Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T09:08:09.705Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Analysis of Aspiration in Sanskrit Phonology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Eva I. Ejerhed
Eva I. Ejerhed
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Umeå, S-901 87 Umeå,. Sweden.
Get access

Abstract

The paper is devoted to the thesis that all Sanskrit aspirates (voiceless as well: as voiced) should be represented as clusters of a consonantal segment /C/ plus a segment /h/, the latter being [-consonantal, -vocalic], and not as single consonantal segments with the feature [+aspirate], which is the usual analysis. The arguments for the correctness of this thesis are based on formal considerations, i.e. on the fact that a cluster analysis yields a simpler formul ation of a 1arge number of different phonological processes in the language. The paper compares the cluster analysis of aspirates with a non-cluster analysis with respect to ten different rules.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , December 1981 , pp. 139 - 159
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

REFERENCES

Anderson, S. 1970: On Grassmann's Law in Sankrit. Linguistic Inquiry 1, 387–396.Google Scholar
Bhatia, T.K. 1976: On the Predictive Role of the Recent Theories of Aspiration. Phonetica 33, 62–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braroe, E. (= Ejerhed) 1975: Sanskirt Aspiracts and Universally Determined Rule Application. In Hovdhaugen, E. (ed.), Papers from the Second Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics. Oslo, pp. 81–93.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. and Halle, M.. 1968: The Sound Pattern of English. Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
Derwing, B., 1973: Transformational Grammer as a Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer-Jørgensen, E. 1970: Phonetic Anlaysis of Breathy (Murrmured) Vowels in Gujarati. Indian Linguistics 28, 71–139.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. 1976: An Overview of Autosegmental Phonology. Linguistic Analysis 2:1.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. 1979: Autosegmental Phonology. Garland Publishing Inc., New York. (MIT diss 1976).Google Scholar
Iverson, G.K. 1974: Ordering Constraints in Phonpology. Ph. D. diss., University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Kentowicz, M. and Kisseberth, C. 1977: Topics in Phonological Theory. Academic Press Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. 1965: Phonological Change. Ph. D. diss, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. 1973; ‘Elsewhere’ in Phonology. In Anderson, S.R. and Kiparsky, P. (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 93–106.Google Scholar
Koutsounds, A., sanders, G., and Noll, C. 1974: On the Application of Phonological Rules. Language 50, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liljencrants, J. and Lindblom, B. 1972: Numerican Simulation of Vowel Quality Systems: The Role of Perceptual Contrast. Language 48, 839–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindblom, B. 1972: Phonetics and the Description of Language. In Rigault, A. and charbonneau, R. (eds.) Proc. of the 7th International Congress of Phobetic Scineces. Mouton, The Hague, pp. 63–97.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. 1975: Experiments in Sound Structure. Plenary Addres at the 8th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Leeds (to appear).Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. 1979: Some Phonetic Null Hypothese for a Biological Theory of Language. In Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Copenhagen, pp. 33–40.Google Scholar
Linell, P. 1974: Problems of Psychological Reality in Generative Phonology A Critical Assessment. Reports from Uppsala University, Department of Linguistics (RUUL) nr. 4.Google Scholar
Linell, P. 1979: Psychological Reality in Phonology: a Theoretical Study (Cambridge Studoes in Linguistics 25). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Nyman, M. 1977: On Gestalt- Preserving Strategies in Sanskirt. In Papers from thr Conference on General Linguistics (Lammi), Publications of the Linguistic Association of Finalnd, 1, Turku.Google Scholar
Ohala, M. and Ohala, J. 1972: The Problem of Aspiration in Hindi Phonetics. Annual Bulletin No. 6, Research Institute of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, University of Tokyo, pp. 39–46.Google Scholar
Phelps, E. and Brame, M. 1973: On Local Ordering of Rules in Sanskrit. Linguistic Inquiry 4, 387–400.Google Scholar
Renou, L. 1968: Grammaire Sanskrite. Paris.Google Scholar
Sag, I. 1974: The Grassmann's Law Ordering Pseudoparadox. Linguistic Inquiry 5, 591–607.Google Scholar
Sag, I. 1976: Pseudosolutions to the Pseudoparadox: Sanskrit Diaspirates Revisited. Linguistic Inquiry 7, 609–21.Google Scholar
Schindler, J. 1976: Diachronic and Synchronic Remarks on Bartholomae's and Grassmann's Laws. Linguistic Inquiry 7, 622–638.Google Scholar
Whitney, W. D. [1889]: 1960 Sanskrit Grammar. Harvard University Press I, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. 1965: Topics in Sanskrit Phonology. Ph. D. diss., MIT Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar