In generalized and part of the overall theory,

In examples (6) and (7), Goldsmith gives two possible formal representations for a short vowel with a contour tone, and argues that both are wrong. According to Goldsmith, what’s wrong with (6) and (7)? 1. Segment (6) does not order the tones– in particular it doesn’t distinguish a falling tone from a rising tone. To account for this, we would need a new way to order the features. Goldsmith suggests vertical ordering. Segment (7)’s issue is that the tonal features are no longer features of the segment.Goldsmith argues that the falling tones in (13) are actually composed of a H tone followed by a L tone. What is Goldsmith’s evidence for this?2. The High tone on the last syllable of the subject NP drops to the Low tone of the verb stem. This drop is anticipated by the last syllable of the subject. Autosegmental notation in segment (14) is used by Goldsmith to illustrate the tonal shift.One of Goldsmith’s arguments for an autosegmental representation of tone is the phenomenon of `stability’: a vowel is deleted, but its tone remains. Goldsmith argues that the Tone Copy rule of (33) is not a good analysis of this type of pattern; why not?3. Segment (33) permits that two tonal feature-specifications can be inside a single vowel segment, which Goldsmith has argued against throughout the paper. While this solution seems like it would be a solid enough rule, in practice, Goldsmith found that for every case of vowel-deletion or desyllabification, the Tone Copy rule had to be reapplied. Therefore, the Tone Copy rule can not hold as a generalization. The concern is, if the Tone Copy rule becomes generalized and part of the overall theory, its existence creates the necessity for so many corrections (in the case of vowel deletion or desyllabification) that the so-called “rule” is not a rule at all.In example (71) and the associated discussion, Goldsmith argues that the surface form ô gbùò éghú `lest he kill the leopard’ involves a floating H tone that has docked onto the segmental tier. What would this form be without that floating H tone? (If you have trouble entering unicode into Canvas, you may upload an image file that shows the correct diacritics.)4.In example (82), would it be possible for the ?Nas autosegment to dock onto the `Stem’? Why or why not?5. ?Nas can not dock to a stem because it is a suffix, and if ?Naswere connected by a morpheme boundary there wouldn’t be an association line to connect the ?Nas to the morpheme boundary.Goldsmith claims (Pg. 159) that morpheme boundaries do not have association lines. Since there isn’t an association line to connect ?Nas with the morpheme boundary, the nasality segments of the stemaNas and the suffix?Nas would result in a line-crossing prohibition with the word boundary between the stemaNas and the suffix?Nas.List two questions that you have about this paper. Make your questions as substantive as possible; for example, instead of saying “I didn’t understand this”, be as specific as you can about what you didn’t understand and why.6. Am I correct to think that Goldsmith spends at least as much time identifying inconsistencies with his theories as he does defining his theories? Why do differences in tone change the meaning of words in some languages, but not in other languages? If tonal variation is important in one language, why isn’t it important in all languages?