Substitutions for English interdentals tend to be consistent based on first language
(L1): eg. [t] for speakers of Russian, [s] for speakers of Japanese. While the facts
suggest that some type of L1 transfer must be involved, a rule affecting a sound
that does not occur in L1 is unlearnable. Optimality Theory (OT) allows a solution
to this conundrum because the grammars contain independently necessary constraint
rankings that also have an effect on the interdentals. [t] substitution results from
high ranked markedness. This can be seen as an effect of universals because this
grammar retains the original ranking that the L1 learners begins with. [s]
substitution results from high ranked Faithfulness. In this case, some L1 phonology
has forced reranking, making this an effect of L1 transfer.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Altenberg, E.
and
Vago, R. M.1987: Theoretical implications of an error analysis of second
language phonology production. In
Ioup, G.
and
Weinberger, S.
, editors, Interlanguage phonology.
Cambridge, MA: Newbury House
, 148-164.
2.
Beckman, J. 1998: Positional faithfulness. Unpublished PhD dissertation, U
niversity of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.
3.
Bernhardt, B.
and
Stemberger, J.1998: Handbook of phonological developm ent from the perspective of
constraint-based nonlinear phonology.
San Diego, CA: Academic Press
.
4.
Broselow, E.1983: Non-obvious transfer: on predicting epenthesis
errors. In
Gass, S.
and
Selinker, L.
, editors, Language transfer in language learning.
Rowley, MA: Newbury House
, 269-280.
5.
D anesi, M.1985: Loanwords and phonological m ethodology.
Montreal: D idier
.
6.
D innsen, D.
1996:
Context effects in the acquisition of fricatives
. In
Bernhardt B.
,
Gilbert, J.
and
Ingram, D.
, editors, Proceedings of the UBC International Conference on
Phonological Acquisition. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
7.
Edwards, J.1994: Multilingualism.
London, New York: Routledge
.
8.
Edwards, M. L.1996: Word position effects in the production of fricatives. 149-158
9.
Fikkert, P.1994: On the acquisition of rhyme structure in Dutch. In
Bok-Bennema, R.
and
Cremers, C.
, editors, Linguistics in the Netherlands.
Amsterdam: John Benjamin
. 37-48.
10.
Fikkert, P.1998: The acquisition of Dutch phonology. In
De Houwer, A.
and
G illis, S.
, editors, The acquisition of Dutch.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins
, 163-222.
11.
Flege, J. E.
,
Munro, M. J.
and
MacKay, I. R. A.1996: Factors affecting the production of word-initial consonants
in a second language. In
Bayley, R.
and
Preston, D. R.
, editors, Second language acquisition and linguistic variation.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins
, 47-73.
12.
Fukazawa, H. 1999. Theoretical implications of O CP effects on features in O
ptimality Theory. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Maryland, College
Park, MD.
13.
Gendron, J.D. 1964: Phonetique orthophonique à l’usage
des Canadiensfrançais. Les Presses d’Université
Laval, Québec.
14.
Gafos, D. 1996. The articulatory basis of locality in phonology. PhD
dissertation, Johns Hopkins.
15.
Gnanadesikan, A.1995. Markedness and faithfulness constraints in child
language.
Kager, R.
,
Pater, J
and
Zonneveld W.
, editors. Constraints in phonological acquisition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
16.
Hecht, B. F.
and
Mulford, R.1987: The acquisition of a second language phonology: interaction
of transfer and developmental factors. In
Ioup, G
, and
Weinberger S.
, editors, Interlanguage phonology.
Newbury House: Cambridge
, MA, 313-328.
17.
Ioup, G.
and
Weinberger, S.1987: Interlanguage phonology.
Cambridge, MA: Newbury House
.
18.
Itô, J. 1986: Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. Unpublished
PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.
19.
Itô, J.
and
Mester, A.1994: Reflections on CodaCond and Alignment. In
Merchant, J.
,
Padgett, J.
and
Walker, R.Phonology at Santa Cruz.
