Phonetics and Phonology in Unstressed Vowel Reduction: Russian and Beyond
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UMass Phonology Group [email protected] April 23, 2004 Phonetics and Phonology in Unstressed Vowel Reduction: Russian and Beyond Jonathan Barnes Boston University I. Introduction • Phonological vowel reduction (hereafter VR): neutralization of vowel quality contrasts in unstressed syllables. • Figures in recent theoretical literature (e.g. Barnes 2002, Beckman 1998, Crosswhite 2001, Flemming 2oo1a and b, Steriade 1994) as an example of a pattern of Positional Neutralization with relatively clear phonetic underpinnings. • Understanding the relationship between these phonetic underpinnings and the phonological grammar in patterns such as VR is a central task of current work on the phonetics-phonology interface. 2. Russian Vowel Reduction 2.1. Facts • Contemporary Standard Russian: traditionally claimed to display two distinct patterns or degrees of VR, one for the syllable immediately preceding the tonic (here, first pretonic), and one for all other unstressed syllables. • Five vowels contrast in stressed syllables1. • Mid vowels do not surface in unstressed syllables. (1) Stressed vowel inventory ⇒ 1 pretonic s ⇒ 2 pretonic, posttonic s i u i u i u e o a a • Focus of this talk: /a/ vs. /o/ • /a/ and /o/ contrast in stressed syllables, but this contrast is neutralized in unstressed syllables as follows: (2) a. /a/, /o/ ⇒ [a]/[] in first pretonic syllables, a.k.a. Degree 1 reduction b. /a/, /o/ ⇒ [] in other unstressed syllables, a.k.a. Degree 2 reduction 1 See Padgett 2001 and sources therein for arguments against a contrast between /i/ and the high central vowel //. -1- UMass Phonology Group [email protected] April 23, 2004 (3) VR in Contemporary Standard Russian STRESSED DEGREE 1 REDUCTION DEGREE 2 REDUCTION /o/ moldst youth malodnkj young (dim.) mladoj young bol pain balet to hurt blvoj pain (adj.) /a/ starj old (adj.) starik old man strna old times razum reason razumn wisely (adv.) rzumet to understand • Several exceptions to the pattern described above have been recognized: EXCEPTIONAL CONTEXT #1: No reduction to schwa in absolute word-initial position /odnomu/ [adnamu] 'one' (dat.sg.) *[dnamu] /obiajet/ [abiajt] 'insult, abuse' (3sg.) *[biajt] EXCEPTION CONTEXT #2: No reduction to schwa in hiatus before [a] /odnoobraznj/ -> [adnaabraznj] 'monotonous' *[adnabraznj] /sootnoenije/ -> [saatnaenije] ‘relationship’ *[satnaenije] EXCEPTIONAL CONTEXT #3: No reduction to schwa in absolute phrase-final syllables (Matusevic 1976: 102, Zlatoustova 1962: 109-139) 2.2. Previous approaches • Two recent OT accounts: a. Alderete (1995): Faithfulness constraints parameterized to the head foot (i.e. the stressed syllable and first pretonic) rank higher than markedness constraints against [a] in unstressed syllables, which in turn outrank general Faithfulness constraints. b. Crosswhite (2001): Vowels outside the head foot cannot bear moras, but [a] cannot be non-moraic, and so is realized as schwa. • Both accounts assume high-ranked constraints banning mid vowels from unstressed syllables. • Both these approaches must present essentially diacritic solutions to the exceptional patterns described above. EXAMPLE: Crosswhite (2001): Exception #1: Align-µ − The left edge of every word must align with some mora. Schwa is non-moraic. Consonant initial words violate this constraint to avoid creating moraic onsets. -2- UMass Phonology Group [email protected] April 23, 2004 Exception #2: *Hiatus([a], []) – The featureless vowel schwa may not occur in hiatus before [a]. Exception #3: Not treated. Align-mora/phrase? CRUCIAL POINT: All previous accounts of VR in Russian treat both Degree 1 and Degree 2 reduction patterns as phonological, i.e. as changing phonological category membership through manipulation of distinctive feature specifications. 3. Vowel Reduction: Phonetics and phonology 3.1. Phonetic Underpinnings of VR • Phonological VR patterns have been claimed to have their source in the reduced durations of vowels in unstressed syllables. • Languages with phonological vowel reduction are almost invariably those languages with a stress accent strongly and reliably cued by a difference in vowel duration between stressed and unstressed syllables (Lehiste 1970)2. (4) Stress accent and vowel reduction in Slavic DURATION-CUED STRESS PHONOLOGICAL VR Russian Yes Yes Belarussian Yes Yes Bulgarian Yes Yes Macedonian No No Serbo-Croatian No No Czech No No Polish No No THE CONNECTION: • Shortening of vowels in unstressed syllables leads to undershoot of more open target articulations of non-high vowels (à la Lindblom 1963). • Raising of these creates a compressed vowel space in which contrasts are likely to be misperceived and to collapse over time (See Barnes 2002, Flemming 2001a for discussion). • Accounts for a strong, if not exceptionless, typological generalization: in VR systems, vowel height contrasts are the first to go3. When this happens, the vowels to go are almost invariably the mid and low vowels. High vowels stay put. 2 Exceptions, of course, exist: Shimakonde (Bantu), for example, removes mid vowels from unstressed syllables even when they are bimoraic (and surface as such). It cannot be accidental that this system would have developed out of a system already implementing vowel height harmony. 