Cyclic and lexical phonology: the structure of Polish 9783111392837, 9783111030333

Table of contents :
Foreword
Symbols and abbreviations
Chapter 1: Theoretical background
Chapter 2: Polish phonology and morphology: some preliminaries
Chapter 3: The status of loanwords in phonological theory and the treatment of exceptions
Chapter 4: Palatalization of coronal consonants
Part A: Basic principles of cyclic phonology
Part B: Further descriptive implications
Chapter 5: Velar consonants and nasal vowels
Part A: Further evidence for rule cyclicity and the problem of ab¬stractness
Part B: Other cyclic rules
Chapter 6: Labio-velar Palatalization and Lower
Chapter 7: Postcyclic rules and the predictions of cyclic phonology
Part A: Rules and predictions
Part B: Further postcyclic rules
Chapter 8: From cyclic to lexical phonology
Chapter 9: Cyclic and lexical phonology: results and prospects
Summary of rules
References

Citation preview

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

Studies in Generative Grammar The goal of this series is to publish those texts that are representative of recent advances in the theory of formal grammar. Too many studies do not reach the public they deserve because of the depth and detail that make them unsuitable for publication in article form. We hope that the present series will make these studies available to a wider audience than has hitherto been possible. Editors: Jan Koster Henk van Riemsdijk Other books in this series: 1. Wim Zonneveld A Formal Theory of Exceptions in Generative Phonology 2. PieterMuysken Syntactic Developments in the Verb Phrase of Ecuadorian Quechua 3. Geert Booij Dutch Morphology 4. Henk van Riemsdijk A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness 5. Jan Koster Locality Principles in Syntax 6. PieterMuysken (ed.) Generative Studies on Creole Languages 7. Anneke Neijt Gapping 8. ChristerPlatzack The Semantic Interpretation of Aspect and Aktionsarten 9. Noam Chomsky Lectures on Government and Binding 10. Robert May and Jan Koster (eds.) Levels of Syntactic Representation 11. Luigi Rizzi

Issues in Italian Syntax 12. Osvaldo Jaeggli Topics in Romance Syntax 13. Hagit Borer Parametric Syntax 14. Denis Bouchard On the Content of Empty Categories 15. Hilda Koopman The Syntax of Verbs 16. Richard S. Kayne Connectedness and Binary Branching

Jerzy Rubach

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

The Structure of Polish

1984

FORIS PUBLICATIONS Dordrecht - Holland/Cinnaminson - U.S.A.

Published by:

Foris Publications Holland P.O. Box 509 3300 AM Dordrecht, The Netherlands Sole distributor for the U.S.A. and Canada: Foris Publications U.S.A. P.O. Box C-50 Cinnaminson N.J. 08077 U.S.A.

CIP-GEGEVENS Rubach, Jerzy Cyclic and Lexical Phonology. The Structure of Polish / Jerzy Rubach. - Dordrecht : Foris Publications. - (Studies in generative grammar ; 17) With ref. ISBN 90 6765 0129 bound ISBN 90 6765 O i l 0 pbk. SISO pool 837.2 UDC 808.4-4 Subject heading : phonology; Polish linguistics.

ISBN 90 6765 012 9 (Bound) ISBN 90 6765 O i l 0 (Paper) © 1984 Foris Publications - Dordrecht. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the copyright owner. Printed in the Netherlands by ICG Printing, Dordrecht.

To Maryna

Contents

Foreword Symbols and abbreviations

XI XIII

Chapter 1: Theoretical background 1.1. Goals of the book 1.2. The standard theory (SPE) 1.3. The standard theory modified: Kiparsky's Alternation Condition 1.4. Cyclic phonology 1.5. Cyclic phonology and the Revised Alternation Condition .. 1.6. Formal properties of cyclic rules 1.7. The role of the lexicon

1 1 1 7 11 17 17 17

Chapter 2: Polish phonology and morphology: some preliminaries . . . 2.1. Polish orthography 2.2. Inventory of underlying segments 2.2.1. Consonants 2.2.2. Vowels 2.3. Major rules of Polish phonology 2.4. Verb morphology 2.4.1. Verb stems 2.4.2. Derived verbal forms 2.4.3. Derived Imperfective 2.4.4. Present tense 2.4.5. Preterite 2.5. Some nominal and adjectival suffixes 2.5.1. Diminutive 2.5.2. Yer inflectional suffixes 2.5.3. Masculine nominative plural 2.5.4. The nominalizing suffix -stw2.5.5. Adjectival -sk- and -n2.5.6. Gender suffixes 2.6. Assignment of cyclic bracketing

21 21 23 23 27 30 35 35 36 37 38 39 40 40 41 41 42 42 43 44

VIII

Contents

Chapter 3: The status of loanwords in phonological theory and the treatment of exceptions 3.1. Nativization 3.2. Etymological borrowings 3.3. Folk etymology 3.4. The treatment of exceptions 3.5. Guide to the organization of further analysis

49 49 51 53 55 57

Chapter 4: Palatalization of coronal consonants 4.0. Guide

59 59

Part A: Basic principles of cyclic phonology

59

4.1. Coronal Palatalization 4.4.1. Introduction 4.1.2. The SPE framework 4.1.3. Basic generalization: evidence for the cyclic status .. 4.1.4. Formalization of the rule 4.1.5. The problem of abstractness 4.2. lotation: evidence for the Strict Cyclicity Principle 4.3. Word formation rules and phonological rules: the imperative 4.4. ./-deletion 4.5. Vowel deletion 4.6. Gliding

59 59 60 61 68 75 75 85 92 97 101

Part B: Further descriptive implications

101

4.7. Noncontinuant Depalatalization

101

Chapter 5: Velar consonants and nasal vowels 5.0. Guide

109 109

Part A: Further evidence for rule cyclicity and the problem of abstractness

110

5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 5.4. 5.5. 5.6.

First Velar Affricate Palatalization Spirantization Second Velar The abstractness controversy Nasal vowels 5.6.1. The problem 5.6.2. Surface facts and surface generalizations 5.6.3. Vowel Shift 5.6.4. The nouns 5.6.5. Residual problems 5.6.6. Conclusion

110 115 119 121 127 130 130 133 135 144 147 147

Contents

IX

Part B: Other cyclic rules

148

5.7. Strident Palatalization 5.8. Fronting

148 151

Chapter 6: Labio-velar Palatalization and Lower 6.0. Guide 6.1. Basic facts 6.2. Surface labial palatalization: the Strict Cyclicity conditions combined 6.3. Surface velar palatalization: rule cyclicity and recent grammatical change 6.4. Lower: evidence for the cycle

165 165 166

174 184

Chapter 7: Postcyclic rules and the predictions of cyclic phonology . . 7.0. Guide

193 193

Part A: Rules and predictions

194

167

7.1. Nasal Palatal Assimilation and the predictions for phonological interference 194 7.2. Liquid spell-out rules 198 7.3. Retraction and the predictions for the assimilation of borrowings 201 7.4. Regressive Devoicing: postcyclic neutralization rules 206 Part B: Further postcyclic rules

208

7.5. Prevocalic Deletion 7.6. Feature Adjustment

209 211

Chapter 8: From cyclic to lexical phonology

8.0 Guide 8.1. Morphological and phonological derivation: a change in the model 8.2. The Elsewhere Condition and lexical identity rules 8.3. Strict Cyclicity and derivational levels 8.4. Prosodic phonology in the lexical model 8.4.1. Strict Cyclicity 8.4.2. The prosodic hierarchy 8.5. Incompatibility of the morphological and the phonological derivation 8.6. Vowel Shift: a syllable oriented revision

215

215 215 217 219 221 221 223 224 229

Chapter 9: Cyclic and lexical phonology: results and prospects

233

Summary of rules

241

References

247

Foreword

This study is a presentation of the theory of cyclic and lexical phonology. The roots of this new linguistic paradigm go back particularly to Chomsky and Halle's (1968) The Sound Pattern of English on one hand, and to Kiparsky's work on the other. We look at the implementation of the cyclic paradigm in the study of Polish. The assumptions of cyclic phonology which we develop in chapter 1 are reviewed later in light of lexical phonology (chapter 8), a theory which has grown out directly from cyclic phonology. The presentation of the theoretical paradigm is organized around descriptive problems of Polish: the rules of Coronal Palatalization and lotation in chapter 4, Velar Palatalizations and Nasal Vowels in chapter 5 as well as Labio-velar /-insertion and Lower in chapter 6. Chapter 7 presents some postcyclic rules which are interesting from a theoretical point of view. The most important theoretical conclusions are summed up in chapter 9. In terms of the description of Polish this book owes much to earlier studies in the generative framework, especially to Gussmann (1978) and (1980a), Laskowski (1975) as well as to Steele (1973), Paulsson (1974) and Rubach (1977a). The data base of this book is much broader than that of the previous studies since we look at the analysis of words which are borrowings from the etymological point of view. I would like to express my gratitude to Morris Halle, Paul Kiparsky and Nick Clements. Their ability to criticize ideas in a truly inspiring way as well as their exceptional talent for promoting linguistic research have greatly helped me with my work on this book. I have also received much helpful criticism from Geert Booij, Jacek Fisiak, Horace Lunt and Kazimierz Polanski. I would like to acknowledge the financial help which has made direct contact with a wider international linguistic community possible. I deeply appreciate the support given to me under the Fulbright-Hays Program which enabled me to spend a year at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. I have a special debt to Vrije Universiteit. I was able to do much of the research for this book when I was in Amsterdam for a period of three months in 1983 and in 1984.

XII

Foreword

Finally I am indebted to Tom Wachtel for a number of stylistic and substantive suggestions and improvements. Let me state very clearly that the responsibility for any flaws and errors in this book is solely mine.

Symbols and Abbreviations

UR WFR SPE // // / / [ ] c 3 3 ϊ C 3 s' z c 3 ή k' g' x' Yer -

underlying representation word formation rule Sound Pattern of English by N. Chomsky and M. Halle (1968) underlying representation intermediate representation phonetic representation voiceless alveolar affricate voiced alveolar affricate voiceless postalveolar fricative voiced postalveolar fricative voiceless postalveolar affricate voiced postalveolar affricate voiceless prepalatal fricative voiced prepalatal fricative voiceless prepalatal affricate voiced prepalatal affricate prepalatal nasal postpalatal, i.e. prevelar, obstruents a fleeting vowel which shows zero -e/i alternation: [ϊ] - front yer, [ϊ] - back yer e upper mid front vowel = IPA [e] e lower mid front vowel = IPA [ε] ο - lower mid back vowel = IPA [o] D.I. derived imperfective dimin. - diminutive aug. - augmentative pejor. - pejorative Ν - noun Adj. or A - adjective Adv. - adverb nom. - nominative gen. genitive dat. - dative ace. - accusative instr. instrumental

XIV

Symbols and Abbreviations

loc. voc. pers. imper. masc. fern. σ F m m'

-

locative vocative personal imperative masculine feminine syllable foot 'mot', i.e. phonological word 'mot'prime, i.e. phonological compound

Chapter 1

Theoretical Background

1.1.

Goals of the book

The goal of this book is to give a detailed presentation of the theory of cyclic phonology and its subsequent improvement in the form of lexical phonology. The assumptions of the cyclic paradigm are laid out in section .1.4. of the chapter. The ensuing chapters investigate various consequences of cyclic phonology and show how this theory leads to a thorough-going restructuring of the phonological component of the grammar. The modifications introduced by lexical phonology are discussed in chapter 8. Cyclicity is not merely an algorithm for rule application. It is viewed as a constraint on the abstractness of underlying representations. We show that the kind of abstractness permitted by The Sound Pattern of English (SPE, hereafter) type of phonology leads to a loss of generalization and to incorrect predictions. The SPE paradigm cannot provide an explanation of how ety mo logically foreign words are accomodated by the grammar of the native language. This paradigm, unlike cyclic phonology, has an undesirable consequence of assigning the status of exceptions to words which should, it is claimed, be treated as perfectly regular cases. In descriptive terms the goal of the book is to show how the cyclic and the lexical frameworks illuminate the phonology of Polish clarifying the problems raised by the excessive abstractness and unexplained exceptions of previous analyses. We provide a detailed account of all the central issues in Polish phonology. Our interest centres primarily on the rules of, palatalization since they are the backbone of Polish morphophonemics. This book is the first study of the functioning of borrowings in the structure of Polish. It thus brings into the scene a number of data which have never been considered before. There is hardly a rule in the standard description of Polish which has not been revised and modified in this book. In some instances we posit new rules which capture generalizations which have never been expressed or even noticed before. 1.2.

The standard theory (SPE)

Generative phonology recognizes two significant levels of representation:

2

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

underlying structure and surface structure. Surface representations are derived by means of applying phonological rules. Central to this model of the organization of phonology are the following two questions: (i) (ii)

how do rules apply? what constitutes an underlying representation?

The standard theory of generative phonology as laid out in SPE assumes that rules apply in a fixed order. Furthermore, the ordering of rules is linear, i.e. a rule A precedes B, B precedes C, etc. Phonological strings have a structure. Thus, for example, the phrase national education can minimally be analysed as consisting of two words: the adjective national and the noun education. Together they form a noun phrase (NP): (1)

[ [national] Ad j [education] N ] ^

Upon further consideration it turns out that each of the minimal constituents in (1) has a structure of its own. The word national is an adjective from nation: (2)

[ [nation] N al] Adj

The noun nation can further be split into two constituents: not- which is a stem as shown by its paradigmatic relatedness to native (nat+ive) and -ion which is a nominalizing suffix: (3)

[[[nat] S T E M ion] N al]Adj

Similarly, education consists of the verb educate and the nominalizing suffix -ion. Thus the structure of the phrase national education is as in (4): (4)

[ [ [ [nat] STEM ion] N al] Adj [ [educat] γ ion] N ]Np

Once we realize that strings have a structure, a question arises whether this constituent structure should play a role in phonological derivation. In particular, one may wonder whether or not this structure should be connected with the mode of rule application. Assume that the underlying representation of national is [ [ [ nit ] +ion] +ael], where plusses mark morpheme boundaries. Surface representation is derived by means of applying rules A, B, and C. There are two conceivable ways in which the word may be derived:

Theoretical Background (i) (ii)

3

the whole string is subjected to rules with no regard to constituent structure; the derivation proceeds as dictated by the constituent structure of the word.

Observe that the constituent structure is hierarchical. The representation given in (3) is equivalent to the following tree diagram:

(3')

STEM na?t

+

ion

+ ael

Alternative (i) assumes the following mode of derivation: (5)

naFt+ion+asl Rule A Rule B RuleC

Alternative (ii) organizes the derivation according to the hierarchy of constituent structure (numbers show constituents): (6)

[ [ [ n s t ] j ion] 2 ael]3

Stage 1: constituent (1)

niet Rule A Rule B RuleC

Stage 2: constituent (2)

nät ion Rule A Rule B RuleC

Stage 3: constituent (3)

met ion ael Rule A Rule B RuleC

4

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

In (6) each of the constituents is derived separately, i.e. phonological rules reapply in the same order at each successive step in the derivation. This mode of organizing derivation is known as cyclic and particular stages in the derivation are called cycles. Thus in (6) we have three cycles, one for each constituent. The rules which reapply at each cycle are called cyclic rules. Other rules are postcyclic and they apply to the whole string at once. The idea of the cycle is older than that of generative phonology if we assume that the latter started with Halle's The Sound Pattern of Russian (1959). The notion of the cycle goes back to the suggestion made originally in Chomsky, Halle and Lukoff (1956). In the standard theory the most important evidence for the cycle in phonology is basically of two types: (i)

Cyclic application makes available to us certain facts from the derivation of particular constituents of a given string and these facts are relevant to the whole structure.

A classic example here is the pair compEnsation vs. condEnsation (capital letters mark the relevant vowels). As observed in SPE (p. 39), the lack of vowel reduction in the second syllable of condEnsation is due to the fact that the word is derived from the verb condense where e is stressed. This is not the case in compEnsation, hence we have the surface contrast: [9] in compensation vs. [e] in condensation. (ii)

The cycle helps solve the so-called "ordering paradoxes". This point requires a more detailed explanation.

As has already been said, phonological rules form an ordered set. Consequently, if rule A is ordered before B then the two rules should always apply in this order. An ordering paradox may consist in the fact that in the derivation of one class of items the correct order of application is A - B but in the derivation of some other items the order must be reversed: B - A, or even worse, A seems to both precede and follow B: A - B - A. An example of this kind was discussed in Halle (1963). We are not interested here in a defence of this particular analysis. We merely wish to illustrate what is meant by an ordering paradox. Consequently, we shall simply assume Halle's underlying representations and the rules as presented in his paper. Russian has a rule of palatalization which, among others, derives [$] from //s// 1 in the environment before a nonround vowel followed by a round vowel. The relevant portion of the rule is as in (7):

Theoretical Background

There is also a rule of vowel deletion: (8)

γ ->

0 / -

V

The verb pw/zw [p'i$u] Ί write' could be derived in a noncyclic manner (we by-pass the problem of stress assignment): (9)

p'is+a+o+u p'i$+a+o+u p'i$+o+u p'i3+u

Rule (7) Rule (8) Rule (8)

However, a noncyclic derivation of broshu [broSu] Ί throw' leads to an ordering paradox. The application of (7) before (8) results in an incorrect output: (10)

bros'+i+i+u bros'+i+u bros'+u

Rule (7) Rule (8) Rule (8)

* bros'+u It seems that in (10) the rules should apply in a reversed order: (8) must precede (7). In fact this is incorrect too. Rule (7) should apply after (8) has applied once deleting the first //i// but before (8) reapplies to delete the second //i//://bros'+i+i+u// -»· /bros'+i+u/ by V-del. ->· /bro$+i+u/ by palatalization -»· [broS+u] by V-del. The paradox is solved easily if we allow rules to apply in a cyclic fashion. Relevant here are cycles 3 and 4: (11)

[ [p'is+a+o] 3 +u] 4 [ [bros'+i+i] 3 + u]4

Cycle 3: p'is+a+o p'i$+a+o p'i$+o

bros'+i+i bros'+i

Rule (7) Rule (8)

Cycle 4: p'i$+o+u

bros'+i+u bro$+i+u bro$+u

Rule (7) Rule (8)

p'i$+u

6

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

Let us look at yet another instance of an ordering paradox. It comes from the analysis of Catalan presented in Mascaro (1976). In Catalan /rj/ is not an underlying segment. It is derived by a rule of Nasal Assimilation (for a full formal statement of this rule and rule (13) below, cf. Mascaro (1976)):

(12)

Assimilation

· \ / - labial/velar stops

Rule (12) applies inside words and across word boundaries. Catalan has also a rule of Cluster Simplification. The portion of the rule relevant to our discussion deletes stops after nasals and before a word boundary:

r-continn (13)

Simplification

aback -> Ulabial J

r +nas η 0 /

aback -# L labialJ

Rules (12) and (13) operate jointly to derive forms such as [berj] from underlying //ben+k// venc Ί sell', where k is the suffix of the 1 p.sg. pres. indicative. It is clear that Assimilation must precede Simplification: //ben+k// -»· /berj+k/ ->· [berj]. The opposite ordering would have produced incorrect *[ben]. The word vint 'twenty' has the underlying representation //bint// and the appearance of the surface allomorphs [bint] vs. [bin] is governed by the rule of Cluster Simplification: [bint] occurs if the environment of Simplification is not met e.g. in [binte] 'twentieth'. In the phrase vint pans 'twenty bread loaves', vint surfaces as [bim] due to the operation of Assimilation. Thus the derivation must proceed as follows: //bint pans// -*· /bin pans/ -» [bim pans]. This shows that Cluster Simplification must be ordered before Assimilation as otherwise the underlying //t// of //bint// would block Assimilation. We have an ordering paradox: for the derivation of venc Ί sell' rule (12) must precede (13) while in the derivation of vint pans 'twenty bread loaves' the order must be reversed. The paradox disappears if rules apply cyclically. The phrase venc vint pans Ί sell twenty bread loaves' is derived as follows (#*s omitted, the cycles marked by numbers):

Theoretical Background

(14)

3 [ 2 [ifl>en]k]

Cycle 1

-

Cycle 2

ben k beg k beg

Cycle 3

beg —

2[

jfbint]

t [pans]]]

-

-

bint

pans -

bin

pans

Assim.(12) Simplif. (13)

bin bim -

pans pans -

Assim. (12) Simplif. (13)

The form /ben/ does not undergo Assimilation since rule (12) cannot affect velar nasals. Summing up, the standard theory of the SPE type uses the concept of the phonological cycle as a principle which governs the mode of rule application. The second basic question which we raised at the beginning of this section, i.e. the question of what constitutes an underlying representation, is inherently connected with the problem of abstractness. The standard theory recognizes what Postal called the Naturalness Condition. This Condition says that underlying representations may deviate from phonetic representations "only to the extent required by the existing regularities of the language or of language generally" (Postal 1968:73). In its wording, the Naturalness Condition says very little since the notion of what constitutes a regularity is left undefined. However, it stresses an inherent link between phonetics and phonology and it requires that the abstractness of underlying representations should always be motivated. There is no answer, however, to the question of how far in the abstractness one may go. This issue is discussed by Kiparsky, who proposes a constraint on underlying representation known as the Alternation Condition. 1.3.

The standard theory modified: Kiparsky 's Alternation Condition

If one assumes, as we did, that the standard theory is the theory of generative phonology as presented in SPE, then Kiparsky's (1968) "How abstract is phonology" is certainly a departure from it. Kiparsky's point was to impose a restriction on the abstractness of underlying representations. This restriction, called the Alternation Condition, had basically the effect of entering surface forms as underlying in cases there was no alternation. However, the notion of "surface form" was understood in its broad meaning, i.e. allophonic modifications were not coded in underlying representation. Thus the aspiration of p in English pit would not be recorded as part of the word's UR.

8

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

The exact wording of the Alternation Condition need not concern us here as Kiparsky himself changed it in a later paper (Kiparsky 1973a). The important point is that the two fundamental issues in generative phonology, i.e. the problem of how rules apply and of the abstractness of underlying representations, were dissociated in the standard theory including Kiparsky's (1968) modification. Kiparsky's (1973a) paper "Abstractness, opacity, and global rules" is a major change in the development of generative phonology. Kiparsky observes that one can limit the abstractness of underlying representations indirectly by imposing certain restrictions on the application of phonological rules. The application of rules and the abstractness problem can be viewed as a single issue since whatever cannot be derived by rules must be stated at the underlying level. Consequently, one should seek to discover a principle which would disallow phonological rules to apply to certain forms. Kiparsky's by now celebrated example comes from Finnish. Finnish has the following two rules:

(15)

t

->

s /

i

and

(16)

e -* i /

#

Rule (15) operates on structures in which /i/ either appears across a morpheme boundary or it is derived via rule (16): (17)

UR:

halut+i Vanted' halus+i

vete tili Svater' 'account' veti vesi -

Rule (16) Rule (15)

The behaviour of these words leads to establishing the notion of derived environment (or input) which means either (18a) or (18b): (18) a. b.

Derived environment: two segments are separated by a morphological boundary; a segment is created in the course of phonological derivation, i.e. it is not present at the underlying level but rather it is derived by applying a rule: the /i/ in vesi //vete// Vater' vs. the //i// in tili //tili// 'account'.

Kiparsky observes that there is a certain class of rules which should be al-

Theoretical Background

9

lowed to apply exclusively in derived environments. This restriction on rule application is an indirect way of constraining the abstractness of underlying representations. To see how such a constraint is implemented, assume that we are dealing with a language which has rules (15) and (16) as in Finnish. Assume further that (15) is a "derived environment" rule, i.e. it applies only if (18) is met. Now all the words containing an invariable phonetic structure [siC], where C stands for a consonant, must be interpreted as derived from //siC//, i.e. underlying representation is identical to phonetic representation. This interpretation is an automatic consequence of the following two facts: (i)

(ii)

condition (18b) is not met because the structure [siC] cannot have a derivable [i] since rule (16) is inapplicable: [i] could not be derived from //e// as rule (16) applies before a word boundary and in the instance under discussion /i/ is followed by a consonant and not by a word boundary; condition (18a) is not met either: [siC] does not have a morphological boundary between [s] and [i].

Since neither (18a) nor (18b) is met, (15) being a "derived environment" rule cannot apply. Consequently, if [siC] were construed to come from underlying //tiC//, then it would end up as phonetic *[tiCJ. It follows therefore that the underlying representation must be //siC// as found on the surface. In the SPE type of framework, where (18) does not function as a constraint, the structure would be more abstract: //tiC//. Kiparsky (1973a) was trying to determine on formal grounds which rules belong to the class of "derived environment" rules. In order to do so, he defined the notion of a neutralizing process as in (19): (19)

"Suppose we have a phonological process P: P A -» B / XC - DY where C, D represent a (phonological and/or morphological) context, and Χ, Υ are arbitrary strings. Then: — Ρ is neutralizing iff there are strings of the form CBD in the immediate input of Ρ - otherwise Ρ is non-neutralizing" (Kiparsky 1973:68).

Let us explain and exemplify Kiparsky's definition. A rule X is neutralizing if the structures produced by this rule in some class of words are found before the rule can apply in another class of words, i.e. CBD may either be part of the UR or it may be derived by a rule applying before X. Both of these possibilities for the source of CBD are found in the analysis of Regressive Devoicing in Polish.

10

Cyctic and Lexical Phonology

Polish has a rule which devoices obstruents before voiceless obstruents (for details see 7.4.): (20)

Devoicing

[+obstr] ->

[-voiced] /

[-voiced]

Thus the word wtad+c-Hi 'ruler' (cf. [d] in wlad+a+c 'rule') derived from //-d+c+a// surfaces as [-t+c+a] due to the operation of Devoicing. However, in the word zastfp+c+a 'deputy' the consonant preceding c must be voiceless at the underlying level since-we have [p] also in zastpp+owac 'replace'. Consequently, zastqpca 'deputy' has the structure //-p+c+a// and Devoicing applies vacuously. We have an instance of CBD (here voiceless obstruent before a voiceless obstruent) at the underlying level, i.e. before Devoicing applies. Now assume that the suffix -sk+i is derived from //-isk-//2. Polish has a rule which deletes //i// in some environments. This rule must apply before Devoicing since otherwise the vowel would incorrectly block Devoicing in e.g.arab+sk+i 'Arabic' //-b+isk-// -»· /b+sk/ by deletion-»· [p+sk] by Devoicing (otherwise //b// surfaces phonetically e.g. in Arab+a 'Arab', gen.). In the word chtop+sk+i farmer' (Adj.) p is underlyingly voiceless since it surfaces as [p] in e.g. chtop+a farmer'(gen.). The structure of the adjective cMopski is thus //-p+isk-//. There is no CBD at the underlying level as //p// stands before a vowel and not before a voiceless obstruent. However, the deletion rule, i ->· 0, which precedes Devoicing, creates a CBD: //-p+isk-// -> /p+sk/. We conclude that Devoicing is a neutralizing rule on both counts: there are CBD's at the underlying level (zastqpca 'deputy') and CBD's arise in the course of phonological derivation (chl&pski farmer', Adj.). The notions of "derived environment" and "neutralizing process" are crucial to the formulation of the Revised Alternation Condition which now reads as follows: (21)

Neutralization processes apply to derived forms (Kiparsky 1973a: 65).

In summary, Kiparsky (1973a) transfers the discussion about constraints on the abstractness of underlying representations from these representations themselves to the ways of constraining the application of rules. Thus the two fundamental issues in generative phonology, i.e. how rules apply and how abstract representations one should posit, are brought closer together. Yet, there is no direct link between the concept of the phonological cycle and the abstractness of underlying representations. In connection with Kiparsky's theory let us introduce the term opacity (converse: transparency) since we shall occasionally refer to rules being opaque or transparent.

Theoretical Background

11

Briefly, the most important point is that rules are opaque if (i) they have exceptions in surface representations and/or (ii) if the environment of the rule is not attested on the surface (the exact definitions are given in Kiparsky 1971, they are modified in Kiparsky 1973a:79). Clause (ii) may require some examples. Assume that the underlying representation of kaprys'+n+y 'capricious', the noun from kaprys 'caprice', is //kapri-s+in+i·//. Palatalization changes //s// to [s'] before //i//. The vowel is deleted later by another rule and hence the surface representation is [kapri-s'+n+i·]. We thus have [s'] on the surface but there is no trace of the vowel which has functioned as the environment for Palatalization. Consequently, Palatalization is opaque. 1.4.

