This paper will be inclusive, so that it will not miss a potential case of opacity, and/or so that it can explicitly argue that a particular pattern does not have to be treated as opaque.
To facilitate the understanding of each phonological interaction, each phonological process is formulated in the SPE style (Chomsky & Halle, 1968), together with references that discuss each pattern and/or the interaction of the two. This paper does not attempt to reproduce or propose an OT analysis, because, again, the focus is the empirical status of each of the opaque patterns; when OT analyses have been proposed in the past, however, this chapter cites and describe them briefly.
As already mentioned, there are now a few works which examine the role of the receiver’s private information by extending the canonical model of CS in various ways. 5 Lai  assumes that the receiver’s private information consists of two components where the first is a threshold level and the second is a signal indicating whether the realized state is higher or lower than the threshold, and shows that the existence of the receiver’s private information lowers the efficiency of communication due to the information effect. Similarly, Chen  assumes that the receiver obtains a binary signal regarding the state and presents an example in which the quality of communication becomes deteriorates as the receiver becomes more informed. 6 Chen  considers a situation in which the sender and the receiver can access to a public signal regarding the state, and shows that an increase in the quality of the public signal leads to less efficient communication. Moreno de Barreda  is most closely related to our paper, and the relationship with this work will be discussed in detail in Section 4.1.
derlying /p/ to [h] is not active even for native items; e.g. /kappa/ → /pakka/, */hakka/ ‘river imp’ and /oppai/ → /paiotsu/, */haiotsu/ ‘breast’. The purported rule that turns underlying /p/ to [h] does not seem to be active even in the native phonology of Japanese.
More crucially, it is important to note that from the view point of orthography, all the pairings in Table 1 can be treated very simply as a unitary rule—an addition of the same diacritic mark (dakuten) (Vance, 2015, 2016). All the letters for the sounds that appear on the right are identical to those letters that represent the sounds on the left, with addition of the dakuten diacritic mark. Rendaku therefore can simply be understood as “the addition of a dakuten mark”. As Vance (2016) says, “the Japanese writing system represents all the [rendaku] alternations in a uniform way” (p.3 of the manuscript version). *2 In the discussion
S6 (M) 5.68 0.34
The maximum and minimum in Table III refer to the extreme front and back values, respectively, for all the samples (including emphasized and non-emphasized) of horizontal jaw position. The more negative the number, the more retruded the position. (The values in the table may include the x-component of jaw rotation; when the jaw opens wider by rotation, the jaw pellet moves backward on the coordinate system shown in Fig. 1.) For five speakers, the lower incisor pellet was found to be located at or behind the origin (see the minimum values in Table 3). One speaker, S6, showed the mandible pel- let moved maximally forward by 5.7 mm from the origin, the most retracted position being 0.3 mm in front of the upper incisor, indicating Class I occlusion. (Class I oc- clusion is such that “the maxillary first molar is slightly posterior to the mandibular first molar.” ( www.dentalcare.com) ). Interestingly, this individual was among those exhibiting large horizontal mandibular movements, and is the one who shows a pattern that is different from the others in Fig 5.