / 46

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Background on Tundra Nenets

Syllable structure

CV(CC) complex codas very limited: C+P (for certain Cs only)

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 8 / 46

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Background on Tundra Nenets

TN: levels

Most alternations that we will be talking about occur in phrasal phonology Within words Across word boundaries within the same phrase (esp. in casual speech style)

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 9 / 46

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Problem

1

Overview

2

Background on Tundra Nenets

3

Problem

4

Analysis

5

Conclusion

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 10 / 46

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Problem

Phrase-initial position

p pj t tj k x # V

  • *
  • No syllable-initial clusters (so # C is impossible)

No [k] phrase-initially This pattern is challenging since cross-linguistically initial position is known to favor preservation of contrasts

Beckman (1998); Casali (1996) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 11 / 46

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Problem

Initial obstruents: borrowed [k] adapted as [x]

p pj t tj k x # V

  • *
  • (1)

Phrase-initial obstruents: a. [pedara] ‘forest’ [ti] ‘reindeer’ b. [xos◦ka] ‘cat’ from Russian ["koSk@] [xjino] ‘cinema’ from Russian ["kji"no]

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 12 / 46

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Problem

Post-consonant strengthening: /x/ → [k]

/x/ strengthens to [k] after a consonant /s/ also strengthens to [ts] (examples not shown) (2) Post-consonant strengthening /jar-x2na/ → [jark◦na] ‘side-loc.sg’ ‘at the side’

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 13 / 46

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Problem

Voicing and postvocalic obstruents: overview

[p pj t tj] are voiced after a vowel, whereas [k] shows no similar alternations An instance of an unnatural class

Mielke (2008)

We’d need a disjunction ‘coronal or labial’ to characterize the undergoers of voicing

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 14 / 46

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Problem

Voicing for coronal and labial stops: examples

(3) Post-vocalic voicing (no similar alternations for [k]) a. Voiced stops after a vowel /ja-ta/ [jada] ‘earth-poss.sg3sg’ ‘his earth’ /mjarjoj2 p2ni2-naP/ [mjarjoj◦ b2ni:naP] ‘bald garment-poss.pl1pl’ ‘our bald garments’ b. Voiceless stops elsewhere /jar-ta/ [jarta] side-poss.sg3sg ‘his side’ /p2ni2/ [p2ni:] garment ‘garment’

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 15 / 46

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Problem

Status of [g]

[g] is allowed in TN, but only after nasals where all obstruents are voiced and strengthened We won’t focus on NC effects here, but it’s important to explain why postvocalic voicing does not produce [g]

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 16 / 46

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Problem

An aside on cluster simplification

Underlying clusters escape voicing, deriving surface post-vocalic [p t k]

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 17 / 46

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Problem

An aside on cluster simplification

Underlying clusters escape voicing, deriving surface post-vocalic [p t k] Although I won’t exemplify all aspects of cluster simplification, we need an overview

Staroverov & Kavitskaya (2017) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 17 / 46

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Problem

An aside on cluster simplification

Underlying clusters escape voicing, deriving surface post-vocalic [p t k] Although I won’t exemplify all aspects of cluster simplification, we need an overview

Staroverov & Kavitskaya (2017)

All syllables must end in a placeless consonant, |P| or |N|, at a certain point in derivation

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 17 / 46

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Problem

An aside on cluster simplification

Underlying clusters escape voicing, deriving surface post-vocalic [p t k] Although I won’t exemplify all aspects of cluster simplification, we need an overview

Staroverov & Kavitskaya (2017)

All syllables must end in a placeless consonant, |P| or |N|, at a certain point in derivation Some consonants lose place to meet this requirement

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 17 / 46

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Problem

An aside on cluster simplification

Underlying clusters escape voicing, deriving surface post-vocalic [p t k] Although I won’t exemplify all aspects of cluster simplification, we need an overview

Staroverov & Kavitskaya (2017)

All syllables must end in a placeless consonant, |P| or |N|, at a certain point in derivation Some consonants lose place to meet this requirement Others add an inserted [P]

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 17 / 46

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Problem

An aside on cluster simplification

Underlying clusters escape voicing, deriving surface post-vocalic [p t k] Although I won’t exemplify all aspects of cluster simplification, we need an overview

Staroverov & Kavitskaya (2017)

All syllables must end in a placeless consonant, |P| or |N|, at a certain point in derivation Some consonants lose place to meet this requirement Others add an inserted [P] P or N later coalesce with a following C, if there’s a suitable target

