Complex diachronies of final nasalization in Austronesian and Dakota

Abstract

Final nasalization of voiced stops is phonetically unmotivated (i.e. not a consequence of universal articulatory or perceptual tendencies). As such, final nasalization has been deemed an impossible sound change. Nonetheless, Blust (2005; 2016) proposes that final nasalization took place in four Austronesian languages: Kayan-Murik, Berawan dialects, Kalabakan Murut, and Karo Batak. In this paper, we argue final nasalization in these languages is not a single sound change and reduce it to a combination of phonetically grounded changes. We demonstrate that in Austronesian, final nasalization involved four steps: (i) fricativization of voiced stops, (ii) devoicing of the fricatives, (iii) spontaneous nasalization before voiceless fricatives, and (iv) occlusion of the nasalized fricatives to nasal stops. Finally, we extend our account to final nasalization in Dakota (Siouan) and propose a new explanation for the development of the unnatural final voicing in the related Lakota language. Our results shed light on the role of phonetic naturalness in diachrony and synchrony. We maintain that while phonetically unnatural phonological processes may arise via a sequence of sound changes or analogical extension, sound changes are always natural and phonetically grounded.

The blurring history of intervocalic devoicing

“…If, on the other hand, unnatural developments can only arise via a combination of a specific set of sound changes, their rarity may then be simply due to the compounded low probability of a sequence of specific changes (Beguš, 2020). Despite their infrequency, unmotivated and unnatural developments do exist (e. g. Beguš, 2020Beguš, , 2022Beguš et al, 2022;Blevins, Egurtzegi, and Ullrich, 2020;Coetzee and Pretorius, 2010;Dąbkowski, 2023;Dąbkowski and Beguš, 2024;Hyman, 2001;Merrill, 2023). They are rare-we maintain-because their diachronic precursors are specific (Beguš, 2019).…”

“…Our findings are consistent with the evolutionary phonology program, which accounts for phonological alternations as phonologizations of articulatorily or perceptually motivated sound changes (Blevins, 2004(Blevins, , 2007(Blevins, , 2008(Blevins, , 2013Blevins, Egurtzegi, and Ullrich, 2020;Hyman, 1976;Ohala, 1981Ohala, , 1983). More specifically, the complex diachrony of intervocalic devoicing provides evidence for the blurring process framework, which holds that unnatural developments require a specific combination of at least three sound changes (Beguš, 2018(Beguš, , 2019(Beguš, , 2020(Beguš, , 2022Beguš et al, 2022;Dąbkowski and Beguš, 2024). 2015b).…”