1 / 49

Syllabification of American English

Syllabification of American English. David Eddington (BYU) Dirk Elzinga (BYU) Rebecca Treiman (WU) Mark Davies (BYU) Brigham Young University and Washington University. We are NOT interested in:. Devising prescriptive rules of syllabification How clever linguists syllabify words

gari
Download Presentation

Syllabification of American English

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Syllabification of American English David Eddington (BYU) Dirk Elzinga (BYU) Rebecca Treiman (WU) Mark Davies (BYU) Brigham Young University and Washington University

  2. We are NOT interested in: • Devising prescriptive rules of syllabification • How clever linguists syllabify words • Syllabification of the written word

  3. We ARE interested in: • Describing how actual speakers syllabify • Syllabification based on sounds not spelling

  4. Don’t we know how English is syllabified already? • Dictionaries often disagree in their phonetic transcription (e.g. silly, hollow, balance) • Merriam Webster si . lly ho . llow ba . lance • Cambridge sill . y ho . llow or holl . ow bal . ance

  5. Previous empirical studies • (Derwing 1992; Derwing and Neary 1991; Fallows 1981; Treiman, Bowey, and Bourassa 2002; Treiman and Danis 1988; Treiman, Gross, and Cwikiel-Glavin 1992; Treiman, Staub, and Lavery 1994; Treiman and Zukowski 1990; Zamuner and Ohala 1999) • Focused principally on bisyllabic words with one medial consonant (e.g. lemon) • Considered mainly monomorphemic words such as about not polymorphemic words such as lightly (light + ly) • Used only 20-40 test words

  6. Findings of previous studies • Stress attracts the medial consonant • lémon > lém . on • attáck > a . ttáck

  7. Findings of previous studies • Initial lax vowels attract the consonant to the coda of the first syllable • letter > lett . er • Initial tense vowels repel the consonant into the onset of the second syllable • laser > la . ser

  8. Findings of previous studies Sonorants are attracted to the coda of the first syllable • silly > sill . y

  9. Findings of previous studies Sonorants are attracted to the coda of the first syllable • silly > sill . y Obstruents are pushed into the onset of the second syllable • aghast > a . ghast

  10. Problem • Vowel quality, stress, and medial consonants interact with each other and must be considered together • Other factors may influence as well

  11. Our innovations • We considered: • Words with 1-4 medial consonants • Both monomorphemic and polymorphemic words • The syllabification of many words • Legality of consonants word initially and finally • Types of morpheme boundaries

  12. BYU Syllabification Survey • 5,000 bisyllabic test items • 841 participants • average of 22 responses per test word • survey completed online • choices based on sounds not spelling

  13. BYU Syllabification Survey • Choose the syllabification of ‘victim’ that sounds best to you • VI / KTUHM • VIK / TUHM • VIKT / UHM • I’m not sure

  14. BYU syllabification survey Factors we considered: • Vowel quality (tense or lax) • Medial consonant quality (nasal, liquid, obstruent, etc.) • Morphological boundaries • Compound word (sheepdog) • Transparent (actor) • Opaque (fifteen) • Stress placement • Legality of consonants word initially and finally

  15. BYU syllabification survey • This is a work in progress • We may consider other factors • Statistical analysis still underway (interactions)

  16. Interpreting Results C O N S T A N T V1 C1 C2 C3 V2

  17. Interpreting Results • Multiple regression performed • Only p < .05 results discussed • I’ll avoid numbers and focus on interpretation of them instead

  18. Results for VCV Words • 60% of the variance is accounted for • Factors that favor V . CV • C is licit word initially (/b/ versus /Ŋ/ • V1 is tense (able) • C is an obstruent (placard) • A transparent or compound morpheme boundary precedes the consonant (tC, cC; rebirth, lawsuit) • Transparent >> compound

  19. Results for VCV Words • Factors that disfavor V . CV • The word is written with a geminate consonant • The consonant is /r/, /l/, or a nasal • A transparent, compound, or opaque morpheme boundary follows the consonant (Ct, Cc, Co) • Compound >> transparent >> opaque • (getup, noisy, shadow)

  20. Results for VCV Words • 60% of the variance is accounted for • Factors that favor VC . V • The word contains a geminate consonant • C1 is /l/, /r/, or a nasal • A compound, transparent, or opaque morpheme boundary follows the consonant (Cc, Ct, Co) • Compound >> transparent >> opaque • (getup, noisy, shadow)

  21. Results for VCV Words • Factors that disfavor VC . V • V1 is tense • A transparent or compound morpheme boundary precedes the consonant (tC, cC) • Transparent >> compound • (prewar, seashore)

  22. Interactions(monomorphemic) Final Stress Initial Stress V.CV VC.V ? Example V.CV VC.V ? Example Lax86 13 1 buffoon 62 37 1 govern Tense90 8 2 erect86 13 1 private

  23. Results for VCCV Words • 75% of variance accounted for • Factors that favor V . CCV syllabification • CC is licit word initially (br- versus *dl-) • C2 is /r/, /l/ or a glide • V1 is tense (council) • Any kind of morpheme boundary precedes CC (+CC) • Compound >> transparent >> opaque • (seaplane, biplane, supplant)

  24. Results for VCCV Words • Factors that disfavor V . CCV syllabification • CC is licit word finally • C1 is /r/, /l/, or nasal • Any kind of morpheme boundary appears between CC (C+C) • Transparent >> compound >> opaque • (subjoin, bloodshed, fifteen) • A compound boundary appears after CC (CCc)

