Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:20:00.642Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A test case for the phonetics–phonology interface: gemination restrictions in Hungarian*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2010

Anne Pycha
Anne Pycha
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Despite differences in parsimony and philosophical orientation, physical and abstract theories of phonology often make similar empirical predictions. This study examines a case where they do not: gemination restrictions in Hungarian. While both types of theory correctly prohibit the lengthening of a consonant when flanked by another consonant, they make different predictions regarding both the relative duration changes within a target consonant and the applicability of restrictions to lengthening processes besides gemination. In two speech-production experiments, these predictions are evaluated by measuring stop and frication durations within affricates. Results show that relative duration changes occur, and that the restriction holds only for gemination, supporting an abstract theory. Yet results also indicate that gemination exhibits sensitivity to inherent durational differences between affricates, providing some support for a physical theory. Thus I argue that an adequate theory of phonology must include abstract constituents, alongside a limited, principled set of physical landmarks.

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , May 2010 , pp. 119 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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

Barnes, Jonathan (2006). Strength and weakness at the interface: positional neutralization in phonetics and phonology. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette (2004). Evolutionary Phonology: the emergence of sound patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette & Garrett, Andrew (1998). The origins of consonant–vowel metathesis. Lg 74. 508–556.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David (2007). Praat: doing phonetics by computer (version 4.3.22). http://www.praat.org/.Google Scholar
Browman, Catherine P. & Goldstein, Louis (1990). Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech. In Kingston, & Beckman, (1990). 341–376.Google Scholar
Byrd, Dani, Kaun, Abigail, Narayanan, Shrikanth & Saltzman, Eliot (2000). Phrasal signatures in articulation. In Broe, Michael B. & Pierrehumbert, Janet B. (eds.) Papers in laboratory phonology V: acquisition and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 70–87.Google Scholar
Byrd, Dani & Saltzman, Elliot (2003). The elastic phrase: modeling the dynamics of boundary-adjacent lengthening. JPh 31. 149–180.Google Scholar
Byrd, Dani, Lee, Sungbok, Riggs, Daylen & Adams, Jason (2005). Interacting effects of syllable and phrase position on consonant articulation. JASA 118. 3860–3873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Byrd, Dani, Krivokapić, Jelena & Lee, Sungbok (2006). How far, how long: on the temporal scope of prosodic boundary effects. JASA 120. 1589–1599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Byrd, Dani & Riggs, Daylen (2008). Locality interactions with prominence in determining the scope of phrasal lengthening. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 38. 187–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cho, Taehong (2005). Prosodic strengthening and featural enhancement: evidence from acoustic and articulatory realizations of /ɑ,i/ in English. JASA 117. 3867–3878.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cho, Taehong (2006). Manifestation of prosodic structure in articulatory variation: evidence from lip kinematics in English. In Goldstein, Louis, Whalen, Douglas & Best, Catherine T. (eds.) Papers in Laboratory Phonology 8. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 519–548.Google Scholar
Cho, Taehong & Keating, Patricia A. (2001). Articulatory and acoustic studies on domain-initial strengthening in Korean. JPh 29. 155–190.Google Scholar
Cho, Young-mee Yu (1990). Parameters of consonantal assimilation. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1999). Affricates as noncontoured stops. In Fujimura, Osamu, Joseph, Brian D. & Palek, Bohumil (eds.) Proceedings of LP '98: item order in language and speech. Prague: Karolinum. 271–299.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Keyser, Samuel J. (1983). CV phonology: a generative theory of the syllable. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail C. (2003). Phonological structure and phonetic duration: the role of the mora. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 15. 69–100.Google Scholar
De Jong, Kenneth & Zawaydeh, Bushra (2002). Comparing stress, lexical focus, and segmental focus: patterns of variation in Arabic vowel duration. JPh 30. 53–75.Google Scholar
