Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Academia.eduAcademia.edu

The phonologically exceptional continent: Alternations yield new insight

Australian languages are known for their very low level of phonological diversity. Yet how and why just one continent should be so homogeneous is not understood. I report on results emerging from the first large scale study of Australian morphophonemics, and show that the “Australian problem” does not extend to all corners of the phonology. Background Existing phonological surveys of Australian languages have focused on phoneme inventories, static phonotactics and stress patterns. However, to better understand the Australian problem we require more information, preferably both synchronic and diachronic, and thus a promising domain of investigation is morphophonemic alternations: synchronic phenomena which preserve a strong signal of prior changes. Data The AusPhon-Alternations database is the first large scale survey of segmental morphophonemic alternations in Australian languages. Alternations are coded in a commensurate manner, irrespective of their description in source materials as ‘allomorphy’ or ‘(morpho)phonological rules’. In order to survey information from a wide band of time depths, we will not distinguish here between productive and nonproductive alternations, but focus instead on the alternations’ content. At time of writing, 80 linguistic varieties and ca. 1,500 alternations have been coded for. Emerging findings NO ‘AUSTRALIAN TYPE’ In Australia, segment inventories, phonotactic constraints and stress patterns show only minor variation across the vast majority of languages and language families. In contrast, there is no comparable, widespread sharing of segmental morphophonological alternations. The following patterns do recur across languages, but the rate of incidence is low. 1. STOP LENITION A pattern of sonority-conditioned stop lenition, identified in earlier research, is not uncommon: stops alternate with glides or zero, with stops appearing after occlusives, and glides appearing after continuants. 2. CONSONANT ASSIMILATION Assimilation in place and manner of articulation is rare, however this can be predicted given phonotactic factors. Namely, since phonotactic constraints typically permit only few sonority sequence types and place sequence types, and since geminates are generally not permitted, what would have been place assimilation typically results in complete deletion, as for example in /ɲn/ → /nn/ → /n/. 3. DELETION IN V+V CLUSTERS Vowels + vowel clusters may simplify by deleting either vowel. This includes when the V+V cluster has been created by a foregoing consonant deletion, raising questions for the standard account in Optimality Theory. Conclusions/perspective The typological homogeneity of Australian language phonologies does not extend to morphophonology. Nevertheless, our observations suggest new insights into those aspects of phonology which are highly uniform: the lenition of stops to glides is inventory-preserving; and assimilation is rare except when it feeds deletion, which preserves phonotactic patterns. Though these effects are small and infrequent, in the long run they may contribute to the temporal stability of the most widespread phonological patterns."

The phonologically exceptional continent Alternations yield new insight Erich R. Round U of Queensland, Australia • Special thanks to research assistants: • Thomas Ennever (U of Queensland) • Jacqui Cook (U of Queensland) and funding support • NSF (Pama Nyungan Prehistory led by C.Bowern) • U of Queensland The “Australian Problem” is unsolved • Australian languages → very low phonological diversity • The “Australian Problem” • explain how one continent can differ so strikingly from the other five Roadmap • Australian languages • their phonological uniformity, as we understand it • The AusPhon-Alternations project • insights from alternations • Discussion • Implications Australian languages & phonological uniformity Australia: ca.340 languages, 28 families • ca. 340 languages Others • 28 distinct families • Pama-Nyungan covers 7/8 of continent Pama-Nyungan • ca.1/3 still spoken • All endangered to some degree ? Phoneme inventories are highly similar coronal peripheral apical alveolar apical retroflex laminal palatal dorsal velar bilabial plosive t ʈ c k p nasal n ɳ ɲ ŋ m lateral l ɭ ʎ trill r rhotic approx. semivowel • Kukata • Nyungar, Pintupi ɻ j • Bardi w • Umbugarla, Walmatjarri, Nyangumarta, Wambaya, Wardaman, Jingulu, Warnman, Watjarri, Yankunytjatjara, Nyigina, Kunin.... Phoneme inventories are highly similar coronal peripheral apical alveolar apical retroflex laminal dental laminal palatal dorsal velar bilabial plosive t ʈ t̪ c k p nasal n ɳ n̪ ɲ ŋ m lateral l ɭ l̪ ʎ trill r rhotic approx. semivowel ɻ j w • Kalkatungu, Badimaya, Payungu, Kariyarra, Kurrama, Martuthunira, Ngarluma, Panyjima, Putijarra, Kija, Guugu Yimidhirr, Ganggalida, Wubuy, Ngawun, Marra, Lardil, Kayardild, Jiwarli, Gooniyandi... Phoneme inventories are highly similar Phonotactic constraints are highly similar • Syllable onsets → simple; obligatory • Space of permitted consonant clusters is tightly constrained • Sonority sequencing: liquid > nasal > obstruent • Sequencing of active articulators: apical (tongue tip) > laminal (tongue blade) > dorsal > labial • (Variation in the domains in which these apply) Prosodic structures are highly similar • Trochaic feet • Peak prominence at the left edge of the word • Cues to stress • late intonational pitch peak • vowel duration, centralisation • No tone languages Static features are highly similar • Highly similar • phoneme inventories • phonotactics • prosodic structures } static features of the phonology • To understand the nature of the Australian Problem • look to dynamic phenomena — (morpho)phonological alternations The AusPhon-Alternations project AusPhon surveys alternations in ca.100 languages • Aim → to survey phonological alternations • allophony • alternations between contrastive segments • Extant information (current estimate) • ca. ~100 languages • 82 languages covered so far • 1,500 alternations Sources analyse alternations as rules, allomorphy • Alternations are analysed in source documents • in terms of rules • in terms of listed allomorphs AusPhon-Alternations aids rapid investigation • Alternations are coded in the database • by AusPhon analysts • ‘Is there a component of this alternation which could be analysed as X?’ • e.g., X = deletion, insertion, assimilation, etc. • ‘what is the correct analysis’ • ‘what is the author’s analysis’ AusPhon-Alternations database New insights from alternations Uniformity does not extend to alternations • Stark uniformity in the phonologies of Australian languages • does not extend to alternations • Australian languages’ alternations vary widely • in number • in kind • in detail Stop ~ glide/zero • A typologically unusual form of lenition • Environment of lenited segment • solely intervocalic; intersonorant • intercontinuant (i.e., is blocked after a nasal or obstruent) • Round (2011) → 35 languages in 13 families • With AusPhon survey → 48 languages in 14 families Assimilation is uncommon, deletion common • Assimilation of consonants • “pervasive” (Dixon 2002) • “rare” (Baker, forthc.) • AusPhon-Alternations: • place assimilation — 102 alternations (36 languages) • manner assimilation — 64 alternations (27 languages) • consonant deletion — 560 alternations (73 languages) V+V simplification • At boundary between STEM+SUFFIX, V1+V2 clusters simplify by preserving: • V1 ~40%, V2 ~60% (N=76) • Concurs with e.g. Optimality Theory (Casali 1997) • Two competing forces: • drive to preserve material in stems (V1+V2) • drive to preserve morpheme initial segments (V1+V2) V+V simplification • Simplification of V+V → often fed by the loss of a suffix initial C: ...V1 + CV2... 1. Deletion of C ...V1 + V2... 2. Preservation of V1 or V2 • V2 not morpheme initial • Thus → ought to be no factor favouring its preservation Discussion Dynamic phonology and the “Australian Problem” The static and dynamic need to be related • Static phonology • Dynamic phonology • “Australian Problem” • more diverse • high degree of uniformity in need of explanation • some recurrent, rare behaviours • Solving the Australian Problem ← find new relationships between these Preference for deletion due to ‘small cluster space’ • Dynamic phonology: • When one C in a cluster undergoes change → deletion ≻ assimilation • Explained by static phonology: • provides a limited ‘space’ of clusters • thus for would-be assimilatory changes, C1+C3 → C2+C3, • there is often no permissible cluster * C2+C3 • hence, deletion C1+C3 > C3 Lenition & inventory uniformity— a common cause dynamic phonology common historical antecedent static phonology • Historical lenitions → dynamic alternations between stop~glide; stop~zero • Stops → sonorants already part of the static inventory: ʈ t c t̪ k p ɻ,j r j j,l w w Static & dynamic phenomena interact • Static constraints on clusters • motivate a dynamic preference for deletion ≻ assimilation • Common third factor promotes • dynamic lenition • conservation of static inventory properties Implications Datasets must encompass dynamic phenomena • Large surveys → often focus on static phenomena • In Australia, doing so results in uniformity • a true picture (for static phenomena) • but an incomplete picture (dynamic phenomena → diversity) Phonological datasets must encompass dynamic phenomena slides available at academia.edu