Vocalisations: Evidence from Germanic Gary Taylor-Raebel A thesis submitted for the degree of doctor of philosophy Department of Language and Linguistics University of Essex October 2016 Abstract A vocalisation may be described as a historical linguistic change where a sound which is formerly consonantal within a language becomes pronounced as a vowel. Although vocalisations have occurred sporadically in many languages they are particularly prevalent in the history of Germanic languages and have affected sounds from all places of articulation. This study will address two main questions. The first is why vocalisations happen so regularly in Germanic languages in comparison with other language families. The second is what exactly happens in the vocalisation process. For the first question there will be a discussion of the concept of ‘drift’ where related languages undergo similar changes independently and this will therefore describe the features of the earliest Germanic languages which have been the basis for later changes. The second question will include a comprehensive presentation of vocalisations which have occurred in Germanic languages with a description of underlying features in each of the sounds which have vocalised. When considering phonological changes a degree of phonetic information must necessarily be included which may be irrelevant synchronically, but forms the basis of the change diachronically. A phonological representation of vocalisations must therefore address how best to display the phonological information whilst allowing for the inclusion of relevant diachronic phonetic information. Vocalisations involve a small articulatory change, but using a model which describes vowels and consonants with separate terminology would conceal the subtleness of change in a vocalisation. The model presented here has therefore been designed to unite the descriptions of consonants and vowels to better demonstrate this change whilst allowing for relevant phonetic information to be included. Acknowledgements For any study spanning four years there will obviously be a number of people who have contributed in one way or another to its progress. I would especially like to thank my supervisor, Wyn Johnson, for the support she has given me throughout. On many an occasion I have explained a particular linguistic problem I have been facing and she has always known exactly which papers I should read to help me and so I thank her for her vast knowledge of the field and I feel honoured that I can now class her as a friend. I extend a thank-you to the linguistics faculty at the University of Essex who have been very encouraging throughout the process and conversations about linguistics with them have been very helpful to better my knowledge. From the faculty I would like to mention and thank Rebecca Clift and Vineeta Chand from my advisory board and Nancy Kula for random conference conversations on phonology. I would also like to thank my research group who have allowed me to test some of my crazier theories on them and given me invaluable feedback, and from this group I would especially like to mention Jenny, Sara, Sami and Nutcha who have been there from the start. Finally I would like to thank my husband, Michael Raebel, who has allowed me to follow my dream knowing full well that we would only be able to afford camping holidays over this period. He has been by my side throughout and given me the emotional support I have needed and I could not have embarked on this project without him. Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Why vocalisations? 4 1.2 Why Germanic? 6 1.3 Outline for the thesis 8 Part 1 Data and Phonetic Analysis 9 2 Complexity of sounds 11 2.1 Consonant prevocalisation 13 2.2 Loci 15 2.3 Child language acquisition 17 2.4 Umlaut 20 2.5 Summary 22 3 Rhotics 24 3.1 The PG rhotic 25 3.2 Rhotic effects on vowels 32 3.3 Summary of the PG /r/ 37 3.4 Rhotic vocalisations 38 4 Laterals 48 4.1 Early Germanic laterals 50 4.2 The complex nature of laterals 52 4.3 Lateral vocalisation as a natural process 54 4.4 Lateral effects on vowels 56 4.5 Lateral vocalisations 66 5 Nasals 73 5.1 Early Germanic nasals 78 5.2 The complex nature of nasals 78 5.3 Nasal effects on vowels 79 5.4 Explanation for the effects 98 5.5 Nasal vocalisations 101 6 Labials 110 6.1 Early Germanic labials 113 6.2 Modern Germanic labials 117 6.3 Labial effects on vowels 120 6.4 Labial vocalisations 126 7 Dorsals 136 7.1 Early Germanic dorsals 136 7.2 The complex nature of dorsals 141 7.3 Dorsal effects on vowels 143 7.4 Dorsal vocalisations 150 8 Coronals 158 8.1 Early Germanic coronals 160 8.2 Modern Germanic coronals 163 8.3 Coronal effects on vowels 170 8.4 Coronal vocalisations 173 9 Summary of Germanic sounds 177 9.1 Coronals 178 9.2 Dorsals 179 9.3 Labials 180 9.4 Nasals 181 9.5 Liquids 182 9.6 Summary 185 Part 2 Phonological Analysis 187 10 The Proto-Germanic accent shift 189 10.1 The nature of accent 190 10.2 PIE accent 194 10.3 Accent changes from PIE to PG 200 10.4 The reasons for the accent shift 207 11 Syllable structure 212 11.1 The heavy root syllable 212 11.2 Morphological considerations 212 11.3 Degemination 215 11.4 Ambisyllabicity 216 11.5 Summary 221 12 Why do giraffes have such long necks? 