Between Phonology and Phonetics: Polish Voicing
for many years, the voicing process of Polish has been on the heart of a heated theoretical debate relating laryngeal phonology because it includes a variety of phenomena that represent the middle of this debate, comparable to ultimate Obstruent Devoicing, Regressive Voice Assimilation, and revolutionary Voice Assimilation. As study into laryngeal phonology progresses on quite a few fronts, it turns into extra noticeable that a huge element of the phenomena in query have phonetic or implementational conditioning, hence proscribing the function of phonology even extra. The version offered this is one during which phonology, phonetic interpretation, and phonetics locate their respective houses. ironically, by means of isolating those 3 degrees of description, we want to combine the disparate threads of contemporary examine of sound styles into one sound approach.
Ascertained – a bogus cluster must be damaged up, which it does in, e.g., łokieć / łokcia ‘elbow, nom.sg./ gen.sg.’. observe that during the word-final context we don't anticipate licensing of laryngeal parts besides. hence, we can't offer any longer dialogue with regards to precise obstruent clusters. one hundred thirty after all, a similar conditioning will carry for CP in e.g., krnąbrny ‘unruly’ and krtań ‘larynx’ respectively, as is illustrated under in (12). 131 For extra dialogue of.
shape a strong-weak pair that's universally present in trochaic ft. no matter if the FEN strengthening is the same in type is an empirical query. As a FEN, it can't be vocalized, so probably its strengthening as a laryngeal licenser is otherwise to accomplish the strong-weak trend. 176 this can be the null speculation that might need to be confirmed. 177 Syllabic sonorant consonants could be associated with either consonantal and nuclear positions (e.g., Scheer 2004). Such consonants are usually not a part of Polish.
courting among [r] and [ӡ/ʃ]? it could look that the information in (39) supply proof for an underlying sonorant and synchronic obstruentization. although, in our research, the presence of [r~ӡ/ʃ] alternations is proof that [ӡ/ʃ] couldn't be derived from [r]. there's a process inner cause which follows from our description of obstruentization in (38). specifically, a phonological relation among /r/ and /ӡ/ must forget about or bypass a few steps and phases of obstruentization. First.
goals nor triggers of actually phonological laryngeal methods, and their impression on such phenomena is often oblique: for instance, sonorants don't take up laryngeal licensing. additionally, simply because they're ruled through previous or following obstruents, they could pose licensing calls for at the appropriate nucleus, resulting in a few micro-variation of their licensing energy, as we observed within the prior part. The phonological part of the sound method utilized in this paintings is particularly basic, if now not primitive.
Papers in Phonology three. (UCLA operating Papers in Linguistics 2), 25-146. l. a.: division of Linguistics, UCLA. Stevens, Kenneth N. 1972 The quantal nature of speech: facts from articulatory-acoustic facts. In P. B. Denes, and E. E. David Jr. (eds.), Human conversation: A Unified View, 51-66. manhattan: McGraw Hill. Stevens, Kenneth N., and Samuel J. Keyser 1989 basic beneficial properties and their enhancement in consonants. Language sixty five: 81-106. Stieber, Zdzisław 1946a Dlaczego mówimy trzy.