Long-Distance /R/-Dissimilation in American English

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Long-Distance /r/-Dissimilation in American
English

Nancy Hall
August 14, 2009

1 Introduction

In many varieties of American English, it is possible to drop one /r/ from certain words that contain two /r/s, such as su(r)prise, pa(r)ticular, gove(r)nor, and co(r)ner. This type of /r/-deletion is done by speakers who are basically ‘rhotic’; that is, who generally do not drop /r/ in any other position. It is a type of dissimilation, because it avoids the presence of multiple rhotics within a word.1
This paper has two goals. The first is to expand the description of American
/r/-dissimilation by bringing together previously published examples of the process with new examples from an elicitation study and from corpora. This data set reveals new generalizations about the phonological environments that favor dissimilation.
The second goal is to contribute to the long-running debate over why and how dissimilation happens, and particularly long-distance dissimilation. There is dispute over whether long-distance dissimilation is part of the grammar at all, and whether its functional grounding is a matter of articulatory constraints, processing constraints, or perception. Data from American /r/-dissimilation are especially important for this debate, because the process is active, it is not restricted to only a few morphemes, and it occurs in a living language whose phonetics can be studied. Arguments in the literature are more often based on ancient diachronic dissimilation processes, or on processes that apply synchronically only in limited morphological contexts (and hence are likely fossilized remnants of once wider patterns).
In this paper, I will concentrate only on long-distance /r/-dissimilation, which
I define as dissimilation of /r/s that are separated by at least one consonant. This means that some of the most famous cases of /r/-dissimilation, such as lib(r)ary, Feb(r)uary, mirr(or) and pre(r)ogative, are not discussed. I make this distinction

1Dissimilation affects both consonantal [r] and vocalic [@~]. Throughout this paper, I will use /r/ as a shorthand to refer to both.

1because of evidence that short-distance /r/-dissimilation has different causes and operates through different means than long-distance dissimilation (see [Author, in prep.]).
For long-distance /r/-dissimilation, I argue that the data support Ohala (1981)’s contention that dissimilation stems from perceptual errors, when a listener hypercorrects for perceived assimilation. English /r/ has drawn-out acoustic ‘resonances’ that can cause a listener to be unsure how many /r/s a word contains. Drawing on phonetic studies, I argue that /r/ tends to disappear precisely where it should be most phonetically masked by the presence of a second /r/. Resonances can also cause listeners to err on the side of perceiving too many /r/s, and this produces colloquial insertion of /r/ in words already containing an /r/, such as farmiliar,

perservere, and sherbert.

I argue that /r/-dissimilation in American English remains only a pattern of sporadic lexical changes. While the phonological grammar may affect the way that misperceptions change lexical representations, long-distance dissimilation per se is not an active part of the grammar, and there is no evidence for a phonological constraint against multiple /r/s at a distance.

2 Introducing the pattern

2.1 History and sociolinguistics of /r/-dissimilation

Dissimilatory dropping of /r/ has occurred in America at least since the nineteenth century, and likely earlier. The first description of the phenomenon by a linguist is that of Hempl (1893), based on his own Southern Michigan dialect. It was also sometime in the nineteenth century that the city of Alburquerque dropped the first /r/ from its name, likely due to dissimilation. Stephenson (1956:275-6) suggests that dissimilation was active in North Carolina in the eighteenth century, based on (rather scant) evidence from naive spelling patterns. Some writers drop only one r from words like orcha(r)ds (1730 and 1732), gove(r)ner (1781 and 1787), and

la(r)ger (1799).

My impression, based on discussion with Americans from different regions, is that /r/-dissimilation (at least in unstressed syllables) is now common in most, and perhaps all, rhotic dialects of the US. There are few concrete data on this, however. Only a few examples of dissimilation have been included in dialect surveys—barbitu(r)ate, by Bert Vaux; ca(r)tridge and lib(r)ary by Kurath & McDavid 1961—and each of these is somewhat phonologically atypical.
In general, /r/-dissimilation is not stigmatized in America, in particular not when it occurs in unstressed syllables as in gove(r)nor (Wolfram & SchillingEstes 1998:50, Merriam-Webster 1994:436, American Heritage:220). Dissimila-

2tory deletion of /r/ in stressed syllables is rarer and perhaps more frowned upon than deletion in unstressed syllables. I have heard negative remarks about speakers who dissimilate in "f(r)ustrated, for example. Murray (1986:24) examines /r/-deletion in qua(r)ter as a sociolinguistic variable in St. Louis, Missouri, and finds that deletion is more common for lower class speakers and in less formal styles. Even for upper class speakers in a formal style, however, it occurs in 34% of tokens, so the level of stigmatization must be slight. Dissimilation may also be somewhat stigmatized when it involves loss of a syllable. Elster (1999), a prescriptivist, cautions against shortening lab(or)atory, and humorist Gene Weingarten, in a Washington Post column of September 17, 2006, describes how his editor ‘speaks like a man who grew up in the Land of the Lost Syllables. Tom takes his dog to the “vetinarian”.’
While this paper concentrates only on strongly rhotic dialects, /r/-dissimilation can occur in non-rhotic dialects, in words that have two post-consonantal /r/s such as spectrogram. Dissimilation can also interact with other kinds of /r/-dropping. Myhill (1988:207) studies speakers who have variable deletion of postvocalic /r/, due to competing influence from the white dialect of Philadelphia, which is largely rhotic, and Black English Vernacular, which is largely non-rhotic. He finds that speakers are significantly more likely to drop an /r/ if there is another postvocalic /r/ in the same word, a difference of .60% versus .40%.

2.2 Data set I: previously reported cases

The phonological analysis of dissimilation presented here will be based on two datasets. The first, presented in Table 1, is a list of 115 reported cases of /r/- dropping that are likely to be due to dissimilation.
I have included words only if they meet several criteria, to exclude words which are likely to have lost one of their /r/s in earlier stages or different dialects of English. First, the non-dissimilated form must still be in current American usage. This excludes examples like Albu(r)querque, where the first /r/ is never pronounced or spelled today. Second, the dissimilated form must be attested in a dialect that is clearly rhotic. Third, the two forms must not differ by more than the presence of /r/. This excludes cases where dissimilation is accompanied by a change in vowel quality, such as ["kætrIdZ]/["kArtrIdZ] for cartridge (however, I have included words in which /@~/ dissimilates to a non-schwa vowel, such as peripheral). This criterion also excludes cases where additional segments besides /r/ are dropped, such as ["SIv@~i] for charivari or [sæsp@~Il@] for sarsaparilla. In such words, the loss of /r/ might be part of a more general ‘erosion’ of material, rather than specifically dissimilatory.

3
Table 1: Previously reported cases of apparent /r/-dissimilation
(Broad) transcription2 Source3

adve(r)sary afte(r)ward(s) ape(r)ture approp(r)iate A(r)thur barbitu(r)ate (St.) Be(r)nard (San) Berna(r)dino -b@~n@"dino

"ædv@-sEri "æft@-w@~dz "æp@tS@~ @"propi@t "AT@~

T1936, G2006 H1893, T1936, KK1953, Y1983 Y1983, G2006 K. Zuraw KK1953, Y1983 G2006, B. Vaux KK1953, C2005 KK1953

-bAr"bItSu@t b@"nArd

be(r)serk

b@"z@~k

G2006, B. Vaux R1988, G2006 G2006

bomba(r)dier cam(ar)aderie Cante(r)bury cate(r)cornered cate(r)pillar celeb(r)atory cereb(r)al palsy checke(r)board ci(r)cumference comfo(r)ter cont(r)oversy co(r)morant co(r)ner co(r)poration crib(r)iform defib(r)illator do(r)mitory

-bAmb@"dir -k@"mAd@~i "kæn(t)@-b@~i "kæR@-korn@~d "kæR@-pIl@~ "sEl@b@-tori -sEr@b@l "pAlzi "tSEk@-bord s@"k2mfr@ns "k2mf@R@~ "kAnt@-v@~si "kom@~@nt -kon@~

KK1953, C2005 KK1953 KK1953, W1982, Y1983, R1988, M1994 G2006 J. Hall Y1983 KK1953, Y1983 H1893, KK1953, Y1983 G2006 G2006 H1893, S1947, KK1953, WS1998 H1893, S1947 L. Hall

-kop@"reIS@n "krIb@form di"fIbj@leIR@~ "dom@-tori "ist@n@~

G2006 B. Flanigan, Tresidder 1943:267 KK1953

easte(r)ner

2Many published sources do not include transcriptions, so these should be seen as approximate. 3Throughout the paper, sources are abbreviated as follows: S1837 Sherwood 1837:67-72;
H1893 Hempl 1893 (Southern Michigan); E1893 Emerson 1893; R1906 Rippmann 1906 (British); T1936 Thomas 1936 (upstate New York); T1942 Thomas 1942 (downstate New York); S1947 Swadesh 1947; T1947 Thomas 1947; KK1953 Kenyon & Knott 1953; W1982 Wells 1982; R1988 Randall 1988; W1993 Wilson 1993; M1994 Merriam-Webster 1994:436; A1996 American Heritage Book of English Usage; SW1997 Schilling-Estes & Wolfram 1997:65 (Ocracoke); WS1998 Wolfram & Schilling-Estes 1998; E1999 Elster 1999; C2005 Canepari 2005; G2006 barelybad.com/words1.htm#rsareus [an amateur linguist’s collection; some details have been clarified through personal communication with the site’s author]; Y1983 Yamada 1983. In cases where individuals have reported examples not found in recent published sources, I have given their names.

4

elde(r)berry ente(r)prise ent(r)epreneur fa(r)mer

"Eld@-bEri "En(t)@-praIz -Ant@pr@"nur "fAm@~

KK1953, M1994, C2005 H1893, E1893, KK1953, A1996 G2006 H1893

fa(r)ther

"fAD@~

H1893

fo(r)lorn

f@"lorn

T1936

fo(r)ward

"fow@~d

H1893

forwa(r)d

"forwId

Wolfram 1969:111

fo(r)mer(ly) forme(r)ly

"fom@~ "form@li

H1893, C. Moffatt H1893, KK1953, Hall 1942:64

f(r)aternity fu(r)ther

f@"t@~nIti "f@D@~

G2006 C2005

furthe(r)more gove(r)nor habe(r)dasher hambu(r)ger hype(r)baric imp(r)opriety inco(r)porate inf(r)astructure inte(r)fere

"f@~D@-mor "g2v@n@~ "hæb@-dæS@~ "hæmb@g@~ -haIp@"bArIk -Imp@"praI@Ri In"kop@~eIt "Inf@-str2ktS@~ -Int@"fir

KK1953, Y1983 T1936, KK1953, W1982, W1993, M1994 KK1953 B. Erickson, B. Vaux G2006 KK1953, Y1983, A1996 H1893 G2006 Y1983

interp(r)et

In"t@~p@t "nIk@-bAk@~ "læb@-tori "lIR@tS@~ "lIv@w@~st "m@d@~@~ "norD@n

KK1953, G2006 Y1983

Knicke(r)bocker lab(or)atory lit(er)ature live(r)wurst mu(r)derer northe(r)n

E1999 G2006, H. Schiffman, B. Vaux Y1983 C2005 KK1953

northe(r)ner no(r)thern(er) No(r)thrup North(r)up offe(r)tory

"norD@n@~ "noD@n@~ "noTr@p "norT@p "Af@-tori

H1893, T1936, KK1953, C2005 H1893, C2005 H1893 KK1953, Y1983 M1994

o(r)der

"od@~

C2005

o(r)dinary o(r)nery

"od@-neri "on@~i

A. Dinkin G2006

o(r)thography Otte(r)burn ove(r)ture

-o"TAgr@fi "AR@b@~n "ov@tS@~

H1893 KK1953, C2005 Y1983

paraphe(r)nalia

-pær@f@"neIlj@

KK1953, M1994, G2006

5

pa(r)liamentary pa(r)lor

-pAl@"mEnt@~i "pAl@~

H1893 H1893

pa(r)ticular

p@"tIkj@l@~ p@"form@ns p@"fjum@~i p@"rIfi@l

H1893, T1936, KK1953, Y1983, G2006

pe(r)form(ance) pe(r)fumery periphe(r)al photog(r)apher

H1893, T1936, KK1953, Y1983 H1893, KK1953, Y1983 G2006, B. Vaux

f@"tAg@f@~

C2005

photomic(r)ography -foRomaI"kAgr@fi

Barrs 1962

po(r)trait

"potr@t

G2006

p(r)eliminary prep(ar)atory pre-p(r)ofessional p(r)ofessor

p@"lIm@nEri "prEp@-tori -prip@"fES@n@l p@"fEs@~

G2006 B. Vaux KK1953 T1936 , C2005, SW1997

p(r)oliferate p(r)oportion(al) p(r)oprietor propriet(r)ess Purmo(r)t

p@"lIf@~eIt p@"porS@n@l p@"praI@R@~ pr@"praI@t@s "p@~m@t

SW1997 (Ocracoke) KK1953, Y1983, B. Samuels KK1953 G2006 H1893

qua(r)ter

"kwoR@~

H1893, S1947, KK1953

recip(r)ocate repe(r)toire repe(r)tory

rI"sIp@keIt "rEp@-twAr "rEp@-tori

G2006 G2006, D. Kamholz Y1983

rep(r)esent rese(r)vation rese(r)voir resp(ir)atory reverb(er)atory rolle(r)coaster sec(r)etary

-rEp@"zEnt -rEz@"veIS@n "rEz@-vwAr "rEsp@-tori rI"v@~b@tori "rolikost@~ "sEk@-tEri

E1893, Y1983 Y1983 KK1953, C2005 Y1983, G2006, L. Hall KK1953 M. Covarrubius, Donahue 2006 E1893, T1947, KK1953, Y1983, C2005

southe(r)ner spect(r)ogram stenog(r)apher su(r)prise

"s2D@n@~

KK1953, C2005

"spEkt@-græm st@"nAg@f@~ s@"praIz

often heard by author T1947, C2005 H1893, T1936, KK1953, W1982, Y1983, M1994, G2006

su(r)veyor

s@"vej@~

KK1953, Y1983

Swa(r)thmore synch(r)otron temp(er)ature terrest(r)ial the(r)mometer tu(r)meric

"swAT-mor "sINk@-trAn "tEmp@tS@~ t@"rEstS@l T@"mAm@R@~ "tum@~Ik

KK1953, Goodman & Halvey 2006 M1994 T1936, Y1983, G2006 G2006 H1893, T1936, KK1953, W1982, Y1983, W1993, M1994, G2006 G2006, B. Vaux

6

ve(r)nacular vet(er)inarian wa(rr)ior

v@"nækj@l@~ -vEt@"nEri@n "woj@~

KK1953, Y1983, M1994, G2006 G2006 G2006

Wate(r)bury weathe(r)board weathe(r)board weste(r)ner

"wAR@-b@~i "wED@-bord "wED@~-bod "wEst@n@~ "wInd@mir

KK1953, C2005 Pederson 1967 (Missouri) Pederson 1967 (Missouri) KK1953

Winde(r)mere

R1988

2.3 Data set II: an elicitation study of two dialects

To get a clearer picture of the extent of dissimilation in specific dialects, I conducted an elicitation study with speakers from two locations: Southern California (SoCal) and the Arkansas Ozarks (AR).

Procedure Words were elicited through a pseudo-psycholinguistic task, advertised as a “word identification study”. Subjects were presented with sentences on a computer screen. In each sentence, one word (the target word) was missing some letters. A random number of stars appeared in the position from which the letters were missing.

(1) Sample elicitation sentences
When his wife left him, he went totally b****erk. (answer: berserk) When the patient suffered a heart attack, the doctors used a defib***tor to restart his heart. (answer: defibrillator)

Subjects read the sentences aloud, filling in the missing word. Their reading was audio-recorded on a Marantz PMD-660 solid state recorder with a Shure PG81 microphone. Instructions given to subjects implied that recording was merely a convenience so that they would not have to write down the answers.
In words which were being tested for dissimilation, the number of letters missing varied, but at a minimum included the r considered likely to drop, the unstressed vowel (if any) adjacent to that r, and at least one other consonant. This word-guessing procedure was designed to minimize spelling pronunciations, both by forcing subjects to pronounce the word without seeing the r in question and by preventing them from sounding out words they might not actually know.
Each subject was asked afterwards what they thought the experiment was studying and whether they had noticed anything that many of the words had in common;

7
5 (all SoCal) suggested pronunciation, and 2 noticed that a lot of words contained r. Both said they had noticed this only near the end of the experiment, so their data was included.

Materials In the SoCal experiment, subjects had to guess 300 words, a task that usually took around half an hour. There were 150 words that contained two /r/s and 40 that contained one /r/. The words with one /r/ served two purposes: they acted as a control to see whether subjects had non-dissimilatory /r/-dropping, and some were items which have been reported to undergo /r/-assimilation, discussed in section 4.2. The remaining 110 words contained no /r/s. Most of these items served purely as distractors, but 9 contained two /l/s in order to check for /l/-dissimilation, also discussed later.
The AR experiment had the same design, but included only 214 sentences, of which 110 contained two /r/s and 30 contained one /r/.
The ordering of words was largely random, except that the first 15 items were all distractors, and three words which are known pronunciation shibboleths (February, library, librarian) were put at the very end, lest they alert subjects early on that the experiment was studying pronunciation.

Subjects Twenty-five SoCal speakers participated. All were native English speakers and had grown up in SoCal; 11 were female, 14 male. Twenty-one were between the ages of 19–27; the remaining 4 were between 36 and 53. Fourteen identified themselves as white, 3 as black, 4 as Hispanic, 3 as Asian, and 1 as a Pacific Islander. All had or were working toward 4-year degrees.
Fifteen Arkansas speakers participated. Fourteen were female, 1 male. Six speakers were between the ages of 18-29; 7 were between 33 and 44, and 2 were 75 and 79. All subjects were white, and were natives or long-term residents of the Ozarks who lived or worked in the town of Marshall (pop. 1,300), where recordings were made. Four subjects had no education beyond high school; 5 had or were working toward 2-year degrees, 6 had or were working toward 4-year degrees.

Scoring The recordings were initially scored by the author and another phoneticallytrained native English speaker. Scorers noted any cases where /r/ or /l/ was deleted or inserted. Productions were scored as invalid if a subject produced the wrong word, no word, or a significantly non-standard form of a word (for example, with stress on the wrong syllable, or addition of sounds other than /r/ or /l/). Cases of discrepancy between the first two scorers were resolved by a third scorer.
Although the experiment was only designed to examine the target words, occasionally subjects also had interesting pronunciations of words in the frame sen-

8tences that they read aloud, and I will refer to some of them below. Transcriptions of frame sentence words are based on the author’s scoring only; they were not double-checked by a second scorer.

Results Words containing only one /r/ had low rates of /r/-dropping: in SoCal, 5 / 926 productions, in AR, 0 / 401 productions. This confirms that the subject group was highly rhotic, and that the experiment elicited careful speech in which little /r/-dropping would be expected to occur due to speech errors or fast-speech elision.
Table 2 shows the 96 words in which some speakers dropped an /r/ in the SoCal experiment. For each /r/, the table gives the number of productions with that /r/ dropped divided by the total number of valid productions. In some of the words, different subjects dropped different /r/s. In these cases, the word is listed twice, with the second occurrence starred. Parentheses indicate which /r/ was dropped. The table omits word from the experiment that had short-distance /r/-dissimilation (February, library, librarian) because they will be discussed in another paper. It also omits Worcestershire sauce, because subjects had around a dozen different pronunciations of this word. Also, a single instance of thunderstorm in which both /r/s dropped is ignored.

Table 2: SoCal: Words where subjects dropped one of two /r/s barbitu(r)ates paraphe(r)nalia su(r)prise bomba(r)dier tu(r)meric Trist(r)am Shandy 6 / 8 San Berna(r)dino be(r)serk
18 / 20 .90 Abe(r)crombie 20 / 24 .83 Aberc(r)ombie* 20 / 24 .83 p(r)ogressive 12 / 15 .80 p(r)oprietor
2 / 23 .09 2 / 23 .09 2 / 23 .09 2 / 23 .09 2 / 23 .09 2 / 24 .08 2 / 24 .08 2 / 24 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 2 / 25 .08 1 /14 .07
11 / 14 .79 cinematog(r)apher
.75 brothe(r)ly
18 / 25 .72 inf(r)astructure 16 / 24 .67 kinde(r)garten d’U(r)bervilles cate(r)pillar rese(r)voir

  • 3 / 6
  • .50 fo(r)ward

11 / 22 .50 afte(r)wards 12 / 24 .50 ente(r)prise

  • 12 / 25 .48 f(r)aternities
  • forme(r)ly

repe(r)toire Cante(r)bury entrep(r)eneur southe(r)ner resp(ir)atory repe(r)tory

  • 9 / 20
  • .45 rep(r)esents

10 / 23 .43 p(r)efer 10 / 25 .40 adve(r)tisers 9 / 24 9 / 25 5 / 15
.38 counte(r)feiters .36 co(r)duroy .33 pu(r)portedly

9cereb(r)al palsy defib(r)illator prep(ar)atory Ruthe(r)ford gube(r)natorial adve(r)sary
7 / 21 6 / 18 8 / 25 7 / 22 4 / 13 7 / 23 7 / 25 7 / 25 7 / 25 7 / 25 4 / 15 6 / 25 5 / 22 5 / 25 4 / 23 4 / 25 4 / 25 4 / 25 4 / 25
.33 reperto(r)y* .33 Aspe(r)ger’s syndrome 1 /16 .06
1 /15 .07
.32 p(r)oliferation .32 imp(r)opriety* .31 wate(r)cress .30 repertoi(r)e* .28 libe(r)tarian .28 pe(r)turbed .28 co(r)porations .28 comfo(r)ter .27 the(r)mometer .24 int(r)amural .23 live(r)wurst .20 hambu(r)ger .17 celeb(r)atory .16 Lab(r)ador retriever .16 biog(r)apher .16 wiza(r)dry .16 cap(r)icorns .16 ba(r)bwire .14 f(r)ustrated .13 fo(r)mer .13 ag(r)iculture .13 lab(or)atory .12 lit(er)ature .12 pe(r)formance .12 qua(r)ter
1 /17 .06 1 /19 .05 1 /19 .05 1 /20 .05 1 /22 .05 1 /22 .05 1 /23 .04 1 /23 .04 1 /23 .04 1 /23 .04 1 /23 .04 1 /24 .04 1 / 24 .04 1 / 24 .04 1 / 24 .04 1 / 24 .04 1 / 24 .04 1 / 24 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 / 25 .04 1 /25 .04 1 /25 .04 gove(r)nor northe(r)ner temp(er)ature furthe(r)more ape(r)ture frate(r)nize ve(r)nacular rolle(r)coasters4 ove(r)ture easte(r)ners hermaph(r)odite weste(r)ner vet(er)inarian disp(r)oportionate 4 / 25 cam(ar)aderie fo(r)lorn photog(r)apher northe(r)n borde(r)line pa(r)ticular silve(r)ware prop(r)ietary alte(r)nator frankfu(r)ter periph(er)al
3 / 21 2 / 15 3 / 23 3 / 24 3 / 25 3 / 25 3 / 25 2 / 17 2 / 20 2 / 20 2 / 22
.12 pe(r)verted .10 f(r)ustration .10 p(r)ocrastinate .09 maste(r)card

There were also a number of words containing two /r/s in which no /r/-dropping occurred; these are given below.

4Although the pronunciation ["roli-kost@~z] has been previously reported, all the SoCal subjects who dissimilated said ["rol@-kost@~z].

10
(2) 51 words with two /r/s and no instances of /r/-dropping (SoCal): abracadabra arbitration arthur barbershop bernards bumperstickers cheeseburger checkerboard christopher circumference controversy corner counterpart energizer entertainers evergreen extra-terrestrial extrovert farther fingerprints furniture gingerbread hovercraft inappropriate interfere intermarry intermediary interpret knickerbockers migratory ordinary overdraft overboard overturned persevered pre-professional professor propeller repercussions reservation Schwarzenegger secretary supervisor surveyors survivors thunderbird thunderstorm trajectory waterboarding waterfront waterproof

Recommended publications
  • T3 Sandhi Rules of Different Prosodic Hierarchies

    T3 Sandhi Rules of Different Prosodic Hierarchies

    T3 Sandhi rules of different prosodic hierarchies Abstract This study conducts acoustic analysis on T3 sandhi of two characters across different boundaries of prosodic hierarchies. The experimental data partly support Chen (2000)’s view about sandhi domain that “T3 sandhi takes place obligatorily within MRU”, and “sandhi rule can not apply cross intonation phrase boundary”. Nonetheless, the results do not support his claim that “there are no intermediate sandhi hierarchies between MRU and intonation phrase”. On the contrary, it is found that, although T3 sandhi could occur across all kinds of hierarchical boundaries between MRU and intonation phrase, T3 sandhi rules within a foot (prosodic word), or between foots without pause, or between pauses without intonation (phonology phrase) are very different in terms of acoustic properties. Furthermore, based on the facts that (1) T3 sandhi could occur cross boundary of pauses and (2) phrase-final sandhi could be significantly lengthening, it is argued that T3 sandhi is due to dissimilation of low tones, rather than duration reduction within MRU domain. It is also demonstrated that tone sandhi and prosodic hierarchies may not be equivalently evaluated in Chinese phonology. Prosodic hierarchies are determined by pause and lengthening, not by tone sandhi. Key words: tone sandhi; prosodic hierarchies; boundary; Mandarin Chinese 1 Introduction So-called T3 sandhi in mandarin Chinese has been widely discussed in Chinese Phonology. Mandarin Chinese has four tones: T1 (level 55), T2 (rising 35), T3 (low-rise 214), T4 (falling 51).Generally, when a T3 is followed by another T3, it turns into T2. The rule could be simply stated as: 214->35/ ___214.
  • Dissimilation in Grammar and the Lexicon 381

    Dissimilation in Grammar and the Lexicon 381

    In Paul de Lacy (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology, CUP. ~ssive' 16 hono­ main, uages Ii and Dissimilation in grammar .t sibi­ l1eme- and the lexicon John D. Alderete Stefan A. Frisch 1992). s har­ peech L1 and form 16.1 Introduction ltivity Dissimilation is the systematic avoidance of two similar sound structures in this is relatively close proximity to each other. It is exhibited in static generalizations over the lexicon, where combinations of similar sounds are systematically lspar­ avoided in lexical items, like the avoidance oftwo homorganic consonants in ~such Arabic roots (Greenberg 1950; McCarthy 1994). Dissimilation is also observed in l than phonological processes in which the target and trigger become less alike for by phonologically. In Tashlhiyt Berber, for example, two primary labial conson­ ction; ants in the same derived stem trigger a process ofdelabialization: Im-kaddabl ~ [n-kaddab] 'consider a liar (reciprocal)' (Elmedlaoui 1992, Jebbour 1985). Dissimilation has been an important empirical testing ground for many of the central research paradigms in modern linguistics. For example, dissimilatory phenomena have been crucial to the development of theories offeature geometry and feature specification in autosegmental phonology (McCarthy 1986, 1988, Padgett 1995, Yip 1989b). As the results emerging from this research were incorporated into constraint-based theories of phonology like Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 2004), dissimilation became an important problem in the study of phonological markedness and constraint composition (Alderete 1997, Ito & Mester 2003). In a different line of research, dissimilation has been argued to have its seeds in the phonetics of sound change, restricted by the same vocal tract constraints involved in speech production and perception (Ohala 1981 et seq.).
  • Prosody of Tone Sandhi in Vietnamese Reduplications

    Prosody of Tone Sandhi in Vietnamese Reduplications

    Prosody of Tone Sandhi in Vietnamese Reduplications Authors Thu Nguyen Linguistics program E.M.S.A.H. University of Queensland St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia Email: [email protected] John Ingram Linguistics program E.M.S.A.H. University of Queensland St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia Email: [email protected] Abstract In this paper we take advantage of the segmental control afforded by full and partial Vietnamese reduplications on a constant carrier phrase to obtain acoustic evidence of assymetrical prominence relations (van der Hulst 2005), in support of a hypothesis that Vietnamese reduplications are phonetically right headed and that tone sandhi is a reduction phenomenon occurring on prosodically weak positions (Shih, 2005). Acoustic parameters of syllable duration (onset, nucleus and coda), F0 range, F0 contour, vowel intensity, spectral tilt and vowel formant structure are analyzed to determine: (1) which syllable of the two (base or reduplicant) is more prominent and (2) how the tone sandhi forms differ from their full reduplicated counterparts. Comparisons of full and partial reduplicant syllables in tone sandhi forms provide additional support for this analysis. Key words: tone sandhi, prosody, stress, reduplication, Vietnamese, acoustic analysis ____________________________ We would like to thank our subjects for offering their voices for the analysis, Dr. Nguyen Hong Nguyen for statistical advice and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. The Postdoctoral research fellowship granted to the first author by the University of Queensland is acknowledged. Prosody of tone sandhi in Vietnamese reduplications 2 1. Introduction Vietnamese is a contour tone language, which is strongly syllabic in its phonological organization and morphology.
  • Repair Strategies in Labial Dissimilation: Diminutive Formations in Xitsonga

    Repair Strategies in Labial Dissimilation: Diminutive Formations in Xitsonga

    Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus, Vol. 44, 2014, 89-103 doi: 10.5842/44-0-642 Repair strategies in labial dissimilation: Diminutive formations in Xitsonga Seunghun J. Lee English, Central Connecticut State University, New Britain, CT, USA E-mail: [email protected] Clementinah Burheni University of Venda, Thohoyandou, Limpopo Province, South Africa E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This paper presents phonological processes in Xitsonga diminutives. The round vowels /u/ and /o/ are changed into the glide [w] to avoid vowel hiatus. When the glide [w] is preceded by labial consonants, then other processes occur: either the labial nasal [m] corresponds to a velar, or the glide [w] deletes when preceded by labial obstruents. The seemingly disjunctive processes are argued to be responses to the OCP-LABIAL constraint in which adjacent segments with [labial] are prohibited. A rule-based analysis and a constraint-based (Optimality Theory) analysis are presented to discuss these processes. Data with affrication is introduced as an alternative repair strategy, but is not included in the formal analysis, which focuses on labial dissimilation. Keywords: Xitsonga, diminutives, labial dissimilation, Optimality Theory, OCP 1. Introduction In Xitsonga diminutive formation, the juncture between the root and the suffix undergoes various phonological processes: glide formation, velarisation and vowel deletion. We argue that these seemingly disjointed processes are results of repair strategies that apply in order to avoid a sequence of labial sounds. In (1), the template for the Xitsonga diminutive is shown (Baumbach 1987:148-157, Ziervogel 1967:216-234). The root noun is immediately preceded by the class (CL)7/8 prefix and followed by –ana.
  • Lecture 5 Sound Change

    Lecture 5 Sound Change

    An articulatory theory of sound change An articulatory theory of sound change Hypothesis: Most common initial motivation for sound change is the automation of production. Tokens reduced online, are perceived as reduced and represented in the exemplar cluster as reduced. Therefore we expect sound changes to reflect a decrease in gestural magnitude and an increase in gestural overlap. What are some ways to test the articulatory model? The theory makes predictions about what is a possible sound change. These predictions could be tested on a cross-linguistic database. Sound changes that take place in the languages of the world are very similar (Blevins 2004, Bateman 2000, Hajek 1997, Greenberg et al. 1978). We should consider both common and rare changes and try to explain both. Common and rare changes might have different characteristics. Among the properties we could look for are types of phonetic motivation, types of lexical diffusion, gradualness, conditioning environment and resulting segments. Common vs. rare sound change? We need a database that allows us to test hypotheses concerning what types of changes are common and what types are not. A database of sound changes? Most sound changes have occurred in undocumented periods so that we have no record of them. Even in cases with written records, the phonetic interpretation may be unclear. Only a small number of languages have historic records. So any sample of known sound changes would be biased towards those languages. A database of sound changes? Sound changes are known only for some languages of the world: Languages with written histories. Sound changes can be reconstructed by comparing related languages.
  • Is Phonological Consonant Epenthesis Possible? a Series of Artificial Grammar Learning Experiments

    Is Phonological Consonant Epenthesis Possible? a Series of Artificial Grammar Learning Experiments

    Is Phonological Consonant Epenthesis Possible? A Series of Artificial Grammar Learning Experiments Rebecca L. Morley Abstract Consonant epenthesis is typically assumed to be part of the basic repertoire of phonological gram- mars. This implies that there exists some set of linguistic data that entails epenthesis as the best analy- sis. However, a series of artificial grammar learning experiments found no evidence that learners ever selected an epenthesis analysis. Instead, phonetic and morphological biases were revealed, along with individual variation in how learners generalized and regularized their input. These results, in combi- nation with previous work, suggest that synchronic consonant epenthesis may only emerge very rarely, from a gradual accumulation of changes over time. It is argued that the theoretical status of epenthesis must be reconsidered in light of these results, and that investigation of the sufficient learning conditions, and the diachronic developments necessary to produce those conditions, are of central importance to synchronic theory generally. 1 Introduction Epenthesis is defined as insertion of a segment that has no correspondent in the relevant lexical, or un- derlying, form. There are various types of epenthesis that can be defined in terms of either the insertion environment, the features of the epenthesized segment, or both. The focus of this paper is on consonant epenthesis and, more specifically, default consonant epenthesis that results in markedness reduction (e.g. Prince and Smolensky (1993/2004)). Consonant
  • Hearing R-Sandhi: the Role of Past Experience Jennifer Hay Katie Drager Andy Gibson

    Hearing R-Sandhi: the Role of Past Experience Jennifer Hay Katie Drager Andy Gibson

    HEARING R-SANDHI: THE ROLE OF PAST EXPERIENCE JENNIFER HAY KATIE DRAGER ANDY GIBSON University of Canterbury University of Hawai‘i University of Canterbury at Mānoa This article reports on patterns in the production and perception of New Zealand English r-san - dhi. We report on two phoneme-monitoring experiments that examine whether listeners from three regions are sensitive to the distribution of r- presence in linking and intrusive environments. The results provide evidence that sound perception is affected by a listener’s experience-driven expec - tations: greater prior experience with a sound in a given context increases the likelihood of per - ceiving the sound in that context, regardless of whether the sound is present in the stimulus. For listeners with extremely limited prior exposure to a variant, the variant is especially salient and we also observe an experiment-internal effect of experience. We argue that our results support models that incorporate both word-specific and abstract probabilistic representations.* Keywords : salience, listener expectations, r-sandhi, sociophonetics, phoneme monitoring, speech perception, rhoticity 1. Introduction . Speech perception involves the extraction of words and sounds from a continuous speech signal. This normally occurs with little difficulty for the lis - tener, despite a great deal of variability in the acoustic properties of sounds. Listeners’ perception is informed by a large amount of information, including phonological con - text (Mann & Repp 1981), prior exposure in lexically relevant contexts (Norris et al. 2003, Maye et al. 2008), the lexical status of the word (Magnuson et al. 2003), the speaker who produced the sound (Kraljic & Samuel 2005, 2007), social characteristics attributed to the speaker (Strand & Johnson 1996, Hay et al.
  • Morphophonology of Magahi

    Morphophonology of Magahi

    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN: 2319-7064 SJIF (2019): 7.583 Morphophonology of Magahi Saloni Priya Jawaharlal Nehru University, SLL & CS, New Delhi, India Salonipriya17[at]gmail.com Abstract: Every languages has different types of word formation processes and each and every segment of morphology has a sound. The following paper is concerned with the sound changes or phonemic changes that occur during the word formation process in Magahi. Magahi is an Indo- Aryan Language spoken in eastern parts of Bihar and also in some parts of Jharkhand and West Bengal. The term Morphophonology refers to the interaction of word formation with the sound systems of a language. The paper finds out the phonetic rules interacting with the morphology of lexicons of Magahi. The observations shows that he most frequent morphophonological process are Sandhi, assimilation, Metathesis and Epenthesis. Whereas, the process of Dissimilation, Lenition and Fortition are very Uncommon in nature. Keywords: Morphology, Phonology, Sound Changes, Word formation process, Magahi, Words, Vowels, Consonants 1. Introduction 3.1 The Sources of Magahi Glossary Morphophonology refers to the interaction between Magahi has three kind of vocabulary sources; morphological and phonological or its phonetic processes. i) In the first category, it has those lexemes which has The aim of this paper is to give a detailed account on the been processed or influenced by Sanskrit, Prakrit, sound changes that take place in morphemes, when they Apbhransh, ect. Like, combine to form new words in the language. धमम> ध륍म> धरम, स셍म> सꥍ셍> सााँ셍 ii) In the second category, it has those words which are 2.
  • Word-Level Distributions and Structural Factors Codetermine GOOSE Fronting

