Deriving moraic consonants from temporal coordination Jason Shaw New York University 14mfm—25 May, 2006 Email: [email protected] Website: jas745

Deriving moraic consonants from temporal coordination

Jason Shaw

New York University

14mfm—25 May, 2006

Email: [email protected]: http://homepages.nyu.edu/~jas745/

Jason Shaw, 14mfm, 27 May 2006 2

Problem Within Prosodic Morphology Foot Binarity is

the explanation for minimal word requirements.

In some languages, initial geminates clearly contribute weight for the purposes of minimal word requirements

But, the representations proposed for initial geminates are incompatible with Foot Binarity


Background Onsets are widely thought to be weightless (but see

Gordon 2005) Initial geminates appear to contribute weight in

some languages: Chuukese (a.k.a. Trukese) (Hart 1991, Davis 1999), Luganda (Clements 1986, Hyman and Katamba 1993, 1999), Ponapean (McCarthy and Prince 1986, Goodman 1995), Pattani Malay (Hajek and Goedesman 2003)

But not in others:Thurgovian (Krahaenman 2003), Bernese (Spaelti 1994, Ham 1998), Morrocan Arabic (Kiparsky 2002), Cypriot Greek (Arvaniti and Rose 2003) , Leti (Hume et. al. 1997)

Weight varies independently of length. (Tranel 1991, Hume et. al. 1997, Muller 2001, Curtis 2003)


Melody: segments Melody: articulatory gestures

Proposal preview: [tto]

μ μ

σ

C-Tier:

V-Tier: C V

μ μ

σ

Current ProposalStandard Moraic Theory

Length: two association lines Length: two blocks on C-tier

weight: mora associated directly to C weight: mora associated to the V-tier

?

(Browman and Goldstein 1986 et. seq.)


Chuukese word-final vowels

a) /pechee/ [peche] 'foot' c.f. [pechee-y]

b) /tikkaa/ [tikka] 'coconut oil' c.f. [tikkaa-y]

c) /chuuchuu/ [chuuchu] 'urine' c.f. [chuuchuu-y]

d) /omosu/ [omos] 'turban shell' [omosu-y]

e) /ffeni/ [ffen] 'love' [ffeni-y]

f) /nemeneme/ [nemenem] 'authority' [nemeneme-y]

1) Long vowels shortened

2) Short vowels deleted


Sub-minimal word lengthening

a. /tipe/ [tiip] *[tip] ‘emotions’ [tipe-n]

b. /chike [chiik] *[chik] ‘basket’ [chike-n]

c. /pəkə/ [pəək] [*pək] ‘handle’ [pəkə-n]

1) CVCV lengthens CVVC

d. /ffənə/ [ffən] *[ffəən] ‘advice’ [ffənə-n]

e. /nnəti/ [nnət] *[nnəət] ‘shrub’ [nnəti-n]

f. /ttoŋa/ [ttoŋ] *[ttooŋ] ‘love’ [ttoŋa-n]

2) GVCV doesn’t lengthen CCVC

(Hart 1991, Davis and Torretta 1997, Davis 1999, Muller 1999, Muller 2001)3) Driven by bimoraic minimal word requirement


Prosodic Morphology (PM)

Parse-σ: Syllables must be parsed into feet

FtBin: Feet must branch at the μ or σ level

Headedness: Prosodic words contain feet…

Mora Confinement: Moras must be licensed by syllables

Hierarchical locality: Only adjacent levels of structure are visible

Uniformity of Linking: No simultaneous linking to distinct levels

(McCarthy and Prince, 1986 et. seq; Ito and Mester, 1992)

Derives Minimal Word effects from

general constraints on

prosodic structure

Additional restrictions discussed:

Standard theory includes:1

2


Structure of the argument

Initial geminates in SMT Proposal—intrinsic overlap Comparison of theories Extension to codas Conclusions


Initial Geminates in SMT

μ

σ

φ

V

ω

Option (1)

C

μ μ

σ

φ

V

ω

Option (3)

C

μμ

σ

φ

V

ω

Option (2)

C

μ

SMT allows for no fewer than 5 distinct representations for [tto] that are compatible with standard views of the prosodic hierarchy

μ

σ

V

ω

Option (4)

C

μ

σ

φ

μ

φ

V

ω

Option (5)

C

μ

σ

(Goodman 1995; Davis 1999; Kiparsky 2002)


Initial Geminates in SMT PM solution to CVC

lengthening requires that surface form contain a binary foot.

