The phonetics and phonology of Homshetsma

Citation preview

THE PHONETICS AND PHONOLOGY OF HOMSHETSMA

A thesis submitted by Sally Jacoba Berens to the Department of Linguistics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts with Honors

Harvard College March 21, 1997

I wish to acknowledge the indefatigable efforts of Bert Vaux, my advisor in the writing of this thesis. Without him was nothing made that was made. Thanks are due to my roommates for convincing me to continue, to Sean for his computer skills, to Joanna for reading it, to Ryan for saying he was proud of me, and to my family for their ceaseless tolerance, support, and love.

Contents 1. Introduction 1.1. Cultural Aspects 1.2. The Language 1.3. Changes 2. The Phoneme Inventory 2.1. The Consonants 2.2. The Vowels 3.

4.

5.

Phonetics 3.1. Vowels 3.1.1. Formant Values 3.1.1.1. /i/ 3.1.1.2. /el 3.1.1.3. !al 3.1.1.4. lo! 3.1.1.5. /u/ 3.1.2. Vowel Length 3.1.3. Hiatus 3.1.4. Underlying /a/ versus /el 3.2. Consonants 3.2.1. Geminates 3.2.2. IKIversus Ill 3.2.3. Aspiration 3.3. Conclusions Syllabification 4.1. Onsets 4.1.1. Word-initial [ts], [if] 4.1.2. Word-initial [j] 4.1.3. Word-initial [i] and [K] 4.2. Codas 4.2.1. Word-final Consonantal Voicing and Devoicing 4.2.2. Syllabification of Word-final /-n/ 4.3. Nuclei 4.4. The Syllabification Process 4.5. Appendicization 4.6. Hiatus 4.6.1. Plural Selection 4.6.2. Syllabification of Hiatus Sequences 4.6.3. Plural Alternations 4.7. Diphthongization 4.8. Conclusions Epenthesis 5.1. Alternations 5.2. Ordering 5.3. n-deletion 5.4. Conclusions

1 2 3 4

6 8

18

26 27

38

40 41 44 45

51 56 58

61 64 67

6.

Stress 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 6.4.

Assignment Distribution of Stress Patterns The Process of Stress Assignment Projection Problems

69 70 71 72

7. Segmental Alternations 7 .1. Stray J-deletion 7 .2. Intervocalic J-deletion 7.3. Nasal Raising and Abstract Segments 7.4. Vowel Alternations in 'carry' 7.5. The Arboreal suffix -(e)(n)i 7.6. The Curious Behavior of tevuf 'hit' 7.7. The Imperfective Affix /gu/ 7.8. Uvular Lowering 7.9. Conclusions

75 77 80 83 86 90 98 100 101

8. Rule Ordering 8.1. Previously Formalized Rules 8.2. The Ordering 8.3. Analysis and Conclusions

102 103 104

9.

106

Conclusion

References

108

1

Introduction

In this thesis I present the first large-scale analysis of the phonetic and phonological systems of Homshetsma. My phonetic treatment focuses on the acoustic properties of the vocalic and consonantal systems. My phonological treatment attempts to elucidate the workings and interactions of syllabification, epenthesis; stress assignment and segmental alternations.

1.1.

Cultural Aspects Homshetsma is a dialect of Armenian which is spoken by as many as several

hundred thousand people, mainly in an area reaching from north-central Turkey to southern Russia along the Black Sea Coast, but also in the Izmit region of western Turkey, cities in Central Asia and in locations to which it has been taken by Homshetsi emigrants, specifically Germany and the United States. All of the Homshetsis still living in Turkey are Muslim. There is also a Christian community which lives in Georgia and Southern Russia. (Vaux 1996; Benninghaus 1989). The Homshetsma data used in this thesis were collected in 1995 and 1996 from Temel Yilmaz, who was born in 1971 in Koprilcti in the province of Hepa in the northeastern region of Turkey near the city of Trabzon. Temel is a native speaker of Homshetsma, though he also learned Turkish, which is now the language he prefers to use, at a very young age. Temel moved from his village to Istanbul at age 14 and to the United States in 1990. He has continued to use Homshetsma in Boston to speak with local Armenians. In fact, speakers of Western Armenian do not generally understand him at first, but (at least in some cases) they eventually become accustomed to his dialect. Conversely, Temel understands Standard Western Armenian (SWA) almost perfectly, but

1

his wife, who is also a speaker of Homshetsma but has not had significant exposure to

SWA, does not.

1.2.

The Language Homshetsma is an interesting language in that it appears superficially to be

significantly different phonologically from other varieties of Armenian. (As mentioned, the two languages are not, at least initially, mutually intelligible.) For example, the Homshetsma word for '(s)he carries' is [phiagu], while the Standard Western Armenian form is [ga phere]. However, I claim that the underlying forms maintained by the synchronic grammar of speakers of Homshetsma are, typically, essentially the same as in other Western dialects, e.g. the underlying representation of [phiagu] is /per-e-0-gu/. This is in keeping with Halle's proposal that, though the surface representations of related dialects may seem dissimilar, such forms may often be traced to a single underlying representation whtch is common among them (1963: 62). In this thesis, I also demonstrate that certain claims can be made about the nature of possible consonant sequences in Homshetsma, and, in regard to these sequences, I discuss processes including deletion, appendicization, and epenthesis. I also claim that, as presented by Vaux 1997, syllable structure must be present underlyingly. This assumption stems from evidence pertaining to plural morpheme selection (4.6.1). Furthermore, I make claims about the underlying representations of certain segments. I assume that glides are underlyingly vowels which become [+cons] as a result of assignment to an onset or coda position during syllabification. I also demonstrate that although there is only one rhotic phone [1] in surface forms, speakers carry two distinct rhotic phonemes in their underlying phonemic inventories. I also present evidence for the storing of morphemes in the lexicon by investigating a rule of glide insertion. I evidence the claim that bound morphemes are stored together in the lexicon, while independent morphemes are stored separately from one another.

2

1.3.

Changes Most of the changes which have occurred in Temel's idiolect since moving here

involve /r/. For instance he now sometimes uses the plural suffix [-(n)er] where he previously deleted the /r/ (cf. 4.6.3).

3

2 The Phoneme Inventory

In this chapter I outline the system of Homshetsma phonemes and their allophones.

2.1.

The Consonants Homshetsma has the repertoire of underlying phonemes in ( 1).

(1)

bilabial

nasal

m

stop

p b

labiodental

t d

lateral

velar

uvular

glottal

f

k g

ts dz

1J ct,

s z

f

3

X

K

h

r

flap retroflex

palatoalveolar

n

affricate fricative

alveolar

l

I

It should be noted that the segments /ts/, /ff/, and /dz/ are single phonemes with a duality in the place of articulation attached to a single timing unit. As evidence of this, the informant, when developing a writing system (the language has no established system), was unwilling to describe these segments as sequences of two letters. It should also be noted that I have not included the consonants [j] and [v] though they appear in surface forms of the language. This is because I believe them to be derived from underlying high vowels. I assume that there is no underlying ljl or /vi because the surface occurrences of these two forms are predictable due to either diphthongization/glide insertion (cf. section 4.1.2) or syllabification of vocalic elements (cf. chapter seven). This is not uncontroversial, however. Note that a contrast arises between heterosyllabic sequences such as [dai] 'year' and monosyllabic sequences such as [thfaj] 'tea' (rather

4

than *[thfai]). This calls into question my hypothesis that surface (j] is not a result of an underlying /j/, but rather is derived from an underlying /i/. If there was only one underlying phoneme, it should arise as the same phoneme in these two identical surface environments (word-finally after an [a]). However, if we assume that underlying representations contain information about the syllable structure of lexical entries (as I will argue in 4.6.1), this may be attributed to the /i/ in [dai] having been specified as a nucleus where the/ ii in [thfaj] was specified as a coda (Guerssel 1986: 1-11). However, this argument is not altogether convincing, because it forces us to stipulate the underlying syllable structure of the regular surface form [i] rather than the exception [j]1. It may, however, also be postulated that, since [thfaj] is an unassimilated Turkish loan-word, it is not subject to the same phonological rules, in this case syllabification rules, as native Homshetsma forms. When such forms are learned, they may be stored with the syllable structure provided by the source language, rather than being resyllabified by the synchronic grammar. These underlying forms may have more than one surface form. Phonemes with more than one possible allophone are given in (2).

