370 likes | 378 Views
Lecture 5. Syllable Complexity. Possibility & Existence. plp kmp ‘pulp’ ‘camp’ ‘kept’ ( existing ) pIlp kImp non-sense ( possible ) pIpl kIpm non-sense ( impossible ). Tripartite Distinction.
E N D
Lecture 5 Syllable Complexity
Possibility & Existence plp kmp ‘pulp’ ‘camp’ ‘kept’ (existing) pIlp kImp non-sense (possible) pIpl kIpm non-sense (impossible)
Tripartite Distinction • The dimensions of possibility and existence need to be kept carefully apart: Existing Words Haphazard lexical inclusion Non-existent but Possible Words Phonological well-formedness Non-existent and Impossible Words
Possible vs. Impossible • A liquid only occurs as a left sibling: Possible Impossible plp, pIlp pIpl • A left nasal sibling assimilates, in place, to its right sibling: Possible Impossible kmp, kImp kInp
Why? • Sonority Sequencing The sonority gap of two degrees is relaxed (pink, film, …). • Assimilation The restriction follows from the rule of place assimilation in nasals. • Two Stops Sonority Sequencing that requires a post vocalic fall in sonority is either too strong or that two stops do not constitute a complex coda. ?
No Rise • Can we say that there are no sonority restrictions on English complex codas ? • However, sonority does not rise in complex codas. • What can we say about the words below, where only the first vowel, in spelling, has phonetic reality? Sonority funnel … nasal (2) > liquid (3) button … obstruent (1) > nasal (2) sickle … obstruent (1) > liquid (3)
Monosyllabic or Bisyllabic • At first sight, such forms may seem to syllabify as: onset + simple nucleus + complex coda ( C V CC ) • However, closer inspection reveals that those forms are not monosyllabic; they are bisyllabic: [f.nl] ‘funnel’ [b.tn] ‘button’ [sI.kl] ‘sickle’
Monosyllabic or Bisyllabic O R O R O R N Cd N N s I l k s I k l
Sonority Profile • The reason for the divergent syllabification is the syllable sonority profile shaped by the Sonority Sequencing Principle. • A word like silk will comply with this principle, but a monosyllabic sickle will not.
Non-vocalic Nuclei • The sonority trough on [k] prevents the consonant cluster [kl] from being a valid coda. • English is a language that relaxes the requirement of vocalic nuclei. • A sonorant consonant is allowed as nucleus.
Semivowels • The non-syllabic segments /w/ and /j/, in words like well and yes, are semivowels (glides or semi-consonants). • They have the phonetic characteristics of vowels, but the phonological behaviour of consonants: • produced without obstructing the airflow vowels • always occurring in syllable margins, but never as nuclei consonants
Semivowels O R O R N Cd N Cd t w a I n t w I n
Sonority Scale • In the sonority scale, semivowels occupy an intermediate level between vowels and liquids: Most sonorous 5 Vowels 4 Semivowels 3 Liquids 2 Nasals Least sonorous 1 Obstruents
Minimum Sonority Distance • The sonority distance restriction imposed on English onset siblings is set as a minimum not as a fixed value. • The liquid obstruent difference of (2) is the minimum: 3 - 1 = 2 l p (pli:z) ‘please’ • However, the semivowel obstruent difference is certainly higher: 4 - 1 = 3 w k (kwi:n) ‘queen’
Formalization O R N x y Sonority Conditions: (i) y 4 (ii) y - x 2
Gaps • Consider the following: twin tw --- pw dwell dw --- bw thwart w --- mw swell sw --- fw queen kw --- vw Gwyn gw • Why ?
Place of Articulation • Like many other languages, English dislikes siblings with an identical place of articulation. • This is a phonologically motivated restriction. • This offers a justification for those gaps. • Both sounds in such clusters share the feature [labial].
The OCP • This tendency of constituent siblings not to have similar places of articulation is stated formally in the OCP: Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP): Similar melodies are disfavoured as constituent siblings. • The OCP is more of a tendency than a principle, and it is subject to a considerable number of exceptions.
Segment Parsing • Segment parsing into syllabic subconstituents is guided by the sonority profile. • English peaks require a sonority level of 5: N N N N N N f I k n p k I n p m p k I n 5 5 5 5 5 5
Segment Parsing • Segments to the left of the nucleus are parsed in the onset, and those to its right to the coda. • Parsing is conditional on compatibility with the Sonority Sequencing: O R O R O R O R O R O R N N Cd N Cd N Cd N Cd N Cd f I k n p k I n p m p k I n 1 3 5 1 5 1 2 5 1 1 5 2 1 5 2 1 1 5 2
Onset Fulfilment • An intervocalic consonant such as /f/ in traffic qualifies, in principle, as an onset or as a coda. • However, languages show an overwhelming tendency to assign an intervocalic consonant to the onset. • This situation is expressed in the principle of Minimal Onset Satisfaction: Minimal Onset Satisfaction Minimal satisfaction of onsets takes priority over satisfaction of codas.
Theory-internal Justification • Minimal Onset Satisfaction maintains core syllable parsing: /VCVCV/ [V.CV.CV] *[VC.VC.V]
Empirical Justification • In non-rhotic accents of English, the // is not phonetically realized in words like car , bar, … • These accents do not admit [] in codas. • However, the // is realized phonetically in words like carriage, barring, …, when parsed as an onset. • Therefore, whenever the two positions are available, onset satisfaction takes priority over satisfaction of codas.
Empirical Justification O R O R O R N N Cd N ‘barring’ ‘bar’
Intervocalic Consonants • Consider the forms below with intervocalic consonant clusters: comply contrive recline compress recruit • Intuitively, the relevant syllable divisions are as follows: com.ply con.trive re.cline com.press re.cruit
Intervocalic Consonants • However, the following divisions are also possible, as they incur no violation of Sonority Sequencing and maintain Minimal Onset Satisfaction: comp.ly cont.rive rec.line comp.ress rec.ruit • Why not ?
Aspiration • A voiceless stop, in English, is aspirated when it occurs in the onset of a stressed syllable. • The marked are aspirated: comply contrive recline compress recruit • So, they must qualify for the description, of occurring in an onset rather than a coda.
Onset Maximization • Intervocalic consonant clusters are allotted to the onset, unless prevented by conditions on syllabification. This is formalized as follows: Onset Maximization Maximal formation of onsets takes priority over formation of codas.
Initial sC Clusters • Consider the following forms: slow sl- (sonority distance 4 – 2 = 2) small sm- (sonority distance 3 – 2 = 1) snow sn- (sonority distance 3 – 2 = 1) spy sp- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) stay st- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) sky sk- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) sphere sf- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) • Why (Minimal Sonority Distance) ?
Initial sC Clusters • Consider the following: gap[tl] gap[dl] gap[l] sleep [sl] • Why (OCP) ?
Initial sC Clusters • Consider the following: Initial three-consonant clusters in English: [ Nucleus …] Gaps: [spw], [stl], [stw] • Why (three-member onsets) ?
Extrasyllabicity • The facts considered provide strong motivation to treat word-initial [s] differently. • Being initial, allows licensing by association to a higher domain (Prosodic Word), hence its extrasyllabic status: PW O R N s p a I
Summing up • Sonority Sequencing is operative throughout the syllable. • Vowels will generally form syllable nuclei and consonants syllable margins. • However, Sonority Sequencing may drive sonorant consonants into nuclei. • Phonotactic discrepancies between C/w/ and C/l/ onsets are accounted for by the Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP) which disfavours similar melodies in constituent siblings. • The parsing of word medial consonants is governed by two principles • Minimal Onset Satisfaction imposes the formation of a minimal onset in preference to a coda to conform to the Core Syllable CV. • Onset Maximization favours the parsing of word-medial clusters as onsets.
Next Week Mid-term Test