DOCSLIB.ORG

Laryngeal Contrast and Phonetic Voicing: a Laboratory Phonology Approach to English, Hungarian, and Dutch

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Laryngeal Contrast and Phonetic Voicing: a Laboratory Phonology Approach to English, Hungarian, and Dutch University of Groningen Laryngeal contrast and phonetic voicing Jansen, Wouter IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2004 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Jansen, W. (2004). Laryngeal contrast and phonetic voicing: A laboratory phonology approach to English, Hungarian, and Dutch. s.n. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 01-10-2021 Laryngeal Contrast and Phonetic Voicing: A Laboratory Phonology Approach to English, Hungarian, and Dutch Wouter Jansen The work in this thesis was supported by grants from the Behavioral and Cognitive Neurosciences (BCN) research school Groningen, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO; grant number 200-50-068), and the European Union’s Training and Mobility of Researchers (TMR) programme through the Learning Computational Grammars (LCG) project (grant ERBFM- RXCT980237, principal investigator: John Nerbonne) Copyright c 2004 by Wouter Jansen Document prepared with LATEX 2ε and typeset by pdfTEX Printed by PrintPartners Ipskamp Enschede Groningen Dissertations in Linguistics 47 ISSN 0928-0030 RIJKSUNIVERSITEIT GRONINGEN Laryngeal Contrast and Phonetic Voicing: A Laboratory Phonology Approach to English, Hungarian, and Dutch Proefschrift ter verkrijging van het doctoraat in de Letteren aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen op gezag van de Rector Magnificus, dr. F. Zwarts, in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 27 mei 2004 om 13.15 uur door Wouter Jansen geboren op 26 januari 1973 te Zuidhorn Promotor : Prof. dr. ir. J. Nerbonne Copromotor : Dr. D.G. Gilbers Beoordelingscommissie : Prof. dr. C. Gussenhoven Prof. dr. J. Hoeksema Prof. dr. V. van Heuven Preface The work presented in this dissertation has greatly benefited from the generosity and patience of a number of people, and I am pleased to be able to repay some of my debt to them, finally. First, much of the work presented here was supported financially by NWO (Gebied Geesteswetenschappen), in the form of grant 200-50-068. This grant, and the travel grant from NWO that allowed me to spend nearly six weeks at Ohio State University during the summer of 2000, are gratefully acknowledged. Two further sources of financial and infrastructural support should be acknowl- edged here, and with the same gratitude. First, the first four months of my PhD project were funded by a grant from the BCN graduate school of the University of Groningen. Second, towards the end of the project I was able to further de- velop and broaden my work at the Department of Linguistics of the University of Tubingen¨ through generous financial support from the Learning Computational Grammars (LCG) project, which was funded by the European Union’s Training and Mobility of Researchers (TMR) programme (grant ERBFMRXCT980237, principal investigator: John Nerbonne). Next, I would like to thank my supervisors, Dicky Gilbers and John Ner- bonne for helping me start a PhD project back in 1997, for encouragement, feedback, support in many practical matters, and above all for great amounts of patience in the face of ever-shifting topics and a major disappearing act. Thanks are also due to the members of my committee, Carlos Gussenhoven, Jack Hoek- sema, and Vincent van Heuven, for their comments on the original manuscript. Thanks, furthermore, to Ilse van Gemert for all her help in getting this document printed. None of the experimental part of this book would have been realised without the help of the volunteer subjects who took part in my experiments; I owe them many thanks for their time and effort. Moreover, I am indebted to the following people for helpful feedback on parts of the work presented below as well as on my thinking on the sub- ject matter in a more general way. They are listed here not in order of im- portance, nor alphabetically, but in a quasi-chronological order: John Harris, Moira Yip and the other members of the London phonology reading group; vi Preface Sue Barry, Stefan Ploch, Peter Sherwood, Maria´ Gosy,´ Peter´ Siptar,´ Miklos´ Torkenczy,¨ Szilard´ Szentgyorgyi,¨ Sylvia Blaho, Catherine Ringen, Jim Scobbie, Patrick Honeybone, Wiebke Brockhaus, Heinz Giegerich. I am especially grate- ful to Gert Heise at Groningen and Bernard Howard at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London for their technical support during the recording of the speech material discussed in chapters 2, 4, and in particular 5, 6 and 7. I’ve been very lucky over the years to work alongside, and sometimes even with, a number of people whose academic specialisms are different from my own to a greater or lesser extent, but whose views, tastes, and passions –and work- ing hours of course– made me feel at home in academia more than anywhere else. I’ll single out Ivelin Stoianov and Stasinos Konstantopoulos (formerly) at Groningen, as well as Michelle Gregory, Jason Brenier, Katja Jasinskaja, and Stefan Benus. Many thanks to my other friends and my family, Nynke, Flip, Inge, Eti- enne, Maarten, Richard, Margaret, Kate, Al, for moral and financial support, for kindness, good humour, welcome distractions and more generosity in many other respects than would fit these pages. And I mean this to include well-timed supplies of fresh socks, and evil red-eyed bears, by the way. Finally, and most importantly, thank you Zoe,¨ for your unwavering support, encouragement, and help in every possible respect with the completion of this book. Far above all else, thank you for walking down Wilmslow Road with me that day in Manchester, and for everything that has come of it. Dublin, 13th May 2004 Contents Preface v Contents vii List of Tables xi List of Figures xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Synopsis .............................. 2 1.2 Notes on transcription ....................... 5 1.3 The descriptive framework .................... 6 1.3.1 Linguistic and extralinguistic speech processing ..... 6 1.3.2 Phonology and phonetics ................. 8 1.3.3 Phonetic rules and representations ............ 10 1.3.4 Hypoarticulation and prosody .............. 14 1.3.5 Absent targets: phonetic underspecification ....... 16 1.4 Formalism vs. functionalism ................... 18 1.4.1 Radical formalism .................... 19 1.4.2 Synchronic functionalism ................ 21 1.4.3 Diachronic functionalism ................. 24 1.4.4 The emergence of structure ................ 26 1.4.5 Perceptibility ....................... 28 1.5 Conclusion: the phonetics-phonology interface revisited .... 30 2 The phonetics of the fortis-lenis contrast 35 2.1 The production of voicing in obstruents ............. 36 2.2 Plosives .............................. 41 2.2.1 Voicing targets for (utterance-)initial fortis and lenis plosives .......................... 41 2.2.2 Positional variation in stop voicing: word-medial and word-final contexts .................... 44 viii CONTENTS 2.2.3 Other correlates of [tense] in plosives .......... 51 2.3 Fricatives and affricates ...................... 55 2.3.1 Voicing targets for tense and lax fricatives ........ 55 2.3.2 Other features of tense and lax fricatives ......... 57 2.3.3 A note on tense vs. lax in affricates ........... 58 2.4 Summary and remaining issues .................. 60 3 Laryngeal neutralisation 63 3.1 Theories of (final) laryngeal neutralisation ............ 65 3.1.1 The nature of neutralisation processes .......... 66 3.1.2 Syllable-driven approaches to laryngeal neutralisation . 67 3.1.3 Cue-based approaches to laryngeal neutralisation .... 69 3.2 The phonetics of laryngeal neutralisation ............. 71 3.2.1 Laryngeal neutralisation as phonetic underspecification . 71 3.2.2 Incomplete laryngeal neutralisation and its implications . 74 3.3 Obstruent feature asymmetries: voicing vs. aspirating languages 78 3.4 Obstruent feature asymmetries: plosives vs. fricatives ...... 79 3.5 Context asymmetries: right and left-adjacent sounds ....... 84 3.6 The word-initial vs. word-final asymmetry ............ 90 3.7 Summary and remaining issues .................. 95 4 Voicing assimilation 99 4.1 Modelling voicing assimilation .................. 101 4.1.1 Phonological analyses of voicing assimilation ...... 103 4.1.2 Articulation-driven voicing assimilation ......... 107 4.2 Voicing assimilation in morphological paradigms ........ 112 4.3 Progressive devoicing at word boundaries ............ 114 4.4 Regressive voicing assimilation at word boundaries ....... 116 4.5 Summary ............................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Using 'North Wind and the Sun' Texts to Sample Phoneme Inventories
    Blowing in the wind: Using ‘North Wind and the Sun’ texts to sample phoneme inventories Louise Baird ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language, The Australian National University [email protected] Nicholas Evans ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language, The Australian National University [email protected] Simon J. Greenhill ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language, The Australian National University & Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History [email protected] Language documentation faces a persistent and pervasive problem: How much material is enough to represent a language fully? How much text would we need to sample the full phoneme inventory of a language? In the phonetic/phonemic domain, what proportion of the phoneme inventory can we expect to sample in a text of a given length? Answering these questions in a quantifiable way is tricky, but asking them is necessary. The cumulative col- lection of Illustrative Texts published in the Illustration series in this journal over more than four decades (mostly renditions of the ‘North Wind and the Sun’) gives us an ideal dataset for pursuing these questions. Here we investigate a tractable subset of the above questions, namely: What proportion of a language’s phoneme inventory do these texts enable us to recover, in the minimal sense of having at least one allophone of each phoneme? We find that, even with this low bar, only three languages (Modern Greek, Shipibo and the Treger dialect of Breton) attest all phonemes in these texts.
    [Show full text]
  • Grapheme-To-Phoneme Transcription in Hungarian
    International Journal of Computational Linguistics and Applications vol. 7, no. 1, 2016, pp. 161–173 Received 08/02/2016, accepted 07/03/2016, final 20/06/2016 ISSN 0976-0962, http://ijcla.bahripublications.com Grapheme-to-Phoneme Transcription in Hungarian ATTILA NOVÁK1 AND BORBÁLA SIKLÓSI2 1 MTA-PPKE Hungarian Language Technology Research Group, Hungary 2 Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Hungary ABSTRACT A crucial component of text-to-speech systems is the one respon- sible for the transcription of the written text to its phonemic rep- resentation. although the complexity of the relation between the written and spoken form of languages varies, most languages have their regular and irregular phonological set of rules. In this paper, we present a system for the phonemic transcription of Hungarian. Beside the implementation of rules describing default letter-to-phoneme correspondences and morphophonological al- ternations, the tool incorporates the knowledge of a Hungarian morphological analyzer in order to be able to detect compound and other morpheme boundaries, and it contains a rich lexicon of entries with irregular pronunciation. It is shown that the system performs well even on texts containing a high number of foreign names. 1 INTRODUCTION In the research reported about in this study, our goal was to imple- ment a system that can automatically transform written Hungarian to its phonemic representation. The original intent of the system This is a pre-print version of the paper, before proper formatting and copyediting by the editorial staff. 162 ATTILA NOVÁK AND BORBÁLA SIKLÓSI was to transcribe a database of Hungarian geographic terms. How- ever, due to certain design decisions, our system proved to perform well also on texts containing a high ratio of foreign names and suf- fixed forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present (Impact: Studies in Language and Society)
    <DOCINFO AUTHOR ""TITLE "Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present"SUBJECT "Impact 18"KEYWORDS ""SIZE HEIGHT "220"WIDTH "150"VOFFSET "4"> Germanic Standardizations Impact: Studies in language and society impact publishes monographs, collective volumes, and text books on topics in sociolinguistics. The scope of the series is broad, with special emphasis on areas such as language planning and language policies; language conflict and language death; language standards and language change; dialectology; diglossia; discourse studies; language and social identity (gender, ethnicity, class, ideology); and history and methods of sociolinguistics. General Editor Associate Editor Annick De Houwer Elizabeth Lanza University of Antwerp University of Oslo Advisory Board Ulrich Ammon William Labov Gerhard Mercator University University of Pennsylvania Jan Blommaert Joseph Lo Bianco Ghent University The Australian National University Paul Drew Peter Nelde University of York Catholic University Brussels Anna Escobar Dennis Preston University of Illinois at Urbana Michigan State University Guus Extra Jeanine Treffers-Daller Tilburg University University of the West of England Margarita Hidalgo Vic Webb San Diego State University University of Pretoria Richard A. Hudson University College London Volume 18 Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present Edited by Ana Deumert and Wim Vandenbussche Germanic Standardizations Past to Present Edited by Ana Deumert Monash University Wim Vandenbussche Vrije Universiteit Brussel/FWO-Vlaanderen John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements 8 of American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Germanic standardizations : past to present / edited by Ana Deumert, Wim Vandenbussche.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Voicing Assimilation, Final Devoicing, and the Problem of [V] (Or, the Mouse That Squeaked)*
    Russian voicing assimilation, final devoicing, and the problem of [v] (or, The mouse that squeaked)* Jaye Padgett - University of California, Santa Cruz "...the Standard Russian V...occupies an obviously intermediate position between the obstruents and the sonorants." Jakobson (1978) 1. Introduction Like the mouse that roared, the Russian consonant [v] has a status in phonology out of proportion to its size. Besides leaving a trail of special descriptive comments, this segment has played a key role in discussions about abstractness in phonology, about the manner in which long-distance spreading occurs, and about the the larger organization of phonology. This is largely because of the odd behavior of [v] with respect to final devoicing and voicing assimilation in Russian. Russian obstruents devoice word-finally, as in kniga 'book (nom. sg.) vs. knik (gen. pl.), and assimilate to the voicing of a following obstruent, gorodok 'town (nom. sg.)' vs. gorotka (gen. sg.). The role of [v] in this scenario is puzzling: like an obstruent, it devoices word-finally, krovi 'blood (gen. sg.)' vs. krofj (nom. sg.), and undergoes voicing assimilation, lavok 'bench (gen. pl.)' vs. lafka (nom. sg.). But like a sonorant, it does not trigger voicing assimilation: compare dverj 'door' and tverj 'Tver' (a town). As we will see, [v] behaves unusually in other ways as well. Why is Russian [v] special in this way? The best-known answer to this question posits that [v] is underlyingly /w/ and therefore behaves as a sonorant with respect to voicing assimilation (Lightner 1965, Daniels 1972, Coats and Harshenin 1971, Hayes 1984, Kiparsky 1985).
    [Show full text]
  • Sprache Der Gegenwart
    SPRACHE DER GEGENWART Schriften des Instituts für deutsche Sprache Gemeinsam mit Hans Eggers, Johannes Erben, Odo Leys und Hans Neumann herausgegeben von Hugo Moser Schriftleitung: Ursula Hoberg BAND XXXVII Heinz Kloss DIE ENTWICKLUNG NEUER GERMANISCHER KULTURSPRACHEN SEIT 1800 2., erweiterte Auflage PÄDAGOGISCHER VERLAG SCHWANN DÜSSELDORF CIP-Kurztitelaufnahme der Deutschen Bibliothek Kloss, Heinz: Die Entwicklung neuer germanischer Kultursprachen seit 1800 [achtzehnhundert]. - 2., erw. Aufl. - Düsseldorf: Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann, 1978. (Sprache der Gegenwart; Bd. 37) ISBN 3-590-15637-6 © 1978 Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann Düsseldorf Alle Rechte Vorbehalten ■ 2. Auflage 1978 Umschlaggestaltung Paul Effert Herstellung Lengericher Handelsdruckerei Lengerich (Westf.) ISBN 3-590-15637-6 INHALTSVERZEICHNIS 0. Vorbemerkungen 9 0.1. Aus der Geschichte des Buches 9 0.2. Zum Titel des Buches 10 0.3. Einstimmung: Spracherneuerung und Nationalismus 13 1. Der linguistische und der soziologische Sprachbegriff 23 1.1. Über einige sprachsoziologische Grundbegriffe 23 1.1. 1. Ausbau und Abstand 23 1.1.2. Weiteres von den Einzelsprachen 30 1.2. Ausbaufragen 37 1.2.1. Ausbauweisen 37 1.2.2. Sachprosa 40 1.2.3. Ausbauphasen 46 1.2.4. Ausbaudialekte 55 1.2.5. Dachlose Außenmundarten 60 1.3. Abstandfragen 63 1.3.1. Wie m ißt man den Abstand? 63 1.3.2. Plurizentrische Hochsprachen 66 1.3.3. Scheindialektisierte Abstandsprachen 67 1.3.4. Kreolsprachen: ein von der Forschung neu er­ schlossener Typ von Abstandsprachen 70 1.4. Zusammenfassung und Vorausschau 79 1.4.1. Zusammenfassung des bisher Gesagten 79 1.4.2. Zur Gliederung der im 2. Kapitel näher behandelten Ausbausprachen und Ausbaudialekte 82 1.4.3.
    [Show full text]
  • [Paper on the Alignment of Low Postnuclear F0 Valleys in Dutch
    ALIGNMENT OF “PHRASE ACCENT” LOWS IN DUTCH FALLING-RISING QUESTIONS: THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS Robin J. Lickley*, Astrid Schepman** and D. Robert Ladd*** *Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh **University of Abertay, Dundee *** Edinburgh University, Edinburgh Running Head: Dutch phrase accent lows Acknowledgements The research reported here was funded by the UK Economic and Research Council (ESRC) under grant no. R000-23-7447 to Edinburgh University, Principal Investigator D. R. Ladd. We are grateful to: Ellen Gurman Bard, for useful discussions about how to use the Map Task; Ineke Mennen for her help in devising sentences for the woon je in task; Andrew Ladd, for preparing new drawings for the Dutch maps; Carlos Gussenhoven, for providing access to the Nijmegen phonetics lab and its helpful staff, and for helping us to recruit speakers; Angela Vonk, for transcribing the Map Task corpus; Michael Bennett, Eddie Dubourg, Cedric Macmartin, and Stewart Smith, for much technical assistance in Edinburgh; the audience at the Colloquium of the British Association of Academic Phoneticians in Newcastle in March 2002, who made comments on a preliminary version of this paper; Francis Nolan and Vincent van Heuven, who read the paper as referees for Language and Speech and made many important suggestions for improvement; and above all our speakers, without whom there would have been nothing to study. Address for correspondence: Dr Robin J. Lickley, Speech and Hearing Sciences, Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh, EH12 8TS, Scotland, UK. Email: [email protected]. 2 Abstract In the first part of this study, we measured the alignment (relative to segmental landmarks) of the low F0 turning points between the accentual fall and the final boundary rise in short Dutch falling-rising questions of the form Do you live in [place name]? produced as read speech in a laboratory setting.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthographies in Grammar Books
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 30 July 2018 doi:10.20944/preprints201807.0565.v1 Tomislav Stojanov, [email protected], [email protected] Institute of Croatian Language and Linguistic Republike Austrije 16, 10.000 Zagreb, Croatia Orthographies in Grammar Books – Antiquity and Humanism Summary This paper researches the as yet unstudied topic of orthographic content in antique, medieval, and Renaissance grammar books in European languages, as part of a wider research of the origin of orthographic standards in European languages. As a central place for teachings about language, grammar books contained orthographic instructions from the very beginning, and such practice continued also in later periods. Understanding the function, content, and orthographic forms in the past provides for a better description of the nature of the orthographic standard in the present. The evolution of grammatographic practice clearly shows the continuity of development of orthographic content from a constituent of grammar studies through the littera unit gradually to an independent unit, then into annexed orthographic sections, and later into separate orthographic manuals. 5 antique, 22 Latin, and 17 vernacular grammars were analyzed, describing 19 European languages. The research methodology is based on distinguishing orthographic content in the narrower sense (grapheme to meaning) from the broader sense (grapheme to phoneme). In this way, the function of orthographic description was established separately from the study of spelling. As for the traditional description of orthographic content in the broader sense in old grammar books, it is shown that orthographic content can also be studied within the grammatographic framework of a specific period, similar to the description of morphology or syntax.
    [Show full text]
  • The Syntax of Phonology a Radically Substance-Free Approach Sylvia Blaho
    The syntax of phonology A radically substance-free approach Sylvia Blaho A dissertation for the degree of Philosophiæ Doctor University of Tromsø Faculty of Humanities Center for Advanced Study in Theoretical Linguistics January 2008 Contents Acknowledgements v Abstract ix 1 Substance-free phonology 1 1.1 Initialassumptions ........................ 1 1.2 Variations on substance-free phonology . 8 1.2.1 TheConcordiaschool. 9 1.2.2 TheTorontoschool . 11 1.2.3 ElementTheory. .. .. 16 1.2.4 The Parallel Structures Model . 17 1.2.5 Radically substance-free phonology . 22 1.3 Formal issues in substance-free phonology . 24 1.3.1 Phoneticvariation . 24 1.3.2 PrivativityinOT . 26 1.3.3 Substance-freegeometry . 30 1.3.4 Geometryvs. binarity . 34 1.4 The architecture of substance-free phonology . .. 40 2 Substance-free OT 45 2.1 Ident[F] ............................. 45 2.2 *[F]................................. 52 2.3 Max[F] and Dep[F] ....................... 56 2.3.1 Esimbi........................... 61 2.4 Feature‘spreading’inOT . 63 2.5 Paradigmatic positional faithfulness . 71 2.5.1 The typological predictions of paradigmatic faithfulness 73 ii Contents 2.5.2 The role of paradigmatic faithfulness in shaping inven- tories............................ 84 3 Slovak voicing assimilation and sandhi voicing 117 3.1 Dataandgeneralisations . .117 3.2 Representations . .118 3.3 Analysis ..............................120 3.3.1 Voicing assimilation between obstruents . 120 3.3.2 Pre-pausedevoicing. .130 3.3.3 Pre-sonorantvoicing . .137 3.4 Summary .............................147 4 Hungarian voicing assimilation 149 4.1 Dataandgeneralisations . .150 4.2 Representations . .153 4.3 Analysis ..............................156 4.3.1 Theregularpattern. .156 4.3.2 /j/ .............................167 4.3.3 /h/ .............................182 4.4 Summary .............................192 Appendix A: tableaux including all constraints .
    [Show full text]
  • The Processing of Reduced Word Pronunciation Variants by Natives and Foreign Language Learners
    The processing of reduced word pronunciaton variants by natves and learners Evidence from French casual speech Sophie Brand 6 511381-L-os-brand Processed on: 14-7-2017 The processing of reduced word pronunciation variants by natives and foreign language learners Evidence from French casual speech 2017, Sophie Brand ISBN: 978-90-76203-87-4 Cover image: Jolijn Ceelen Printed and bound by Ipskamp Drukkers b.v. The processing of reduced word pronunciation variants by natives and foreign language learners Evidence from French casual speech Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen op gezag van de rector magnificus prof. dr. J.H.J.M. van Krieken, volgens besluit van het college van decanen in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 27 september 2017 om 16.30 uur precies door Sophie Wijnanda Maria Brand geboren op 25 augustus 1985 te Roermond Promotor: Prof. dr. M.T.C. Ernestus Copromotor: Dr. E. Janse Manuscriptcommissie: Prof. dr. R.W.N.M. van Hout Prof. dr. N. Warner (University of Arizona, Verenigde Staten) Dr. A. Bürki (Universität Potsdam, Duitsland) Prof. dr. H.M.G.M. Jacobs Dr. M.B.P. Starren The research reported in this dissertation was supported by a Consolidator grant from the European Research Council [grant number 284108] awarded to Prof. dr. M.T.C. Ernestus. ‘I don’t know what I may seem to the world, but, as to myself, I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me’.
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Object Marking in Hungarian and the Morphosyntax of Case and Agreement
    Differential object marking in Hungarian and the morphosyntax of case and agreement András Bárány Downing College, University of Cambridge November 2015 This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Voor ⴰⵎⵓⵛⵛ Contents Declaration ix Acknowledgements xi Abbreviations xiii List of Tables xv List of Figures xvii 1 DOM, case and agreement 1 1.1 Introduction .................................... 1 1.2 Differential object marking ........................... 2 1.3 Person features and hierarchies ........................ 5 1.3.1 Hierarchies and functional approaches to DOM ......... 9 1.4 Case and agreement ............................... 10 1.5 Theoretical assumptions ............................. 14 1.5.1 Cyclic Agree ............................... 14 1.5.2 Agree can fail .............................. 17 1.5.3 Syntax and morphology ........................ 18 1.6 The sample of languages ............................ 21 Part I Differential object marking in Hungarian 23 2 DOM in Hungarian 25 2.1 Introduction: Hungarian object agreement ................. 25 v Contents 2.2 The distribution of object agreement ..................... 27 2.2.1 Direct objects and subject agreement ................ 28 2.2.2 Direct objects that trigger object agreement ............ 33 2.2.3 “Unexpected” object agreement ................... 43 2.3 Summary ...................................... 45 3 A hybrid analysis of object agreement: syntactic structure and π-features 47 3.1 Introduction .................................... 47 3.2 Towards an analysis ............................... 48 3.2.1 Problems for semantic approaches ................. 48 3.2.2 Problems for syntactic approaches ................. 50 3.2.3 Syntactic structure and person features .............. 53 3.3 Evidence from possessive noun phrases in Hungarian .......... 58 3.3.1 Types of possessors: nominative, dative, pronominal ...... 58 3.3.2 Non-specific possessives and dative possessors .......... 61 3.3.3 Possessed noun phrases and object agreement .........
    [Show full text]
  • Hungarian Style Guide
    Hungarian Style Guide Published: February, 2019 Microsoft Hungarian Style Guide Contents 1 About this style guide............................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Recommended style references .............................................................................................................. 4 2 Microsoft voice .............................................................................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Choices that reflect Microsoft voice ..................................................................................................... 7 2.1.1 Flexibility ........................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1.2 Word choice................................................................................................................................................. 8 2.1.3 Word-to-word translation.................................................................................................................. 9 2.1.4 Words and phrases to avoid ......................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Sample Microsoft voice text.................................................................................................................... 11 2.2.1 Address the user to take action .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Typology ∧ Phonology
    Frans Plank An implicational universal to defy: typology ⊃ ¬ phonology ≡ phonology ⊃ ¬ typology ≡ ¬ (typology ᴧ phonology) ≡ ¬ typology v ¬ phonology Abstract: The purpose of this chapter is twofold: first, to assess how typology has been dealing with phonology (§2), from early days (§2.1) to the present (§2.2); second, focusing on phonology (§3), to ask about an imbalance of phonology and syntax- inflection in general (§3.1) and about typological concerns in phonology itself (§3.2). Looked at from both angles, the phonology–typology relationship is seen to be special, and the impression is confirmed that, in comparison especially with syntax, phonological typology as well as typological phonology are behindhand in the quest for system in linguistic diversity. (Though not all is well about the syntax–typology relationship, either.) Explanations are suggested in terms of the substance of subject matters (§3.1) and of the attitudes to description and theory in different subcommunities in linguistics (§3.2). 1 The typological programme and where it is in arrears In linguistics, typology is a research programme, not a subfield or a theory, and its remit is (i) to chart linguistic diversity, (ii) to discover order or indeed unity in diversity, and (iii) to make sense of what has been charted and discovered. Regrettably but perhaps understandably, given how this enterprise has usually been named after Gabelentz (1894, 1901) and given the meanings of this term in other fields, typology has sometimes been taken to be about the classification of the discipline’s cherished cardinal individuals, namely languages, into types; but for linguistic typology “type” in this sense of “class” is really a secondary and indeed expendable concept.
    [Show full text]