224 12.1 Type 1 and Type 2 changes 228 12.2 OT and language change 229 12.2.1 The stress changes in Germanic 231 12.2.2 Syllabic considerations in Germanic 236 12.3 Representation of sounds 242 13 Representation of vocalisations 253 13.1 Coronals 256 13.2 Labials 260 13.3 Rhotics 262 13.4 Laterals 267 13.5 Dorsals 269 13.6 Nasals 272 14 Conclusion 275 14.1 The data 275 14.2 Why vocalisations occur 275 14.3 How vocalisations occur 276 14.4 Further study 277 Bibliography 279 1 Introduction A vocalisation is a linguistic process whereby a former consonant in a language’s history starts to be produced as a vowel and more specifically it refers to the precise period in the language’s history that such a change occurs. Within my own variety of English, for example, I have a process known as l-vocalisation, such that my phonemic /l/ is produced as a vowel [ɤ ~ o] in a non-prevocalic position. In prevocalic position I produce the sound as [l], such that ‘lull’, which is phonemically /lɐl/ is more likely to be produced as [lɐɤ] by me. I, and others who l-vocalise or are familiar with the process, perceive both the initial and final sounds as /l/ but the initial allophone will be produced consonantally, whereas the final /l/ is produced vocalically. We can therefore say that my dialect, and many other English varieties, is undergoing a process of vocalisation. Vocalisations are part of a larger process called lenition. Lenitions are described by Kirchner (2001:3) as referring to “synchronic alternations, as well as diachronic sound changes, whereby a sound becomes “weaker”, or where a “weaker” sound bears an allophonic relation to a “stronger” sound.” A number of people have produced ‘paths of lenition’ to show the usual direction a sound takes within a lenition process. Figure 1 1 We have for example a general model by Lass (1984:178) as shown in Figure 1, one by Hock (1991:83) specifically for coronals as shown in Figure 2 and one showing how rhotics change, though not specifically showing lenitions, by Sebregts (2014:281) in Figure 3. Figure 2 Figure 3 Of the three, Sebregts is the only representation to indicate the possibility of a vocalisation with both Lass and Hock bypassing this step, although, for coronals we shall see that this is 2 indeed mainly accurate. Also by looking at the models of lenition as shown above it can be seen that there are a number of different processes which may be classed as lenitions. We find sonorisation, where voiceless sounds become voiced, degemination, where long or double consonants become short or single consonants and debuccalisation, where a sound loses its place of articulation and becomes glottal. An alternate approach to lenition is that found in Government Phonology. Harris (1990:265) suggests the following definition: “...under an element-based analysis, lenition is defined quite simply as any process which involves a reduction in the complexity of a segment. Complexity is directly calculable in terms of the number of elements of which a segment is composed.” Here segments are described in terms of privative ‘elements’, such that given the element (h) representing ‘noise’, (?) representing occlusion and (R) representing coronality, a combination of all three elements would produce the sound [t]. A lenition would therefore eliminate one of the elements, such that loss of occlusion, (?), from the sound would produce [s], followed by loss of coronality, (R), producing [h] and then finally loss of noise, (h), would result in elision (cf. Harris 1990:269). As an overall series of synchronic snapshots, such an approach is attractive, however it does not allow for representation of underlying phonetic information which, although irrelevant synchronically may be diachronically relevant. We shall see in this study that it is often this synchonically irrelevant underlying phonetic information which surfaces in the process of lenitions. The form of lenition mentioned above which is most relevant to the vocalisation process is lenition of stricture where the stricture at a sound’s place of articulation decreases.