[Lingtyp] [ɸ] - [h]

[Françoise Rose]

Dear Christian,

“Questions such as whether [ts] consists of two segments /ts/ or is one affricate /ʦ/ are not solvable by phonetics (to the best of my knowledge), but are resolved by analyzing the distribution of this element.” This is in fact how I have proceeded for Mojeño Trinitario (Arawak, Bolivia) to distinguish the bi-phonemic sequence /ts/ from the phoneme /ʦ/. Yet this is backed up by phonetics (in particular the duration of the fricative part), as shown in the following paper.

Rose, Françoise. 2021. Mojeño Trinitario. Journal of the International Phonetic Association (Illustration of the IPA) 1–19. (doi:10.1017/S0025100320000365<https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100320000365>)

As for your original question, “Assuming that I want a rule that assimilates a fricative to a following [u], producing [ɸ], I will have to accept an articulatory feature like [labial] in my phonology. Does this correspond to the state of the art in phonology?” I would say yes. I use the class “labial consonant” to explain the change affecting a vowel following this class of consonant:
Labialization; {Labial C}{non-front V}{front V} → {Labial C}w{a͡e,i}

Rose, Françoise. 2019. Rhythmic syncope and opacity in Mojeño Trinitario. Phonological data and analysis 1(2). 1–25.

Best,
Françoise


De : Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> De la part de Christian Lehmann
Envoyé : mardi 23 mai 2023 15:41
À : LINGTYP LINGTYP <LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
Objet : Re: [Lingtyp] [ɸ] - [h]


Dear Miren and everybody,

I find this problem interesting. Nowadays everybody appears to agree that syntactic and morphological classes are essentially distribution classes although the elements in question have meaning. In the same spirit, the distributionalists conceived of the phoneme in terms of the distribution of phones although these have physical properties. And the basic phonological features like [consonantal] and [syllabic] essentially relate to the distribution of segments in phonotactic patterns. Questions such as whether [ts] consists of two segments /ts/ or is one affricate /ʦ/ are not solvable by phonetics (to the best of my knowledge), but are resolved by analyzing the distribution of this element. Again, it is true that distribution alone leads to unsatisfactory classes. The complementary distribution of [h] and [ŋ] in several languages including English is one such example. Apparently a distribution class counts as a natural class only if it has a phonetic motivation.

My impression is that a full phonological description works with a heterogeneous set of features: It does not abide by purely distributional phonological features, but  also needs features which are essentially phonetic and have no direct relation to the distribution of the segments characterized by them. This may concern, in particular, features involved in processes of assimilation. If a consonant assimilates to an adjacent vowel, it means they share a feature despite their appurtenance to distinct distribution classes.

Net result for my initial question: Assuming that I want a rule that assimilates a fricative to a following [u], producing [ɸ], I will have to accept an articulatory feature like [labial] in my phonology. Does this correspond to the state of the art in phonology?

Christian
--

Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann
Rudolfstr. 4
99092 Erfurt
Deutschland
Tel.:

+49/361/2113417

E-Post:

christianw_lehmann at arcor.de<mailto:christianw_lehmann at arcor.de>

Web:

https://www.christianlehmann.eu


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20230524/a1145780/attachment.htm>