A test case for the phonetics–phonology interface: gemination restrictions in Hungarian

Abstract

Despite differences in parsimony and philosophical orientation, physical and abstract theories of phonology often make similar empirical predictions. This study examines a case where they do not : gemination restrictions in Hungarian. While both types of theory correctly prohibit the lengthening of a consonant when flanked by another consonant, they make different predictions regarding both the relative duration changes within a target consonant and the applicability of restrictions to lengthening processes besides gemination. In two speechproduction experiments, these predictions are evaluated by measuring stop and frication durations within affricates. Results show that relative duration changes occur, and that the restriction holds only for gemination, supporting an abstract theory. Yet results also indicate that gemination exhibits sensitivity to inherent durational differences between affricates, providing some support for a physical theory. Thus I argue that an adequate theory of phonology must include abstract constituents, alongside a limited, principled set of physical landmarks. * I am grateful to Peter Dienes, who wrote the stimulus sentences for Experiment 1.Four anonymous reviewers and the editors of Phonology provided constructive criticism, which greatly improved the paper. Audiences provided useful feedback at

Looking into Segments

“…This was mentioned, above, in the case of Hungarian, in which Pycha (2010) demonstrates that the relative internal timing differences between alveolar and post-alveolar affricates in Hungarian are preserved under gemination. We assume the standard approach to phonological length, namely the association of more than one abstract phonological timing (or weight) unit with a long segment.…”

A Q-theoretic approach to distinctive subsegmental timing

“…We find such a case in Hungarian, where Pycha has argued that a segment-internal timing distinction across two types of affricates is maintained under gemination. Pycha (2009Pycha ( , 2010 (2016) proposed a Q-theoretic representation for these segments, as shown in (13). (13) Pycha (2009Pycha ( , 2010 explains that this same distinction in relative stop-fricative durations holds under gemination, in which the frication portion of the affricate remains the same but and the duration of the closure is extended.…”

“…Pycha (2009Pycha ( , 2010 (2016) proposed a Q-theoretic representation for these segments, as shown in (13). (13) Pycha (2009Pycha ( , 2010 explains that this same distinction in relative stop-fricative durations holds under gemination, in which the frication portion of the affricate remains the same but and the duration of the closure is extended. Crucially, while this same pattern holds under phonological gemination, it does not hold in phonetic lengthening conditions.…”

“…This model of the subsegment is particularly well suited to representing prenasalized and postnasalized stops, as in (1) (Steriade 1993 In example (1a), the closure phase of the stop (A 0 ) is linked to a privative nasal feature, which results in a prenasalized stop; in (1b), only the release phase (A max ) is linked to a nasal feature, which results in a postnasalized stop; in (1c), both the closure and release phases are linked to a nasal feature, which results in a fully nasalized stop; and in (1d), neither the closure nor the release phase is linked to a nasal feature, such that the resulting stop is fully oral. While Aperture Theory provides crucial machinery for representing bipartite segments, a large body of subsequently compiled evidence indicates that two subsegments is in fact not sufficient to capture the level of granularity for the detail of subsegmental information permitted by human languages (among many others, see Akinlabi & Liberman 2001, Hyman 2007, Kim 2008, Tadmor 2009, Operstein 2010, Pycha 2010, Remijsen 2013, Remijsen & Ayoker 2014. Specifically, three subsegments appears to be the necessary level of granularity, and as such, we embrace Q Theory, a model of the segment comprised of three (rather than two) subsegments.…”

Degemination in Hungarian: Phonology or phonetics?

“…According to the measurements of Pycha (2010), in cases like ráccsal 'with grating', páccal 'with brine', the full duration of affricates is 150% of the corresponding singleton affricates (223.6 ms vs. 149.3 ms), whereas in cases like kinccsel, tánccal it is 110% (149.1 ms vs. 135.5 ms). 21 That is, in unrestricted cases, the geminate is one and a half times (rather than twice) as long as the corresponding singleton (in harmony with the results of Pycha (2009) and also with the results of Olaszy (2006) and Beke & Gyarmathy (2010) cited above, but in contrast with the conventional naive wisdom); but, more surprisingly, in the degemination cases, the geminate does not become as short as the singleton, or taking a different perspective: the flanking consonant does not prevent the gemination of the affricate, it only restricts it to some extent.…”