Morphological embedding and phonetic reduction: the case of triconstituent compounds
- 376 Downloads
In this paper we propose that the internal bracketing of a word with more than two morphemes is reflected in the phonetic implementation. We hypothesize that embedded forms show more phonetic reduction than forms at higher structural levels (‘Embedded Reduction Hypothesis’). This paper tests the prediction of the Embedded Reduction Hypothesis with triconstituent compounds. The analysis of the durational properties of almost 500 compound tokens shows that there is a lengthening effect on the non-embedded constituent, and a shortening effect on the adjacent embedded constituent. Yet, this predicted effect of embedding interacts with other lexical factors, above all the bigram frequency of the embedded compound. At a theoretical level, these effects mean that the durational properties of the cross-boundary constituents are indicative of the hierarchical structure and of the strength of the internal boundary of triconstituent compounds. Hence, morphological structure is reflected in the speech signal.
KeywordsEnglish Compound Embedding Reduction Duration
- Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium. Google Scholar
- Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2013). Praat: doing phonetics by computer (version 5.3.41). Computer program. Retrieved 1 March 2013 from http://www.praat.org/.
- Bullon, S. (Ed.) (2002). Longman dictionary of American English. Your complete guide to American English. White Plains: Longman. Google Scholar
- Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row. Google Scholar
- Davies, M. (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 450 million words. 1990–present. http://www.americancorpus.org.
- Farnetani, E., Torsello, C. T., & Cosi, P. (1988). English compound versus non-compound noun phrases in discourse: an acoustic and perceptual study. Language and Speech, 31(2), 157–180. Google Scholar
- Hanique, I., & Ernestus, M. (2012). The role of morphology in acoustic reduction. Lingue E Linguaggio, 2012(2), 147–164. Google Scholar
- Hay, J. B. (2003). Causes and consequences of word structure. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
- Hornby, A. S. (Ed.) (1983). Oxford student’s dictionary of American English. London: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
- Hornby, A. S. (1995). Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary. London: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
- Kiparsky, P. (1982). From cyclic phonology to lexical phonology. In H. van der Hulst & N. Smith (Eds.), The structure of phonological representations (pp. 131–176). Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar
- Kösling, K. (2013). Prominence assignment in English triconstituent compounds. PhD thesis, Universität Siegen, Siegen. Google Scholar
- Kunter, G. (2015). Coquery: A corpus query tool. http://www.coquery.org.
- Kunter, G., & Plag, I. (2007). What is compound stress? In Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Saarbrücken (pp. 1005–1008). Google Scholar
- Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–38. Google Scholar
- Liberman, M. Y., & Prince, A. (1977). On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry, 8(2), 249–336. Google Scholar
- Mohanan, K. P. (1986). The theory of lexical phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar
- Pluymaekers, M., Ernestus, M., & Baayen, R. H. (2006). Effects of word frequency on the acoustic durations of affixes. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Spoken Language (INTERSPEECH 2006), Pittsburg, PA (pp. 953–956). Google Scholar
- Pluymaekers, M., Ernestus, M., Baayen, R. H., & Booij, G. (2010). Morphological effects in fine phonetic detail: the case of Dutchigheid. In C. Fougeron (Ed.), Laboratory phonology 10, Phonology and phonetics (pp. 511–531). Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
- Sproat, R. (1993). Looking into words. In S. Hargus & E. M. Kaisse (Eds.), Studies in lexical phonology (pp. 173–195). San Diego: Academic Press. Google Scholar
- Sproat, R., & Fujimura, O. (1993). Allophonic variation in English /l/ and its implications for phonetic implementation. Journal of Phonetics, 21, 291–311. Google Scholar
- Summers, d. (Ed.) (2000). Longman advanced American dictionary. Harlow: Longman. Google Scholar
- Trask, L. (1996). A dictionary of phonetics and phonology. London: Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar