k-Ø And what phonology can do

This article looks at the Turkish k-Ø alternation and questions whether it can be counted as a phonological process. After a discussion of what it means to be phonological, the empirical facts are weighed against the theoretical expectations. The alternation has several quirks, and any account treating it as phonological must allow for complex machinery to deal with those, thus weakening the predictive power of the theory employed. This is true of earlier rule-based accounts, but also of accounts that have been presented within Government Phonology, the framework that also this article is couched in. After careful revision of several problems that previous accounts have run into and that seem insurmountable, we must conclude that the k-Ø alternation does not qualify as phonological.

___

Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York, Evanston, London: Harper & Row.

Balcı, E. (2008). Turkish consonants: A government phonology analysis. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.

Denwood, A. (1998). A template for Turkish. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics, 8, 177190.

Denwood, A. (2002). K~ø: morpho-phonology in Turkish. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics, 12, 8998.

Erguvanlı Taylan, E. (2011). Is there evidence for a voicing rule in Turkish. In E. Erguvanlı Taylan & B. Rona (Eds.), Puzzles of language. Essays in honour of Karl Zimmer (pp. 7192). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Fromm, H. (1982). Finnische grammatik. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London, New York: Routledge.

Goldsmith, J. A. (1976). Autosegmental phonology. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistics Club.

Harris, J. W. (1969). Spanish phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Harris, J. (1994). English sound structure. Oxford: Blackwell.

Harris, J. (1997). Licensing inheritance: An integrated theory of neutralisation. Phonology, 14, 315370.

Harris, J. (1999). Release the captive coda: The foot as a domain of phonetic interpretation. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 11, 165194.

Harris, J., & Gussmann, E. (1998). Final codas: Why the west was wrong. In E. Cyran (Ed.), Structure and interpretation. Studies in phonology (pp. 139162). Lublin: Wydawnictwo Folium.

Harris, J., & Kaye, J. (1990). A tale of two cities: London glottaling and New York City tapping. The Linguistic Review, 7(3), 251274.

Inkelas, S.( 2011). Another look at velar deletion in Turkish. In E. Erguvanlı Taylan & B. Rona (Eds.), Puzzles of language. Essays in honour of Karl Zimmer (pp. 3753). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Inkelas, S. (1995). The consequences of optimization for underspecification. In J. Beckman (Ed.), Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 25 (pp. 287302). Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association.

Kallestinova, E.( 2004). Voice and aspiration of stops in Turkish. Folia Linguistica, 38, 117143.

Kaye, J. (1989). Phonology: A cognitive view. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kaye, J. (1990). Coda licensing. Phonology, 7(2), 301330.

Kaye, J. (1995). Derivations and interfaces. In J. Durand & F. Katamba (Eds.), Frontiers of phonology: Atoms, structures, derivations (pp. 289332). London, New York: Longman.

Kaye, J., Lowenstamm, J., & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1985). The internal structure of phonological elements: A theory of charm and government. Phonology Yearbook, 2, 303328.

Kaye, J., Lowenstamm, J., & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1990). Constituent structure and government in phonology. Phonology, 7(2), 193231.

Kaye, J., & Pöchtrager, M. A.. (2012). Paradigms? Phonologists say, NIMBY! (How to do things to make words.). Paper presented at WoRSE (Workshop on the representation and selection of exponents), June 78, 2012, CASTL Tromsø/Norway.

Kaye, J., & Pöchtrager, M. A. (in preparation). Falling through the cracks. What shall we do with paradigms? Ms.

Kiparsky, P. (1976). Abstractness, opacity and global rules. In A. Koutsoudas (Ed.), The application and ordering of grammmatical rules (pp. 160186). The Hague, Paris: Mouton.

Laalo, K. (1988). Imperfektimuotojen ti~si-vaihtelu suomen kielessä. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.

Lees, R. B. (1961). The phonology of modern standard Turkish. Bloomington: Indiana University & The Hague: Mouton & Co.

Lewis, G. (1967). Turkish grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nuhbalaoğlu, D. (2010). On the role of empty onsets in Turkish: A government phonology approach. MA thesis. Boğaziçi University.

Özsoy, A. S. (2004). Türkçenin yapısı I. sesbilim. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University Press.

Sezer, E. (1981). The k/Ø alternation in Turkish. In G. N. Clements (Ed.), Harvard Studies in Phonology (pp. 354382). Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.

Yoshida, S. (1993). Licensing of empty nuclei: The case of palestinian vowel harmony. The Linguistic Review, 10, 127159.

Zimmer, K. (1975). Some thoughts on likely phonologies for non-ideal speakers. Papers from the Parasession on Functionalism (pp. 556567). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

Zimmer, K., & Abbott, B. (1978). The k/Ø alternation in Turkish; some experimental evidence for its productivity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 7, 35-46.