Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 21, No. 0, pp.636-655
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Jan 2021
Received 17 Jun 2021 Revised 14 Jul 2021 Accepted 24 Jul 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.21..202107.636

The Capitalistic versus Militaristic Debate: Paradigm Uniformity Revisited

Jungyeon Kim
Postdoctoral Researcher, Yonsei University, Tel: 02)2123-2329 jungyeonkim@yonsei.ac.kr


© 2021 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The present study examined the well-known data in which the onset of the third syllable is flapped in capitalistic whereas it is aspirated in militaristic even though both words have the same stress pattern and syllable structure. While a number of studies have considered several different approaches in this discussion including paradigm uniformity effect, foot-based analyses, optimality theoretic (OT) accounts, and analogy, there has been no research that seeks to account for the possibility that the underlying /t/’s of those two words can be realized as both aspirated and flapped by speakers of American English. This study basically follows a prosodic foot-based account to explain this phenomenon and attempts to capture the variant realizations using the audio pronunciation listed in eleven different online dictionaries within the Maximum Entropy (MaxEnt) Model, which is a probabilistic model that assigns each candidate a probability rather than picking a single winner as in standard OT. The frequency data observed from those dictionaries were fed into MaxEnt to see if the learned grammar can successfully predict the observed frequency. The current simulation results show that the frequency found in the actual linguistic data corresponds to that predicted by the training corpus data, which indicates that the learned grammar is able to accurately reproduce the observed frequency. These findings suggest that MaxEnt modeling has a more explanatory power than classical OT analyses in that it can serve to account for grammars involving free variation.

Keywords:

paradigm uniformity, American English flapping, optimality theory, Maximum Entropy

