Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:41:52.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palatalization and “strong i” across Inuit dialects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Richard Compton  and
B. Elan Dresher
Richard Compton
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
B. Elan Dresher
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Inuit dialects with palatalization all distinguish between “strong i” and “weak i”: instances of surface [i] that cause palatalization and those that do not, respectively. All dialects that have completely lost this contrast also lack palatalization. Why are there no /i, a, u/ dialects in which all instances of surface [i] trigger palatalization? We propose that this typological gap can be explained using a contrastivist analysis whereby only contrastive features can be phonologically active, palatalization is triggered by [coronal], and contrastive features are assigned in an order placing [low] and [labial] ahead of [coronal]. In a three-vowel inventory only [low] and [labial] are contrastive, while in the four-vowel inventory [coronal] must also be contrastive to distinguish strong and weak i. It follows from these assumptions that [i] can trigger palatalization only if it is in contrast with a fourth vowel.

Résumé

Résumé

Les dialectes inuits avec palatalisation distinguent tous entre les «i forts» et les «i faibles» : les [i] de surface qui provoquent la palatalisation et ceux qui ne la provoquent pas, respectivement. Dans tous les dialectes où ce contraste est complètement perdu, la palatalisation est absente. Pourquoi n’existe-t-il pas de dialectes /i, a, u/ dans lesquels tous les [i] de surface déclenchent la palatalisation? Nous proposons que cet écart typologique peut être expliqué en utilisant une approche contrastiviste selon laquelle seuls les traits contrastifs peuvent être actifs dans la phonologie, la palatalisation est déclenchée par [coronal] et les traits contrastifs sont ordonnés de telle façon que les traits [bas] et [labial] sont assignés avant [coronal]. Dans un inventaire de trois voyelles, seuls les traits [bas] et [labial] sont contrastifs, tandis que dans un inventaire de quatre voyelles, [coronal] doit aussi être contrastif pour distinguer les i forts des i faibles. Il résulte de ces hypothèses que [i] ne peut déclencher la palatalisation que s’il est en contraste avec une quatrième voyelle.

Keywords

phonological contrastpalatalizationfeature hierarchiesInuitvowel inventoriescontraste phonologiquepalatalisationhiérarchies de traitsinuitinventaires vocaliques
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , July 2011 , pp. 203 - 228
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, John M. 2005. Old English i-umlaut (for the umpteenth time). English Language and Linguistics 9:195–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, John M. and Ewen, Colin J.. 1987. Principles of dependency phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1994. Grounded phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Avery, Peter and Rice, Keren. 1989. Segment structure and coronal underspecification. Phonology 6:179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea. 1995. A constraint-based theory of phonological markedness and simplification procedures. Linguistic Inquiry 26:373–463.Google Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea. 2005. Markedness and economy in a derivational model of phonology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, Philip, Durand, Jacques, and Ewen, Colin J., eds. 2005. Headhood, elements, specification and contrastivity: Phonological papers in honour of John Anderson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherry, E. Colin, Halle, Morris, and Jakobson, Roman. 1953. Toward the logical description of languages in their phonemic aspect. Language 29:34–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G.N. 2001. Representational economy in constraint-based phonology. In Distinctive feature theory, ed. Hall, T. Alan, 71–146. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. 2003. Feature economy in sound systems. Phonology 20:287–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G.N. 2009. The role of features in phonological inventories. In Contemporary views on architecture and representations in phonological theory, ed. Raimy, Eric and Cairns, Charles, 19–68. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Compton, Richard. 2008. Contrast in Inuit consonant inventories. In Proceedings of the 2008 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, ed. Jones, Susie. Available at: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2008/CLA2008_Compton.pdf.Google Scholar
Dorais, Louis-Jacques. 1993. From magic words to word processing: A history of the Inuit language. Iqaluit: Arctic College.Google Scholar
Dorais, Louis-Jacques. 2003. Inuit uqausiqatigiit: Inuit languages and dialects. 2nd rev. ed. Iqaluit: Nunavut Arctic College.Google Scholar
Dorais, Louis-Jacques. 2010. The language of the Inuit: Syntax, semantics, and society in the Arctic. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan. 1998. On contrast and redundancy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Linguistic Association, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan. 2003. Contrast and asymmetries in inventories. In Asymmetry in grammar, Vol. 2: Morphology, phonology, acquisition, ed. Sciullo, Anna-Maria di, 239–257. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan. 2009. The contrastive hierarchy in phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan and Zhang, Xi. 2005. Contrast and phonological activity in Manchu vowel systems. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 50:45–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan, Piggott, Glyne, and Rice, Keren. 1994. Contrast in phonology: Overview. In Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 13, ed. Dyck, Carrie, iii–xvii.Google Scholar
Dyck, Carrie. 1995. Constraining the phonology-phonetics interface, with evidence from Spanish and Italian dialects. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael. 1991. Inuktun: An introduction to the language of Qaanaaq, Thule — En introduktion til Thulesproget. Copenhagen: Institut for eskimologis skriftraekke, Københavns Universitet.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael, Jacobson, Steven A., and Kaplan, Lawrence D.. 1994. Comparative Eskimo dictionary with Aleut cognates. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center.Google Scholar
Hall, Daniel Currie. 2007. The role and representation of contrast in phonological theory. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Hall, Daniel Currie. To appear. Phonological contrast and its phonetic enhancement: Dispersedness without dispersion. Phonology.Google Scholar
Hall, T. Alan. 2007. Segmental features. In The Cambridge handbook of phonology, ed. Lacy, Paul de, 311–334. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1959. The sound pattern of Russian: A linguistic and acoustical investigation. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2001. Vowel harmony in Gunu. Studies in African Linguistics 30:146–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2002. On the limits of phonetic determinism in phonology: NC revisited. In The role of perception in phonology, ed. Hume, Elizabeth and Johnson, Keith, 141–185. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2003. ‘Abstract’ vowel harmony in A system-driven account. In Typologie des langues d’Afrique et universaux de la grammaire, ed. Sauzet, Patrick, Zribi-Hertz, Anne, 85–112. Paris: l’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Steven A. 1995. A practical grammar of the Central Alaskan Yup’ik Eskimo language. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, Fant, C. Gunnar M., and Halle, Morris. 1952. Preliminaries to speech analysis. MIT Acoustics Laboratory Technical Report, No. 13.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman and Halle, Morris. 1956. Fundamentals of language. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Lawrence D. 1981. Phonological issues in North Alaskan Inupiaq. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Lawrence D. 1990. The language of the Alaskan Inuit. In Arctic languages: An awakening, ed. Collis, Dirmid R.F., 131–158. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael J. 1994. Phonology in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Keyser, Samuel Jay, and Stevens, Kenneth N.. 2001. Enhancement revisited. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Kenstowicz, Michael J., 271–291. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kochetov, Alexei. 2011. Palatalisation. In The Blackwell companion to phonology, vol. 3: Phonological processes, ed. Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Beth, Oostendorp, Marc van, and Rice, Keren, Chapter 71. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael A. 1975. St. Lawrence Island Eskimo phonology and orthography. Linguistics: An International Review 152:39–72.Google Scholar
Morén, Bruce. 2003. The Parallel Structures Model of feature geometry. In Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, ed. Brugman, Johanna and Riehl, Anastasia, vol. XV, 194–270. Ithaca: Department of Linguistics, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Morén, Bruce. 2006. Consonant-vowel interactions in Serbian: Features, representations and constraint interactions. Lingua 116:1198–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevins, Andrew. 2010. Locality in vowel harmony. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, Robert. 1990. The Greenlandic language: Its nature and situation. In Arctic Languages: An awakening, ed. Collis, Dirmid R.F., 293–308. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 2002. Vowel place contrasts. In Language universals and variation, ed. Amberber, Mengistu and Collins, Peter, 239–270. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 2007. Markedness in phonology. In The Cambridge handbook of phonology, ed. Lacy, Paul de, 79–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rischel, Jørgen. 1974. Topics in West Greenlandic phonology. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Robbe, Pierre and Dorais, Louis-Jacques. 1986. Tunumiit Oraasiat — Tunumiut oqaasii — Detøstgrønlandske sprog — The East Greenlandic Inuit language — La langue inuit du Groenland de l’Est. Québec: Centre d’études nordiques.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1989. Primary features and their enhancement in consonants. Language 65:81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N., Keyser, Samuel Jay, and Kawasaki, Haruko. 1986. Toward a phonetic and phonological theory of redundant features. In Invariance and variability in speech processes, ed. Perkell, Joseph S. and Klatt, Dennis H., 426–449. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Tersis, Nicole. 2008. Forme et sens des mots du tunumiisut: Lexique inuit du Groenland oriental. Paris: Peeters.Google Scholar
Trigo, Loren. 1991. On pharynx-larynx interactions. Phonology 8:113–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underhill, Robert. 1976. The case for an abstract segment in Greenlandic. International Journal of American Linguistics 42:349–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Hulst, Harry. 1995. Radical CV phonology: The categorial gesture. In Frontiers of phonology, ed. Durand, Jacques and Katamba, Francis, 80–116. Essex: Longman.Google Scholar
van der Hulst, Harry. 1996. Radical CV phonology: The segment-syllable connection. In Current trends in phonology: Models and methods, ed. Durand, Jacques and Laks, Bernard, 333–361. Salford: European Studies Research Institute (ESRI).Google Scholar
van der Hulst, Harry. 2005. The molecular structure of phonological segments. In Headhood, elements, specification and contrastivity: Phonological papers in honour of John Anderson, ed. Carr, Philip, Durand, Jacques, and Ewen, Colin J., 193–234. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Xi. 1996. Vowel systems of the Manchu-Tungus languages of China. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar