Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T06:34:55.236Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can [Consonantal] Spread?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Ellen M. Kaisse
Ellen M. Kaisse*
Affiliation:
University of Washington
*
Department of Linguistics GN-40, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Current versions of feature geometry generally locate the features [consonantal] and [sonorant] as annotations on the root node, rather than as normal dependents of that or some other node. This geometry is intended to reflect the observation that, unlike other features, the major class features do not participate in phonological processes such as assimilation (spreading of a feature) or dissimilation (delinking of that feature). This article disputes the empirical observation concerning [consonantal]: several examples are provided where vowels or glides become consonantal next to consonants (assimilation) and where consonants become vowels or glides next to consonants (dissimilation). The feature geometry is modified to allow for such processes by placing [consonantal] as a daughter of the root node.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 68 , Issue 2 , June 1992 , pp. 313 - 332
Copyright
© 1992 Linguistic Society of America

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

Special thanks are due to Reinhard Hahn, Larry Hyman, Christine Kamprath, David Odden, Jan-Olof Svantesson and Draga Zec. They provided much data and analysis of individual languages discussed here. Thanks also to Colin Ewen, Tracy Hall, Sharon Hargus, Harry van der Hulst, John McCarthy, Bill Poser, Pieter van Reenen, Jurek Rubach, Patricia Shaw, Norval Smith, Alice Taff, Leo Wetzels, Martha Youngscholten, and two anonymous Language referees for their help in tracking down examples and thinking about their consequences. Audiences of Lund University, the Free University of Amsterdam, The University at Leiden, Manchester University and the University of Washington provided provocative and helpful comments. All should be absolved for the misuses to which I may have put their suggestions. Portions of this work were supported by NEH grant FE-25621–91.

The following abbreviations are used in this paper for features: ant = anterior, asp = aspirated, bk = back, cons = consonantal, cont = continuant, cor = coronal, dist = distributed, dor = dorsal, hi = high, lab = labial, lar = laryngeal, lat = lateral, nas = nasal, and voi = voice.

References

Anderson, Stephen R. 1974. The organization of phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. 1985. The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2. 223–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, George N. 1990. The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. Papers in laboratory phonology I: Between the grammar and physics of speech, ed. by Kingston, John and Beckman, Mary E., 283–333. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortune, G. 1955. An analytical grammar of Shona. London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Hahn, Reinhard F. 1991. Spoken Uyghur. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Tracy A. 1990. Syllable structure and syllable-related processes in German. Seattle: University of Washington dissertation.Google Scholar
Hankamer, Jorge, and Aissen, Judith. 1974. The sonority hierarchy. Chicago Linguistic Society Parasession on natural phonology, 131–45.Google Scholar
Jarring, Gunnar. 1933. Studien zu einer osttürkischen Lautlehre. Lund: Håkan Ohlsson.Google Scholar
Daniel, Kahn. 1976. Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Kaisse, Ellen M. 1988. Modern Greek continuant dissimilation and the OCP. Seattle: University of Washington, ms.Google Scholar
Kaisse, Ellen M. 1992. Rule generalization and rule reordering in Lexical Phonology: A reconsideration. Studies in Lexical Phonology, ed. by Hargus, Sharon and Kaisse, Ellen. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, to appear.Google Scholar
Kamprath, Christine. 1986. The syllabification of consonantal glides: Post-peak distinctions. North Eastern Linguistic Society 16. 217–29.Google Scholar
Kamprath, Christine. 1987. Suprasegmental structures in a Räto-Romansh dialect: A case study in metrical and lexical phonology. Austin: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar
Kari, James. 1990. Ahtna Athabaskan Dictionary. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska.Google Scholar
Kipri, Theophanous. 1979. Glossarion Georgiou Louka. [Glossary of Georghios Loukas.] Nicosia: Cyprus Research Centre.Google Scholar
Kučera, Henry. 1961. The phonology of Czech. S-Gravenhage: Mouton.Google Scholar
Lutta, C. M. 1923. Der Dialekt von Bergün und seine Stellung innerhalb der rätoromanischen Mundarten Graubündens. Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie, Supplement 71.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1988. Feature geometry and dependency. Phonetica 43. 84–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, Brian. 1972. Cypriot Greek: Its phonology and inflections. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, Keren, and Avery, Peter. 1989. On the relationship between sonorancy and voicing. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 10.Google Scholar
Sagey, Elizabeth. 1986. The representation of features and relations in non-linear phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Schein, Barry, and Steriade, Donca. 1986. On geminates. Linguistic Inquiry 17. 691–744.Google Scholar
Smith, Norval. 1988. Consonant place features. Features, segmental structure and harmony processes, ed by van, Harry Hulst, der and Smith, Norval, 209–35. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Zhao, Xiangru, and Zhu, Zhining. 1985. Weiwueryu jianzhi. [Outline of Uyghur]. (Zhongguo shaoshu minzu yuyan jianzhi congshu [Series of outlines of China's minority languages.]) Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe.Google Scholar