(2) underlying form !pl /bl /ti

!di /kl /cj

surface form(s) [p], [ph] [b ], [bh]

[t ], [th] [d], [dh] [k], [kh] [g], [gh]

Voiceless stops are aspirated before a vowel. This may occur across word boundaries in fast speech, for example [inthf ikh#enethfi]

'what thing does (s)he do.'

The segments [bh] and [dh] seem to occur in the same environments as their voiceless counterparts, but the segment [gh] shows aspiration less frequently, but this may be a result

1 The sequence [Vj#] appears only in a few Turkish loan words.

5

of a shorter burst of noise which is not easily seen using my equipment. It is also difficult to determine impressionistically if there is aspiration. Conversely, in the case of /1/ and /r/, each underlying segment surfaces as [1], i.e. they merge on the surf ace. This will be discussed further in chapter seven. The surface consonant allophones of Homshetsma have the following features specifications: (3) cons son voice asp ant high back low nasal cont later

mp Ph b ~ f V + + + + + + + + - - + + - + +

+ -

-

+ +

-

+

+

th d dh ts dz s

n

t

+

+ +

+ +

+ +

+ +

z + + + +

+

-

3

- + - + - + - - + - + -

+ - + + + + + + + + + +

-

if ct3k g X. g + + + + + + + + + +

I

l

+ + + +

-

+

- + +

+ + + + - +

-

+

- - -

-

+

+ + + +

-

h + + +

-

+ +

+

- -

-

-

+ + + +

-

+

+

-

+ + + +

In this chart, I define /hi as [+cons]. I do so because /hi is never assigned to the nucleus of a syllable, which we would expect of a [-cons] segment. This is discussed in section 4.4. It should also be noted that the voiceless affricates [ts] and ['U']are aspirated in the same environments ·as the voiceless stops, though I have not included the aspirated allophones [ths] and [thJ] in my chart. Also, [v] is often pronounced as a bilabial approximant.

2.2.

The Vowels Native Homshetsma lexical items draw from the set of underlying vowels in (4).

There are also a number of vowels that appear in unassimilated Turkish loan words. However, these Turkish vowels often surface as their assimilated Homshetsma counterparts, as in (5), eg. Turkish ajri 'apart' becomes Homshetsma [aii]. Note that here the Turkish [aj] sequence becomes a Homshetsma [a], unlike in [thJaj].

6

(4) Native underlying form Iii /el /a/ /u/ lo!

surface form(s) [i], [I], [j] [e], [E] [a] [u], [v] [o]

(5) Turkish 2 Iii lyl /0/ /rel

[i] [y], [u], [i] [0], [o] [re], [a]

The lax form [E]is the epenthetic vowel, as in [marthe] 'the man.' The lax segments [1] and [E] seem to be recognized when the vowel pronounced is shorter in duration. From the formant values given in 3.1.1, there is no strong evidence of a contrast between tense and lax, however I and others have noted a distinction impressionistically. The glides [j] and [v] are found where syllabification assigns underlying /i/ and /u/, respectively, as a syllable onset, in words such as [jaB"]'butter' and [vas] 'grapevine.' These vowels have the feature specifications given in the chart below: (6) round high back low ATR

I y 0 e - + + + + + - - - - - - - + - + + +

i

E

re a

-

-

-

-

+ + + - -

-

u + + - + + +

i

0

+ + +

+ +

2 Examples of these alternations are given in 3.1.

7

3

Phonetics

In this chapter, I discuss the acoustic properties of the vocalic and consonantal systems, as determined by analysis of spectrograms. I present such vowel characteristics as height, backness, and length. My analysis of the consonants focuses on issues of gemination, realizations of Ill, and aspiration. I lay out spectrographic qualities of phonetic segments in order to better determine their phonological underpinnings. For example, I feel that it is important to map out the characteristics of certain less familiar segments, such as the [1~],so that we have a firm understanding of their place of articulation and feature specifications. This knowledge may then be applied to our understanding of the phonological behavior of these segments.

3.1.

Vowels The Homshetsma native lexicon has the underlying five vowel system in (1).

u

(1)

e

0

a

In Turkish loanwords, the vowels {i, y, 0, re} sometimes appear, though they often alternate with assimilated vowels, as in (2). (2) [i]

➔

[y] ➔ [0] ➔ [re] ➔

[i] {u,i} [o] [a]

T. fjamaJi:r ➔ [thJamaJii] T. Jykyt ➔ [uskhuth] T. ekfje ➔ [okthJe] T. kic1=l➔ [khjal]

'laundry' 'quiet' 'heel' 'bald'

The [-low, -back] phonemes have lax ([-ATR]) allophones, to be discussed in section 3.1.1. The surface inventory of vocalic phones therefore contains the nine vowels in (3).

8

(3)

u

y

1

¼

I

e ce E re

0

a

The average formant values for these allophones can be plotted as in (4) and (5). (4) vowel

F2 Fl F2-Fl

i 1860 450 1410

I

i

1810 435 1375

1500 490 1010

e

1850 515 1335

£

a

0

1590 510 1080

1360 650 710

1310 510 800

u 1250 420 830

(5)

Vowel

Formants F2-F1

1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 '

i i

I;

♦

F2-F1, F1

I ~:

900 '

800

700 300

·~

400

J•◄

♦l

•e

♦ E•

..

.i.

500 ~

◄ ,o

~

'!

- 600

~

at

t:

700

3.1.1. Formant Values Formant values give us a more precise picture of the vowels than is possible through impressionistic observation. Therefore, I think it is important to consider the informant's speech through spectrographic analysis before proceeding with the phonology of the language.

9

3.1.1.1. Iii

The first formant of the tense vowel [i], as in [biia] 'beer,' appears between 400 Hz and 475 Hz, averaging 450 Hz (all formant values approximated). The second formant ranges from 1625 Hz to 2300 Hz, averaging 1860 Hz. The second formant values for [i] often appear very lightly on the spectrogram, making it easy to confuse the third formant for the second formant. The wide range of the second formant may be attributable to the elusive nature of the second formant. Since the range of the second formant spreads into that of the third, there may be instances where the third formant has been mistaken for the second. The third formant of [i] appears between 1950 Hz and 2750 Hz, with a mean of 2270 Hz. These formant values correspond to those of a high, front vowel (Ladefoged 1975: 194). There is also a lax variant of /i/, [1], which appears in such words as [1stus] 'this way.' Here the formant levels do not differ significantly from those of the tense allophone. The first formant ranges between 350 Hz and 550 Hz, and averages 435 Hz. The second formant is spread from 1750 to 2000 Hz and has a mean of 1810 Hz. The third formant ranges from 2200 Hz to 2700 Hz and averages 2510 Hz. Thus, the first formant is slightly lower than that of tense [i]. The second formant is also slightly lower on average, and the third formant averages 240 Hz higher. The phoneme Iii, found in unassimilated Turkish loan words such as [khizim] 'my girl,' has a first formant of approximately 490 Hz and a second formant of approximately 1500 Hz. The first formant is slightly higher than that of [i] or [1], signifying a lower vowel, while the value of the second formant is slightly lower, leading us to believe that [i] is more back than [i] or [1] (Ladefoged 1975: 194). My own It/ vowel has a first formant of approximately 500 Hz, a second formant of between 2200 Hz and 2300 Hz, and a third formant ranging from 2750 Hz to 3200 Hz. The contrast between the second formants would seem to predict that the Homshetsma Iii vowel is produced further back than my (American) /i/ vowel.

10

3.1.1.2. /el The Homshetsma tense [e], as in [leman] 'from the mountain,' has a first formant ranging from 450 Hz to 550 Hz, with a mean value of 515 Hz. The second formant appears between 1700 Hz and 2050 Hz, averaging 1850 Hz. The third formant ranges between 2500 Hz and 2650 Hz, with a mean of 2545 Hz. Formant readings for Homshetsma [e] correspond to a mid, front vowel (Ladefoged 1975: 194). Homshetsma has both an epenthetic and a phonemic /e/ (cf. chapter five). The epenthetic vowel is more often produced as a lax vowel, [e]. The lax quality can be heard best in the final vowel of the word [ellele] 'going up'. The epenthetic vowel also often tends to be slightly shorter in duration, but again, there is a large amount of variation here. This lax [e] has first formants ranging from 450 Hz to 550 Hz, averaging 510 Hz. The second formant values are spread from 1500 Hz to 1950 Hz, with a mean of 1590 Hz. The third formant ranges from 2500 Hz to 2750 Hz, averaging 2595 Hz. While the average first and third formants are almost equivalent to those of tense [e], the average second formant of the lax vowel is 260 Hz lower than that of the tense vowel, denoting a more front vowel. This is interesting because we would expect the tense vowel to be higher and more front. On the spectrogram, the lax vowel tends to appear to be lighter and shorter in duration than its tense counterpart. Thus, the underlying (phonemic) /el is distinct from the epenthetic [e] in [ATR] and frontness. Despite these differences, the two vowels are treated as allophones rather than as separate vowels. As evidence of this, it should be noted that the informant writes for both underlying and epenthetic e.

