Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:45:08.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

’Imala and rounding in a rural Syrian variety: Morpho-phonological and lexical conditioning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Rania Habib
Rania Habib*
Affiliation:
Syracuse University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates two concurrent phenomena— ’imala and rounding — in the Arabic variety spoken in the Syrian village of Oyoun Al-Wadi. ‘Imala refers to the use of [e] and [e:] in place of the urban vowels [a] and [a:] respectively; rounding refers to the use of [o] and [o:] in place of the urban vowels [a] and [a:] respectively. The use of two different vowels for each urban vowel is explained morpho-phonologically. The study economically proposes two phonological rules to account for ‘imala and rounding and shows that only one rule can apply per word, to the final syllable of a word. In light of Lexical Phonology theory, certain morphological patterns and suffixes explain the presence of ‘imala in initial syllables and in environments that induce rounding. That is, it is part of the lexical representation of a morphological pattern or suffix in the lexicon. Hence, ‘imala could occur in the initial syllable as part of the morphological pattern, and rounding could occur in the final syllable of the same word as a result of a post-lexical phonological rule.

Résumé

Résumé

Cette étude examine deux phénomènes concurrents — le ’imala et l’arrondissement—dans la variété d’arabe parlée au village syrien d’Oyoun Al-Wadi. Le ‘imala est l’utilisation de [e] et [e:] à la place des voyelles urbaines [a] et [a:], respectivement; l’arrondissement est l’emploi de [o] et [o:] à la place des voyelles urbaines [a] et [a:], respectivement. L’utilisation de deux voyelles différentes pour chaque voyelle urbaine est expliquée morpho-phonologiquement, avec quelques mots conditionnés au niveau du lexique. L’étude propose deux règles phonologiques économiques pour expliquer le ‘imala et l’arrondissement et montre qu’une seule règle s’applique par mot, toujours à la dernière syllabe d’un mot. En tenant compte de la théorie de la phonologie lexicale, certains modèles morphologiques et certains suffixes expliquent la présence du ‘imala dans les syllabes initiales et dans des environnements causant l’arrondissement. Autrement dit, le ‘imala fait partie de la représentation lexicale d’un modèle morphologique ou d’un suffixe du lexique. Ainsi, le ‘imala pourrait se produire à la syllabe initiale comme une partie du modèle morphologique et l’arron-dissement pourrait se produire à la syllabe finale du même mot comme résultat d’une règle phonologique postlexicale.

Keywords

’imalaroundingSyrian Arabicmorpho-phonological conditioninglexical phonology’imalaarrondissementarabe syrienconditionnement morpho-phonologiquephonologie lexicale
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 51 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2012 