Cyclic phonology

There is a further modification of the SPE phonology to be noted, now in the area of the phonological cycle. Kean (1974) has shown that the condition of Strict Cyclicity introduced by Chomsky (1973) in syntax is necessary also in phonology. According to this condition "on any cycle A no cyclic rule may apply to material within a previous cycle B without making crucial use of material uniquely in cycle A" (Kean 1974:179). In other words, cyclic rules are allowed to go back to an earlier cycle B after this cycle has been terminated only if their environment is met for the first time on a later cycle A. In all other instances the application of cyclic rules in the domain of the earlier cycle B is blocked by Strict Cyclicity. We shall illustrate the consequences of Strict Cyclicity later since Chomsky's principle applied to phonology by Kean has subsequently been revised. Now let us only observe that up to this point the theory of the phonological cycle and the ways of constraining the abstractness of underlying representations evolve separately in the development of generative phonology. Mascaro's (1976) insight lies in the fact that he combines into a single theory both of these streams: the cycle and the constraints on abstractness. In his investigation of the phonological cycle Mascaro (1976) discovers that Chomsky's Strict Cyclicity should be reformulated to permit cyclic rules to apply in derived environments as stated in (18b), i.e. when segments are produced in the course of phonological derivation. The other situation where derived environments occur, i.e. the presence of a morphological boundary, is automatically predicted by the concept of the phonological cycle since the domain of the cycle is dictated by morphological boundaries. In other words, the principle of Strict Cyclicity and the concept of the cycle jointly predict Kiparsky's results. Mescaro's formulation of Strict Cyclicity has been revised slightly by Halle (1978) and below we quote Halle's version:

12

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(22)

The Strict Cyclicity Principle "A cyclic rule R applies properly on cycle j only if either (a) or (b) is satisfied: (a) R makes specific use of information, part of which is available on a prior pass through the cyclic rules, and part of which becomes first available on cycle j. There are three separate cases subsumed under (a). R refers specifically to some A or Bin: (i) [. X A Y . . . [ Η . . . Β ...] Z]; ( ) [ Z [ H ..."B] XAY]; (iii) [/X [j.Ji A]Y [..; ... B . . . ] Z ] ; (b) R makes specific use of information assigned on cycle j by a rule applying before R". Clause (a) of the Strict Cyclicity Principle prevents cyclic rules from applying in the domain of one cycle solely. It requires that part of the structural description of the rule must be present in the domain of another cycle, i.e. no cyclic rule may apply to structures internal to a single cycle. In effect this means that cyclic rules cannot apply in morpheme internal positions. We thus have a constraint on the abstractness of underlying representations. Suppose there is a rule which changes //t// to a palatal affricate [c] before front vowels: (23)

t

->

c

Assume further that (23) is cyclic. Now phonetic structures such as [Xc+i] are derived from //Xt+i// since //t// and //i// are on different cycles and hence (23) is applicable (X is an arbitrary string):

(24)

UR [2 [j Xt ] i]

Cycle 1 Cycle 2

cyclic rules are blocked by Strict Cyclicity Xt-i-i Xc+i Rule (23)

However, morpheme internal phonetic representation [Xci] is set up as underlying //Xci// since (23) being cyclic could not derive [c] from //t//. In effect the underlying representation of this string is identical to the surface structure: the Strict Cyclicity Principle acts as a constraint on the abstractness of admissible representations. Clause (b) of Principle (22) defines the class of cases in which cyclic rules may go back to the cycle which has already been terminated. This

Theoretical Background

13

may happen only if a given rule X applying on a later cycle A has introduced changes which are feeding with respect to a rule Υ which is ordered after X. Then rule Υ may effect changes in the domain of an earlier cycle B. This application of Υ is possible only on the cycle A, i.e. on that cycle where the feeding change has been introduced. In all other cases cyclic rules cannot go back to the cycle which has been terminated. Let us look at some examples which illustrate the function of clause (b) in the Strict Cyclicity Principle. The examples come from Polish and they are discussed in detail in later chapters of this book. For our purpose now it is sufficient to give a considerably simplified version of the relevant rules. Assume that we have the following cyclic rules: (i) (ii) and (iii) (iv)

c k

-» C / - i -> c / - i, which is ordered after (i)

0 s

-> j / - V V -> $ / - j, which is ordered after (iii).

Assume further that Kozacy 'Cossacks' has the underlying representation //kozak+i// and kosza^ they mow' is derived from //kos+i+om//. The derivations proceed as in (25): (25) (a) [[[kozak]i]#] (b) [ [ [kos] i] om] Cycle 1: all cyclic rules are blocked by Strict Cyclicity (22a) Cycle 2:

kozak+i kozac+i

Cycle 3:

Rule(i) Rule (ii)

kozac+i # BLOCKED Rule (i) Rule (ii)

kos+i -

Rule (iii) Rule (iv)

kos+i+om kos+ji+om koS+ji+om

Rule (iii) Rule (iv)

In (25a) the application of rule (i) on the third cycle is blocked by Strict Cyclicity since the feeding change (k ->· c) has been performed on an earlier pass through the cycle. However, in (25b) rule (iv) is allowed to affect the structure within the domain of the earlier cycle because the feeding change (/-insertion) has been introduced on the same cycle by rule (iii) which is ordered before (iv). Clause (b) of Principle (22) allows cyclic rules to apply in yet another situation. Recall the Finnish example //vete// -»· [vesi]. Rule (16), e ->· i, applies on the word boundary cycle and introduces a feeding change with

14

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

respect to (15). Rule (15) may therefore go back to an earlier cycle and effect the change t ->· s. The interesting observation here is that this change affects a morpheme internal structure. Thus Principle (22b) permits cyclic rules to apply morpheme internally if the environment is created in the course of phonological derivation: (26) Cycle 1 : Cycle 2:

[ [vete] #] Strict Cyclicity (22a) blocks the application of cyclic rules vete # veti # Rule (16) vesi # Rule (15)

Polish Spirantization, which we discuss in 5.3., works exactly like rule (15), i.e. it affects morpheme internal structures provided they are derived by an earlier rule. Halle (1978) gives yet another version of the Strict Cyclicity Principle whose formulation he attributes to N. Clements: (27)

The Strict Cyclicity Principle: version 2 "A cyclic rule R applies properly on cycle j if and only if there is an immediately preceding cycle j-lsuch that R must make specific use of information not present in the string at the end ofthat cycle.

This version allows cyclic rules to apply in the following two types of underlying strings which are ruled out by (22): (0

[j Z [j-i · · · ]

(ii)

[j XA [j.j] . . . BZ]

(Halle 1978)

This version of Strict Cyclicity goes back to Mascaro's (1976) idea. It is a weaker constraint than (22) since it permits cyclic rules to apply cycle internally in affixes. In other words, both versions of Strict Cyclicity prevent cyclic rules from applying on the first (root) cycle in all instances where the environment is not derived by a cyclic rule applying on the same cycle (clause (b) in (22)). However, (27) permits cyclic rules to apply morpheme internally in all other cycles except the root cycle while (22) specifically excludes such applications and in this sense it is stronger (more restrictive) than (27). To illustrate the difference between (22) and (27), assume that we have the following hypothetical rule:

Theoretical Background

(28)

i -» j

/

-

15 V

Assume further that (28) is cyclic. On both versions of Strict Cyclicity the underlying structure //Xi+V//, where X is an arbitrary string of the root, will be changed to /Xj+V/ by rule (28). The two versions make different predictions in case of representations such as //X+iV//. The underlying / cannot be affected by (28) under version (22) but it can under version (27): (29)

(a) Both versions of Strict Cyclicity [ [X i] V] Cycle 2 X i + V X j + V (Rule (28) (b) Version (22) (c) Version (27) [ [X] iV] [ [X] iV] Cycle 2 X+iV X+iV BLOCKED Rule (28) X+jV Rule (28) Halle (1978) does not make any categorical choice between the two versions of Strict Cyclicity since he has not found any evidence to prefer one version over the other. Polish supports version (22) though the choice is made by a small margin (see Lower in 6.4.). Let us observe that the recognition of the class of cyclic rules in phonology has an interesting consequence for the theory of rule ordering. Recall that cyclic rules apply from smaller to larger constituents. Thus only a certain portion of the word is available to phonological rules at a time. It is therefore natural to assume that cyclic and postcyclic rules form separate blocs, i.e. postcyclic rules cannot apply in the middle of cyclic rules. Postcyclic rules have the property of being applicable to whole strings and consequently they could not apply at the time when only certain portions of the string are processed phono logically. For example, a postcyclic rule which affects a word with a cyclic structure [ [ [X] Y] Z] cannot apply when only the constituents Χ Υ are available. Summing up, the phonological component has two blocs of rules: cyclic and postcyclic and the former precede the latter. In other words, all cyclic rules are ordered before any postcyclic rule. There are interesting predictions which follow from this organization of phonology. Suppose we have a certain rule X which must be ordered before a given rule Υ and the latter is cyclic. The prediction then is that X must also be cyclic. Exactly the same is true in the area of postcyclic rules except that the direction of the prediction is reversed. If rule X is postcyclic and it is ordered before Υ then Υ must also be a postcyclic rule. We shall show in the course of our analysis that these predictions have

16

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

interesting empirical consequences (cf., for example, Spirantization in 5.3. and Nasal Palatal Assimilation in 7.1.). The assumptions presented in this section constitute a far going departure from the standard SPE type of theory. In fact we are dealing with a new phonological paradigm whose predictions in the area of rule application and in the structure of underlying representations are very different from the classical model. We therefore propose that this new paradigm be called cyclic phonology so as not to confuse it with the classical theory of the cycle on one hand and the classical procedure for the discovery of underlying representations on the other hand. Below we sum up the most important tenets of cyclic phonology: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)

(vi) (vii)

(viii)

(ix)

Phonological rules fall into two classes: cyclic rules and postcyclic rules. The two classes of rules form distinct sets, i.e. cyclic and postcyclic rules cannot be interspersed in a derivation. The bloc of cyclic rules precedes the bloc of postcyclic rules. Cyclic rules apply from smaller to larger constituents as dictated by bracketing. We assume that cyclic bracketing falls at morphological boundaries and the brackets are assigned starting from the root and further to enclose all affixes (see 2.6. for the bracketing convention). Cyclic rules apply in accordance with the Strict Cyclicity principle, which leads to the following further assumptions: No cyclic rule may apply in the domain of a single cycle unless (ix) below is applicable. Recall, however, that under version 2 of Strict Cyclicity presented in (27) this restriction does not hold for affixes. No cyclic rule may go back to a cycle which has been terminated unless a rule ordered before it has introduced a feeding change on the same cycle. A feeding change performed by a later rule on the cycle which has been terminated is irrelevant. A cyclic rule may apply in the domain of a single cycle (i.e. morpheme internally) exclusively under the circumstances described in (viii), i.e. when the environment is derived by rule. Then a cyclic rule goes back to an earlier cycle which may also be the first (root) cycle.

We shall show later how cyclic phonology has been improved by introducing some further principles. These new principles have the interesting consequence of simplifying the assumptions of cyclic phonology on one hand, and extending them on the other. The revised framework has been termed lexical phonology. We discuss it in chapters 8 and 9.

Theoretical Background 1.5.

17

Cyclic phonology and the Revised Alternation Condition

The Strict Cyclicity Principle discussed in the preceding section does two things at the same time: it guarantees proper application of cyclic rules (Kean's (1974) insight taken over from Chomsky (1973)) and, indirectly, it is a constraint on the abstractness of underlying representations. In this second capacity, Strict Cyclicity covers much of what has been previously subsumed under the Revised Alternation Condition. However, this "takeover" is not complete. In some ways Strict Cyclicity is a stronger claim than the Revised Alternation Condition since the rules which cannot apply morpheme internally must be compatible with the cyclic mode of application. This was not a requirement for the rules which were covered by the Revised Alternation Condition. In some other ways the Strict Cyclicity Principle as stated in (27), i.e. version 2, is less restrictive than the Revised Alternation Condition. Recall that on version 2 cyclic rules may apply to affixes where the environment need not be derived. Such application is ruled out by the Revised Alternation Condition. As we shall see cyclic phonology (but particularly lexical phonology, see chapter 9) can make the use of the + boundary redundant. Finally, the Revised Alternation Condition covers the class of neutralization rules. If this class were reinterpreted in cyclic phonology as the class of cyclic rules, then the predictions of the Revised Alternation Condition and the Strict Cyclicity Principle would, in this respect, be identical3. 1.6.

Formal properties of cyclic rules

An obvious question to ask is whether there are any formal properties which would allow us to predict whether a given rule should be cyclic or postcyclic. Mascaro (1976) claims that obligatory neutralization rules are cyclic. If Mascaro is right, then Polish Devoicing (20) must be a cyclic rule. We discuss this question in 7.4. Pesetsky (1979) has made a different claim. He finds that cyclic rules are those which admit unmotivated exceptions. As we shall see, neither Mascaro's nor Pesetsky's claim is fully tenable. 1.7.

The role of the lexicon

The idea that rules apply cyclically and that the cycles fall at morphological boundaries leads naturally to the question about the relation of cyclic rules to word formation rules (WFRs, hereafter). Some such relation must be specified at least for this class of WFRs which apply productively and actually generate words.

18

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

Assume that we have cyclic rules A, B, C and WFRs numbered 1, 2, and 3. These WFRs attach morphemes Χ, Υ, Ζ, respectively, to the root morpheme R. Theoretically one can imagine that the interaction of rules A, B, C and 1,2,3 may be either as in (i) below or as in (ii): Model (i) Cyclic rules apply among productive WFRs in the following way: Cycle 1: the root R is picked out from the lexicon; no cyclic phonological rules apply as Strict Cyclicity prevents their application on the first cycle. Cycle 2

[R]

X] R X'

Cycle 3

R X' Y'

Cycle 4

WFR 1 Rule A Rule B Rule C, where RX' is the structure de · rived by applying cyclic rules A, B, C.

WFR 2 Rule A Rule B RuleC

[ [R Χ' Υ'] Ζ] WFR 3 Rule A Rule B R Χ' Υ' Ζ' Rule C

Postcyclic rules Model (ii) WFRs as a bloc precede cyclic rules. (a) Lexical word-forming derivation: R R+X WFR 1 R+X+Y WFR 2 R+X+Y+Z WFR 3

Theoretical Background (b)

19

Assign cyclic bracketing at morphological boundaries starting from the root till the outer constituent is reached (see 2.6. for discussion): [ [ [ [R] Χ] Υ] Ζ]

(c) Phonological derivation: Cycle 2 R X Rule A Rule B RuleC

R X' Cycle 3

Cycle 4

R Χ'

Υ

R Χ'

Υ'

R X'

Υ'

R Χ'

Υ'

Rule A Rule Β RuleC Ζ

Ζ'

Rule A Rule Β RuleC

Po st cyclic rules . .. In model (i) cyclic rules apply in the lexicon together with WFRs and phonological derivation sensu stricto starts at the level of postcyclic rules. On the other hand, in model (ii) cyclic phonological rules apply also in the lexicon but after the word has been formed and cyclic bracketing has been assigned by convention. Figures (30i) and (30ii) illustrate the differences between the two models:

20

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(30)

(i) list of lexical entries

(ii)

list of lexical entries

WFRs and cyclic rules

WFRs

words

words cyclic rules

postcyclic rules

postcyclic rules

phonetic representation

phonetic repre· sentation Both of these models are compatible with the requirements of cyclic phonology. Model (30ii) is a weaker claim in that it does not require that cyclic bracketing, and hence the order in which phonological cycles are done, should mirror the application of WFRs. We shall first assume model (30ii). In chapter 8, however, we shall look at the differences of interpretation which arise if one assumes model (30i). In this book we shall be concerned with phonological rules (cyclic and postcyclic). In one instance, however, we shall look at WFRs in detail. This is the discussion of the imperative in 43. NOTES 1. We use double slashes to denote underlying segments, single slashes for intermediate representation, and square brackets for phonetic representation. 2. This representation as well as //Γη// in kaprysny 'capricious' given below will be motivated in 2.5.5. 3. Actually Kiparsky's Revised Alternation Condition also has a weak version which is different from the one cited in (21) in that it refers only to the class of neutralization rules which are non-automatic (cf. Kiparsky 1973a.) The weak version does not seem to work very well since Mascaro (1976) has shown that there are automatic rules which apply exclusively in derived environments.

Chapter 2

Polish Phonology and Morphology: Some Preliminaries

2.1.

Polish orthography

Readers who have not had any experience with Slavic may find it helpful to know some most important correspondences between letters and sounds, especially as Polish has a number of characters which diverge from the ordinary latinate alphabet. (31) Consonant letters (a) prepalatal sounds s or si — prepalatal voiceless fricative [s'J z or zi - prepalatal voiced fricative [z] c or ci — prepalatal voiceless affricate [c] dz or dzi — prepalatal voiced affricate [3 ] ή or ni — prepalatal nasal [ή]; note: before a fricative ή represents a nasalized front glide p]; (b) postalveolar stridents sz - postalveolar voiceless fricative [$] rz or ζ - postalveolar voiced fricative [2] cz - postalveolar voiceless affricate [C] dz - postalveolar voiced affricate [$] (c) velar fricative ch or h — voiceless velar fricative [x] (voiced before voiced obstruents); (d) alveolar affricates c — alveolar voiceless affricate [c] dz - alveolar voiced affricate [3 ] (e) semivowels / - front glide [j ] /· — back glide [w] but in the dialects of Eastern Poland it denotes a velarized dental lateral [4·]. Note: w is read [v]. (f) In Polish clusters of obstruents agree in voicing, i.e. they are uniformly either voiceless or voiced. Thus the letter which normally stands for a voiced consonant may actually represent a voiceless

22

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology sound, and conversely. We shall transcribe all clusters whenever this is essential to our discussion. See also Regressive Devoicing (20) in 1.3. and in 7.4.

(32) Vowel letters (a) The letter / represents sound [j] if it appears before a vowel letter. Otherwise / stands for [i]. These rules have one systematic exception: if / stands before a vowel letter and is preceded by s, z, c, dz or n then it is merely a diacritic denoting that the preceding letter represents a prepalatal sound: note the sequences given in (3la). Thus, for example, pies 'dog' and diabet 'devil' are read /pjes/ and /djabew/ but sierp 'sickle' is pronounced /s'erp/ and not */sjerp/. (b) The letter y invariably represents a high central nonround vowel

M-

(c) The "nasal vowel" letters ς and q represent combinations of [e] and [o], respectively, and nasal consonants or a nasalized back glide [w]: (i) before stops and affricates et and a, are pronounced as sequences of oral vowels followed by nasal consonants which are assimilated to the point of articulation of the stop or affricate. The general formula is /VN/ and, specifically, it stands for one of the following combinations:

ο

m n ή D

For example, zej y 'teeth' is pronounced [zembi], compare also prett 'rod' [prent], sqdzic 'judge' [sortie], rqka 'hand' [rerjka]; (ii) before fricatives e represents [ew] and q is read [ow], e.g. wqch 'sense of smell' [vewx], \vqs 'moustache' [vows]; (iii) word final ς, q are pronounced as oral vowels and the nasalized glide [w]: [ew] and [ow]. In some dialects the glide is replaced by [m]. Thus q is rendered as [om]. (d) The letters ς and q are pronounced as oral vowels [e] and [o], respectively, if they stand before the letter l· or /, e.g. zaczql 'he began' [zaCow], zaczqli 'they began' (masc.) [zaoel'i].

Polish Phonology and Morphology 2.2.

23

The inventory of underlying segments

2.2.1. Consonants In this section we shall comment on the following two problems: (i) the inventory of underlying consonants whenever the answer is not obvious; (ii) the use of phonetic features to describe underlying segments in all cases where the classification of segments is not self-evident. The discussion is summed up in the table of underlying segments and their feature matrices. The system of underlying consonants of Polish is by and large uncontroversial. In the early days of generative phonology analyses were produced to exclude the so-called "palatals" from the underlying inventory (cf. for example, Lightner 1963). However, in a number of words "palatals" appear in the environment of back vowels or consonants: (33)

[ca-] cal-y Svhole', [la-] lalka 'doll', [Su-] szukac 'search', [Za-] zar 'heat', [Ca-] czas 'time', [sa] siarka 'sulphur', [za·] ziarno 'grain', [ca-] ciarki 'creeps', [su-] dziura 'hole', [na-] niania 'nurse', fob-] dzban 'jar', [sr-] s'ruba 'screw', etc.

Gussmann (1980a) has correctly pointed out that any attempt to derive these "palatals" from underlying plain consonants would be unjustified. The back vowel in each case would have to be preceded by a front vowel (in some words by a front glide) so as to trigger palatalization rules. Needless to say, there is no independent motivation to posit such underlying representations outside the desire to get rid of "palatals". One would therefore end up with a highly circular analysis. In the case of palatalizing vowels necessary to derive [s' z 6 3 ] this move would be unwelcome on still further grounds: we would violate the regularity that no native words can have vowel clusters inside the same morpheme. It thus seems uncontroversial that the "palatals" must be part of the underlying inventory of Polish. The use of the term "palatals" can be very misleading. In traditional descriptions of Polish a distinction is drawn between functional and phonetic palatals. The former include /I c 3 S Z C $/ which are palatals only in the sense that they can alternate with plain consonants /4- t d s z r k g χ/ and used to be phonetically "soft" until the 15/16thc. From the articulatory point of view /I c 3/ are alveolar and /S i, £ $/ are postalveolar hard consonants. The back lateral /}·/ is different from /!/ in that the former is dental and velarized. In most dialects of Polish /!·/ is realized as [w] but there is plentiful evidence from many different areas of pho-

24

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

nology to substantiate the claim that /!·/ has to be recognized as a member of the underlying inventory (cf. Rubach 1976). The remaining segments /s z c 3 ή/ are palatal both functionally and phonetically. They alternate with /s z t d n/ in the context of a front vowel and, articulatorily speaking, they are described as alveolo-palatals or prepalatals. The status of /v/ as an underlying segment is unclear. In diachronic terms there is no question that /v/ comes from /w/. The problem is whether /v/ has acquired the status of an underlying segment or whether it is still derivable in all instances by the rule w -»· v. We leave this as an open question since the status of /v/ is not in any way essential to the analysis of Polish proposed here. The use of phonetic features in the description of consonants requires some comment. Particularly important here are the features [±back], [tdistributed], and [±coronal]. The feature [±back] describes both a primary and a secondary articulation in Polish. The former type of articulation refers obviously to velar [k g x] which are produced by raising the back of the tongue to the velum. These sounds are classified as [+back, +high], where [+high] describes the gesture of raising. In the production of other consonants [+back] denotes a secondary articulation, i.e. it describes the position of the tongue body. Thus, for example, [t] is dental as regards the action of the tongue tip but [+back] with respect to the position of the tongue body. This classification is based on the descriptions given by Wierzchowska. Wierzchowska (1963 and personal communication) observes that the tongue body can take three different positions in the articulation of Polish consonants: — It can be moved forward to produce front vowels and phonetically palatalized consonants, e.g. [s' z c 3 ή k ' g']. We shall describe this configuration by the feature [-back]. - It can have a flat central position of the vowel [a] which is [+back]. This posture is characteristic for all anterior consonants, i.e. [p b m f v t d s z r l n c 3 ] and postalveolar [S 2 C $]. — It can be moved backward to produce [u o] and velar consonants (sometimes also labials), i.e. the sounds which are described traditionally as [+back]. Thus all sounds of Polish are either [+back] or [-back]. It is important to point out that Polish is distinct from Russian in that in the latter consonants are not only [+back] but also [+high], i.e. they are velarized. Among Polish coronals it is only /}·/ that is velarized (cf. Wierzchowska 1971).

Polish Phonology and Morphology

25

Returning to the underlying "palatals" we obtain the following classification: //s 2 6 3 ή//, i.e. prepalatals are

, //c 3 1 δ 2 C J //

and all other consonants are [+back]. Phonetically, however, it is not just the prepalatals but any consonant that can be

g

. This is due to the

operation of a very late allophonic type rule which we shall call Surface Palatalization. This rule applies before /i j/ and palatalizes any consonant inside words and across word boundaries. , . , -i r -cons π Wk l· — (heg]) +high " backj L-backJ

t

Thus we have: (35)

[p ' ] pisk 'scream', chtop idzie 'the farmer is walking' [s ' ] pas jest 'the belt is' [t ' ] tiara 'tiara', brat i siostra 'brother and sister' [r ' ] ring 'ring', wieczor jest 'the evening is' [§ ' ] Chicago, masz je 'you have them' [C ' ] Chile, zobacz je 'see them' [z ' ] imazinizm 'imaginism' [3 ' ], dzinsy 'jeans', etc.

It is important to emphasize that a palatalized /s/ or /t/ is distinct from underlying prepalatal stridents or those derived from these same segments by rules of deep phonological palatalization, i.e. in our transcription [s ' t ' ] φ [c 3]. The former are /s t/ which have acquired the features as specified in (34) while the latter have a distinct place of articulation (they are [-anter]) and in the case of / -»· c a different manner of articulation: a stop is changed into an affricate (see Coronal Palatalization in chapter 4): (36)

gios 'voice' — gk>sic [s'] 'to voice' pot 'sweat' - pocic [c] 'to sweat'

In the case of velars, Surface Pal. has the effect of fronting the velar to the prevelar or postpalatal position, i.e. rule (34) does not describe the raising of the tongue towards the hard palate with the main place of articulation being retained as in the nonpalatalized variant (examples in (35) but rather a change in the place of occlusion:

26

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(37)

[k ' ]: kino 'cinema', obk»k jest the cloud is' [g ' ]: ginac 'perish' [x ' ]: historia 'history', dach i okna 'roof and windows', etc.

Polish consonants are also characterized by the feature [idistributed] as defined in SPE. Dentals and alveolars are [-distrib] while postalveolars /S Z 3/ and prepalatals /s' z c 3 ή/ are [+distrib]. English // 3/ can now be differentiated from Polish /$ Z/ by means of the opposition [-back] vs. [+back], i.e. without making arbitrary assumptions (cf. Rubach 1982) about the use of [idistrib]. It should also be noted that the domain of the feature [±coronal] has recently been changed. Clements (1976) and later Halle and Stevens (1979) have proposed that palatals be included in the class of [+coron] segments. In consequence of this modification Polish /j/, a palatal glide, can now be described as functioning together with/s' z c 3 ή/ 1 . The system of underlying consonants and glides in Polish is presented in table (38):

Table 38

bibb.

p

conion

b

m

-

+

dental

f

v

+

+

-

-

+·

•f

d

I

alvtolir

π

1

+

+

s

z

•f

+

c

po!ttalveolar

3

Γ

1

+·

•f

1

?

+

+

f

prrptlatal

5

s

i

+

+

c

-

-

coron

-

-

-

-

t

3

ή

j

-

•f

+

k

ft

X

W

-

-

U bill

+

+

·¥

diitrib

-f

+

•f

del trl

-

+

•f

+

•f

-

utci

-

-

-

-

+ +

+

•f

+

+

•f

' •f

[US·]

Uter

vclu

pal

+

sonor contin

tab.· dent.

-

-

high

-f

•f-

+

·*·

+

+

-

•f

-

+

+

+

+

bick voiced

-

+

+

-

•f

-

·*·

+

+

-

+

•f

-f

·*·

-

+

+

+

•f

Polish Phonology and Morphology

27

2.2.2. Vowels In terms of surface representation Polish has six important vocalic segments (to give a detailed description we subdivide the traditional height distinction regions into upper and lower high, upper and lower mid, and upper and lower low): (i)

(ii)

(iii)

vowels articulated in the upper high region: [i] - front unrounded [i] - central unrounded; on the front - back horizontal line it corresponds to English schwa and Polish [a], and, like the latter two, it is classified as [+back] in terms of features used in generative phonology; [u] — back rounded; lower mid vowels: [e] - front unrounded [o] - back rounded; [a] - lower low central vowel which is uncontroversially classified as [+back] in generative phonology.

These six vowels are the traditional taxonomic phonemes in Polish2. They are also underlying segments in generative phonology. The occurrence of surface variants of these vowels is governed by two rules: Vowel Nasalization and e-raising. The former nasalizes vowels if they appear before nasal glides [w] and [j], which are derived from /n/ and /ή/, respectively, by Nasal Gliding (see 5.6.2.): ~-cons"| (39) V-nasaliz. V -» [+nas] / — -syll I +nasj The rule of e-raising raises lower mid /e/ to upper mid [e ] in the environment of prepalatal consonants and glides, i.e. in the context of /s' z c 3 ή j/: (40)

sien 'hallway', ziemia 'earth', ciemny 'dark', dzieto Vork', jesien 'fall', osiem 'eight', tesc 'father-in-law', etc.

The problem now is what feature should be used to describe the height distinctions of Polish vowels. Specifically, we need to distinguish between upper mid and lower mid vowels, i.e. [e] must be somehow different from [e]· Wood (1975) has shown that [tadvanced tongue root] could be replaced by [±tense]. In a way this is a return to tenseness as has been

28

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

traditionally understood in phonetics. The import of Wood's paper lies in the fact that tenseness has been redefined in more accurate terms as a degree of constriction in the regions of hard palate, soft palate, upper pharynx and lower pharynx. In this understanding upper high, upper mid and backer low vowels are [+tense]. The crucial difference involves the distinction between backer and other low vowels, a contrast that could not be brought out by [±advanced tongue root]. It now becomes possible to distinguish between Polish [a] as in tak 'yes' and English [a] as in father: the former is [-tense] and the latter [+tense]. In terms of phonetics not only Polish [a] but also mid vowels [e] as in tez 'also' and [o] as in bok 'side' are [-tense]. The system of tense vowels will therefore include [i t u e ]. In some cases phonetic [e] must be set up as underlying //e// as distinct from //e//. The point is that in surface terms some e 's alternate with ο and some with a. This matter has been investigated in detail by Gussmann (1980a) and it has turned out that the distinction of the two types of e is unavoidable at the level of underlying representation. The e 's which alternate with a are set up as tense //e// while all the others are represented as //e//. By assuming //e// rather than Gussmann's //ae// 3 we can simplify the grammar in the sense that those instances of e 's which have not been changed by rule to /a/ can be mapped directly from the underlying representation without postulating any special spell-out rule. Tense //e// is thus present both underlyingly and phonetically in words such as: (41)

powies'c 'novel', compare: powkzstka 'poetic tale'; wiedziec 'to know', wiedzidi 'they knew' (masc.), compare: wiedzial 'he knew', wiedzuri-y 'they knew' (fern.); etc.

