tobias scheer & guylaine brun-trigaud université de nice – sophia antipolis, umr 6039...

Tobias Scheer &Guylaine Brun-Trigaud

Université de Nice – Sophia Antipolis, UMR 6039

Lenition of branching Onsets:

Celtic, Gorgia Toscana, Gallo-Romance

(dialectal evidence from the ALF)

Going Romance 24

Leiden, 9-11 December 2010

The Strong Position in Phonology

•the Strong Position (in Romance and elsewhere, Ségéral & Scheer 2001, 2008)

- {#,C}__ = Strong Position: PORTA > porte

TALPA > taupe

- V__V = weak position A: FABA > fève

- __{#,C} = weak position B (Coda): LUP(U) > l[u]

RUPTA > route•the mirror effect: {#,C}__ vs. __{#,C} are symmetric

- with respect to their position: mirror image

- with respect to their effect: strength vs. weakness

relevant consonants:

the word-initial consonant

the consonant that occurs after a coda

the initial CV = #

represents the morphological information

« beginning of the word »

•analysis in CVCV (Lowenstamm 1996, Scheer 2004)

The Coda Mirror: Government & Licensing

initial consonant #__ post-Coda consonant C.__

C V - C V … … V C V C V …

| | | | | |

C V V R T V#

GvtGvt

Government

inhibits the segmental expression of its target

empty nuclei must be governed

Lic Lic

Licensing

promotes the segmental expression of its target

P O RTA T A L P A

consonants in Strong Position occur

after an empty nucleus

ø __

consonants in Strong Position are

licensed

but ungoverned


intervocalic position V__V

C V C V

| | |

V C V

Gvt

Lic

F A B A

internal coda __.C final coda __#

… V C V C V ... V C V #

| | | | | |

V R T V V C

R U P T A L U P (U)

intervocalic V__V: the consonant is

not adjacent to any empty nucleus

licencensed and governed

in coda position: the consonant

occurs before an empty nucleus: __ø

is neither licensed nor governed

Lic

Gvt

Lic

Gvt

summary

Strong Position = {#,C}__ = ø__ = strength = ungoverned but licensed

Coda = __{#,C} = __ ø = weak A = ungoverned and unlicensed

intervocalic = V__V = V__V= weak B = governed and licensed


C V C V C V

| | | |

C T R V

•worse than making a wrong prediction:

Gvt

Lic

branching onset

<==

IG

•the liquid R: licensed, but ungoverned ==> strong position

making NO prediction at all

branching onsets in CVCV

•what a branching Onset looks like (after a consonant)

•the solidarity of the cluster is due to a relationship that is contracted by the (melodies of) the two consonants: IG (Infrasegmental Government)

•the obstruent T: target of neither Gvt nor Lic ==> ??

Locality in Syntax

Relativized Minimality, Rizzi (1990)

given two classes of items A and B,

a relation between A1 et A2 is local iff no other A intervenes

Locality in Syntax

•three major classes of items in syntax: - verbs (heads) - arguments (A position) - quantifiers (A’ position)

Couldi John __i have come ?hea

dargumen

thea

dhea

d

☺ John could have come

argument

head

head

John could have come Havei John could __i come ?hea

d

*

C V C V C V

| | | |

C T R V

•a branching onset is a non-local structure: - major classes of items in phonology are: onset and nucleus- an internuclear relation exists whereby a third nucleus intervenes.

Gvt

Lic

branching onset

<==

IG

A M P L U S

Locality in Syntax

The trouble: summary

1. no prediction made

2. violation of locality

C V C V C V

| | | |

C T R V

Gvt

Lic

branching onset

<==

IG

•the intervening nucleus is the source of government

Gvt

instead of having a non-local government relation

The cure: making branching onsets local

•it is entitled to govern because it is not itself governed: it is unpronounced for a different reason (IG)

•consequence: the definition of what a good governor is owes nothing to phoneticsbefore: only nuclei with phonetic content can governnow: a nucleus can govern iff it is not governed itself

C V C V C V

| | | |

C T R V

Lic

TR in Strong Position

<==

•in case the TR is in intervocalic position, the T will also be in intervocalic position (licensed and governed)

•when the TR is preceded by an empty nucleus (Strong Position), the T will also be in Strong Position (licensed but ungoverned)

Gvt

C V C V C V

| | | | |

C V T R V

TR in intervocalic positon

<==

Lic

Gvt

local branching onsets: predictions

in other words:

given a branching onset TR, T behaves like if R were not there

•hence the following prediction:the T of a TR group behaves exactly like a simplex T

- if the TR group is in Strong Position, T will be strong

- if the TR group is in intervocalic position, T will be intervocalic

local branching onsets: predictions

testing the prediction

•typologically speaking, branching onsets are rare

•even rarer are languages that allow to test the reaction of TRs on lenition

•we examine 4 cases: - Celtic (in its prehistory) - Gorgia Toscana - French diachrony - Gallo-Romance dialects as witnessed by the ALF (Atlas Linguistique de la France)

•==> the empirical situation is largely unexplored

test case 1: Celtic

the classical scenario assumes 3 stages (e.g. McCone 1996)

•stage 1: IE b,d,g > v,,ɣ / V__V et V__RV

1. V__V IE Proto-Celtic Old Irish glose b kladibos *klaivos klaiəv épée

d kladibos *klaivos klaiəv épéeg tegos *teɣos tieɣ maison

2. V__RVb dubro- *duvro- dovər eaud widwa: *wiwa: fiev veuveg wegros *weɣros fe:r herbe

3. but resistance in Strong Position {#,C}__ and in gemination

N__ *windos fiind blanc#__, gém *buggos bog mou

test case 1: Celtic

•stage 2: as stage 1, but now also across word boundaries

1. V__V Insular Celtic Proto-Irish Old Irish glose t *ehja teɣah *eja eɣa ə ieɣ sa maison

k *inda: kloka: *inda: loa: iŋ lo la pierre

2. V__RVt *bre:tra: *bre:rə briiaər motk *dakra *dærə die:r larme

3. but resistance in Strong Position {#,C}__ and in geminationR__ *eisko- *eisk iask poissongém *makwkwos *makwkwah mak garçon

•stage 3: t,k > , / V__V and V__RV (there is no p)

test case 2: Gorgia Toscana

Castellani (1960), Giannelli & Savoia (1978, 1979), Marotta (2000-01)

1. V__V Stand. It. Tuscan glose p apɛrto aɸɛrto

ouvertt laato laaθo côték bruuko bruuxo, bruuho, bruuo

worm

2. V__RVp la piega la ɸjɛɛɣa le plit liitro liiθro litrek la krɛɛma la xɾɛɛma, la hrɛɛma la

crème

3. but resistance in Strong Position {#,C}__ and in gemination

R__ pɔrta pɔrta porte#__ pjɛɛde pjɛɛe

piedgém. gatto gatto chat

p,b,t,d,k,g > ɸ,β,θ,,x/h/ø,ɣ / V__(R)V

test case 3: French

•only labials and dentals are examined – the situation of velars is complicated by palatalizations (Bourciez 1967 etc.)

#__ Coda__ V__V

pr

pl

prunaprune

plenu plein

comprend(e)recomprendrepurp(u)ra pourpreamplus ample*temp(u)la temple

capra chèvrepip(e)re poivreduplu doublecap(u)lu afr chable

br

bl

brachiu bras

*blastimareblâmer

umbra ombrearb(o)re arbregerm *blād afr emblaverumb(i)licus afr umblil

labra lèvrerob(o)re rouvre—fab(u)la fable

•labials in TR groups

#__ Coda__ V__V

p porta porte talpa taupe riparive

b bene bien herbaherbe

faba fève

•simplex Labials

p

p

p

p

b

b

b

b

v

v

vv

#__ Coda__ V__V

tr tres troistractare traiter

capistru chevêtrealt(e)ru autre

petra pierreit(e)rare errer

dr drappu drap*dras(i)c drêche

—perd(e)re perdre

quadratu carrérid(e)re rire

•dentals in TR groups

#__ Coda__ V__V

t tela toile cantarechanter

vita vie

d dente dent ardore ardeur codaqueue

•simplex dentals

t

t td d

ø

dtd

øø

ø

test case 3: French

test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)

ALFAtlas Linguistique de la FranceGilléron, Jules, and Édmond Édmont 1902-10. Atlas linguistique de la France. Paris: Champion, 9 vol., supplément 1920.

based on fieldwork 1897-1900, 639 points of inquiry.


•prediction in a dialectal system T alone and T in a TR cluster behave alike in every given system (dialect)

•examination of labials in intervocalic position

•dentals are inconclusive for independent reasons (desolidarisation, see next slide), velars are blurred by palatalisations.

•hence for each obstruent and each position, the isoglosses of T alone and T in a TR cluster are identical.

==> not exactly a trivial or intuitive prediction==> a prediction about 639 systems at the same time


•goal: comparison of -P- with -PR- -B- with -BR-

•variation and its interpretation: only actual branching onsets (solidary TR groups) are an input for the comparison. Hence non-solidary groups are counted out:

coda vocalisation betrays desolidarisation: V.TRV > VT.RV

(grey-shaded on the maps below) example: solidary TR group: FEBREM > fièvre, TAB(U)LA > table

non-solidary TR group: FEBREM > fewre, TAB(U)LA > tole

-B-ABANTIARE > avancerABOCULUS > aveugleFABA > fèveHIBERNU > hiver

-BR- (primary)FEBREM > fièvre

-B’R- (secondary)BIB(E)RE > boireSCRIB(E)RE > écrire

-BL- (primary)OBLITARE > oublier

-B’L- (secondary)SAB(U)LU > sableDIAB(U)LU > diableSTAB(U)LA > étable

syntheses

lexical basis ALF level 0

B’L 0

BL 0

B’R 0

BR 0

B 0

level 1

BR 1

BL 1

B 1

level 2

BR 2

B 2

?

-B- vs. -BR-


-P-CREPANT > crèventNEPOTE > neveu*ARRIPARE > arriverTROPARE > trouverLUPA > louveSAPONE > savonSAPA > sève

-PR- (primary)APRILE > avril

-P’R- (secondary)PIP(E)R > poivreLEP(O)RE > lièvreOP(E)RARIU > ouvrier

-PL- (primary)DUPLU > double

-P’L- (secondary)CAP(U)LU > câble

syntheses

lexical basis ALF level 0

P’L 0

PL 0

P’R 0

PR 0

P 0

level 1

PR 1

PL 1

P 1

level 2

PR 2

P 2

?

-P- vs. -PR-


-P- aloneintervocalic

-P-in an intervocalic TR group

superposition:intervocalic -P- alone and in a group

poitevin

Croissant


Croissant

•-P- alone spirantizes (-P- > -v-), but remains a stop in -PR- (> -br-).

•8 points of inquiry (503‑5, 600, 601, 800, 802, 803)•well-known zone of transition (Croissant).


poitevin

•opposite pattern: P in PR spirantizes (> vr), but lexical variation is observed for isolated P (> b, v) (which however always voices)

•24 points of inquiry (429, 448, 459, 479, 509-13, 515, 517, 518, 521, 525, 527-29, 533, 535, 536, 540, 621, 630, 632)•since ‑PR‑ always spirantizes, a fricative output is also expected for ‑P‑.

•lexical basis ALF: 7 words•unexpected non-spirantization concerns only two words •two contravening words: LOPA > loube, SAPONE > sabon•LOPA: contravening in 19 out of 24 points, SAPONE in 17 out of 24. The five other words are well-behaved in all 24 points.

==> lexical inconsistency points to contact, rather than to regular evolution.

-B-alone intervocalic

-B-in an intervocalic TR group

superposition:intervocalic -B- alone and in a group

provençal


provençal

- there are no *vl, *vr at all - hence -BL-, -BR- could not produce *vr, *vl (cf. *vl in oïl)

thank you for your attention

References 1

Bourciez, Edouard & J. Bourciez 1967. Phonétique française. 9e édition Paris:

Klincksieck.Brun-Trigaud, Guylaine & Tobias Scheer 2010. Lenition in branching onsets in

French and in ALF dialects. Development of Language through the Lens of

Formal Linguistics, edited by Petr Karlík, 15-28. Munich: Lincom.Castellani, Arrigo 1960. Precisazioni sulla gorgia toscana. Boletin de de Filologia

19, 242-261.Giannelli, Luciano & Leonardo Savoia 1978. L'indebolimento consonantico in

Toscana (I). Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia 2, 25-58.Giannelli, Luciano & Leonardo Savoia 1979-80. L'indebolimento consonantico in

Toscana (II). Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia 3-4, 39-101.Lowenstamm, Jean 1996. CV as the only syllable type. Current trends in

Phonology. Models and Methods, edited by Jacques Durand & Bernard

Laks, 419-441. Salford, Manchester: ESRI.Marotta, Giovanna 2000-01. Non solo spiranti. La gorgia toscana nel parlato di

Pisa. L'Italia Dialettale 62, 27-60.McCone, Kim 1996. Towards a relative chronology of ancient and medieval celtic

sound change. Maynooth: St. Patrick's College.Rizzi, Luigi 1990. Relativized Minimality. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 16.

Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

References 2

Scheer, Tobias 2004. A Lateral Theory of Phonology. Vol.1: What is CVCV, and

why should it be? Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Ségéral, Philippe & Tobias Scheer 2001. La Coda-Miroir. Bulletin de la Société

de Linguistique de Paris 96, 107-152.Ségéral, Philippe & Tobias Scheer 2008. The Coda Mirror, stress and positional

parameters. Lenition and Fortition, edited by Joaquim Brandão de Carvalho,

Tobias Scheer & Philippe Ségéral, 483-518. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.


Dentalsoïl oc

-T- ø d

-TR- ør jr

-D- ø d,z

-DR- ør ør

desolidarisation j is the regular result of k,g in coda

postion: aqua > oc aigue agnellus > oïl agneau

desolidarisation ?

desolidarisation zero is the regular result of -D- in coda position: MOD(U)LU > oïl moule > oc mole ADLUMINARE > oïl, oc allumer RAD(I)CINA > oïl racine > oc racina

tobias scheer & guylaine brun-trigaud université de nice – sophia antipolis, umr 6039...

Documents

v et v

v stand

cvcvc v ctr v worse

coda position

u p u intervocalic v

p slide

weak position b coda

v cvcv vcv gvt lic f