[tto]

μ μ

φ

σ σσ

φ

μ μ

orEither

SMT Option (4)

1) binary feet at σ level

2) Initial [t] is a syllable peak

μ

σ

V

ω

C

μ

σ

φ

SMT Option (4)


Current Proposal

Moras are assigned to V-Tier (Clements and Keyser 1983)

(Fowler 1983; Browman and Goldstein 1986 et. seq.)

Consonants and vowels overlap

(Gafos 2002, Hall 2004)

Timing relations between consonants and vowels are controlled in the Phonology


I. Moras are assigned to V-Tier The length of the vocalic tier corresponds to the

duration of vocalic gestures in a syllable

V-Tier:O

CT R

Of

μ

σ

V-Tier:O

CT R

Of O

CT R

O

μμ

σ

O1O2

R2C2

T2C1T1 R1

Of1 Of2

μμ

σ

O = Onset of movementT = Achievement of TargetC = Midpoint of gestural plateau (C-center)R = Release from targetOf – Offset of the gesture

Landmarks in the life of a gesture (Gafos 2002):


II. Consonants and vowels overlap

CV(Syn) CV(Cen)

μμ

σ

Consonant gestures are timed with respect to vowel gestures

μμ

σ

V-Tier:

C-Tier:

When a consonant overlaps a mora association, the increased weight has been attributed to the consonant

I will call these pseudo-moraic consonants

O

CT R

O

O

CT R

OO

CT R

O

O

CT R

O


III. Timing relations controlled by Phonological constraints

Align(C, C-Center, V, Onset)

Align (C, Onset, V, Onset)

/t:o:/ CV(SYN) CV(CEN)

a) [tto]

*

b) [ttoo]

*!

μ μ

σ

C-Tier:

V-Tier:

μ μ

σ

C-Tier:

V-Tier:

Phonological Constraints

Implication: consonant clusters cannot satisfy either CV constraint without completely overlapping each other. (the constraint RECOV mitigates against complete overlap, see Gafos 2002 for discussion)

CV(Syn): C & V are synchronous

CV(Cen): C & V partially overlap

O

CT R

O

O

CT R

O


Summary

2 intra-syllabic structures: Light, Heavy Light geminates are long gestures that do not

overlap a mora Heavy geminates are long gestures that do

overlap a mora Contrastive length is determined by tier-length CV(SYN) or CV(CEN) undominated prohibit

clusters (Gafos 2002, see also Browman and Goldstein 2000)


Comparison of Theories

μ

σ

V

ω

SMT

C

μ

σ

φ

[tto]

μμ

σ

V-Tier:

C-Tier:

ω

φ

[tto]

Are geminates really syllabic?


Initial geminates vs. Syllabic Nasals

Syllabic initial geminates have been proposed for Luganda and Ponapean

Both languages also have syllabic nasals

Is such structural similarity warranted?

μ

σ

V

ω

C

μ

σ

φ

[mmet]

μ

σ

V

ω

N C

μ

σ

φ

[nta]


Ponapean

a. /pwili/ [pwiil] *[ pwil] ‘gum (of)’ [pwili -n]

b. /sapwe/ [saapw] *[ sapw] ‘land (of)’ [sapwe -n]

c. /masa/ [masa] [*mas] ‘face (of)’ [masa -n]

1) CVCV lengthens CVVC, a la Chuukese

2) GVCV resists lengthening GVC, as does NCVC

d. [mmet] *[mmeet]

e. [mwmwus] *[mwmwuus]

f. [ŋŋech] *[ŋŋeech]

g. [nta] *[ntaa]

h. [ŋket] *[ŋkeet]

i. [mwpwer] *[mwpweer]

With respect to word minimality, structural similarity between NC and G appear to be justified, but…


Ponapean Systematic absence of GVVC, GVV, CVVG

Feels like a bimoraic syllable maximum This explanation is not available under syllabic analysis of

geminates

Conclusion:

NCV and GV satisfy FtBin at different levels

NCVVC = (LL)Φ GVC = (H)Φ

NCVVC is attested (nseen ‘to snare’)