Gussmann (1980a) has shown that in addition to the vowels enumerated so far it is necessary to include high lax /Ϊ/ and /t/ ("abstract" vowels) as members of the underlying inventory. There is no need to repeat Gussmann's excellent arguments in their entirety. Let us only draw attention to some more important points. In purely surface terms some e's in Polish alternate with zero and some do not: (42)

lew 'lion' — Iw+em (instr.) vs. ztew 'sink' - zlew+em (instr.) sweter 'sweater' - swetr+y (pi.) vs. krater 'crater — krater+y (pi.) len. 'flax' — In+u (gen.) vs. teren 'terrain' — teren+u (gen.).

It thus becomes necessary to draw some distinction between the two kinds of e. Furthermore, the e's that alternate with zero may also alternate with /i/or/*/:

Polish Phonology and Morphology (43)

29

zamek 'lock' — zamka (gen.) — zamykaja 'they lock' - zamkna 'they will lock' wycifcie 'cutting' — wycmasz 'you cut out' - wytniesz 'you will cut out' (Gussmann's examples, 1980a:39).

Needless to say, there are also /'s and j's which do not alternate either with zero or with e. The alternating e\ seem to share some features with mid vowels and some with high unrounded vowels. Like these latter they can be palatalizing or not: mech 'moss' /mex/ — mch+u (gen.) vs. pies 'dog' /p'jes/ - ps+a (gen.) and also kwiat 'flower' - kwiat+ek (dimin.) - kwiat+k+i (pi.) vs. krok 'step' - krocz+ek (dimin.) - krocz+k+i (pi.): k -» c. Gussmann suggests that the alternating e's be represented underlyingly as high vowels parallel to /jiff and //*// but distinct from them by being [-tense]. We shall transcribe these vowels as //i// and //*// and call them "yers" for purely mnemonic purposes without necessarily implying that they should correspond to the yers fimiliar to students of historical grammar. In fact, l/i *// often have nothing to do with the "true" historical yers. For example, the word sweter 'sweater' quoted in (42) is a borrowing from English. It has a deleting e but no yer history behind it. Gussmann (1980a:38) points out that the use of a phonological feature to designate //i *//, a pair of "abstract" vowels which never surface phonetically in their underlying shape, is strongly supported by the fact that they can be tensed in the middle of a derivation (one would not expect this of a lexical diacritic theory). This happens when yers are followed by the Derived Imperfective morpheme aj as in ίης Ί cut' - wycinaj 'cut out' (imper.) and zamknqc 'to lock' - zamykaj (imper.): //i// ->· [i] and //*// -* [*]. Polish thus has a rule of Derived Imperfective Yer Tensing which is (roughly) as below (for details, cf. Gussmann 1980a):

(44)

D.I. Tensing

+syll +high -tense

[+tense] / — C

Pulling all the information together, the system of underlying vowels in Polish is as follows (but see the discussion of / / in 5.6.4.):

30

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(45)

u

ο

These vowels are classified in terms of phonetic features in table (46):

Table (46)

high low

back

u

i

υ i

e

+

+

+

+

+

—

—

—

—

+

+

—

+

+

—

+

+ —

round

2.3.

+

—

tense

u

i

—

—

—

— +

e —

o

a

—

— +

—

—

—

—

—

+

+

—

+

—

—

—

—

—

—

+

—

Major rules of Polish phonology

In this section we shall briefly summarize some of the most important rules of Polish phonology as they are interpreted in this book. The rules will be stated informally, however, reference will be made to the respective sections of the book where these rules are explicitly formalized and discussed in detail. (i) Lower and Yer Deletion (cf. 6.4.) w

In the preceding section we discussed the abstract vowels //i *// and noted that they surfaced as [ i t ] before the Derived Imperfective suffix -af (cf. rule 44). If not tensed, yers either lower to /e/ or delete. The lowering takes place if a yer is followed by another yer. The environment yer may

Polish Phonology and Morphology

31

be part of a derivational morpheme or an inflectional ending. The former \t is illustrated by e.g. the diminutive suffix //4-k// as in pies 'dog' - pieska (dimin.gen.) from //pis+*k+a//. The stem yer lowers before the diminutive yer in the following syllable. Yers are also found as endings of the nom.sg. of masculine and the gen.pl. of feminine and neuter nouns (see 252. below). Thus pies 'dog', for example, has the structure //pis+t//, where //*// is a paradigmatic ending. Similarly, the gen.pl. of owca 'sheep' (fem.) has the structure //ovits+4·//, owiec, and the gen.pl. of zrodto 'spring' (neuter) is //zrud-t-H-t//, zrodet. The yers which are not followed by another yer delete (cf. Gussmann's Lower, 1980a:39). We thus have two rules: Yer Surfacing which we shall call Lower and Yer Deletion. Mnemonically: *J

(47)

(a) Lower (b) Yer Del.

\i \t

it Ϊ*

->· e / -> 0

C0

V

yer

We shall assume that (47a) and (47b) are two separate rules and further that Lower is cyclic and Yer Deletion postcyclic. This distinction will be justified at length in chapter 6 (section 6.4.). To summarize, in a word such as pieseczek 'dog' (double dimin. masc. nom.sg.) derived from //pis+tk+ik+i·//4 the stem yers lower by (47a) while the inflectional yer deletes since it \jis not followed by a yer. In \j \j pieseczka (id.gen.sg.) derived from //pis+*k+ik+a// the first two yers lower and the last one deletes as stipulated by rules (47a) and (47b). (ii)

Coronal Palatalization (cf. 4.1.)

Anterior coronal consonants are turned to prepalatals before front vowels and glides (before /j/ they are modified further by lotation, see below): (48)

s t n 4r

z ->· s' z = prepalatal fricatives d -> c 3 = prepalatal affricates ->· ή prepalatal nasal -»Γ -» F ', which is later spelt out either as plain [r] or as a postalveolar fricative [z].

Thus, for instance, //s// is changed to [s'] in gk>s Voice' - gk>sie [-s'+e] (loc.) - glosic [-s'+i+c] 'to voice'. The rule which we call Coronal Palatalization is stated informally as (49): //.ΠΛ (49) v '

/-. r>Pal. ι r +anter l -»· prepalatal 1 . 1 /; Cor. L+coronJ

p-cons"! , , L~backJ

32

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(iii)

lotation (cf. 4.2.)

lotation (Steele's 1973 term) is a palatalization before /j/. It affects prepalatal obstruents: (50)

s' c

z -*· 5 2 = postalveolar fricatives 3 "*· C 3 = alveolar affricates

BUT sc 3

Z

-> sC "*" z3, where /£ J / are postalveolar affricates.

Note that /c £/ preceded by strident consonants become /C $/ and not /c 3/ as they do in all other contexts. The generalization is therefore as follows:

(51)

lot.

prepalatal obstruents

'postalveolar; alveolar if ,, ,, /c 3/ are not after /s z/

before/

The /j/ which causes palatalization does not appear on the surface since it is deleted by the rule discussed in (iv). We thus have kobiet+a Vornan' - kobiec+a 'womanly' (fern.), where the derivation of the final c from t is as follows: (52)

kobieca UR:kobjet+j+a kobjec+j+a kobjec+j+a kobjec+a

where //j// is the adjectivizing morpheme and σ is an inflectional ending Cor. Pal. (49) lotation (51) /-deletion (see below)

As shown by (52), lotation is fed by Cor. Pal. Note that lotation does not affect sonorants. They are palatalized before /j/ in exactly the same way as before front vowels. (iv)

/-deletion (cf. 4.4.)

The front glide /j/ is deleted in two environments:

33

Polish Phonology and Morphology

(53)

/-del.

after coronals

(a)

before a consonant or a word boundary

(b)

0

Rule (53a) applies in kobieca Vomanly' (derivation 52) as /c/ is a coronal consonant. However, in matp+a 'monkey' — malpia /-p+j+a/ (Adj.) / does surface phonetically since p is not a coronal sound. The glide is deleted also in the environment of (53b): compare pomag+aj+q 'they help', where (53b) is inapplicable vs. pomag+a+c //-g+aj+c// 'to help' and pomag+a //-g+aj// 'he helps'. (v)

Vowel Deletion (cf. 4.5.)

This is a well known rule of Slavic discovered originally by Jakobson (1948). Its role will become clear when we discuss verb morphology in 2.4. For now simply assume that e.g. the word widzisz 'you see' is derived from underlying //vid+e+i+S//. The cluster of vowels is simplified by rule (54): (54)

V-del.

V

-»

(vi)

Retraction (cf. 7.3.)

0 /

V in verbs

Compare the words kosic [kos'+i+c] 'mow' and chmurzyc [xmu2+H-c] 'become cloudy'. Both are derived from nouns by adding the verbalizing suffix //i// (c is the infinitive morpheme): (55)

kosa //kos+a// 'scythe' - kosic //kos+i+c// chmura //xmur+a// 'cloud' - chmurzyc //xmur+i+c//

In the second example //r// is changed to / f ' / by Cor. Pal. (49) and it is spelled out as [2] by a later rule. Note that there must also be a rule which will cause the retraction of //i// to /*/. This rule applies after "hard" coronals, i.e. after all coronal consonants except palatals /s' z c 3 ή/. (56)

Retraction

i

(vii)

First Velar (cf. 5.1.)

r+coron~| [+back J

First Velar Palatalization changes //k g χ// to /£ 3 §/ before front vowels and glides. It accounts for alternations such as the following:

34

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(57)

krok 'step' - kroczek [kroo+ek] (dimin.) - kroczyc [kroC+H-c] 'to step' miazga 'pulp' - miazdzyc H+*+c] 'to squash' sl-uch 'hearing' - styszec [-S+e+c] *to hear'.

Note that the surface [4·] in kroczyc *to step' and miazdzyc to squash' is the result of Retraction, i ->· i·. We state 1st Velar informally as (58):

(58)

l

(ix)

Spirantization

The affricate /3 / derived by 1 st Velar from //g// is further spirantized to /z/ if it stands after sonorants: (59)

Spir.

3 -> z / [+sonor] —

Rule (59) accounts for the alternation of //g// and /£ / in words such as snieg 'snow' - sniezek [-ez+ek] (dimin.) - sniezyca [-e2-t4c+a] 'snowstorm', where UR //i// is changed to [i] by Retraction (56). (x)

Second Velar (cf. 5. 4.)

In morphologically specified contexts of front vowels, underlying //k g// appear as [c 3]: Norweg 'Norwegian' - Norwedz+y (pl.),Kozak 'Cossack' - Kozac+y (pi.), where [t] is the result of Retraction. We derive [c 3] via an intermediate stage /C $/ which is provided by 1st Velar. The rule requires a detailed discussion, which we must postpone till section 5 .4. (xi)

Affricate Palatalization (cf. 5 .2.)

The affricates //c 3// are changed to /δ $/ before front vowels and /j/, for example, zajqc 'hare' — zajqcz+ek (dimin.) (60)

Aff. Pa., c 3 - 5 Ϊ /

-

The voiced affricate /J/ derived by (60) is changed further to [2] if the environment of Spirantization is met, e.g. ksiqdz 'priest' — ksiqz+yk (dimin.):

(61)

ksiezyk

//-n3+ik-// n3+ik nz+ik nz+i-k

Aff. Pal. (60) Spir. (59) Retraction (56)

Polish Phonology and Morphology (xii)

Labio-velar Palatalization

(62)

Lab./vel. 0 -> j

/ [-coron] —

35

e

This rule inserts /j/ after noncoronals and before e. The palatalization itself is effected by the rule of Surface Pal. (34), which is a low level allophonic process. Compare the derivation of zab+ie 'frog' (dat.sg. from zab+d): (63)

2.4.

//Zab+e// zab+je 2ab'+je

Lab./vel. (62) Surf. Pal. (34)

Verb morphology

In this section as well as in 2.5. below we shall present some facts of Polish morphology but only inasmuch as they are relevant to the subsequent discussion of palatalization rules. We are not in a position to explicitly formalize word formation rules as too little is known about Polish morphology at the present stage of research in this area. In one case, however, we shall present a detailed study in order to show the relationships which hold between WFRs and phonological rules. This' is the discussion of the imperative in 4.3. 2.4.1. Verb stems Verbs fall into several classes depending on the phonological structure of the stem: (64)

(i) C-verbs, i.e. those which end in a consonant or a glide. Compare the infinitive vs. 3 p.pl. present (pending): //-t -all ples'+c 'blab' - ploi+a, kfas'+c 'put' - klad+n //-s -z// pas'+c 'graze' - pas+a, gryz+c 'bite' - gryz+a //-k -g// wlec 'drag' - wlo£+a, moc 'can' - mog+a //-m -n// da+c 'blow' — dw+a, zacza+c 'begin' — zacz«+a II-ill drze+c 'tear' - d/-+a //•j// my+c 'wash' - my/+a and likewise pi+c 'drink' pi/'+a, tru-i-c 'poison' - tru/'+a. The C in these verbs is part of the root. The remaining classes are distinguished on the basis of different verbalizing suffixes which attach to roots. (ii) -a/ stems: czyt+a+c 'read' - czyt-fu/+a 'they read', gr+a+c 'play' - gr-hj/'+a 'they play* chow+a+c 'hide' - chow-hz/+a 'they hide', etc.

36

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology (iii)-ey stems:

(iv) -e stems:

(v) -a stems: (vi) -/stems:

siw+ie+c 'become grey' - siw+iey'+a 'they become grey' (cf. a in siw+ia+i· 'he was becoming grey'), and likewise dretw+ie+c *become numb', lys+ie+c 'become bald', etc. dysz+e+c 'hear' (cf. a in stysz-to+i· 'he heard'), lec+ie+c 'fly', wis+ie+c 'hang', widz+ie+c 'see', etc. pis-hz+c Svrite', kazfa+c Order', chrap-hz+c 'snore', etc. kos+i+c 'mow', g4os+/+c 'to voice', poc+i+c to sweat', jezdz+i+c 'to travel', etc.

2.4.2. Derived verbal forms In this section we shall briefly look at some verbal formations which do not fall under conjugational paradigms. Let us explain at the very outset that the infinitive suffix is //c//, spelled c, as in kos+i+c 'to mow'. (i) Present Gerund The present Gerund is formed by adding the suffix -qc to the verb stem. The suffix surfaces as [one] and there is no reason to believe that the underlying representation should be different from what is found on the surface, i.e. the UR is also //one//. Here are some examples: (65)

Infinitive gryzc 'to bite' czytac 'read' leciec'fly* kosic 'mow'

(ii)

Preterite Gerund

Verb stem //griz// //&t+aj// //let+e// //kos+i//

Present Gerund //gri-z+onc// //»t+aj+onc// / //let+e-K>nc// //kos+i+onc//, etc.

The suffix of the Preterite Gerund -wszy surfaces phonetically as [f&] if preceded by a vowel and as [s+] if preceded by a consonant. However, many people (myself included) do not make this surface distinction in slow speech: they pronounce [fst] regardless of the context, i.e. also in e.g. szedtszy 'having gone', where the suffix is preceded by a consonant (in rapid speech [f] is deleted in this suffix and in several other cases). The underlying representation of -wszy is controversial. Traditionally, it is assumed to have a yer (Laskowski 1975) though the motivation for this yer is far from being clear. The first segment of -wszy is also subject to discussion. The problem is that the status of//w// or //v// as underlying segments in Polish has not been studied in any conclusive way. The stan-

Polish Phonology and Morphology

37

dard generative theory is that [v] is not an underlying segment but it is derived from //w// by a context-free rule: w -»· v. (This idea is due to Andersen (1969) who studied this problem in Russian in a framework which is not generative.) In sum, the underlying representation of -wszy could be //w&//, where [f] is derived by the w -» v rule and Devoicing (20), //v&// with [f] being the result of Devoicing (20), or even //f&//, as found on the surface. The exact shape of the underlying representation is not relevant to our discussion. The Preterite Gerund suffix is not added directly to verb stems. As shown by Laskowski (1975), it is added after the preterite suffix ί 5 . Thus, for example, ugryzhzy 'having bitten' (from gryz+c 'bite') has the structure: //u+gri-z+4-+w&//6, i.e. prefix + verb stem + preterite suffix + Gerund. (iii)

Passive Participle

The Passive Participle has three allomorphs: //t//, //en// and //n//. The first allomorph is added to C-stems which end in a sonorant: for example, myty //rrH-j+t+i·// Svashed', where //*// is the masc. gender marker. The second allomorph, //en//, appears in the class of /-stems and with those C-stems which end in an obstruent. The surface representations of //en// are governed by the rule of backing which turns //e// to [o] if the following consonant is not palatalized: o+gtosz+en+i 'announced* (masc. pi.) - o+gk>sz+on+y 'announced' (masc.sg.). Finally, of-stems, e-stems and a-stems take //n// in the Passive Participle e.g. czyt+a+n+y 'read', stysz+a+n+y 'heard' (here //e// surfaces as [a] due to backing, //j// has been deleted by (53b)), pis+a+n+y Vritten' (all three are masc. sg. forms).

2.4.3. Derived Imperfee five Verbs may assume an imperfective form. This is effected by attaching the suffix -aj to the verb stem (and additionally, prefixes but this is irrelevant for our purposes). The / of this suffix appears on the surface before vowels since in other contexts it is deleted by/-deletion (53): (66)

gryz+c'bite'

-

wy+gryz+aj+a 'they bite out', wy+gryz+a+c 'to bite out'

Likewise: od+miodz+i+c 'make younger! za+pros+i+c 'invite'

-

-

od+ml-adz+aj+a, od+miadz+a+c 7 za+prasz+aj+a, za+prasz+a+c, etc.

38

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

2.4.4. Present tense There are two present tense suffixes: //i// and //e//. They function as stem extensions in the 2nd and 3rd p.sg. and in the 1st and 2nd p.pl. They do not appear in the 1st p.sg. and the 3 p.pl. (I owe this suggestion to M. Halle, cf. also Gussmann 1980a:51). Thus, for example, underlying l Ig/1 is palatalized to [2] in mozesz //mog+e+S// 'y°u can> but not in mogq //mog-K>m// 'they can'. The distribution of the suffixes //i// and //e// is governed by the phonological make-up of the stem: //i// appears with stems which end in a front vowel, //e// occurs elsewhere. We thus have: (67)

widz+ie+c 'see' widzisz //vid+e+i+S// 'you see' top+i+c 'drown' — topisz //top+i+i+S//8 'you drown' vs. moc 'can' infinitive - mozesz //mog+e+S// 'you can' pis+a+c Syrite' - piszesz //pis+a+e+S// 'you write' 4-ys+ie+c 'become bald' - 4-ysiejesz //44s+ej+e+S// 'you become bald', etc.

Verbs in the class of o/'-stems do not seem to take the present tense suffixes: czyt-Hi+c 'read', czyt-Hz/+q *they read' - czytasz //Ctt+aj+S// 'you read'. On the level of word formation rules we might assume that the stem extension //e// is added but it is later deleted by an allomorphy rule, which applies in the context of of. The structure of the present tense inflectional endings is as follows: (68) st

1 . P· 2nd p. 3 p.

Singular -? //Vm// -sz Ml zero ending

Plural -my -cie —a

//m*// Heel I //om//

Some explanation is needed in the case of the 1 p.sg. and the 3 p.pl. endings -ς and -q. The underlying representation of the former will be discussed in 5.6.4. For now we assume that it has some kind of a nonpalatalizing lax vowel. The 3 p.pl. ending -q appears as phonetic [om] in the speech of many people, hence we postulate underlying //om// 9 . However, many speakers have a rule of word final gliding which turns //m// to [w]. In their pronunciation the ending is realized as [ow]. Let us sum up the discussion of the present tense conjugation by looking at the paradigm forpisac //pis+a+c//

Polish Phonology and Morphology (69)

Singular pisze //pis+a+Vm// piszesz //pis+a+e+S// pisze //pis+a+e//

st

1 p. 21™ p. 3 p.

39 Plural piszemy //pis+a+e+mi// piszecie //pis+a+e+ce// pisza //pis+a+om//

2.4.5. Preterite The preterite is formed by adding the suffix //!·// to the verb stem, for example, kos+i+c 'mow' — kos+i+4 'he mowed'. Preterite inflection is characteristic in that personal endings are preceded by gender markers. Gussmann (1980a:93-94) has established that the structure of these gender markers is as follows: (70)

Singular: masc. //*// fern, //a// neuter //o//

Plural: masc. personal //i// non-masculine //i·//

The underlying representations in (70) are equivalent to surface representations in all cases except the masc. sg. marker //*//, which shows up on the surface as [e] in the 1 and the 2 p.sg. One of the reasons for postulating a back yer here is the absence of palatalization of the preceding /!/: kos+i+4+e+m Ί mowed' and not kos+i+l+e+m as one would have expected, had the surface e been an underlying segment. The back yer is changed to [e] due to the operation of Lower (47a). This rule applies since, Gussmann claims, the inflectional endings of the 1 and the 2 p.sg. contain a yer: -m is //mt// and -s is //si//. The final yer of these endings is deleted by Yer Deletion (47b). (The inflectional endings for different persons in the conjugation are given in (71) below). For our purposes the structure of the masc. gender is not significant in any essential way. We shall simply assume Gussmann's analysis with one minor modification: the 2 p.sg. ending -s has a non-alternating [s'] and hence one might just as well assume that the fricative is palatal at the underlying level. Let us look at the paradigm for kos+i+c 'to mow' (the verb from kos+a 'scythe'): (71)

Structure:

(a) Masculine: Singular:

root + verbalizing suffix + preterite + gender marker + inflectional ending o+

u

u

1 p. kosilem Ί mowed' //kos+B4+*+mt// 2nd~p. kosiies 'you mowed' //kos+i+l+i+si// 3rci p. kosii 'he mowed' //kos+i+4-+t//; note: the 3 p.sg. and pi. has a zero inflectional ending;

40

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology 1st p. kosilismy 'we mowed' //kos+i+l+i+smi// 2nd p. kosiliscie 'you mowed' //kos+i+4-+i+sce// 3rd p. kosili 'they mowed' //kos+H4+i// (b) Feminine and neuter : Feminine Neuter st Sg. 1 p. kosiiam //kos+i+4-+a+mt// nd 2 p. kosiias //kos+i+*+a+s'i// rd 3 p. kosita //kos+i+4-+a// kosito //kos+i+4-+o// Plural:

Plural: 1st p. 2nd~p. 3rd p.

2.5.

non-masculine gender kosiiys'my //kos+i+i+t+smi// kosiiyscie //kos+i+4-+t+sce// kosiiy //kos+i+4-H//

Some nominal and adjectival suffixes

In this section we shall briefly discuss some of the more complex derivational and inflectional suffixes which are often used in the examples illustrating various phonological phenomena in the subsequent chapters of this book.

2.5.1. Diminutive The diminutive has four basic allomorphs at the underlying level: ik ik

V,

tk ¥, tk

The upper two have tense vowels and they surface in their underlying form: (72)

drut Fiat tryb

Svire' — druc+ik 'Fiat' - Fiac+ik 'pinion' - tryb+ik

vs.

rzemien 'strap' —rzem+yk grzebien 'comb' -grzeb+yk indor turkey' - ind+yk

Gussmann (1980a:60 ff.) has established that the other two allomorphs have underlying yers which surface as [e] in accordance with Lower (47a): (73)

palatalizing //ik//: krok 'step' - krocz+ek (k -»· C) brzuch 'stomach' - brzusz+ek (x -*· ?) Czeslaw (first name) — Czes+iek (s ->· s) nonpalatalizing //*k//: snop 'sheaf — snop-Kk kwiat 'flower' - kwiat+ek pas 'belt' — pas+ek

Polish Phonology and Morphology

41

The yers in these suffixes have been motivated in Gussmann (1980a). Most importantly, the evidence comes from vowel - zero alternation as in snop+ek (nom.) 'sheaf - snop+k+a (gen.), and from the fact that surface ~ek triggers Lower (47a), for example, pies //pis// 'dog' (cf. ps+a, gen., vowel - zero alternation hence a yer stem) -pies+ek (dimin.).

2.5.2. Yer inflectional

suffixes

The discussion of the diminutive Vraises the question of how one can derive surface [e] from the yer in the ik/tk allomorphs. Gussmann (1980a: 36 ff.) argues that the so-called "zero endings" are represented as yers at the underlying level. We thus have //*// as the ending of the nom.sg. of masculine and the gen.pl. of feminine and neuter nouns. Consequently, snopek 'sheaf (masc. nom. sg.) has the structure //snop+tk+i//. The inflectional yer triggers Lower (47a) and is deleted later by Yer Del. (47b). The same nom.sg. suffix is responsible for yer surfacing in the stem pies //pis+4·// 'dog'. Compare also other yer stems: ι/

V

^

\j

(74)

owc+a //ovic+a// 'sheep', where a is the fern, nom.sg. ending vs. gen.pl. owiec //ovic+i// zrod4-K> //zrudi4-K>// 'spring', where ο is the neuter nom.sg. suffix vs. gen.pl. zrodei //zrudtl+t//.

The interpretation that the inflectional suffixes under discussion have underlying yers is supported further by the fact that /j/ does not delete in spite of what looks like a context of a word boundary (recall that rule (53) deletes /j/ before consonants and #). Gussmann (1980a:48) quotes kraj 'country', sloj 'jug' and zlodziej 'thief as examples. The glide cannot delete since /-del. is blocked by the yer ending: kraj 'country' (nom.sg.) has the structure //kraj+i// 10 .

2.5.3. Masculine nominative plural It is entirely uncontroversial that the nom.pl. of masculine nouns has two allomorphs: //i// which attaches to personal nouns, and //*// occurring elsewhere. Both suffixes surface in their underlying form but the former may also appear as [t] due to Retraction (56): (75)

II\H:

Szwed 'Swede' - Szwedz+i (palataliz. d -> 3) Wegier 'Hungarian' - Wegrz+y (palatalization r -> 2, Retraction i -»· *·) //*//·' gad 'raptile' - gad+y tor 'lane' - tor+y

The front vowel //i// is also the ending of the masc. personal nom.pl. in adjectives: bos+y 'bare-footed' — bos+i [bos'+i].

42

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

2.5.4. The nominalizing suffix -stwGussmann (1980a:78) has established that -stwo has the structure //istiv+o//, where -o is an inflectional ending of the nom.sg. in neuter nouns. Gussmann's evidence for the two underlying yers in -stw+o comes from several sources: (i)

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

-stw+o causes palatalization of the preceding consonant, compare: szalon+y 'crazy' - szalen+stw+o 'craziness', n ->· ή before the first yer; -stw+o triggers Lower (47a), which indicates thatv the suffix itself u must have a yer, for example, kup+iec //kup+ic+i·// 'merchant' (t is the nom.sg. ending; the stem has a yer, cf. vowel - zero alternation kup+iec vs. kup+c+a, gen.) — kup+iec+tw+o 'commerce'; underlying / is not deleted before -stw+o, which would have happened if the suffix had started with a consonant, compare: z-todziej 'thief - zlodziej+stw+o 'theft'; /-del. (53) is blocked by the first yer of//istiv+o//; the second yer of -stw+o may actually surface as [e] if the environment of Lower is met, i.e. when a yer suffix follows e.g. pan+stw+o v V ^ 'state' — pan+stew+k+o //pan+isttv+tk+o// (dimin.). However, Gussmann notes an irregularity here: the first yer of //isttv+o// never surfaces as [e] in spite of the fact that it is always followed by a yer (the second yer of the suffix). As we shall see, there is a straightforward explanation of this irregularity if one adopts the framework of cyclic phonology (cf. 6.4.).

2.5.5. Adjectival -sk- and -nAlso these adjectival suffixes have been studied by Gussmann (1980a). He has established that they have the structure l/isk// and //in//, respectively. The evidence is very much the same as with the suffix -stw+o: (i)

(ii)

They cause palatalization of the preceding consonant :diabel 'devil' - diabel+sk+i //4+isk+i·// 'diabolic' - diabel+n+y H-i+ln+'i/l 'devilish'. Note: the inflectional suffix / in diabelski 'diabolic' comes from //*// which is fronted to [i] later in the derivation. We discuss this problem at length in 5.8. They cause the surfacing of the yer in the preceding syllable. The root of the word diabet 'devil' has the structure //djabi-l·//. The yer surfaces in the nom.sg. before the inflectional yer (cf. 252. above): //djabi4-i4//-»-/djabe4·/ by Lower (47a) and Yer Del. (47b). As expected, the root yer deletes before non-yer suffixes e.g. -a of the gen.sg.: diab-l+a. However, it surfaces phonetically

Polish Phonology and Morphology

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

43

as [e]Jf it is followed by the suffix -sk or -n-, compare: diabelski //djabtl+isk-ht// 'diabolic', diabelny //djabtl+m+i// 'develish'. Rule (53) which deletes /j/ before consonants does not apply before -sk· and -n: z-todziej 'thief - z-todzief+sk+i (Adi.^urodzaf 'harvest' - urodzaj+n+y (Adj.). Gussmann (1980a:37) finds that the yer of//in// actually surfaces phonetically as [e] in the so-called "short adjectives": win+n+y 'guilty' - winien //vin+in-4// (short form). Let us add that the same happens in other contexts, for example, podob+n+y 'similar' - podob+ien+stw+o //podob+in+isHv+o// 'similarity'. The yer of //isk// can never surface phonetically as the suffix is never followed by a syllable containing a yer. Derivational nominal suffixes if/if drop their vowel before vocalic endings: kolonia 'colony' //kolon+ij+a// -> /kolon+j+a/, partia 'party' //part-»4j+a//->-/part+j+a/. If the suffix is -«- or-sfc-, the vowel does not delete: kolon+ij+n+y 'colonial', part+yf+n+y 'party' (Adj.); also artyler+i-Hi 'artillery' -artyler+yf+sk+i //artiler+ M tj+isk+i// (Adj.). The rule of //* deletion does not apply if there is a yer in the next syllable11.

Finally, let us note that there is reason to believe that the suffix -n· has an u allomorph with a back yer, i.e. it is also //4-n// at the underlying level. This interpretation would account for an otherwise inexplicable lack of palatalization in words such as the following: (76)

mies+o 'meat' mies+n+y (Adj.) vs. glos 'voice' glos'+n+y 'loud': s -*· s'by Cor.Pal. (49) wierzch 'surface' na+po+wierzch+n+y 'surface-like' vs. po+s4-uch Obedience* — po+slusz+n+y Obedient': χ -» § by 1st Velar (58).

We shall return to this question briefly in 5.2. 2.5.6. Gender suffixes Examples in this book will normally appear in the nom.sg. form unless marked otherwise. Therefore it may be helpful to know the relationship between nom.sg. of nouns and adjectives and their gender. We wish to note the following facts: (i)

Masculine nouns characteristically end in a consonant or a glide12 e.g. kot 'cat', kraj 'country'.

44

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(ii)

Feminine nouns end in -a, for example, ryb+a 'fish', nog+a 'leg' (in other words, -a is the nom.sg. ending in the feminine declension). Neuter nouns end in -o or -e, for instance, lat+o 'summer', pol+e 'field'. In the system of adjectives, the ending -y is characteristic for the masculine form, -a for the feminine form, and -e for the neuter form: czarn+y 'black' (masc.), czarn+a (fern.), czarn+e (neuter).

(iii) (iv)

2. 6.

Assignment of cyclic bracketing

Words which are at the output of the word formation component (see model (30ii) in 1.7.), receive cyclic bracketing by convention. We suggest that this convention should read as follows: (77)

Assign cyclic brackets at morphological boundaries starting with the root.

Let us now return to the word kupiectwo 'commerce' cited as an example in 2.5.4. It has the following morphological structure: — -

kup iec stw ο

//kup// 'buy', root morpheme //ic//, agentive morpheme, cf. kup+iec 'merchant' //isttv//, suffix forming abstract nouns //ο//, inflectional ending of the nom.sg. in neuter nouns. W

C*

ι/

Convention (77) acts on the structure //kup+ic+istiv+o// and assigns brackets as in (78) below, where numbers refer to cycles: (78)

[[kup]j fc] 2 ic]2 istiv]3 ic]2 isuv]3 o]4 [# [[[[kuplj ic]2 istH3 o]4 For convenience we shall henceforth use plusses rather than brackets to mark the cyclic structure (obviously, plusses correspond to morpheme boundaries). Observe that our example involves only suffixation. A question arises what happens if a word has both suffixation and prefixation. Theoretically, one can imagine that the mode of bracket assignment may follow either of the following two principles:

Polish Phonology and Morphology (79)

45

(i) assign brackets from the root first to suffixes and then to prefixes; (ii) assign brackets from the root first to prefixes and then to suffixes.

While we take (77) to be a universal convention, (79) may have to be language specific since probably different languages choose different variants of (79). For Polish there is no doubt that (79i) is the correct principle13. This follows from the fact that Polish prefixes are clitics. There is plentiful evidence to substantiate the claim that prefixes are clitics in Polish. Most rules of Polish segmental phonology do not apply at prefix junctures. For example: (80)

(a) otwierac Open* - po+otwierac Open up': V-del. (54) does not apply (b) /mienny 'named' — bez+/mienny 'nameless': Retraction (56) does not turn //i// to [t] in spite of the fact that its environment is met - at the relevant stage of derivation /i/ is preceded by non-palatalized /z/.

As a matter of fact, the only rules that do apply to prefix structures are Regressive Devoicing (20), Surf. Pal. (34), and Lower (47a): (81)

z+czesac 'comb down', z -> s z+ignorowac 'ignore',U zy -> z' v ze+rwac tear off //zt+rtv+a+c//, t -> e.

Characteristically, these rules apply also across word boundaries: (82)

w czesaniu 'in combing', v -* f w ignorowaniu 'in ignoring', ν -»· v' we krwi'in blood' //v* kriv+i//,t -»· e.

In sum, Polish prefixes are true word level clitics.

NOTES 1. For further details about the use of features, see Rubach (1982), where I substantiate the choice of features by looking at the phonological behaviour of segments, e.g. nasals and laterals are [-contin] since they function together with stops. Note also that [-Kiel rel] describes only affricates and does not include fricatives. 2. In taxonomic phonemics some linguists did not recognize /*/ as a phoneme. Instead, they posited palatalized - non-palatalized phonemic distinction for nearly

46

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

all consonants. Thus, for example, pisk 'scream', would be represented as /p'isk/ and pysk 'snout' as /p+sk/. In this theory the distinction of [i] and [+] would be allophonic as the former would always occur in the context of palatalized or palatal sounds and the latter elsewhere. Other phonemicists recognized as phonemes both I'll and /*/. The palatalization of /p/ in pisk 'scream' would be an allophonic process: /pisk/ -» [p'isk]. In generative phonology there is a general consensus that this second view is correct. Consequently, //i// and //+// are underlying segments. This position allows us to avoid a phonemic distinction of/r'/ and /r/, which would have to be claimed for a handful of recent borrowings: there is a "minimal pair" trik 'trick' and tryk 'ram'. The recognition of /r'/ as a phoneme (underlying segment) would be unavoidable in order to predict the occurrence of [i] in the former and [+] in the latter word. The inadequacy of this theory lies not only in the fact that /r'/ would be necessary for only some ten or so very recent borrowings into Polish. The primary reason for rejecting /r'/, etc. comes from the observation that in all cases, without exception, words containing /r'i/ tend to restructure to /r·»·/ (e.g. earlier bridz 'bridge' is now brydz, riksza 'rickshaw' tends to be pronounced with [+], etc.). The appearance of the innovating forms with /+/ cannot be explained in terms of the theory which recognizes the phoneme /r'/. On the other hand, in the theory which posits /i/ and /*/ as phonemes ([r'] is then derived by rule from /r/) the explanation is natural and straightforward. It literally "falls out" from the theory of cyclic phonology, though not from the standard SPE theory. We discuss this problem in detail in chaper 7, see Retraction in 7.3. 3. Gussmann (1980a) was unaware of Wood's paper. He used [±tense] as an abstract feature with no phonetic realization in Polish. ? iY 4. ik/ik are the allomorphs of the diminutive morpheme, see 2.5.1. 5. Perhaps it is also true that the Present Gerund //one// is added to the structure: verb stem + present tense suffix (see below) rather than directly to verb stems. Either of these interpretations is compatible with the system of phonological rules developed here. 6. Laskowski (1975) assumes further that the suffix -wszy does not contain //w// or //v//. He presumably derives /v/ (phonetically voiceless due to Devoicing) from the preterite suffix //I·// via Lateral Vocalization (l· ->· w, see rule (106) in chapter 4) and the w -»· v rule. However, assuming Laskowski's underlying representation, one would not be able to account for frequent (though originally hypercorrect) pronunciations such as [-g-hv+fsi-] in bieg+l+szy 'having run', etc., where [w] comes from IHII via Lateral Vocalization and [f J is apparently the underlying //w// or //v// which has been devoiced before an obstruent. 7. Apart from consonantal alternations, Derived Imperfectives show a vowel change, ο -> a. This rule is not relevant to our subsequent discussion. Let us only note that contrary to Gussmann's assumption (1980a:73 ff.), the change ο -> a cannot be explained by expanding D.I. Tensing (44). The point is that this rule applies before Yer Del. (so as to account for [+] in e.g. zamyk-ia-tc //zamtk-faj+c// 'close' (D.I.), cf. also the analysis of "nasal vowels" in 5.6. and in Gussmann 1980a:90 ff.). Consequently, D.I. Tensing would be incorrectly blocked by the yer in e.g. uwidaczniac 'show' (D.I.), which has the structure //u+vidok-Hn-H-tej-hi//. It is derived from uwidocznic 'show' //u+vidok-Kn-H-h;//, compare widok 'sight'//vidok-// and widoczny Visible' //vidok-Hn+i·//. 8. In the case of /-stems the present tense extension //i// is not relevant as all the phonetic forms could be derived without it. However, our assumption that it is added, simplifies the distribution of the //e// vs. //i// extensions. At the same time no harm is done from the phonological point of view. V-del. (54) deletes the first vowel in a vowel cluster. Note that the //i// extension is absolutely necessary in e-stem

Polish Phonology and Morphology

47

verbs as it is //ill which surfaces phonetically in e.g. widzisz 'you see': //vid+e-H4S// -* /vid-H-«/ by V-del. (54). 9. There are also other reasons. Let us only draw attention to the fact that in the class of fl/-stem verbs the 1st p.sg. ending appears invariably as [m], for example, czyt-ta+m Ί read'. 10. For a further discussion of yer inflectional endings, see Gussmann (1980a). 11. Gussmann (1980a:54 ff.) interprets #'/#/ as derived from underlying yers: //ij'// and //tj//, respectively. Consequently, he postulates a rule of yer tensing across / and before a yer (his rule 95 p.55). On this analysis the yers of #/*/, if not tensed, are deleted by Yer Deletion (47b). Whatever, the exact interpretation, it still holds that this behaviour of -sk- and -n- supports the claim that they have yers at the underlying level. 12. This is true on the surface. At the underlying level the ending here is a yer: recall the discussion in 2.5.2. 13. Pesetsky (1979) makes exactly the same claim for Russian.

Chapter 3

The Status of Loanwords in Phonological Theory and the Treatment of Exceptions

3.1.

Nativization

One of the most interesting questions facing phonological theory is what happens when borrowings enter the language. There are two sets of problems involved in this question: (i) (ii)

how are borrowings perceived and adapted? how do they function in the language, i.e. how do they behave with respect to phonological rules?

The ways of perceiving and adapting incoming borrowings have been studied in fair detail in the past. On a general level this problem has been addressed by e.g. Hyman (1970) and Holden (1972), among others. With regard to the structure of Polish notable here are especially Fisiak's works (1961, 1962, 1968, 1975) as well as a number of other papers (e.g. Polariski 1963, Brocki 1964). The generalization is that borrowings are perceived in terms of the native structure of the recipient language. The behaviour of borrowings vis a vis phonological rules has never been studied for Polish so far. Yet, the generalization is not difficult to discover: (83)

All borrowings (or "almost" all borrowing, cf. 3.2.) eventually undergo all phonological processes.

Let us look at two very recent borrowings into Polish: Fiat (car make), which started to be used as a common word when Poland bought the licence from the Fiat Company in the 1960's, and hotdog 'hotdog', the word borrowed from English in the mid 1970's. The interesting fact about Fiat is that it has developed a diminutive form by adding the suffix -ik: Fiacik. It should be noticed that the final /t/ appears as [c] in the diminutive, i.e. the rule of Cor. Pal. (49) has applied: //fjat+ik//->·/fjac+ik/. The word hotdog is pronounced [xoddok] or [xoddog], depending on the following context. The obstruent cluster agrees in voicing as pre-

50

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

dieted by Voice Assimilation. A novel diminutive form is hotdot+ek, where UR //§// has been turned to /$/ via 1st Velar (58) and further to [ϊ] via Spirantization (59). One wonders how it is that such recent borrowings undergo various phonological rules of Polish so readily. The answer should be sought in the fact that neither Fiat nor hotdog have any structural properties which would mark these words as different (foreign) from native words. Thus they are processed by morphophonemic rules in the same way as native words are. Let us pursue further the question of how borrowings behave vis vis phonological rules. Specifically, we ask what happens if borrowings do have a phonological structure which makes them uniquely identifiable as non-native words. Polish exhibits a straightforward generalization with respect to the phonotactic structure of nasals and fricatives. In native words the nasal consonant //n// must be preceded by a mid vowel //e// or //o// when followed by a fricative inside the same morpheme. Thus wqs 'moustache' and w^ch 'sense of smell' have the structure //vons// and //venx//, respectively. The underlying //n// is changed to a glide /w/ by the rule of Nasal Gliding which we state informally as follows (see 5.6.2.): (84) v '

Nas. Gliding B

n -» w / '

Γ+obstr I

In other words, the glide arises in the context of fricatives. Rule (84) derives surface [vows] from //vons// 'moustache' and [vewx] from //venx// 'sense of smell', where the vowel is nasalized before nasal glides by rule (39). A number of borrowings violate the phonotactic generalization under discussion. We thus have nonmid vowels followed by n and fricatives in e.g. instytut 'institute', kunszt 'art' and mansarda 'attic'. Rule (84) does not apply and in slow speech the words in question are pronounced [institut], [kuriSt] and [mansarda]. However, in rapid and/or casual speech Nasal Gliding is extended to apply to these structurally non-native words: /n/ is changed to [w] and we have [iwst+tut] 'institute', [kuw§t] 'art' and [mawsarda] 'attic'. The operation of extended Nasal Gliding is so persistent that it even causes phonological interference in the speech of Poles learning English. Mispronunciations such as [siws] for [sins] since and [kiEwsar] for [kaensar] cancer are a commonplace. The conclusion of this discussion lends strong support to the assumption stated in (83): borrowings undergo phonological rules not only when they are structurally compatible with phonotactic constraints on native words but also when they exhibit a clearly foreign pattern. This being

The Status of Loanwords in Phonological Theory

51

the case, borrowings provide invaluable evidence to the phonologist concerning the predictions made by his theory. 3.2.

Etymological borrowings

In the past, generative research on Polish has not looked at loanwords since it has been assumed that they form a system of their own. Let us consider this assumption somewhat in detail. From the etymological point of view, dach 'roof, zegar 'clock' and dingo 'dingo' are all borrowings. However, they do not form a homogeneous class. The word dach 'roof, a borrowing from German (Szober 1913), is indistinguishable from native words both synchronically and diachronically. For example, it undergoes the rule of 1 Velar Palatalization (58) in the same way as native words do. Compare dach 'roof - dasz+ek (dimin.) and brzuch 'stomach' - brzusz+ek (dimin.) : χ -> §. The second example, zegar 'clock' borrowed into Polish from Middle High German, is in a different class. It stands out as foreign in the diachronic sense. Had it been a native word, it would have had the pronunciation [zegar] and not [zegar] since Slavic words have prepalatal obstruents before front vowels e.g. ziemia [ze-] 'earth'. From the synchronic point of view, zegar 'clock' can hardly be identified as a borrowing. Its morphology is perfectly native. More, it has a native diminutive form: zegar+ek 'watch' carries the Slavic suffix //4-k//. In terms of the standard generative description of contemporary Polish, zegar 'clock' is peculiar only in one respect: it does not undergo Coronal Pal. (49), ζ -> ζ before /e/. Thus in the standard analysis it would have to be marked as an exception. Such an analysis is peculiar in view of the fact that there are thousands of etymologically foreign words in Polish which, like zegar 'clock', fail to undergo Cor. Pal. What is more, there are also native words, e.g. deptac 'tread', which offend Cor. Pal. (we have [d] and not [3] before e). It would be entirely unrealistic to claim that zegar 'clock' is excluded from Cor. Pal. due to its [-(-Foreign] status. From the point of view of today's Polish, zegar 'clock' and deptac 'tread' are in the same class: they share the totally arbitrary property of not undergoing Cor. Pal. Thus the assignment of the diacritic [+Foreign] in order to exclude zegar 'clock', etc. from Cor. Pal., would in effect be equivalent to marking these lexical items as exceptions. One must therefore look for reasons other than etymological borrowing to explain why zegar 'clock', deptac 'tread', etc. offend the rule of Cor. Pal. We shall address this problem in chapter 4. The foregoing discussion should not be understood to mean that incoming borrowings may not be exceptions to phonological rules. This is

52

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

certainly not true. Recent borrowings may fail to undergo some rules but normally they stop being exceptions within a fairly short period of time. The word Riwiera is an illuminating example. If used in the sense 'French Riviera', it fails to undergo Retraction (56), ϊ->·+after nonpalatal coronals. We normally have the pronunciation /ri/ rather than /ri/· However, Riwiera is also a name of a well known students' dormitory in Warsaw. When used in this meaning it is invariably pronounced with [ri·], i.e. Retraction does apply. This confirms the assumption stated in (83) that eventually all borrowings undergo all phonological processes. In sum, the case of Riwiera is not in any way parallel to that of zegar 'clock'. The latter word has been in Polish for a few hundred years and yet it has not undergone Cor. Pal. This indicates that zegar 'clock' should not be treated as an exception to Cor. Pal. Rather, we should look for some systematic reason in the structure of Polish to explain the non-application of Cor. Pal. to this and many other words. Finally, let us look at the word dingo 'dingo'. It is peculiar in several ways. First of all, it stands out as an indeclinable noun (the class of such nouns is extremely small in Polish). This is due to a clash between its semantically masculine gender assigned on the basis of association with pies 'dog' (Fisiak 1962) and its structurally nonmasculine final segment: -o characterizes the class of neuter nouns in Polish. At the same time dingo fails to undergo Cor. Pal. and Retraction: it has [di] rather than [31] or [d*]. A convergence of several different factors makes it possible to isolate dingo as belonging to some special lexical class which we might wish to designate with the feature (^Foreign]1. Fisiak (1962) has pointed out that [+Foreign] is an entirely arbitrary feature and it is justified only inasmuch as it denotes an unusual behaviour of some words. Clearly speakers do not know which words are etymologically foreign and which are not. Thus we can only speak about words showing a different behaviour with respect to some phonological rule or rules. At this point we can distinguish two classes of items: (1)

(ii)

morphemes which show exceptionality features in several independent areas, e.g. dingo 'dingo': no palatalization, anomalous morphology; morphemes which for some reason do not seem to undergo just one phonological rule, e.g. zegar 'clock': no palatalization of ζ before a front vowel.

The words in class (i) may (perhaps) form a subsystem of their own in a grammar. However, there are very few examples. On the other hand, the words in class (ii) can hardly be described as forming a system of their own. They simply indicate either that we are dealing with exceptions or

The Status of Loanwords in Phonological Theory

53

else that the rule which they seem to offend has not been stated correctly. This second possibility must be considered seriously whenever we find a large class of words which would have had to be marked as exceptions, had the rule been formulated differently. The overwhelming majority of etymological borrowings belong to class (ii). They thus constitute an important source of evidence for developing a system of phonological rules. It is this class of borrowings that we shall look at in the ensuing chapters. 3.3.

Folk etymology

In this section we wish to further substantiate our conclusion from the preceding paragraph that borrowings do not constitute a homogeneous class and that they, by and large, are not meant to, and in fact do not form a system of their own. This is clearly indicated by a very high analytic activity on the part of native speakers of the recipient language. It is surprising how much conscious, or more often subconscious effort there is in imposing a native morphological structure on incoming foreign words, where the term "native" should be understood to refer to the structure familiar to native speakers and not necessarily Slavic in the etymological sense. Borrowings are "nativized" by adding various suffixes, e.g. the diminutive -ek, UR //*k//, as in brosz+k+a 'brooch" (cf. gen. pi. brosz+ek) from French broche, bombonier+k-ta 'box of chocolates' (cf. gen. pi. bombonier+ek) from French bonbonniere, etc. In a vast majority of cases, but excluding, for example, verbs which exhibit a fixed pattern of structure in Polish, one can hardly see any reason why such suffixes should be added. For instance, bombonier+a 'box of chocolates' would have been a perfectly natural nativization of bonbonniere. In fact now bomboniera can be heard in colloquial speech but characteristically it assumes an emotional augmentative meaning. Thus it seems that the primary reason for adding some suffixes is the desire to nativize incoming borrowings. Still more interesting are cases of folk etymology. Native speakers try to "discover" their own morphological structure in borrowed words and thereby violate the principles of "correct" linguistic analysis. Normative grammarians constantly point out that e.g. derby from English Derby is a singular and not a plural form as -y misleadingly suggests (-V is the plural morpheme in Polish). Yet, this word as well as some others e.g. Helsinki, Saloniki (those are recognized by normative grammarians) are commonly treated as plural nouns, with respect to concord. Association with the diminutive suffix -ek2, has produced forms with deleting e (recall Lower and Yer Deletion, rules (47a) and (47b) in 2.3.). This e is not justified from the etymological point of view:

54

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(85)

Helsink+i - Helsinek (gen. pi.) from Finnish Helsinki szmink+a 'lipstick' - szminek (gen. pi.) from German Schminke szynk+a 'ham' - szyndc (gen. pi.) from German Schinken arabesk+a 'arabesque' - arabesek (gen. pi.) from Italian arabesca ganek 'porch' from German Gang trunek 'alcoholic beverage' from German Trunk korek 'cork' from German Kork rynek 'market' from German Ring (Doroszewski 1962:427) kalk+a 'carbon sheet' - kalk ^ kalek (gen. pi., only the former is listed in dictionaries) from French caique, etc.

Some of these "incorrect" formations have now been reanalysed and the -ek form appears as a true diminutive: Kreja (1970:78) points out that spelun+a 'dive' is a back formation from the earlier spelunka (from Latin spelunca), cf. e in the gen. pi. spelunek. This analytic activity of native speakers has not by any means weakened over the ages. Doroszewski (1951a:31) observes that the inhabitants of Kluczbork tend to incorrectly call their native town *Kluczborek. My own observations show that drink, a very recent borrowing from English, not yet listed in dictionaries, is in variation with the form drinek3. In some other words folk etymology has been prompted by the native suffix -ec, the one of kup+owac 'to buy' - kup+iec 'merchant' - kup+c+a (gen. sg.): vowel zero alternation hence UR //ic//. Thus we have: (86)

szaniec 'retrenchment' from German Schanze (Grappin 1952:35) walec 'cylinder' from German Walze smalec 'lard' from German Schmalz.

This group includes also taniec 'dance' from German Tanz which is interesting in that it now has a form without -ec, as in the phrase ruszyc w tany 'to start dancing'. Cienkowski (1972:75) points out that besarabski 'Bessarabian' is often pronounced with z due to the interference of the native prefix bez- Nvithout'. The word gulasz 'goulash' from Hungarian gulyas is treated very often as if it had a voiced fricative: gula[Z]u (gen.). The mistake comes from the association with the native morpheme -arz (Doroszewski 1965: 95) which does indeed have a voiced fricative. Speakers are active not only in imposing a morphological analysis on incoming words but also in trying to discover the "correct" underlying form. In doing so they are sometimes misled due to the operation of phonological rules. Polish word final devoicing is undoubtedly held responsible for today's variation in the word standard 'standard': standardu ^ standartu (gen.), standardz+ie Λ/ standarc+ie (loc.), etc. The variation

The Status of Loanwords in Phonological Theory

55

carries over also to derivational morphology: standard+owy 'v standart+ owy (Adj.). Preconsonantal devoicing results in mistakes such as agrawek (gen. pi.) from agrafka 'safety pin' (originally, from French agrafe, Cienkowski 1972:55). French marriage has been borrowed twice: once as a name for a card game and later in the meaning 'marriage'. In the first but not in the second instance it was incorrectly nativized as mariasz, with a word final voiceless fricative (Folfanski 1946:21). Thus, there is a remarkable activity on the part of native speakers to analyse and accomodate borrowings. It is this fact that has prompted the extension of our data base to include etymologically foreign words as legitimate and relevant material. The importance of this broadened data base is further justified by the fact that Polish has a very high number of words which are borrowings from the etymological point of view. Damborsky (1974:350) has found that there are thirty thousand foreign words in Polish, counting only some technical terms, and their frequency of usage is as high as 25%. 3.4.

The treatment of exceptions

There are significant differences between the classical generative phonology (SPE framework) and cyclic phonology with regard to the question of what constitutes an exception to phonological rules. Vowel alternations before r are an illuminating example. Polish has a rule of r-lowering which we quote after Gussmann (1980a, his rule 139):

(87)

r-lowering

+high +tense -round

-high] backj

t

Rule (87) lowers /i 4·/ to /e/ before /r/. It is seen to operate in words that have underlying yers which are tensed by D.I. Tensing (44): (88)

umr+p Ί will die' - umier+aj (imper.)4 br+ac 'take' - zbier+aj (imper.) pr+ac 'wash' - dopier+aj 'wash out' (imper.) wespr+f Ί will support' - wspier+aj (imper.) rozwr+e Ί will open' - rozwier+aj (imper.) wytr+e Ί will wipe' - wycier+aj (imper.) dr+£ Ί tear' - wydzier+aj 'tear out' (imper.), etc.

Gussmann's work (1980a) is a correct and consistent analysis carried out

56

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

within the framework of the classical SPE type of phonology. He therefore assumes that r-lowering applies with no regard to derived and nonderived forms. These latter are the cases of nonalternating /er/, for example in szmer 'rustle' and teraz 'now'. They are represented as underlying //tr//. However, if r-lowering is allowed to apply to nonderived forms, one finds a number of words which have to be quoted as exceptions, e.g. wyraz 'word', czyrak 'boil', wirowac 'rotate', Mirostaw (Slavic name), etc. Since //i-r// is postulated also in etymologically foreign words (ster 'steering wheel', rower 'bicycle', both in Gussmann 1980a:83), the number of exceptions literally jumps into dozens if not hundreds, e.g. pirat 'pirate', irytowac 'upset', cyrk 'circus', syrop 'syrop', syrena 'mermaid', tyran 'tyrant', wira'z 'turning', wirus Virus', and many others. Observe that if r-lowering is taken to be cyclic, then no difficulties arise: the rule becomes entirely exceptionless. It will apply exclusively to the items in (88) in our body of data since it is only there that the /i t/ are derived segments, i.e. they are produced by the application of an earlier rule (here D.I. Tensing): (89)

umieraj Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Postcyclic

'die'

[ u [ [mir]aj ] mir+aj mir+aj mer+aj mjer+aj

D.I. Tensing (44) r-lowering (87) Lab/vel/-insertion (62)

u+mjer+aj no rule applies u+m'jer+aj

Surf. Pal. rule (34)

The cyclicity of /•-lowering has another clear consequence: the nonalternating /er/ must be set up as //er// since /e/ could not be derived from live tr// due to the fact that it is morpheme internal and cyclic rules cannot apply on the first cycle. The reasoning behind Gussmann's analysis was much more elaborate than that presented so far. Underlying //tr// was postulated in nonalternating forms to account for the fact that palatalization rules did not apply in e.g. teraz /te-/ 'now' vs. ciemny /ce-/ 'dark': both have surface /e/. As we shall see in the course of further analysis, the lack of palatalization can be explained in a different way and therefore the cyclicity of r-lowering has no negative consequences for the rest of the Polish phonological system. In summary, cyclic phonology provides an illuminating framework for an analysis of words which, in surface terms, seem to be exceptions to rules. Such words may, in many cases, be systematically excluded from the

The Status of Loanwords in Phonological Theory

57

domain of phonological rules if these are claimed to be cyclic. The classical SPE type of analysis cannot provide a comparably adequate interpretation since in effect it reduces the offending examples to the status of unexplained exceptions. 3.5.

Guide to organization of further analysis

Our presentation of the cyclic framework is organized around descriptive problems of Polish phonology. This is deliberate. Other alternatives such as organizing the book around purely theoretical questions would lead to much confusion since the system of Polish is fairly complex. General linguists who have little interest in descriptive problems of Slavic are advised to closely follow guides which are provided at the beginning of every chapter. These guides point to the most interesting theoretical problems of the analysis. Chapters 4, 5, and 7 are divided into parts A and B. Part B is primarily meant for readers with an interest in Polish. It complements part A by providing further details. Chapter 8 is oriented theoretically and not descriptively. It introduces some new assumptions and gives a revised analysis of two phonological rules: Lower and Vowel Shift. Chapter 9 sums up the theories of cyclic and lexical phonology. It is organized around questions which are primarily of theoretical and not of descriptive interest. NOTES 1. In the sphere of scientific vocabulary Polish has a class of -cja, -zfa words. The class is so large that a "borrowing pattern" (cf. Holden 1972) has developed: this is the way of adapting foreign -i/o«, -now words, e.g. recently telewizja from English television (Rybicka 1976:52). In terms of rules presented in the ensuing chapters, this class does not show any phonological irregularities. If there is anything foreign about it at all, it is the suffix ij/ij which requires a special rule to account for the i/4· - zero alternation (cf. Gussmann 1980a:55): telewiz -k/'+a 'television' vs. telewiz+y/+n+y (Adj.), wherey/= [ij] is clearly a suffix (cf. telewiz+or TV set'). See 2.5.5. and note 11 in chapter 2. 2. The suffix -ek, UR //4k// and //ik//, may have other meanings than the diminutive. We shall omit this problem and continue to refer to -ek as the diminutive suffix. 3. At first glance, the words just quoted and those enumerated under (85) look like evidence for postulating some sort of a phonological constraint or rule to the effect of inserting the e. This would be a false step. The deleting vowel can indeed be inserted but only before a liquid and never before an obstruent, viz. English single - Pol. singiel, Eng. Beatles — Pol. Bitels (varying with Bitles), Eng. singleton - Pol. singielton, Frenchfiacre- Pol. flakier (cf. also Kaye and Nykiel 1981). 4. The examples are given in the imperative so as to show the presence of -of, which is the environment for D.I. Tensing. See also the analysis of the imperative in 4.3.

Chapter 4

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

4.0.

Guide

The rules developed in part A of this chapter are examples of processes which fall under the Strict Cyclicity Principle. Specifically, they should be constrained not to apply on the first cycle. Coronal Palatalization (see 4.1.) is a classic example of such a process. lotation (see 4.2.) illustrates the mechanics of cyclic application. It supports the stipulation of the Strict Cyclicity Principle that cyclic rules may return to an earlier cycle of a derivation if a feeding change has been introduced by a rule applying earlier in the current cycle. The remaining rules: /-deletion (see 4.4.), V-deletion (see 4.5.) and Gliding (see 4.6.) complement the picture of palatalization which emerges from the discussion of Coronal Palatalization and lotation. Section 4.3. is devoted to the interaction of word formation rules and phonological rules. It deals with the structure of the imperative. Part B provides further details illustrating how the theory proposed in this book deals with depalatalization processes. Part A: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CYCLIC PHONOLOGY

4.1.

Coronal Palatalization

4.1.1. Introduction Polish has a very productive rule of palatalization which is responsible for alternations in the class of coronal consonants. In the context of front vowels //s z t d// are replaced by prepalatal fricatives and affricates /s z c 3/; the dental nasal //n// becomes a prepalatal nasal /ή/, the "dark" lateral //4// changes to "clear" /!/, and the alveolar liquid //r// is realized phonetically as a postalveolar fricative /£/: (90)

nom. sg. pas 'belt' glaz 'stone' brat 'brother'

-

loc. sg.: ending//e// pas-He [pas'+e] gJ-az+ie [gwaz+e] brac+ie [brac+e]

60

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology cud 'miracle' dzwon 'bell' wat 'rampart' mur 'wall'

-

cudz+ie [013+6] dzwon+ie [svon+e] wal+e [val+e] murz+e [mu2+e]

There are three kinds of problems that arise in connection with the alternations exhibited in (90): (i) (ii) (iii)

What is the generalization? More specifically, should the palatalization rule be constrained in some principled way? What is the exact form of the rule? How abstract are underlying representations? This question is asked with respect to the interpretation of nonalternating palatals which appear in the environment of front vowels.

4.1.2. The SPE framework With respect to question (i) from the preceding paragraph, past research on Polish (Steele 1973, Laskowski 1975, Gussmann 1978) has uncovered the generalization that the alternations in (90) are governed by a rule of palatalization applying before front vowels. This research has been carried out in the SPE framework and is perfectly consistent with it. The palatalization rule applies in an unconstrained manner whenever its environment is met, both across morpheme boundaries and inside morphemes. Question (ii), i.e. how the rule should be formulated, is answered by proposing rule (91) which we shall call General Palatalization: (91)

Gen. Pal.

[-syll] L J J

-

^. ~

/

This formulation is quoted from Steele (1973) and a similar one is found in Laskowski (1975) . Gussmann's (1978) rule corresponding to (91) is restricted to anterior consonants, i.e. dentals and labials, as the input. Rule (91) applies to the data in (90) and produces palatalized (but not palatal) consonants:

(92)

s z t d n r 4-

->

s' z' t' d' n' r' Γ

The outputs as presented in (92) undergo late spell-out rules which yield the phonetic forms transcribed in (90), i.e. /s'/ changes to a prepalatal fricative [s], /t'/ becomes a prepalatal affricate [c], etc. In sum, the palatalization exhibited by the data in (90) is a two stage process: the surface forms are derived via an early palatalization rule and further via spell-out rules.

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

61

Actually, rule (91) is broader than required by the data in (90). It covers also velars and labials. Thus the change of //k// to [δ] as in czlowiek 'man' - czlowiecz+e (voc.) would pass through an intermediate stage /k'/. In Gussmann's formulation (1978) velars are excluded, i.e. the change of //k// to [£] is effected in one step. However, labials pass through an intermediate stage. Thus snap 'sheaf - snop+ie [snop'+je] (voc.) is derived by an early rule which turns //-p+e// to /p'+e/ and by a late /-insertion rule which inserts /j/ after a palatalized labial. We shall discuss the form of the rules involved in the palatalization of coronal, velar and labial consonants in 4.1.4. and in chapters 5 and 6. In the SPE framework the answer to the third question from 4.1.1., i.e. how abstract underlying representations of nonalternating forms are, follows from the assumption that the palatalization rule applies both across morpheme boundaries and inside morphemes. Consequently, morpheme internal prepalatal consonants in words such as siew [s'e-] 'sowing', siwy [si-] 'grey', den [ce-] 'shadow' and cichy [ci-] 'silent' are derived from underlying //se- si- te- ti-// in spite of the fact that there are no alternations with [s] or [t] in any allomorph of these morphemes. In what follows we shall discuss the same three questions in the framework of cyclic phonology. 4.1.3. Basic generalization: evidence for the cyclic status Let us assume that Polish has a palatalization rule such as (91) which applies in an unconstrained manner as stipulated in the past research on Polish. Even if we restrict (91) to apply to anterior consonants only (Gussmann's interpretation, 1978), the rule still runs into a number of difficulties: (i)

There is a sizeable group of etymologically native words with [+anter] consonants which cannot be excluded from the operation of (91) in any nonarbitrary way and yet do not show palatalization, i.e. they constitute exceptions to Gen. Pal.:

(93)

beczec 'bleat', bekac 'stir', berbec 'tot', pel-zac 'crawl', besztac 'scold', deptac 'tread', sejm 'parliament', wtedy 'then', wedle 'according', dreptac 'trot', rechotac 'laugh', etc.

(ii)

Were Gen. Pal. to apply to these words, we would expect to find phonetic structures such as [b'je-], [36-], [s'e-], [ce-], [v'je-], [2e-]. These, however, do not occur. In chapter 3 we showed that the rule of r-lowering should be regarded as cyclic from the synchronic point of view. This precludes the possibility of analysing words such as ser 'cheese',

62

(iii)

(94)

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology teraz 'now', zerkac 'peep', sterczec 'stick out', serce 'heart' and many others as having the underlying structure //-«-//, where the //+// would lower to /e/ after Gen. Pal. has applied, The number of exceptions to rule (91) grows drastically for yet another reason. As indicated in chapter 2 and amply motivated in Gussmann (1980a), Polish has a rule which lowers yers to /e/ if they appear before a yer and deletes them in all other environments (rules (47a) and (47b) from chapter 2). These rules known as Lower and Yer Deletion, could effectively be used to block palatalization in a number of potential counterexamples. Thus bez 'without', tez 'also', nawet 'even', zez 'squint', tesc 'fatherin-law', etc. could be claimed to have the underlying representations //blz+//, //tizi//, //nav+t-i·//, z+zi// and //t+sci//. Lower, applying after (91), would correctly derive surface e's from underlying back yers and in this way explain the lack of palatalization of the preceding consonant. Observe, however, that there is a cost associated with this analysis: the only reason we posit final yers in bez 'without', tez 'also', zez 'squint', etc. is to create the environment for Lower to apply so that the yer of the preceding syllable could lower to a mid vowel. This, however, cannot be taken as a serious argument. More importantly, we shall show in chapter 6 that Lower must be a cyclic rule for reasons entirely independent of how we want to view Polish palatalization. Recall that one of the consequences of the rule being cyclic is that it cannot apply in nonderived environments. Therefore positing a final yer in words such as those above does not solve the problem: Lower still cannot apply as there is no morpheme (cycle) boundary. A further consequence of cyclic Lower is the impossibility of deriving the e's which are exceptions to Gen. Pal. from back yers even in the words which have a yer in the final syllable. Etymological borrowings such as perki 'pearl', mebel 'furniture', sweter 'sweater' as well as native welna 'wool' have been analysed as having the structure //ptr&+a//, //m+bW+i//, etc. (Gussmann 1980a:44). There is no doubt that the stem-final syllable must contain a yer. We have vowel - zero alternations in: perl+a 'pearl' - perei (gen. pi.) mebel 'furniture' - mebl+e (pi.) sweter 'sweater' - swetr+a (gen.) we4n+a - weien (gen. pi.). Still the preceding vowel cannot be analysed as a yer since in the absence of any motivation for a derived environment Lower could

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

63

not apply and produce /e/. This may look like a serious objection against the claim that Lower should be cyclic: had it been postcyclic, no problem in the analysis would have ever arisen. Observe, however, that the yer blocking strategy fails completely with polysyllabic words or dissyllabic words which for one reason or another have not developed a penultimate yer: (95)

(iv)

(96)

weteran 'veteran', peleryna 'pelerine', serweta 'tablecloth', sekret 'secret', detektyw 'detective', determinizm 'determinism', dezerter 'deserter', neseser 'dressing case', deser 'dessert', defekt 'defect', teren 'terrain', desen 'pattern', trener 'coach', etc. It is therefore clear that the possibility of blocking Palatalization by positing back yers in the first syllable of the words in (94) is a matter of accident rather than a systematic generalization, The data in (95) bring us to the problem of borrowings. Here we are dealing not with hundreds but with thousands of words which systematically violate Gen. Pal.: Sekunda 'second', senator 'senator', semestr 'semestre', zecer 'typesetter', gazeta 'newspaper', rezerwowac 'to book', fektura 'cardboard', cfentysta 'dentist', garderoba 'dressing room', podest 'landing', drenaz 'drainage', rower 'bicycle', adres 'address', nerw 'nerve', «egatywny 'negative', majonez 'mayonnaise', kämet 'ticket book', etc. At this point one may start wondering whether we have not arrived at a true generalization: Palatalization does not apply to borrowings. There is an immediate difficulty involved in trying to maintain this position. As observed in chapter 3, etymological borrowings by and large do not exhibit as a class any properties which would make them easily identifiable as a distinct subset of the Polish lexicon. Therefore claiming, for example, that zegar 'clock', zegarek 'watch' (a borrowing from German in Old Polish) or deska 'board' (most probably a borrowing from Latin in ProtoSlavic) are excluded from Palatalization as [+Foreign] words is in fact equivalent to quoting them as exceptions to (91). Furthermore, any attempt to set up an arbitrary division of the lexicon into those items that do and those that do not undergo Palatalization (etymological borrowings) is bound to fail on descriptive grounds. No statement could be more incorrect than the generalization

64

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology suggested at the beginning of this paragraph. The fact is that borrowings do undergo Palatalization and, what is more, they do it in an entirely exceptionless manner. Suffice it to say that any foreign name which ends in an anterior consonant will appear with a palatalized segment in, for instance, the loc.sg. which has the suffix -e:

(97)

Nixon - Nixon+ie [-ή+e], Ford - Fordz+ie [-3+6], Carter - Carterz+e [-2+e], Harris - Harris+ie [-s'+e], etc. Palatalization is perfectly productive with any suffix which starts with a front vowel:

(98)

masc. pers. nom. pi. //i//: Szwed 'Swede' - Szwedzi [-3+1], lingwist+a 'linguist' - lingwis'ci [-c+i], intruz 'intruder' - intruzi [z+i], Anglosas 'Anglo-Saxon' - Anglosasi [-s'+i], Holender 'Dutchman' - Holendrzy [-2++], dzentelmen 'gentleman' - dzentelmeni [-n+i]; dimin. //ik//: punkt 'point' - punkcik [-c+ik], Trabant (foreign car make) - Trabancik [-c+ik], huragan 'storm' - huraganik [-n+ik]; pejorative //in+a// : asystent 'assistent' — asystencina [-c+in+a], aktor 'actor' - aktorzyna [-2+in+a]; agentive //ist+a//: portret 'portrait' - portrecista [-c+ist+a], ballad+a 'ballad' - balladzista [-3+ist+a], ras+a 'race-rasista [-s+ist+a], Byron - bajronista [-n+ist+a]. There still remains a possibility that some borrowings could be marked as exceptions to Palatalization, those in (95) and (96), while others would not carry any lexical exclusion features and would thus behave like native words: those in (97) and (98). To see why this is untenable consider the data in (99):

(99)

serwis 'service' or auto-service - serwisie [serv'is'+e] (loc.) rewolwer 'revolver' — rewolwerze [revolve2+e] (loc.) teza 'iiiesis' - tezie [tez+e] (loc.) test 'test' - tescie [tesc+e] (loc.) - tes'cik [tesc+ik] (dimin.) silos 'silo' - silosie [s'ilos'+e] (loc.) - silosik [s'ilos'+ik] (dimin.).

These words form what one might call "minimal pairs" in that the same sequence of segments is both nonpalatalized and palatalized in the same word: /se/ vs. /s'e/ in serwis+ie 'service'

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

65

(v)

/servis'+e/, /si/1 vs. /si/ in silos+ik 'silo'. Consequently, any lexical marking excluding serwis 'service', etc. from Palatalization would fail on the grounds of being observationally inadequate. It becomes clear now that the true generalization is completely different from the one suggested earlier: Palatalization is a cyclic rule. All the difficulties elaborated in the previous paragraphs disappear now: the presence vs. the absence of palatalization is an automatic consequence of the assumption that the rule is cyclic. For example, in serwis+ie 'service' (loc.) the phonetic contrast of initial /se/ vs. final /s'e/ goes back to the difference in the structure at the underlying level: //servis+e//. There are at least three further points to be made in connection with our claim that Palatalization is cyclic, Consider the following data:

(100)

a.

b.

optimum /ti/ Optimum' - optymalny /ti·/ Optimal' ultimatum /ti/ 'ultimatum' - ultymatywny /ti/ (Adj.) maksimum /si/ 'maximum' - maksymalny /si·/ 'maximal'; /i/ A/ /i/ variation, sometimes reflected even in the spelling: miting 'meeting' 'v mityng, bridz 'bridge' (now out-dated) A/ brydz, faksimile 'facsimile' "w faksymile, singiel 'single play', rizotto 'risotto', ring 'boxing ring', prodiz 'crock-pot', etc.

All these words are borrowings from Latin, English or French and, as shown by the alternations in (lOOa) and the variation in (lOOb), the foreign input form has the high front vowel /i/. Even a very cursory knowledge of the phonology of Latin, English and French reveals that the source forms could not have had the high back unrounded vowel /i/ since no such vowel exists in these languages. Consequently, the development of /i/ is a Polish innovation. This is further confirmed by the fact that the items on the left in (lOOa) are actually Latin quotation forms while those on the right have been nativized by the operation of the WFR (word formation rule) attaching the adjectivization suffix -n+y. In (lOOb) the forms with /i/ are invariably felt to sound more native than the forms with /i/. The word strip-tease is undoubtedly a very recent import into Polish. Phonology goes hand in hand with the entertainment policy. Disregarding the voiced - voiceless obstruent variation we are still left with four different pronunciation variants: /striptis/'v /striptis/A, /striptis/ A/ /striptis/. A brief look at some older borrowings from Latin, German, French and English demonstrates that the change from the orig-

66

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology inal /i/ to the native /*/ (spelling: y) has taken place literally in thousands of words:

(101) a.

b.

c.

d.

Latin: instytucja 'institution', edykt 'bill', desygnat 'referent', skrypt 'script', konsylium 'consultation'; French: sentyment 'sentiment', rutyna 'routine', witryna 'shop window', rywal 'rival', kaprys 'whim', sylwetka 'silhouette'; German: dykta 'plywood', gryf 'griffin', prysznic 'shower', sztych 'engraving', wentyl 'valve'; English: bryczesy 'britches', dyspeczer 'dispatcher', detektyw 'private investigator', purytnin 'Puritan', stylon 'steelon', werdykt 'verdict', Brytania 'Britain', dyktafon 'dictaphone'2, etc.

The word zydel 'stool' is an interesting example. It comes from Middle High German sidel and has been nativized to the extent that a yer has developed in the last syllable: zydl+a (gen.). Yet, the original /zi/ has become /z+/ rather than /zi/. The rule held responsible for these vowel changes is Retraction (56). It changes /i/ to /+/ in the environment after a back coronal consonant (see 2.3. and 7.3.). Obviously, Retraction must follow and not precede Palatalization since otherwise this latter could never apply in the context of high front vowels in both native and foreign words. Some examples for Retraction have already been given, though quite unintentionally. In (98) we cited Holendrzy |-z44] 'Dutchmen' and aktorzyna [-2+i-n+a] 'actor' (pejor.) derived from Holender and aktor via Palatalization. After the spell-out rule taking /f/ to /Z/ has applied, the //i// of the nom. pi. or the pejorative morpheme is retracted to /+/. Needless to say, Holendrzy and aktorzyna cannot be derived from underlying //i·// since first, Palatalization could not apply and, second, the suffixes in question must have //i// as precisely this vowel surfaces phonetically in contexts which are not inputs to Retraction. We shall return to the details of this analysis in 7.3. The question which we are facing now is why Palatalization does not apply and hence does not bleed Retraction. Observe that palatalizing as a natiivization strategy is carried out consistently at

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

(vi)

67

morpheme boundaries: striptisik 'striptease' [-s'+ik] (dimin.), skrypcik [-c+ik] 'script' (dimin.), flecista [-c+ist+a] 'flutist' (cf. flet 'flute'), etc. On the cyclic theory the answer is obvious: Palatalization is cyclic and hence it cannot affect morpheme internal strings such as those in (101) while Retraction must be postcyclic and thus it applies across the board with no regard to the derived - nonderived status. The cyclic theory makes the prediction that the variation attested in (100) will ultimately be eliminated in favour of the * -forms. On a noncyclic theory all these facts are a random collection of inexplicable exceptions. Worse, the prediction made, if any, is that, when finally nativized, miting 'meeting' should end up as *micing /c/, bridz 'bridge' as *brzydz /£/, etc. All the evidence available (note: even the spelling) points to the fact that this does not and cannot happen. In defiance of what we have said so far, there does exist a small group of borrowings which have been nativized via Palatalization applying morpheme internally. Moszynska (1975) points out that today's osiol [-s'-J 'donkey', pacierz [-c-] 'prayer', dziekan [-3-] 'dean' (contemporary meaning) come originally from Latin asellus - Proto-Slavic /osM/, pater - via Old Czech patef, and decanus. Rudnicki (1906) draws attention to the fact that Latin castellwn has been borrowed into Polish twice: once around the 10/11th c. as today's kosciol· [-c-] 'church', via Old Czech kosttl, and later directly from Latin as kasztel 'castle'. Szober (1962) quotes -tacina [-c-] 'Latin' as a 12 c. borrowing of latino, Krynski (1920:277) derives Malgorzata [-Z-] 'Margaret' from Middle High German Margarethe, etc. These examples do not constitute any problem for our theory. On the contrary, they support it. Nobody doubts that today's /s/, /z/, /c/, etc. are derivable in the historical sense, i.e. in ProtoSlavic they invariably go back to sequences of /s z t/ and a front vowel in nonderived environments. Thus Palatalization was unquestionably a noncyclic rule in Proto-Slavic and in Old Polish. It could therefore apply morpheme internally and consequently, the early borrowings (all of the examples just mentioned are such) do indeed have palatal obstruents. At some point in the history of Polish, Palatalization became a cyclic rule and thus stopped affecting nonderived structures. These structures were being processed by Retraction and today we have contrasting forms such as -tacina 'Latin' [-c-] vs. latynista 'Latinist', latynizm 'Latinism' - all derived from the same source but at different stages in the history of Polish.

68

(vii)

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology Observe that on a noncyclic theory all these facts are something of a mystery. An adherent of such a theory is faced with what may constitute an embarrassing question: why would the early borrowings only, and not the later ones, undergo Palatalization if the rule is interpreted as applying morpheme internally until this day? Similar evidence may be drawn from words of the native stock. Siatkowski (1965:80) notes that today's tes'c 'father-in-law' used to be ciesc fee·/ in Old Pilish. Rybicka (1976:12) says that wesele 'wedding party' was once pronounced wesiele /s/. Bruckner (1957) points out that serce 'heart' used to be sierce /s/ until the 15 c., etc. On the cyclic theory these changes are an automatic consequence of the fact of Palatalization becoming cyclic. When morpheme internal sequences stopped being affected, some words retained the historical hard consonants while some others restructured assuming as underlying representations what used to be derivable outputs. J. Fisiak has drawn my attention to the word osierdzie 'pericardium' which is a very interesting and instructive example. There is no doubt that historically, though hardly synchronically, serc+e 'heart' and o+sierdz+ie 'pericardium' are related and they used to have the same underlying and phonetic representation as regards the sequence sier- [ser-]. Now the former has an underlying representation which seems to correspond to the historical one while the latter has assumed what used to be a derivable phonetic structure: serce //se-// vs. osierdzie //-s'e-//. Thus today they are not related at the underlying level. It is also characteristic that the two words have developed quite divergent idiosyncratic meanings: 'heart' (a common word) and 'pericardium' (a medical term). All the evidence enumerated under the seven points in this section leads to the conclusion that the rule responsible for the palatalization of coronal consonants as shown by the data in (90) is cyclic.

4.1.4. Formalization of the rule Now let us turn to the controversial question of how the palatalization rule should look. As explained in 4.1.2., the traditional approach is to hold that the palatalization of coronal consonants is a two stage process: (i) addition of the features [+high, -back] by an early rule and (ii) spelling out the differences in the place and manner of articulation by late rules. The early rule would have to be Gen. Pal. (91) or some such rule (e.g.

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

69

Gussmann's /-anterior, i.e. (91) limited to [+anter] inputs, cf. Gussmann 1978). A priori there is nothing wrong with assuming Gen. Pal. (91) as a cyclic rule. Given (91) we shall have /s' z' t' d' η' Γ' Γ/ at an early stage in the derivation. Later (postcyclic) spell-out rules will produce the desired phonetic segments: Obstruent Spell-out /s' z' t' d'/ ->· [s z c 3], i.e. prepalatal stridents; Nasal Spell-out /η'/ -> [ή], a prepalatal nasal; r-spell-out /r'/ ->· [£], i.e. postalveolar voiced fricative; Lateral Spell-out /!'/ -»· [1]. The last rule would be necessary for words which have a phonetic sequence of [1] plus [e] or a consonant: (102) ciepl+y 'warm' - ciepl+ej 'warmer' vs. [Γ] in ociepl+i+c 'to heat' zl+y 'bad' - zl+e 'badly' vs. [Γ] in zl+i 'bad' (nom. pi. pers. masc.) diabel 'devil' - diabel+sk+i 'develish' vs. diabl+i (nom. pi.) stt+a 'strength' - sil+n+y 'strong' vs. wysil+i+c sie 'make an effort'? As we shall see below, the motivation for Lateral Spell-out and r-spell-out is very strong. No such statement can be made about Obstruent and Nasal Spell-outs. The reason for postulating these latter rules derives from the fact that palatalized //t d n// lose their palatalization in the context of sonorants. The details of this process will be discussed in section 4.7. Now let us merely observe that the rule which is held responsible for these changes can depalatalize /t' d' n'/ just as readily as /c 3 n/. The only modification required is an introduction of two more features in the output: [-del rel] and [+anter]. At this price we can get rid of two otherwise unavoidable rules: Obstruent Spell-out and Nasal Spell-out. The suggestion of the foregoing discussion therefore is that Palatalization be formulated as a direct change rule. It would turn //s z t d n// directly into [s' z c 3 n] thus by-passing the intermediate stage of/s' z ' t ' d' n'/. Returning to the form of Palatalization, let us record a certain disturbing peculiarity of Gen. Pal. (91): this rule is almost identical to Surface Palatalization, rule (34) proposed in 2.2.1. Keeping two rules which produce the same output in a very similar environment is a rather disquieting fact. Obviously we should ask whether this is really necessary. There is no doubt that Gen. Pal., or some such rule, must be part of the Polish grammar. One might, however, try to exclude Surface Palatalization by collapsing it with Gen. Pal. Any attempt in this direction is bound to fail since the two rules are very different in both their nature and their domain of application:

70

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

— Gen. Pal. (or some such rule) is cyclic while Surface Pal. is postcyclic. - Gen. Pal. must be ordered early (see below) while Surf. Pal. is among the last rules in Polish phonology (it applies after postcyclic r-spellout, see 7.2.). - Gen. Pal. derives e.g. [s], a prepalatal fricative (directly or via spell-out, whichever the theory), while Surf. Pal. produces [s'J, a palatalized alveolar fricative. Both of these are found in silosik [s'ilos'+ik] 'silo' (dimin.) from underlying //silos+ik//. Compare also: diabef- 'devil' - diabl+i (pi.) - an alveolar lateral via Gen. Pal. vs. diabel· i 'devil and' — [d'jabew#i]: here Gen. Pal. does not apply as there is a word boundary; Surface Pal. does not apply since //4·// has been changed to a glide (see lateral Vocalization below). - As indicated by the last example, Gen. Pal. applies only inside words while Surf. Pal. also across word boundaries: dzentelmen 'gentleman' — dzentelmeni [-ή+i] (pi.) vs. dzentelmen i [-n'#i] 'gentleman and' 4 , kat 'hangman' - kaci [-c+i] (pi.) vs. kat idzie [-t'#i] 'the hangman is walking', etc. In previous research on Polish, Surface Palatalization (34) has not been recognized as a separate rule 5 . Little attention was paid to phonetic detail as the interest centred on morphophonemic alternations. Presumably the assumption was that Gen. Pal. could generate all the forms including phonetic details such as [t'J in kat idzie 'the hangman is walking'. This, however, would be the wrong analysis as the context-free spell-out f -> c6 would produce [c] in kat idzie. It follows therefore that we would have to have both Gen. Pal. and Surf. Pal. as separate rules. The input would be the same and the rules would effect identical changes but Gen. Pal. would be an early rule while Surf. Pal. would be a late phonetic rule. An alternative analysis is to assume that the early palatalization rule changes obstruent dentals and nasals to prepalatals directly. We can thus simplify the grammar by rejecting Obstruent Spell-out and Nasal Spell-out as viable rules of Polish phonology. In sum, considerations of simplicity and naturalness prompt the solution that Palatalization be formulated as a rule taking dentals to prepalatals in one step. Let us call this rule Coronal Palatalization.

(103)

+ anter + coron Cor. Pal. - del rel α obstr

"—back" +distr +high -anter astrid

-cons'! -backj

Ε

Coronal Palatalization turns //s z t d η 4- r// to prepalatals /s' z c 3 ή Γ Γ/

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

71

before front vowels and /j/. The first five segments are actually found in phonetic representations (hence no spell-out rules are necessary). The last two, (Υ F/, undergo further modifications which we shall discuss later (see 7.2. and below). A number of points call for explanation. First of all, Cor. Pal. does not affect labials. This follows from the fact that palatalization of labials is indeed a very different process. For example, it involves /-insertion in the environment before -e rather than a change in the place of articulation: skarb 'treasure' - skarbie /b+je/ (loc.), ps+a 'dog' (gen.) - pies /pjes/ (nom.), etc. We discuss this problem in a separate chapter (see 6.2.). Secondly, the input to (103) excludes the affricates /c 3/. This exclusion follows from the fact that cMopiec 'boy' - cMopc+y //-c+i// (pi., [i] by Retraction (56) from chapter 2), goniec 'runner' - gonc+y (pi.) surface as [c+i] rather than *[c+i]. Recall that the nom. pi. masc. ending of personal nouns is //i//, as demonstrated on the surface by the data in (98), and [+] is the result of Retraction. There is, however, some marginal evidence from mistakes made by native speakers that the input restriction to [ -del rel] has a tendency to be dropped, at least for some words. Stonski (1947) warns against the incorrect form *cudz+i 'somebodyelse's' (Adj.) - nom. pi. of cudz+y. Doroszewski (1951b:82) notes the pervasive mistake *obc+i 'strange' as in *obc+i ludzie 'strangers', etc. Furthermore, we shall claim in chapter 5 that the so-called Second Velar Palatalization which derives /c $/ from underlying //k g// must in fact precede Cor. Pal. This raises the problem of excluding the outputs of 2 Velar from Cor. Pal. since drog+a 'road' - drodz+e (dat.), fyk-Hi 'meadow' — iqc+e (dat.) surface with alveolar and not prepalatal affricates. The ordering problem will be discussed in chapter 5. Now let us only note that some evidence from slips does in fact indicate that this is the right order. For example, Doroszewski (1951b:3) records the form *francusci [-c+i] as in *francusci delegaci 'French delegates'. The word for 'French' is an adjectivization of Francuz 'Frenchman' by appending the suffix -sk (cf. 2.5.5.) and the correct form is francuscy: //isk+i// goes to /sc+i/ by Velar Pal. and further to [sc+i] by Retraction (56). Thirdly, the alpha variable in rule (103) guarantees that //t d// are changed into affricates while //n l r// remain sonorants. This brings us to the problem mentioned earlier: the motivation for having an intermediate stage in the derivation of /I z"/ from H\ r//. The necessity for such a move has been amply demonstrated especially in Gussmann (1978) and (1980a). Therefore, we shall look at the most important issues only. As has already been noted, //r// is transformed to /z"/ in the context of front vowels and glides. However, phonetic /Z/ may also come from two other sources: it may be present at the underlying level, as in papiez 'pope', miodzie'z 'youth', or it may be derived from //g// via Velar Pal.