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 17 / 46

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Problem

Cluster simplification: an example

Derivation: /s2s-sj2/ → |s2P-sj◦| → s2tsj◦ ‘be strong-ger.mod’ Place loss introduces [–cont] values

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 18 / 46

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Problem

Cluster simplification: an example

Derivation: /s2s-sj2/ → |s2P-sj◦| → s2tsj◦ ‘be strong-ger.mod’ Place loss introduces [–cont] values Second step is a single coalescence mapping: |P1s2| → [ts1,2]

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 18 / 46

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Problem

Cluster simplification: an example

Derivation: /s2s-sj2/ → |s2P-sj◦| → s2tsj◦ ‘be strong-ger.mod’ Place loss introduces [–cont] values Second step is a single coalescence mapping: |P1s2| → [ts1,2] Coalescence analysis matches what we know independently about morphological domains and process ordering in TN

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 18 / 46

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Problem

Cluster simplification: an example

Derivation: /s2s-sj2/ → |s2P-sj◦| → s2tsj◦ ‘be strong-ger.mod’ Place loss introduces [–cont] values Second step is a single coalescence mapping: |P1s2| → [ts1,2] Coalescence analysis matches what we know independently about morphological domains and process ordering in TN Strengthening + deletion analysis (|Ps| → |Pts| → [ts]) doesn’t match independent evidence of process ordering

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 18 / 46

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Problem

Voicing blocked when cluster simplification happens

Underlying obstruent clusters surface as voiceless singletons (4) Cluster simplification and lack of voicing /mjat-ta/ → |mjaPta| → [mjata], *[mjada] ‘tent-poss.sg3sg’ ‘his tent’ /mjis-p2-/ → |mjiPp2-| → [mjip2-], *[mjib2-] ‘give-dur’ ‘be giving’

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 19 / 46

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Problem

Cluster simplification and strengthening: [k] from /x/

[k] doesn’t undergo voicing

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 20 / 46

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Problem

Cluster simplification and strengthening: [k] from /x/

[k] doesn’t undergo voicing [k] derives from underlying /x/ via strengthening

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 20 / 46

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Problem

Cluster simplification and strengthening: [k] from /x/

[k] doesn’t undergo voicing [k] derives from underlying /x/ via strengthening Strengthening may be accompanied by cluster simplification

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 20 / 46

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Problem

Cluster simplification and strengthening: [k] from /x/

[k] doesn’t undergo voicing [k] derives from underlying /x/ via strengthening Strengthening may be accompanied by cluster simplification Lack of voicing is parallel to other underlying clusters

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 20 / 46

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Problem

Cluster simplification and strengthening: [k] from /x/

[k] doesn’t undergo voicing [k] derives from underlying /x/ via strengthening Strengthening may be accompanied by cluster simplification Lack of voicing is parallel to other underlying clusters There are also examples of non-alternating intervocalic [k]

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 20 / 46

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Problem

Cluster simplification and strengthening: [k] from /x/

[k] doesn’t undergo voicing [k] derives from underlying /x/ via strengthening Strengthening may be accompanied by cluster simplification Lack of voicing is parallel to other underlying clusters There are also examples of non-alternating intervocalic [k] (5) Intervocalic [k] a. At a morpheme boundary: alternates with [x] /mjat-x2na/ → |mjaPx◦na| → [mjak◦na], *[mjag◦na] ‘tent-loc.sg’ ‘in/at the tent’ b. Non-alternating intervocalic [k] [wenjeko] ‘dog’; [tjuku] ‘this’

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 20 / 46

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Problem

Summary: voicing and onsets

p pj t tj k x # V

  • *
  • V V
  • C V
  • *

Phrase-initial [k] adapted as [x] in loanwords Intervocalic [k] alternates with /C+x/ All surface [k]s derive from underlying /x/

Janhunen (1986) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 21 / 46

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Analysis

1

Overview

2

Background on Tundra Nenets

3

Problem

4

Analysis

5

Conclusion

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 22 / 46

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Analysis

[k] from /x/ analysis

At some (deep) level TN prohibits /k/ Later on there is a strengthening process introducing surface [k] Result: [k] only occurs where strengthening has occurred

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 23 / 46

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Analysis

Proposal: Stratal OT

Stratal OT: Sevearl OT evaluations tied to morphological structure: Stem, Word, Post-lexical

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 24 / 46

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Analysis

TN stratal phonology overview

Stem: no output |k| Lexical: every syllable must end in a placeless consonant, |P| or |N| Post-lexical: placeless consonants coalesce with a following onset, underlying singleton stops are voiced after a vowel Independent evidence of stratal affiliation of these processes

Staroverov & Kavitskaya (2017)

We’ll focus on dorsals, and trace this derivation ‘top down’ from post-lexical to stem level

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 25 / 46

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Analysis

TN Post-lexical coalescence

Coalescence mapping: |P1x2| → [k1,2] |jar-x2na| → |jarP-x◦na| → jark◦na ‘side-loc.sg’ |mjat-x2na| → |mjaP-x◦na|→ mjak◦na ‘tent-loc.sg’ Constraints and rankings Max ≫ Uniformity *P ≫ Uniformity *P ≫ Ident(cont); Ident(cg)

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 26 / 46

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Analysis

TN Post-lexical coalescence: an illustration

|mjaP-x◦na|→ mjak◦na ‘tent-loc.sg’ /mjaP1x2◦na/ Max *P Id(cont) Id(cg) Uniformity ✑ a. mjak1,2◦na 1 1 1

  • b. mjax2◦na

W1 L L L

  • c. mjaP1x2◦na

W1 L L L

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 27 / 46

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Analysis

TN Post-lexical voicing

Mappings: |VP1T2| → [VT1,2]; but |VT| → [VD] |ja-ta| → |ja-ta|→ jada ‘tent-loc.sg’ |mjat-x2na| → |mjaP-x◦na|→ mjak◦na ‘tent-loc.sg’ Constraints and rankings (gang effect) *VT: violation for a vowel followed by a voiceless stop Ident(voi) & Ident(cg) ≫ *VT ≫ Ident(voi), Ident(cg), Uniformity

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 28 / 46

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Analysis

TN Post-lexical voicing: an illustration

|ja-ta|→ jada ‘earth-poss.sg.3sg’ /jata/ Id(voi)&Id(cg) *P *VT Id(voi) Id(cg) Unif ✑ a. jada 1

  • b. jata

W1 L

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 29 / 46

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Analysis

TN Post-lexical non-voicing: an illustration

|mjaP-x◦na|→ mjak◦na ‘tent-loc.sg’ /mjaP1x2◦na/ Id(voi)&Id(cg) *P *VT Id(voi) Id(cg) Unif ✑ a. mjak1,2◦na 1 1 1

  • b. mjag1,2◦na

W1 L W1 1 1

  • c. mjaP1x2◦na

W1 L L L

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 30 / 46

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Analysis

TN Lexical level

All syllables end in a placeless consonant: |P| or |N| I won’t present a full analysis here (and we haven’t seen a full range of data) Key idea: a constraint prohibiting consonants with place features at a syllable edge, and a variety of responses based on individual consonants Ranking difference: *P has to be low-ranked lexically

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 31 / 46

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Analysis

TN Stem level

*k: a violation for each dorsal stop But there is no evidence of how exactly this constraint is enforced We could hypothesize a ranking *k ≫ Ident(cont), which is later reversed post-lexically The evidence for this ranking is only indirect

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 32 / 46

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Conclusion

Summary

An opaque distributional generalization, encoded as a stem-level phonotactic constraint *k: a violation for each dorsal stop

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 33 / 46

slide-51
SLIDE 51

Conclusion

Some problems solved

Why [k] never occurs phrase-initially? Because it’s always derived from /x/ after a consonant, and there are no initial clusters Why is [k] never voiced after a vowel? Because underlying clusters never show voicing

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 34 / 46

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Conclusion

Some extensions

A very similar analysis extends to other puzzles in TN Coda alternations exclude dorsals: in fact [k x N j w] are not allowed in a coda at the stem level Voiced coronal and labial stops [b bj d dj] also have a limited distribution, in line with their alternations. These could also be derived from their voiceless counterparts

Janhunen (1986) Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 35 / 46

slide-53
SLIDE 53

Conclusion

A question on abstractness

Surface [k] is derived from /x/ even in cases where there’s no evidence from alternations ‘Crazy’ patterns reanalyzed as non-surface but well-behaved This could be a plausible history of these patterns, although we have little comparative data to rely on

Bermúdez-Otero (2015); Janhunen (1986)

Do the speakers really represent TN [k] as coming from /x/? How do we find out?

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 36 / 46

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Conclusion

Thank you!

