Phonological Acquisition in Optimality Theory: The Early Stages 1

Recent experimental work indicates that by the age of ten months, infants have already learned a great deal about the phonotactics (legal sounds and sound sequences) of their language. This learning occurs before infants can utter words or apprehend most phonological alternations. I will show that this early learning stage can be straightforwardly modeled with Optimality Theory. Specifically, the Markedness and Faithfulness constraints can be ranked so as to characterize the phonotactics, even when no information about morphology or phonological alternations is yet available. I will also show how later on, the information acquired in infancy can help the child in coming to grips with the alternation pattern. I also propose a procedure for undoing the learning errors that are likely to occur at the earliest stages. There are two specific formal proposals. One is a constraint ranking algorithm, based closely on Tesar and Smolensky’s Constraint Demotion, which mimics the early, “phonotactics only” form of learning seen in infants. I illustrate the algorithm’s effectiveness by having it learn the phonotactic pattern of a simplified language modeled on Korean. The other proposal is that there are three distinct default rankings for phonological constraints: low for ordinary Faithfulness (used in learning phonotactics); low for Faithfulness to adult forms (in the child’s own production system); and high for output-to-output correspondence constraints.

[1]  Roderick Gould,et al.  Multiple correspondence , 1957, Mech. Transl. Comput. Linguistics.

[2]  J. Berko.  The Child's Learning of English Morphology , 1958 .

[3]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Some controversial questions in phonological theory , 1965, Journal of Linguistics.

[4]  G. Seth.  Psychology of Language , 1968, Nature.

[5]  P. D. Eimas,et al.  Speech Perception in Infants , 1971, Science.

[6]  M. Braine,et al.  The acquisition of Phonology , 1976 .

[7]  Andreas M. Koutsoudas.  The Application of Phonological Rules. , 1974 .

[8]  J. Fodor,et al.  The Psychology of Language , 1974 .

[9]  J. D. Miller,et al.  Speech perception by the chinchilla: voiced-voiceless distinction in alveolar plosive consonants , 1975, Science.

[10]  John Algeo.  What Consonant Clusters Are Possible , 1978 .

[11]  J D Miller,et al.  Speech perception by the chinchilla: identification function for synthetic VOT stimuli. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Marlys A. Macken,et al.  The child's lexical representation: the ‘puzzle-puddle-pickle’ evidence , 1980, Journal of Linguistics.

[13]  P K Kuhl,et al.  Enhanced discriminability at the phonetic boundaries for the voicing feature in macaques , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  M. Garman,et al.  Language acquisition : studies in first language development , 1982 .

[15]  B. Derwing,et al.  Response coincidence analysis as evidence for language acquisition strategies , 1982, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[16]  P. Kuhl,et al.  Enhanced discriminability at the phonetic boundaries for the place feature in macaques. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  J. Ohala.  The Origin of Sound Patterns in Vocal Tract Constraints , 1983 .

[18]  P. Keating,et al.  Patterns in allophone distribution for voiced and voiceless stops , 1983 .

[19]  J. Werker,et al.  Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life , 1984 .

[20]  P. Keating.  PHONETIC AND PHONOLOGICAL REPRESENTATION OF STOP CONSONANT VOICING , 1984 .

[21]  Ruth A. Berman,et al.  The acquisition of Hebrew. , 1985 .

[22]  P. Keating,et al.  On the naturalness of stop consonant voicing , 1986, Journal of Linguistics.

[23]  B. Derwing,et al.  Language acquisition: Assessing morphological development , 1986 .

[24]  T. Vance.  "Canadian Raising" in Some Dialects of the Northern United States , 1987 .

[25]  Janet F. Werker,et al.  Cross-language speech perception: Initial capabilities and developmental change. , 1988 .

[26]  P. Kuhl.  Human adults and human infants show a “perceptual magnet effect” for the prototypes of speech categories, monkeys do not , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants' preference for the predominant stress patterns of English words. , 1993, Child development.

[28]  A. Friederici,et al.  Phonotactic knowledge of word boundaries and its use in infant speech perception , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  P. Smolensky,et al.  The Learnability of Optimality Theory: An Algorithm and Some Basic Complexity Results , 1995 .

[30]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants′ Sensitivity to the Sound Patterns of Native Language Words , 1993 .

[31]  T. Mark Ellison,et al.  Phonological Derivation in Optimality Theory , 1994, COLING.

[32]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants' sensitivity to phonotactic patterns in the native language. , 1994 .

[33]  P. Fikkert.  On the acquisition of prosodic structure , 1994 .

[34]  C. Levelt.  On the acquisition of place , 1994 .

[35]  P. Fikkert.  Acquisition of phonology , 1995 .

[36]  Bruce Tesar,et al.  Computing Optimal Forms in Optimality Theory: Basic Syllabification ; CU-CS-763-95 , 2008 .

[37]  Linda Lombardi,et al.  Laryngeal neutralization and syllable wellformedness , 1995 .

[38]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants′ Detection of the Sound Patterns of Words in Fluent Speech , 1995, Cognitive Psychology.

[39]  F. Guenther,et al.  The perceptual magnet effect as an emergent property of neural map formation. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Paradigm Uniformity and the Phonetics-Phonology Boundary , 1996 .

[41]  Markus Walther,et al.  OT SIMPLE - a construction-kit approach to Optimality Theory implementation , 1996, ArXiv.

[42]  Marilyn M. Vihman,et al.  Phonological Development , 2014 .

[43]  P. Smolensky.  On the comprehension/production dilemma in child language , 1996 .

[44]  C. Bellone,et al.  ON A ROLE , 1996 .

[45]  S. Jun,et al.  The Phonetics and Phonology of Korean Prosody , 2018 .

[46]  P. Smolensky.  The Initial State and 'Richness of the Base' in Optimality Theory , 1996 .

[47]  P. Boersma.  How we learn variation, optionality and probalility , 1997 .

[48]  Joe Pater.  Minimal Violation and Phonological Development , 1997 .

[49]  Robert Kirchner,et al.  Contrastiveness and faithfulness , 1997, Phonology.

[50]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants' memory for spoken words. , 1997, Science.

[51]  Jason Eisner,et al.  Eecient Generation in Primitive Optimality Theory , 1997 .

[52]  Bruce Tesar,et al.  Robust Interpretive Parsing in Metrical Stress Theory , 1998 .

[53]  R. Kager,et al.  From phonological typology to the development of receptive and productive phonological competence : Applications of minimal violation , 1998 .

[54]  Daniel Matthew Albro,et al.  Evaluation, implementation, and extension of primitive optimality theory , 1998 .

[55]  P. Smolensky,et al.  Learnability in Optimality Theory , 2000, Linguistic Inquiry.

[56]  J. McCarthy.  Morpheme structure constraints and paradigm occultation , 1998 .

[57]  Charles Reiss,et al.  Formal and Empirical Arguments concerning Phonological Acquisition , 1998, Linguistic Inquiry.

[58]  Frederick J. Newmeyer,et al.  Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics: Volume I: General papers , 1999 .

[59]  René Kager,et al.  Surface opacity of metrical structure in optimality theory , 1999 .

[60]  J. Stemberger,et al.  Handbook of Phonological Development: From the Perspective of Constraint-Based Nonlinear Phonology , 1999 .

[61]  D. Steriade.  Phonetics in Phonology: The Case of Laryngeal Neutralization , 1999 .

[62]  Michael Kenstowicz,et al.  Uniform Exponence: Exemplification and extension , 1999 .

[63]  Bruce Hayes,et al.  An Automated Learner for Phonology and Morphology , 1999 .

[64]  R. Gómez,et al.  Artificial grammar learning by 1-year-olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge , 1999, Cognition.

[65]  D. Slobin,et al.  The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition , 2000 .

[66]  M. van Oostendorp,et al.  The Derivational Residue in Phonological Optimality Theory , 2000 .

[67]  William J. Turkel.  Learning Phonology: Genetic Algorithms and Yoruba Tongue Root Harmony , 2000 .

[68]  Bruce Hayes,et al.  Phonological Restructuring in Yidin and its Theoretical Consequences , 2000 .

[69]  Laura W. McGarrity,et al.  On the Role of Sympathy in Acquisition , 2000 .

[70]  Bruce Hayes,et al.  Gradient Well-Formedness in Optimality Theory , 2000 .

[71]  Jeroen van de Weijer,et al.  Optimality theory : phonology, syntax, and acquisition , 2000 .

[72]  A. Gnanadesikan.  Constraints in Phonological Acquisition: Markedness and faithfulness constraints in child phonology , 2004 .

[73]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Learning a grammar in Functional Phonology , 2000 .

[74]  Kie Zuraw,et al.  Patterned exceptions in phonology , 2000 .

[75]  P. Boersma,et al.  Empirical Tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm , 2001, Linguistic Inquiry.

[76]  Charles W. Kisseberth.  On the Functional Unity of Phonological Rules , 2022 .