UNIVERSITY of CALGARY Coronalization As Assibilation By
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Coronalization as Assibilation by Corey Stuart Telfer A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS CALGARY, ALBERTA APRIL, 2006 © Corey Stuart Telfer 2006 UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES The undersigned certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate Studies for acceptance, a thesis entitled “Coronalization as Assibilation” submitted by Corey Stuart Telfer in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Approval Page ii ABSTRACT The common phonological process of coronalization, where a velar stop k becomes a strident coronal affricate ʦ or ʧ before a high front vocoid, has yet to receive an adequate formal explanation. While this process is usually thought to result from articulatory assimilation, some linguists have claimed it to be primarily acoustic in nature (Flemming 2002, Guion 1996, 1998, Ohala 1992). This is analogous to assibilation, an acoustic process where a dental stop t becomes ʦ before a high front vocoid (Kim 2001). The striking similarities between coronalization and assibilation lead me to argue that they are closely related, and that a formal analysis of assibilation (Kim 2001) can be adapted to account for coronalization. After comparing the typology of coronalization (Bhat 1978) to the typology of assibilation (Hall and Hamann 2003) I provide a thorough formal analysis of coronalization that takes both acoustic and articulatory factors into account. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the many students who I have become friends with through my university career. These include Chirlene Lee, Jeff Long, Annie Cheung, Nicole Rose, Genevieve Cloutier, Mary McCrae, Marni Penner and Scott Moisik. Among the former and current master’s students I would like to thank Sheena Van Der Mark, Youri Zabbal, Cory Sheedy, Elizabeth Stacey, Rachel Klippenstein and Emily Elfner. I was also fortunate to befriend many PhD students, including Andrea Wilhelm, Elham Rohany-Rahbar, Antonio Gonzalez-Poot, Aili You, and Ilana Mezhevich. Finally I would like to thank my office-mates Heather Bliss, Karen Jesney and Dave Thermoset. Karen was always finding interesting data for me to consider, educating me about things I should have already known, and, most importantly, challenging my ideas. Outside of university I would like to thank Dennis & Becky Horvath, Shane & Alana Fitzgerald, Collin Desjardins, Mark Hebert & Angie Rout, Shamim Mohtadi and Houman & Damineh Eshraghi-Yazdi for their continued friendship and support. I would also like to thank those friends that I have met through the medium of Celtic music: Carla & Brent Johnson, Adrian & Jocelyn Textor and Ryan Jones. The University of Calgary Linguistics Department is home to a host of stalwart professors who I would like to thank for their efforts in setting a high academic standard while maintaining a relaxed and encouraging atmosphere. These include Betsy Ritter, Robert Murray, Martha McGinnis, John Archibald and Amanda Pounder. Perhaps the most invaluable member of our department is Linda Toth, who ensures that all of the administrative details are taken care of. Always kind, helpful and understanding, Linda deserves a great deal of thanks from myself and many others. iv I appreciate the responses I received from Tracy Hall, Lev Michael and the late Peter Ladefoged, and I would like to thank them for taking the time to consider my questions. My family has always supported my academic efforts, even if they do laugh when I tell them what I really study. Special thanks to my brothers Ryan and Reid, to my sister Laura, and to my mom and dad, Dan and Mary. Thanks also to my parents- in-law, Walter & Wendy Vaughan, who allowed my wife and I to stay with them during the final weeks of completing this thesis, and to my brother and sister-in-law, Amanda & Roggero Ciofani. Thanks to all of my cousins, my Grandma Lucille and Grandpa Peter, who I lived with while taking my undergraduate degree, and to my Grammy Leona and Grampy Ed for the good conversation and the encouragement. Special thanks go to Doug Walker and Michael Dobrovolsky for taking the time to read and critique my thesis. I should also mention Suzanne Curtin, who served as the neutral chair during my thesis defense. My great appreciation goes out to my friend Darin Howe, who also happens to be my thesis advisor. His patience, wisdom, encouragement and his encyclopedic knowledge of phonological theory were integral to this thesis. Simply thanking him is not enough for all of the time and effort he has dedicated towards my academic endeavours. I would also like to thank Darin’s daughters, Melanie and Jessica, who have always provided a happy reprieve from the serious work of scholarly pursuit. Finally, I would like to thank my wife Alberta who has supported me wholeheartedly throughout the writing of this thesis. v Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my grandfather, Edmund S. Telfer, who encouraged me in my pursuit of academic study, and who shares my love of language. Tapadh leibh vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Approval Page ............................................................................................................... ii Abstract.........................................................................................................................iii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................ iv Dedication..................................................................................................................... vi Table of Contents ........................................................................................................ vii List of Tables................................................................................................................ ix List of Figures .............................................................................................................. xi List of Abbreviations and Symbols............................................................................xiii Epigraph...................................................................................................................... xiv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1 1.1 Transcription conventions................................................................ 4 1.2 Terminology..................................................................................... 5 1.3 Theoretical framework..................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ....................................................... 9 2.1 A Neogrammarian view................................................................. 10 2.2 Chomsky & Halle (1968): The Sound Pattern of English ............ 11 2.3 Halle, Vaux & Wolfe (2000): Revised Articulator Theory .......... 13 2.4 Clements & Hume (1995): Vowel-Place Theory.......................... 15 2.4.1 Problems with treating front vowels as [−anterior]......... 17 2.4.2 Problems with treating front vowels as [coronal]............. 21 2.4.3 Problems with vowel height in Vowel-Place Theory ....... 27 2.4.4 Other problems with Vowel-Place Theory........................ 29 2.5 Lahiri & Evers (1991) ................................................................... 31 2.6 Hall (1997)..................................................................................... 34 2.7 Halle (2005) ................................................................................... 38 2.8 Calabrese (2005) ............................................................................ 45 2.9 Guion (1998).................................................................................. 50 2.10 Lee (2000)...................................................................................... 56 2.11 Summary ........................................................................................ 58 CHAPTER 3: COMPARING CORONALIZATION AND ASSIBILATION .......... 65 3.1 Coronalization................................................................................ 65 3.1.1 Coronalization triggers ...................................................... 68 3.1.2 Coronalization outcomes ................................................... 69 vii 3.1.3 Voicing asymmetry in velar coronalization ...................... 72 3.1.4 Summary ............................................................................ 75 3.2 Assibilation .................................................................................... 76 3.2.1 Assibilation triggers........................................................... 76 3.2.2 Assibilation outcomes........................................................ 80 3.2.3 Voicing asymmetry in assibilation .................................... 83 3.2.4 Assibilation as an acoustic process ................................... 84 3.2.5 Summary ............................................................................ 90 3.3 Comparing Coronalization and Assibilation ................................. 91 CHAPTER 4: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH....................................................... 92 4.1 Coronalization as assibilation........................................................ 92 4.1.1 The proposed analysis........................................................ 92 4.1.2 Velar palatalization