Non-derivational Phonology Meets Lexical Phonology

Abstract A proper theory of phonology has to provide at least the three subtheories listed in (1): (1) (i) a theory of the nature of phonological representations (ii) a theory of the form of phonological generalizations (iii) a theory of the organization of phonology as part of the grammar Autosegmental phonology, Prosodic Phonology, and the theory of Feature Geometry are examples of theories that deal with (aspects of) the nature of phonological representations. The issue of how to express phonological generalizations has become one of the foci of recent phonological research. The basic ingredients of the classical SPE approach, and of Lexical Phonology in its standard form, are rules and derivations. We now observe a shift to constraint-based approaches such as Constraints-and-Repairs Phonology (Paradis 1988–9) and Harmonic Phonology (Goldsmith 1990; 1993), in which both rules and constraints play a role, and Optimality Theory (OT). In the latter theory, rules have been completely abolished in favor of a hierarchy of constraints, and there is no derivational, serial computation of the correct phonetic form of a word (Prince and Smolensky 1993). In another approach, Declarative Phonology, rules have been replaced with stative, declarative statements that express well-formedness constraints that apply conjunctively (Coleman 1995).