{"title":"A guide to Radical CV Phonology, with special reference to tongue root and tongue body harmony","authors":"H. Hulst","doi":"10.1515/9783110691948-005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"My goal in this article is contribute to the discussion about different perspectives on element theory. To this end, I provide an outline of my perspective, which is captured in a model that I have been developing over many years, called Radical CV Phonology (RCVP). This model covers segmental structure as well as syllabic structure. A book-length exposition of this model is offered in van der Hulst (2020), to which I must refer readers for more details, and empirical support from typological studies on phonemic contrast, as well as insights that the model provides about affinities between traditional features that are usually captured in terms of stipulative redundancy rules.1 Such affinities are ‘built in’ into the model, which uses only two elements that, given their structural position in an intrasegmental dependency structure, express all ‘features’ that are necessary to capture all phonemic contrasts that have been attested. While this chapter contains a brief comparison between RCVP and two other models (Contrastive Hierarchy Theory and versions of Government Phonology), the book devotes a chapter to comparison to many other theories of segmental structure. I also show in this book how the principles of RCVP can be applied in the domain of sign phonology. An extensive application of how the model can deal with vowel harmony systems can be found in van der Hulst (2018), which combines the RCVP perspective on vowel structure with a notion of licensing of ‘variable elements’ to account for vowel harmony patterns in both relatively simple and more complex cases that involve transparent and opaque vowels. Inevitably, the model has gone through different versions. This article is faithful to the 2020 version, with the exception of how I here propose to deal with distinctions that are traditionally captured by features such as [ATR], [RTR], [low and high]. Section 2 briefly states my background assumptions about some central issues in phonology. Section 3 then provides an outline of the RCVP model. Sections 4 and 5 discuss comparisons with Contrastive Hierarchy Theory and Government Phonology. In section 6 I consider some alternatives to the 2020 model with regard to tongue root distinctions. I offer some conclusions in section 7.","PeriodicalId":343949,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Element Theory","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Element Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110691948-005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
My goal in this article is contribute to the discussion about different perspectives on element theory. To this end, I provide an outline of my perspective, which is captured in a model that I have been developing over many years, called Radical CV Phonology (RCVP). This model covers segmental structure as well as syllabic structure. A book-length exposition of this model is offered in van der Hulst (2020), to which I must refer readers for more details, and empirical support from typological studies on phonemic contrast, as well as insights that the model provides about affinities between traditional features that are usually captured in terms of stipulative redundancy rules.1 Such affinities are ‘built in’ into the model, which uses only two elements that, given their structural position in an intrasegmental dependency structure, express all ‘features’ that are necessary to capture all phonemic contrasts that have been attested. While this chapter contains a brief comparison between RCVP and two other models (Contrastive Hierarchy Theory and versions of Government Phonology), the book devotes a chapter to comparison to many other theories of segmental structure. I also show in this book how the principles of RCVP can be applied in the domain of sign phonology. An extensive application of how the model can deal with vowel harmony systems can be found in van der Hulst (2018), which combines the RCVP perspective on vowel structure with a notion of licensing of ‘variable elements’ to account for vowel harmony patterns in both relatively simple and more complex cases that involve transparent and opaque vowels. Inevitably, the model has gone through different versions. This article is faithful to the 2020 version, with the exception of how I here propose to deal with distinctions that are traditionally captured by features such as [ATR], [RTR], [low and high]. Section 2 briefly states my background assumptions about some central issues in phonology. Section 3 then provides an outline of the RCVP model. Sections 4 and 5 discuss comparisons with Contrastive Hierarchy Theory and Government Phonology. In section 6 I consider some alternatives to the 2020 model with regard to tongue root distinctions. I offer some conclusions in section 7.
我在这篇文章中的目标是对元素理论的不同观点的讨论做出贡献。为此,我提供了我的观点大纲,这是我多年来开发的一个模型,称为激进CV语音(RCVP)。这个模型既包括音段结构,也包括音节结构。van der Hulst(2020)对该模型进行了一本书长度的阐述,我必须向读者提供更多细节,以及音位对比的类型学研究的经验支持,以及该模型提供的关于传统特征之间的亲和力的见解,这些特征通常是根据规定冗余规则获得的这种亲和性被“内置”到模型中,它只使用两个元素,考虑到它们在分段内依赖结构中的结构位置,它们表达了捕获已证实的所有音位对比所必需的所有“特征”。虽然这一章包含RCVP和其他两种模式(对比层次理论和政府音韵学版本)之间的简要比较,但本书专门用一章来比较许多其他分段结构理论。在这本书中,我还展示了RCVP的原理如何应用于符号音韵学领域。在van der Hulst(2018)中可以找到该模型如何处理元音和谐系统的广泛应用,该模型将RCVP对元音结构的看法与“可变元素”许可的概念相结合,以解释涉及透明和不透明元音的相对简单和更复杂情况下的元音和谐模式。不可避免地,这种模式经历了不同的版本。本文忠实于2020年版本,除了我在这里提出的如何处理传统上由[ATR]、[RTR]、[low and high]等特征捕获的区别。第2节简要陈述了我对音韵学中一些核心问题的背景假设。然后,第3节提供了RCVP模型的大纲。第4节和第5节讨论了与对比等级理论和政府音韵学的比较。在第6节中,我考虑了关于舌根区分的2020模型的一些替代方案。我在第7节中给出了一些结论。