3 The other two contrast types commonly targeted in stress-based positional neutralization systems are length and nasalization, both negatively impacted by decreased duration (see Barnes 2002 for details)s. -3- UMass Phonology Group [email protected] April 23, 2004 (5) Common Stressed-Unstressed Mapping i u i u e o ⇒ a (6) Non-occurring Stressed-Unstressed Mapping i u e o ⇒ e o a a • VR systems specifically targeting other commonly-neutralized dimensions of contrast for vowels, such as palatality, rounding, or ATR, are spottily attested at best. No vertical vowel systems in unstressed syllables only. No VR analogue of Turkish palatal harmony4. (7) Non-occurring Stressed-Unstressed Mapping i u e o ⇒ a a 3.2. VR in the Grammar: Three Approaches (8) Positional Faithfulness and Positional Markedness (Alderete 1995, Beckman 1996, 1998, Crosswhite 2001, Zoll 1997, inter alia) • Phonological strong licensing results from Faithfulness or Markedness constraints parametrized to refer to the certain positions. a Ident[hi]/σ@ >> *MidV >> Ident[hi] b *MidV/unstressed σ >> Ident[hi] >> *Mid • PROBLEM: In principle, any feature or marked structure may be paired with any strong or weak position to derive attested patterns. (9) Licensing-by-Cue and Direct Phonetics (Steriade 1997 et seq., Flemming 1995, 1997, 2001, to appear, Kirchner 1998, Zhang 2001) • Phonetic cues, not arbitrarily listed positions, license the realization of contrasts EXAMPLE: Vowel contrasts are licensed in stressed syllables not by stressedness per se, but by the additional duration accorded vowels realized there. Durational pressures in unstressed syllables force neutralization. PAYOFF: Accounts for typology given above. 4 Though see below on Sosva Mansi. -4- UMass Phonology Group [email protected] April 23, 2004 POTENTIAL PROBLEMS: • Predicts necessary co-presence of PN patterns and phonetic patterns giving rise to them. • Must assign "unnatural" or synchronically arbitrary patterns a radically separate grammatical implementation. (10) Grounding Conditions (Archangeli and Pulleyblank 1994, Hayes 1997, Smith 2002) • Smith 2002: Schema/Filter model of CON; position-specific markedness and faithfulness constraints freely constructed from constraint schemas (IDENT, ALIGN, C/str) and arguments. • Results submitted to "substantive filters" which remove phonetically or psycholinguistically problematic constraints from consideration. • Accounts for the typology of positional neutralization patterns without allowing the phonology direct access to phonetic information. 4. One experiment, begetting another... • In order to determine more precisely the role of phonetic duration in the synchronic VR system of Russian, the following experiment was designed. 4.1. Methodology • Experiment #1 was designed to determine what, if any, active role phonetic duration plays in the realization of vowel reduction. • Test words: 72 Russian trisyllables 12 stressed /a/ 12 stressed /o/ 12 1 pretonic /a/ 12 1 pretonic /o/ 12 2 pretonic /a/ 12 2 pretonic /o/ • All target vowels were located in open syllables followed by unpalatalized voiced or voiceless stops and preceded by unpalatalized voiced stops, voiceless stops, or laterals. • Tokens were embedded in frame sentences of the form Mashka X skazala, 'Mashka said X'. Each token appeared twice for a total of 144 sentences. • Sentences were randomized and arranged in blocks of 12. • Subjects, one male from St. Petersburg, one female from Ufa, student-age native speakers of Russian, were instructed to read through each block of sentences once slowly and then once again as quickly as possible to achieve maximum variation in vowel durations. • Sessions were recorded directly to CD at a sampling rate of 44.1 KHz. Duration and LPC formant measurements were taken using Praat 4.1.11 speech analysis software (Copyright@1992-2003 by Paul Boersma and David Weenink). -5- UMass Phonology Group [email protected] April 23, 2004 4.2. Results 4.2.1. Mean values for duration and F1 (11) Speaker 1 5 1 PRETONIC 2 PRETONIC Duration 84 ms. 41 ms F1 553 Hz 462 Hz (12) Speaker 2 STRESSED 1 PRETONIC 2 PRETONIC /a/ /o/ /a, o/ /a, o/ Duration 86 ms. 73 ms 68 ms. 25 ms. F1 722 Hz 466 726 Hz 492 Hz • Neither speaker had any significant difference between unstressed /a/ and /o/ in any position. This contrast