μμ

σ

C C

V VV-Tier:

C-Tier:

ω

φ

[tto]

Syllabic nasals

[nta]

N C

V VV-Tier:

C-Tier:

ω

φ

μ

σ

μ

σ

Current proposal

Initial geminates


Vowels before initial NC in Ponapean

/mpei/ [impey] ~ [mpey] ‘buoyant’

/mwpwer/ [imwpwer] ~ [mwpwer] ‘twin’

/nsen/ [insen] ~ [nsen] ‘will’

/ntiŋ / [intiŋ] ~ [ntiŋ] ‘to write’

/ntaa/ [inta] ~ [nta] ‘blood’

/nket/ [iŋket] ~ [ŋket] ‘to roof’

Initial NC in free variation with VNC

structural difference or phonetic noise?


Summary

SMT representation compatible with FtBin forces a bi-syllabic analysis of initial geminates. Forces voiceless obstruents to be syllable nuclei in

Chuukese Prevents syllable maximum account of *GVV, *CVVG

restriction in Ponapean Current analysis solves these problems and

extends to syllabic nasals.


*!

b) [ sopw]

*

a) [ soopw]

Ident(length)FtBin/ sopwu / ‘district’

Chuukese Lengthening

μμ

σ

C-Tier:

V-Tier:

μ

σ

C-Tier:

V-Tier:

Final consonant does not contribute to weight Vowel lengthens to satisfy FtBin, branching structure at the moraic

level.


Extension to Codas

heavy CVC: Japanese light CVC: Khalkha Mongolian

Acoustic duration of the vowel is determine both by the length of the vowel and the timing relation of the coda.

μμ

σ

V-Tier:

C-Tier:

(87.3 ms)c.f. 49.3 in CV

μ

σ

V-Tier:

C-Tier:

(78.4)c.f. 70.3 ms in CV

(Data from Gordon 2002)


Proposal Summary

What we did:

Replaced segments with gestures Controlled gestural coordination in the

grammar Limited mora associations to vowels


Results

What this accomplished:

Extension of FtBin to languages with initial geminates

Allowed for a more restrictive ontogeny of prosodic structures

Provided a unified source of consonant weight


Undiscussed

Compensatory Lengthening Systematic C:V duration ratios Vowel to vowel coordination Mora Faithfulness

Composite Model (Muller 2001) Other two layer models (Curtis 2003) Non-moraic approaches (Levin 1985) Alternate conceptions of moraicity and overlap (B&G

1988)


Arvaniti, A. 2001. Cypriot Greek and the phonetics and phonology of geminates. Paper presented at Proceedings of the First International Conference of Modern Greek Dialects and Linguistic Theory, University of Patras.

Blevins, Juliette and Harrison, Sheldon. 1999. Trimoraic feet in Glibertese. Oceanic Linguistics, 38.203-30.Broselow, Ellen, Chen, Su-I and Huffman, Marie. 1997. Syllable weight: Convergence of phonology and phonetics. Phonology, 14.47-82.Browman, Catherine P. and Goldstein, Louis. 1988. Some Notes on Syllable Structure in Articulatory Phonology [Jan-June]. Haskins Laboratories

Status Report on Speech Research, 93-94.85-102.—. 1992. Articulatory Phonology: An Overview [July-Dec]. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, 111-112.23-42.—. 2000. Competing Constraints on Intergestural Coordination and Self-Organization of Phonological Structures. Bulletin de la Communication

Parlee, 5.25-34.Caramaza, Alfonso, Chialant, Doriana, Capasso, Rita and Micell, Gabriele. 2000. Separable processing of consonants and vowels [27 January, 2000].

Nature, 403.428-30.Clements, G. N. 1986. Compensatory lengthening and consonant gemination in Luganda. Studies in Compensatory Lengthening, ed. by L. Wetzels and

E. Sezer, 37-77. Dordrecht: Foris.Clements, G. N. and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1983. CV Phonology: A Generative Theory of the Syllable. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Curtis, Emily. 2003. Geminate weight: case studies and formal models, Dept. of LInguistics, University of Washington: Phd.Davis, S. and Torretta, G. 1997. An Optimality Theoretic Account of Compensatory Lengthening and Geminate Throwback in Trukese. Paper

presented at NELS 18.Davis, Stuart. 1999. On the representation of initial geminates [1999]. Phonology, 16.93-104.Dunn, Margaret Hall. 1994. The Phonetics and Phonology of Geminate Consonants: A Production Study: Dissertation/Thesis.Fowler, Carol. 1983. Converging sources of evidence on spoken and perceived rhythms of speech: cyclic production of vowels in monosyllabic stress

feet. [1983]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112.386-412.Gafos, Adamantios. 2002. A grammar of gestural coordination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 20.269-337.Goodenough, Ward, H. 1957. The long or double consonants of Trukese. Paper presented at Proceedings of the ninth Pacific Sciences Association,

Chulalongkorn University.Goodman, Beverley D. 1995. Features in Ponapean Phonology, Cornell University: Ph. D. Dissertation.Gordon, Matthew. 2002. A phonetically-driven account of syllable weight [2002]. Language, 78.51-80.—. 2005. A percetually-driven account of onset-sensitive stress [2005]. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23.595-653.Hall, Nancy. 2003 Gestures and segments: vowel intrusion as overlap. UMASS: Ph.D DissertationHam, William. 1998. Phonetic and Phonology Aspects of Geminate Timing, Linguistics Department, Cornell University.Hart, Michele. 1991. The moraic status of initial geminates in Trukese. BLS, 17107-20.

References


Hayes, Bruce. 1989. Compensatory Lengthening in moraic phonology. Linguistic Inquiry, 20.253-306.Hyman, Larry M. & Francis X. Katamba. 1999. The syllable in Luganda phonology and morphology. The syllable: views and facts, ed. by

Harry van der Hulst & Nancy Ritter. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Ito, Junko. 1986. Syllable Theory in Prosodic Phonology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst: Ph. D. Dissertation.Ito, Junko and Mester, Armin. 1992. Weak layering and word binarity. Santa Cruz, CA: University of CaliforniaKager, René. 1996. On affix allomorphy and syllable counting. Interfaces in phonology, ed. by U. Kleinhenz, 155-71. Berlin: Akademie

Verlag.Kennedy, Robert. 2003. Confluence in Phonology: Evidence from Micronesian Reduplication, University of Arizona.Kiparsky, Paul. 2002. Syllables and moras in Arabic. The Optimal Syllable, ed. by Caroline Féry and Ruben van de Vijver. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.Krahenmann, Astrid. 2001. Swiss German stops: geminates all over the word. Phonology 18.109-45.Kurisu, Kazutaka. 2001. The Phonology of Morpheme Realization, University of Santa Cruz: Ph. D. Dissertation.Levin, Juliette. 1985. A Metrical Theory of Syllabicity, MIT: Ph. D. Dissertation.McCarthy, John J. 1981. A prosodic theory of nonconcatenative morphology. Linguistic Inquiry, 12.373-418.McCarthy, John and Prince, Alan. 1986. Prosodic Morphology (RuCCS Technical Report Series TR-3). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Center

for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University—. 1991. Prosodic Minimality—. 1994. The emergence of the unmarked: Optimality in prosodic morphology. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 24, ed. by

Mercè Gonzàlez, 333-79. Amherst, Mass.: GLSA Publications.Muller, Jennifer. 1999. A unifed mora account of Chuukese. Paper presented at WCCFL 18, Somerville, MA.—. 2001. The phonology and phonetics of word-initial geminates, Linguistics Department, The Ohio State University.Ostry, D and Munhall, K. 1985. Control of rate and duration of speech movements. The Journal of the acoustical society of America, 77.640-

48.Prince, Alan; Smolensky, Paul. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University Center for

Cognitive Science Technical Report 2Smith, Caroline L. 1995. Prosodic Patterns in the Coordination of Vowel and Consonant Gestures. Phonology and Phonetic Evidence, ed. by

Bruce Connell and Amalia Arvaniti, 205-22. Cambridge: Cambridge U Press.



PM solution to CVC lengthening requires that surface form contain a binary foot.

