Whamit!

Speaker: Christopher Legerme (MIT)
Title: Representation and Computation in Phonological Theory: Faust and Scheer (2025)
Time: , 5pm - 6:30pm
Location: 32-D831

Abstract: Before asking what rules or constraints a grammar needs, we need to know what kind of representations those computations should be operating over in the first place: “If the representations are right, then the rules will follow” (McCarthy 1988:84). I’ll be presenting Faust & Scheer’s (2025) work on the behavior of stem-final TR clusters in North-Eastern Creusois (NEC), using the paper to foreground a broader methodological question pertaining to the division of labor between representation and computation in phonological theory. NEC shows a noun/verb asymmetry in the repair of illicit stem-final TR clusters. The account of Faust & Scheer combines Strict CV representations with Optimality Theory (OT) to derive deletion in nouns and metathesis in verbs through non-transderivational morphological exponence that is followed by a completely regular phonological computation in which phonology doesn’t need to make reference to syntactic category (2025: 32). And so, we are brought to consider the broader architectural question of what a modular grammar might require of its interfaces. For Faust & Scheer, their study of the NEC pattern is only one contribution to a larger debate over whether phenomena that appear to require cross-modular information really force us to weaken certain assumptions about modularity, or whether they can instead be derived by reconsidering our phonological representations and how the different components of grammar get related to one another. Please note that, as the inaugural talk of the 2026-27 season of Phonology Circle, this presentation will be oriented primarily toward introducing the NEC data, which instantiate the kinds of patterns familiar from morphophonology more generally, and the basic concepts needed to follow the paper’s argument, including the relevant machinery of OT, Strict CV, and some background assumptions about Spell-Out that motivate the analysis, rather than toward adjudicating the broader theoretical debate. That said, any comments, thoughts, or questions will of course be very welcome.

Speaker: Eyal Marco (MIT), Roni Katzir (Tel-Aviv University), Ezer Rasin (Tel-Aviv University)
Title: The complementary-distribution challenge for phonological learning: The case of [h] and [?] in English
Time: , 12:30pm - 2pm
Location: 32-D461

Abstract: The distribution of [h] and [?] in English poses a well-known challenge for the structuralist assumption that segments in complementary distribution are allophones of the same phoneme. In this study, we show that this distribution also poses a challenge within generative linguistics, a challenge of explanatory adequacy. The challenge is to explain why the English-learning child does not acquire a grammar in which [h] and [?] are derived from the same underlying representation. The generative literature has not identified this as a problem, largely because of the assumption that [h] and [?] are too phonetically dissimilar to participate in an alternation. However, we argue that phonetic accounts do not eliminate the challenge. We discuss simplicity-based theories of learning and show that under naive representational assumptions, simplicity-based learners prefer to derive [?] from an underlying /h/, rather than a longer sequence of /ng/ (or an underlying /?/), and therefore make wrong predictions about English speakers’ knowledge. The same learners, however, make correct predictions when combined with a representational framework that assumes underspecification and lexical redundancy rules. We therefore conclude that the acquisition problem can be addressed using simplicity-based learning, and that the complementary distribution of [h] and [?] provides an argument for underspecification and lexical redundancy rules.

A paper co-authored by our 3rd year student Rotsuprit (Ford) Saengthong and John Gluckman (University of Kansas), entitled “Thai Tough-Constructions and the Tough Signature”, has been accepted for publication by Syntactic Theory & Research (STAR). Below is the abstract:

We investigate the tough-construction in Thai, focusing on two exceptional properties. First, Thai tough-constructions may involve a potentially unconstrained dependency, and second, the gap in the embedded clause can be in the subject position. While these facts superficially support a heterogeneous view of tough-constructions across the world’s languages, on closer inspection, we come to a different conclusion. We argue that unconstrained dependencies and subject gaps are not a function of Thai tough-constructions, but instead reflect the fact that Thai has an undiagnosed broad subject position. Once controlled for, Thai tough-constructions look surprisingly like other well-documented cases. Ultimately, we are concerned not with variation in tough-constructions, but rather crosslinguistic similarities.

You can read the paper here: https://lingbuzz.net/lingbuzz/010319

Congratulations, Ford!