2011
DOI: 10.3765/bls.v37i1.3196
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anti-markedness patterns in French epenthesis: An information-theoretic approach

Abstract: Cross-linguistically, certain vowel types tend to be used to break up otherwise ill-formed consonant clusters in a given language: they are generally non-low, non-round and either front or central. Such epenthetic vowels are commonly referred to as the language’s default vowel. For example, the default vowel in Maltese is [i],in Spanish it is [e], and it is schwa in Finnish, English, and Dutch. One might assume, then, that these vowels have certain properties that make them particularly good candidates for bei… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This finding represents a challenge to classic models of phonology, which cannot easily link sound change to contrast among actual lexical items; indeed, generative phonological formalisms are explicitly designed to exclude actual words from consideration (see section 4 below). In contrast, VUE models contribute testable hypotheses about the relationship between existing lexical forms, their usage, and the development of phonological patterns (e.g., Hay & Maclagan, 2012;Hume et al, 2013;Maclagan & Hay, 2007;Wedel, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This finding represents a challenge to classic models of phonology, which cannot easily link sound change to contrast among actual lexical items; indeed, generative phonological formalisms are explicitly designed to exclude actual words from consideration (see section 4 below). In contrast, VUE models contribute testable hypotheses about the relationship between existing lexical forms, their usage, and the development of phonological patterns (e.g., Hay & Maclagan, 2012;Hume et al, 2013;Maclagan & Hay, 2007;Wedel, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has often been observed that epenthetic vowels tend to be short and otherwise perceptually non-salient (e.g. Hume & Bromberg 2005), and high vowels are often shorter than lower vowels (Catford 1977, Maddieson 1997), so epenthetic high vowels consistent with the general idea that phonological repairs make minimal changes (Steriade 2001). This account is also consistent with the absence of most visually salient labial consonants from the range of epenthetic consonants.…”
Section: Ipa Maps For Relative Frequencymentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Because any grammatical system contains traces of its idiosyncratic history, single examples cannot provide convincing evidence either for or against a broader framework such as this. Instead, evaluations of the MOP framework require quantitative studies (ideally over larger cross-linguistic databases) that assess whether the statistical tendencies predicted by it are borne out (see, for example, the cross-linguistic strategy in Wedel et. al (2013) for studying the effect of functional load on predicting phoneme mergers; see also Graff 2012;Graff & Jaeger 2009;Piantadosi et al 2011Piantadosi et al , 2012.…”
Section: Tests Of the Mop Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of particular relevance to the current purpose, case studies have demonstrated that some properties of phonological systems can be derived from information theoretic or Bayesian considerations about message transmission, including work on allophony (Hall 2009(Hall , 2012, assimilation (Turnbull, Seyfarth, Hume & Jaeger, in prep), epenthesis (Hume & Bromberg 2005;Hong 2011;Tily & Kuperman 2012), markedness (Hume 2005;Hume et al 2016), phoneme mergers (Wedel et al 2013a,b), vowel harmony (Goldsmith & Riggle 2012), and consonant deletion (Cohen Priva 2015). What has been lacking to date is a larger picture of how these individual pieces fit together to predict the shape of phonological systems more generally (though see, e.g., Cohen Priva 2012; Flemming 2010; Wedel 2012, Hall 2013Hume & Mailhot 2013;Moulin-Frier et al 2015 for steps in this direction). Providing this larger picture is our goal here.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%