Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T16:09:02.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lenition, perception and neutralisation*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2016

Jonah Katz
Jonah Katz*
Affiliation:
West Virginia University
*
E-mail: katzlinguist@gmail.com.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper argues that processes traditionally classified as lenition fall into at least two subsets, with distinct phonetic reflexes, formal properties and characteristic contexts. One type, referred to as loss lenition, frequently neutralises contrasts in positions where they are perceptually indistinct. The second type, referred to as continuity lenition, can target segments in perceptually robust positions, increases the intensity and/or decreases the duration of those segments, and very rarely results in positional neutralisation of contrasts. While loss lenition behaves much like other phonological processes, analysing continuity lenition is difficult or impossible in standard phonological approaches. The paper develops a phonetically based optimality-theoretic account that explains the typology of the two types of lenition. The crucial proposal is that, unlike loss lenition, continuity lenition is driven by constraints that reference multiple prosodic positions.

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , May 2016 , pp. 43 - 85
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Many thanks to Larry Hyman, John Kingston, the associate editor and two anonymous reviewers for detailed feedback on the manuscript. Thanks as well to Edward Flemming, Melinda Fricke, Sharon Inkelas, Keith Johnson, John Ohala and Donca Steriade for helpful discussion. Several other colleagues, including Michael Becker, Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero and Bruce Hayes, provided helpful feedback and questions after the initial acceptance of this manuscript; sadly, these are not incorporated here. I thank them nonetheless.

