Abstract
This paper argues that processes traditionally classified as lenition fall into at least two subsets, with distinct phonetic reflexes, formal properties and characteristic contexts. One type, referred to as loss lenition, frequently neutralises contrasts in positions where they are perceptually indistinct. The second type, referred to as continuity lenition, can target segments in perceptually robust positions, increases the intensity and/or decreases the duration of those segments, and very rarely results in positional neutralisation of contrasts. While loss lenition behaves much like other phonological processes, analysing continuity lenition is difficult or impossible in standard phonological approaches. The paper develops a phonetically based optimality-theoretic account that explains the typology of the two types of lenition. The crucial proposal is that, unlike loss lenition, continuity lenition is driven by constraints that reference multiple prosodic positions.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference89 articles.
1. Morelli Frida (1999). The phonotactics and phonology of obstruent clusters in Optimality Theory. PhD dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
2. Shosted Ryan (2006). The aeroacoustics of nasalized fricatives. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
3. Directional asymmetries in the morphology and phonology of words, with special reference to Bantu
4. Handbook of Amazonian Languages, Volume 1
Cited by
34 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献