|
Theoretical issues in Korean and English phonology
Shinsook Lee
Ph.D. Dissertation, 1994
Abstract
In Autosegmental Phonology, the phonological component is seen as a set
of interacting submodules, such as Feature Geometry, Underspecification,
Prosodic Lexical Phonology, and Optimality, rather than a homogeneous
system. The goals of this dissertation are to evaluate these subsystems
in relation to problematic phenomena of Korean and English phonology and
to provide a more principled explanation of the latter. I show that the
Revised Constriction Theory with the peripheral node, which groups labials
and velars, not only expresses non-coronals as a natural class but also
accounts for the asymmetry of Korean place assimilation. I also show that
several phonological phenomena in Korean provide arguments for (Revised)
Constriction Theory: the blocking effect of both underlying and derived
palatals in umlaut, the fact that vowel palatalization is triggered only
by coronal consonants, and the transparency of the vowels /i/ and /i/
in vowel harmony. I propose that front vowels should have both the coronal
node and the feature value (-anterior) under it; I argue that this representation
not only explains these phenomena in a principled way, but also provides
insight into English palatalization as well. Concerning several prosodically-bounded
processes, I show that dialect differences and lexical idiosyncracies
relating to Stray Erasure in Korean receive a satisfactory explanation
under Optimality Theory, which allows alternate rankings between the Korean-specific
Peripherality Constraint and the universal Coda Sonority Constraint. Moreover,
I propose an analysis of Coda Licensing in Korean, which appeals to the
peripheral node, and argue that it is superior to other analyses, given
that peripherality also crucially figures into place assimilation and
Stray Erasure. For English, I show that the problem of bracketing paradoxes
is resolved by positing the prosodic word. With the prosodic word, I account
for (a) the different behavior of several segmental rules with respect
to level 1 and level 2 suffixes and (b) the alternation of inflectional
morphemes as a single process of prosodic licensing.
|
|