μ μ

φ

σ σσ

φ

μ μ

orEither

SMT Option (1)

[tto]

μ

σ

φ

V

ω

C

μ

SMT Option (1)1) No binary foot

2) Predicts lengthening to [ttoo]




[tto]

μ μ

φ

σ σσ

φ

μ μ

orEither

SMT Option (2)

SMT Option (2) 1) Unattested foot type, (μσ)φ

2) Strictly speaking, binary at neither μ or level σ

μ

σ

φ

V

ω

C

μ




[tto]

μ μ

φ

σ σσ

φ

μ μ

orEither

SMT Option (3)

SMT Option (3)1) No binary foot

2) Predicts lengthening to [ttoo]

μ

σ

φ

V

ω

C

μ

σσ




[tto]

μ μ

φ

σ σσ

φ

μ μ

orEither

SMT Option (5)

SMT Option (5) 1) Never actually proposed

2) Predicts syllables with multiple nuclei, non-contiguous rhyme.

μ

φ

V

ω

C

μ

σ



μ

σ

φ

V

ω

Option (1)

C

μ μ

σ

φ

V

ω

Option (3)

C

μμ

σ

φ

V

ω

Option (2)

C

μ μ

σ

V

ω

Option (4)

C

μ

σ

φ

μ

φ

V

ω

Option (5)

C

μ

σ

Only one real option for Chuukese initial geminates.


I. Some languages force vowels to overlap across consonants

II. Side effects include V-V coarticulation & syllable timing

Vowel to vowel coordination

(Smith 1995; Dunn 1994)

O

CT R

O

O

CT R

O O

CT R

O

O

CT R

O

μ

σ1

O

CT R

O O

CT R

O

O

CT R

O

μ

σ2

μμ

σ1

Vowel gestures extend across consonants to satisfy VV-Coord.


Independent Evidence for VV-Coarticulation in Chuukese

/paca/ ‘attached’ [pace-tiw]

‘attached to the bottom’

b) [paco-wu]

‘attached to the outside’

c) [paco-nong]

‘attached to the inside’ [paca- t]‘attached to the top’

Final vowel of roots predictable from the quality of the suffix vowel.

Not strictly harmonizing, but a compromise in space between vowels.


*[coccis]

*[ coccis]

Ident(s)VV-

Coord/coccisi/

Coda weight in Chuukese

Consecutive vowel gestures overlap.

The value of the stiffness parameter in the input is the same as the value of the stiffness parameter in the output.

no shortening/lengtheningC-Tier:

V-Tier:

μ

σ

μ

σ

μ μ

σ

C-Tier:

V-Tier:

μ

σ

Phonological Constraints

VV-Coord:

Ident(S)

VV-Coord is vacuously satisfied in final position

(Gafos 2002)


Composite Model

Compatible with Prosodic Morphology

Maintains Uniformity of Linking, mora confinement

Gen builds unattested structures ruled out by grammar that stipulates geminate, coda moraicity

X X X

μ

rt rt

μ

σ

Incorporates a tier of X-slots (Levin 1985)

Moras assigned to x-slots in 1:1 ratio

Length determined by X-slot associationsWeight determined by mora


Comparison of Theories

Current Theory CM SMT

Uniformity of Linking Yes Yes No

Initial geminates compatible w/ Prosodic Morphology

Yes Yes No

Phonemic length account Gestural stiffness Two X-slots Two association lines

Account of Consonant pseudo-moraicity

Overlap with moraic vowel Moraic elements not protected by the grammar are ruled out with *μ

moraic elements specified by grammar, plus faithfulness to underlying moras

Cluster non-moraicity/ fake-geminate non-moraicity

The only rankings that allow clusters disallow overlap with moraic vowel

Not protected by the grammar so non-moraic by virtue of * μ

Non-moraic by virtue of a grammatical constraint NoMoraicOnset

# of levels gesture; tier; mora root; X-slot; mora segment; mora

Account for closed syllable lengthening

Yes No No


SpreadingShifting

Remaining Issues

Shifting predicts word final vowel reduction Spreading predicts lengthening

There are others ways to satisfy VV-Coord.

V-Tier:

C-Tier:

μ

σ

μ

σ

V-Tier:

C-Tier:

μ

σ

μ

σ

μ

σ


Remaining Issues

Chuukese GVV syllables entail trimoraic vowels, but no CVVV Gilbertese lengthening CV1V2 CV1V1V2 but

*VVV Estonian has 3-way Vowel length contrast

Deriving moraic consonants from temporal coordination Jason Shaw New York University 14mfm—25 May, 2006 Email: [email protected] Website: jas745

Documents