assumption that CL is all about mora conservation (cf. Hayes 1989 and several others) — their deletion should not induce lengthening. Second, CL is an instance of opacity, and opacity is the single biggest conundrum that OptimalityTheory faces. This paper addresses both issues and suggests that CL should
clusters are smaller than syllables, the SSP is not reduced to a mere tendency (Keydana, 2012: 103). However, Keydana has formulated his analysis in OptimalityTheory ( OT ), a major tenet of which is that all constraints are potentially violable, therefore violations of the SSP are predicted to be
phonological representations can be substantially unstable at the onset of their creation, a condition not considered in previous installments of OptimalityTheory.
Let us now turn to the nature of the evaluation process. Given a single input, CON evaluates a set of output candidates along faithfulness and
) ar- gues that it is the stressed syllable and the syllable adjacent to it that surface. The Greek data provide evidence in support of both models. Moreover, I adopt OptimalityTheory (Prince & Smolensky 1993, hereafter OT) for the analysis of the data under discussion. I show that this framework
mainly within OptimalityTheory, in various languages. The Lesvian dialectal variet- ies, however, allow us to probe deeper into the precise statement of such intra-paradigmatic identity constraints. We show, ﬁrst, that the identity con- straints holding among various surface forms must have a limited
extensive work on Cypriot Greek, Dodecanesian, and the Northern Greek dialects, always within the framework of the latest theoretical models, such as Distributed Morphology and OptimalityTheory.
Unfortunately, a short message cannot cover the personality and the work of Gaberell Drachman. I consider
Salzburg Department of Linguistics teaching Phonology in undergraduate and postgraduate courses and seminars.
Angeliki had a very thorough knowledge of all phonological theoretical frameworks of 20th century, from Structuralism to OptimalityTheory, and she was always willing to share this knowledge
. “Asymmetrical cluster de- velopment in a disordered system”. Language Acquisition 7.1–49; Barlow, J. A., & J. A. Gierut. 1999. “Optimalitytheory in phonological acquisition.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 42.1482–1498; Gnanadesikan, A. E. 2004. “Markedness and faithfulness constraints in
during the acquisition process. Studies on language development are primarily couched within the Principles and Parameters (PP) framework (Chomsky 1981) and OptimalityTheory (OT, Prince & Smolensky 1993, McCarthy & Prince 1993a, 1993b). According to Chom- sky (1981), Universal Grammar (UG) consists of a
contrast, we entertain the hypothesis that compositional accentuation is dependent on speciﬁc modes of morpheme combination. The analysis is couched in the theoretical framework of OptimalityTheory (Prince & Smolen- sky 1993, McCarthy & Prince 1994, et seq). The paper is organized as follows: Section 2