In phonology, if two rules are in feeding order, rule A creates new phonological contexts in which rule B can apply. It would not have been possible for rule B to apply otherwise.
A good example of this can be seen in English, where preglottalization can be considered as rule B. As a consequence of this rule, all voiceless plosives which make part of a word-final consonant cluster are glottalized. This can be seen in the form looked, with the underlying representation [lʊkt]. It is pronounced [lʊʔkt]. Another rule in English which is called fortis stop insertion shall be considered here as rule A. This rule inserts a voiceless plosives for example in [prɪns] (prince), so that the new form of the word becomes [prɪnts]. Because a new phonological context has been created in which rule B can take place, the final output form of prince is [prɪnʔts].
If two rules which are in feeding order apply in the opposite order, this is called a counterfeeding order. An example of this can be seen in French, where petite nièce ("little niece") is pronounced [pətit njɛs]. If the rule which deletes word-final /-ə/ in French would have applied before another rule which deletes word-final consonants before another consonant, this would have been a feeding order so that the final output form would have been [pəti njɛs] instead. A counter-feeding order of phonological rules thus very often creates phonological opacity. In the given case, it is the application of the rule deleting word-final consonants which has become opaque in French.
Gussenhoven, C. & Jacobs, H. (1998). Understanding Phonology. Arnold, Londen.
Jensen, J.T. (2004). Principles of Generative Phonology: An introduction.
|
|
Wikis
Search
