Untitled

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Consonantal interaction37sumed to reside on the same autosegmental line (Scheer 1999a). Comingback to the consonantal interaction, it is assumed that the IG relation‘ ’ is contracted whenever an element on a given autosegmentalline faces an empty position ‘c’ (at least on one line). When both lines inboth segments are occupied or empty, the consonantal relation cannot becontracted. The representation in (9) is taken from Scheer (1999a:226)and slightly modified, heads of the expressions are underlined. 27→(9) a. b. c.p r k r s r t pI/U line ----- c I ---- U ----- I ------------ I ----- I ---------- c ---- c ---A line ----- c A ---- c A ------------ A -----A---------- c ---- c ---→→→As illustrated above, a domain of IG may be established for [pr] and [kr](9a) where at least one element faces an empty position on a given line.By contrast, IG may not hold within the clusters of (9b, c) because eitherall places are filled [sr] or no governor is available [tp].Once we have arrived at the correct representation of the consonantalinteraction within the Strict CV model, we are ready to address thequestions raised at the end of section 4. Thus, in what follows we shalltry to explain why there are languages which are more permissive thanothers in that they allow for both #TR and #RT clusters initially andtolerate complex consonant sequences. In order to be able to answer thisquestion, however, we have to discuss another mechanism, that is, GovernmentLicensing.5.2. Initial empty CV unitSince in the GP model of phonology constituents are maximally binarybranching, this theory is considered to be rather constrained. Recall thatin GP a typical branching onset is composed of the onset head (an obstruent)which governs the following complement (a sonorant). An evenmore constrained framework, the extreme point GP could reach, is theStrict CV approach. In the latter model branching constituents do not27Note that the labial element (B) can not reside on a separate line (it is not representedunder (9)). Were this possible, we would arrive at the situation where the labial/p/ could contract the IG relation with the preceding /t/ or even /r/ as the latter, unlikethe former, lack the labial element.
38 The frameworkexist. What is a BrO in GP is represented in the Strict CV framework asa sequence of two onsets separated by an empty nucleus, that is, ONO.Such onsets, if adequately equipped, can contract a consonantal relation.Moreover, we have seen that in Scheer’s (1999a, 2004) version of theElement Theory, contrary to earlier proposals, it is the sonorant whichacts as the head and can govern the preceding obstruent. The relationbetween both consonants is called Infrasegmental Government (10).(10) Lic. Lic.a.C 0V 0 C 1|TV 1P→C 2|RV 2|Vb.C 0V 0 C 1|RIt is generally accepted that an empty nucleus separating consonantswhich contract a relation can remain empty. In other words, it is licensedto stay unexpressed simply by appearing in the domain of the consonantalinteraction. The pressing question is why the structure in (10b) is notfound in English or German. Why are initial #RT clusters not attested inthose languages? A partial solution to the problem lies in Charette’s(1990, 1992) proposal of the mechanism she calls Government Licensing.Charette (1990) claims that any consonantal relation must belicensed by the following audible vowel. To be more precise, the head ofthe relation must be licensed in order to govern the complement. Scheer (1999a) makes use of Government Licensing (GL) to explain the absenceof structures like those in (10b) from languages like English. However,he adds that the head of the domain, i.e. the sonorant, must belicensed by an immediately following nucleus. Now, the reason why thestructure in (10b) is impossible in English falls out naturally. Note thatin (10b) the sonorant is followed by an empty nucleus which is unable togive it the licence required to contract the IG relation. However, the attentivereader would raise two immediate questions. First, how comethere exist languages like Polish and Czech which do allow such sequencesinitially. Second, given the fact concerning the application of ProperGovernment, one more option becomes available, namely, the consonantsare separated by an empty nucleus which is properly governed by thefollowing audible one. What is crucial here, however, is the fact that bothrepresentations in (10) start with the initial empty CV unit. In order toclarify this point, let us now discuss briefly Lowenstamm’s (1999)proposal. In his article Lowenstamm (1999) puts forward the ideathat words of every major category are preceded by an empty CV unit.V 1P→C 2|TV 2|
Page 2 and 3: Polish and EnglishConsonantal Clust
Page 4 and 5: Artur KijakPolish and EnglishConson
Page 6 and 7: ContentsPreface . . . . . . . . . .
Page 8 and 9: PrefaceThe phonotactic peculiaritie
Page 10 and 11: Preface92000), Ploch (1999), van de
Page 12: List of abbreviationsBrODIdim.FODge
Page 15 and 16: 14 The frameworkemploying the simpl
Page 17 and 18: 16 The frameworksion in section 3 b
Page 19 and 20: 18 The frameworkmodel is able to ha
Page 21 and 22: 20 The frameworkhanan 1986). Thus,
Page 23 and 24: 22 The frameworkare not derived at
Page 25 and 26: 24 The frameworkWhat is interesting
Page 27 and 28: 26 The frameworklateral relations,
Page 29 and 30: 28 The frameworkIn general, we can
Page 31 and 32: 30 The frameworkobstruents followed
Page 33 and 34: 32 The frameworkLet us look more de
Page 35 and 36: 34 The framework(7) PGO N O N O N O
Page 37: 36 The frameworkby all sounds. Thus
Page 41 and 42: 40The frameworkLowenstamm’s (1999
Page 43 and 44: 42 The frameworksky and Halle’s (
Page 45 and 46: 44 The phonological nature of the b
Page 89 and 90:
88 The phonological nature of the b
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
III. Bogus clusters, syllabic conso
Page 103 and 104:
102 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
152 Conclusionnisms available in th
Page 155 and 156:
154 ReferencesBotma, B. (2004) Phon
Page 157 and 158:
156 ReferencesGussmann, E. (1998) D
Page 159 and 160:
158 ReferencesPawelec, P. (1989) Cy
Page 161 and 162:
160 ReferencesScheer, T. (1997) Vow
Page 164 and 165:
Author indexAbercrombie, David 103A
Page 166 and 167:
Artur KijakGrupy spó³g³oskowe w
Page 168 and 169:
Zusammenfassung167für alle anderen
show all

Untitled

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?