Left margin in Polish49(6)Infinitivea. braædrzeæpraæb. bryzgaædrapaæpracowaæ‘take’‘tear’‘wash’‘splash’‘scratch’‘work’Prefixed verbzE+braærozE+drzeæodE+praæz+bryzgaæroz+drapaæod+pracowaæPrefixed DerivedImperfective (DI)z+bieraæroz+dzieraæod+pierzez+bryzgiwaæroz+drapywaæod+pracowywaæThe conclusion that can be drawn from the data in (6) is that it seemsnecessary to postulate two separate representations due to two distinctresults of prefixation. In (6a) the presence of the jer in the stem enforcesthe phonetic realisation of the jer in the prefix; the former jer is properlygoverned itself and cannot serve as a potential governor to the latter.The examples in (6b) illustrate prefixed forms in which neither the prefixnuclear position nor the stem one is phonetically realised. Additionally,as has been mentioned earlier, the initial clusters in (6b) are neverseparated by an alternating vowel in DI. Note that in this group the DIforms are produced by affixation -i/ywaæ. The first idea which springs tomind, i.e. to represent the clusters in (6b) as branching onsets, must berejected as in the Strict CV model there are no branching constituents.Another possibility is to represent the clusters as IG relations. Note thatthe conditions for such relations to hold are fulfilled. This solution isplausible as the nuclear position separating such clusters is lexically empty,i.e. it is not an alternating jer. Moreover, we can now explain theabsence of the prefixal vowel. The nuclear position occurring in the domainof IG is governed by the fact that it is locked between two consonantsholding a governing relation, which enables the first audible stemvowel to properly govern the prefixal one. To sum up the discussion sofar, we have seen that the clusters which are never broken up by thealternating vowel (6b) are represented as the IG relations (7b). On theother hand, the forms in (6a) are resolved by means of Proper Government(7a). The existence of both mechanisms in the language is responsiblefor the inconsistent behaviour of prefixes in the class of DI.(7)a. PG b. PGCV|oC|dV|e+ C V C V C V C V C V +|p e|r|a|t¡‚|P|r|o|z eC|dVP→IGC|rV|aC|pV|aC|t¡‚V|P4 Polish...
50 The phonological nature of the beginning of the wordIn (7b) the consonant cluster, i.e. [dr], fulfils the conditions required tohold IG and so the relation is contracted. This means that the nucleusoccurring in the domain of IG is locked, i.e., it does not require an externalgovernor. The first vowel of the stem, that is, [a], can now properlygovern the prefix final vowel, and the latter remains disassociated andhence phonetically inaudible. At first sight, the situation may appearproblematic as we need to postulate two different representations whichdescribe phonetically the same cluster. Note, however, that in (7a) thecluster is separated by a lexically present vowel which prohibits the consonantsfrom interacting in the IG relation. In (7b), on the other hand,the nucleus is lexically empty and so the relation can be contracted. Laterin the chapter it will be demonstrated that this is not always thecase, and that what is a locked nucleus in one form can be unlocked ina related one.How does the solution discussed above compare with the previousaccounts? In the past it has been claimed that the difference between theforms in (6a, b) arises due to a different bracketing of prefixed verbs(Rubach 1984, Szpyra 1989, Rowicka 1999c). Thus, forms likethose in (6a) are said to form one phonological word, i.e. the prefix isattached synthetically, e.g. [odeprat¡‚]. On the other hand, the examplesin (6b) represent analytic prefixation, that is, they form two separatedomains, e.g. [roz][drapat¡‚]. In the Strict CV model it is possible to analysethe same cases without resorting to analytic bracketing. All thathas to be said is that #TR clusters must contract the IG relation unlessthere is an intervening lexically present vowel. In the former case, thatis, when the #TR cluster contracts the IG relation, the prefixal vowel issuppressed (7b). In the situation when the #TR cluster is separated withthe lexically present vowel which is properly governed (7a), the prefixvowel is vocalised.Finally, let us discuss similar cases in a closely related language,Czech. It will be demonstrated that in Czech, just like in Polish, twoseparate structures must be assigned to phonetically the same cluster,which schematically may be represented as TR.Scheer (1996, 1997, 1999a) in discussing Czech data points outthat consonant final prefixes such as podP- ‘under’ and odP- ‘away’ aresometimes realised with the prefix-final vocalised nucleus. The vowelappears only if the following root begins with at least two consonants, e.g.ode-brat ‘take away pf.’ vs. od-birat ‘id. ipf.’. Moreover, similarly to whatwe have witnessed in Polish, phonetically the same clusters bring aboutcontrasting results. Compare the Czech forms odebrat ‘take away’ andbezbrady ‘beardless’ with the Polish forms zebraæ ‘take, pf.’ and zbryzgaæ
- 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 and 38: 36 The frameworkby all sounds. Thus
- Page 39 and 40: 38 The frameworkexist. What is a Br
- 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 47 and 48: 46 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 49: 48 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 53 and 54: 52 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 55 and 56: 54 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 57 and 58: 56 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 59 and 60: 58 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 61 and 62: 60 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 63 and 64: 62 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 65 and 66: 64 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 67 and 68: 66 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 69 and 70: 68 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 71 and 72: 70 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 73 and 74: 72 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 75 and 76: 74 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 77 and 78: 76 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 79 and 80: 78 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 81 and 82: 80 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 83 and 84: 82 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 85 and 86: 84 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 87 and 88: 86 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 89 and 90: 88 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 91 and 92: 90 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 93 and 94: 92 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 95 and 96: 94 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 97 and 98: 96 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 99 and 100: 98 The phonological nature of the b
- Page 101 and 102:
III. Bogus clusters, syllabic conso
- Page 103 and 104:
102 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 105 and 106:
104 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 107 and 108:
106 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 109 and 110:
108 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 111 and 112:
110 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 113 and 114:
112 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 115 and 116:
114 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 117 and 118:
116 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 119 and 120:
118 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 121 and 122:
120 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 123 and 124:
122 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 125 and 126:
124 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 127 and 128:
126 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 129 and 130:
128 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 131 and 132:
130 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 133 and 134:
132 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 135 and 136:
134 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 137 and 138:
136 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 139 and 140:
138 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 141 and 142:
140 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 143 and 144:
142 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 145 and 146:
144 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 147 and 148:
146 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 149 and 150:
148 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- Page 151 and 152:
150 Bogus clusters, syllabic conson
- 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