Default unstressed initial syllable? re-

[sandra Levey]

Sharing this article re: syllable omission.

Levey, S., & Schwartz, R. G. (2002). Syllable omission by two-year-old children. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 23(4), 169-177.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Barbara Bernhardt<mailto:bernharb at interchange.ubc.ca> 
  To: Joe Pater<mailto:pater at linguist.umass.edu> 
  Cc: Brian MacWhinney<mailto:macw at mac.com> ; info-childes at mail.talkbank.org<mailto:info-childes at mail.talkbank.org> 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 11:08 AM
  Subject: Re: Default unstressed initial syllable? re-


  The term 'dummy syllable' is old....also found in Magnusson, Nettelbladt 
  in the early '80s on Swedish acquisition, and therefore probably before 
  that. Maybe it was Smith who coined it - haven't looked.

  Joe Pater wrote:

  > Dear all,
  > In both Gnanadesikan's and Smith's data, the pattern is one of 
  > replacement of an initial unstressed syllable by a default syllable 
  > (the term "dummy" is Gnanadesikan's, I think). I don't recall either 
  > one discussing the perseverative pattern.
  >
  > You can get a pre-publication version of Amalia's paper here - it's 
  > one of the first, and one of the best applications of Optimality 
  > Theory to phonological acquisition:
  >
  > http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?id=77<http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?id=77>
  >
  > Best,
  > Joe.
  >
  > On Jan 10, 2005, at 3:32 PM, Brian MacWhinney wrote:
  >
  >> Folks,
  >>     It seems to me that Lynn's son and Sharon's son show patterns 
  >> that are similar in one respect, but different in another.  Sharon 
  >> reports this:
  >>
  >>> My son at age 3 also used a "default" unstressed initial syllable, 
  >>> except in his case the syllable was "buh."  So we ate buhsketti, and 
  >>> buhzagna,  about and around became "buhbout," and "buhwound"  
  >>> aquarium was "buhkarium" etc.  He began by using it for unstressed 
  >>> schwa syllables in the initial position, but then began using it for 
  >>> other initial unstressed syllables.  For example museum became 
  >>> "buhzeum," refrigerator was "buhfidgewator," and I was a 
  >>> "buhfessor."  He held onto this pattern for a long time, especially 
  >>> for the 3-4 syllable words.
  >>
  >>
  >> Here we see the /buh/ substituting for CV structures in the target.  
  >> Words like "about" often have an initial glottal that makes them
  >> qualify as having initial CV.  So this involves simply substituting a 
  >> simple CV for a more difficult initial CV.
  >>
  >> Lynne's son is doing the same, but the difference is that the 
  >> potential source of the substituted CV was possibly an earlier 
  >> epenthetic syllable in forms such as "recycling rebins."  The earlier 
  >> use of /re/ seems to reflect syllable-level perseveration rather than 
  >> the use of a filler.  In any case, the point is that the substituting 
  >> /re/ in Lynne's son case has a very different potential origin, 
  >> although its function at the time in question is similar.
  >>
  >> The problem is that I think we need some way of distinguishing 
  >> between syllables that perform substitutions in the prosodic grid and 
  >> syllables that open up new slots.  To me, the term "filler" is 
  >> limited to filling a slot.  So, the second /re/ in "recycling rebins" 
  >> would not be a filler.  I'm not sure what "dummy" means in this case.
  >>
  >> In regarding to all of these accounts, including  Smith (1973) and 
  >> Gnanadesikan (2004), it would be useful to know whether the 
  >> substituting syllable is always used for substitution or whether it 
  >> is ever actually  being inserted where no syllable existed.
  >> Sorry, I don't have Gnanadesikan and I don't know where in my copy of 
  >> Smith to go to look this up.
  >>
  >> Also, I am assuming that neither Smith or Gnanadesikan are reporting 
  >> the additional aspect of Lynn's son profile in which the filler 
  >> potentially derives from an earlier epenthetic.
  >>
  >> ---Brian MacWhinney
  >>
  >>
  >
  >
  >

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20050117/fb81cfa5/attachment.htm>