Cover not available
Part of
Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 15: Papers from the 2015 Leiden Conference
Edited by Harry van der Hulst and Anikó Lipták
[Approaches to Hungarian 15] 2017
► pp. 135–156

Chapter 5
Co-patterns, subpatterns and conflicting generalizations in Hungarian vowel harmony

In this paper we examine coexisting patterns of variation in Hungarian front/back harmony conditioned by prosodic structure (the Polysyllabic Split), locality (the Count Effect), morphological structure/uniformity (Harmonic Uniformity) and the paradigmatic property of whether a suffix is harmonically alternating or harmonically invariant (Sequential Bias). We show that these patterns of harmony may be in conflict and some prevail over the others in environments of conflict. We argue for an approach that employs wide-scope generalisations holding over all the relevant forms where the conflict is resolved by specificity: when in conflict, the more specific ones win.
Keywords: Hungarian front/back harmony, variation, neutral vowels, count effect, Elsewhere Condition
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background: Overview of variation in HVH
  • 3.The count effects: CE & PS
  • 4.Harmonic Uniformity
  • 5.Sequential Bias
  • 6.The structure of coexisting patterns in HVH
  • 7.Conclusion: Generalisations, co-patterns, subpatterns
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 August 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.15.05reb
References (41)
References
Albright, Adam. 2002. The identification of bases in morphological paradigms. Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles PhD. dissertation.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana & Douglas Pulleyblank. 2002. Kinande vowel harmony: domains, grounded conditions and one-sided alignment. Phonology 19. 139–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bat-El, Outi. 2005. Competing principles of in paradigm uniformity: Evidence from the Hebrew imperative paradigm. In Laura J. Downing, T. Alan Hall & Renate Raffelsiefen (eds.), Paradigms in phonological theory, 44–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benua, Laura. 1995. Identity effects in morphological truncation. In Jill Beckman, Laura Walsh Dickey & Suzanne Urbanczyk (eds.), University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, 77–136. Amherst, GLSA.Google Scholar
Blaho, Sylvia & Dániel Szeredi. 2013. Hungarian neutral vowels: a microcomparison. Nordlyd 40.1. 20–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borowsky, Toni. 1986. Topics in the lexical phonology of English. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Amherst PhD. dissertation.Google Scholar
Forró, Orsolya. 2013. Ingadozás a magyar elölségi harmóniában. Szempontok a variabilitás szinkróniájának és diakróniájának feltárásához és értelmezéséhez [Variation in palatal harmony in Hungarian. Approaches to the interpretation of synchronic and diachronic variability]. Piliscsaba: Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem PhD. dissertation.Google Scholar
Halácsy, Péter, András Kornai, László Németh, András Rung, István Szakadát, & Viktor Trón. 2004. Creating open language resources for Hungarian. In Maria Teresa Lino, Maria Francisca Xavier, Fátima Ferreira, Rute Costa & Raquel Silva (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2004, May 26–28, 2004, Lisbon, Portugal, 1201–1204. Paris: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce & Zsuzsa Cziráky Londe. 2006. Stochastic phonological knowledge: the case of Hungarian vowel harmony. Phonology 23. 59–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce, Kie Zuraw, Péter Siptár, & Zsuzsa Londe. 2009. Natural and unnatural constraints in Hungarian vowel harmony. Language 85. 822–863. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulst, Harry van der. 2015. Phonological ambiguity. Theoretical Linguistics 41.1–2. 79–87. Google Scholar
Itô, Junko & Armin. Mester. 1995. Japanese phonology. In John Goldsmith (ed.) The Handbook of phonological theory. Oxford: Blackwell. 817–847.Google Scholar
Kálmán, László & Forró Orsolya. 2014. „Lökött” korlátok nyomában. Rejtélyes mássalhangzó-magánhangzó interakciók a magyar elölségi harmóniában. [In search of unnatural constraints: mysterious consonant-vowel interactions in Hungarian backness harmony]. In É. Kiss Katalin & Hegedűs Attila (eds.), Nyelvelmélet és diakrónia 2. [Linguistic theory and language history 2.], 109–129. Piliscsaba: PPKE BTK.Google Scholar
Kálmán, László, Péter Rebrus & Miklós Törkenczy. 2012. Possible and impossible variation. In Ferenc Kiefer, Mária Ladányi & Péter Siptár (eds.), Current issues in morphological theory. (Ir)regularity, analogy and frequency. Papers from the 14th International Morphology Meeting, Budapest, 13–16 May 2010, 23–49. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1996. Base-identity and uniform exponence: alternatives to cyclicity. In Jacques Durand & Bertrand Laks (eds.), Current trends in phonology: Models and methods, 363–393. European Studies Research Institute, University of Salford Publications.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1973. ‘Elsewhere’ in phonology. In Stephen Anderson & Paul Kiparsky (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, 93–106. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul & Karl Pajusalu. 2003 Towards a typology of disharmony. The Linguistic Review 20. 217–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krämer, Martin. 2003. Vowel harmony and correspondence theory. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linzen, Tal, Sofya Kasyanenko & Maria Gouskova. 2013. Lexical and phonological variation in Russian prepositions. Phonology 30. 453–515. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevins, Andrew. 2010. Locality in vowel harmony. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pater, Joe. 2007. The locus of exceptionality: morpheme-specific phonology as constraint indexation. In Leah Bateman, Michael O’Keefe, Ehren Reilly & Adam Werle (eds.), Papers in Optimality Theory III., 259–296. Amherst: GLSA.Google Scholar