de Lacy, Paul (2006). Markedness: reduction and preservation in phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorman, Michael F., Raphael, Lawrence J. & Isenberg, David (1980). Acoustic cues for a fricative-affricate contrast in word-final position. JPh 8. 397–405.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Siptár, Péter (1989). Towards a natural phonology of Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 39. 29–51.Google Scholar
Flemming, Edward (2001). Scalar and categorical phenomena in a unified model of phonetics and phonology. Phonology 18. 7–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fougeron, Cécile & Keating, Patricia A. (1997). Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. JASA 101. 3728–3740.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fukaya, Teruhiko & Byrd, Dani (2005). An articulatory examination of word-final flapping at phrase edges and interiors. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 35. 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gafos, Adamantios I. (2002). A grammar of gestural coordination. NLLT 20. 269–337.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John (1976). Autosegmental phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Gósy, Mária (ed.) (1991). Temporal factors in speech: a collection of papers. Budapest: Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Gósy, Mária (2001). The VOT of the Hungarian voiceless plosives in words and in spontaneous speech. International Journal of Speech Technology 4. 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ham, William H. (2001). Phonetic and phonological aspects of geminate timing. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1986a). Inalterability in CV phonology. Lg 62. 321–351.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1986b). Assimilation as spreading in Toba Batak. LI 17. 467–499.Google Scholar
Hockey, Beth Ann & Fagyal, Zsuzsanna (1999). Phonemic length and pre-boundary lengthening: an experimental investigation on the use of durational cues in Hungarian. In Proceedings of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, San Francisco. 313–316.Google Scholar
Howell, Peter & Rosen, Stuart (1983). Production and perception of rise time in the voiceless affricate/fricative distinction. JASA 73. 976–984.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hualde, José Ignacio (1988). Affricates are not contour segments. WCCFL 7. 143–157.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (1985). A theory of phonological weight. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon & Cho, Young-mee Yu (1993). Inalterability as prespecification. Lg 69. 529–574.Google Scholar
Kassai, Ilona (1979). Időtartam és kvantitás a magyar nyelvben. [Duration and quantity in Hungarian.] Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Kassai, Ilona (1982). A magyar beszédhangok időtartamviszonyai. [Temporal relationships of Hungarian speech sounds.] In Bolla, Kálmán (ed.) Fejezetek a magyar leíró hangtanból. [Chapters from Hungarian descriptive phonetics.] Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 115–154.Google Scholar
Kenesei, István, Vago, Robert M. & Fenyvesi, Anna (1998). Hungarian. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael (1982). Gemination and spirantization in Tigrinya. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 12. 103–122.Google Scholar
Kingston, John & Beckman, Mary E. (eds.) (1990). Papers in laboratory phonology I: between the grammar and physics of speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchner, Robert (2000). Geminate inalterability and lenition. Lg 76. 509–545.Google Scholar
Klatt, Dennis H. (1976). Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: acoustic and perceptual evidence. JASA 59. 1208–1221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavoie, Lisa (2001). Consonant strength: phonological patterns and phonetic manifestations. New York: Garland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lombardi, Linda (1990). The nonlinear organization of the affricate. NLLT 8. 375–425.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1986). OCP effects: gemination and antigemination. LI 17. 207–263.Google Scholar
Miller, Joanne L. (1981). Effects of speaking rate on segmental distinctions. In Eimas, Peter D. & Miller, Joanne L. (eds.) Perspectives on the study of speech. Hillsdale: Erlbaum. 39–74.Google Scholar
Miller-Ockhuizen, Amanda & Zec, Draga (2002). Durational differences in Serbian palatal affricates. In Proceedings of the 1st Pan-American/Iberian Meeting on Acoustics. Cancun, Mexico.Google Scholar
Muller, Jennifer S. (2001). The phonology and phonetics of word-initial geminates. PhD dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Nádasdy, Ádám (1989). The exact domain of consonant degemination in Hungarian. In Szende, Tamás (ed.) Proceedings of the Speech Research '89 International Conference. Budapest: Linguistics Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. 104–107.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. (1990). The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation. In Kingston, & Beckman, (1990). 258–275.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. (1997). Aerodynamics of phonology. Proceedings of the 4th Seoul International Conference on Linguistics [SICOL]. Seoul: Linguistic Society of Korea. 92–97.Google Scholar
Olaszy, Gábor (1994). Sound duration measurements in declarative sentences. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 42. 51–62.Google Scholar
Olaszy, Gábor (2000). The prosody structure of dialogue components in Hungarian. International Journal of Speech Technology 3. 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olaszy, Gábor (2002). Predicting Hungarian sound durations for continuous speech. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 49. 321–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papp, Ferenc (1969). Reverse-alphabetized dictionary of the Hungarian language. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Pycha, Anne (2007). Phonetic vs. phonological lengthening in affricates. In Trouvain, Jürgen & Barry, William J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Saarbrücken: Saarland University. 1757–1760.Google Scholar
Pycha, Anne (2009). Lengthened affricates as a test case for the phonetics–phonology interface. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 39. 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Repp, Bruno H., Liberman, Alvin M., Eccardt, Thomas & Pesetsky, David (1978). Perceptual integration of acoustic cues for stop, fricative, and affricate manner. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 4. 621–637.Google ScholarPubMed
Rose, Sharon (2000). Rethinking geminates, long-distance geminates, and the OCP. LI 31. 85–122.Google Scholar
Rounds, Carol (2001). Hungarian: an essential grammar. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy (1994). Affricates as strident stops in Polish. LI 25. 119–143.Google Scholar
Schein, Barry & Steriade, Donca (1986). On geminates. LI 17. 691–744.Google Scholar
Siptár, Péter & Törkenczy, Miklós (2000). The phonology of Hungarian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smiljanic, Rajka & Bradlow, Ann R. (2007). Stability of temporal contrasts across speaking styles in English and Croatian. JPh 36. 91–113.Google Scholar
Smith, Caroline L. (1995). Prosodic patterns in the coordination of vowel and consonant gestures. In Connell, Bruce & Arvaniti, Amalia (eds.) Phonology and phonetic evidence: papers in laboratory phonology IV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 205–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steriade, Donca (1993). Closure, release, and nasal contours. In Huffman, Marie K. & Krakow, Rena A. (eds.) Nasals, nasalization, and the velum. Orlando: Academic Press. 401–470.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (1994). Complex onsets as single segments: the Mazateco pattern. In Cole, Jennifer & Kisseberth, Charles (eds.) Perspectives in phonology. Stanford: CSLI. 203–291.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (1999). Phonetics in phonology: the case of laryngeal neutralization. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 2: Papers in Phonology 3. 25–146.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (2001). Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: a perceptual account. In Hume, Elizabeth & Johnson, Keith (eds.) The role of speech perception in phonology. San Diego: Academic Press. 219–250.Google Scholar
Summers, W. Van (1987). Effects of stress and final-consonant voicing on vowel production: articulatory and acoustic analysis. JASA 82. 847–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarnóczy, Tamás (1987). The formation, analysis and perception of Hungarian affricates. In Channon, Robert & Shockey, Linda (eds.) In honor of Ilse Lehiste. Dordrecht: Foris. 255–270.Google Scholar
Turk, Alice E. & Shattuck-Hufnagel, Stefanie (2000). Word-boundary-related duration patterns in English. JPh 28. 397–440.Google Scholar
Turk, Alice E. & Shattuck-Hufnagel, Stefanie (2007). Multiple targets of phrase-final lengthening in American English words. JPh 35. 445–472.Google Scholar
Vago, Robert M. (1980). The sound pattern of Hungarian. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Warner, Natasha, Jongman, Allard, Sereno, Joan & Kemps, Rachèl (2004). Incomplete neutralization and other sub-phonemic durational differences in production and perception: evidence from Dutch. JPh 32. 251–276.Google Scholar