Type frequency influences phonological generalizations: Eliminating stressed open syllables with short vowels in West Germanic

Mailhammer, Robert; Kruger, William W.; Makiyama, A. M.

doi:10.1017/s1470542715000069

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…OSL is a widely known phenomenon in European languages, and has been studied in considerable detail in Middle English, Middle Dutch and Middle High German in particular (see, e.g., Minkova ; Lahiri & Dresher ; Page ; Mailhammer et al. ). The process is based on the cross‐linguistic generalisation that vowels tend to be phonetically longer in open syllables than in closed ones (Maddieson : 213–14).…”

Section: Cvl‐lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

On The Mergers Of Latin Close‐Mid Vowels

Leppänen

Alho

2018

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we examine the details and dating of the mergers of Latin ı, e into e ̣ and u˘, o into o ̣. While these mergers have long since been recognised as a matter of historical fact within the broader development of Latin into Romance, their micro-level mechanics present several problems. By re-examining the available evidence from various empirical and theoretical perspectives, we argue that the mergers were the result of two phonological processes: the rise of peripherality distinctions in the vowel system on the one hand and the loss of contrastive vowel length in the fifth century AD on the other. 1 The authors wish to thank Andreas Opfermann and Michael Mazzola for reading and commenting drafts of this article. We also wish to thank the editor, James Clackson, and the two anonymous reviewers for useful suggestions and corrections. All remaining errors are our own.

show abstract

Section: Cvl‐lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

On The Mergers Of Latin Close‐Mid Vowels

Leppänen

Alho

2018

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some cases, the introductory nature of the book prevents a full discussion, and hence statements can come across as a bit stipulative. For example, chapter 7 does not mention the experimental confirmation of the claim that long vowels and the consonant following a short vowel are much more variable in their duration (see Mailhammer, Kruger & Makiyama 2015:214 with references). Thus the description of the phonetic reality of syllable cut may sound somewhat esoteric, especially since there is no phonetic evidence showing that abruptly-cut vowels are in fact “cut-off” (Restle 2003:45–46).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus the description of the phonetic reality of syllable cut may sound somewhat esoteric, especially since there is no phonetic evidence showing that abruptly-cut vowels are in fact “cut-off” (Restle 2003:45–46). An alternative is to explain a syllable-cut prosody as a configuration in which syllable structure and segmental properties are interrelated (see, for example, Mailhammer 2009 and Mailhammer, Kruger & Makiyama 2015). Similarly, the concept of preference laws, presented in chapter 5, might need more unpacking for uninitiated and skeptical readers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, the concept of preference laws, presented in chapter 5, might need more unpacking for uninitiated and skeptical readers. In particular, the fact that these “laws” are theorems, as Vennemann (1988) calls them—that is, axiomatically postulated generalizations rather than empirical generalizations—is a key point that helps prevent misunderstandings (see Mailhammer, Restle & Vennemann 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation