Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 465–513 | Cite as

Stricture and nasal place assimilation

  • Jaye Padgett
Article
  • 132 Downloads

Abstract

Theories of feature organization typically treat stricture features like [continuant], [consonantal] and [approximant] as independent of place of articulation features. The best argument for this view centers on [continuant] and facts of nasal place assimilation — in particular, instances of nasal place assimilation to fricatives, where the nasal appears to remain a stop. However, a closer look at nasal place assimilation provides a strong argument against this standard view: across languages, place assimilation to fricatives is highly disfavored in comparison to assimilation to stops, and occurring nasal-fricative clusters behave like affricates. I show how a theory in which [continuant] is place-dependent can explain these facts, exploiting the notion of structure preservation. The treatment of stricture proposed brings feature geometry more in line with models based on facts of phonetics and vocal tract anatomy, e.g., the gestural model of Browman and Goldstein.

Keywords

Artificial Intelligence Strong Argument Feature Organization Vocal Tract Articulation Feature 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, Stephen: 1975, ‘The Description of Nasal Consonants and the Internal Structure of Segments’, in C. A. Ferguson et al.,Nasalfest, Language Universals Project, Dept. of Linguistics, Stanford University, 1–25.Google Scholar
  2. Archangeli, Diana: 1984,Underspecification in Yawelmani Phonology and Morphology, doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  3. Archangeli, Diana: 1988, ‘Aspects of Underspecification Theory’,Phonology 5, 183–207.Google Scholar
  4. Archangeli, Diana and Douglas Pulleyblank: 1986,The Content and Structure of Phonological Representations, unpublished manuscript, University of Arizona and University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
  5. Archangeli, Diana and Douglas Pulleyblank: to appear,Grounded Phonology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  6. Aronoff, Mark and Richard Oehrle: 1984,Language Sound Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  7. Bethin, Christina: 1984, ‘A Syllabic Analysis of Nasal Vowels in Polish’,Studies in Language 8(2), 163–180.Google Scholar
  8. Borowsky, Toni: 1986,Topics in the Lexical Phonology of English, doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  9. Bright, William: 1972, ‘The Enunciative Vowel’, in theInternational Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 1, 26–55.Google Scholar
  10. Brooks, Maria Zagórska: 1968,Nasal Vowels in Contemporary Standard Polish—an Acoustic-Phonetic Analysis, Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
  11. Browman, Catherine P. and Louis Goldstein: 1986, ‘Towards an Articulatory Phonology’,Phonology 3, 219–252.Google Scholar
  12. Browman, Catherine P. and Louis Goldstein: 1989, ‘Articulatory Gestures as Phonological Units’,Phonology 6(2), 201–251.Google Scholar
  13. Browman, Catherine P. and Louis Goldstein: 1990, ‘Tiers in Articulatory Phonology, With Some Implications for Casual Speech’, in Kingston and Beckman 1990, 341–397.Google Scholar
  14. Calabrese, Andrea: 1987, ‘The Interaction of Phonological Rules and Filters in Salentino’,Proceedings of NELS 17, 79–99.Google Scholar
  15. Catford, J. C.: 1988,A Practical Introduction to Phonetics, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. Cho, Seung-Bog: 1967,A Phonological Study of Korean, Almqvist and Wiksells, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  17. Cho, Young-mee: 1990, ‘A Typology of Voicing Assimilation’,Proceedings of WCCFL 9, 141–155.Google Scholar
  18. Chomsky, Noam and Morris Halle: 1968,The Sound Pattern of English, Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Clements, G. N.: 1985, ‘The Geometry of Phonological Features’,Phonology Yearbook 2, 225–52.Google Scholar
  20. Clements, G. N.: 1987, ‘Phonological Feature Representation and the Description of Intrusive Stops’,CLS 23,Part II, Chicago Linguistic Society, 29–50.Google Scholar
  21. Clements, G. N.: 1988, ‘Toward a Substantive Theory of Feature Specification’,NELS 18, GLSA, UMass, Amherst, MA, 79–93.Google Scholar
  22. Clements, G. N.: 1991, ‘Phonological Primes: Gestures or Features?’, inActes du XIIème Congrès International des Sciences Phonètiques I, Publications de l'Université de Provence, Aix-en-Provence.Google Scholar
  23. Clements, G. N.: to appear, ‘Place of Articulation in Consonants and Vowels: a Unified Theory’, in B. Laks and A. Rialland (eds.),L'Architecture et la Géometrie des Représentations Phonologiques, Editions du C.N.R.S. Paris.Google Scholar
  24. Cohn, Abigail: 1989, ‘Phonetic Evidence for Configuration Constraints’,Proceedings of NELS 19, 63–77.Google Scholar
  25. Cohn, Abigail: 1990,Phonetic and Phonological Rules of Nasalization, doctoral dissertation,UCLA Working Papers 76.Google Scholar
  26. Cohn, Abigail: to appear, ‘The Status of Nasalized Continuants’, to appear in M. K. Huffman and R. Krakow,The Feature Nasal: Phonetic Bases and Phonological Implications, Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
  27. Coupez, André: 1980,Abrégé de Grammaire Rwanda 1, Institute National de Recherche Scientifique, Butare, République Rwandaise.Google Scholar
  28. Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa: 1988,Investigations into Polish Morphology and Phonology, doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  29. Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa: 1992, ‘Placelessness, Markedness and Polish Nasals’,Linguistic Inquiry 23, 139–46.Google Scholar
  30. Davis, Stuart: 1989, ‘The Location of the Feature [continuant] in Feature Geometry’,Lingua 78, 1–22.Google Scholar
  31. de Bhaldraithe, Tomás: 1975,The Irish of Cois Fhairrge, Co. Galway, The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
  32. Dell, François: 1973,Les Règles et les Sons, Introduction à la Phonologie Générative, Hermann, Paris.Google Scholar
  33. Doke, C. M.: 1926,The Phonetics of the Zulu Language, special issue ofBantu Studies 2.Google Scholar
  34. Doke, C. M.: 1931,The Southern Bantu Languages, Dawsons of Pall Mall, London.Google Scholar
  35. Duanmu, San: 1990,A Formal Study of Syllable, Tone, Stress and Domain in Chinese Languages, doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  36. Dukiewicz, L.: 1967,Połskie Gloski Nosowe: Analiza Akustyczna, Państwowe Wydawnictwa Naukowe, Warszawa.Google Scholar
  37. Einarsson, S.: 1940, ‘Nasal + Spirant or Liquid in Icelandic’,The Journal of English and Germanic Philology 34, 462–464.Google Scholar
  38. Goldsmith, John: 1990,Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology, Basil Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  39. Goldsmith, John: to appear, ‘Harmonic Phonology’, in J. Goldsmith (ed.),The Last Phonological Rule: Reflections on Constraints and Derivations in Phonology, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  40. Gussmann, Edmund: 1980,Studies in Abstract Phonology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  41. Hale, Kenneth: 1973, ‘Deep-Surface Canonical Disparities in Relation to Analysis and Change: an Australian Example’, in T. Seboek (ed.),Current Trends in Linguistics II, Mouton, The Hague, 401–458.Google Scholar
  42. Halle, Morris and Kenneth Stevens: 1971, ‘A Note on Laryngeal Features’,Quarterly Progress Report of the Research Laboratory of Electronics 101, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  43. Harris, James: 1969,Spanish Phonology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  44. Harris, James 1984, ‘Autosegmental Phonology, Lexical Phonology, and Spanish Nasals’, in Aronoff and Oehrle, 67–82.Google Scholar
  45. Hayes, Bruce: 1984, ‘The Phonetics and Phonology of Russian Voicing Assimilation’, in Aronoff and Oehrle, 318–328.Google Scholar
  46. Hayes, B.: 1986, ‘Inalterability in CV Phonology’,Language 62, 321–51.Google Scholar
  47. Herbert, Robert: 1986,Language Universals, Markedness Theory, and Natural Phonetic Processes, Mouton de Gruyter, New York.Google Scholar
  48. Hooper, Joan: 1972, ‘The Syllable in Phonological Theory’,Language 48, 525–540.Google Scholar
  49. Inkelas, Sharon and Young-mee Cho: to appear, ‘Inalterability as Prespecification’, to appear inLanguage.Google Scholar
  50. Itô, Junko: 1986,Syllable Theory in Prosodic Phonology, doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, published 1988, by Garland Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Itô, Junko: 1989, ‘A Prosodic Theory of Epenthesis’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7, 217–259.Google Scholar
  52. Itô, Junko and R. Armin Mester: to appear, ‘Licensed Segments and Safe Paths’, to appear in C. Paradis and D. LaCharité (eds.),Constraint-Based Theories in Multilinear Phonology, special issue of theCanadian Journal of Linguistics.Google Scholar
  53. Itô, Junko, R. Armin Mester and Jaye Padgett: 1993, ‘Constraint Ranking and Underspecification’, report no. LRC-93-08, Linguistics Research Center, UC Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
  54. Keating, Patricia: 1988, ‘A Survey of Phonological Features’, Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana.Google Scholar
  55. Keating, Patricia: 1990, ‘The Window Model of Coarticulation: Articulatory Evidence’, in Kingston and Beckman, 451–470.Google Scholar
  56. Kenstowicz, Michael: 1972, ‘Lithuanian Phonology’,Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 2(2), University of Illinois, 1–85.Google Scholar
  57. Kingston, John and Mary Beckman (eds): 1990,Papers in Laboratory Phonology I.Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Kiparsky, Paul: 1982, ‘Lexical Phonology and Morphology’,Linguistics in the Morning Calm, Seoul, Hanshin Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  59. Kiparsky, Paul: 1985, ‘Some Consequences of Lexical Phonology’,Phonology 2, 85–138.Google Scholar
  60. Krejnovich, E.: 1937,Fonetika Nivxkogo Jazyka, Gosudarstvennoe Učebno-Pedagogičeskoe Izdatel'stvo, Moscow.Google Scholar
  61. Ladefoged, Peter and Ian Maddieson: 1986,Some Sounds of the World's Languages: Preliminary Version,UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 64.Google Scholar
  62. Liberman, Mark and Janet Pierrehumbert: 1984, ‘Intonational Invariance Under Changes in Pitch Range and Length’, in Aronoff and Oehrle, 157–233.Google Scholar
  63. Lombardi, Linda: 1990, ‘The Non-Linear Organization of the Affricate’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8, 375–425.Google Scholar
  64. McCarthy, John J.: 1988, ‘Feature Geometry and Dependency: A Review’,Phonetica 43, 84–108.Google Scholar
  65. McCarthy, John J. and Alan Prince: 1993, ‘Prosodic Morphology I: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction’, manuscript, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and Rutgers University, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
  66. Maddieson, Ian and Peter Ladefoged: 1988, ‘Multiply Articulated Segments and the Feature Hierarchy’, expanded version of a paper presented at the 1988 annual meeting of the LSA.Google Scholar
  67. Mascaró, Joan: 1976,Catalan Phonology and the Phonological Cycle, doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  68. Mascaró, Joan: 1984, ‘Continuant Spreading in Basque, Catalan and Spanish’, in Aronoff and Oehrle, 287–298.Google Scholar
  69. Mascaró, Joan: 1991a, ‘A Reduction and Spreading Theory of Voicing and Other Sound Effects’, unpublished manuscript., Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
  70. Mascaró, Joan: 1991b, ‘Iberian Spirantization and Continuant Spreading’,Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 1991, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 167–179.Google Scholar
  71. Mester, R. Armin and Junko Itô: 1989, ‘Feature Predictability and Underspecification: Palatal Prosody in Japanese Mimetics’,Language 65, 258–293.Google Scholar
  72. Mohanan, K. P.: 1983, ‘The Structure of the Melody’, unpublished manuscript, MIT and the National University of Singapore.Google Scholar
  73. Mohanan, K. P.: 1986,The Theory of Lexical Phonology, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  74. Mohanan, K. P.: 1991, ‘On the Bases of Radical Underspecification’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 285–325.Google Scholar
  75. Mohanan, K. P.: to appear, ‘Fields of Attraction in Phonology’, in J. Goldsmith (ed.),The Last Phonological Rule, Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Murray, R. and Theo Vennemann: 1983, ‘Sound Change and Syllable Structure in Germanic Phonology’,Language 59, 514–528.Google Scholar
  77. Myers, Scott: 1991a, ‘Persistent Rules’,Linguistic Inquiry 22, 315–344.Google Scholar
  78. Myers, Scott: 1991b, ‘Structure Preservation and the Strong Domain Hypothesis’,Linguistic Inquiry 22, 379–385.Google Scholar
  79. Navarro Tomás, T.: 1965,Manual de Pronunciación Española, Madrid, Publicaciones de la Revista de Filología Española, Núm, III.Google Scholar
  80. Newton, B.: 1972,The Generative Interpretation of Dialect, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Ní Chiosáin, Máire and Jaye Padgett: 1993, ‘On the Nature of Consonant-Vowel Interaction’, paper presented at the first Holland Institute of Linguistics Phonology Conference, Leiden, and report no. LRC-93-09, Linguistics Research Center, UC Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
  82. Ohala, John: 1975, ‘Phonetic Explanations for Nasal Sound Patterns’, in C. A. Ferguson et al.,Nasalfest, Language Universals Project, Dept. of Linguistics, Stanford University, 289–316.Google Scholar
  83. Ó Siadhail, Micheál: 1989,Modern Irish, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Padgett, Jaye: 1991,Stricture in Feature Geometry, doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, to appear CSLI, Stanford.Google Scholar
  85. Paradis, Carole: 1988, ‘On Constraints and Repair Strategies’,The Linguistic Review 6, 71–97.Google Scholar
  86. Pétursson, M.: 1973, ‘Phonologie des Consonnes Nasales en Islandais Moderne’,La Linguistique 9, 115–138.Google Scholar
  87. Pierrehumbert, Janet: 1990, ‘Phonological and Phonetic Representation’,Journal of Phonetics 18.Google Scholar
  88. Piggott, G. L.: 1988, ‘On the Autonomy of the Feature Nasal’,CLS 23,Part II, Chicago Linguistic Society, 223–238.Google Scholar
  89. Piggott, G. L.: 1992, ‘Variability in Feature Dependency: The Case of Nasality’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10, 33–77.Google Scholar
  90. Poser, William: 1982, ‘Phonological Representations and Action-at-a-Distance’, in H. van der Hulst and N. Smith (eds.),The Structure of Phonological Representations, Part II, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  91. Prince, Alan: 1990, ‘Quantitative Consequences of Rhythmic Organization’,Proceedings of CLS 26.Google Scholar
  92. Prince, Alan and Paul Smolensky: 1993, ‘Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar’, manuscript, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, and University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  93. Pulleyblank, Douglas: 1989, ‘Patterns of Feature Cooccurrence: The Case of Nasality’, Arizona Phonology Conference 2:Coyote Working Papers 9, 98–115.Google Scholar
  94. Rice, Keren: 1987, ‘The Function of Structure Preservation: Derived Environments’,Proceedings of NELS 17, 501–519.Google Scholar
  95. Rubach, Jerzy: 1984,Cyclic and Lexical Phonology, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  96. Rosenthall, Samuel: 1989, ‘The Phonology of Nasal-Obstruent Sequences’, unpublished masters thesis, McGill University, Montréal.Google Scholar
  97. Rosenthall, Samuel: 1992, ‘Prenasalized Stops and Feature Geometry’, inPhonologica 1988, W. U. Dressler, H. C. Luschützky, O. E. Pfeiffer and J. R. Rennison (eds.), Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Rycroft D. and A. Ngcobo: 1979,Say it in Zulu, SOAS Publications Office, London.Google Scholar
  99. Sagey, Elizabeth: 1986a,The Representation of Features and Relations in Non-Linear Phonology, doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  100. Sagey, Elizabeth: 1986b, ‘On the Representation of Complex Segments and their Formation in Kinyarwanda’, in L. Wetzels and E. Sezer (eds.),Studies in Compensatory Lengthening, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  101. Schein, Barry and Donca Steriade: 1986, ‘On Geminates’,Linguistic Inquiry 17, 691–744.Google Scholar
  102. Selkirk, Elisabeth: 1990, ‘On the Inalterability of Geminates’, paper presented at the Cortona Conference, Italy.Google Scholar
  103. Selkirk, Elisabeth: 1991, ‘A Two-Root Theory of Length’, in E. Dunlap and J. Padgett (eds.),University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 14:Papers in Phonology. GLSA, UMass, Amherst.Google Scholar
  104. Shaw, Patricia: 1991, ‘Consonant Harmony Systems: the Special Status of Coronal Harmony’, in C. Paradis and J. F. Prunet (eds.),Phonetics and Phonology 2, Academic Press, San Diego, 125–157.Google Scholar
  105. Sommerstein, Alan: 1973,The Sound Pattern of Ancient Greek, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  106. Steele, Richard: 1973,The Segmental Phonology of Contemporary Standard Polish, doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  107. Steriade, Donca: 1982,Greek Prosodies and the Nature of Syllabification, doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  108. Steriade, Donca: 1986, ‘A Note on Coronal’, manuscript, MIT.Google Scholar
  109. Steriade, Donca: 1987, ‘Redundant Values’,CLS 23,Part II, Chicago Linguistic Society, 339–362.Google Scholar
  110. Steriade, Donca: 1989, ‘Affricates’, paper presented at the MIT Conference on Feature Geometry.Google Scholar
  111. Steriade, Donca: 1990, ‘Gestures and Autosegments’, in Kingston and Beckman, 382–397.Google Scholar
  112. Steriade, Donca: 1991, ‘Closure, Release and Nasal Contours’, unpublished manuscript, UCLA.Google Scholar
  113. Stringer, M. and J. Hotz: 1973, ‘Waffa Phonemes’, in H. McKaughan (ed.),The Languages of the Eastern Family of the East New Guinea Highland Stock, University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  114. Vance, Timothy: 1987,An Introduction to Japanese Phonology, State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
  115. Welmers, W. E.: 1962, ‘The Phonology of Kpelle’,Journal of African Languages 1, 69–93.Google Scholar
  116. Welmers, W. E.: 1973,African Language Structures, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  117. Whitney, W. D.: 1889,Sanskrit Grammar, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  118. Wetzels, W. Leo: 1991, ‘Contrastive and Allophonic Properties of Brazilian Portuguese Vowels’, in D. Wanner and D. Kibbee (eds.),New Analyses in Romance Linguistics, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 77–99.Google Scholar
  119. Wilkinson, Karina: 1988, ‘Prosodic Structure and Lardil Phonology’,Linguistic Inquiry 19, 325–334.Google Scholar
  120. Wonderly, William: 1946, ‘Phonemic Acculturation in Zoque’,IJAL 12, 92–95.Google Scholar
  121. Wonderly, William: 1951, ‘Zoque I,II,III,IV,V,VI’IJAL 17, 1–9, 105–123, 137–162, 235–251.Google Scholar
  122. Wonderly, William: 1952,IJAL 18, 35–48, 189–202.Google Scholar
  123. Yip, Moira: 1988, ‘The Obligatory Contour Principle and Phonological Rules: A Loss of Identity’,Linguistic Inquiry 19, 65–100.Google Scholar
  124. Yip, Moira: 1991, ‘Coronals, Consonant Clusters, and the Coda Condition’, in C. Paradis and J. F. Prunet (eds.),Phonetics and Phonology 2, Academic Press, San Diego, 61–78.Google Scholar
  125. Ziervogel, D., P. J. Wentzel and T. N. Makuya: 1972,A Handbook of the Venda Language, Pretoria, University of South Africa.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaye Padgett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsStevenson CollegeSanta Cruz

Personalised recommendations