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

Abdel-Jawad, Hassan Rashid S. 1981. Lexical and phonological variation in spoken Arabic in Amman. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Abdel-Jawad, Hassan Rashid S., and Suleiman, Saleh M.. 1990. Lexical conditioning of phonological variation. Language Sciences 12:291–330.Google Scholar
Ali, Latif H. and Daniloff, Raymond G. 1972. A contrastive cinefluorographic investigation of the articulation and emphatic-non emphatic cognate consonants. Studia Linguistica 26:81–105.Google Scholar
Al Khatib, Sam. 2008. On the directionality of emphasis spread. In Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, ed. Jones, Susie, 1–10. Available from: homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2008/CLA2008_AIKhatib.pdf.Google Scholar
Al-Masri, Mohammad and Jongman, Allard. 2004. Acoustic correlates of emphasis in Jordanian Arabic: Preliminary results. In Proceedings of the 2003 Texas Linguistics Society Conference, ed. Agwuele, Augustine, Warren, Willis, and Park, Sang-Hoon, 96–106. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
AI-Mozainy, Hamza. 1981. Vowel alternations in Bedouin Hijazi Arabic: Abstractness and stress. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Al-Nassir, A. A. 1993. Sibawayh the phonologist: A critical study of the phonetic and phonological theory of Sibawayh as presented in his treatise Al-Kitab. London: Kegan Paul International.Google Scholar
Al-Rafl’i, Mustafa Sadiq. 2000. Tarikh ‘adaab l-’Arab [‘History of Arab Literatures’], part I. Saida, Lebanon: 1-Maktaba l-’Asriah liT-Tiba’a wan-Nashir [‘The Contemporary Library for Printing and Publishing’].Google Scholar
Amara, Muhammed. 2005. Language, migration and urbanization: The case of Bethlehem. Linguistics 43:883–901.Google Scholar
Bani Yasin, Raslan and Owens, Jonathan. 1987. The lexical basis of variation in Arabic. Linguistics 25:705–738.Google Scholar
Behnstedt, Peter. 1997. Sprachatlas von Syrien. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
Bin-Muqbil, Musaed S. 2006. Phonetic and phonological aspects of Arabic emphatics and gutturals. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert and Rubach, Jerzy. 1987. Postcyclic versus postlexical rules in lexical phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 18:1–44.Google Scholar
Broselow, Ellen. 1976. The phonology of Egyptian Arabic. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Brown, James Dean and Kondo-Brown, Kimi. 2006. Perspectives on teaching connected speech to second language speakers. Honolulu: National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.Google Scholar
Bukshaisha, Fouzia A.M. 1985. An experimental study of some aspects of Qatari Arabic. Doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Cantineau, Jean. 1936. Études sur quelques parlers de nomades arabes d’Orient. Annales de l’Institut d’Etudes Orientales 2:1–118.Google Scholar
Cantineau, Jean. 1951. Analyse phonologique du parler arabe de ‘el Hamma de Gabes. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris 4:64–105.Google Scholar
Cantineau, Jean. 1960. Études de linguistique arabe. Paris: C. Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Card, Elizabeth A. 1983. A phonetic and phonological study of Arabic emphasis. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Corriente, F. 1977. A grammatical sketch of the Spanish Arabic dialect bundle. Madrid: Instituto Hispano-Arabe de Cultura.Google Scholar
Cowell, Mark. 1964. A reference grammar of Syrian Arabic. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Daher, Jamil. 1998. Linguistic variation in Damascus Arabic: A quantitative analysis of men’s and women’s speech. Doctoral dissertation, New York University.Google Scholar
Daher, Jamil. 1999. (θ) and (ð) as ternary and binary variables in Damascene Arabic. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics XII: Papers from the Twelfth Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, ed. Benmamoun, Elabbas, 163–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Davis, Stuart. 1993. Arabic pharyngealization and phonological features. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics V, ed. Eid, Mushira and Holes, Clive, 149–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Davis, Stuart. 1995. Emphasis spread in Arabic and grounded phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 26:465–498.Google Scholar
Diehl, Randy L., Kluender, Keith R., Walsh, Margaret A., and Parker, Ellen M.. 1991. Auditory enhancement in speech perception and phonology. In Cognition and the symbolic processes: Applied and ecological perspectives, ed. Hoffman, Robert R. and Palermo, David Stuart, 59–76. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1956. The emphatic l in Arabic. Language 32:446–452.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1997. Grammatical agreement in Classical Arabic and the modern dialects: A response to Versteegh’s pidginization hypothesis. In Structuralist studies in Arabic linguistics: Charles A. Ferguson’s papers, 1954-1994, compiled by Belnap, R. Kirk and Haeri, Niloofar, 81–91. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Gairdner, W.H.T. 1925. The phonetics of Arabic. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ghazeli, Salim. 1977. Back consonants and backing coarticulation in Arabic. Doctoral dissertation. University of Texas Austin.Google Scholar
Habib, Rania. 2005. The role of social factors, lexical borrowing and speech accommodation in the variation of [q] and [?] in the colloquial Arabic of rural migrant families in Hims, Syria. Master’s thesis, University of Florida.Google Scholar
Habib, Rania. 2008. New model for analyzing sociolinguistic variation: The interaction of social and linguistic constraints. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida.Google Scholar
Habib, Rania. 2010a. Rural migration and language variation in Hims, Syria. SKY Journal of Linguistics 23:61–99.Google Scholar
Habib, Rania. 2010b. New model for analyzing sociolinguistic variation: Introducing social constraints to stochastic Optimality Theory. In Sociolinguistics, ed. Spencer, Edmund T., 47–97. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.Google Scholar
Habib, Rania. 2011a. Meaningful variation and bidirectional change in rural child and adolescent language. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17(2):81–90, Article 10. Available at: repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol17/iss2/10.Google Scholar
Habib, Rania. 201lb. New model for bilingual minds in sociolinguistic variation situations: Interacting social and linguistic constraints. International Journal of Psychology Research 6:707–760.Google Scholar
Haeri, Niloofar. 1996. The sociolinguistic market of Cairo: Gender, class, and education. London: Kegan Paul International.Google Scholar
Harrel, Richard. 1957. The phonology of colloquial Egyptian Arabic. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1987. Ablaut and ambiguity: Phonology of a Moroccan Arabic dialect. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Herzallah, Rukayyah. 1990. Aspects of Palestinian Arabic phonology: A non-linear approach. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2008. Exceptions to sound change and external motivation. In English historical linguistics 2006: Geo-Historical Variation in English. [Selected papers from the fourteenth International conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14)], vol. 3, ed. Gotti, Maurizio, Dossena, Marina, and Dury, Richard, 185–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hoberman, Robert. 1995. Current issues in Semitic phonology. In A handbook of phonological theory, ed. Goldsmith, John, 839–847. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Holes, Clive. 2009. Colloquial Arabic of the Gulf and Saudi Arabia. London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. [1984]Google Scholar
Ibn Jinni, Abu al-Fath ‘Uthman. 1952. al-Khasā’is, vol. 3, ed. al-Najjar, M.A.. Cairo.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1957. Mufaxxamah, the ‘emphatic’ phonemes in Arabic. In Studies presented to Joshua Whatmough, ed. Pilgram, Ernst, 105–115. The Hague, Mouton.Google Scholar
Jastrow, Otto. 1978. Die Mesopotamisch-Arabischen Qiltu-Dialekte. Wiesbaden: Steiner.Google Scholar
Johnstone, Thomas M. 1967. Eastern Arabian dialect studies. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jongman, Allard, Herd, Wendy, and Al-Masri, Mohammad. 2007. Acoustic correlates of emphasis in Arabic. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS) XVI, ed. Trouvain, Jürgen and Barry, William J., 913–916. Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes.Google Scholar
Katamba, Francis. 1993. Morphology. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982a. From cyclic phonology to lexical phonology. In The structure of phonological representations, vol. 1, ed. Hulst, Harry van der and Smith, Norval, 131–175. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982b. Lexical phonology and Morphology. In Linguistics in the morning calm: Selected papers from SICOL-1981, vol. l, ed. Yang, In-Seok, 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Levin, Aryeh. 1978. The ‘Imala of the ‘Alif of Fa:’il in Old Arabic. Israel Oriental Studies 8:174–203.Google Scholar
Levin, Aryeh. 1992. The authenticity of Sibawayhi’s description of the ‘imala. Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 15:74–93.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1994. The phonetics and phonology of Semitic pharyngeals. In Papers in laboratory phonology, vol. III: Phonological structure and phonetic form, ed. Keating, Patricia A., 191–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, T.F. 1956. An introduction to Egyptian Colloquial Arabic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mohanan, Karuvannur Puthanveettil. 1982. Lexical phonology. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Mustafawi, Eiman M. 2006. An Optimality Theoretic approach to variable consonantal alternations in Qatari Arabic. Doctoral dissertation, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Norlin, Kjell. 1987. A phonetic study of emphasis and vowels in Egyptian Arabic. Working Papers of the Lund University Department of Linguistics 30:1–119.Google Scholar
Owens, Jonathan. 2006. A linguistic history of Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Prince, Allen and Smolensky, Paul. 2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Maiden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Prochazka, Stephan. 2002. Die arabischen Dialekte der Cukurova (Südtürkei). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Recasens, Daniel. 1985. Coarticulatory patterns and degrees of coarticulatory resistance in Catalan CV sequences. Language and Speech 28:97–114.Google Scholar
Recasens, Daniel and Pallares, Maria Dolors. 1999. A study of /r/ and in the light of the “DAC” coarticulation model. Journal of Phonetics 27:143–169.Google Scholar
Sallam, A.M. 1980. Phonological variation in educated spoken Arabic: A study of the uvular and related plosive type. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 43:77–100.Google Scholar
Sasse, H.-J. 1971. Linguistische Analyse des arabischen Dialekte der Mhallamiye in der Provinz Mardin (Südosttürkei). Doctoral dissertation, Munich University.Google Scholar
Shaaban, Kassim. 1977. The phonology of Omani Arabic. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Shahin, Kimary N., 1998. Optimized postvelar harmony in Palestinian Arabic. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics XL Papers from the eleventh annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, ed. Benmamoun, Elabbas, Eid, Mushira, and Haeri, Niloofar, 183–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Shahin, Kimary N. 2002. Postvelar harmony. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Shahin, Kimary N. 2011. Pharyngeals. In The Blackwell companion to phonology ed. Oostendorp, Marc Van, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth, and Rice, Keren, 604–627. Maiden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sibawayh, Abi Bishr. ‘Amr ibn ‘Uthman ibn Qanbar (died A.D. 796). n.d. Kitab Sibawayh, vol. 4. Retrieved October 23, 2011, from www.al-eman.com/library/book/book-display.htm?BID=205.Google Scholar
Versteegh, Kees. 1997. The Arabic language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Watson, Janet C.E. 1999. The directionality of emphasis spread. Linguistic Inquiry 30:289–300.Google Scholar
Yeou, Mohamed. 1997. Locus equations and the degree of coarticulation of Arabic consonants. Phonetica 54:187–202.Google Scholar
Younes, Munther A. 1994. On Emphasis and /r/ in Arabic. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics VI: Papers from the eleventh annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, ed. Eid, Mushira, Cantarino, Vicente, and Walters, Keith, 215–233. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Zamakhshari, ‘Abi al-Qasim Mahmud ibn ‘Umar (died A.D. 1144). n.d. Al-Mufassal fi ‘Ilm l-’Arabiyyah [The Detailed in Arabic Science’], 2nd ed. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar 1-Jil lin-Nasher wat-tawzi’ waT-Tiba’ah [The Generation House for Publication, Distribution, and Printing’].Google Scholar
Zawaydeh, Bushra Adnan, 1998. Gradient uvularization spread in Ammani-Jordanian Arabic. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics XI: Papers from the eleventh annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, ed. Benmamoun, Elabbas, Eid, Mushira, and Niloofar, Haeri, 183–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar