On the Natural History of Preaspirated Stops Ian D. Clayton A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Linguistics. Chapel Hill 2010 Approved by Elliott Moreton Jennifer L. Smith Paul T. Roberge Patrick O’Neill Erik Thomas © 2010 Ian D. Clayton ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Ian D. Clayton: On the Natural History of Preaspirated Stops (Under the direction of Elliott Moreton) This dissertation makes two contributions, one empirical, the other theoretical. Empirically, the dissertation deepens our understanding of the lifecycle and behavior of the preaspirated stop, an extremely rare phonological feature. I show that in most confirmed cases, preaspirated stops develop from earlier voiceless geminate stops, less commonly from nasal-voiceless stop clusters. When decaying, preaspirated stops typically develop into unaspirated voiceless stops, or undergo buccalization to become preaffricated. More rarely, decaying preaspirated stops may trigger tonogenesis, or undergo spirantization or nasalization. Phonologically, preaspirated stops usually function as positionally conditioned allophones of underlying aspirated voiceless stops contrasting with voiceless unaspirated stops. The dissertation tests three theoretical frameworks. First, the State-Process model (Greenberg 1978, 1969, 1966) claims that the synchronic distribution of linguistic features offers insight into their rates of innovation and transmission. Conventionally, the rarity of preaspirated stops is attributed to a presumed low rate of transmission: they are rare because they are hard to hear (Silverman 2003, 1997; Bladon 1986). However, the geographic and genetic distribution of preaspirated stops fit the State-Process model’s prototype of an infrequently innovated but robustly transmitted linguistic feature. Further, I show iii experimentally that preaspirated stops are no more difficult to distinguish from unaspirated stops than are much more abundant postaspirated stops. Second, the dissertation tests the success of two models, one cognitive, the other phonetic/diachronic, at accounting for two place-based asymmetries in Scottish Gaelic preaspiration. Whereas a conventional Optimality-Theoretic analysis of these asymmetries overgenerates, an analysis modified via Steriade’s P-map Hypothesis (2001a, 2001b) resolves this overgeneration. The P-map analysis depends on congruent perceptual scales, which the perception experiment (above) confirms: participants’ confusion rates closely match the place-based asymmetries observed in Gaelic. The competing “innocent misperception” model (Ohala 2005, 1993; Blevins 2004) depends on the presence of phonetic precursors to produce an ambiguous phonological signal, which listeners may interpret differently than intended by the speaker, leading to an alteration in a segment’s underlying form. A series of production experiments identifies potential precursors, but also reveals between-speaker variation more compatible with the P- map account than “innocent misperception,” again lending support to Steriade’s hypothesis. iv To Tobie my rock v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This has been a very long journey, and I am pleased to finally have this opportunity to thank at least a few of the numerous people who helped show the way. Elliott Moreton, my dissertation advisor, deserves far more thanks than I can possibly express here. The quality and vision of Elliott’s own work have been my chief inspiration and model. If I can ever be half the scientist he is, I’ll count that a landmark success. I must also thank him for his apparently bottomless patience through my periods of obtuseness and downright stubbornness, his ever-open door, and for the surprise bagpiper. Jen Smith also must be profusely thanked, for showing me just how fascinating phonology can be, and for reminding me at key intervals to keep my eye on the ball (and my nose to the grindstone). I could always rely on her to point out all the angles I had overlooked. Were it not for Patrick O’Neill, I would never have undertaken this project. In large part through his fascinating (and extraordinary challenging) introduction to Old Irish, I discovered a love for the Celtic languages that has never faltered. His encouragement led to the first of several summers on the Misty Isle, and my first encounter with preaspiration. Paul Roberge and Erik Thomas have my gratitude for their expertise and patience. Their keen eyes caught many errors that would have otherwise gone unnoticed, and their numerous and excellent suggestions greatly improved the final product. It goes without saying that any remaining errors are my own. Great thanks are due also to many in Scotland: to the wonderful people at Sabhal Mòr Ostaig (especially Caoimhín Ó Donnaíle) for their indispensable assistance and hospitality; to Domhnull MacIlliosa, Iain MacKenzie, and John MacLeod for their help at the Fountainbridge Library; and to so many study participants who offered their valuable time to the curious American with the microphone and laptop computer. Additional thanks are owed to Hugon Karwowski and Olof Steinthorsdottir, without whose help the Polish and Icelandic components of this study would simply have been impossible. Finally, I would like to thank the other grad students at Carolina, especially Melissa Frazier and Jen Renn, whose own fascinating work has been such a welcome relief from my own. I’ll miss our post-colloq Fridays at Lucy’s (however bad the service may have been). The completion of this dissertation has been facilitated by a Foreign Language Area Studies scholarship, funded through the UNC-CH Center for European Studies, and by a Pre- Dissertation Travel award, made available by the UNC-CH Center for Global Initiatives. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Tables ..........................................................................................................................xii List of Figures ........................................................................................................................xiii Chapter 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................1 1.1 What are preaspirated stops?.................................................................7 1.2 The segmental status of preaspiration .................................................12 1.3 Previous works ....................................................................................18 1.3.1 Silverman (2003).....................................................................18 1.3.2 Helgason (2002)...................................................................... 20 1.3.3 Ní Chasaide (1985)..................................................................21 1.4 Theoretical underpinnings...................................................................22 1.4.1 The State-Process Model.........................................................23 1.4.2 The P-map................................................................................26 1.4.3 The diachronic/channel bias model.........................................28 1.5 Preview of dissertation.........................................................................29 2 The typology of preaspirated stops..................................................................31 2.1 Introduction..........................................................................................31 2.2 Celtic....................................................................................................35 vii 2.2.1 Scottish Gaelic.........................................................................36 2.2.2 Irish..........................................................................................41 2.3 North Germanic...................................................................................42 2.3.1 Icelandic...................................................................................44 2.3.2 Faroese.....................................................................................46 2.3.3 Norwegian................................................................................47 2.3.4 Swedish....................................................................................47 2.4 English.................................................................................................48 2.5 Finno-Ugric..........................................................................................50 2.5.1 Sami.........................................................................................50 2.5.2 Forest Nenets...........................................................................51 2.6 Mongolic: Halh Mongolian.................................................................52 2.7 Uto-Aztecan.........................................................................................53 2.7.1 Toreva Hopi.............................................................................53 2.7.2 Tohono O’odham.....................................................................56 2.8 Algonquian...........................................................................................56 2.8.1 Central Algonquian..................................................................57 2.8.2 Homorganic preaspiration in Fox............................................58 2.9 Tarascan...............................................................................................59