Phonology 2 (LIN 623, Spring 2026)

Course Information

Course: TuTh 09:30-10:50, SBS 216

Instructor: Jeffrey Heinz, jeffrey.heinz@stonybrook.edu

Office Hours: MW 4:30-6pm in IACS L160

Syllabus: pdf html

We reviewed D&E’s analysis of ITB syllabification.
We reviewed P&S’s analysis of ITB syllabification.
For next Tuesday please read Strother-Garcia 2018.
For a non-technical introduction to logical transductions, please read Heinz 2025 before the Strother-Garcia paper.

We reviewed the course to date
- Architectures of classic OT, HS, HG
- How to do OT (analysis, presentation)
- Critiques of OT
We previewed the next phase of the course on syllabification in ITB
- with rules
- with OT
- with logical transductions
We discussed and analyzed syllabification in ITB html pdf
- Dell and Elmedaoui 1985
- Prince and Smolensky 1993, section 2, pages 11-22
- Strother-Garcia 2018

We discussed why counterbleeding and counterfeeding is problematic for classic OT, HG and HS.
old handout on opacity in OT
We briefly introduced stratal OT.

We discussed Ilokano.
We finished our discussion of Harmonic Serialism.
We discussed Harmonic Grammar.
For next week, please read Chapter 2 of Vaux and Nevins 2008 for a critique of OT. On Tuesday we will focus on the arguments regarding opacity, optionality, and ineffability, but Q&A on any aspect of the chapter is welcome.

Class canceled because of the storm.
The Ilokano assignment is now due Tuesday March 3 in class.
Please also read the first two sections of Pater 2016 for an introduction to Harmonic Grammar for Thursday Feb 26.

We continued discussing the Ilokano assignment pdf html due Thursday, February 26 during class.
We discussed McCarthy 2010 on Harmonic Serialism.
- What is HS? How is a surface form calculated from an underlying form?
- Considering the stress-syncope interaction in Macushi Carib, what is McCarthy’s argument for intermediate representations?
- Why does McCarthy say HS provides a more restrictive typology than classic parallel OT?
- Why does McCarthy pinpoint global optimization as a flaw of classic parallel OT?

We discussed the Lezgian assigment. Here are some general comments.
We discussed Chapter 3 of McCarthy 2008.
- how to organize a paper
- how to write an OT analysis
- good scholarship, criticism
- how to write clearly
We discussed the current Ilokano assignment pdf html due Thursday, February 26 during class.
Read McCarthy 2010 on Harmonic Serialism for Thursday. What are McCarthy’s main arguments for HS?

We concluded discussion of Chapter 2 of McCarthy 2008 and the relevant excerpts.
In particular we dicussed:
- constraints in ranking arguments
- inputs in ranking arguments
- richness of the base
- contrast in OT
- finding and fixing problems, what to check
- recursive constraint demotion
- logic of constraint ranking (time permitting)
Your next squib assignment is on Ilokano pdf html and it is due Thursday, February 26 during class. Please print a physical copy of your assignment and turn it into me then.
For next Tuesday, please read Chapter 3 of McCarthy 2008.

We continued our discussion of McCarthy 2008 up to section 2.7.
In particular we discussed:
- violation and comparative tableaux and Hasse diagrams
- the Yawelmani example illustrating how to come up with ranking arguments
- limits of ranking arguents
- candidates in ranking arguments
- harmonic bounding
Finish reading Chapter 2 of McCarthy 2008 (you may skip section 2.9) by next Thursday, and be prepared to discuss the relevant excerpts.

We discussed Lezgian, due next Tuesday.
We discussed excerpts from the first couple sections of McCarthy 2008, chapter 2.
(optional) Rooij and Baggio 2021 on theorizing in cognitive science.
For next Tuesday, please read up to section 2.7 (up to page 83) of McCarthy 2008 and be prepared to discuss the relevant excerpts.
Finish reading Chapter 2 of McCarthy 2008 (you may skip section 2.9) by next Thursday.

We discussed any questions related to the intro handout.
We discussed questions from McCarthy 2008, chapter 1.
We intended to further discussed Lezgian, but did not, so we will start off with this on Thursday.
Read Chapter 2 of McCarthy 2008 up to and including section 2.2 (up to page 53). Be prepared to disscuss the excerpts from these sections.

We went over the syllabus pdf html.
We went over the introduction pdf html to this course.
We began discussion of the Lezgian assignment pdf html due Tuesday, February 10 during class. Please print a physical copy of your assignment and turn it into me then.
For Tuesday, please read Chapter 1 of McCarthy 2008 and be prepared to discuss the following questions.
1. Section 1.2 asks “Why Must Constraints Be Violable?” Is McCarthy’s argument convincing? Why or why not?
2. In section 1.3, McCarthy writes “OT itself does not say much about the nature of constraints, beyond distinguishing between markedness and faithfulness. OT is a theory of how constraints interact with one another; it isn’t a theory of what the constraints are, nor is it a theory of representations.” Why do you think this is or isn’t true, and what does it mean for a theory of phonology?
3. Section 1.4 claims the operations in GEN are “extremely general”. Can you think of any reasonable limits to the operations GEN employs?
4. Section 1.6 ends with McCarthy arguing against positing highly specific markedness constraints and says “The best practice in OT is to state constraints in very general ways and then try to limit their activity through interaction with higher-ranking constraints.” In the specific case he discussed in Timugon Murut, how could one decide between these two alternatives?
5. Please bring any questions you have about chapte 1 to class.