Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Variation in Finnish Vowel Harmony: An OT Account

  • Published:
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents data on vowel harmony with disharmonic roots in Finnish which show that when the last harmonic vowel in a disharmonic root is back, in almost all cases the only possible harmonic suffix vowel is back, but when the last harmonic vowel is front, there is usually variation in suffix vowel choice that seems to be influenced by several factors, including sonority and stress. These data, which cannot easily be accounted for in rule-based theories, can be accounted for in Optimality Theory. A highly ranked alignment constraint accounts for harmony with native roots and loans in which the last harmonic vowel is back. Unranked constraints, which tie suffix vowel choice to stress and sonority, as well as alignment requirements, determine suffix vowel quality for the remainder of forms. Variation is seen to be a function of the relative frequency with which a particular suffix vowel is designated as optimal by the different possible rankings of the unranked constraints.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, Lloyd: 1980, ‘Using Asymmetrical and Gradient Data in the Study of Vowel Harmony’, in Robert M. Vago (ed.), 1980, pp. 271–340.

  • Anttila, Arto: 1997, ‘Deriving Variation from Grammar’, in Frans Hinskens, Roeland van Hout and Leo Wetzels (eds.), Variation, Change and Phonological Theory, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 35–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, Jill: 1997, ‘Positional Faithfulness, Positional Neutralization, and Shona Vowel Harmony’, Phonology 14(1), 1–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, Jill: 1998, Positional Faithfulness, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts.

  • Beckman, Jill, Laura Walsh Dickey, and Suzanne Urbanczyk (eds.): 1995, UMOP 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, GLSA, Amherst, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bladon, R. A. W. and Björn Lindblom: 1981, ‘Modeling the Judgment of Vowel Quality Differences’, JASA 69, 1414–1422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Lyle: 1980, ‘The Psychological and Sociological Reality of Finnish Vowel Harmony’, in R. Vago (ed.): 1980, pp. 245–269.

  • Campbell, Lyle: 1981, ‘Generative Phonology vs. Finnish Phonology: Retrospect and Prospect’, in D. L. Goyvaerts (ed.): 1981, pp. 147–182.

  • Ellison, T. Mark: 1995, ‘Phonological Derivation in Optimality Theory’, unpublished manuscript, University of Edinburgh.

  • Fujimura, Osamu (ed.): 1973, Three Dimensions of Linguistic Theory, TEC Corp., Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, John: 1985, ‘Vowel Harmony in Khalkha Mongolian, Yaka, Finnish, and Hungarian’, Phonology Yearbook 2, 253–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goyvaerts, D. L. (ed.): 1981, Phonology in the 1980s, Story-Scientia, Ghent.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halle, Morris and Jean-Roger Vergnaud: 1981, ‘Harmony Processes’, in W. Klein and W. Levelt (eds.), Crossing the Boundaries in Linguistics, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harms, Robert: 1982, ‘What Helmholtz Knew about Neutral Vowels’, Texas Linguistic Forum 19, 67–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, Kyril: 1972, Loan-words and Phonological Systems, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas.

  • Ikola, Osmo 1971, Nykysuomen käsikirja (A Handbook of Contemporary Finnish), second edition, Weilin and Göös, Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikola, Osmo (ed.) 1986, Nykysuomen käsikirja (A Handbook of Contemporary Finnish) second, revised edition, Weilin and Göös, Espoo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Itô, Junko and Armin Mester: 1995, ‘Core and Periphery Structure of the Lexicon and Constraints on Reranking’, in Beckman et al. (eds.): 1995, pp. 181–209.

  • Itô, Junko, Armin Mester, and Jaye Padgett: 1995, ‘Licensing and Underspecification in Optimality Theory’, Linguistic Inquiry 26, 571–613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiparsky, Paul: 1973, ‘Phonological Representations’, in O. Fujimura (ed.), pp. 3–136.

  • Kiparsky, Paul: 1981, ‘Vowel Harmony’, unpublished manuscript, MIT.

  • Kiparsky, Paul: 1993, ‘Variable Rules’, paper presented at The First Rutgers Optimality Workshop (ROW#1), October, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

  • Kirchner, R.: 1993, ‘Turkish Vowel Disharmony in Optimality Theory’, paper presented at The First Rutgers Optimality Workshop (ROW#1), October, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

  • Kirchner, Robert: 1997, ‘Contrastiveness and Faithfulness’, Phonology 14(1), 83–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontra, Miklós and Catherine O. Ringen: 1986, ‘Vowel Harmony: The Evidence from Loanwords’, Ural-Altaic Yearbook, 1–14.

  • Kontra, Miklós and Catherine O. Ringen: 1987, ‘Stress and Harmony in Hungarian Loadwords’, in Károly Rédei (ed.), Studien zur Phonologie und Morphonologie der uralischen Sprachen, Verband der Wissenschafliche Gesellschafte Österreichs, Vienna, pp. 81–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontra, Miklós, Catherine O. Ringen, and Joseph P. Stemberger: 1991, ‘The Effect of Context on Suffix Yowel Choice in Hungarian Vowel Harmony’, in Werner Bahner, Joachim Schildt and Dieter Viehweger (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress of Linguists, vol. 1, Akademie-verlag, Berlin, pp. 450–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levomäki, Mauri: 1972, ‘Vierasperäisten sanojen suffiksaali vokaalisointu’, (Suffixal vowel harmony in words of foreign origin), Virittäjä 76, 254–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John and Alan Prince: 1993a, Prosodic Morphology I: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction, unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts and Rutgers University.

  • McCarthy, John and Alan Prince: 1993b, ‘Generalized Alignment‘, in Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology, pp. 79–154.

  • McCarthy, John and Alan Prince: 1995, ‘Faithfulness and Reduplicative Identity’, in Beckman et al., 1995, pp. 249–384.

  • Penttilä, Aarni: 1963, Suomen kielioppi (Finnish grammar), second, revised edition, WSOY, Porvoo, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince, Alan and Paul Smolensky: 1993, Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar, Technical Report #2 of the Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringen, Catherine O.: 1988a, ‘Transparency in Hungarian Vowel Harmony’, Phonology 5, 327–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringen, Catherine O.: 1988b, Vowel Harmony: Theoretical Implications, Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1975. Published by Garland, New York, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringen, Catherine O. and Miklós Kontra: 1989, ‘Hungarian Neutral Vowels’, Lingua 78, 181–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringen, Catherine O. and Robert M. Vago: 1995, ‘A Constraint Based Analysis of Hungarian Vowel Harmony’, in István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian, vol. 5.

  • Ringen, Catherine O. and Robert M. Vago: 1998, ‘Hungarian Vowel Harmony in Optimality Theory’, Phonology 15(3).

  • Saarimaa, E. A.: 1971, Kielenopas (Language guide), eighth ed. WSOY, Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadeniemi, Matti: 1946, ‘Marttyyreja vai marttyyrejä? (Marttyyreja or marttyyrejä?) Virittäjä 50, 79–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadeniemi, Matti: 1949, Metriikkamme perusteet (Fundamentals of Finnish metrics), Otava, Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth: 1994, ‘Optimality Theory and Featural Phenomena’, lecture notes, Linguistics 730, University of Massachusetts, Amberst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolensky, Paul: 1993, ‘Harmony, Markedness, and Phonological Activity’, paper presented at The First Rutgers Optimality Workshop (ROW#1), October, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey (ROA 87-0000, ROA 37-000).

  • Steriade, Donca: 1987, ‘Redundant Values’, in Anna Bosch, Barbara Need, and Eric Schiller (eds.), CLS 23, Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago, pp. 339–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ultan, Russell: 1973, ‘Some Reflections on Vowel Harmony’, Working Papers on Language Universals 12, 37–67.

  • Vago, Robert M. (ed.): 1980, Issues in Vowel Harmony, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vago Robert M.: 1988, ‘Vowel Harmony in Finnish Word Games’, in Harry van der Hulst and Norval Smith (eds.), Features, Segmental Structure and Harmony Processes, Part II, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 185–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Välimaa-Blum, Ritta: 1987, ‘Finnish Vowel Harmony as a Prescriptive and Descriptive Rule: An Autosegmental Account’, in A. Miller and Joyce Powers (eds.), 4th ESCOL 1987, The Ohio State University, Columbus, pp. 511–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoll, Cheryl: 1996, Parsing Below the Segment in a Constraint Based Framework, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, U.C. Berkeley.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Linguistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, 52242

    Catherine O. Ringen

  2. Department of Linguistics, University of Helsinki, PL 4 Helsingin Vliopisto, FIN-00014, Finland

    Orvokki Heinämäki

Authors
  1. Catherine O. Ringen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Orvokki Heinämäki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ringen, C.O., Heinämäki, O. Variation in Finnish Vowel Harmony: An OT Account. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17, 303–337 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006158818498

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006158818498

Keywords

Search

Navigation