國
立立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
output.Together with an L1 constraint, *COMPLEX CODA, undominated MAX-IO(OBS) makes [plæ̃t] in (21) the optimal choice in the interlanguage.
(21) Interlanguage of BP-accented English
a. English b. BP Interlanguage English c. Gloss
[plæ̃nt] [plæ̃t] ‘plant’
[klæ̃n] [klæ̃] ‘clan’
[õnz] [õz] ‘owns’
[æ̃w̃ns] [æ̃w̃s] ‘ounce’
With the existence of L1 setting, these interlanguage markedness constraints have to be promoted on top of L1 constraints to the undominated position to take effect. At the same time, L2 constraints are activated and incorporated in the interlanguage grammar from the other end, resulting in a constraint ranking in the order in (22).
(22) Constraint ranking in Stage 1
interlanguage markedness constraints >> L1 constraints >> L2 constraints
The inclusion of interlanguage markedness constraints has several implications.
First, L2acquisition is more complicated than L1 acquisition. In L1 acquisition, child grammar is similar to UG, and there are only two variables involved. In L2acquisition, there are three variables affecting what the resultants will be. Second, with the promotion to the undominated position, interlanguage constraints bring about tremendous influence on interlanguage grammar. Due to the dominance over L2 constraints, interlanguage constraints usually play a negative role in the construction of L2 grammar. Finally, it is expectable that the dominance of interlanguage constraint over L1 and L2 constraints would result in learner’s forms that are unique to L1 and L2 forms.
Stage two
In stage 2, interlanguage markedness constraints and L1 constraints undergo error-driven demotion. Constraint demotion continues in a rank by rank fashion.
Error-driven demotion is an iterative process; it suspends when target forms can be predicted and resumes when target forms do not successfully surface. When there are
•‧
from EDCD. EDCD requires a pivotal constraint to be the reference point of demotion.However, it is not evident why higher-ranked constraint in child grammar has the priority over lower-ranked constraint to be demoted. EDCD seems to suggest that higher-ranked loser-favoring constraints are more mobile than lower-ranked ones, yet theoretical support of the privilege from ranking is not much. Unlike EDCD, the proposed algorithm does not resort to a pivotal constraint to partition the edge above which loser-favoring constraints should be demoted. Instead, in the proposed algorithm, the constraint demotion sequence depends on the frequencies of exposure to the corresponding forms. Take tableau (12) for example, whether FeetR is demoted prior to Trochaic is determined by the frequency ratio of FeetR to Trochaic. If FeetR is more often obeyed in the L2 language than Trochaic, FeetR should be easier to learn and demoted prior to Trochaic, and vice versa. The proposed sequence of constraint reranking can be supported by Pater’s study (2015) on child phonology.
The study shows that Dutch children learn syllable structures in the sequence in (23):
(23) CV ! CVC ! V ! VC! {CVCC ! VCC ! CCV ! CCVC} CCVCC
!{CCV!CCVC!CVCC!VCC} !
Pater (2015) puts related constraints, like NoCoda, Onset, *Complex Onset,
*Complex Coda, in numerical scale and has them gradually reranked. The result shows that different acquisition orders are predicted based on the frequencies of syllable types in different languages. Pater’s research enlightens the present study in the aspect of constraint reranking order. When there are two or more constraints to be demoted, it is the most frequently encountered relevant constraint to be demoted first.
Take tableau (12) as an example, the order of Trochaic and Feet R demotion depends on their frequencies in L2. In L2, if alignment between foot and word on the right edge is more frequent than trochaic words, then the demotion of Trochaic is more likely to take place before the demotion of FeetR, and vice versa. It is true that obtaining statistic distribution of the corresponding forms might be time-consuming for analysis. A possible alternative solution is to look at the constraint ranking of the L2 language. When a constraint is ranked high, its corresponding forms are assumed to outnumber the others. With a more frequent encounter of the related data, each of which reinforces the status of the constraint, demoting an undominated constraint is
•‧
國
立立 政 治 大
㈻㊫學
•‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
supposed to be more difficult. By contrast, demoting a violable constraint is easier.
Since it is originally violable, playing down its role in the grammar is relatively simpler than that of the undominated constraints.
The two main stages of extended EDCD can be illustrated in Figure 3.
Stage 1
interlanguage constraints Stage 2
non-L2 constraints
L2 constraints Figure 3. The bidirectional model of extended EDCD
Operation of the extended EDCD
I shall illustrate grammar formation in the bidirectional model with a similar case of EDCD in (12). Tableau (24) illustrates the initial state in the extended EDCD, where L2 setting is the only grammar that speakers possess. At this state, L2 stimuli are not encountered, and therefore L1 constraints are not applied to process any language forms.
(24) The original state
TrochaicL1 FeetRL1
Next, the exposure to L2 stimuli initiates the first stage, which features interlanguage markedness constraint promotion and L2 constraints inclusion. As can be seen in (25), ALIGN-HEAD represents the interlanguage markedness constraint, which is directly promoted to the undominated position.
