Abstract
The goal of this paper is to discuss phonotactic constraints that govern the formation of word-initial consonant clusters in two different languages, German and Polish, and to establish a general procedure for a rank-ordering of clusters. The description of clusters is based on corpus and dictionary data. We define several dimensions in cluster description, namely (i) complexity of clusters, (ii) place of articulation, (iii) manner of articulation and (iv) voicing of segments, for which a total of 15 parameters is derived, each expressing a structural preference for cluster formation true to various degrees in the two languages. These preferences can be seen in part as extensions of the frequently used measure of sonority based mainly on manner of articulation features, and can be considered to provide a more detailed description of clusters than one based on sonority. In addition, a cluster analysis for the two sets of clusters lends support to the conclusions on the fundamental difference between Polish and German word-initial phonotactics. For each cluster, values obtained for every parameter are summed up to calculate an empirically justified rank ordering of the clusters in both languages.
Acknowledgments
This paper has benefited immensely from the advice and help of Hubert Cuyckens, as editor of Folia Linguistica, of Michael Cysouw, Bernd Möbius, Barbara Samlowski, and of two reviewers for the journal. Support for this work came from a grant by the state of Hesse within the LOEWE programme “Fundierung linguistischer Basiskategorien”.
References
Avery, Peter & Keren D. Rice. 1989. Segment structure and coronal underspecification. Phonology 6. 179–200.10.1017/S0952675700001007Search in Google Scholar
Bargiełówna, Maria. 1950. Grupy fonemów spółgłoskowych współczesnej Polszczyzny kulturalnej [Consonant clusters of contemporary Polish]. Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego 10. 1–25.Search in Google Scholar
Bethin, Christina Y. 2011. Polish syllable structure. In Marc van Oostendorp, Colin Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren D. Rice (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology, vol. 5, 2609–2630. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0109Search in Google Scholar
Clements, George N. 1990. The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In John Kingston & Mary E. Beckman (eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology. vol. 1: Between the grammar and physics of speech, 283–333. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511627736.017Search in Google Scholar
Clements, George N. & Elizabeth Hume. 1996. The internal structure of speech sounds. In John A. Goldsmith (ed.), Handbook of phonological theory, 245–306. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Dobrogowska, Katarzyna. 1992. Word initial and word final consonant clusters in Polish popular science text and in artistic prose. Studia Phonetica Posnaniensa 3. 47–121.Search in Google Scholar
Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna. 1995. Phonology without the syllable: A study in the natural framework. Poznań: Motivex.Search in Google Scholar
Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna. 2001. Phonotactic constraints are preferences. In Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kolaczyk (ed.), Constraints and preferences, 69–100. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110881066Search in Google Scholar
Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna. 2002. Beats-and-binding phonology. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna. 2009. NP extensions: B&B phonotactics. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 45(1). 55–71.10.2478/v10010-009-0011-9Search in Google Scholar
Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna. 2014. Explaining phonotactics using NAD. Language Sciences 46. 6–17.10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.003Search in Google Scholar
Frisch, Stefan, Janet B. Pierrehumbert & Michael Broe. 2004. Similarity avoidance and the OCP. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22. 179–228.10.1023/B:NALA.0000005557.78535.3cSearch in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.). 1963. Universals of language: Report of a conference held at Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., April 13– 15, 1961. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978a. Some generalizations concerning initial and final consonant clusters. In Joseph H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of human language, vol. 2, 243–279. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978b. Universals of human language, vol. 2. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gussmann, Edmund. 2007. The phonology of Polish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hall, Tracy Alan. 1992. Syllable structure and syllable-related processes in German. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.10.1515/9783111657882Search in Google Scholar
Hall, Tracy Alan. 1997. The phonology of coronals. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.149Search in Google Scholar
Henke, Eric, Ellen M. Kaisse & Richard Wright. 2012. Is the sonority principle an epiphenomenon? In Steve Parker (ed.), The sonority controversy, 65–100. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110261523.65Search in Google Scholar
International Phonetic Association (ed.). 2007. Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet, 9th edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1962. Selected writings I: Phonological studies. Berlin: Mouton.Search in Google Scholar
Jassem, Wiktor. 2003. Polish. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 33. 103–107.10.1017/S0025100303001191Search in Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1913. Lehrbuch der Phonetik, 2nd edn. Leipzig: Teubner.Search in Google Scholar
Jessen, Michael & Catherine Ringen. 2002. Laryngeal features in German. Phonology 19. 189–218.10.1017/S0952675702004311Search in Google Scholar
Kohler, Klaus J. 1995. Einführung in Die Phonetik Des Deutschen, 2nd edn. (Grundlagen der Germanistik 20). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Kohler, Klaus J. 2007. German. In International Phonetic Association (ed.), Handbook of the International Phonetic Association, 86–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1993. A course in phonetics, 3rd edn. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter & Ian Maddieson. 1996. Sounds of the world’s languages. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Leben, William R. 1973. Suprasegmental phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2011a. Consonant inventory. In Matthew Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/1 (accessed 10 September 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2011b. Consonant-vowel ratio. In Matthew Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/3 (accessed 10 September 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2011c. Syllable structure. In Matthew Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/12 (accessed 10 September 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Madejowa, Maria. 1990. Modern Polish linguistic norm with special reference to the pronunciation of consonants. Studia Phonetica Posnaniensa 2. 69–105.Search in Google Scholar