3.1.1.3. /al The low vowel [a], as in [ma.1th] 'man,' is realized phonetically with a first formant ranging from 550 Hz to 775 Hz, and averaging 650 Hz. The second formant ranges from 1200 Hz to 1550 Hz, averaging 1360 Hz. The third formant ranges from 2325 Hz to 2750 Hz, averaging 2475 Hz. These formant readings for Homshetsma [a]

11

correspond with those of a low, back vowel on the Ladefoged vowel chart (Ladefoged 1975: 194).

3.1.1.4. lo/ The vowel [o], as in words such as [khilo] 'kilogram,' has a first formant which ranges from 450 Hz to 550 Hz. Its mean is 510 Hz. The second formant is spread from 1200 Hz to 1510 Hz, averaging 1310 Hz. The third formant appears from 1990 Hz to 2500 Hz, with a mean of 2375 Hz. The formants for Homshetsma [o] correspond to those of a mid (though higher than [e]), back vowel (Ladefoged 1975: 194). It is noteworthy that the average fust formant value for [o] is slightly lower than that of [e], indicating a slightly higher vowel. I would have expected that [o] be somewhat lower than [e] because the physical space in which front vowels are produced allows more room to produce a high vowel than does the back of the mouth, so a front mid-vowel should be correspondingly higher than its back counterpart. Furthermore, in other languages it is the case that [e] is generally a higher vowel than [o], as noted by the fact that Ladefoged's vowel chart has [e] plotted at about 50 Hz lower than [o] (450 Hz versus 500 Hz), indicating a higher vowel. However, the difference in averages which I have calculated is only about 5 Hz, and it is important to note that the sample is relatively small.

3.1.1.5. /u/ The first formant of the vowel [u], as in such words as [dun] 'house,' ranges from 240 Hz to 490 Hz, averaging 420 Hz. The second formant is spread between 1000 Hz and 1500 Hz, averaging 1250 Hz. The values for the third formant range from 2300 Hz to 2650 Hz, with a mean of 2425 Hz. The formants of [u] correspond to those of a high, back vowel (Ladefoged 1975: 194).

12

3.1.2. Vowel Length Homshetsma does not exhibit phonological length contrasts, despite Dumezil's use of length markers in transcriptions such as ta.a 'that' (Dumezil 1963: 7). My informant produces this word as [thaa]. Nevertheless, like all languages, we expect Homshetsma to show systematic variation in vowel length at the phonetic level. In attempting to characterize vowel length, we expect vowels to be longest before voiced obstruents, shortest before voiceless obstruents, and of intermediate length before other segments (Giegerich 1992: 234-5), as in (6). (6) NI ➔

[V:] /_[-son, +voice] [V·] /_[-son, -voice] [V] /_[+son], pause

In my sample, vowels preceding voiced obstruents were, in fact, slightly longer than those preceding voiceless obstruents (an average of 82 msec versus 78 msec). However, while the former is slightly longer than the latter, the difference is very slight (probably not statistically significant), and I believe that it is more an accident of the instances that I have used than of the actual average length. Vowel duration is also (according to my data) longer before [l], [K] and [l] than before obstruents and shorter than average before nasals and glides, an unexpected result, considering Giegerich's study. The problems I have encountered in determining vowel length may also be a result of the recordings themselves: my informant's rate of speech varies dramatically throughout recordings. In order to yield more accurate results, I think the speaker should be asked to record single words in isolation.