72

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

and Spirantization both of which apply as very early rules in Polish (see chapter 5): Bog 'God' - Boz +e (voc.), boz+ek 'god', poboz+n+y 'religious'. The palatalized sonorant derived from //r// undergoes depalatalization to [r] before consonants and it surfaces as [Z] only before vowels or a word boundary (see 7.2.). However, the /z"/ from //g// or the underlying IJi.ll surface as [2] in all contexts (before voiceless consonants fif is devoiced to [$]). Consider the data in (104). The palatalizing suffixes here are: -ec /fiefI (compare vowel - zero alternation in (104a) to see why the vowel is a yer), the verbalizing //i// which surfaces as f+1 due to Retraction (56) as well as //isk//, //in// and //istiv+o// - these latter have been motivated in 2.5.4. and 2.5.5. Note that rz and z are two ways of spelling the same sound [Z]: (104) (a) star+y Old' - starz+ec Old man' - star+c+a (gen.),wzor 'pattern' - wzorz+ec 'module' - wzor+c+a (gen.) vs. grabiez 'plundering' - grabiez+c+a 'plunderer', kraz+y+c 'circulate' (also: krag 'circle') - domokraz+c+a 'peddler', ciemiez+y+c Oppress' (also: ciemieg+a Oppression') ciemi$z+c+a Oppressor'; (b) dwor 'court' - dworz+e (loc.) - dwor+sk+i (Adj.) — nadwor+n+y (Adj., associated with the court),aktor 'actor' — aktorz+e (loc.) - aktorz+yn+a (pejor.) - aktor+sk+i (Adj.) - aktor+stw+o 'acting' vs. maz 'man' - mes+k+i 'manly' - mez+n+y 'brave, - mes+tw+o 'bravery'; (c) miar+a 'measure' - mierz+y+c (V) - mier+n+y (Adj.),wiar+a 'faith' - wierz+y+c 'believe' — wier+n+y (Adj.) vs. poteg+a 'power' - potez+n+y (Adj.), podroz 'journey' — podroz+n+y (Adj.). If Cor. Pal. changed //r// to It I directly, there would be no way of recovering /r/ in the contexts where it undergoes depalatalization. Thus, for instance, wiemy 'faithful' and podrozny 'journey' (Adj.) would have the same structure after Palatalization had applied: /Z+inf. Therefore, following the standard generative descriptions of Polish, we assume that the change //r// to /2/ passes through an intermediate stage. We propose that it be /Γ/ - a prepalatal sonorant. A spell-out rule (see 7.2.) will derive the final outputs [2] or [r], depending on the context. Cor. Pal. changes the velarized lateral //I// to a prepalatal /!'/. This turns out to be fortunate for Strident Assimilation, the rule which derives [s'z] from I Is z// before prepalatal noncontinuants:

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

73

(105) (a) post 'a fast' - poscic [-sc+i+c] 'to fast' jazd+a 'travel' - jezdzie [-zs+e] (dat.) jasn+y 'bright' - jas'niej [-s'n+ej] 'brighter' bi-azen 'fool' - Waznie [-ζή+e] (voc.); (b) z++y 'bad' - zle [zl+e] 'badly' poset 'representative' — posle [-sl+e] (voc.) zwiez4-+y 'succinct' - zwiezle [-zl+e] (Adv.), etc. The words in (105a) show that the change from //s z// to [s' z] takes place before prepalatals [c 3 ή]. In (105b) prepalatal [s'z] arise before [1] which is phonetically a back alveolar consonant. This fact suggests that at some stage of derivation the [1] of (105b) must have been a prepalatal consonant so that the assimilation of //s z// to [s z] could take place. Let us observe that the assimilation under discussion occurs only before the [1] which is derived from //4·//. In all other cases //s z// remain unassimilated e.g. slogan 'slogan', slip+y 'bathing suit'. Especially the last example is interesting. Phonetically we have a palatalized [Γ] here due to Surf. Pal. (34). The assimilation does not take place since [F] has not been turned to a prepalatal consonant in the course of derivation: morpheme internal consonants cannot be affected by Cor. Pal. since the rule is cyclic. In sum, the facts of Strident Assimilation7 require that in the derivation of [1] from //ill there should be a stage /!'/ where the lateral is a prepalatal consonant. This is exactly what we have as the output of Cor. Pal. The back alveolar [1] of zle [zl+e] 'badly', etc. is derived from /!'/ by a spell-out rule which we discuss in 7.2. As a final point let us note that a two step derivation for [2] and [1] is predicted by the generative apparatus itself: it would be impossible to incorporate all these divergent changes into a single rule and yet, the palatalization process itself is clearly one and the same generalization, no matter whether the inputs are obstruents or sonorants. There is one more point to be discussed in connection with the velarized (Hfl. As mentioned before, the /'s which have not been affected by (103) undergo vocalization to /w/ in most dialects of Polish:

(106)

Lateral Vocalization

- . -, +later +back +high_

-cons -later —coron —anter

Let us observe in passing that (106) should actually be formulated as a change in one feature: [±cons]. All the other features are automatically predicted given a system like Polish (the only other glide is /j/). However,

74

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

such a formulation would require a linking rule and hence a meaningful theory of how such rules should work. Since neither is available, we leave (106) in its present unsatisfactory formulation. Unlike Cor. Pal., (106) is a very late postcyclic rule. We need the l\\ to allow Nasal Deletion to operate in words such as dqt 'he blew', αςία 'she blew' from the intermediate forms /donn4/, /demH+a/. Nasal Deletion is a very well known rule of Polish phonology and its formulation goes back to Schenker (1954). It deletes nasals before laterals at a fairly late stage in phonological derivation (the evidence comes from e.g. nasal vowel alternations; see 5.6.). We have noted on several occasions that Cor. Pal. is a very productive rule. It applies before a wide range of different suffixes, both inflectional and derivational: (107) (a) verbalizing //i//: kaprys 'whim' - kaprysic //kapris-H+c//, brud 'dirt' - brudz+i+c, tetn+o 'pulse' - tetn+i+c, mydl+o 'soap' - mydl+i+c, chmur+a 'cloud' - chmurz+y-hi; (b) verbalizing //ej//: idiota //idjot+a// 'idiot' - idiociec //idjot+ej+c//, lys+y 'bald' -tys+ie+c,dobr+y 'good' wydobrz+e+c; (c) verbalizing //e//: lot 'flight' - leciec //let+e+c//, wiad+om+y 'known' - wiedz+ie+c, widok 'sight' - widz+ie+c, etc.; (d) present tense //e//: gryza //gr+z+om// 'they bite' - gryziesz //gri-z+e+S// 'you bite', gryzie //gri-z+e// 'he bites', wiod+^i 'they lead' - wiedz+ie+sz 'you lead', ton+a 'they drown' ton+ie+sz 'you drown'; (e) femin, //ic+a//: kot 'cat' - kocica //kot+ic+a//, wielbJ-ad 'camel' - wielW-adz+ic+a, lis 'fox' - lis+ic+a, wampir 'vampire' - wampirz+yc+a, baiwan 'fool' - ba4-wan+ic+a; (0 dimin. //in+a//: pies 'dog' - psina //pis+in+a//, sosna 'pine' sosn+in+a, kobieta 'woman' - kobiec+in+a; (g) augmentative //isk+o//: but 'shoe' - bucisko //but+isk+o//, Szwed 'Swede' — Szwedz+isk+o, pies 'dog' — ps+isk+o, bagn+o 'swamp' - bagn+isk+o, skai+a 'rock' - skal+isk+o, wicher 'wind' - wichrz+ysk+o; (h) adjectival //ist-N·//: wyraz 'expression' - wyrazisty //v*raz+ ist+t//, kol-+o 'circle' - kol+ist+y, srebr+o 'silver' - srebrz+ yst+y; (i) denominal adjectivization //i//: kret 'mole' — krecia //kret+ i+a//8->[krec+a], koz+a 'goat' — koz+i+a, baran 'ram' baran+i+a, kur+a 'hen' - kurz+a, sokot 'falcon' - sokol+a; and many others!

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

75

The examples in (107i) may superficially present a problem as the //i// does not appear on the surface in any of the words quoted. This is due to the rule of Gliding and /-deletion. Since this latter applies in the environment after coronals, the //i// does surface as /j/ by Gliding in noncoronal contexts, e.g. lew 'lion' - Iwia [lv'+j+a], mApa 'monkey' - mc&pia [-p+j+a] (see 4.4 and 4.6.). 4.1.5. The problem of abstractness In section 4.1.1. we raised the problem of how to represent nonalternating palatals. Recall that in previous research carried out in the SPE framework they were derived from dentals in words such as siew 'sowing', siw+y 'grey', den 'shadow' and cich+y 'silent' (cf. 4.1.2.). In the cyclic framework the underlying representations of the roots in these words must have palatal consonants: //sev-//, //siv-//, //cen-// and //cix-//, respectively. This follows from the fact that Cor. Pal. is a cyclic rule and hence it could not apply morpheme internally. In other words, underlying reprensentation equals phonetic representation in the structures under discussion. In historical terms, nonalternating palatals are cases of restructuring: the historical derivable forms are now underlying representations in consequence of the fact that Cor. Pal. has changed its status from a noncyclic to a cyclic rule. The palatals under consideration are therefore parallel to the structure //-s'e// in osierdzie 'pericardium' discussed in (vii) of 4.1.3. By claiming that morpheme internal palatals are underlying and not derivable via phonological rules, cyclic phonology leads to a much more concrete analysis than the SPE framework. We shall return to the problem of abstractness in 5.5. For the moment suffice it to observe that the analysis imposed by the cyclic theory explains why borrowings do not "nativize" by changing the original input structures of coronal consonants followed by front vowels into the structures containing palatals in morpheme internal position. We have discussed this problem in (iv) and (v) in section 4.1.3. (see also the discussion of Retraction in 7.3.). 4.2.

fotation: evidence for the Strict Cyclicity Principle

In this section we shall be concerned mainly with the problem of palatalization in the conjugation of Polish verbs. The derivations will illustrate the provisions of the Strict Cyclicity Principle and specifically the case where rules are allowed to go back to a cycle which has already been terminated. Let us start by looking at surface phonetic facts in the forms of /stem verbs:

76

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(108)

(a) alternation: s - s - S kos+a 'scythe' - kos+i+c [kos+i+c] 'mow' — kosz+a[ko$+ow]10 'they mow'; (b) alternation: ζ — ζ — ϊ mroz 'frost' - mroz+i+c[mroz+i+c] 'freeze' - mroz+§ [mroz"+ ow] 'they freeze'; (c) alternation: t - c - c pot 'sweat' - poc+i+c [poc+i+c] 'to sweat' - poc+a [poc+ow] 'they sweat'; (d) alternation: d - 3 — 3 brud 'dirt' - brudz+i+c [bni3+i+c] 'make dirty' - brudz+a [bru3+ow] 'they make dirty'; (e) alternation: t - c - £ post 'fast' (N) - posc+ic [posc+i+d] 'to fast' — poszcz+a [poSC+ow] 'they fast' (note: the appearance of [s'] or [S] before the affricate is due to Strident Assimilation, see note 7 earlier in this chapter); (f) alternation: d - 3 - $ jazd+a 'travel' - jezdz+i+c [jezs+i+c] 'to travel' - jezdz+a [jez^+ow] 'they travel' (note: [z] and [z] before the affricate are due to Strident Assimilation, see note 7 earlier in this chapter).

The alternations of dentals and prepalatals are clearly a result of applying Cor. Pal.: //s z t d// -*· [s z c 3] before front vowels. However, the alternations of dental obstruents with [S z* c 3 Ϊ 3] cannot be explained in terms of Cor. Pal. Superficially, this seems to be due to the fact that the latter series of strident consonants appear phonetically before a back vowel of the 3 p.pl. suffix -g. The problem is solved easily by observing that verbs whose roots end in a labial appear phonetically with [j] before the ending

(109) zgub+a 'loss' - zgub+i+c [zgub'+i+c] 'lose' - zgub+ia [zgub'+jow] 'they lose'; mow+a 'speech' - mow+i+c [muv'+i+c] 'speak' — mow+ia [muv'+ jow] '.they speak', etc. These data show that the suffix -q must appear with a front glide /j/ at some stage in the derivation. The glide surfaces phonetically if the preceding consonant is a labial, otherwise it is deleted by /-deletion (53) (see 4.4. for discussion). We have now arrived at an important observation: dental obstruents followed by /j/ at some stage in a derivation surface phonetically as

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

77

[S Z c 3 ε $]. In other words, the palatalization of dental obstruents before /j/ is distinct from the palatalization before front vowels. In the latter case dentals change into prepalatals as predicted by Cor. Pal. As a final observation referring to surface phonetic facts, let us point out that /t d/ may change either to [c 3] or to [£ J] in the context of /j/ - see (108e) and (1080- The change to [C $] takes place if //t d// are preceded by a strident consonant, i.e. //st zd// -»· [s8 z$ ] while //t d// ->· [c 3] in all other environments. Let us tabulate the palatalization of dental obstruents in the context of front vowels and in the context of/j/: (110) UR s

Palatalization before front V s'

Palatalization before /j/ S

z t st d zd

z c sc 3 Z3

z c sf 3 z$

t

u

Clearly the palatalization of dental obstruents 11 before /j/ must be effected by a rule which is different from Cor. Pal. Steele (1973) has called this rule lotation. Let us restrict the term "iotation" to refer to the rule producing the outputs as in the right hand side column of (110). Observe that a much simpler system can be obtained if we order lotation after Cor. Pal.: stops /t d/ will already have been turned into affricates by Cor. Pal. and lotation may then be viewed as an adjustment in the place of articulation. Furthermore, Cor. Pal. need not be complicated to exclude the context of /j/ in case when obstruents are the inputs. We therefore propose that /s z c s/ are at the input to lotation: (Ill)

+strid lot +high

Γ -high 1 ->·

[_J

/

-syll ' -cons -back

Rule (111) applies before /j/ and it has two expansions. In accordance with the conventions of generative phonology, the longer expansion (the one that includes the expression in angle brackets) applies first. It turns /c 3 / to /c s/ when the preceding segment is not a strident consonant, i.e. in all instances where /c s/ are not preceded by /s z/. The shorter expansion is the one which by-passes the features enclosed in angle brackets. It applies to /s z/ and to those instances of /c 3/ where the affricates are preceded by /s/ or /z/. The fricatives and the affricates are turned into postalveolar consonants /$ 2 Ε $/, respectively12.

78

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

lotation applies among cyclic rules (e.g. before /-del., cf. 4.4.). Consequently, it must be cyclic itself. This fact alone, i.e. independent of how we formulate lotation, accounts for the lack of palatalization in morpheme internal /Cj/ sequences, as in diabef- 'devil', tiara 'tiara', diecezja 'diocese', dialektyka 'dialectics', dialekt 'dialect', stiuk 'stucco', sjesta 'siesta', Sierra Leone, etc. Let us look at some examples illustrating how lotation interacts with Cor. Pal. There is a small class of denominal adjectives which are formed by adding the suffix //j// (cf. Gussmann 1980a:58)13: (112) sierot+a Orphan' kobiet+a 'woman' zwierzet+a 'animals'

-

sieroc+y kobiec+y zwierzec+y

The underlying representation of sieroc+y [seroc+f] Orphan' (Adj.) is //serot+j+i//, where //j// is the adjectivizing morpheme and //*// is the masc. nom. sg. inflectional ending: (113)

sierocy //s'erot+j+i// Cycle 2

Cycle 3

s'erot+j s'eroc+j s'eroc+j s'eroc

Cor. Pal. (103) lotation (111) /-deletion (53)

seroc+i

While central to the verbal system, lotation is a fairly marginal rule from the point of view of the adjectival and the nominal systems. In addition to the data quoted in (112), lotation applies to nominalizations such as zqd+a+c 'to demand' - tqdz+a //-d+j+a// 'a demand', wtod+a+c 'rule' - wtadz+a //-d+j+a// 'power', tlust+y 'fat' - tluszcz //-st+j-// 'fat' (N), cf. Rubach (1984a). Now let us turn to verbs. The data in (108) illustrate the pattern of alternations in the verbal system. Recall that the data in (109) have indicated that /j/ must be present at some stage in the derivation of the 3 p. pi. forms. Clearly the inflectional suffix -q does not have //j// at the underlying level. Had this been the case, we would have expected palatalization to take place in the class of C-stem verbs (cf. 2.4.1.). This, however, is not true. For example, we have [t] in plot+q 'they blab'. Consequently, the [j] in gub+iq 'they lose', etc. must be due to the application of some rule. Let us also observe that [j] appears also in α-stem verbs, such as kop+a+c 'dig' - kop+iq [kop'+jow] 'they dig'. In fact it appears in all cases

79

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

where the root of a vowel stem ends in a labial consonant. Thus Polish must have a rule of /-insertion. The /j/ appears phonetically whenever the rule of/-deletion (53) is inapplicable. It has been pointed out to me by Morris Halle that the environment of /-insertion in Slavic is that of a tense vowel followed by a lax vowel. In the case of Polish the quality of the first vowel does not seem to matter. The rule can therefore be stated as (114): (114) /-insertion

0 ->· j

ΓΊ

/

[_-tenseJ

]V

All the otherwise inexplicable alternations fall out automatically on the assumption that (114) is a viable rule of Polish phonology. First let us look at the derivation of kosz+q 'they mow', gub+iq 'they lose' and kop+iq 'they dig'. The underlying forms are //kos+i+om//, //gub+i+om// and //kop+a+om//, respectively. The last morpheme is the inflectional ending -q //om// (cf. note 10). The vowel before it is the verbalizing morpheme, compare the infinitives kos+i+c 'mow', gub+i+c 'lose' and kop+a+c 'dig': (115)

koszp

gubi^

kopi?

'they mow' 'they lose' 'they dig' UR

kos-H+om gub+i+om kop+a+om

Cycle 2

kos+i

gub+i

kop+a /-inser. (114) V-del. (54) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (53)

kos+i

Cycle 3

kos+i+om gub+i+om kop+a+om kos+ji+om gub+ji+om kop+ja+om kos'+j+om gub+j+om kop+j+om ko$+j+om ko$+om

Postcyclic

gub'+j+om kop'+j+om

/-inser. V-del. Cor. Pal. lot. /-del. Surf. Pal. (34)

80

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

Recall that /e ο a/ as well as the yers are lax vowels (cf. 2.2.2.)· Consequently, /-insertion applies on the third cycle in derivation (115). The insertion of /j/ provides an environment for the application of lotation. The latter applies changing /s/ to [S] in koszq 'they mow'. Notice that this is a classic example of a case where the Strict Cyclicity Principle (cf. 1.4.) allows the rule to go back to a cycle which has already been terminated: lotation affects /s/ which is in the domain of the second and not the third cycle. This is possible since /-insertion which becomes first applicable on the third cycle has changed the structure of koszq 'they mow' by introducing /j/ which triggers lotation. The latter is allowed to apply since the feeding change has taken place on the same cycle and it has been produced by a rule ordered before lotation. The derivation of koszq 'they mow' in (115) is not by any means an isolated example which illustrates the operation of the Strict Cyclicity Principle. Many similar cases will appear in the derivation of other verb classes and verbal forms. Let us therefore look at some other paradigms. We shall take examples from each verb stem class (cf. the discussion in 2.4.1.). Recall that all verbs except a/'-stems take the present tense extension suffixes //e// or //i// in the 2ncf p. sg. and pi., 3rd p. sg. and 1st p. pi. Let us take pas+-c 'graze' and czyt+a+c 'read'as examples for C-verbs and •a/ verbs. We shall look at the 2 p. sg. and the 3 p. pi. since whatever is true of the former is also true of the 3 p. sg., 1st p. pi. and 2 p. pi., likewise,the 3 p. pi. exhibits the same alternations as the 1st p. sg. The endings of the 2nd p. sg. and the 3rd p. pi. are //δ// and //om//: (116)

pasiesz pasa czytasz 'you graze' 'they graze' 'you read'

czytaja 'they read'

UR Cycle 2

-s+e+S s+e — s+e -

-t+aj+om t+aj /-inser. (114) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (53)

Cycle 3

s'+e+S s+om t+aj+S t+aj+om /-inser., Cor. Pal. and lot. do not apply t+a+S /-del.

-s+om s+om -

-t+aj+S t+aj -

Notice that (116) provides another instance illustrating the process of/· deletion. We shall discuss this rule in 4.4. For now let us only remember that/ is deleted before or after a consonant.

81

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

The verbs 4ys+ie4f 'become bald' (cf. iys+y 'bald') and lec+ie+c 'fly' (cf. lot 'flight') represent -ef and -e stems, respectively: (117)

lysiejesz

4-ysieja

lecisz

lec^

2nd p. sg. 3rd p. pl. 2nd p. sg. 3rd p. pl. UR Cycle 2

Cycle 3

-s+ej+e+S s+ej

-s+ej+om s+ej

-t+e+i+S t+e

— — s+ej — —

— — s'+ej — —

— — c+e

s+ej+e — —

s'+ej+om —

c+e+i

— — —

— — — —

-t+e+om t+e -

c+e

— —

c+i

— — — -

c+e+om c+je+om c+j+om c+j+om c+om

/-inser. (114) V-del. (54) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (53)

/-inser. V-del. Cor. Pal. lot. /-del.

Note that lecisz 'you fly' cannot be affected by /-insertion, and hence by lotation , since /i/ is a tense vowel. The verbs p/s-hz+c 'write' and zapros+i+c 'invite' exemplify -a and -i stems, respectively.

(118)

piszesz pisz§ nd 2 P- sg. 3rd P- pl.

zaprosisz 2nd P- sg.

zaprosz^ 3rd P- pl.

UR Cycle 2

-s+a+e+S s+a

-s+a+om s+a

-s+i+i+S s+i

— — — —

— — —

— —

-s+i+om s+i -

Cycle 3

—

— —

s+a+e s+ja+e s+j+e s+j+e S+j+e S+e

s+a+om s+ja+om s+j+om s'+j +om S+j+om S+om

s+i

s+i

— — s'+i+i

s+i

—

s+i+om s'+ji+om s+j+om

— — —

S+j+om S+om

/-inser. (114) V-del. (54) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (53)

/-inser. V-del. Cor. Pal. lot. /-del.

82 Cycle 4

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology S+e+S S+om # s+i+5 None of the relevant rules can apply.

S+om#

As a final illustration of conjugation paradigms let us derive some forms of the verb fezdz+i+c 'travel' which is related to the noun jazd+a 'travel'; - jezdzisz 'you travel' //-zd+i+i+S//, where the first / is the verbalizing suffix and the second is the present tense suffix while /?/ is the inflectional ending; - jezdiq 'they travel' //-zd+i+om// which has the structure: root + the verbalizing suffix +3 p. pi. ending (recall that there is no present tense suffix in the 1st p. sg. and the 3rd p. pi.); — jezdzili 'they travelled' //-zd+i+*+i//, where the verbalizing / is followed by the past tense suffix 4 and the past tense plural masculine suffix /; - jezdz y 'they travelled', feminine form, //-zd+i+l+i·//, the same structure as above but the plural gender marker is //+//. (119)

jezdzisz

UR Cycle 2

-zd+i+i+S -zd+i+om -zd+i+4-+i zd+i zd+i zd+i only Cor. Pal. can apply 23+i

-zd+i+t+izd+i

zs+i+i Z3+i

zs+i+om Z3+ji+om Z3+j+om

Ζ3+Ϊ+4-

—

zj+j+om zj+om

zs+i+S

z$+om #

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

jezdza

jezdzili

jezdzH-y

Ζ3+Ϊ

/-inser. (114) V-del. (54) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (53)

/-inser. V-del. Cor. Pal. lot. /-del.

Ζ3+Ϊ+Γ+1

Postcyclic Z5 +om

Cor. Pal. (103)

Z3+i+l'+i

zs+i+w+izs+i+w+i

Lat. Voc.(106) Strid. Assim. (see note 7)

What remains to be looked at now is how our rules work outside the con-

83

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

jugational paradigms in derived verbal forms14. Let us take zapros+i+c 'invite' and odmk>dz+i+c 'make younger' as examples for the formation of the Passive Participle and the Derived Imperfective (see 2.4.2. and 2.4.3., also note 7 in chapter 2): - zaproszeni 'invited' (masc. pi.), odmtodzeni 'made younger' (masc. pi.): //-s+i+en+i// and //-d+i+en+i//, where the front vowel is the verbalizing suffix, en is the Pas. Part, morpheme, and / is the masc. gender plural marker; - zapraszajq 'they invite' //-s+i+aj+om//, odmtodzajq 'they make younger' //-d+i+aj+om//. The structure here is: root +verbalizing suffix + D.I. morpheme +inflectional ending. (120)

zaproszeni odmlodzeni

zapraszaja odmladzaja

UR Cycle 2

-s+i+en+i s+i

-s+i+aj+om -d+i+aj+om s+i d+i

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

-d+i+en+i d+i

s+i

3+i

s+i

3+i

s+i+en s+ji+en s+j+en

3+i+en 3+ji+en 3+j+en

S+j+en 5+en

3+j+en 3+en

s'+i+aj s'+ji+aj s'+j+aj — S+j+aj S+aj

3+i+aj 3+Ji+aJ 3tJ+aj — 3+J+aj 3+aj

S+en+i

3+en+i

S+aj+om

3+aj+om

3+en+i

/-inser. (114) V-del. (54) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (53)

/-inser. V-del. Cor. Pal lot. /-del.

/-inser. V-del. Cor. Pal. lot. /-del.

Incidentally, let us observe that our classification of/a/ as [-tense] on purely phonetic grounds (see 2.2.2.) is now confirmed by its phonological behaviour: /a/ triggers/-insertion: zapraszajq 'they invite', etc. As has already been said (see 2.4.2.) the Present Gerund suffix is //one// (this, by the way, is also its surface form). We therefore have the following structures:

84

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

— piszqc 'writing' //-s+a+onc//, where a is the verbalizing suffix; — proszqc 'asking, inviting' //-s+i+onc//, recall that pros+i+c 'ask' is an /-stem verb; - lecqc 'flying' //-t+e+onc//, lec+ie+c 'fly' is a tense e-stem verb.

(121)

piszac

proszac

lecac

UR Cycle 2

-s+a+onc s+a

-s+i+onc s+i

-t+e+onc t+e

Cycle 3

s+a+onc s+ja+onc s+j+onc s+j+onc S+j+onc S+onc

s+i

c+e

s+i+onc s+ji+onc s+j+onc S+j+onc S+onc

c+e+onc c+je+onc c+j+onc c+j+onc c+onc

/-inser. (114) V-del. (54) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (53)

/-inser. V-del. Cor. Pal. lot. /-del.

Let us observe in passing that our analysis of lotation as a rule acting on prepalatals rather than on dentals, leads to a lower degree of abstractness in underlying representations and has fortunate consequences for the interpretation of "soft stems". There is a class of verbs which derive from the so-called "soft stem" nouns. For example, gosc+i+c 'to host' comes from gosc 'guest'. The noun ends in a "soft" consonant /c/ which does not show any alternations with /t/. However, we do have reflexes of lotation e.g. goszcz-Hf 'they host': [c] alternates with [£]. Had lotation been formulated as a rule acting on dentals, i.e. /t/ ->· [£], gosc 'guest' would have had to be analysed as having the structure //gosti-// (the traditional view), where the yer //i// would have been motivated solely by the need to derive surface [c] in [gosc]. Such an analysis is undesirable on the grounds that it complicates the system of "soft stems" (cf. Rubach 1984a). In our theory gosc 'guest', etc. has the structure //gosc-// rather than //gosti-//. There is no reason to posit the latter highly abstract form since, first, [c] never alternates with [t] in this morpheme, and, second, the [C] of goszcz-^f 'they host' can be derived directly from //c// via lotation: //gosc+i+om// ->· /gosc+ji+om/ by /-insertion (114) -* /gosc+j+om/ by Vdel. (54) -» /gosi+j+om/ by lotation (111) -> /gosC+om/ by /-del. (53) -> /go&i+om/ by Strident Assimilation (see note 7). We conclude that the intricate and complex pattern of consonantal

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

85

alternations within the verbal system can actually be reduced to positing one rule of/-insertion, which in conjunction with independently motivated Cor. Pal. and lotation can account for a vast range of variants15. In the past the same effect was achieved by postulating two rules: Gliding, i->-j before a nonhigh vowel, and a highly unnatural rule changing /a/ to /j/ (Gladney 1971, Laskowski 1975) or a complex /-insertion (Gussmann 1980a). Gliding especially seems to be a very unfortunate choice. As we shall see below, Polish does indeed have a rule of Gliding but its form is much more natural than has been assumed so far: /i/ is turned to /j/ before any vowel and not just before nonhigh vowels. Gliding is motivated by evidence from outside the verbal system and is a late rule applying after lotation. It thus would have to be different from the Gliding suggested in the literature for verbs. We would therefore have two rules of Gliding, both cyclic but ordered at different points in the derivation. What this shows is that the traditional view is simply incorrect. 4.3.