References

REFERENCES

Andronov, M. S. (1969). Yazyk Kannada. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Bagou, Odile, Fougeron, Cécile & Frauenfelder, Uli H. (2002). Contribution of prosody to the segmentation and storage of ‘words’ in the acquisition of a new mini-language. In Bel, Bernard & Marlien, Isabelle (eds.) Speech prosody 2002. Aix-en-Provence. 159–162. Available (January 2016) at http://www.isca-speech.org/archive/sp2002.Google Scholar
Baković, Eric (1997). Strong onsets and Spanish fortition. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 23. 21–39.Google Scholar
Beckman, Jill (1998). Positional faithfulness. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Borgman, Donald M. (1990). Sanuma. In Derbyshire, Desmond C. & Pullum, Geoffrey K. (eds.) Handbook of Amazonian languages. Vol. 2. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 15–248.Google Scholar
Brandão de Carvalho, Joaquim, Scheer, Tobias & Ségéral, Philippe (eds.) (2008). Lenition and fortition. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Browman, Catherine P. & Goldstein, Louis (1986). Towards an articulatory phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3. 219–252.Google Scholar
Butcher, Andrew (2004). ‘Fortis/lenis’ revisited one more time: the aerodynamics of some oral stop contrasts in three continents. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 18. 547–557.Google Scholar
Bye, Patrik & de Lacy, Paul (2008). Metrical influences on fortition and lenition. In de Carvalho, Brandão et al. (2008). 173–206.Google Scholar
Chong, Adam J. (2011). Lenition in Gaalpu: an optimality theoretic analysis. Australian Journal of Linguistics 31. 473–490.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. (1986). Compensatory lengthening and consonant gemination in LuGanda. In Wetzels, Leo & Sezer, Engin (eds.) Studies in compensatory lengthening. Dordrecht: Foris. 37–77.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail (1993). The status of nasalized continuants. In Huffman, Marie K. & Krakow, Rena A. (eds.) Nasals, nasalization, and the velum. Orlando: Academic Press. 329–367.Google Scholar
Davis, Stuart & Cho, Mi-Hui (2003). The distribution of aspirated stops and /h/ in American English and Korean: an alignment approach with typological implications. Linguistics 41. 607–652.Google Scholar
De Jong, Kenneth J. (2011). Flapping in American English. In van Oostendorp, Marc, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth & Rice, Keren (eds.) The Blackwell companion to phonology. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell. 2711–2729.Google Scholar
de Lacy, Paul (2002). The formal expression of markedness. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Derbyshire, Desmond C. & Pullum, Geoffrey K. (eds.) (1986). Handbook of Amazonian languages. Vol. 1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dmitrieva, Olga (2012). Geminate typology and the perception of consonant duration. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Downing, Laura J. (2004). What African languages tell us about accent typology. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 37. 101–136.Google Scholar
Dunn, Leone (1988). Badimaya, a Western Australian language. Papers in Australian Linguistics 17. 19–149.Google Scholar
Flemming, Edward (1995). Auditory representations in phonology. PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Flemming, Edward (2001). Scalar and categorical phenomena in a unified model of phonetics and phonology. Phonology 18. 7–44.Google Scholar
Fougeron, Cécile & Keating, Patricia A. (1997). Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. JASA 101. 3728–3740.Google Scholar
Glasgow, Kathleen (1981). Burarra phonemes. In Waters, Bruce (ed.) Australian phonologies: collected papers. Darwin: SIL. 63–89.Google Scholar
Gowda, K. S. Gurubasave (1975). Ao grammar. Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages.Google Scholar
Green, Anthony Dubach (2005). Word, foot, and syllable structure in Burmese. In Watkins, Justin (ed.) Studies in Burmese linguistics. Canberra: Australian National University. 1–25.Google Scholar
Gurevich, Naomi (2003). Functional constraints on phonetically conditioned sound changes. PhD dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Hall, T. A. & Hamann, Silke (2006). Towards a typology of stop assibilation. Linguistics 44. 1195–1236.Google Scholar
Harris, James W. (1969). Spanish phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, John (1990). Segmental complexity and phonological government. Phonology 7. 255–300.Google Scholar
Harris, John (2003). Grammar-internal and grammar-external assimilation. In Solé, M. J., Recasens, D. & Romero, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Barcelona: Causal Productions. 281–284.Google Scholar
Harris, John & Urua, Eno-Abasi (2001). Lenition degrades information: consonant allophony in Ibibio. In Faulkner, Andrew, Rosen, Stuart & Holland, Martyn (eds.) Speech, hearing and language: work in progress. Vol. 13. London: University College London. 72–105.Google Scholar
Howard, Linda (1967). Camsa phonology. In Elson, Benjamin F. (ed.) Phonemic systems of Colombian languages. Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 73–87.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (1972). A phonological study of Feʔfeʔ-Bamileke. PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (1975). Phonology: theory and analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (2008). Directional asymmetries in the morphology and phonology of words, with special reference to Bantu. Linguistics 46. 309–350.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (2010). Affixation by place of articulation: the case of Tiene. In Wohlgemuth, Jan & Cysouw, Michael (eds.) Rara and rarissima: documenting the fringes of linguistic diversity. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 145–183.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko (1986). Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko & Mester, Armin (1986). The phonology of voicing in Japanese: theoretical consequences for morphological accessibility. LI 17. 49–73.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Haike & Wetzels, Leo (1988). Early French lenition: a formal account of an integrated sound change. In van der Hulst, Harry & Smith, Norval (eds.) Features, segmental structure and harmony processes. Part 1. Dordrecht: Foris. 105–129.Google Scholar
Jaeger, Jeri J. & van Valin, Robert D. Jr. (1982). Initial consonant clusters in Yateé Zapotec. IJAL 48. 125–138.Google Scholar
Jensen, John T. (2000). Against ambisyllabicity. Phonology 17. 187–235.Google Scholar
Johnson, Elizabeth K. & Jusczyk, Peter W. (2001). Word segmentation by 8-month-olds: when speech cues count more than statistics. Journal of Memory and Language 44. 548–567.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah (1993). The phonetics and phonology of Korean prosody. PhD dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Jusczyk, Peter W., Hohne, Elizabeth A. & Bauman, Angela (1999). Infants’ sensitivity to allophonic cues for word segmentation. Perception and Psychophysics 61. 1465–1476.Google Scholar
