USC Graduate Phonology ✳︎ Fall 2019 ✳︎ Smith
HW write-up tips
You are encouraged to work in groups to work out your analysis, but it is by no means required. After working out your analysis write up a coherent presentation of your account. The write-up must be your own — not a group effort. Your write-up must contain enough written explanation to constitute a complete argument.
Begin by stating the relevant generalizations apparent in the data with some supporting evidence (e.g. “the segments [e] and [ɛ] are in a contrastive distribution, as indicated by the minimal pairs: …,” or “voiceless unaspirated and aspirated stops are in complementary distribution; the complementary environments in which they occur are as follows…”). Try to find patterns in the data. Wherever possible, rather than listing all the contexts in which a sound occurs, see if you can find something in common about those contexts (e.g. instead of “stops become voiced before {m, n, ŋ},” say “stops become voiced before nasals”). A well-written generalization is clera enough the someone could use it to generate fictional examples.
Where applicable, explain an alternation in terms of some general phenomenon (e.g. assimilation, neutralization, etc.). Your analysis could be strengthened if you can show that it is justified by phonetic naturalness. On occasion, this will not be possible, in which case you can comment on it if appropriate.
Along with your discussion, give a formal account of the data. The formal part of your analysis should be expressed in written text and also with formal analytical devices utilized to the best of your ability. Examples of formal devices include phonological rules, distinctive features, and OT tableaux. Be careful not to let the formal component substitute for your written explanation in the text. Both parts need to be there for your account to be complete. After presenting your analysis, show how it works with a few illustrative examples (e.g. derivations or, later in the course, tableaux).
In many cases your argument for your proposed account can be strengthened by considering an alternative approach and showing how it is weaker on some point (e.g. doesn’t capture phonetic naturalness, requires a more complex formal description, etc.). This is only effective if you consider a reasonable alternative; avoid selecting ones that are blatantly untenable.
The above points are simply guidelines. Use your own judgment about what will be the best way to present your analysis for a given problem.