An early version of these entities was posited to account for "conspiracies" in Yawelmani Yokuts in a paper discussing functional unity by Charles Kisseberth. "Templatic" ones of these can be active on a reduplicant to derive its size. These can be "categorical" or "gradient" - an example of the latter are those which, along with Parse, determine whether a language has secondary stress, depending on their relative ranking. Examples of these include Max, Dep, and Ident, which prevent deletion, epenthesis, and changing a sound's feature. In some languages, the "NoCoda" one is undominated, making all syllables open. In a theory developed by Prince and Smolensky, a pointing hand is assigned to the winning candidate, with the "least bad violation" of these entities. Used by Optimality Theory, FTP, name these linguistic rules which restrict out
An early version of these entities was posited to account for "conspiracies" in Yawelmani Yokuts in a paper discussing functional unity by Charles Kisseberth. "Templatic" ones of these can be active on a reduplicant to derive its size. These can be "categorical" or "gradient" - an example of the latter are those which, along with Parse, determine whether a language has secondary stress, depending on their relative ranking. Examples of these include Max, Dep, and Ident, which prevent deletion, epenthesis, and changing a sound's feature. In some languages, the "NoCoda" one is undominated, making all syllables open. In a theory developed by Prince and Smolensky, a pointing hand is assigned to the winning candidate, with the "least bad violation" of these entities. Used by Optimality Theory, FTP, name these linguistic rules which restrict outputs but not inputs.
An early version of these entities was posited to account for "conspiracies" in Yawelmani Yokuts in a paper discussing functional unity by Charles Kisseberth.
linguistic (or {phonological}) {constraints}