Santa Cruz: Linguistics Research Center
, 27-46.
20.
Itô, J.
and
Mester, A.1995: The core-periphery structure of the lexicon and constraints on
reranking. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers (U MO P) 18.
Graduate Student Linguistics Association (GLSA),
Amherst, MA
: 181-210.
21.
Itô, J.
and
Mester, A.1999: The phonological lexicon. In
Tsujimura, N.
, editor, Handbook of Japanese Linguistics.
Oxford: Blackwell
, 62-100.
22.
James, A .R.
1984:
Phonic transfer: the structural bases of interlingual assessments
. In
van der Broecke, M. P. R.
and
Cohen, A.
, editors, Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Phonetic
Sciences. D ordrecht: Foris,
62-100
.
23.
Lado, R.1957: Linguistics across cultures.
Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press
.
24.
Locke, J.1983: Phonological acquisition and change.
New York: Academic Press
.
25.
Lombardi, L.1990:
The nonlinear organization of the affricate
. Natural L anguage and Linguistic Theory8,
375-425
.
26.
Lombardi, L.1995:
Affricates, level-ordering and the feature [strident]
. Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics3,
89-115
.
27.
Lombardi, L.1999:
Positional faithfulness and voicing assimilation in Optimality Theory
. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory17,
267-302
.
28.
Lombardi, L.2001: Why Place and Voice are different: constraint-specific
alternations in Optimality Theory. In
Lombardi, L.
, editor, Segmental phonology in Optimality Theory: constraints and
representations.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
, 13-45.
29.
Maddieson, I.1984: Patterns of sounds.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
30.
McCarthy, J. J.2002: Athematic guide to Optimality Theory.
Cambridge: Cambridge U niversity Press
.
31.
Moren, B. 1999: Distinctiveness, coercion and sonority: a unified theory of
weight. U npublished PhD dissertation, U niversity of Maryland, College Park, MD.
32.
Noss, R. B.1964: Thai reference gramm ar.
Washington, D C: Foreign Service Institute
.
33.
Padgett, J.1995a: Feature classes. University of M assachusetts O
ccasional Papers (UMO P) 18.
Graduate Student Linguistics A ssociation (GLSA),
A mherst, MA
, 385-420.
34.
Padgett, J.
1995b:
Partial class behavior and nasal place assimilation
. Proceedings of the Southwestern O ptimality Theory Conference,
Coyote Working Papers, University of A rizona,
145-183
.
35.
Ritchie, W. C.1968:
O n the explanation of phonic interference
. L anguage L earning18,
183-197
.
36.
Schmidt, R. W.1987: Sociolinguistic variation and language transfer in
phonology. In
Ioup, G.
and
Weinberger, S.
, editors, Interlanguage Phonology.
Cambridge, MA: Newbury H ouse
, 365-377.
37.
Smith, N.1973: The acquisition of phonology: a case study.
Cambridge: Cambridge U niversity Press
.
38.
Steriade, D.1988:
Reduplication and syllable transfer in Sanskrit and elsewhere
. Phonology5,
73-55
.
39.
Tesar, B.
and
Smolensky, P.2000: L earnability in O ptimality Theory.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
.
40.
Velleman, S.
1996:
Metathesis highlights feature-by-position constraints
. In
Bernhardt, B.
,
G ilbert, J.
and
Ingram, D.
, editors, Proceedings of the UBC International Conference on
Phonological A cquisition. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla
Press,
173-186
.
41.
Vihman, M. M.1996: Phonological development.
Oxford: Blackwell
.
42.
Walker, D. C.1984: The pronunciation of Canadian French.
Ottawa: U niversity of O ttawa Press
.
43.
Weinberger, S.
1990:
Minimal segments in second language phonology
. In
Leather, J.
and
James, A.
, editors, N ew Sounds 90: Proceedings of the 1990 A m sterdam
Symposium on the acquisition of second language speech.
University of A msterdam,
263-311
.
