Untitled

Bogus clusters and vowel syncope117here to propose a solution to the occurrence of the clusters in question.Conversely, we shall confine ourselves to introducing the relevantdata and pinpointing some problematic areas in previous accounts.The analysis proper will appear later on in the second part of this chapter.A starting point for discussion is the set of variable forms first introducedin Vennemann (1968) and analysed within the GP frameworkby Brockhaus (1995). Specifically, Vennemann’s (1968) setrepresents consonant clusters which undergo the general rule ofFinal Obstruent Devoicing (henceforth FOD) in one dialect, NorthernStandard German, but which refuse to undergo devoicing in anotherone, Hochlautung. This set is of particular interest to us as the fluctuatingobstruent is always the first consonant of the bogus cluster.Moreover, the German case is interesting as it seems to challengethe general ban on the word-initial bogus clusters. The latter observation,if true, runs counter to our prediction which says that a languagepossessing the active word-initial empty CV unit does not allowfor consonant clusters separated by the empty governed nucleusat the left margin (see Chapter One). Finally, it will become evidentthat the three phenomena, i.e. syllabic consonants, bogus clusters andvowel syncope, are, as in English, closely related in German. In whatfollows we draw heavily on Brockhaus’s (1995) analysis of FOD inGerman.3.2.2. Bogus clusters in GermanIn her meticulous, book-length analysis of Final Obstruent Devoicingin German, Brockhaus (1995) proposes to explain the phenomenonin question by a single claim, namely, that FOD in German appears beforethe empty nucleus. The reason why we mention this study is twofold.Firstly, it presents the analysis of German consonant clusters couchedwithin Government Phonology. Secondly and more importantly, Brockhaus(1995) in her analysis discusses a set of words which she classifies(after Vennemann (1968:140)) as variable items. The latter are crucialto our study as they represent bogus clusters. Thus, the words representedin (11) have at least two different pronunciations. The forms in (11a) arecharacteristic of Hochlautung, while those in (11b) of Northern StandardGerman (NSG). The data in (11) have been collected from Brockhaus(1995:186).