References

  • Ahmed, S., S. Andersson and B. Vaux. 2020. English phonology and morphology. In B. Aarts, A. McMahon and L. Hinrichs, eds., The Handbook of English Linguistics, 345-364. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc. [https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119540618.ch18]
  • Anderson, V. 2011. Bidialectalism in Intense Language Variety Contact: An “Unexpected” Development in the Death of Pennsylvania Dutchified English. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
  • Anttila, A. 1997. Variation in Finnish Phonology and Morphology. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
  • Banner-Inouye, S. 1995. Trills, Taps and Stops in Contrast and Variation. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA.
  • Benua, L. 1995. Identity effects in morphological truncation. In J. Beckman, L. Dickey and S. Urbanczyk, eds., University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 18, 77-136. GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
  • Benua, L. 1997a. Transderivational Identity: Phonological Relations between Words. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
  • Benua, L. 1997b. Affix classes are derived by faithfulness. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 5, 1-26.
  • Berkson, J. 1944. Application of the logistic function to bio-assay. Journal of the American Statistical Association 9, 357-365. [https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1944.10500699]
  • Blevins, J. 2003. The independent nature of phonotactic constraints: An alternative to syllable-based approaches. In C. Féry and R. van de Vijver, eds., The Syllable in Optimality Theory, 375-403. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511497926.016]
  • Boersma, P. 1997. How we learn variation, optionality and probability. In Proceedings of the Institute of Phonetic Sciences of the University of Amsterdam, vol. 21, 43-58.
  • Borowsky, T. 1986. Topics in the Lexical Phonology of English. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
  • Burzio, L. 1994. Principles of English Stress. Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519741]
  • Cambridge Dictionary. 2021. Cambridge University Press. Available online at http://www.dictionary.cambridge.org
  • Chambers, J. 1973. Canadian raising. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 18, 113-135. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008413100007350]
  • Chomsky, N. 1956. Three models for the description of language. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 2(3), 113–124. [https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.1956.1056813]
  • Chomsky, N. and M. Halle. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.
  • Collins English Dictionary. 2021. Available online at http://www.collinsdictionary.com, .
  • Davies, M. 2018. The iWeb Corpus. Available online at https://www.english-corpora.org/iWeb, /.
  • Davis, S. 2003. The footing of dactylic sequences in American English. In T. Homma, M. Okazaki, T. Tabata and S. Tanaka, eds., A New Century of Phonology and Phonological Theory, 277-289. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
  • Davis, S. 2005. Capitalistic vs. militaristic: The paradigm uniformity effect reconsidered. In L. Downing, T. Hall and R. Raffelsiefen, eds., Paradigms in Phonological Theory, 107-121. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199267712.003.0005]
  • Davis, S. 2010. Distributional evidence for the foot from the L1 acquisition of American English. Phonological Studies 13, 39-50.
  • Davis, S. and M. Cho. 2003. The distribution of aspirated stops and /h/ in American English and Korean: An alignment approach with typological implications. Linguistics 41, 607-652. [https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2003.020]
  • Davis, S. and W. Summers. 1989. Vowel length and closure duration in word-medial VC sequences. Journal of Phonetics 17, 339-353. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30449-8]
  • de Jong, K. 1998. Stress-related variation in the articulation of coda alveolar stops: Flapping revisited. Journal of Phonetics 26, 283-310. [https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1998.0077]
  • Dictionary.com. 2021. Available online at http://www.dictionary.com
  • Eddington, D. 2006. Paradigm uniformity and analogy: The capitalistic versus militaristic debate. International Journal of English Studies6(2), 1-18.
  • Educalingo. 2021. Available online at http://www.educalingo.com, .
  • Flemming, E. 1995. Auditory Features in Phonology. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA.
  • Fujimura, O. 1986. Relative invariance of articulatory movements: An iceberg model. In J. Perkell and D. Klatt, eds., Invariance and Variability in Speech Processes, 226-234. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Earlbaum Assoc.
  • Fox, R. and D. Terbeek. 1977. Dental flaps, vowel duration and rule ordering in American English. Journal of Phonetics 5, 27-34. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31111-8]
  • Gebraeel, N., M. Lawley, R. Li and J. Ryan. 2005. Residual-life distributions from component degradation signals: A Bayesian approach. IIE Trans. 37, 543–557. [https://doi.org/10.1080/07408170590929018]
  • Goldwater, S. and M. Johnson. 2003. Learning OT constraint rankings using a maximum entropy model. In J. Spenader, A. Eriksson and O. Dahl, eds., Proceedings of the Stockholm Workshop on Variation within Optimality Theory, 111-120. Stockholm: Stockholm University.
  • Hayes, B. 1981. A Metrical Theory and Stress Rules. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
  • Hayes, B. 2000. Gradient well-formedness in optimality theory. In J. Dekkers, F. van der Leeuw and J. van de Weijer, eds., Optimality Theory: Phonology, Syntax and Acquisition, 88-120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Hayes, B. and C. Wilson. 2008. A maximum entropy model of phonotactics and phonotactic learning. Linguistic Inquiry 39, 379-440. [https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2008.39.3.379]
  • Gussenhoven, C. 1986. English plosive allophones and ambisyllabicity. Gramma 10, 119-141.
  • Harris, J. 2013. Wide-domain r-effects in English. Journal of Linguistics 49, 329-365. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226712000369]
  • Harris, J. and J. Kaye. 1990. A tale of two cities: London glottalling and New York City tapping. The Linguistic Review 7, 251-274. [https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.1990.7.3.251]
  • Hopcroft, J. and J. Ullman. 1979. Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
  • Inkelas, S. and I. Rose. 2007. Positional neutralization: A case study from child language. Language 83, 707-736. [https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2008.0000]
  • Inouye, B. 1989. The flap as a contour segment. UCLA Working Papers 72, 39-81.
