Bleeding order is a term used in phonology to describe specific interactions of phonological rules. The term was introduced in 1968 by Paul Kiparsky. If two phonological rules are said to be in bleeding order, the application of the first rule creates a context in which the second rule can no longer apply.
The opposite of this is called feeding order.
An example of this in English is the /ɪ/-insertion between a voiceless alveolar fricative and a plural-z, as in [bʌsɪz] (with the underlying representation //bʌs-z//). English also has a rule which devoices segments after voiceless consonants, as in [bʊks], with the underlying representation //bʊk-z//). In the output form [bʌsɪz] (buses), final devoicing has not applied, because the phonological context in which this rule could have applied has gone as a consequence of the application of /ɪ/-insertion. Put differently, the application order "(1) /ɪ/-insertion (2) final devoicing" is a bleeding order in English.
If two rules which would have a bleeding relationship in one order actually apply in the opposite order, the latter is called a counterbleeding order. An example of this can be seen in the pronunciation of the diminutive of the word slang ("snake") in the Dutch dialect of Kaatsheuvel: [slɑŋəskə]. If [s]-insertion had applied first, then the rule which inserts an additional /-ə/ between the noun stem and the suffix /-kə/ could no longer have applied and the output form would have been [slɑŋskə]. However, the rules have applied in the reverse order.
Gussenhoven, C. & Jacobs, H. (1998). Understanding Phonology. Arnold, Londen.
Jensen, J.T. (2004).
This page is automatically generated and may contain information that is not correct, complete, up-to-date, or relevant to your search query. The same applies to every other page on this website. Please make sure to verify the information with EPFL's official sources.
Introduces secret key cryptography, covering 'one-time pad' encryption, flaws in key sharing, and the Data Encryption Standard (DES) principles and operation.
In linguistics, Optimality Theory (frequently abbreviated OT) is a linguistic model proposing that the observed forms of language arise from the optimal satisfaction of conflicting constraints. OT differs from other approaches to phonological analysis, which typically use rules rather than constraints. However, phonological models of representation, such as autosegmental phonology, prosodic phonology, and linear phonology (SPE), are equally compatible with rule-based and constraint-based models.
In phonology and historical linguistics, feeding order of phonological rules refers to a situation in which the application of a rule A creates new contexts in which a rule B can apply; it would not have been possible for rule B to apply otherwise. Suppose there are two rules. Rule A takes in input x and returns output y. Rule B takes in input y and returns input z. When rule B is applied to input x, it will return the same output (x).