Similarity Avoidance and the OCP
By Stefan A. Frisch, Janet B. Pierrehumbert, Michael Broe. 2004
421 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4bb081837138048c734ef8a309ab5ccce8e7fa0a
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Artificial Intelligence
- Shigeto Kawahara
- Andries W. Coetzee
- Bruce Hayes
- Elliott Moreton
- Z. Londe
- M. Kenstowicz
- Rachel Walker
- Juliette Blevins
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Bruce Hayes
- Ulrike Hahn
- Nivedita Mani
- Andries W. Coetzee
- Todd M. Bailey
- Kim Plunkett
- Andrew Garrett
- Elliott Moreton
In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Bruce Hayes
- Shigeto Kawahara
- Andries W. Coetzee
- Eric Bakovic
- Elliott Moreton
- Marie-Hélène Côté
- Z. Londe
- Rachel Walker
Citations in the corpus
- A Typology of Consonant Agreement as Correspondence (2004, methodology): “In this study, we use the similarity scales resulting from the method of computation proposed in Frisch et al. 2004—which function as our basis for relative similarity—together with our survey of attested LDCA patterns as a guide to this threshold.”
- Analytic bias and phonological typology* (2008, background): “It has been proposed that such gradient constraints are acquired when natural classes co-occur more or less often than would be expected if they were independent (Frisch et al. 2004: 215–216).”
- Stochastic phonological knowledge: the case of Hungarian vowel harmony (2006, background): “An alternative would be to unify LOCAL[B] and DISTAL[B] into a single, gradiently violated constraint, as Frisch et al. (2004) do for the similaritybased phonotactics of Arabic roots.”
- Antigemination, assimilation and the determination of identity (2005, background): “The view I adopt here, in line with the recent growing literature on the calculation of segmental similarity (Berkley 2000, Côté 2004, Frisch et al. 2004, inter alia), is that what it means for two segments to be ‘basically the same type’ (Langacker 1968: 169) is ‘an embarrassment to current…”
- Blocking Effects in Agreement by Correspondence (2007, neutral): “…language-specific ‘‘weighting’’ of manner versus voicing distinctions is found in similarity-sensitive OCP[Place] effects (Coetzee and Pater 2006; cf. Frisch, Pierrehumbert, and Broe 2004). b. t+i . . . zi . . . +i a. t+i . . . i . . . +i /t+ . . . z . . . s/ ID[ ant]- IO c. t+i . . . zi . . .…”
- Phonetic bias in sound change (2011, background): “A traditional competing explanation appeals to motor planning errors (Grammont 1895, Carnoy 1918, Grammont 1939, Frisch 2004, Frisch et al. 2004, Alderete and Frisch 2007).”
- Phoneme similarity and confusability (2005, background): “Frisch has related the natural class metric to behavioral data including English speech errors, phonotactic constraints in Arabic, and acceptability judgments of Arabic pseudo-words (Frisch, 1996; Frisch & Zawaydeh, 2001; Frisch, Pierrehumbert, & Broe, 2004 ).”
- Phonological features and phonotactic constraints in speech production (2004, background): “…there is a gradient constraint on consonants; the more perceptually similar the two initial consonants are, the lower the frequency (e.g., roots with highly perceptually similar consonants like /t/ and /s/ are less frequent than roots with consonants like /t/ and /n/; Frisch et al., 2004).”
- Grammaticality and Ungrammaticality in Phonology (2008, background): “They conjugated these non-word roots as verbs, and presented them to Arabic speakers, with the task to rate each non-word for its word-likeness.”
- A theoretical synopsis of Evolutionary Phonology (2006, background): “At the same time, there is mounting psycholinguistic evidence that some phonological generalizations are productive, while others are not (e.g. Sanders 2003, Blevins 2004b), and that some are gradient, while others are categorical (e.g. Frisch et al. 2004).”
- Consonant Cooccurrence Restrictions in Yamato Japanese (2006, background): “The cooccurrence restrictions found in Yamato Japanese are much weaker than what is found in Arabic (see Frisch et al. 2004:168; their O/E values for pairs from the same identity class are usually less than 0.1).”
- Syntagmatic distinctness in consonant deletion (2004, methodology): “Phonology 21 (2004) 1–41. f 2004 Cambridge University Press DOI: 10.1017/S0952675704000120 Printed in the United Kingdom 1 Frisch et al. (2004) and, from a different perspective, MacEachern (1997).”
- Phonological specificity of vowels and consonants in early lexical representations (2007, background): “On the other hand, Frisch, Pierrehumbert, and Broe (2004) have argued that an increase in the number of contrastive features shared by the vowels in a language may lead to greater perceived similarity between the vowels.”
- Half rhymes in Japanese rap lyrics and knowledge of similarity (2007, methodology): “specific to the Japanese rap rhyme patterns, it parallels the claim by Frisch (1996), Frisch et al. (2004), and Stemberger (1991, 78-79) that similarity is inherently a gradient notion.”
- Weighted constraints and gradient restrictions on place co-occurrence in Muna and Arabic (2008, neutral): “Frisch et al. (2004) propose an alternative account of the Arabic place restriction, based on a similarity metric that calculates the similarity of a pair of homorganic segments (x, y) as in (2).”