Criteria Segmentrepresentaties criteria feature theorieën: algemeen wetenschappelijk algemeen UG Clements’ criteria voor Feature Geometrieën Beoordeling criteria

Criteria Wetenschappelijke Theorie Karl Popper (Wikepedia): It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory — if we look for confirmations. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions; that is to say, if, unenlightened by the theory in question, we should have expected an event which was incompatible with the theory — an event which would have refuted the theory. Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.

Karl Popper (Wikepedia): A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice. Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it. Testability is falsifiability; but there are degrees of testability: some theories are more testable, more exposed to refutation, than others; they take, as it were, greater risks. Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory; and this means that it can be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. (I now speak in such cases of "corroborating evidence.") Criteria Wetenschappelijke Theorie

Criteria Segmentrepresentaties Karl Popper (Wikepedia): Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers — for example by introducing ad hoc some auxiliary assumption, or by reinterpreting the theory ad hoc in such a way that it escapes refutation. Such a procedure is always possible, but it rescues the theory from refutation only at the price of destroying, or at least lowering, its scientific status. (I later described such a rescuing operation as a "conventionalist twist" or a "conventionalist stratagem."). One can sum up all this by saying that the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability.

Criteria Segmentrepresentaties algemeen wetenschappelijk: restrictief/verbiedend een theorie moet testbaar/ falsificeerbaar/weerlegbaar zijn intern consistent

Criteria Segmentrepresentaties algemeen UG: beknoptheid –generalisaties procesbeschrijvingen –economie representaties op elk terrein? beknoptheid/generalisaties in de fonologie? hersenopslag lijkt vrij onbeperkt localiteit natuurlijkheid

Criteria Feature Geometrieën A phonological feature system must be able to distinguish all vowel and consonant segments to be phonemically contrastive, and (preferably) only those

Criteria Feature Geometrieën A phonological feature system must be able to distinguish all vowel and consonant segments to be phonemically contrastive, and (preferably) only those It must make it possible to refer to natural classes of sounds, and only those, by a single set of feature specifications

Criteria Feature Geometrieën A phonological feature system must be able to distinguish all vowel and consonant segments to be phonemically contrastive, and (preferably) only those It must make it possible to refer to natural classes of sounds, and only those, by a single set of feature specifications It must account for natural groupings of features, i.e. it must distinguish features that tend to function together in phonological rules from those that do not

Criteria Feature Geometrieën A phonological feature system must be able to distinguish all vowel and consonant segments to be phonemically contrastive, and (preferably) only those It must make it possible to refer to natural classes of sounds, and only those, by a single set of feature specifications It must account for natural groupings of features, i.e. it must distinguish features that tend to function together in phonological rules from those that do not Within the context of a theory of markedness, it must distinguish between more- and less-favored vowel and consonant inventories

Criteria Feature Geometrieën A phonological feature system must be able to distinguish all vowel and consonant segments to be phonemically contrastive, and (preferably) only those It must make it possible to refer to natural classes of sounds, and only those, by a single set of feature specifications It must account for natural groupings of features, i.e. it must distinguish features that tend to function together in phonological rules from those that do not Within the context of a theory of markedness, it must distinguish between more- and less-favored vowel and consonant inventories It must make use of non-abstract features, that is, features that have a core of invariant cross- linguistic acoustic and articulatory properties

Model Een model van de werkelijkheid is een abstractie/karikatuur van de werkelijkheid Alle irrelevante informatie wordt idealiter verwijderd vraag: in hoeverre kunnen we deze abstractie gelijkstellen aan de werkelijkheid? Laat iedere spreker van de taal hetzelfde weg?

Discussie met dank aan Jenne Klimp In hoeverre mag een formeel systeem een abstractie van de werkelijkheid zijn? Is het wel zo dat formele/symbolische representaties identiek zijn aan mentale representaties? Hoe eenduidig zijn de klanken in natuurlijke klassen ingedeeld als we naar echte fonologische processen kijken? Kunnen/moeten features articulatorisch, akoestisch en/of perceptief gedefinieerd worden? Hoe verhoudt zich de continue stroom geluid (fonetiek) zich tot de abstracte, mentale, discrete symbolen (fonologie)? Kunnen de abstracte, mentale entiteiten via processen gerealiseerd worden als continu geluid? (veel processen gradueel)

Onderwerpen Articulatory Phonology – Gestures (Browman & Goldstein) (Zsiga) Akoestische segmentrepresentaties (Wilbert Heeringa) Phonetically-driven Phonology (Hayes) Functionalisme (Kirchner) (Stevens) (Boersma) Sign Language (Brentari) (Coulter) (vdHulst) Particle Phonology (Schane) Natural Phonology (Stampe) (Bybee/Hooper) Charm & Government Phonology (Kaye) Autosegmental Phonology (Goldsmith) Feature Geometries (Clements) (Kenstowicz) Dependency Phonology (Ewen & Anderson) Underspecification Theory (Steriade) (Kiparsky) (Archangeli) Laboratory Phonology (Ohala) (Pierrehumbert) (Beckman) (Flemming) (Boersma) (Stevens) Self-Organisation in Vowel Systems (Bart de Boer)

Referaat Sjabloon Wat houdt de bestudeerde theorie in het kort in? Wat zijn de geleverde argumenten voor deze representatievorm van klanksegmenten? (In hoeverre verschilt de bestudeerde theorie van de standaardtheorie?) Geef minstens één voorbeeld van de behandeling van een fonologisch proces in deze theorie. In hoeverre voldoet de theorie aan de criteria voor klankrepresentaties van Clements? (In hoeverre voldoet de theorie aan wetenschapsfilosofische en taalkundige criteria voor modellen?”) (Bediscussieer de relevantie van deze criteria.) Wat is je oordeel over deze theorie?