Ringen, Catherine & Miklós Kontra. 1989. Hungarian neutral vowels. Lingua 78. 181–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ringen, Catherine & Orvokki Heinämäki. 1999. Variation in Finnish vowel harmony: an OT account. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17. 303–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rebrus, Péter. 2000. Morfofonológiai jelenségek. [Morphophonology] In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3. Morfológia. [A structural grammar of Hungarian 3. Morphology.], 763–947. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Rebrus, Péter & Péter Szigetvári. 2013. Antiharmony, transparency, truncation. Poster presented at the 21st Manchester Phonology Meeting, 25 May 2013. [URL]
Rebrus, Péter, Péter Szigetvári & Miklós Törkenczy. 2012. Dark secrets of Hungarian vowel harmony. In Eugeniusz Cyran, Henryk Kardela & Bogdan Szymanek (eds.), Sound, Structure and Sense: Studies in memory of Edmund Gussmann, 491–508. Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.Google Scholar
Rebrus, Péter & Trón Viktor. 2002. A fonotaktikai általánosításokról: Kísérlet a magyar mássalhangzó-kapcsolatok nem-reprezentációs leírására [On phonotactics generalizations: a non-representational account of Hungarian consonant clusters]. In Maleczki Márta (ed.) A mai magyar nyelv leírásának újabb módszerei V. [New methods in the description of Hungarian V], 17–63. Szeged: Szegedi Tudományegyetem.Google Scholar
Rebrus, Péter & Miklós Törkenczy. 2005. Uniformity and contrast in the Hungarian verbal paradigm. In Laura J. Downing, T. Alan Hall & Renate Raffelsiefen (eds.), Paradigms in phonological theory, 262–295. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
. 2015a. Monotonicity and the typology of front/back harmony. Theoretical Linguistics 41.1–2. 1–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015b. The monotonic behaviour of language patterns. Theoretical Linguistics 41.3–4. 241–268.Google Scholar
. 2015c. An ‘unnatural’ pattern of variation in vowel harmony: a frequency-based account. Poster presented at 2015 Annual Meeting on Phonology (AMP 2015), University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada 9–11 October ([URL]).
. 2016. Monotonicity and the limits of disharmony. In Adam Albright & Michelle A. Fullwood (eds.), Proceedings of the 2014 meeting on phonology. 1–12. Washington, DC: Linguistic Society of America,Google Scholar
Siptár, Péter & Miklós Törkenczy. 2000. The phonology of Hungarian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Törkenczy, Miklós. 2006. The phonotactics of Hungarian verbs. In László Varga (ed.), The Even Yearbook 7: ELTE SEAS Working Papers in Linguistics. Budapest: ELTE.Google Scholar
. 2011. Hungarian vowel harmony. In Marc van Oostendorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth V. Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, 2963–2990. Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Törkenczy, Miklós, Péter Rebrus & Péter Szigetvári. 2013. Harmony that cannot be represented. In Johan Brandtler, Valéria Molnár & Christer Platzack (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 13: Papers from the 2011 Lund Conference Volume 13, 229–252. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trón, Viktor & Péter Rebrus. 2001. Morphophonology and the hierarchical lexicon. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 48/1–3. 101–136.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1999. Lexical conservatism in French adjectival liaison. In Jean-Marc Authier, Barbara E. Bullock & Lisa A. Reed (eds.), Formal perspectives on Romance linguistics: selected papers from the 28th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL XXVIII), University Park, 16–19 April 199, 243–270. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Paradigm uniformity and the phonetics-phonology boundary. In Michael Broe & Janet Pierrehumbert (eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology 5., 313–334. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vago, Robert. 1980. The sound pattern of Hungarian. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Zuraw, Kie. 2015. Polarized exceptions: extreme bi-modal distributions of exceptional words. Talk delivered at 12th Old World Conference in Phonology (OCP12), Barcelona 27–30 January.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Harry van der Hulst & Nancy A. Ritter
2024. The Oxford Handbook of Vowel Harmony, DOI logo
Rebrus, Péter, Péter Szigetvári & Miklós Törkenczy
2023. Morphological Restrictions on Vowel Harmony. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Morphology, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Rebrus, Péter & Miklós Törkenczy
2021. Harmonic Uniformity and Hungarian front/back harmony. Acta Linguistica Academica 68:1-2 ► pp. 175 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.