  • Jaynes, E. 1957. Information theory and statistical mechanics. The Physical Review 106(4), 620-630. [https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.106.620]
  • Jensen, J. 1987. English stop allophones in Metrical Theory. Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 2, 153-156.
  • Jensen, J. 2000. Against ambisyllabicity. Phonology 17, 187-235. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700003912]
  • Joos, M. 1942. A phonological dilemma in Canadian English. Language 18, 141-144. [https://doi.org/10.2307/408979]
  • Kahn, D. 1980. Syllable-Based Generalizations in English Phonology. New York: Garland.
  • Kaisse, E. 1985. Connected Speech: The Interaction of Syntax and Phonology. Orlando: Academic Press.
  • Keller, F. 2000. Gradience in Grammar: Experimental and Computational Aspects of Degrees of Grammaticality. Doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh.
  • Keller, F. and A. Asudeh. 2002. Probabilistic learning algorithms and optimality theory. Linguistic Inquiry 33(2), 225-244. [https://doi.org/10.1162/002438902317406704]
  • Kenstowicz, M. 1996. Base-identity and uniform exponence: Alternatives to cyclicity. In J. Durand and B. Laks, eds., Current Trends in Phonology: Models and Methods, 363-393. CNRS, Paris X and University of Salford: University of Salford Publications.
  • Kim, Y. 2009. On ternary feet in American English. Language and Information Society 11, 1-19. [https://doi.org/10.29211/soli.2009.11..001]
  • Kiparsky, P. 1978. Analogical change as a problem for linguistic theory. In P. Kiparsky, ed., Explanation in Phonology, 217-236. Dordrecht: Foris.
  • Kiparsky, P. 1979. Metrical structure assignment is cyclic. Linguistic Inquiry 10, 421-441.
  • Legendre, G., Y. Miyata and P. Smolensky. 1990. Can connectionism contribute to syntax?: Harmonic Grammar, with an application. In M. Ziolkowski, M. Noske and K. Deaton, eds., Proceedings of the 26th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 237-252. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
  • Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. 2021. Harlow, English: Longman. Available online at http://www.ldoceonline.com, .
  • Macchi, M. 1985. Segmental and Suprasegmental Features and Lip and Jaw Articulators. Doctoral dissertation, NYU.
  • Merriam-Webster Dictionary. 2021. Available online at http://www.merriam-webster.com
  • McCarthy, J. 1982. Prosodic structure and expletive infixation. Language 58, 574-590. [https://doi.org/10.2307/413849]
  • Nagy, N. and B. Reynolds. 1997. Optimality theory and variable word-final deletion in faetar. Language Variation and Change 9, 37-55. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500001782]
  • Nespor, M. and I. Vogel. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
  • OED Online. 2021. Oxford University Press. Available online at http://www.oed.com
  • Pater, J. 2000. Non-uniformity in English secondary stress: The role of ranked and lexically-specific constraints. Phonology 17, 237-274. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700003900]
  • Patterson, D. and C. Connine. 2001. Variant frequency in flap production. Phonetica 58, 254-275. [https://doi.org/10.1159/000046178]
  • Prince, A. and P. Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. RuCCS Technical Report. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
  • Prince, A. and B. Tesar. 1999. Learning phonotactic distributions. RuCCS Technical Report. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
  • Pulleyblank D. and W. Turkel. 1996. Optimality theory and learning algorithms: The representation of recurrent featural asymmetries. In J. Durand and B. Laks, eds., Current Trends in Phonology: Models and Methods, 653-694. University of Salford.
  • Riehl, K. 2003. American English flapping: Perceptual and acoustic evidence against paradigm uniformity with phonetic features. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 15, 271-337.
  • Selkirk, E. 1978. On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. In T. Frethein, ed., Nordic Prosody II, 111-140. Trontheim: Tapir.
  • Selkirk, E. 1982. The Syntax of Words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Smolensky, P. 1986. Information processing in dynamical systems: Foundations of harmony theory. In J. McClelland, D. Rumelhart and the PDP Research Group, eds., Parallel Distributed Processing, vol. 2: Psychological and Biological Models, 390–431. MA: MIT Press.
  • Sproat, R. and O. Fujimura. 1993. Allophonic variation of English /l/ and its implications for phonetic implementation. Journal of Phonetics 21, 291-311. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31340-3]
  • Stampe, D. 1973. A Dissertation on Natural Phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.
  • Steriade, D. 1995. Underspecification and markedness. In J. Goldsmith, ed., The Handbook of Phonological Theory, 114-175. Blackwell Publishing.
  • Steriade, D. 1996. Paradigm uniformity and the phonetics-phonology boundary. Paper presented at the 5th Conference on Laboratory Phonology, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.
  • Steriade, D. 1998. Licensing laryngeal features. In M. Gordon, ed., UCLA Papers in Phonology 3, 25-147.
  • Steriade, D. 2000. Paradigm uniformity and the phonetics-phonology boundary. In J. Pierrehumbert and M. Broe, eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology V: Acquisition and the Lexicon, 313-334. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Stone, M. and S, Hamlet. 1982. Variations in jaw and tongue gestures observed during the production of unstressed /d/s and flaps. Journal of Phonetics 10, 401-415. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31004-6]
  • Tesar, B. and P. Smolensky. 1993. The learnability of optimality theory: An algorithm and some basic complexity results. RuCCS Technical Report. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
  • The CMU Pronouncing Dictionary. 2021. Available online at http://www.speech.cs.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/cmudict
  • The Free Dictionary. 2021. Available online at http://www.thefreedictionary.com
  • Umeda, N. 1977. Consonant duration in American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 61, 846-858. [https://doi.org/10.1121/1.381374]
  • Wilson, C. 2006. Learning phonology with substantive bias: An experimental and computational investigation of velar palatalization. Cognitive Science 30, 945-982. [https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_89]
  • Wilson, C. 2014. Maximum Entropy Models. Cambridge, MA: Department of Linguistics, MIT.
  • Withgott, M. 1983. Segmental Evidence for Phonological Constituents. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
  • YouGlish. 2021. Available online at http://www.youglish.com, .
  • Zue, V. and M. Laferriere. 1979. Acoustical study of medial /t, d/ in American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 66, 1039-1050. [https://doi.org/10.1121/1.383323]