1932

Abstract

Opacity is a natural language phenomenon where a phonological process is rendered non-surface-true by virtue of its interaction with other processes. Phonologists have long been fascinated with opaque generalizations both from a typological standpoint (What kinds of non-surface-true generalizations are found?) and a theoretical one (Which formal tools permit an analysis of opacity?). This review aims to () discuss the breadth of non-surface-true generalizations in light of phonologists’ (often implicit) working definitions of opacity and () address opacity as a flashpoint in one of the larger debates in generative phonology, between the rule-based serial approach of Chomsky & Halle's and constraint-based parallel Optimality Theory. A conclusion offered here is that the well-known problems Optimality Theory faces with some kinds of opacity are due not to its lack of serialism but to the fact that such processes are input-motivated rather than output-motivated.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120748
2023-01-17
2024-06-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/linguistics/9/1/annurev-linguistics-031220-120748.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120748&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Adler J, Zymet J. 2021. Irreducible parallelism in phonology: evidence for lookahead from Mohawk, Maragoli, Sino-Japanese, and Lithuanian. Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 39:2367–403
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Al-Mozainy H. 1981. Vowel alternations in a Bedouin Hijazi Arabic dialect: abstractness and stress PhD Thesis Univ. Tex. Austin:
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Baković E. 2007. A revised typology of opaque generalisations. Phonology 24:2217–59
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baković E. 2011. Opacity and ordering. The Handbook of Phonological Theory J Goldsmith, J Riggle, ACL Yu 40–67. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. , 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baković E, Blumenfeld L. 2018. Overapplication conversion. Hana-Bana (): A Festschrift for Junko Ito and Armin Mester R Bennett, A Angeles, A Brasoveanu, D Buckley, N Kalivoda, et al Santa Cruz: Dep. Linguist., Univ. Calif., Santa Cruz https://itomestercelebration.sites.ucsc.edu/
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Baković E, Blumenfeld L. 2019. Rule interaction conversion operations. Loquens 6:2e062
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Becker M, Flack Potts K. 2011. The Emergence of the Unmarked. See van Oostendorp et al. 2011 1363–79
  8. Benua L. 1997. Transderivational identity: phonological relations between words PhD Thesis Univ. Mass. Amherst:
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bermúdez-Otero R. 1999. Constraint interaction in language change: quantity in English and Germanic PhD Thesis: Univ. Manchester Manchester, UK:
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Black HA. 2006 (1993). Constraint-Ranked Derivation: A Serial Approach to Optimization Dallas, TX: SIL Int https://www.sil.org/resources/publications/entry/9244
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Blevins J. 1997. Rules in Optimality Theory: two case studies. Derivations and Constraints in Phonology I Roca 227–60. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Breteler J. 2017. Deriving bounded tone with layered feet in Harmonic Serialism: the case of Saghala. Glossa 2:157
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Browman CP, Goldstein LM. 1986. Towards an articulatory phonology. Phonol. Yearb. 3:219–52
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Browman CP, Goldstein LM. 1992. Articulatory phonology: an overview. Phonetica 49:3–4155–80
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Calamaro S. 2017. Stratal Harmonic Serialism: typological predictions and implications PhD Thesis Yale Univ. New Haven, CT:
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Chen MY. 2000. Directionality constraints on derivation?. The Derivational Residue in Phonological Optimality Theory B Hermans, M van Oostendorp 105–27. Philadelphia: John Benjamins
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chomsky N, Halle M. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English New York: Harper & Row
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Cohn AC, McCarthy JJ. 1998 (1994). Alignment and parallelism in Indonesian phonology. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, Vol. 1253–137. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Phon. Lab., Cornell Univ.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Crowhurst MJ. 2011. Constraint conjunction. See van Oostendorp et al. 2011 1461–90
  20. Elfner E. 2016. Stress-epenthesis interactions in Harmonic Serialism. See McCarthy & Pater 2016 261–300
  21. Elsman M. 2016. Parallelism versus serialism, or constraints versus rules? Tongan stress and syllabification revisited. See McCarthy & Pater 2016 139–54
  22. Hall E, Jurgec P, Kawahara S. 2018. Opaque allomorph selection in Japanese and Harmonic Serialism: a reply to Kurisu; 2012. Linguist. Inq. 49:3599–610
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hauser I, Hughto C. 2020. Analyzing opacity with contextual faithfulness constraints. Glossa 5:182
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Hermans B, van Oostendorp M. 2000. The Derivational Residue in Phonological Optimality Theory Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Hooper JB. 1976. An Introduction to Natural Generative Phonology New York: Academic
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Idsardi WJ. 2000. Clarifying opacity. Linguist. Rev. 17:2–4337–50
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Ito J, Mester A 2003. On the sources of opacity in OT: coda processes in German. The Syllable in Optimality Theory C Féry, R van de Vijver 271–303. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Iverson GK 1995. Rule ordering. The Handbook of Phonological Theory JA Goldsmith 609–14. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Jarosz G. 2014. Serial markedness reduction. Proceedings of the 2013 Annual Meeting on Phonology J Kingston, C Moore-Cantwell, J Pater, R Staubs Washington, DC: Linguist. Soc. Am https://doi.org/10.3765/amp.v1i1.40
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  30. Jesney K 2011. Positional Faithfulness, non-locality, and the Harmonic Serialism solution. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 39) S Lima, K Mullin, BW Smith Amherst, MA: Grad. Linguist. Stud. Assoc https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/T3PN93H7
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  31. Kager R. 1999. Optimality Theory Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kaye JD. 1974. Opacity and recoverability in phonology. Can. J. Linguist. 19:2134–49
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Kenstowicz M, Kisseberth C. 1979. Generative Phonology: Description and Theory New York: Academic
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Kimper WA. 2011. Locality and globality in phonological variation. Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 29:2423–65
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Kiparsky P 1971. Historical linguistics. A Survey of Linguistic Science WO Dingwall 576–649. College Park, MD: Univ. Md.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Kiparsky P. 1973. Abstractness, opacity, and global rules (Part 2 of “Phonological Representations”). Three Dimensions of Linguistic Theory O Fujimura 57–86. Tokyo: TEC
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kiparsky P 1976. Abstractness, opacity, and global rules. The Application and Ordering of Grammatical Rules A Koutsoudas 160–86. The Hague, Neth: Mouton
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Kiparsky P. 1982. Explanation in Phonology Dordrecht, Neth.: Foris
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Kiparsky P 2015. Stratal OT: a synopsis and FAQs. Capturing Phonological Shades Within and Across Languages YE Hsiao, L-H Wee 2–44. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Sch. Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Kirchner R. 1996. Synchronic chain shifts in Optimality Theory. Linguist. Inq. 27:2341–50
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Kisseberth CW. 1970. On the functional unity of phonological rules. Linguist. Inq. 1:3291–306
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Kisseberth CW 1973. Is rule ordering necessary in phonology?. Issues in Linguistics: Papers in Honor of Henry and Renée Kahane BB Kachru, RB Lees, Y Malkiel, A Pietrangeli, S Saporta 418–41. Urbana, IL: Univ. Ill. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Kisseberth CW 1976. The interaction of phonological rules and the polarity of language. The Application and Ordering of Grammatical Rules A Koutsoudas 41–54. The Hague, Neth: Mouton
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Koutsoudas A. 1976. Unordered rule hypotheses. The Application and Ordering of Grammatical Rules A Koutsoudas 1–21. The Hague, Neth.: Mouton
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Koutsoudas A, Sanders G, Noll C. 1974. The application of phonological rules. Language 50:11–28
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Lamont A. 2021. Serial reduplication is empirically adequate and typologically restrictive. Linguist. Inq. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00452
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  47. Mascaró J. 2011. Rule ordering. See van Oostendorp et al. 2011 1736–60
  48. McCarthy JJ. 1999. Sympathy and phonological opacity. Phonology 16:3331–99
    [Google Scholar]
  49. McCarthy JJ 2000. Harmonic serialism and parallelism. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 30), Vol. 2 M Hirotani, A Coetzee, N Hall, J Kim Amherst, MA: Grad. Linguist. Stud. Assoc. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/nels/vol30/iss2/8
    [Google Scholar]
  50. McCarthy JJ. 2002. A Thematic Guide to Optimality Theory Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  51. McCarthy JJ 2003. Sympathy, cumulativity, and the Duke-of-York Gambit. The Syllable in Optimality Theory C Féry, R van de Vijver 23–76. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  52. McCarthy JJ. 2007a. Hidden Generalizations: Phonological Opacity in Optimality Theory London: Equinox
    [Google Scholar]
  53. McCarthy JJ 2007b. Restraint of analysis. Freedom of Analysis? S Blaho, P Bye, M Krämer 203–31. New York: Mouton de Gruyter
    [Google Scholar]
  54. McCarthy JJ. 2008a. Doing Optimality Theory Malden, MA: Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  55. McCarthy JJ. 2008b. The gradual path to cluster simplification. Phonology 25:2271–319
    [Google Scholar]
  56. McCarthy JJ. 2008c. The serial interaction of stress and syncope. Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 26:3499–546
    [Google Scholar]
  57. McCarthy JJ. 2009. Studying GEN. J. Phonet. Soc. Jpn. 13:23–12
    [Google Scholar]
  58. McCarthy JJ. 2010. An introduction to Harmonic Serialism. Lang. Linguist. Compass 4:101001–18
    [Google Scholar]
  59. McCarthy JJ 2011a. Autosegmental spreading in Optimality Theory. Tones and Features: Phonetic and Phonological Perspectives JA Goldsmith, E Hume, WL Wetzels 195–222. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter
    [Google Scholar]
  60. McCarthy JJ. 2011b. Perceptually grounded faithfulness in Harmonic Serialism. Linguist. Inq. 42:1171–83
    [Google Scholar]
  61. McCarthy JJ 2012. Pausal phonology and morpheme realization. Prosody Matters: Essays in Honor of Elisabeth Selkirk T Borowsky, S Kawahara, M Sugahara 341–73. London: Equinox
    [Google Scholar]
  62. McCarthy JJ. 2016. The theory and practice of Harmonic Serialism. See McCarthy & Pater 2016 47–87
  63. McCarthy JJ, Kimper W, Mullin K. 2012. Reduplication in Harmonic Serialism. Morphology 22:2173–232
    [Google Scholar]
  64. McCarthy JJ, Pater J, eds. 2016. Harmonic Grammar and Harmonic Serialism London: Equinox
    [Google Scholar]
  65. McCarthy JJ, Pater J, Pruitt K. 2016. Cross-level interactions in Harmonic Serialism. See McCarthy & Pater 2016 88–138
  66. McCarthy JJ, Prince A. 1993. Prosodic morphology: constraint interaction and satisfaction ROA Tech. Rep. 482 Rutgers Cent. Cogn. Sci. New Brunswick, NJ: http://roa.rutgers.edu/article/view/492
    [Google Scholar]
  67. McCarthy JJ, Prince A 1994. The emergence of the unmarked: optimality in prosodic morphology. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 24) M González 333–79. Amherst, MA: Grad. Linguist. Stud. Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Moreton E, Smolensky P 2002. Typological consequences of local constraint conjunction. Proceedings of the 21st West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics L Mikkelsen, C Potts 306–19. Cambridge, MA: Cascadilla
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Myers S. 1991. Persistent rules. Linguist. Inq. 22:2315–44
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Newman S. 1944. Yokuts Language of California New York: Viking Fund
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Newton BE. 1971. Ordering paradoxes in phonology. J. Ling. 7:131–53
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Norton RJ. 2003. Derivational phonology and optimality phonology: formal comparison and synthesis PhD Thesis Univ. Essex Colchester, UK:
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Odden D 2011. Rules v. constraints. The Handbook of Phonological Theory J Goldsmith, J Riggle, ACL Yu 1–39. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. , 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Pater J. 2000. Non-uniformity in English secondary stress: the role of ranked and lexically specific constraints. Phonology 17:2237–74
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Pater J 2012. Serial Harmonic Grammar and Berber syllabification. Prosody Matters: Essays in Honor of Elisabeth Selkirk T Borowsky, S Kawahara, M Sugahara 43–72. London: Equinox
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Pouplier M. 2011. The atoms of phonological representations. See van Oostendorp et al. 2011 107–29
  77. Prince A 2002. Arguing optimality. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 26: Papers in Optimality Theory II A Carpenter, A Coetzee, P de Lacy 269–304. Amherst, MA: Grad. Linguist. Stud. Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Prince A, Smolensky P. 2004 (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar Malden, MA: Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Pruitt K. 2010. Serialism and locality in constraint-based metrical parsing. Phonology 27:3481–526
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Pruitt K. 2012. Stress in harmonic serialism PhD Thesis Univ. Mass. Amherst:
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Pruitt K. 2022. Parallelism within serialism: primary stress is different. Phonology In press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675722000033
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  82. Rasin E. 2022. Shifting interactions and countershifting opacity: a note on opacity in Harmonic Serialism. Linguist. Inq. 53:4836–51
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Roca I 1997. Derivations and Constraints in Phonology Oxford, UK/New York: Clarendon/Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Rubach J. 2000. Glide and glottal stop insertion in Slavic languages: a DOT analysis. Linguist. Inq. 31:2271–317
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Shaw PA. 1980. Theoretical Issues in Dakota Phonology and Morphology New York: Garland
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Smolensky P. 1995. On the internal structure of the constraint component Con of UG Handout of talk given at University of California Los Angeles: Apr. 7. http://roa.rutgers.edu/article/view/87
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Staubs R 2013. Pathologies of feature-driven stress. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 41), Vol. 2 Y Fainleib, N LaCara, Y Park 219–32. Amherst, MA: Grad. Linguist. Stud. Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Staubs R. 2016. Serial restrictions on feature/stress interactions. See McCarthy & Pater 2016 155–75
  89. Torres-Tamarit F. 2016. Compensatory and opaque vowel lengthening in Harmonic Serialism. See McCarthy & Pater 2016 301–26
  90. Torres-Tamarit F, Pons-Moll C 2012. Serial prosodification and voiced stop geminates in Catalan. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2010: Selected Papers from “Going Romance” Leiden 2010 I Franco, S Lusini, A Saab 115–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
    [Google Scholar]
  91. van Oostendorp M, Ewen CJ, Hume E, Rice K, eds. 2011. The Blackwell Companion to Phonology Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Weigel WF. 2005. Yowlumne in the twentieth century PhD Thesis Univ. Calif. Berkeley:
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Zwicky A. 1987. Rule interactions: another gloss on K&K. Innov. Linguist. Educ. 5:191–111 https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/iulcwp/article/view/26041/31709
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120748
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120748
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error