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 37 / 46

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Question period

1

Overview

2

Background on Tundra Nenets

3

Problem

4

Analysis

5

Conclusion

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 38 / 46

slide-56
SLIDE 56

Question period

Codas: unnatural class

p t k s x m n N l r V {C,#} bP P P mP P (??) lP rP Opaque process, some glottal stops subsequently eliminated A potential instance of an unnatural class

Mielke (2008)

Underlying /N/ reanalyzed here

  • cf. Janhunen (1986); Salminen (1997, 2012)

The non-existence of coda [k x] is important

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 39 / 46

slide-57
SLIDE 57

Question period

Codas: some examples

p t k s x m n N l r V {C,#} bP P P mP P (??) lP rP (6) Coda place loss and glottal stop insertion (phrase-final): a. /mjat/ [mjaP] ‘tent’ /ma2s/ [ma:P] ‘chest pocket’ /sji;n/ [sji;P] ‘lid’ b. /jar/ [jarP] ‘side’ /xampol/ [xambolP] ‘litter’ /Nob/ [NobP] ‘one’ /num/ [numP] ‘sky’

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 40 / 46

slide-58
SLIDE 58

Question period

Summary: codas

p t k s x m n N l r V {C,#} bP P * P * mP P * lP rP Coda dorsals are prohibited in the ‘input’ Coronals change to the glottal stop Other consonants add a glottal stop

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 41 / 46

slide-59
SLIDE 59

Question period

Nasal-final stems distribution according to Salminen

Salminen (1997): 77–78 Type 1 (-n) Type 2 (-ng) Type 3 (-n/j) 4 nouns many nouns 3 nouns 1 verb no verbs many verbs

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 42 / 46

slide-60
SLIDE 60

Question period

TN Lexical level: overview

All syllables end in a placeless consonant: |P| or |N| [–cont] coronals lose place in coda: |mjat-x2na| → |mjaP.x◦.na| ‘tent-loc.sg’ P insertion after other codas: |jar-x2na| → |jarP.x◦.na| ‘side-loc.sg’

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 43 / 46

slide-61
SLIDE 61

Question period

TN Lexical level: constraints

All syllables end in a glottal stop [–cont] coronals lose place in coda P insertion after other codas Constraints *P is low-ranked (unlike at the post-lexical level) *Plc]σ: no place features at the right syllable edge *L: no placeless liquids Max; Max(Dor,Lab); *L ≫ Dep ≫ Max(Cor)

Preservation of the marked de Lacy (2006)

No dorsal codas in the stem-level output

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 44 / 46

slide-62
SLIDE 62

Question period

TN Lexical level: illustration 1

|mjat-x2na|→ mjaPx◦na ‘tent-loc.sg’ /mjatx2na/ Max *Plc]σ Max(cor) *P ✑ a. mjaP.x◦.na 1 1

  • b. mjat.x◦.na

W1 L L

  • c. mja.x◦.na

W1 L 1

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 45 / 46

slide-63
SLIDE 63

Question period

TN Lexical level: illustration 2

|jar-x2na| → |jarP.x◦.na| ‘side-loc.sg’ /jarx2+na/ Max *L Plc]σ Dep *P ✑ a. jarP.x◦.na 1 1

  • b. jaP.x◦.na

W1 L 1

  • c. jar.x◦.na

W1 L L

  • d. ja.x◦.na

W1 L L

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 46 / 46

slide-64
SLIDE 64

References

Beckman, Jill. 1998. Positional faithfulness. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 2001. Voicing and continuancy in Catalan: a nonvacuous Duke-of-York gambit and a Richness-of-the-Base paradox. Ms., University of Manchester. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 2015. Amphichronic explanation and the life cycle of phonological processes. In The oxford handbook of historical phonology, ed. Patrick Honeybone & Joseph Salmons, 374–399. Oxford: OUP. Casali, Roderic. 1996. Resolving hiatus. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. de Lacy, Paul. 2006. Markedness: Reduction and preservation in

  • phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Janhunen, Juha. 1986. Glottal stop in Nenets. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society. Kiparsky, Paul. 2000. Opacity and cyclicity. The linguistic review 17:351–367.

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 46 / 46

slide-65
SLIDE 65

References

Mielke, Jeff. 2008. The emergence of distinctive features. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nikolaeva, Irina. 2014. A Grammar of Tundra Nenets. Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. Prince, Alan, & Paul Smolensky. 2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell. Rasin, Ezer, & Roni Katzir. 2017. A learnability argument for constraints

  • n underlying representations. Ms., MIT and Tel Aviv University.

Salminen, Tapani. 1997. Tundra Nenets inflection. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society. Salminen, Tapani. 2012. Tundra Nenets grammatical sketch. URL http://www.helsinki.fi/~tasalmin/sketch.html, ms., University

  • f Helsinki.

Staroverov, Peter, & Darya Kavitskaya. 2017. Tundra nenets consonant sandhi as coalescence. The Linguistic Review ahead of print.

Peter Staroverov Nenets dorsals September 30, 2017 46 / 46