Mattys, Sven L., Peter W. Jusczyk, Paul A. Luce & James L. Morgan. 1999. Phonotactic and prosodic effects on word segmentation in Infants. Cognitive Psychology 38. 465–494.10.1006/cogp.1999.0721Search in Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1986. OCP effects: Gemination and antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17. 207–263.Search in Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1988. Feature geometry and dependency: A review. Phonetica 43. 84–108.10.1159/000261820Search in Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Alan S. Prince. 1993. Prosodic morphology I: Constraint interaction and satisfaction. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts. http://scholarworks.umass.edu/linguist_faculty_pubs/14/?utm_source=scholarworks.umass.edu%2Flinguist_faculty_pubs%2F14&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages (accessed 5 January 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Meinhold, Gottfried & Eberhard Stock. 1980. Phonologie der Deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut Leipzig.Search in Google Scholar
Morelli, Frida. 1999. The phonotactics and phonology of obstruent clusters in Optimality Theory. College Park, MD: University of Maryland dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. & Haruko Kawasaki-Fukumori. 1997. Alternatives to the sonority hierarchy for explaining segmental sequential constraints. In Stig Eliasson & Ernst Hakon Jahr (eds.), Language and its ecology: Essays in memory of Einar Haugen, 343–365. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Orzechowska, Paula & Richard Wiese. 2011. Reconstructing the sonority hierarchy. In Wai-Sum Lee & Eric Zee (eds.), Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of the Phonetic Sciences 2011, 1542–1545. Hong Kong: Department of Chinese, Translation and Linguistics, City University of Hong Kong.Search in Google Scholar
Paradis, Carole & Jean-François Prunet (eds.). 1991. The special status of coronals: Internal and external evidence. San Diego: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Prince, Alan S. & Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory. Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/ (accessed 2 August 2014).Search in Google Scholar
Richtsmeier, Peter T., LouAnn Gerken & Diane K. Ohala. 2011. Contributions of phonetic token variability and word-type frequency to children’s phonological representations. Journal of Child Language 38. 951–978.10.1017/S0305000910000371Search in Google Scholar
Rochoń, Marzena. 2000. Optimality in complexity: The case of Polish consonant clusters. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Rose, Sharon & Rachel Walker. 2004. A typology of consonant agreement as correspondence. Language 80. 475–531.10.1353/lan.2004.0144Search in Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy. 1984. Cyclic and lexical phonology: The structure of Polish. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.10.1515/9783111392837Search in Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy. 1996. Nonsyllabic analysis of voice assimilation in Polish. Linguistic Inquiry 27. 69–110.Search in Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. 1984. On the major class features and syllable theory. In Mark Aronoff & Richard T. Oehrle (eds.), Language sound structure, 107–136. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sievers, Eduard. 1901. Grundzüge der Phonetik: Zur Einführung in das Studium der Lautlehre der Indogermanischen Sprachen. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.Search in Google Scholar
SPSS Statistics (version 20). 2013. IBM Corporation.Search in Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1990. Greek prosodies and the nature of syllabification. New York: Garland Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1999. Alternatives to the syllabic interpretation of consonantal phonotactics. In Osamu Fujimura, Brian D. Joseph & Bohumil Palek (eds.), Item order in language and speech, 205–242. Columbus, OH: The Karolinum Press.Search in Google Scholar
Treiman, Rebecca, Carol A. Fowler, James Gross, Denise Berch & Sarah Weatherston. 1995. Syllable structure or word structure? Evidence for onset and rime units with disyllabic and trisyllabic stimuli. Journal of Memory and Language 34(1). 132–155.10.1006/jmla.1995.1007Search in Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, Nikolaj S. 1967. Grundzüge der Phonologie. 2nd edn. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Search in Google Scholar
Ulbrich, Christiane, Phillip Alday, Johannes Knaus, Paula Orzechowska & Richard Wiese. 2015. The role of phonotactic principles in language processing. Ms., University of Marburg.10.1080/23273798.2015.1136427Search in Google Scholar
Van de Vijver, Ruben & Dinah Baer-Henney. 2012. Sonority intuitions are provided by the lexicon. In Steven Parker (ed.), The Sonority controversy, 195–215. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110261523.195Search in Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo. 1988. Preference laws for syllable structure and the explanation of sound change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110849608Search in Google Scholar
Walker, Rachel. 2000. Long-distance consonantal identity effects. In Roger Billerey & Brook D. Lillehaugen (eds.), Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 532–545. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar
Whitney, William D. 1865. The relation of vowel and consonant. Journal of the American Oriental Society 8. 277–300.Search in Google Scholar
Wiese, Richard. 1988. Silbische und Lexikalische Phonologie: Studien zum Chinesischen Und Deutschen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.10.1515/9783111594729Search in Google Scholar
Wiese, Richard. 2000. The phonology of German, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 1988. The obligatory contour principle and phonological rules: A loss of identity. Lingustic Inquiry 19. 65–100.Search in Google Scholar
Zydorowicz, Paulina, Paula Orzechowska, Michał Jankowski, Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Piotr Wierzchoń & Dawid Pietrala. In preparation. Phonotactics and morphonotactics of Polish and English: Theory, description, tools and applications. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Search in Google Scholar
©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton