Place Assimilation in OT

In this paper, I would like to explore the possibility that the nature of place assimilation can be captured in terms of the OCP within the Optimality Theory (Mccarthy & Prince 1999. 1995; Prince & Smolensky 1993). In derivational models, each assimilatory process would be expressed through a different autosegmental rule. However, what any such model misses is a clear generalization that all of those processes have the effect of avoiding a configuration in which two consonantal place nodes are adjacent across a syllable boundary, as illustrated in (1):(equation omitted) In a derivational model, it is a coincidence that across languages there are changes that have the result of modifying a structure of the form (1a) into the other structure that does not have adjacent consonantal place nodes (1b). OT allows us to express this effect through a constraint given in (2) that forbids adjacent place nodes: (2) OCP(PL): Adjacent place nodes are prohibited. At this point, then, a question arises as to how consonantal and vocalic place nodes are formally distinguished in the output for the purpose of applying the OCP(PL). Besides, the OCP(PL) would affect equally complex onsets and codas as well as coda-onset clusters in languages that have them such as English. To remedy this problem, following Mccarthy (1994), I assume that the canonical markedness constraint is a prohibition defined over no more than two segments, $\alpha$ and $\beta$: that is, $^{*}\{{\alpha, {\;}{\beta{\}$ with appropriate conditions imposed on $\alpha$ and $\beta$. I propose the OCP(PL) again in the following format (3) OCP(PL) (table omitted) $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are the target and the trigger of place assimilation, respectively. The '*' is a reminder that, in this format, constraints specify negative targets or prohibited configurations. Any structure matching the specifications is in violation of this constraint. Now, in correspondence terms, the meaning of the OCP(PL) is this: the constraint is violated if a consonantal place $\alpha$ is immediately followed by a consonantal place $\bebt$ in surface. One advantage of this format is that the OCP(PL) would also be invoked in dealing with place assimilation within complex coda (e.g., sink [si(equation omitted)k]): we can make the constraint scan the consonantal clusters only, excluding any intervening vowels. Finally, the onset clusters typically do not undergo place assimilation. I propose that the onsets be protected by certain constraint which ensures that the coda, not the onset loses the place feature.