Robin Baugus

Homework #3

Javanese
Description:
This write up will seek to analyze the distribution of consonants and word-initial nasals in
Javanese in relation to the noun and denominal forms. In particular it will analyze whether the
alternations present are predictable or random.

Morphological Analysis:
The data presented lists nouns in the nominative and denominal form. A morphological
analysis indicates that the denominative form is marked by the nasal prefixes [m], [n], [] (for
the purposes of this analysis, recognized as a postalveolar nasal), and [] and the morpheme
marking the nominative is null (). Two alternations are of interest in this analysis: the
alternations of the nasal prefixes marking the demonimal form as exhibited in some of the data
provided:
[n+do] to tell a story

[+uo]

to peck

[m+ol]

[+ui]

to lock

to hoe

and those alternations between consonants exhibited by some of the noun stems:
[pol]~[ ol]

hoe

[uo]~[uo]

bill

[tmb]~[mb]

dike

[kui]~[ui]

lock

[ikt]~[ikt] brush
Namely, these alternations are between the segments: [p], [t], [k], [], and [] which alter
will null ().
The data does provide nouns whose stems do not undergo any alternation: [bubor]
porridge, [do] story, [r] drill, [gunte] scissors, [lrs] harmony, [ri] even,

[io] green, [r] pickle, and [omb] wave. It is of interest to note that all of these nonalternating forms begin with a voiced obstruent.
The various alternations present indicate the presence of phonological rule or rules being
followed. Determining whether these are allophonic or neutralizing mandates that we determine
whether the identified segments are contrastive.

Contrast:
We will first deal with the contrastiveness of the denominal prefixes. The data does not
present any minimal pairs for these nasals, however near-minimal pairs can help allude to the
contrastiveness of the segments in question. Forms such as [mol], [nmb], and [r]
highlight the contrastive nature of [m], [n], and [] which can be seen all in the same phonetic
environment: word-initially before the low back vowel []. The pair [uo] vs. [ui] exhibit
both [] and [] in contrastive distribution word-initially before the high back vowel [u]. While
no minimal pairs exist which clearly illustrate a contrastive relationship between [], [m], and
[n], we might assume that such a relationship exists anyway.
Because these segments both participate in an alternation and are otherwise contrastive,
we can determine that their realization is mandated by a neutralization rule. This will be
explored further a little later in this analysis.
Now let us focus on the alternations of consonants in the noun stem. Each of the
segments listed ([p], [t], [k], [], and []) all alternate with null () rather than with each other or
any other consonants which makes contrastiveness difficult to pinpoint. This indicates that an
allophonic rule is at work determining their presence or absence. This rule must be one of
consonantal insertion or deletion.

Rules:
We have determined that two rules (one allophonic and one neutralizing) are at work in
this data set. An examination of the phonetic environments for the denominational prefixes and
the noun stems leads to some interesting observations.
We will first determine the rule which supplies the insertion or deletion of the voiceless
obstruents mentioned. Creating a rule of insertion would be difficult as we are faced with the
task of establishing methods of predicting the (seemingly) spontaneous addition of five
consonants. Furthermore, because all five of the alternating segments alternate with the same
null segment, it is far more likely that a deletion rule is at work. That rule would be realized as:

Deletion: [-voice -syllabic] [] / #[+nasal]___

Voiceless consonants are deleted when following a word-initial nasal.

The data only shows deletion of voiceless obstruents, however I expanded my rule to
include all voiceless consonants indicating that they could possibly also undergo this deletion.
This is not contradicted by the data and seems to be a reasonable assumption. It is crucial that
the rule include the nasal as word-initial, otherwise the rule is falsified in the data by such forms
as [gunte] or [kui].
The next rule to determine is the realization of the denominational prefix. An
examination of the phonetic environments of these suffixes presented indicates a few interesting
things: the first is that prefixes [m], [n], and [] occur in very few environments while prefix []
seems to occur in a wide variety of environments. Furthermore, when we realize that the
deletion rule postulated above is considered, these environments become more specific.

The phonetically realized forms exhibited in the data show the prefix [m] only in a wordinitial environment followed by the consonant [b] ([mbubor]) and vowel [] ([mol]).
However, taking into account the deletion rule the underlying environment of [m] is word-initial
followed by consonants [b] and [p] (/mbubor/ and /mpol/). The distribution for [n] is similarly
affected. Without considering the deletion rule we find [n] word-initially followed by consonant
[d] and vowel [] ([ndo] and [nmb]), but when taking the rule into account the
environments become word-initially followed by [d] and [t] (/ndo/ and /ntmb/). []
without the deletion rule is restricted to word-initially followed by [] ([r]), [u] ([uo]),
and [i] ([ikt]) and accounting for the deletion rule, word-initially followed by [] (/r/),
[t] (/tuo/), and [] (/ikt/). The [] continues to be realized in a variety of environments in
both non-alternating ([gunte], [lrs], [ri], [io], [r], and [omb]) and alternating
([ui] vs. /kui/) forms.
In non-alternating forms we see that many of the nasal denominal suffixes agree in place
with their following consonant. Furthermore, in those noun stems which do alternate, by taking
into account the deletion rule postulated, we see that the denominal suffixes agree with the place
of the consonant otherwise found in the underlying representation of the noun stem. This is true
of three of the four denominal suffixes [m], [n], and []. This seems to suggest and interaction
between the addition of the denominal suffix (that is to say, which of the four possible suffix
allomorphs is applied) and the noun stem. While [] does agree with the position of both its
alternating and non-alternating following obstruents, it also proceeds a variety of other
consonants ([l], [r]) and vowels ([i], [u], [o], and []) This everywhere else distribution of []
indicates its position as the underlying phoneme realized as the four allophones [m], [n], [], and
[].

The rule for the neutralization of [] as a denominal suffix in Javanese is as follows:

Nasal assimilation: [+nasal, +high, -front] [placei]/___[-sonorant, placei]

Word initial velar nasals assimilate to the place of the following obstruent.

This rule is preferable to others for a variety of reasons: one is that any other rules would
become unnecessarily complex in an attempt to account for the variety of phonetic environments
in which [] is found. This rule assumes that all nasals are, in their underlying form, velar. Also,
the rule provides assimilation as a logical reasoning behind the neutralization.
I did not specify that the velar nasal must be word-initial as all nasals presented in the
given data adhere to this place assimilation rule and as such the data provides good evidence that
this rule is consistent throughout the language, not just with the additional of the denominal
prefix.

Rule Ordering:
What remains is to determine in which order these rules are applied allowing for a correct
production of all of the forms given in the data. This is only achieved when the nasal
assimilation rule is observed followed by the consonant deletion rule. A reversal of these rules
would produce incorrect forms as seen below with to hoe:
UR

/+pol/

Deletion

ol

Assimilation

----

PR

*[ol]

A correct derivation of this form is given later in this analysis.

Here we can see that the reverse ordering of the rules prevents the velar nasal from any
assimilation in those stems which contain initial voiceless consonants. Only those words in
which the assimilation rule does not apply (glosses to make green, to pickle, to wave, to
harmonize, to even up,) or in which the initial velar nasal would apply vacuously (glosses to
make scissors, to lock) would produce correct phonetic realizations.
These rules alter the underlying representations of the forms listed in the given data set.
Below is a list of all of the glosses in their underlying forms in accordance to the given rules:
Noun

Denominal

/bubor/

porridge

/+bubor/

to make porridge

/do/

story

/+do/

to tell a story

/r/

drill

/+r/

to drill

/ute/

scissors

/+ute/

to make scissors

/pol/

hoe

/+pol/

to hoe

/tb/

dike

/+tb/

to dike

/uo/

bill

/+uo/

to peck

/kui/

lock

/+kui/

to lock

/ikt/

brush

/+ikt/

to brush

/lrs/

harmony

/+lrs/

to harmonize

/ri/

even

/+ri/

to even up

/io/

green

/+io/

to make green

/r/

pickle

/+r/

to pickle

/ob/

wave

/+ob/

to wave

Derivations:
The following derivations illustrate nasal assimilation and consonant deletion in
Javanese:
UR

/+pol/

/kui/

/+kui/

/+bubor/

/+lrs/

Assimilation

mpol

kui

ui

mbubor

----

Deletion

mol

----

ui

----

----

PR

[mol]

[kui]

[ui]

[mbubor]

[lrs]

In our first derivation (to hoe) both rules are applied. The assimilation rule requires the
velar [] to be realized as the bilabial [m] in the presence of the following [p]. Because it is
voiceless, the [p] is then dropped with the application of the deletion rule which removes all
voiceless obstruents following word-initial nasals. The second derivation (lock) undergoes one
change. While there is no initial nasal to satisfy the requirements of the assimilation rule or the
deletion rule, there is a nasal present in the middle of the noun stem which would assimilate to
the place of its following obstruent, changing [] to []. In the derivation for to lock however,
both rules can be applied. Our assimilation rule applies to our first nasal in a vacuous situation,
as both the nasal [] and consonant [k] are articulated in the same place. The second nasal
assimilates from [] to [] in accordance to its following obstruent. The deletion rule then
removes the [k] in the presence of the word-initial [] nasal. The fourth derivation (to make
porridge) sees the application of the assimilation rule (wherein [] becomes [m] in the presence
of the bilabial [b]) but not the deletion rule as the consonant [b] is voiced. Finally, the fifth
derivation (to harmonize) experiences no alternations as a result of the postulated rules. The
initial nasal [] is not followed by an obstruent and the nasal-following consonant [l] is voiced
and so is not deleted.

These rules exist and operate in a counter-bleeding interaction. This is clearly illustrated
in derivations of the gloss to hoe. When the rules are reversed (as in the rule-ordering section
of this analysis), deletion of the voiceless consonant prevents the assimilation of the nasal which,
when correctly ordered (as in the first derivation of this section), would otherwise occur.