Variable vowel adaptation in Standard Mandarin loanwords

Article

Abstract

This study examines which English vowel is matched with which vowel in Standard Mandarin in loanword adaptation, investigates the general patterns for and restrictions on vowel adaptation in Standard Mandarin loanwords, and determines which aspects of vowel quality is more carefully replicated than others. The results show that despite the seemingly high degree of variation, there are systematic patterns: (i) the front-back dimension is more faithfully replicated than height and rounding, (ii) deviation along the height dimension is tolerated but minimal, (iii) a rounding mismatch occurs mostly in adapting mid central/back vowels, and (iv) central vowels behave as if they are unspecified for or ambiguous between front and back. This study demonstrates how the grammar prioritizes which aspects to replicate in the loanword adaptation process and has implications for theories of loanword phonology in particular and feature theory in general.

Keywords

Loanword phonology Vowel adaptation Mandarin Optimality Theory 

References

  1. Adler Allison N. (2006) Faithfulness and perception in loanword adaptation: A case study from Hawaiian. Lingua 116: 1024–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bao Zhiming. (1996) The syllable in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 24: 312–353Google Scholar
  3. Davis Stuart, Mi-Hui Cho. (2006) Phonetics versus phonology: English word final /s/ in Korean loanword phonology. Lingua 116: 1008–1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duanmu San. (2000) The phonology of standard Chinese. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Flemming Edward S. (2002) Auditory representations in phonology. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Hsieh, Feng-fan, Michael Kenstowicz, and Xiaomin Mou. 2005. Mandarin adaptations of coda nasals in English loanwords. Ms., MIT.Google Scholar
  7. Kang Yoonjung. (2003) Perceptual similarity in loanword adaptation: English postvocalic word-final stops in Korean. Phonology 20: 219–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kenstowicz Michael. (2007) Salience and similarity in loanword adaptation: A case study from Fijian. Languages Sciences 29: 316–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kenstowicz Michael, Atiwong Suchato. (2006) Issues in loanword adaptation: A case study from Thai. Lingua 116: 921–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. LaCharité Darlene, Carole Paradis. (2005) Category preservation and proximity versus phonetic approximation in loanword adaptation. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 223–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lee Wai-Sum, Eric Zee. (2003) Standard Chinese (Beijing). Journal of the International Phonetic Association 33: 109–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lin, Yen-Hwei. 1989. Autosegmental treatment of segmental processes in Chinese phonology. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  13. Lin, Yen-Hwei. 1990. The phonology of Standard Mandarin loan words. Paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, Nashville.Google Scholar
  14. Lin Yen-Hwei. (2007) The sounds of Chinese. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Miao, Ruiqin. 2006. Loanword adaptation in Mandarin Chinese: Perceptual, phonological and sociolinguistic factors. Dissertation, Stony Brook University.Google Scholar
  16. Paradis Carole (2006) The unnatural /Cju/ (< foreign /Cy/) sequence in Russian loanwords: A problem for the perceptual view. Lingua 116: 976–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Paradis Carole, Darlene LaCharité. (1997) Preservation and minimality in loanword adaptation. Journal of Linguistics 33: 379–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Peperkamp, Sharon. 2005. A psycholinguistic theory of loanword adaptation. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. M. Ettlinger, N. Fleischer, and M. Park- Doob, 341–352. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
  19. Peperkamp, Sharon, and Emmanuel Dupoux. 2003. Reinterpreting loanword adaptations: The role of perception. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 367–370. Barcelona: Casual Productions.Google Scholar
  20. Rose Yvan, Katherine Demuth. (2006) Vowel epenthesis in loanword adaptation. Lingua 116: 1112–1139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shih, Li-Jen. 2004. Consonantal and syllabic adaptations in English loanwords in Mandarin. MA thesis, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  22. Silverman Daniel. (1992) Multiple scansions in loanword phonology: Evidence from Cantonese . Phonology 9: 289–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith, Jennifer L. 2006a. Loan phonology is not all perception: Evidence from Japanese loan doublets. In Japanese/Korean linguistics, ed. T. J. Vance and K. A. Jones, 63–74. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, Jennifer L. 2006b. Modeling loanword adaptation: Evidence from Japanese. Paper presented at International Conference on East Asian Linguistics, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  25. Steriade, Donca. 2001. Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: A perceptual account. In The role of speech perception in phonology, ed. E. Hume and K. Johnson, 219–250. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  26. Steriade, Donca. 2002. The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. Ms., University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  27. Uffmann Christian. (2006) Epenthetic vowel quality in loanwords: Empirical and formal issues. Lingua 116: 1079–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vendelin Inga, Sharon Peperkamp. (2006) The influence of orthography on loanword adaptations. Lingua 116: 996–1007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yip Moira. (1993) Cantonese loanword phonology and Optimality Theory. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 2: 261–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yip Moira. (2002) Necessary but not sufficient: Perceptual loanword influences in loanword phonology. The Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan, Special Issue on Aspects of Loanword Phonology 6: 4–21Google Scholar
  31. Yip Moira. (2006) The symbiosis between perception and grammar in loanword phonology. Lingua 116: 950–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zwicky Arnold M., Zwicky Elizabeth D. (1986) Imperfect puns, markedness and phonological similarity: With fronds like these, who needs anemones? Folia Linguistica 20: 493–503Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Linguistics and LanguagesMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations