Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T07:33:52.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonological Degrees of Labiality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Jérémy Pasquereau
Jérémy Pasquereau*
Affiliation:
Surrey Morphology Group, University of Surrey
*
Surrey Morphology Group [I1], University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey Gu2 7XH, UK, [j.pasquereau@surrey.ac.uk]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A [+round] or [labial] feature is traditionally viewed as an elementary phonological unit that has different phonetic realizations depending on the height and backness of the segment that realizes it (McCarthy 1988, Clements & Hume 1995, Halle 1995, Kaun 1995, among others). In this article, I make two claims: (i) qualitatively different lip gestures are phonological in some languages, and (ii) there is more faithfulness to more extreme lip gestures.

Keywords

roundinglabialityKarataNakh-Daghestanian

Information

Type
Phonological Analysis
Information
Language , Volume 94 , Issue 4 , December 2018 , pp. e216 - e265
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 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

References

Boyce, Suzanne E. 1988. The influence of phonological structure on articulatory organization in Turkish and in English: Vowel harmony and coarticulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University dissertation.Google Scholar
Browman, Catherine, and Goldstein, Louis. 1989. Articulatory gestures as phonological units. Phonology 6. 201-51. DOI: 10.1017/S0952675700001019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casali, Roderic F. 1996. Resolving hiatus. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles dissertation.Google Scholar
Charachidzé, Georges. 1981. Grammaire de la langue avar. Paris: Éditions Jean-Favard.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. 1991. Vowel height assimilation in Bantu languages. Berkeley Linguistics Society (Special session on African language structures) 17. 25–64. DOI: 10.3765/bls.v17i2.1662.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N., and Hume, Elizabeth. 1995. The internal organization of speech sounds. The handbook of phonological theory, ed. by Goldsmith, John A., 245–306. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1995. Letter commenting on Burzio's article. Glot International 1(9/10).Google Scholar
Kaun, Abigail. 1995. The typology of rounding harmony: An optimality theoretic approach. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles dissertation.Google Scholar
Kaun, Abigail. 2004. The typology of rounding harmony. Phonetically-based phonology, ed. by Hayes, Bruce, Kirchner, Robert, and Steriade, Donca, 87–116. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalikov, K. G., and Efendiev, I. I.. 2002. Slovar' orientalizmov v avarskom jazyke [Dictionary of orientalisms in Avar]. Makhachkala: Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Alexander E. (ed.) 2001. Bagvalinskij jazyk: Grammatika, teksty, slovari [The Bagvalal language: Grammar, texts, dictionaries]. Moscow: Nasl'ed'e.Google Scholar
Kimper, Wendell. 2011. Competing triggers: Transparency and opacity in vowel harmony. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles dissertation.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 2000. Opacity and cyclicity. The Linguistic Review 17. 351-67. DOI: 10.1515/tlir.2000.17.2-4.351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolga, Margus, and Tõnurist, Igor. 2013. The red book of the peoples of the Russian Empire. Thomas Niimann.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1971. Preliminaries to linguistic phonetics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter, and Maddieson, Ian. 1996. The sounds of the world's languages. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lindau, Mona. 1978. Vowel features. Language 54. 541-63. DOI: 10.2307/412786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linker, Wendy. 1982. Articulatory and acoustic correlates of labial activity in vowels: A cross-linguistic study. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles dissertation.Google Scholar
Magomedbekova, Patimat. 1971. Karatinskij jazyk: Grammatičeskij očerk, teksty, slovar' [Karata: Grammar sketch, texts, dictionary]. Mecniereba: Tbilisi.Google Scholar
Magomedova, Patimat T., and Khalidova, Rashidat Sh.. 2001. Karatinsko-ruskij slovar' [Karata-Russian dictionary]. Makhachkala: Dagestanskij Nauchnyj Centr Rossiskoj Akademii Nauk.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1988. Feature geometry and dependency: A review. Phonetica 45. 84–108. DOI: 10.1159/000261820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasquereau, Jérémy. 2011. Valency in Karata: A preliminary study. Lyon: Université Lumière Lyon 2, ms.Google Scholar
Pasquereau, Jérémy. 2013. Degrees of labiality in Karata. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst, ms.Google Scholar
Pasquereau, Jérémy. 2014. Degrees of labiality. Poster presented at the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) 32, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan, and Smolensky, Paul. 1997. Optimality: From neural networks to universal grammar. Science 275. 1604-10. DOI: 10.1126/science.275.5306.1604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steriade, Donca. 1993. Closure, release, and nasal contours. Phonetics and phonology, vol. 5: Nasals, nasalization, and the velum, ed. by Huffman, Marie K. and Krakow, Rena A., 401-70. San Diego: Academic Press. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-360380-7.50018-1.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 2001. The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT, ms.Google Scholar
Suomi, Kari. 1983. Palatal vowel harmony: A perceptually motivated phenomenon? Nordic Journal of Linguistics 6. 1–35. DOI: 10.1017/S0332586500000949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terbeek, Dale. 1977. A cross-language multidimensional scaling study of vowel perception. Berkeley: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Wolf, Matthew. 2007. For an autosegmental theory of mutation. Papers in optimality theory III (University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics 32), ed. by Bateman, Leah, O'Keefe, Michael, Reilly, Ehren, and Werle, Adam, 315–404. Amherst: GLSA Publications.Google Scholar