  25. Results for VCCV Words • 69% of variance accounted for • Factors that favor VC . CV syllabification • C1 is /r/, /l/, or nasal • Any kind of morpheme boundary separates the CC (C+C) • Compound >> transparent >> opaque • (subjoin, bloodshed, fifteen)

  26. Results for VCCV Words • Factors that disfavor VC . CV syllabification • CC is licit word initially • C2 is /r/, /l/, or a glide • Any kind of morpheme boundary falls before CC (+CC) • Transparent >> compound >> opaque • A compound or transparent morpheme boundary falls after CC (CCc, CCo) • Compound >> transparent

  27. Results for VCCV Words • 34% of variance accounted for • Factors that favor VCC . V syllabification • CC is licit word finally • A compound or transparent morpheme boundary follows CC (CCc, CCt) • Compound >> transparent • (handout, actor)

  28. Results for VCCV Words • Factors that disfavor VCC . V syllabification • CC is licit word initially • C1 is /r/ • A transparent or compound boundary separates CC (CtC, CcC) • Compound >> transparent • (prewar, myself)

  29. Interactions(monomorphemic) Final Stress V.CCV VC.CV V.CCV ? Example Lax Licit Onset Clusters 76 22 2 0 afflict Illicit Onset Clusters 3 94 3 0 vaccine Tense Licit Onset Clusters 76 17 3 5 digress Illicit Onset Clusters 8 86 5 2 maintain Initial Stress V.CCV VC.CV V.CCV ? Example Lax Licit Onset Clusters 34 60 5 1 saffron Illicit Onset Clusters 4 89 7 1 after Tense Licit Onset Clusters 74 23 1 1 program Illicit Onset Clusters 10 84 5 1 flounder Largest percentage in each category appears in boldface.

  30. Syllabification by cluster • Several ways to determine permissibility of CCC • Are all three consonants licit word initially? • str- is licit given strange • rtr- is illicit *rtrange • Are all three consonants licit word finally? • -nst is licit given rinsed • -lnm is illicit *talnm • Are the final two consonants licit word initially? • nfl- is licit given fling • rtl- is illicit *tling • Are the first two consonants licit word finally? • -rkr is licit given work • -bst is illicit *rabs [bs]

  31. Results for VCCCV Words • 70% of variance accounted for • Factors that favor V . CCCV • CCC is licit word initially (astray) • V1 is tense (cambric) • A compound or transparent boundary precedes CCC (cCCC, tCCC) • Compound >> transparent • (drawstring, rescript)

  32. Results for VCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor V . CCCV • The first two consonants of CCC are licit word finally • (margrave, masthead) • There is a transparent boundary (CtCC; nonstop)

  33. Results of VCCCV Words • 77% of the variance accounted for • Factors that favor VC . CCV • The last two consonants of CCC are licit word initially • (coxcomb, contract) • A compound or transparent boundary occurs CcCC or CtCC • Compound >> transparent • (outgrow, nonstop)

  34. Results of VCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor VC . CCV • CCC is licit word initially or finally • (bowstring, curtsey) • The first two consonants are licit word finally • (talesman) • The following morpheme boundaries • cCCC, tCCC, CCcC, CCtC, CCCc

  35. Results of VCCCV Words • 81% of variance accounted for • Factors that favor VCC . CV • The first two consonants are licit word finally • (darksome, sixty, empty, sanctum) • The following morpheme boundaries exist: • CCcC, CCtC, CCoC, and CCCc (??) • (porthole, endless, children, huntsman [hʌnsmʌn])

  36. Results of VCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor VCC . CV • CCC is licit word initially • Final two consonants are licit word initially • The following morpheme boundaries: • CcCC, CtCC, CCCo • (outgrow, nonstop, centrist)

  37. Results of VCCCV Words • 17% of variance accounted for • Factors that favor VCCC . V • CCC is licit word finally (monster) • CCCo morpheme boundary (centrist)

  38. Results of VCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor VCCC . V • tCCC, CcCC, CCcC morpheme boundaries • (rescript, outgrow, porthole)

  39. Syllabification by cluster • Responses tend to break up illicit clusters • por . trait, chand . ler • Licit CCC, CC C, and C CC clusters following a tense vowel are kept intact • pro . scribe, pro . scribe, poul . try • Licit CCC, CC C, and C CC clusters following a lax vowel favor C.CC even if it breaks a licit cluster • as . tray, res . t(au)rant, pil . grim

  40. Results of VCCCCV Words • 36% of the variance accounted for • Factors that favor V . CCCCV • NONE

  41. Results of VCCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor V . CCCCV • The first three consonants are licit word finally

  42. Results of VCCCCV Words • 79% of the variance accounted for • Factors that favor VC . CCCV • The final three consonants are licit word initially • (abstract)

  43. Results of VCCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor V . CCCCV • A CCtCC morpheme boundary • (transplant)

  44. Results of VCCCCV Words • 68% of the variance accounted for • Factors that favor VCC . CCV • NONE

  45. Results of VCCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor VCC . CCV • The final three consonants are licit word initially • (abstract) • A CCCcC morpheme boundary • (marksman, textbook)

  46. Results of VCCCCV Words • 83% of the variance accounted for • Factors that favor VCCC . CV • A CCCcC morpheme boundary • (worldwide, swordsman)

  47. Results of VCCCCV Words • Factors that disfavor VCCC . CV • The final two consonants are licit word initially

  48. Result of VCCCCV Words • No one syllabified any word VCCCC . V

  49. Summary of Results • Syllabification was highly influenced by: • Morpheme boundaries • Legality of consonant clusters word initially and finally • V1 quality • Medial consonant quality • Stress • Interactions among these factors

More Related