We are upgrading the repository! A content freeze is in effect until December 6th, 2024 - no new submissions will be accepted; however, all content already published will remain publicly available. Please reach out to repository@u.library.arizona.edu with your questions, or if you are a UA affiliate who needs to make content available soon. Note that any new user accounts created after September 22, 2024 will need to be recreated by the user in November after our migration is completed.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHeiberg, Andrea
dc.contributor.editorSuzuki, Keiichiroen_US
dc.contributor.editorElzinga, Dirken_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-01T19:06:44Z
dc.date.available2012-06-01T19:06:44Z
dc.date.issued1995
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/227245
dc.description.abstractThe neutralization of the laryngeal features of a consonant that is not directly followed by a vowel is a common process cross -linguistically. Laryngeal neutralization in this position has a clear phonetic cause: laryngeal features are not salient unless they are immediately followed by a vowel. Since laryngeal neutralization has a phonetic cause, it seems reasonable to characterize it directly in phonetic terms, without positing any additional layer of phonological abstraction. However, a phonetic explanation is not sufficient to account for all cases of laryngeal neutralization. For example, in Korean, laryngeal neutralization occurs in a nonneutralizing phonetic environment; in Nisgha, laryngeal neutralization occurs only in the reduplicant, although the phonetic environment for neutralization is found in both the reduplicant and the base. Although phonetics is the major factor leading to the development of these types of restrictions on laryngeal features, I argue that a phonetic account is not adequate for all such restrictions. Abstract phonological constraints and representations are necessary. Hence, two types of neutralization are possible: (i) phonetic neutralization, which results directly from the lack of saliency of cues and occurs in every instance of the neutralizing environment; and (ii) abstract phonological neutralization, which may occur where the neutralizing environment is absent (as will be demonstrated for Korean), and may fail to occur in every instance of the neutralizing environment (as will be demonstrated for Nisgha).
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherDepartment of Linguistics, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ)en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesArizona Phonology Conference Vol. 5en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesProceedings of South Western Optimality Theory Workshop 1995en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCoyote Papersen_US
dc.subjectGrammar, comparative and general -- Phonologyen_US
dc.subjectOptimality theory (Linguistics)en_US
dc.titleCoda Neutralization: Against Purely Phonetic Constraintsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Arizonaen_US
dc.identifier.oclc26728293
refterms.dateFOA2018-04-26T07:54:57Z
html.description.abstractThe neutralization of the laryngeal features of a consonant that is not directly followed by a vowel is a common process cross -linguistically. Laryngeal neutralization in this position has a clear phonetic cause: laryngeal features are not salient unless they are immediately followed by a vowel. Since laryngeal neutralization has a phonetic cause, it seems reasonable to characterize it directly in phonetic terms, without positing any additional layer of phonological abstraction. However, a phonetic explanation is not sufficient to account for all cases of laryngeal neutralization. For example, in Korean, laryngeal neutralization occurs in a nonneutralizing phonetic environment; in Nisgha, laryngeal neutralization occurs only in the reduplicant, although the phonetic environment for neutralization is found in both the reduplicant and the base. Although phonetics is the major factor leading to the development of these types of restrictions on laryngeal features, I argue that a phonetic account is not adequate for all such restrictions. Abstract phonological constraints and representations are necessary. Hence, two types of neutralization are possible: (i) phonetic neutralization, which results directly from the lack of saliency of cues and occurs in every instance of the neutralizing environment; and (ii) abstract phonological neutralization, which may occur where the neutralizing environment is absent (as will be demonstrated for Korean), and may fail to occur in every instance of the neutralizing environment (as will be demonstrated for Nisgha).


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
apc-v-051-060.pdf
Size:
386.1Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record