(25) ALIGN-HEAD (PrWd-R, Head(PrWd)-R) (hereafter ALIGN-HEAD
(word, head(word))
Align the right edge of the prosodic word with the right edge of the head of the prosodic word
As shown in (26), Trochaic and FeetR are L1 constraints; Iambic and FeetL are L2 constraints, which join interlanguage grammar from a lower rank. Each constraint is indicated with a subscript to show the grammar system that it belongs to, and it
•‧
does not imply any morphological category as indexed constraints do.
The penult in the input and outputs is a heavy syllable, which is indicated with two mora symbols. Syllables that are not indicated with mora symbols are light. The dominance of interlanguage constraint, ALIGN-HEAD, leads to the surface of candidate (f). Candidate (f) is less marked than the target form candidate (b) in that the heavy penultimate syllable is stressed.
(26) stage one: interlanguage markedness constraint promotion and L2 constraint incorporation
Next, to achieve greater resemblance of L2 grammar, error-driven constraint demotion is launched. The sequence of demotion is determined by constraint mobility;
violable constraints in the L2 language is more mobile and should be demoted prior to high-ranked constraints. Provided that the constraint ranking in the L2 language is as follows. Constraints that are shaded in (27) are winner-disfavoring constraints to be demoted.
(27) Constraint ranking in the L2 language
Iambic >> Trochaic >> FeetL >> FeetR >> ALIGH HEAD
As lower ranked constraints are more easily to move due to less reinforcement, constraint demotion should follow the following order in (28).
(28) Constraint demotion order
ALIGH HEAD ! FeetR ! Trochaic
As can be seen in tableau (29), interlanguage constraint ALIGH HEAD is demoted
•‧
by one rank, uncrucially rank with Trochaic. ALIGH-HEAD punishes candidates whose main stress does not lie on the ultimate syllable. Here, all candidates except candidate (f), incurs a violation of ALIGH-HEAD.
The evaluation shows that the actual output, candidate (b), loses to candidate (f) for one more violation of ALIGH-HEAD. Since the existing grammar fails to predict the target form, the constraint reranking will continue by lowering ALIGH-HEAD by one more rank.
(29) Stage 2A: error-driven constraint demotion of ALIGH-HEAD
/σσσµµσ/ ranked with FeetR. This time, candidate (e) beats candidate (f) by conforming to the undominated constraint, Trochaic. Since the target form is not successfully predict, the demotion of ALIGH-HEAD will continue with one more rank.
(30) Stage 2B: error-driven constraint demotion of ALIGH-HEAD
/σσσµµσ/ the bottom rank. As can be seen, movements in the lower ranks do not alter the result
•‧
continue with another target form disfavoring constraint, i.e. FeetR.(31) Stage 2C: error-driven constraint demotion of ALIGH-HEAD
/σσσµµσ/
(32) Stage 2D: error-driven constraint demotion of ALIGH-HEAD
/σσσµµσ/
(33) Stage 2E: error-driven constraint demotion of ALIGH-HEAD
/σσσµµσ/
In tableau (34), FeetR is demoted by one rank, uncrucially ranked with Iambic.
Here, candidate (e) still beats the other candidates with better conformation to the
•‧
upper-ranked constraints, including Trochaic, FeetR, and Iambic. However, to make candidate (b) surface, further demotion of FeetR is necessary.
(34) Stage 2F: error-driven constraint demotion of FeetR
/σσσµµσ/
In tableau (35), FeetR is lowered by one rank, uncrucially with FeetL. This time, candidates (a), (c), and (e), are all selected as optimal choices. Their violations of Iambic, FeetR, FeetL, and ALIGH HEAD are equally serious.
(35) Stage 2G: error-driven constraint demotion of FeetR
/σσσµµσ/
In tableau (36), when FeetR is demoted by one more rank, candidates (c) and (e) do not survive any more. With fewer violations of FeetL, what wins in the competition is candidate (a). To this step, FeetR has been demoted to the bottom rank, and the last cycle of demotion should be Trochaic.
(36) Stage 2H: error-driven constraint demotion of FeetR
/σσσµµσ/
TrochaicL1 IambicL2 FeetLL2 FeetRL1 ALIGH
HEADIL
•‧
In tableau (37), Trochaic is lowered by one rank, uncrucially ranked with Iambic.
The demotion of Trochaic alleviates the violation of candidate (b), which surfaces as the optimal choice with candidate (a). Obviously, to make candidate (b) the sole winner, Trochaic has to undergo further demotion.
(37) Stage 2I: error-driven constraint demotion of Trochaic
/σσσµµσ/
In tableau (38), Trochaic is demoted by one more rank, uncrucially ranked with FeetL. This time, all the constraints disfavor candidate (b) are almost moved to the right of the tableau, which enables candidate (b) to defeat all the other candidates.
(38) Stage 2J: error-driven constraint demotion of Trochaic
/σσσµµσ/