    Word-Level Distributions and Structural Factors Codetermine GOOSE Fronting

    Word-level distributions and structural factors codetermine GOOSE fronting Márton Sóskuthy1, Paul Foulkes1, Bill Haddican2, Jen Hay3, Vincent Hughes1 1University of York, 2CUNY – Queens College, 3NZILBB – University of Canterbury {marton.soskuthy|paul.foulkes|vincent.hughes}@york.ac.uk, [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT examples of GOOSE in these classes derive historically from different monophthongs and We analyse dynamic formant data from a corpus of diphthongs, mainly Middle English /oː/, /iu/ and /ɛu/. Derby English spanning three generations, focusing GOOSE words containing /j/ are subject to variation on the relationship between yod-dropping and in most dialects of present-day English. The /j/ may GOOSE (/uː/)-fronting. Derby English exhibits a undergo a process of ‘coalescence’ with adjacent stable but variable pattern of yod-dropping in post- consonants (thus issue may be /ɪsjuː/ or /ɪʃuː/), or coronal position (e.g. new [njuː]~[nuː]), and an deletion. The latter process is often referred to as ongoing process of /uː/-fronting. The degree of /uː/- yod-dropping (i.e. new may be /njuː/ or /nuː/). fronting is highest in words which categorically Deletion varies markedly across dialects, include yod (e.g. cube) and lower in words which particularly in stressed positions [20]. Historical /j/ never show a yod (e.g. noodle). Words with variable was lost earliest after palatals, /r/ and /l/ (chew, rude, yod-dropping exhibit intermediate degrees of blue), and is now almost universally absent in these fronting. The degree of fronting in variable words is contexts [20]. Most contemporary British and North partly determined by how frequent the lexical item American dialects show variation according to is: frequent words undergo more fronting than preceding context.
  • August 25-26, 1969

    August 25-26, 1969

    Fourth International Conference on Salish Languages University of Victoria August 25-26, 1969 LABIALIZATION IN NOOTKAN William H. Jacobsen Jr. University of Nevada A well-known phonological characteristic of most of the Indian languages of the Northwest is the presence of contrast­ ing pairs of plain and labialized dorsal consonants. In 1920 Boas observed: The study of phonetics indicates that certain features have a limited and well-defined distribution which, on the whole, is conttnuous. To give an example: the extra­ ordinary development of the series of k sounds and of laterals (1 sounds) is common to the most diverse languages of the NOrth Pacific coast, while in California and east of the Rocky mountains this characteristic feature disappears •••• The labialization of k sounds following an 0 or u is widely spread in the eftreme-Northwest, arid infrequent 'Outside of that territory. Later he elaborated on this statement, in the context of making comparisons to the phenomenon as occurring in Kwakiutl: The labialization of k sounds after 0 and u is a widely spread phenomenon on the Pacific coast~. Tn Chinook when a u vowel precedes a k sound and the latter is either followed oy a vowel or is a prefix, it must be labial~zed or followed by a vowel of the u group (HAIL I, 569). In Tlingit k sounds preceded by 0 or u-change the following i and e to 0 and u ~ibid. p. 16;). A similar type of labia~ization of-k after --a, 0, and -u occurs in Kutenai (IJAL IV, p.
  • From Tone to Accent

    From Tone to Accent

    This page intentionally left blank Matthew Chen’s landmark study offers the most comprehensive analysis to date of the rich and complex patterns of tone used in Chinese languages. Chinese has a wide repertoire of tones which undergo often surprising changes when they are connected in speech flow. The term tone sandhi refers to this tonal alternation. Chen examines tone sandhi phenomena in detail across a variety of Chinese dialects. He explores a range of important theoretical issues such as the nature of tonal representation, the relation of tone to accent, the prosodic domain of sandhi rules, and the interface between syntax and phonology. His book is the culmination of a ten-year research project and offers a wealth of empirical data not previously accessible to linguists. Extensive references and a bibliography on tone sandhi complete this invaluable resource which will be welcomed as a standard reference on Chinese tone. Having taught for many years at the University of California, San Diego, is Professor and chair of Linguistics and Dean of the Humanities and Social Sciences faculty at the City University of Hong Kong. He has written numerous articles on linguistics and is Associate Editor of the Journal of Chinese Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley. In this series 52 . and . : English focus constructions and the theory of grammar 53 : Linguistic realities: an autonomist metatheory for the generative enterprise 54 : From etymology to pragmatics: metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure 55 : Relevance relations in discourse: a study with special reference to Sissala 56 : On definiteness: a study with special reference to English and Finnish 57 and : The syntax of Noun Phrases: configuration, parameters and empty categories 58 : Conditions on phonological government 59 .
  • Studies in African Linguistics Volume 21, Number 3, December 1990

    Studies in African Linguistics Volume 21, Number 3, December 1990

    Studies in African Linguistics Volume 21, Number 3, December 1990 CONTEXTUAL LABIALIZATION IN NA WURI* Roderic F. Casali Ghana Institute of Linguistics Literacy and Bible Translation and UCLA A spectrographic investigation into the non-contrastive labialization of consonants before round vowels in Nawuri (a Kwa language of Ghana) sup­ ports the notion that this labialization is the result of a phonological, feature­ spreading rule and not simply an automatic transitional process. This as­ sumption is further warranted in that it allows for a more natural treatment of some other phonological processes in the language. The fact that labial­ ization before round vowels is generally not very audible is explained in terms of a principle of speech perception. A final topic addressed is the question of why (both in Nawuri and apparently in a number of other Ghanaian languages as well) contextual labialization does tend to be more perceptible in certain restricted environments. o. Introduction This paper deals with the allophonic labialization of consonants before round vowels in Nawuri, a Kwa language of Ghana.! While such labialization is gener­ ally not very audible, spectrographic evidence suggests that it is strongly present, * The spectrograms in this study were produced at the phonetics lab of the University of Texas at Arlington using equipment provided through a grant of the Permanent University Fund of the University of Texas system. I would like to thank the following people for their valuable comments and suggestions: Joan Baart, Don Burquest, Mike Cahill, Jerry Edmondson, Norris McKinney, Bob Mugele, Tony Naden, and Keith Snider. I would also like to express my appreciation to Russell Schuh and an anonymous referee for this journal for their helpful criticism of an earlier version, and to Mary Steele for some helpful discussion concerning labialization in Konkomba.