Kahn, Daniel (1980). Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Kakumasu, James (1986). Urubu-Kaapor. In Derbyshire & Pullum (1986). 326–403.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Abby (2010). Phonology shaped by phonetics: the case of intervocalic lenition. PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto (2006). A faithfulness ranking projected from a perceptibility scale: the case of [+voice] in Japanese. Lg 82. 536–574.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto (2012). Amplitude changes facilitate categorization and discrimination of length contrasts. IEICE Technical Report 112. 67–72.Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia A. (2006). Phonetic encoding of prosodic structure. In Harrington, Jonathan & Tabain, Marija (eds.) Speech production: models, phonetic processes, and techniques. New York: Psychology Press. 167–186.Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia A., Taehong Cho, Cécile Fougeron & Hsu, Chai-Shune (2003). Domain-initial articulatory strengthening in four languages. In Local, John, Ogden, Richard & Temple, Rosalind (eds.) Phonetic interpretation: papers in laboratory phonology VI. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 145–163.Google Scholar
Kingston, John (1985). The phonetics and phonology of the timing of oral and glottal events. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Kingston, John (2008). Lenition. In Colantoni, Laura & Steele, Jeffrey (eds.) Selected proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla. 1–31.Google Scholar
Kirchner, Robert (1998). An effort-based approach to consonant lenition. PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Lavoie, Lisa M. (2001). Consonant strength: phonological patterns and phonetic manifestations. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Li, Fangfang, Edwards, Jan & Beckman, Mary (2009). Contrast and covert contrast: the phonetic development of voiceless sibilant fricatives in English and Japanese toddlers. JPh 37. 111–124.Google Scholar
Lisker, Leigh (1957). Closure duration and the intervocalic voiced–voiceless distinction in English. Lg 33. 42–49.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda (2001). Why Place and Voice are different: constraint-specific alternations in Optimality Theory. In Lombardi, Linda (ed.) Segmental phonology in Optimality Theory: constraints and representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 13–45.Google Scholar
Luce, R. Duncan (1963). Detection and recognition. In Luce, R. Duncan, Bush, Robert R. & Galanter, Eugene (eds.) Handbook of mathematical psychology. Vol. 1. New York: Wiley. 103–189.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. (1967). Le rôle d'un système de traits phonologiques dans un théorie du langage. Langages 8. 112–123.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. (1968). The phonological component of a grammar of Japanese. The Hague & Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Michael, Lev, Farmer, Stephanie, Finley, Gregory, Beier, Christine & Sullón Acosta, Karina (2013). A sketch of Muniche segmental and prosodic phonology. IJAL 79. 307–347.Google Scholar
Morelli, Frida (1999). The phonotactics and phonology of obstruent clusters in Optimality Theory. PhD dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
Nakatani, Lloyd H. & Dukes, Kathleen D. (1977). Locus of segmental cues for word juncture. JASA 62. 714–719.Google Scholar
Nayak, Rajendra M. (2001). Nāḍōr Kannada: a taxonomic analysis. Dharwad: Shobha.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. (1983). The origin of sound patterns in vocal tract constraints. In MacNeilage, Peter F. (ed.) The production of speech. New York: Springer. 189–216.Google Scholar
Okell, John (1969). A reference grammar of Colloquial Burmese. 2 parts. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Onaka, Akiko, Palethorpe, Sallyanne, Watson, Catherine & Harrington, Jonathan (2003). Acoustic and articulatory difference of speech segments at different prosodic positions. Proceedings of the 9th Australian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology. 148–153.Google Scholar
Padgett, Jaye (1994). Stricture and nasal place assimilation. NLLT 12. 465–513.Google Scholar
Pająk, Bożena (2010). Contextual constraints on geminates: the case of Polish. BLS 35. 269–280. Available (January 2016) at http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/bls/previous_proceedings/bls35.pdf.Google Scholar
Pols, Louis C. W. (1983). Three-mode principal component analysis of confusion matrices, based on the identification of Dutch consonants, under various conditions of noise and reverberation. Speech Communication 2. 275–293.Google Scholar
Popjes, Jack & Popjes, Jo (1986). Canela-Krahô. In Derbyshire & Pullum (1986). 128–199.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren (1989). A grammar of Slave. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy & Booij, Geert (1990). Edge of constituent effects in Polish. NLLT 8. 427–463.Google Scholar
Saadah, Eman (2011). Towards quantifying lenition in Ondarroan Basque. Illinois Working Papers 36. 89–107.Google Scholar
Saffran, Jenny R., Newport, Elissa L. & Aslin, Richard N. (1996). Word segmentation: the role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory and Language 35. 606–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Ruth Laila & Kohistani, Razwal (2008). A grammar of the Shina language of Indus Kohistan. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Ségéral, Philippe & Scheer, Tobias (1999). The coda mirror. Ms, University of Paris 7 & University of Nice.Google Scholar
Ségéral, Philippe & Scheer, Tobias (2008). Positional factors in lenition and fortition. In de Carvalho, Brandão et al. (2008). 131–172.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth (1982). The syllable. In van der Hulst, Harry & Smith, Norval (eds.) The structure of phonological representations. Part 2. Dordrecht: Foris. 337–383.Google Scholar
Shiraishi, Hidetoshi (2006). Topics in Nivkh phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Shosted, Ryan (2006). The aeroacoustics of nasalized fricatives. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Smith, Jennifer L. (2008). Markedness, faithfulness, positions, and contexts: lenition and fortition in Optimality Theory. In de Carvalho, Brandão et al. (2008). 519–560.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (2001). Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: a perceptual account. In Hume, Elizabeth & Johnson, Keith (eds.) The role of speech perception in phonology. San Diego: Academic Press. 219–250.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (2009). The phonology of perceptibility effects: the P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. In Hanson, Kristin & Inkelas, Sharon (eds.) The nature of the word: studies in honor of Paul Kiparsky. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 151–179.Google Scholar
Szigetvári, Péter (2008). What and where? In de Carvalho, Brandão et al. (2008). 93–129.Google Scholar
Upadhyaya, U. Padmanbha (1976). A comparative study of Kannada dialects: Bellary, Gulbarga, Kumta, and Nanjangud dialects. Mysore: Prasaranga.Google Scholar
Woods, David L., Yund, E. William, Herron, Timothy J. & Ua Cruadhlaoich, Matthew A. I. (2010). Consonant identification in CVC syllables in speech-spectrum noise. JASA 127. 1609–1623.Google Scholar
Yoon, Kyuchul (1999). A study of Korean alveolar fricatives: an acoustic analysis, synthesis, and perception experiment. In Henderson, Michael T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 34th Mid-America Linguistics Conference. Lawrence: Linguistics Department, University of Kansas. 549–563.Google Scholar