Vowel/Glide Alternation in a Theory of Constraint Interaction

Rosenthall, Samuel

doi:10.4324/9781315052359

Cited by 53 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This indicates that *C OMPLEX , the constraint prohibiting multiple segments in syllable margins, must dominate a faithfulness constraint such as D EP . Inputs which sharing which is motivated by the place markedness subhierarchy may be found in Alderete et al (1996); see also Rosenthall (1994). 17 Wiltshire, working in a pre-Correspondence Theoretic framework, adopts the constraint FILL, fromcontain consonant sequences that might be syllabified in an onset position do not surface faithfully.…”

Section: Tamil Onsetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lexical stresses must also be retained, creating exceptions to the default stress pattern. The analysis of stress in Spanish and Catalan is a thorny problem which has inspired a considerable literature (see Harris 1983Harris , 1989Harris , 1992Roca 1986 for representative derivational analyses, as well as Cabré &Rosenthall 1994 for recent Optimality Theoretic treatments of stress in Spanish and Catalan). The details of Catalan stress placement are largely orthogonal to the point at hand; I will assume, for expositional purposes, a block of prosodic constraints compressed under the label S TRESS ; some of the key constraints subsumed under this label are given in (43).…”

Section: The Analysis Of Western Catalanmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Positional Faithfulness

Beckman¹

2004

Optimality Theory in Phonology

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Tamil Onsetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Analysis Of Western Catalanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positional Faithfulness

Beckman¹

2004

Optimality Theory in Phonology

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This is similar to previous proposals suggesting that glides have narrower constriction targets (e.g., Straka, 1964;Maddieson & Emmorey, 1985), with arguments referring both to phonological distribution and phonetic properties such as a lower acoustic intensity of glides. Such proposals vary, however, in precise feature specification, such as employing [±consonantal] instead of [±vocalic] (e.g., Hyman, 1985;Hayes, 1989;Rosenthall, 1994). For the distinction of interest in this study, such an account would entail that the production of a lingual [j] glide has a tighter constriction reached by a higher lingual articulation than its [i] vowel counterpart.…”

Section: Competing Phonological Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence and characterization of a glide-vowel distinction in American English

Jaggers¹

2018

Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tests whether native speakers of American English exhibit a glide-vowel distinction ([j]- [i]) in a speech elicitation experiment. When reading sentences out loud, participants' pronunciations of 4 near-minimal pairs of pre-existing lexical items (e.g., Eston [iə] vs. pneumon [jə]) exhibit significant differences when acoustically measured, confirming the presence of a [j]- [i] distinction. This distinction is also found to be productively extended to the production of 20 near-minimal pairs of nonce words (e.g., Súmia → [sumiə] vs. Fímya → [fimjə]), diversified and balanced along different phonologically relevant factors of the surrounding environment. Multiple acoustic measurements are compared to test what aspects most consistently convey the distinction: F2 (frontness), F1 (height), intensity, vocalic sequence duration, transition earliness, and transition speed. This serves the purpose of documenting the distinction's acoustic phonetic realization. It also serves in the comparison of phonological representations. Multiple types of previously proposed phonological representations are considered along with the competing predictions they generate regarding the acoustic measurements performed. Results suggest that the primary and most consistent characteristic of the distinction is earliness of transition into the following vowel, with results also suggesting that the [j] glide has a greater degree of constriction. The [j] glide is found to have a significantly less anterior articulation, challenging the application of a representation based on place or articulator differences that would predict [j] to be more anterior.

show abstract

“…If V1 is /i/, it is turned into the palatal glide [j]; however if V1 is /u/, it is turned into the labio-velar glide [w]. Thus, the resultant [j] and [w] are derived glides because they are surface or positional variants of underlying vowels (Rosenthall 1994). This complementary distribution is not surprising as high vowels and glides share the same feature content except that the former are moraic and the latter are not.…”

Section: Glide Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This complementary distribution is not surprising as high vowels and glides share the same feature content except that the former are moraic and the latter are not. As shown in Figure 3 below (adapted from Rosenthall 1994 and, a glide is a high vocoid linked directly to the syllable node and a vowel is a high vocoid linked to a mora. Glide formation occurs in the formation of possessive pronouns and quantitatives, as shown in Table 1 below.…”

Section: Glide Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing vowel hiatus resolution in ciNsenga and chiShona: An Optimality Theory analysis

Kadenge

Simango

2014

SPiL Plus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article seeks to contribute to typology by presenting a formal comparative analysis of repair strategies used to resolve vowel hiatus in ciNsenga and chiShona. In these two languages, hiatus resolution is sensitive to phonology and morphosyntax such that hiatus resolution strategies apply differently depending on the phonological and morphosyntactic context. Across the prefix + noun stem boundary and within the Inflectional Stem, V1 undergoes "resyllabification" (Myers 1987:222) in the form of glide formation, secondary articulation and elision. An interlinguistic difference occurs when V2 is MacroStem-initial: in ciNsenga, hiatus resolution is blocked but in chiShona spreading is triggered. We follow Mudzingwa (2010) in proposing that resyllabification in chiShona is blocked at the Prosodic Stem edge by an alignment constraint (ALIGNL-PSTEM) that requires the left edge of a Prosodic Stem to align with the left edge of an onset-full syllable. We argue that resyllabification and glide epenthesis in ciNsenga are blocked when V2 is MacroStem-initial because ALIGN (ROOTVERB, L,σ,L) outranks ONSET and ALIGNL-PSTEM. Crucially, this article demonstrates that whilst vowel hiatus resolution is categorical in chiShona, it is domain-specific in ciNsenga.

show abstract

Vowel/Glide Alternation in a Theory of Constraint Interaction

Cited by 53 publications

References 28 publications

Positional Faithfulness

Positional Faithfulness

Evidence and characterization of a glide-vowel distinction in American English

Comparing vowel hiatus resolution in ciNsenga and chiShona: An Optimality Theory analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About