* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 20.686

Wed Mar 04 2009

Qs: Autonomy of Internal Codas?

Editor for this issue: Dan Parker <danlinguistlist.org>

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query.

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
        1.    Sylvain Casagrande, Autonomy of Internal Codas?

Message 1: Autonomy of Internal Codas?
Date: 04-Mar-2009
From: Sylvain Casagrande <sylvcasahotmail.com>
Subject: Autonomy of Internal Codas?
E-mail this message to a friend

Dear fellow phonologists,

I am wondering whether it is true that final codas (i.e. word-final
consonants, __#) may, but internal codas (i.e. consonants in
pre-consonantal position, __.CV) may not trigger phonological processes *in
absence of reaction of the other coda*.

In addition to processes that are triggered by both codas (such as
r-vocalization in varieties of English for example, or closed syllable
shortening in Turkish), the pattern whereby processes are triggered by
internal, but not by final codas is quite common. This may concern effects
on the coda consonant itself or on the preceding vowel, in which case we
are talking about closed syllable effects:

1. coda-effect on internal codas (but not on final codas): l-vocalization
in Old French for example. The lateral does vocalize in internal codas
(cheval-s ''horse pl.'', falt > faut [fo] ''it is necessary'' vs. fall-oir
''[fal-oir] ''id., inf.''), but does not vocalize in final codas (cheval
[...al] ''horse, sg.'').

2. coda-effect on the vowel preceding internal codas (but not on the vowel
preceding final codas): closed syllable shortening. In Icelandic for
example, long vowels shorten before internal codas, i.e. in the context
__C.CV, but remain long before word-final consonants.

This pattern is classically analyzed in terms of extrasyllabicity: the
word-final consonant is extrasyllabic, i.e. unsyllabified when the relevant
process takes place, and is then (re)integrated into syllable (or prosodic)
structure. On the other hand, word-final consonants are not extrasyllabic
in languages where both internal and final codas trigger relevant processes.

The question is whether the symmetrical pattern exists: a language where a
process (consonantal or vocalic) is triggered by final, but not by internal
codas. This pattern should not exist on the regular extrasyllabic count
since extrasyllabic items are supposed to be restricted to margins
(Peripherality Condition, e.g. Hayes 1995). This typological claim is made
explicit in Scheer (2004). I know a case from an Ligurian dialect spoken
around Nice/France where final -r is deleted, but r before word-internal
consonants survives. Hence the pattern that should not exist. I would
therefore like to ask the audience whether any other instances of this
pattern are known somewhere on the globe

To sum things up: I want to know whether pattern 3 is empirically real.
internal coda final coda
pattern 1 triggers triggers exists: C# non-extrasy.
pattern 2 triggers does not trigger exists: C# extrasyll.
pattern 3 does not trigger triggers ???

I will post a summary of responses and data.

Linguistic Field(s): Phonology

Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Please report any bad links or misclassified data

LINGUIST Homepage | Read LINGUIST | Contact us

NSF Logo

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.