3.1.3. Hiatus Situations of hiatus in vowel sequences are often resolved through the insertion of a glide, [j], as in the word /piagu/ '(s)he brings' which surfaces as [phijagu], as in (7).

13

(7)

3.100

Al:

g:_7oe'."'3 Hz

4000 3500

3000 2500 2000

..1soo 1000

I.

500

p

I

I

i

j

a

I

g

lu

The glide correlates with a rapid transition from the formants of one vowel to those of the next. If this were a simple vowel sequence, there would not be as much of a transitionthe formants would change frequencies more abruptly. The informant writes the in and contrasts sequences such as [phi a] and [phija], although the former is not an actual sequence in his language. Of the vowels on either side of the glide, one often appears to be significantly shorter than the other. There does not seem to be a determining factor as to which, of the pair, will be shortened. One such occurrence is in the word [aei], in which the [a] is shortened, as in (8).

14

J J ~

j ~

(8) Al:

~- 70e-3 Hz

4000 3500 3000 2500

2000 1500

1000 500

ff

I

e

a

I l

lg

It appears here, by the formants, as if the [e] begins earlier in the vowel sequence. However, impresionistically, it is not heard until the point marked on the spectrogram. It is also noticeable that the first formant of [a] is, unexpectedly, lower than that of [e]. This is, I believe, due to a palatal spread as a result of the preceding [tf]. The language has a number of sequences of two identical vowels, eg. [aa], [ee], etc., as in [eer] 'if and [phaa] 'money.' We may ask how the distinctions between the two members of the sequence are cued acoustically. There are several possibilities. It might, for example, be the case that both vowels are the same duration and intensity, but how would this be distinguished from a single, long vowel? In Homshetsma, such sequences often result in the the second vowel appearing with lighter formants which correspond to less energy, especially word-finally. An example of this is seen in the word

[gaa] '(s)he is able' in (9).

15

J J .

~

j

~

A2:3.110 4500' Hz

4000 3500 3000 2500 2000

1500 1000 .....

u.

j

J

j j

500

·~

g I

a

a

This difference in formant intensity allows the hearer to distinguish between the two vowels as single vowels do not lose energy in this way. Furthermore, a difference is noted in vowel length as well because single vowels are about half as long in duration (approximately 75 msec) as these two-vowel sequences (150 msec).

3.1.4. Underlying la/ versus /el Word final [a] can result from underlying /a/ (as in /paa/ 'money') or /el (as in

/gar-e-0/ '(s)he is able'); it is therefore of interest to see whether the two phonemes actually retain a phonetic distinction, in order to make sure we are not missing a subtle difference between the surface forms of the two underlying vowels. The first formant of both variations averages 560 Hz. The second formant for underlying /a/ averages 1410 Hz, while that of underlying /el averages 1575 Hz. The third formant of underlying /a/

16

averages 2440 Hz. That of underlying /el averages 2600 Hz. Thus, the second and third formants for the underlying le/ tend to be slightly higher, approximately 160 Hz for both F2 and F3. The average formants for both underlying /al and /e/ (that surface as /al) fall between the expected formants of /al and /e/, with the formants for underlying /e/ being closer to those expected for /el and the formants of /al being closer to those expected for

/al. The exception is the third formant, where that of underlying /el lies above that of the expected le/ (which is already higher than that of the expected /al). In addition, the formants for an underlying /el tend to become slightly lighter. The most dramatic example of this is in the contrast between [phuthaa] (10) (underlying /al) and [gaa] (9) (underlying /el). (10) 3.1()0

A2:3. 110 4500 Hz

4000 3500 3000 ·2500 2000 1500 1000

500

p I

a

h

17

J J .

~

j

~

While the formants of [phuthaa] lighten, the change is not as dramatic as the one in [gaa]. Thus we see that although both underlying forms are realized as [a], the phonetic realization still holds some distinction. It is interesting to note here that the informant writes for both underlying forms. This would suggest that he does not distinguish between the two surface forms, yet there seems to be a slight phonetic difference.

3.2.

Consonants

3.2.1. Geminates Homshetsma shows gemination of /1/,Im.I, Inf, ltl, and, in some dialects, lvl. The duration of these geminates is roughly double that of single consonants. The most common geminate is /LJ,and its average duration can be the most accurately measured of the five. In a limited sample, [l:] averages 105 msec, as compared to an average 50 msec for [l] (11).

18

(11)

A2:3.110 4500 Hz

4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500

g Only one example of geminate [m:] was taken from this sample, measuring 145 msec. This is slightly more than double the average length of [m] (65 msec), but I believe more examples of [m:] should be measured for better reliability, as it is likely that this sample lies on the upper end of the spectrum of duration since my informant speaks the sentence from which this was taken relatively slowly. As with [m:], only one sample of [n:] was taken, measuring 55 msec-

slightly

greater than the average duration of [n], but not as.large a difference as in the other geminates. This measurement is, however, fairly unreliable due to the probability of great fluctuation in durations. It is possible that the sample of [n:] taken is on the lower end of the spectrum of duration for this sequence. This is, though, as with the study of [m:], purely speculative.

19

j

J ~

j ~

To see if my own, American English, geminates contrast in duration with simple consonants, I measured the duration of the [n:] in 'unnatural' with the [n] in 'anagram,' 'monopoly' and 'intimate.' The [n:] averaged 165 msec in length, while the [n] averaged 65 msec. Thus we see that, as in Homshetsma, geminates in my American English are slightly more than twice as long as simple consonants.

3.2.2. /rd versus Ill Homshetsma shows a contrast between /rs/ and Ill. Catford describes [K] as a uvular fricative, produced when the tongue back is relatively flat or convex (1988: 99). According to Gunnar Fant ( 1970), a velar or pharyngeal articulation will be realized as having a medium or low F2 which carries a large part of the fricative noise. Furthermore, the F-pattem except Fl should be clearly visible. Instead in Homshetsma, the [K] shows up as a lighter continuation of the formants of the preceding vowel. There is no fricative noise visible, and there is generally no significant velar pinch, though in a few samples there is raising of the second formant and lowering of the third formant, as in (12).

20

A2:3.110 ·4500 Hz

4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500

kl h I

j

a

My impressionistic obsservations suggest that IKIis a uvular approximant (Catford 1988: 65). Further evidence for this claim is found in Turkish where IKIis also an approximant. Interestingly, the phonetic realization of lg/ often appears similar to that of /g/. The acoustic realization of /1/ and /r/ appears in two main varieties. The first is a raising of F2, accompanied by a dip in F3, as in (8), a velar pinch, suggesting that [1] has a dorsal or velar component. This realization is very similar acoustically and impressionistically to my American [1] in words such as 'yearly' and 'ever.' This is interesting considering the relative rarity of [l] in the world's languages. The second variant of [l], as in (13), is a lightened continuation of the formants of the preceding vowel with vague high frequency noise (from 2500 to 4000Hz), similar to the appearance of /g/ and intervocalic lg/, as in (14).

21

J J j j ~

(13) 3,100

Al:

9 ..70e-:3

A2:3.110 4500 Hz

4000

r .·3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 100.0

500

1

e

Il I

22

n

I

a

I n

J j j j

~

(14) 3.10'0 Hz

4000

3500 3000 2500 2000 1500

e

d

lhl

a

I

g

I

e

3.2.3. Aspiration Aspirated stops are another interesting feature of the language. Homshetsma has three voiceless stops: Ip/, /t/, and /kl. They show aspiration in every tested instance in my sample. Their periods of closure vary between approximately 15 msec and 60 msec with the rate of speech. Periods of aspiration vary between 10 msec and 90 msec. Aspiration occasionally appears before as well as after the period of closure, as if it were mis-timed, as in (15) and (16).

23

J J .

~

j

~

(15) 3.100

a

Iii h I t

I

24

(16) 3.:tOO ,Al: 9. 70e:...3 Hz

i

4000 3500

I

3000 2500

2000 1500 ·1000

I

p

I

J

j

~

j

~

i

The voiced counterparts of these stops (lb/, /d/, and /g/) also have aspirated allophones. To the ear, these phonemically voiced segments often sound voiceless. It seems that /g/ does not show aspiration intervocalically, while both /bl and /d/ do. Consider the appearance of [dh] and /g/ in (14). In this spectrogram, it is also apparent that in fast speech, stop closure is marked by vowel transitions (/g/) with only a slight velar pinch. According to Ladefoged (1975: 124, 261), aspiration is specified by when the voicing begins with respect to the timing of the articulation. If the segment is voiced throughout articulation, it is realized acoustically as voiced. If the voicing starts with the release of the articulator, the segment is pronounced unaspirated. Conversely, if voicing begins much later at (or after) the release, the segment is heard as aspirated. By this

25

analysis, there should be no voiced aspirates, and in fact, when a voiced consonant is followed by aspiration, it sounds impressionistically devoiced.