Word formation rules and phonological rules: the imperative

In this section we shall look not only at phonological rules but also at word formation rules. As explained in 1.7., we assume that word formation rules precede as a bloc phonological rules: see model (30ii). The task of word formation rules is to organize morphemes into words. Consequently, these are the rules which add or delete morphemes and spell out allomorphs (allomorphy rules, cf. Aronoff 1976). In this theory a distinction is drawn between lexical representation and underlying representation. For example, we shall be assuming with Gussmann (1980b) that the imperative morpheme in Polish has two allomorphs at the underlying level: //i// and //iji//. However, only one allomorph is encoded in the lexicon, i.e. appears as the lexical representation of the imperative. The other allomorph is derived in the course of word forming derivation by an allomorphy rule. This view makes it clear why it is possible for underlying allomorphs to show phonological relatedness in their structure. Let us look at some most important facts about Polish imperatives. Phonetically the imperative manifests itself in several different ways: (122) (a) as a phonetic zero in verbal stems which end in //j//: my/16 'wash', czytaj 'read', siwiej 'become grey', compare myf+q 'they wash', czytaj+q 'they read', siwiej+q 'they become grey'; (b) as a phonetic zero with the preceding consonant being palatalized by Cor. Pal.: gryz+et Ί bite' - gryz, klad+e( Ί put' kladz(see C-verbs in (64), section 2.4.1.);

86

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology (c) in fl-stem verbs as a phonetic zero with the preceding consonant being palatalized via lotation: pis+a+c 'to write' — pisz, kaz+a+c 'to order' - kaz ', (d) as phonetic [ij] with the preceding consonant showing a reflex of Cor. Pal.: klq+c 'to swear' - klnij [-ή+ij], zacza+c 'begin' - zacznij [-ή+ij], drze+c 'to tear' - drzyj [-Z+*j]; (e) as a phonetic zero with the preceding consonant being palatalized via Cor. Pal. This case seems to be entirely parallel to (b) above. We distinguish it only for the clarity of our further discussion. The relevant examples come from the group of / and e stems (see (64) in 2.4.1.): kos+i+c 'to mow' — kos, lec+ie+c 'to fly' - lee (compare the nouns kos+a 'scythe' and lot 'night').

Gussmann (1980b) has established that the principal underlying allomorph of the imperative morpheme is a front yer //i//. In the words of (122a) the presence of //i// makes it clear why the final glide is not deleted in spite of the fact that Polish has a rule of/-deletion (53) which applies in the environment either before a word boundary or after a consonant (see next section). The verbs in (122b) and (122c) do not present any problem in the framework of rules developed here. The imperative yer triggers Cor. Pal. in (122b) and /-insertion rule (114) in (122c) with Cor. Pal. and lotation following as expected: (123)

myj 'wash'

gryz 'bite'

pisz 'write'

UR Cycle 2

rmj+i m+j+ϊ -

gr+z+i gri-z+i gr+z+i -

pis+a+i pis+a -

/-insertion (114) V-del.(54) Cor. Pal. (103) lotation (111) /-deletion (53)

gr+z+i # -

pis+a+i pis+ja+i pis+j+i pis'+j+i pi$+j+i pi$+i

/-insertion V-del. Cor. Pal. lotation /-deletion

Cycle 3

m+j+i# — —

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants Postcyclic

mij -

griz gris

pis" p'iS

87 Yer Del. (47b) Devoicing before a pause (cf. 7.4.) Surf. Pal. (34)

The verbs in (122d) require that the imperative have another allomorph at the underlying level. Gussmann (1980b) establishes it to be //iji//. He observes further that //iji// is attached to verbs which contain a yer. A stem yer can indeed be shown to be an appropriate representation for the verbs in (122d). Thus klqc 'swear' causes yer surfacing in the prefix //zi// which appears phonetically either as [ze] via Lower (47a) when followed by another yer or as [z] ([s] by Devoicing before a voiceless consonant) when Lower is inapplicable: ze+kln+ie 'he will rebuke'vs. s+klin+aj 'rebuke' (D.I. imper.). The latter form is a Derived Imperfective where the yer of klqc 'to swear', UR //klin+c//, is tensed to /i/ by D.I. Tensing rule (44), The other two verbs in (122d) are parallel to klqc 'to swear', compare: (124) zaczn+ς Ί will begin' [δη] vs. zaczyn+aj (D.I. imper.) [c+n] dr+ς Ί tear' [dr] vs. wy+dzier+aj (D.I. imper., here additionally /•-lowering rule (87) and Cor. Pal.) z+dzier-\vj 'tear down' (D.I. imper., no yer surfacing in the prefix as the stem yer has been tensed) vs. ze+dr+ς Ί will tear down' (the prefix yer lowers as /e/ before the yer of the verbal stem). With respect to palatalization, the verbs in (122d) do not present any problem: Cor. Pal. is triggered by the front vowel of //iji// as in klnij 'swear', UR //klin+iji// - phonetic [klnij] by Cor. Pal. and Yer Deletion (47b). It thus seems that Gussmann's analysis of the Polish imperative can be easily translated into our system of rules. However, a problem arises when we consider the verbs in (122e). If the underlying representations of kos 'mow' and lee 'fly' are //kos+i+i// and //let+e+i//, then /-insertion (114) can apply and we end up with phonetic reflexes of lotation rather than Cor. Pal. Thus there is something missing in our analysis. M. Halle has pointed out to me that an answer to our problem may lie in morphological truncation rules. This indeed seems to be a fruitful path to follow. However, first let us take a closer look at the imperative allomorphs Hill and //iji//. It does not seem to be desirable to postulate two different lexical representations for the imperative morpheme. Such an analysis is unwelcome in the sense that the final yer of the //iji// allomorph cannot be related to the yer of the principal allomorph //i//. It thus seems to be an accident that both allomorphs have an underlying yer. An obvious question is why

88

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

at all we need the final yer in //iji// - phonetic [ij]. In Gussmann's analysis the yer of //iji// is necessary to block /-deletion, the rule which deletes Ijl before a word boundary (see 4.4.). This undoubtedly is a correct move to make but we would still wish to motivate it on independent grounds and relate the final yer of //iji// to the principal allomorph //i//. Let us therefore assume that the lexical representation of the imperative is just H\ll and Polish has allomorphy rule (125):

(125) Imper. Allomorphy

0 -»· ij /

+syll +high -tense

C

o

A word formation process for klnif 'swear' (imper.) would thus look as follows: (126) stem: WFR: Imperative Formation WFR: Allomorphy (125)

//klin// klin+i klin+ij+i17

It is now clear why both allomorphs of the imperative have a yer and why / is not deleted before what phonetically is a word boundary in klnif 'swear'. Rule (125) applies in the context as established by Gussmann: it inserts /ij/ if the preceding syllable has a yer. Gussmann (1980b) observes that in the case of //nin// stem verbs18 the selection of the appropriate imperative allomorph depends on whether //nin// is preceded by a vowel or by a consonant. In the former case verbs surface with phonetic zero as the imperative (the final n of //nin// is palatalized) while in the latter case [ij] appears phonetically as expected (the nasal is obviously palatalized). We thus have tonqc 'to drown' - ton (imper.) vs. klepnqc 'to tap' - klepnij derived from the stems //to+nin-// and //klep+nin//, respectively (//nin// is a morpheme, compare utopic 'to drown sb', klepac 'to tap'). Gussmann posits an allomorphy rule which deletes the //i// of //iji// when //nin// is preceded by a vowel (the deletion of / follows from /deletion which applies not only before a word boundary but also after consonants, see 4.4.): (127) i -> 0/[-cons] + nin

+ —

ji (Gussmann 1980b:43)

Thus, on Gussmann's theory, the derivation of ton 'drown' would proceed as follows:

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants (128) ton 'drown'

//to+nin+iji// to+nin+ji to+ntn+i

89

Allomorphy (127) /-deletion (53)

Derivation (128) cannot be accepted if we want to keep the generalization that allomorphy spell-out rules precede phonological rules: in (128) Lower (47a) would apply and produce *[to+nen] for the correct [ton]. This shows that the answer to the question lies in an allomorphy rule which must spell out the suffix //nin// as //n// rather than in the imperative spell-out of //iji// as //ji//. There is yet another reason why we need an allomorphy rule for //n*n//. We need a degemination rule in order to derive present tense forms such as ton+q 'they drown': //to+n+n+om// -*· /to+nn+om// by Yer Del. (47b) -»· [to+n+om] by deleting /n/ in the cluster /nn/ (Gussmann's analysis 1980a:96). It is true that Polish has Degemination, however, the rule applies only in the environment of a consonant (before or after a consonant)19. Intervocalic geminates are a commonplace in Polish: dluzszy [dwuS+S-H] 'longer', lekko [lekk+o] 'light' (Adv.), fontanna [fontann+a] 'fountain', etc. Therefore the Degemination just mentioned cannot be the same as the degemination required for tonq 'they drown' as there the preceding segment is a vowel and not a consonant. Consequently, one would have to posit a special rule which would degeminate only the cluster which arises after the deletion of the yer in the morpheme //η+η/Λ This fact as well as the behaviour of the imperative morpheme in ton 'drown' (no -//') indicate that we have a case of an allomorphy rather than a phonological rule. As pointed out to me by H. Lunt, the //ni-n// morpheme has an allomorph //n// at the underlying level20. We suggest that the allomorphy rule be the following: (129) nin

Allomorphy nin

->· n /

[-cons] —

[-cons]

Now the selection of the surface allomorph for the imperative follows automatically from WFR (125) ordered after (129): (130) Stem: WFR: Imper. Formation WFR: Allomorphy (129) WFR: Allomorphy (125)

ton 'drown' //to+nin// to+nin+i to+n+i -

klepnij 'tap' //klep+mn// klep+n*n+i klep+nin+ij+i

Now consider the infinitive and the imperative forms in (131):

90

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(131)

snic 'dream' - s'nij uniewinnic 'acquit' - uniewinnij zapewnic 'ensure' - zapewnij nag+osnic 'install loudspeakers' - nagi-os'nij wejrzec 'look into' - wejrzyj drzec 'tremble' - drzyj,etc.

All the words in (131) have yer stems. Thus, for example snic //sin+i+c// 'dream' is a verb from sen 'a dream' which undoubtedly has a yer, compare the e - zero alternation in sen (nom. sg.) vs. snu (gen. sg.). Similarly: uniewinnic //-vinin+i+c// 'acquit' - winn+a 'guilty' (fern.) — winien (masc.); zapewnic //-pevin+i+c// 'ensure' - pewn+a 'sure' (fem.) -pewien (masc.), nagtosnic //-gk»s+in+i+c// 'install loudspeakers': //in// is the adjectivizing morpheme, etc. The yer of the root in the verbs listed under (131) makes it clear why the imperative form surfaces with [ij]. Notice, however, that Imperative Allomorphy (125) cannot apply as long as the stems in (131) have their verbalizing suffixes //i// and //e//, i.e. as long as s'nif 'dream' (imper.) and wejrzyj 'look into' have the form //s4n+i-// and //vi+jiZ+e-//. The verbalizing suffixes must therefore be deleted prior to the application of Imperative Allomorphy (125). Consequently, Polish must have yet another word formation rule: Front Vowel Truncation which applies in the environment before the imperative morpheme //i//: (132)

Front V Truncation

Front Vowel Truncation is a word formation rather than a phonological rule since, first, it applies in the middle of the word formation component (it is ordered before the Imperative Allomorphy) and, second, it deletes morphemes in the environment of a specified morpheme (verbalizing front vowels disappear in the imperative). Recall now that our analysis of the verbs in (1 22e) posed a problem since kos 'mow' and lee 'fly' would incorrectly undergo /-insertion if they were derived from underlying //kos+i+i// and //let+e+i//, i.e. if the verbalizing suffixes //i// and //e// were made available to phonological rules. The alleged difficulty disappears completely once we realize that Polish has WFR (132). A morphological derivation for s'nif 'dream', kos 'mow' and lee 'fly' proceeds as in (133): (133) Verb stem: WFR: Imper. Formation

s'nij //s+n+i// s+n+i+i

kos' //kos+i// kos+i+i

lec //let+e// let+e+i

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants WFR: (132) WFR: (125)

SHi+ί sln+ij+i

91 kos+i

let+i

The imperatives kos 'mow' and lee 'fly' (vs. pisz 'write' from //pis+a+i//) are no longer inputs to /-insertion (114). Cor. Pal. accounts for surface [s c], the yer is deleted by postcyclic Yer Deletion as was the case with the words presented in (123). The word powiedz+ie+c //-d+e+c// 'to say' - powiedz (imper.) is an interesting counterexample to Front V Truncation (132). It must be treated as an exception since the imperative form shows the reflex of lotation rather than Cor. Pal.: powiedz 'say' /3/ not /3/ (later devoiced before a pause) vs. regular lec+ie-H: //-t+e+c// 'fly' - lee [lee] (imper.). The underlying structure of powiedz 'say' is //-d+e+i// and the //e// exceptionally does not delete in this word via rule (132). Consequently, /-insertion (114) applies and lotation derives /3/. This shows that /-insertion should be formulated precisely as it has been formulated in (114), i.e. it applies if the second vowel is lax. Observe that an alternative analysis to explain why kos //kos+i+i// 'mow' (imper.) and lee //let+e+i// 'fly' (imper.) in (133) do not undergo lotation, is to claim that /-insertion (114) cannot apply to /- and e-stem verbs if the second vowel in the VV cluster is a yer. We could thus build in conditions into /-insertion rather than postulate Front V Truncation. The imperative powiedz 'say' would not support such an analysis as then the exceptional /3/ output could not be explained at all: powiedz has the structure //-d+e+i// and /-insertion must apply here in spite of the fact that we have an e-stem verb and the second vowel is a yer. It is clear now that building conditions into /-insertion would not be well advised since the appearance of [3] in powiedz 'say' would then be an unexplained exception. As pointed out earlier, Front V Truncation as a rule is motivated independently by the need to give Imperative Allomorphy (125) an access to the structure of the root in the verbs exemplified by the data in (131). Clearly the word formation truncation rules adduced in the foregoing discussion are not the only cases where Polish requires that some morphological adjustments be made before a given structure can be processed by phonological rules. In a group of four irregular verbs the verbalizing suffix is dropped in the environment of vowels: (134) wyrwfl+c 'pull out' and also wyrwa+4· 'he pulled out', wyrwa+n+y 'pulled out' vs. wyrw+e Ί will pull out', rw+ac 'pulling out', etc. Likewise: wspomniec 'mention', prac 'wash' and brae 'take'.

92

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

In another group of some six verbs the verbalizing suffix //e// appears only in the infinitive: (135)

drz+e+c 'to tear' vs. dr-hj Ί tear' dr+§c 'tearing' dar+1· 'he tore' po+dar+t+y 'torn' in the last two examples //»// is changed to /a/.

Exactly the same pattern of alternation is found in the following five verbs: (136)

trz+e+c 'rub', u+mrz+e+c 'die', prz+e+c 'push', wy+wrz+e+c 'impress', roze+wrz+e+c Open'.

All the verbs in (136) have yer stems (compare e.g. the surfacing of the prefix yer in zedrzec 'tear down'). We therefore have the following allomorphy rule:

(137) Infinitive Allomorphy

0 ->

e

/

+syll +high -tense "

C

ο

The //e// is thus inserted in drzec 'to tear' but not e.g. in drac 'tearing': (138) drzec Verb stem: //dir// Infinitive Formation: d+r+c Present Gerund Formation WFR: Allomorphy (137) dlr+e+c

drac //dir// d+r+onc

The working of the morphological component is poorly understood at the present stage of research in general and in the case of Polish in particular. There is little doubt, however, that positing various allomorphy rules of truncation and insertion cannot be avoided in any way. Our discussion in this section is merely a case of testing ground for developing a comprehensive and coherent theory of morphology which awaits further investigation.

4.4.

/-deletion

We now return to the rule of/-deletion which has often been mentioned in the preceding sections. From the theoretical point of view, /-deletion

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

93

is an example of a cyclic rule and it illustrates the clause of the Strict Cyclicity Principle which prohibits cyclic rules from applying on the first cycle. Our discussion of lotation has uncovered one important environment for /-deletion: after a consonant. Recall that adjectivizations such as sierot+a Orphan' — sieroc+y (Adj.) (see the data in 112) have //-t+j+i-// as the underlying representation. The adjectivizing morpheme //j// accounts for the alternation [t] - [c], where [c] is derived via lotation. Similarly, words such as tluszcz 'fat' (N), a nominalization from tlust+y 'fat', are derived from underlying //-st+j-//. The //j// is a nominalizing suffix and it explains why /st/ alternates with /si/. Had the nominalizing morpheme been a vowel, we would have had /sc/ via Cor. Pal. rather than /si/ via lotation. There are many similar examples especially in the area of the so-called "soft stems" (cf. Rubach 1984a). In all these cases the environment for/-deletion is after a consonant. We have already seen that there is plenty of evidence for /-deletion in the verbal system (see 4.2.). Observe, however, that the evidence from verbs, nouns, adjectives, etc. shows that the preceding consonant, i.e. the environment for /-deletion, is invariably coronal. This in fact turns out to be the relevant generalization. There is no /-deletion in gtqbia /b+j+a/ 'depth', a nominalization from gtqb+ok+i 'deep', where //j// is the same nominalizing suffix as in tluszcz 'fat'. Also, the glide appears phonetically in verbs whose stem ends in a labial: (139) kop+a+c 'dig' vs. present tense forms kop+if Ί dig', kop+ie+sz 'you dig', kop+ie 'he digs', kop+ie+my Sve dig', kop+ie+cie 'you dig',kop+ia 'they dig'. Likewise grzeb+a+c 'bury' - grzeb+i^, klam+a+c 'lie' - kiam+ίς, lam+a+c 'break' — 4-am+ie, etc. The /j/ comes from /-insertion in (139) and it surfaces phonetically in all the inflected verbal forms. In sum, 1)1 is deleted after coronals as shown by the following derivations:

94

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

(140)

kobiecy 'womanly'

kaza 'they order'

kopia 'they dig'

UR Cycle 2

-t+j+i t+j

-z+a+om z+a

-p+a+om p+a /-inser. (114) V-del. (54) Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) /-del. (cf. below)

c+j c+j c

Cycle 3

c+t

z+a+om z+ja+om z+j+om z+j+om f+j+om Z+om

p+a+om p+ja+om p+j+om

/-mser. V-del. Cor. Pal. lot. /-del.

The verbal system discloses still another context for /-deletion: before a consonant. In the class of C-verbs (cf. 2.4.1.) we quoted words such as myf+ς Ί wash', pij+ς Ί drink', truj+ς Ί poison', etc. Here the underlying / surfaces phonetically whenever it is followed by a vocalic suffix. Thus we see it also in my/+e+sz 'you wash', myj+e 'he washes', myj+e+my 'we wash' . . . myj+qc 'washing', etc. As pointed out by Jakobson (1948) the glide deletes if it is followed by a consonant: myki //m+j+i+a// 'she washed', myty //m4j+t+4·// 'washed', where / is the preterite ending and t the Past Participle suffix. The same is true of other classes of verbs: (141) (a) 4-ysieje Ί become bald' vs. J-ysiec //-s+ej+c//'to become bald', 4-ysiala //-s+ej+4-+a// 'she was becoming bald'; (b) pomagaj§ 'they help' vs. pomagac //-g+aj+c// 'to help', pomagal-a //-g+aj+l-+a// 'she helped', pomagasz //-g+aj+S// 'you help', pomagamy //-g+aj+mi// 'we help', etc. The environment for /-deletion before consonants is broader than that after consonants. The rule applies regardless of whether the following segment is coronal: pomag+a+my 'we help', pomag+a+m Ί help'. Finally, /j/ is deleted also before a word boundary (Gussmann, 1980a: 47). The evidence here comes from the analysis of -a/ stem verbs which have a zero ending in the 3 p. sg. present tense: (142)

pomag+a //-g+aj// 'he helps', chwyt+a //-t+aj// 'he catches', pyt+a //-t+aj// 'he asks', chow+a //-v+aj// 'he hides' vs. 3 p. pi. pomag+aj+a, chwyt+aj+a, pyt+aj+a, chow+aj+a.

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

95

In sum,/-deletion is the following rule: [-K;oron] (143) /-deletion

j

—» 0 / V'

# As has already been mentioned, /-deletion is a cyclic rule. The cyclicity explains why, in defiance of (143), / is found in the environment of consonants in a sizeable group of native words and in virtually all etymological borrowings21. Needless to say, all the examples at hand are cases of morpheme internal sequences: (144) diabei 'devil', tiar+a 'tiara', diament 'diamond', lian+y 'liana', nuncjusz 'nuncio', wariat 'madman'; rajd 'ride', slajd+y 'slides', gejzer 'geyser', majster 'foreman', fajn+y 'great', rejs 'cruise', pejzai 'landscape', boiler 'boiler', lejc+e 'reins', strajk 'strike'; sejm 'parliament', wojt 'head of a village'; fajtlap+a 'bungler', uprzejm+y 'kind', Wojciech (Slavic name), lajdak 'rascal', etc. We have already seen how /-deletion interacts with palatalization rules (cf. 4.2.)· It is ordered after lotation so as to give lotation a chance to apply. There is an interesting consequence of this ordering. Recall that lotation is preceded by Cor. Pal. (feeding order). Thus, the order of rules is as follows: Cor. Pal., lotation, /-deletion. We now have an additional argument for regarding Cor. Pal. and lotation as cyclic rules: /-deletion is cyclic and consequently all the rules which are ordered before it must be cyclic as well. This follows from the principle of cyclic phonology that cyclic and postcyclic rules form separate blocs and the two types of rule cannot be intermixed. It is hardly a coincidence that this prediction of the theory and all of the independent evidence adduced earlier point to the same conclusion: Cor. Pal. and lotation are cyclic rules. Gussmann (1980a:46 ff.) has discussed the relationship between /deletion and the rule which deletes yers (Yer Del. (47b) in our theory). He observes that /-deletion is an opaque rule in the sense that there are a number of words which look like exceptions to it in terms of their surface representation: (145) (a) gaj+e 'groves' - gaj (masc. nom. sg.) jaj+o 'egg' — jaj (neuter gen. pi.) (b) myj+3 'they wash' — myj (imper.)

96

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology (c) olej Oil' (masc. nom. sg.) - olej+n+y (Adj.) (d) zk>dziej 'thief (masc. nom. sg.) - ztodziej+sk+i (Adj.) - z4odziej+stw+o 'theft' (e) jaj+o 'egg' -jaj+k+o (dimin.)

Gussmann points out that all of these examples have a straightforward explanation since at the underlying level //j// is followed by a yer. Recall that he assumes that the masc. nom. sg. and the fern./ neuter gen. pi. are represented as //*// at the underlying level. The yer accounts for the application of Lower (47a) in e.g. lew //liv+l// 'lion' (masc. nom. sg.) vs. Iw+y (nom. pi.), owc+a 'sheep' (fern. nom. sg.) vs. owiec //ovic-4// (gen. pi.), etc. Thus the examples in (145a) have the structure //gaj+l// 'grove' and //jaj+i// 'eggs' (gen. pi.). In section 4.3. we have given reasons why the imperative morpheme should be interpreted as //i//. Consequently, my/ 'wash' quoted in (145b) has the structure //mij+i//. The examples in (145c-e) all involve suffixes which have yers at the underlying level (cf. 2.5.): the adjectivizing //in// and //isk//, the nominalizing //istiv//, and the diminutive //ik//. Gussmann concludes that the appearance of [j] in surface representations before a word boundary (145ab) and a consonant (145c-e) can be explained easily by assuming that Yer Deletion is ordered after/-deletion 22 . In cyclic phonology this ordering need not be specified at all. The fact that Yer Del. must apply after /-del. follows automatically from our theory: Yer Del. is a postcyclic rule (cf. 2.3. and 6.4.) and hence it must apply after /-del. which is cyclic. The derivation of jaj 'eggs' (gen. pi.), jajko (dimin.) and olejny Oil' (Adj.) proceeds as in (146):

(146) UR Cycle 2

Cycle 3

Postcyclic

jaj ^ jaj+j jaj 4 -

jajko jaj+ik+o jaj+ik -

olejny olej+in-Holej+in -

/-del. (143)

jaj+ϊ # -

jaj+ik+o -

olej+in+4· -

/-del.

jaj

jaj+k+o

olej+n+i

Yer Del. (47b)

Still, rule (143) does have a very small class of real exceptions. These are foreign names such as Garibaldi - Garibaldiego(gen.), Disreali - Disrealiego (gen.). We would expect them to have phonetic /-d+ego/, /-1+ego/ rather than /-dj+ego/, /-lj+ego/. This indeed is the case with some names which are more widely known: Sk>wnik poprawnejpolszczyzny (Diction-

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

97

ary of Correct Polish) claims that we have /-1+ego/ in Bacciarelli — Bacciarellego. 4.5.

Vowel Deletion

Native Slavic words obey, both synchronically and diachronically, one significant generalization: they do not contain vowel clusters inside a single morpheme. On the other hand, vowel sequences across junctures are a commonplace in underlying (but not in phonetic) representations. As we have shown, Polish conjugation requires a rule of Vowel Deletion. In its formulation this rule goes back to Jakobson's (1948) ingenious study of Russian conjugation. We have little, if anything, to add to Jakobson's original statement. Vowel Deletion was meant to apply to verbs and there is no reason to change this qualification: (147)

V-del.

[+syll] -» 0 /

—

[+syll]

The restriction to verbs makes Vowel Deletion an almost entirely transparent rule23. Vowel sequences, which are a commonplace in borrowings, are now automatically accounted for without constraining (147) to etymologically native words. There is nothing particularly important about viewing Vowel Deletion in this way. The only thing that we can gain is avoiding the usage of [±Foreign] as a lexical feature. In general, this should be considered a virtue since the partition of the lexicon into major lexical categories such as nouns, verbs, etc. is unquestionable while the division of the vocabulary into native and foreign is a very delicate matter (cf. chapter 3): the line between borrowings and genuine exceptions to rules is virtually impossible to draw. Etymologically foreign nouns and adjectives have vowel sequences not only inside morphemes (teatr 'theatre', poet+a 'poet', etc.) but also across morpheme boundaries24. Furthermore, these vowel clusters do not show any tendency towards simplification no matter whether the words in question are recent or fairly old borrowings. This is true in equal measure about both derivational and inflectional morphology, which is surprising as inflection is by and large governed by very transparent and exceptionless rules. The proposed restriction of Vowel Deletion to verbs accounts for the lack of cluster simplification in words such as: (148) (a) ide+a 'idea' (nom. sg.), ide+i (gen./dat. sg.), ide+e (ace. sg.), ide+a (instr. sg.), ide+e (nom. pi.), ide+ami (instr. pi.), ide+ach (loc. pi.). Likewise: orchide+a Orchid', gwine+a 'guinea' as well as

98

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology neuter nouns - muze+um 'museum' (nom. sg.), muze+a(nom. pi.), muze+ow (gen. pi.), etc. (b) ide+a 'idea' vs. derivatives: ide+ow+y 'idealistic', ide+ow+os'c 'idealism', (c) punkt 'point, on time' vs. punktualny 'punctual' //-t+u+al +in-t4// (d) lice+um 'high-school' vs. lice+al+n+y (Adj.), lice+al+ist+a 'high-school student', etc.

Being restricted to verbs, Vowel Deletion may now apply as an early rule but obviously not before/-insertion. The generalization that there are no vowel clusters inside one morpheme seems to be contradicted on the surface by the palatalizing properties of suffixes. Looking at words such as wazny 'important' - wazniak [-ή+ak] 'bighead', DS, i.e. Dom Studencki 'dormitory' - DSiak [-s+ak] 'a student living in a dormitory', student 'student' - studenciak [-c+ak] 'student' (patronizing), mtod+y 'young' - mLodziak H+ak] 'youngster', etc. One might be led to posit //iak// 25 as the underlying representation for the final morpheme. In fact the putative ι does appear phonetically as /j/ after labials (due to Gliding, see below): Warszaw+a 'Warsaw' — warszawiak [-v'+jak] 'Varsovian'. Observe, however, that there are also forms with the same morpheme but without phonetic reflexes of palatalization: rod 'family' - rod+ak 'countryman', jedyn+y Only one' (Adj.) — fedyn+ak Only child', Sybir 'Siberia' — sybir+ak 'person living in Siberia',o/eci4fl 'poverty' — bied+ak 'poor man', etc. Thus the argument for positing //iak// in the lexicon does not hold. We have //ak// in the lexicon and //iak// is the result of an allomorphy rule which inserts //i// in lexically governed contexts. The choice of //ak// as the basic allomorph follows from the generalization that there are no vowel clusters inside one morpheme in the phonological representation of lexical entries in the native part of the vocabulary. There are other cases which are entirely parallel to the one just discussed. Below we give some examples. The structures with //i// are all derived by allomorphy rules: (149)

(a) //ux//vs.//iux// star+y Old' - star+uch Old man', czarn+y 'black' - czarn +uch 'nigger', obzart+y 'gorged with food' - obzart+uch 'glutton' vs. upart+y 'stubborn' - uparc+iuch 'stubborn person' prost+y 'simple' -pros'c+iuch 'simpleton', natret+n+y 'intrusive' natrec+iuch 'intruder'.

