Positional Neutralization - Linguistics - University of California ...

perfectly understandable in the phonologization approach. Final lengthening and
supralaryngeal gestural strengthening make final syllables phonetically strong; low
subglottal pressure, however, together with an attendant drop in F0, lower intensity, and
partial or complete devoicing or the onset of non-modal phonation can also negatively
impact the perceptual robustness of contrasts realized in this position. Which tendency
ultimately wins out seems to be a matter decided by the particular configuration of the
language-specific phonetics of a given system. Furthermore, even when one of these
phonetic tendencies is phonologized, however, creating either phonological weakness or
strength, this by no means entails the effacement of the opposing phonetic tendencies,
since these two systems function largely independently. From a UG-based perspective,
on the other hand, there is no particular reason to expect such waffling from the final
syllables of the languages of the world. If phonological prominence is in fact a matter of
Universal Grammar specifying, for whatever reason, whether a given position is to be
strong or weak as a licenser of contrasts, the best we can do let final position belong to
both lists. The precise nature of the patterns arising in cases of either behavior, however,
remain mysterious.
Chapter Four contrasted the phonologization approach with a UG-based approach
deriving PN in initial syllables from psychological characteristics connected with the
initialness of the syllable in question. Contrary to what a UG approach would predict,
351