An Overview of Lexical Phonology

This article reviews Lexical Phonology, a theory of rules and derivations. Rules are of three types: cyclic rules, postcyclic rules, and postlexical rules. Various diagnostic properties of rules are discussed, including the phonological cycle, word vs. phrase domain application, the Strict Cyclicity Constraint, derived environments, the Structure Preservation Constraint, lexical conditioning, and the interaction of phonology and morphology. The data are drawn from English, Dutch, Polish, Russian, and Slovak. Lexical Phonology grew out of The Sound Pattern of English (SPE hereafter; Chomsky and Halle 1968) as a refinement of the structure of the phonological and the morphological components of the grammar. The roots of Lexical Phonology go back to Kiparsky (1973), Mascaro (1976), Halle (1978), and Rubach (1981). The opening paper for the theory was Kiparsky’s (1982) ‘From Cyclic to Lexical Phonology’. The lexical framework inspired the research of the 1980s and 1990s, as I explain in Section 6. Today, Lexical Phonology remains the source of insight especially in two lines of phonological investigation: Distributed Morphology (DM) and Derivational Optimality Theory (DOT). It is for this reason that the theory merits attention in spite of the fact that it is no longer practised in the form as described in this article. Lexical Phonology is a theory of rules and derivations. It is a theory of rules, because it claims that rules are universally of three types: cyclic rules, postcyclic rules, and postlexical rules. It is a theory of derivations, because it claims that the way in which the derivation is organized is crucial to phonological analysis. In particular, some derivations proceed in steps, called cycles, while others do not. Non-cyclic derivations are of two types: word level derivations and postsyntactic derivations. Lexical Phonology is an extreme embodiment of Chomsky’s (1970) lexicalist hypothesis. It is extreme because it claims that all word formation, including inflection, takes place in the lexicon. Furthermore, word formation rules (WFR hereafter) interact with a subset of phonological rules called cyclic rules. This interaction is possible, because cyclic

[1]  Paul Kiparsky,et al.  Some consequences of Lexical Phonology , 1985, Phonology Yearbook.

[2]  Joan Mascaró,et al.  Catalan phonology and the phonological cycle , 1978 .

[3]  J. Stemberger,et al.  Optimality Theory , 2003 .

[4]  Catherine O. Ringen,et al.  Vowel harmony : theoretical implications , 1975 .

[5]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Backness switch in Russian , 2000, Phonology.

[6]  Jerzy Rubach.  Cyclic phonology and palatalization in Polish and English , 1981 .

[7]  Richard Wiese,et al.  The Phonology of German , 1996 .

[8]  JERZY RUBACH,et al.  ABSTRACT VOWELS IN THREE DIMENSIONAL PHONOLOGY: THE YERS , 1986 .

[9]  Maria Helena Mira Mateus,et al.  The phonology of Portuguese , 2000 .

[10]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Lexical Phonology: lexical and postlexical derivations , 1985, Phonology Yearbook.

[11]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .

[12]  G. Booij.  The Phonology of Dutch , 1995 .

[13]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Mid vowel fronting in Ukrainian , 2005, Phonology.

[14]  Miklós Törkenczy,et al.  The phonology of Hungarian , 2000 .

[15]  Gjert Kristoffersen,et al.  The phonology of Norwegian , 2000 .

[16]  Brandon R. Schrand.  Works Cited , 1991, Bach's Cycle, Mozart's Arrow.

[17]  Ora Matushansky,et al.  The Morphophonology of Russian Adjectival Inflection , 2006, Linguistic Inquiry.

[18]  John J. McCarthy,et al.  What Is Optimality Theory? , 2007, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[19]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Glide and Glottal Stop Insertion in Slavic Languages: A DOT Analysis , 2000, Linguistic Inquiry.

[20]  Anne Violin-Wigent.  OPTIMALITY THEORY: CONSTRAINT INTERACTION IN GENERATIVE GRAMMAR , 2006 .

[21]  David Odden,et al.  The phonology and morphology of Kimatuumbi , 1996 .

[22]  D. Siegel.  Topics in English morphology , 1979 .

[23]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Remarks on Nominalization , 2020, Nominalization.

[24]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Duke-of-York Derivations in Polish , 2003, Linguistic Inquiry.

[25]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Derivation in Optimality Theory: A Reply to Burzio , 2004, Linguistic Inquiry.

[26]  Sharon Hargus,et al.  Studies in lexical phonology , 1993 .

[27]  John J. McCarthy,et al.  Sympathy and phonological opacity , 1999, Phonology.

[28]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Cyclic and Lexical Phonology: The Structure of Polish , 1984 .

[29]  Alan S. Prince,et al.  Faithfulness and reduplicative identity , 1995 .

[30]  Geert Booij,et al.  Non-derivational Phonology Meets Lexical Phonology , 1997 .

[31]  Heinz Giegerich,et al.  Lexical Strata in English: Morphological Causes, Phonological Effects , 2005 .

[32]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  The Lexical Phonology of Slovak , 1993 .

[33]  M. Halle,et al.  Segmental phonology of Modern English , 1985 .

[34]  Nigel Fabb,et al.  English suffixation is constrained only by selectional restrictions , 1988 .

[35]  Jerzy Rubach,et al.  Polish palatalization in derivational optimality theory , 2003 .

[36]  Marc van Oostendorp,et al.  Lexical phonology , 2005 .

[37]  Geert Booij,et al.  Syllable structure assignment in Polish , 1990 .

[38]  Morris Halle,et al.  Formal vs. functional considerations in phonology , 1979 .

[39]  K. P. Mohanan,et al.  The Theory of Lexical Phonology , 1982 .

[40]  P. Kiparsky.  BLOCKING IN NONDERIVED ENVIRONMENTS , 1993 .

[41]  Michael Kenstowicz,et al.  The Phonology of Syllabic Nuclei in Slovak , 1987 .

[42]  P. Kiparsky.  Opacity and cyclicity , 2000 .

[43]  Morris Halle,et al.  Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection , 1993 .

[44]  G. Booij,et al.  Postcyclic versus postlexical rules in lexical phonology , 1987 .

[45]  B. Vaux.  The phonology of Armenian , 1998 .