Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 01.01.1980, Page 19

17
A Note on Local Ordering
linear ordering. The standard theory, on the other hand, does not cate-
gorically proscribe distinct but identical (or nearly identical) rules. It is
true that an analysis that postulated such rules would be vulnerable
to the criticism that it failed to capture a significant generalization, in
that it made the same statement twice. However, the evaluation of
competing analyses in terms of such a criterion is always a relative one;
an analysis that appears to miss a generalization is not thereby incorrect,
but only less favored than an analysis in which (all else being equal)
the generalization is captured. Thus there is nothing in the logic of the
standard theory that forces it to adopt assumption (1). Consequently,
when faced with any case of what appears to be a genuine counter-
example to linear ordering, and in the absence of any well-motivated
alternative explanation (such as an appeal to the principle of the cycle),
the standard theory must postulate that two formally identical, but
distinct mles are involved, ordered at different points in the grammar.
Given the existence of genuine „ordering paradoxes“, such a con-
clusion is perhaps not as counterintuitive as it might first appear. It is
well known that in the history of a given language, the same rule may
arise twice in succession; in most known instances (e.g. velar palataliza-
tion in Chinese, cf. Chen (1973:238-9) and references therein), the first
rule has ceased to be productive long before the second, formally
identical rule enters the grammar. It is not implausible, however, that
ln given cases the first rule might leave an ample enough set of alter-
nations behind to permit its recoverability as a synchronic (phonological
or lexical) rule by the time the second rule enters the grammar. As-
suming, furthermore, that rule addition typically takes place at the end
of tbe grammar, we should expect in such a situation that a potential
^ordering paradox“ will arise in which the old rule (A') must apply
before some other rule (B) which in tum must apply before the new
rule (A"). Within the theory of local ordering, such a situation neces-
sitates an ordering statement incompatible with the principles of linear
ordering. Within the linear ordering theory, on the other hand, this
situation necessitates an analysis in which A' and A" are distinct rules
ordered at different points in the phonology.
It can now be shown that there is a logically possible class of deriva-
tional sequences that is consistent with linear ordering but inconsistent
with local ordering. Let us consider a phonology in which we find three
íslenskt míl II 2