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

99

(b) //us// vs. //ius// dziad+us 'grandpa' vs. dziadz+ius (same), kit+us 'pussy' vs. kic+ius (same), note: these are "minimal pairs".

(c) //at// vs. IM I nos 'nose' - nos+at+y (Adj.), kud4-+y 'fluffy hair' - kudl+at+y (Adj.), brod+a 'beard' - brod+at+y (Adj.), brzuch 'belly' brzuch+at+y (Adj.), zeb+y 'teeth' - zeb+at+y (Adj.), etc. vs. krost+a 'pimple'- krosc+iat+y (Adj.), was 'moustache' — was+iat+y [-s'+at+i] (Adj.), uch+o 'ear' - usz+at+y (Adj.), krow+a 'cow' - krow+iat+y [-v'+jat-H·] (Adj.), skrzyd4-+o 'wing' - skrzydl+at+y (Adj.). 4.6.

Gliding

Polish has a number of structures containing the suffix //i// which, however, does not appear in phonetic representation at all. We have seen many such examples in the preceding section and earlier when we were discussing denominal adjectivization in (107i). Let us look at these latter again to introduce the problem. Undoubtedly, kocia [koc+a] 'cat' (Adj. fern.), lisia [l'is'+a] 'fox' (Adj. fern.), etc. must contain a high front vowel and not //j// since they show reflexes of Cor. Pal. and not lotation. The vowel causes the palatalization of the preceding consonant (compare: hot 'cat', Us 'fox') and deletes, hence we have [-c+a] and [-s'+a] on the surface. One solution would be to posit a yer as the adjectivizing morpheme. Then Yer Deletion (47b) would account for the loss of the vowel: //kot +i+a// 'cat' (Adj.), /i/ cannot surface and hence deletes. This, however, turns out to be the wrong analysis. There are words which have a yer as part of their root e.g. pies //pis-// 'dog' (compare: ps+a, gen. sg.: vowel - zero alternation). The denominal adjective ispsia (fern.) and not *piesia as would have been the case, had the denominal adjectivization morpheme been a yer (Lower (47a) would have applied). In sum, psia 'dog' (Adj.) must have the structure //pis+i+a// and not //pis+i+a//. This reasoning applies in equal measure to the morphemes discussed in (149): for example, we have ps+iak 'dog' (dimin.) and not *piesiak, i.e. the underlying representation of the stems is //pis-riak-//. We have observed earlier that the underlying high vowel surfaces as /j/ after labials: rybia //rib+i+a// 'fish' (Adj.), malp+i+a 'monkey' (Adj.), krow+i+a 'cow' (Adj.), hipopotam+i+a 'hippopotamus' (Adj.) - all derived from the respective nouns - ryb+a, mal-p+a, krow+a, hipopotam. If the adjectivizing vowel were lost at some point in the derivation, then we would need two additional rules: one palatalizing labials and the other

100

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

inserting /j/. The first rule would set off the labials which require /-insertion from those which do not: at an intermediate stage rybia 'fish' (Adj.) would be different from ryba 'fish' by having /b'+a/. The rule of/-insertion applying after palatalized labials would derive the correct surface form: [b'+j+a]. On the other hand, if we assumed that Polish has a rule of Gliding which turns high front vowels to /j/ before a vowel, then in fact we could do away with the two putative rules of labial palatalization and/-insertion (see chapter 6) and thereby obtain a simpler grammar. Thus //b+i+a// would be transformed to /b+j+a/ by Gliding and Surface Palatalization rule (34) of chapter 2 would give the final output [b'+j+a]. The loss of the underlying high vowel in kocia [koc+a] 'cat' (Adj.) presents no problem either: the vowel undergoes Gliding and is later deleted by the independently motivated/-deletion discussed in 4.4. These theoretical arguments are fully supported on purely descriptive grounds. Regardless of how we interpret the data presented in the preceding paragraph, Polish must have a rule of Gliding anyway. It is necessary to account for the alternations in words such as those in (150): (150)

defin/cja [·ήί·] 'definition' — defin/+owac [-nj+o-] 'define', Garibald/' [-d'i] - Garibald/+ego [-d'j+e-], Viscont/ [-t'i] - Viscont/+ego [-t'j+e-], Zanuss/ [-s'i] - Zanussf+ego [-s'j+e-], Kadafff [-Fi] Kadaffi+ego [-fj+e-]: names in nom. sg. and gen. sg.

All these words show the phonetic structure [C'j] before a vowel, where C is not necessarily a labial. Thus there is no possibility of suggesting any rule of /-insertion, which in any case would not solve the problem as we have surface [i] in the nom. sg.: Garibaldi, etc. In sum, we propose that rule (151) is part of the grammar of Polish:

(151)

Gliding

+syll +high -back

[-syll]

/

—

V

Rule (151) is cyclic and it is ordered after lotation so that we do not get *[koc+a] for [koc+a] kocia 'cat' (Adj. fern.). Gliding applies before cyclic /-deletion, rule (143) - a feeding relationship:

101

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants (152) UR Cycle 2

Cycle 3

kocia 'cat' (Adj.) kot+i+a kot+i koc+i

rybia 'fish' (Adj.) »b+i+a r+b-ri

koc+i+a

rib+i+a

koc+j+a koc+a Postcyclic

-

Cor. Pal. (103) lot. ( I l l ) did. (151) /-del. (143)

ri-b+j+a

rib'+j+a

Cor. Pal. lot. Glid. /-del.

Surf. Pal. (34)

PART B: FURTHER DESCRIPTIVE IMPLICATIONS 4.7.

Noncontinuant Depalatalization

Depalatalization is uncontroversial as a rule since it is required under any analysis of Polish phonology. The version of depalatalization to be proposed in this book is a departure from the traditional view to the extent that the form of the rule is different. We specifically suggest that there be only one phonologically motivated depalatalization rule and that the processing of underlying //r// to [2] and [r] be subsumed under r-spellout (see 7.2.)26. We thus arrive at the class of coronal noncontinuants as an input to Depalatalization: +high +coron (153) Noncontin. -contin Dep. -later

"-high —del rel +anter

-t-cons +coron +sonor

Rule (153) turns prepalatals to dentals: /c 3 ή/ -> [ t d n] before coronal sonorants: nasals and liquids. As has been pointed out by Gussmann (1978), there is no depalatalization before noncoronals, as in CW-H 'moth', kon+mi 'horses' (instr.), hanb-Ηι 'shame', etc. The motivation for Noncontin. Depal. derives from various alternations of palatal vs. nonpalatal consonants. The word prze+chodz+ien [pSe+xos +en] 'passer-by' is a relevant example. The underlying representation of the stem is //-xod+in-//, where //d// is motivated by the alternation in

1 02

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

chad 'walking' and the yer of the final morpheme is postulated on the strength of the vowel - zero alternation: przechodzien //-xod+in-4// 'passer-by' (nom. sg. hence the inflectional ending *) vs. przechodnia //-xod+in+a// (gen. sg.). In the gen. sg. Lower (47a) cannot apply, hence the yer deletes by (47b). Note also that the //d// of the first morpheme //xod// has not been palatalized to [3]: przechodnia [-xod+n+a]. We therefore need to account for the surface alternation [3] in przechodzien 'passer-by' and [d] in przechodnia (gen.). An off-hand answer to this problem is to order Yer Del. (47b) before Cor. Pal. (103). On this account the //d// in przechodnia (gen.) cannot become [3] as the palatalizing yer is not there at the time Cor. Pal. applies. This analysis is clearly wrong. Firstly, cyclic phonology does not allow for such an analysis. Cor. Pal. is cyclic while Yer Del. is postcyclic, hence the former must apply before the latter (all cyclic rules precede postcyclic rules). Secondly, there is ample independent evidence that Yer Del. must follow and not precede Cor. Pal. Had the order been different, we would not have been able for instance, to account for the palatalization before the suffix -sk- //isk//, where the yer is always deleted: pan 'sir' - ραή+sk+i (Adj.), etc. (see 2.5.5.). The analysis of przechodzien 'passer-by' —przechodnia (gen.) must be different. The underlying //d// is palatalized to /3/ in all cases. However, this /3/ may later be turned to /d/ if it is next to a coronal sonorant, i.e. in the environment as specified in (153): (154)

przechodzien 'passer-by' (nom. sg., + ending)

przechodnia (gen. sg., a ending)

UR Cycle 2

-xod+in+ί xod+in χο3+ίή -

-xod+in+a xod+in χο3+ίή -

Cycle 3

Cor. Pal. (103) Lower (47a)

χθ3+ή+ xo3+en+i

Postcyclic xo3+en -

xos+n+a xod+n+a

Cor. Pal. Lower Yer Del. (47 b) Noncontin. Depal.(153)

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

103

Incidentally, notice that the ordering of Noncontin. Depal. after postcyclic Yer Deletion assigns Noncontin. Depal. to the class of postcyclic rules. The adjectivizing suffix //in// (cf. 2.5.5.) provides a number of examples which support Noncontin. Depal. We thus have [t d n] as the final consonants of the root morphemes in (155a) below. At the same time the words in (155b) show phonetic [s z 1] as Noncontin. Depal. does not apply to fricatives and laterals: (155)

Noun (a) sekret 'secret' brud 'dirt' sian-K) 'hay' (b) kaprys 'caprice' mroz 'frost' diabe* 'devil'

Adjective - sekretny //-t+in-N·// -*[t+n-N·] - brudny //-d+in-H// -»[d+n+i·] - sienny //-n+in+t·// -»-[n+n-N·]27 - kaprysny //-s+in+i// -»-[s'+n+i·] — mrozny //-z+in-N·// -»[z+n+i·] - diabelny //4+in+t// -"[1+n+i]

An unexpected advantage of our analysis is that we can now handle a number of the so-called "soft stems"28 in a natural way without being forced into positing structures such as //ti di ni// in cases where no alternations are attested outside the context of NoncontinuantDepalatalization. Rule (153) turns underlying //c 3 n// to /t d n/ in: (156) wilgoc dobroc napasc zoiedz czeladz jesien ko/7

'humidity' 'goodness' 'aggression' 'acorn' 'house-hold' 'autumn' 'horse'

— -

wilgof+n+y (Adj.) dobrof+liw+y (Adj.) napasr+liw+y (Adj.) ζοί-ed+n+y (Adj.) czelatf+n+y (Adj.) jesiew+n+y (Adj.) korc+n+y (Adj.), etc.

In sum, our interpretation of Noncontin. Depal., as a rule acting on prepalatals /c 3 n/ rather than on palatalized consonants /t' d' n'/ leads to a much more concrete analysis than has been traditionally assumed (cf. Steele 1973, Laskowski 1975, Gussmann 1978). It turns out, for example, that deriving dzien [sen] 'day' from //dini-// or some other such structure is a case of unmotivated abstractness. Assuming a much more surface oriented representation //sin-//, we derive surface [d] in dnia (gen.) and surface [n] in dzienny 'daily' via Noncontin. Depal. (note: the yer of the root dzien is motivated by the alternation with zero in the gen. sg. dnia)29: (157) dzien'day' (nom. sg., f ending)

dnia (gen. sg.)

dzienny (Adj.)

104

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

UR Cycle 2

Cycle 3

3in+i sin-H·

sen-4 # -

Postcyclic sen -

3in+a sin+a -

sin+in sen+in

Lower (47a)

sin+a # -

sen+in+t -

Lower

sn+a dn+a

sen+n+i· 3en+rH4

Yer Del. (47b) Noncontin. Depal. (153)

NOTES 1. Phonetically the /s/ is palatalized (see this word in (99) above) due to the operation of Surface Palatalization (34) which palatalizes consonants before /i j/ inside words and across word boundaries. However, this fact is irrelevant. Our point is that the first s in silos+ik 'silo' does not become a prepalatal fricative [s'] while the second one does. In what follows we shall disregard surface palatalization whenever it is not relevant. Recall that in our transcription slashes denote intermediate stages while the actual phonetic output is transcribed in square brackets. 2. Some of these words, for example the latter two, originally come from Latin or Greek but they have been borrowed into Polish from English (Fisiak 1962). 3. In diabelski and silny there is an underlying //i// which is deleted earlier in the derivation (recall 2.5.5.). 4. Recall that [ή] is a prepalatal nasal while [n!] is a dental but palatalized nasal (see 2.2.1.). The nasals in kon i ja 'a horse and Γ and on i fa 'he and Γ are distinct: kon has an underlying //ή// which surfaces as such phonetically, while in on the underlying //n// has been palatalized to [n'J by Surf. Pal. (34). 5. Gussmann (1978) postulates Surface Velar Palatalization as a rule effecting the change of /k g χ/ to [k' g' χ']. Consequently, velars are excluded from his early palatalization rule (/-anterior which corresponds to Steele's Gen. Pal.). We shall argue in chapter 6 that Surface Velar Palatalization is not necessary as a rule of Polish phonology. 6. Contrary to Gussmann's assumption (1978:87), the spell-out rule would have to be context-free. For example, the /s'/ of glos+n+y //gk>s-Hn-H·// 'loud' can be spelled out as [s] only after the yer of the //in// suffix has been deleted. This follows from the fact that Obstruent Spell-out would have to be ordered after Depalatalization, the rule which, in the classical theory, for instance, turns /d'/ of glod+n+y //gtod -Hn-H// 'hungry' to [d] before sonorants. Depalatalization can apply after the yer has been deleted. In sum, the order of rules would have to be the following: Yer Del., Depalatalization, Obstruent Spell-out. We return to the details of this analysis in 4.7. 7. Actually Strident Assimilation is a broader rule. Underlying //s z// are changed not only to [s' z] as described here but also to [S ?]. The latter arise before the affricates /? 37, e.g. post 'a fast' - poszcz-ty 'they fast', jazd-ta 'travel' — jezdz+q 'they travel': //s z// -»· [S ?] after //t d// have been turned to [Ϊ 3"] via lotation (see 4.2.). As an obligatory rule, Strident Assim. applies only before noncontinuants and affects only //s z//. Words such as pass:+e 'kind of cheese-cake' (dat.) have [s$] and not [S5] in slow speech.

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

105

8. We give the feminine form to avoid a possible confusion of the derivational /if with the inflectional /', e.g. krec+i (masc. nom. sg.). 9. The denominal adjectives from orzei 'eagle' and karzet 'dwarf are orla /or -HHi-te/ and karla /karHHi-ta/, respectively, both in the fern. nom. sg^ The stems of the words orzet 'eagle' and karzei 'dwarf must be derived from /or -Hl·/ and /kar •tiil since they show /£/ - /τ/ alternation (for the /r/ compare the gen. sg. o/-W-to and kar-U+a). The /?/ is derived via Cor. Pal. (103). The irregularity in these two stems consists in the fact that first, or and kar are "cran berry "morphemes (they do not occur independently) and second, they undergo an allomorphy rule which changes //ft// to /&/. Note that the morpheme ei If&ff is normally represented with a back yer, compare krqc+ic //-t-H-fc// 'turn' - po-ffcr^-W+o //-t-HrHx>// 'knob' po+kr$t+el (gen. pi. no palatalization of t). In this connection let us also note that there are seven other stems which are also "cranberry" morphemes, e.g. korz+ec 'bushel' from underlying //kor-Kc//; compare the gen. sg.fcor-hr-hz:/?/ — /r/alternation. The morphological analysis of korzec as korz-tec is based on the pattern wzor 'model' - wzorz+ec 'design'. The morpheme //kor// is of the "cranberry" type: unlike //vzor// 'model', it does not appear independently. 10. Some speakers pronounce the ending — q as [om] rather than [owj. We shall assume the former as the underlying since /w/ is not a member of the underlying phonological inventory. The form [ow] must be generated by a later rule which changes //ml/ to /w/. 11. The palatalization of sonorants //l· r n// and velars //k g χ// yields the same results before both front vowels and /j/. 12. The values for the features [tback] and [±distrib.] are supplied by a late rule of Feature Adjustment. This rule is motivated independently by several other processes, for example, by Noncontin. Depal., Affricate Palatalization, Strident Palatalizations, Nasal Palatal Assimilation, etc. These rules as well as Feature Adjustment are discussed below (see 7.6. for Feature Adjustment). 13. Recall that the primary adjectivizing suffix is //i//, //j// being a marginal allomorph (data in 107i). 14. The imperative is discussed in 4.3. 15. As concerns the other interacting rules,/-deletion and V-deletion, our analysis is not different from the traditional generative view of Polish conjugation. These rules are necessary in both theories. The motivation for /-del. derives from outside the verbal system (see 4.4.). 16. We take the 2nd p. sg. as the example. The 1st p. pi. and the 2nd p. pi. do not reveal anything new about the imperative. They are formed by adding to the stems the clitic suffixes -my and -de, respectively: myj#my 'let's wash', m>y#c/e'wash' (2nd p. pi.). 17. It is irrelevant for our analysis whether there is a plus boundary before //i//. 18. For further analysis of these verbs see Gussmann (1980a) and 5.6. 19. For example, we have Sybill-tot [11] 'Sybilla' but sybil+sk+i (Adj.), Lozann+a [nn] 'Losanne' but lozan+sk+i (Adj.), lozan+cz+yk 'inhabitant of Losanne'. Underlying //ll// and //nn// undergo Degemination but only if they stand before a consonant (in the case of //nn// we first have palatalization to /nn/ and assimilation to /nn/ via Cor. Pal. and Nasal Palatal Assimilation, see 7.1.). Geminates are also simplified if they stand after a consonant. For instance, kop-ht+ij (imper. from kop-tnq+c 'to kick') is derived as follows: //kop+nin+ij-H// -* /kop-tnm-Hj-H/ by Cor. Pal. -* /kop-hin-Hj/ by Yer Deletion -»· /kop-hnrVHj/ by Nasal Palatal Assimilation (see 7.1.) ->· [kop+n+ij] by Degemination. 20. H. Lunt has suggested further that nq //ηϊη// could be represented with a lax

106

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

unrounded mid vowel, /·>/ in my analysis (see 5.6.): //ηγη//. On this analysissch+na+c //»χ-// 'to dry' and pc/z-bip-hc //pi-x-// 'push', etc. are regular with respect to Lower (47a): the root yer does not surface as the nq suffix does not have a yer. However, zdech+nptc //zdix-// 'die' must be a positive exception to Lower as the root yer surfaces as [e] before the suffix nq. If nq has the structure //ni-n//, then zdechnqc 'die' is regular while schnqc 'dry' and pchnqc 'push' are marked [-Lower] in the lexicon. Thus there are advantages and disadvantages in both analyses. Not to complicate our discussion, we shall keep to the analysis of nq as //n*n//, though Lunt's proposal is definitely a viable, and probably a better interpretation. 21. Some borrowings may be highly misleading: stek and keks from English steak and cakes do involve / loss when compared to the original form. However, it is more than likely that they came into Polish via German and the / was lost in this intermediary source (cf. Steibach 1978). This is the conclusion of Fisiak (1968). Interestingly, Fisiak observes that the loss of/ may also have been due to the fact that the words were borrowed in the first half of the 19th c. What this would mean is that/-deletion was still postcyclic at this time. Finally, the original /j/ may sometimes be lost due to a conscious effort of the people who set up spelling and pronunciation norms for newly acquired words. The word lady is a case in point: Siownik poprawnej polszczyzny (Dictionary of Correct Polish) rules that the correct pronunciation is [ledij. 22. There is yet another class of words which are accounted for in the same manner. They have the suffixes ijlij as in kolonia //kolon-Hj-Ja// 'colony' and partia //part "**j"te// 'party'. The yer blocks/-deletion. See Gussmann (1980a:54 ff.) and note 11 in chapter 2 above. 23. Note that words such as dole 'to milk' have/ at both the underlying and the phonetic level (see 2.4.1.). There is a handful of foreign stem verbs which violate Vowel Deletion. Most of these exceptions can actually be dispensed with by claiming that they have an underlying //w// or //4·// between vowels - they surface phonetically with [w], e.g. sytuowac 'situate', dewaluowac 'devaluate', ewakuowac 'evacuate'. Alternatively, we could assume that the ow of -ow-hz-hf is not specified as ]y. Observe that the verbalizing morpheme here is -a. This would do away with three or four remaining exceptions such as kreowac 'create'. 24. Foreign names ending in -e drop this vowel before inflectional endings: Nietsche - Nietsch+ego (gen.) - Nietsch-tem (instr.). The rule at work here must be highly restricted. It does not carry over to derivational morphology, viz. nietsche+an+sk+i (Adj.), neither can it apply to other vowels: Visconti — Visconti+ego (gen.). In fact the rule must be narrowed down to proper names as there is no vowel deletion in e.g. ide+e 'ideas'. 25. Clearly the structure could not be //jak// as we have reflexes of Cor. Pal. rather than of lotation, compare studenc+iak [-c+ak] 'student' (patronizing) earlier in this paragraph. It could, however, be asked whether the first vowel should not be a yer. We address this problem in the next section. 26. For coronal consonants Gussmann (1978:56) posits two depalatalization rules in addition to r-spell-out (this rule has not been stated formally but it is required by his theory): the depalatalization of nasals and the depalatalization of /t' d' r'/ which are the outputs of his /-anterior palatalization. He thus collapses the rules depalatalizing /t' d'/ and /r'/ into one by means of angle bracket notation. In doing this he is forced to arbitrarily assume that /r/ is [-contin]. Our suggestion is to keep the rules depalatalizing /t' d'/ and /r'/ (actually /c 3/ and /?'/ in our theory) separate. We collapse the depalatalization of /?'/ and r-spell-out (F -»· r before consonants and to \ϊ] elsewhere). We also collapse the depalatalization of nasals and the depalatalization of /c 3/ into one rule which we state as (153) below. In sum, our analysis requires

Palatalization of Coronal Consonants

107

only two rules to account for the depalatalization of coronal consonants: Noncontinuant Depalatalization (153) below, and r-spell-out (cf. 7.2.)· Gussmann's analysis has three rules: depalatalization of nasals, depalatalization of noncontinuants (with /r/ classified arbitrarily as a noncontinuant), and r-spell-out. 27. Note: there is also an alternation between [a] in the noun and [e] in the adjective. The appearance of [e] is due to the palatalizing context in the following syllable. This shows that sienny 'hay' (Adj.) must have undergone Cor. Pal. at some stage in the derivation and the phonetic [nj in the root morpheme is a result of applying Noncontin. Depal.: //-n+in-H·// -»· /ή+ίη-Η·/ by Cor. Pal. -*· /n+n-H·/ by Yer Deletion -* [η+ηΉ·] by (153). The same reasoning applies to words such as lat+o 'summer' - let-bvti (Adj.), gwiazd+a 'star' — gwiezd+n+y (Adj.), where the alternation a/e shows the influence of the palatalizing context in the adjectives. 28. "Soft stems" are those that end in nonanterior coronal segments such as those which appear word finally in items on the left in (156) below. For a detailed discussion of "soft stems" see Rubach (1984a). 29. The [n] in dzion+ek 'day' (dimin.) is derived via Morphological Depalatalization, a rule which I discuss in Rubach (1984a).

Chapter 5

Velar Consonants and Nasal Vowels

5.0.

Guide

Part A of this chapter presents rules which are of theoretical interest from the perspective of cyclic phonology and from the point of view of the abstractness of underlying representations. First Velar Palatalization (see 5.1.) makes a case for the Strict Cyclicity Principle in its capacity as a constraint which excludes the application of rules to morpheme internal structures. The discussion of Affricate Palatalization in 5.2. prepares the ground for the analysis of 2 Velar Palatalization. Affricate Palatalization is an interesting rule in its own right as it points to a much less abstract interpretation of underlying structures than has been assumed so far. We conclude that the so-called Baudouin de Courtenay Palatalization is no longer a rule of contemporary Polish. The cyclicity of Spirantization (see 5.3.) is a case of an interesting prediction made by the theory. The rule is cyclic exclusively because it must apply among cyclic rules (cyclic and postcyclic rules form distinct blocs). The cyclicity of Spirantization explains why borrowings assimilate in two different ways: some of them undergo Spirantization and some do not. The rule makes a case for the derived environment condition in the Strict Cyclicity Principle. Second Velar Palatalization (see 5.4.) is an example of rule generalization in historical terms. Its operation in the system of today's Polish illustrates the clause of the Strict Cyclicity Principle which prohibits cyclic rules from going back to a cycle which has already been terminated. Section 5.5. shows the implications of cyclic phonology for constraining the abstractness of underlying representations. It is claimed that the cyclic theory can successfully limit the arbitrariness and the excessive abstractness of the SPE theoretical framework. Nasal vowel alternations, discussed in 5.6., provide an example of an analysis where cyclic phonology seems to fail as the proper framework. The Strict Cyclicity Principle makes a correct prediction in the case of verbs but not in the case of nouns. We return to the analysis of these nouns in chapter 8 and we show that the problem is only apparent. It can easily be solved in the framework of lexical phonology.

110

Cyclic and Lexical Phonology

Part B of this chapter gives an analysis of three further cyclic rules: Nominal Strident Palatalization, Adjectival Strident Palatalization and Fronting. These rules as well as 2 Velar discussed earlier in 5.4. show that the Strict Cyclicity Principle is correct in restricting cyclic rules from going back to an earlier cycle. Fronting provides a very straightforward explanation for the surface opacity of the palatalization rules, A number of apparent exceptions to velar palatalizations turn out to be perfectly regular cases once it becomes clear that Polish has a rule of Fronting. The discussion of this rule prepares the ground for the analysis of surface velar palatalizations in section 6.3. of the next chapter.

PART A:

5.1.

FURTHER EVIDENCE FOR RULE CYCLICITY AND THE PROBLEM OF ABSTRACTNESS

First Velar

It is unquestionable that Polish must have a rule of velar palatalization which accounts for alternations between underlying //k g x// and surface

(158) (a) Verbal suffixes, for example: /-verbs: krok 'step' - krocz+y+c 'to step' Sg. PI. 1st p. krocz+e krocz+y+my 2 p. krocz+y+sz krocz+y+cie 3 p. krocz+y krocz+^ Likewise: miazg+a 'pulp' - miazdz+y+c 'squash', strach 'fright' - strasz+y+c 'frighten', etc. e-verbs: krzyk 'a shout' - krzycz+e+c 'to shout', krzycz+£ Ί shout', krzycz+y+sz 'you shout', krzycz+y 'he shouts' . . . siuch 'hearing' - sl-ysz+e+c 'hear', siysz+ζ Ί hear', etc. (b) Nominal suffix es, for example: gtuch+y 'deaf - gkisz+ec 'wood grouse' bok 'side' - bocz+ek (dimin.) mozg 'barin' - mozdz+ek (dimin.) much+a 'fly' - musz+k+a (dimin.) cMopak 'boy' - chlopacz+ysk+o (augmentative) ch4-opacz+yn+a (dimin.)

Velar Consonants and Nasal Vowels

11 1

brzuch 'belly' - brzusz+ysk+o (aug.) - brzusz+yn+a (dimin.) dabek Oak' (dimin.) - d^bcz+ak 'young oak' cziowiek 'man' — cz4owiecz+e (voc.). (c) Adjectival suffixes, for example: byk 'bull' - bycz+a (fem.) macoch+a 'stepmother' - macosz+a (fem.) r§k+a 'hand' - r^cz+n+y grzech 'sin' — grzesz+n+y sok 'juice' - socz+yst+y puch 'fluff - pusz+yst+y, etc. The /$/ derived from //g// is further changed to /z*/ by Spirantization, the rule which we shall discuss in 5.3.: (159) wag+a 'scale' - waz+y+c 'to weigh', waz+ς Ί weigh' . . . ubog+i 'poor' — uboz+e+c 'become poor' rog 'horn' — roz+ek (dimin.) - jednoroz+ec 'unicorn' nog+a 'leg' - noz+ysk+o (aug.) - noz+yn+a (dimin.) - noz+n+y (Adj.) Bog 'God' — Boz+e (voc.) - poboz+n+y 'religious' snieg 'snow' - sniez+yst+y (Adj.) — sniez+yc+a 'snowstorm, etc. The alternation invariably occurs before a front glide or a front vowel. Recall, for example, that the -ak in detbcz-Hik 'young oak' is the same suffix as the -ak in mtod+y 'young' - mlodz+iak 'youngster' discussed in 4.5. The palatalization in bycz+a 'bull' (Adj. fem.) involves the same //i// suffix as in kret 'mole' - krec+i+a (Adj. fem.) which was presented in (107i). The -ec ofglusz+ec 'wood grouse' -glusz+c+a (gen.) has the structure //ic// as in czyst+y 'pure' - czysc+iec 'purgatory' - czys'c+c+a (gen.): vowel vs. zero alternation. The general picture may be somewhat obscured by the operation of Retraction (56) which turns /i/ to /+/ after nonpalatal coronal consonants. Thus, superficially, there is no front vowel in krocz+yc 'to step', cMopacz+ysko 'boy' (aug.), pusz+ysty 'fluffy', but compare: gk>s+ic 'to voice', koc+isko 'cat' (aug), z/oc-H'sfy 'golden'. The front vowel may have undergone Gliding (151) and /-deletion (143) as is the case in e.g. detbcz+ak from intermediate /-C+iak/ 'young oak'. Finally, the vowel may have been deleted by Yer Deletion as in nozny 'leg' (Adj.), UR //nog+in-H·//. The rule responsible for all these changes is First Velar Palatalization 1 . It turns underlying //k g χ// to /