-IDENT[±F] and MAX[F] compared

With the advent of the notion faithfulness (Prince and Smolen sky 1993) and Correspondence Theory (McCarthy and Prince 1995), the status of features in phonological theory must be reconsidered, for the following reason: whether features are properties of segments or independent entities has important consequences for the way we view faithfulness and correspondence. Throughout this book I have assumed that features are attributes of segments l that cannot be preserved independently of their segmental sponsors. Featural faithfulness is evaluated through segmental correspondence, by IDENT[Feature] constraints. Some researchers have argued that features are independent entities that can be preserved outside of their sponsoring segments. Under this view, features enter into correspondence relations separately from segments. Featural faithfulness is then evaluated by the constraints MAX [Feature] and DEP[Feature] (Lamontagne and Rice 1995; Lombardi 1995, 1998; Causley 1997a,b; Parker 1997; Walker 1997). I refer to the ftrst theory as 'Featural Attribute Theory,' and the second as 'Featurallndependence Theory.' I compare them in this chapter, and conclude that both can account for a number of phenomena, some of which have been thought to rely crucially on the idea that features are autosegments. They are distributing diphthongization, feature movement, coalescence, feature stability, and dissimilation. The comparable success of these theories in accounting for these phenomena is due to two factors. First, the featural faithfulness constraints in these theories share important characteristics: existentialism, unidirectionality, and feature value speciftcity. Second, both theories assume segmental correspondence and therefore allow segmentally based analyses of the aforementioned phenomena through ftssion or fusion of segments, or a combination thereof.