3.3.

Conclusions In this chapter I have outlined several interesting features of the phonetics of

Homshetsma. I pointed out that several Turkish vowels are borrowed by speakers, and that these vowels are often assimilated to corresponding native vowels but occasionally surf ace in their original form. I also pointed out that surface forms which are presumed to be equal, in the case of surface [a] segments which are derived from either /a/ or !el, are not necessarily phonetically identical. On the topic of consonants, I contrasted geminate sequences with their singlephoneme counterpart and found that the geminate is generally twice as long. This finding evidences a later claim (cf. chapter eight) that geminates are produced when a single segment is attached to two timing units. I also considered the rhotic phonemes and found that, although [:r~]is described as a fricative, it appears to be an approximant in Homshetsma. It is interesting, as well, that the [1] appears similar to the American [1]. This is interesting considering the relative rarity of the phoneme in the world's languages. Furthermore, I analyzed the properties of aspirated stops and found that the exact nature of voiced aspirates is difficult to determine from the spectrographic evidence which is available.

26

4

Syllabification

In this chapter, I outline the structure of syllables in Homshetsma and attempt to determine the nature of the processes that assign this structure. I begin by giving examples of possible syllable onsets, nuclei, codas and appendices. I then outline the syllabification process, touching on questions involving appendicization, hiatus and diphthongization.

4.1.

Onsets The default assumption for determining possible onset sequences is that possible

syllable onsets correspond to possible word-initial sequences. Homshetsma allows the following word-initial sequences: (1) [b-] [ths-] [thJ-] [d-] [f-] [g-] [h-] [dz-] [ct-] [3-] [kh-] [l-] [m-] [n-] [ph..] [s-] [J-] [th..] [v-] [x-l [j-] [z-] [3-] 3

'beer' 'be thirsty' 'water' 'house' 'poor' 'begin' 'spirit' 'laugh' 'bird' 'shake' (v) 'nose' 'mountain' 'man' 'new' 'money' 'stove' 'very' 'door' 'down' 'drink' (v) 'butter' 'at all' 'blackberry'

bila thsa1venuf thfur dtm. fakhir gebtJuf hokhi dzidzarruf ctirntux 3a3geluJ khinth le1 ma1th IlOl

phaa soba fad thur va1 xemuJ jaK zath 3ekh3

This form is not found in my informant's dialect, but, rather, in a Christian dialect.

27

[tsv-] [tskh..] [tfv-] [khj]

'kill'

tsvonnuJ tskhuJ tfvon khjaK

'throw' 'rope' 'village'

From these word-initial sequences, we can generalize that Homshetsma allows only monoconsonantal onsets, with the notable exception of [tsv], [tfv] (examples given above) and [tskh] 4 . The other exception to this generalization is the onset /khj-/, as in [khjaK] and [khjal] 'bald.' However, these are apparently the only instances where this onset occurs;

its status in the synchronic phonological system of Homshetsma is unclear. It is also possible that, in this case, the [j] is a part of the nucleus, rather than the onset.

4.1.1. Word-initial {1s,tf} It is possible that, as all of these complex sequences have /ts/ or /tf/ as the initial

segment, this segment is appendicized to a regular monoconsonantal onset. Note in this connection that the sequence /tsk/ violates the Sonority Sequencing Principle (SSP), which implies that the initial segment is not actually part of the onset of the syllable, under the assumption that all syllables conform to the SSP. However, it is possible that the [1s] segment is actually syllabified as an appendix in these cases. Appendices may appear at word boundaries without being a part of the syllable to which they are attached (Kenstowicz 1994: 260). In this model, the word /tskuJ/ would be represented as in (2). (2)

Prosodic Word

cr R

r-...._ A I 1s

0 I

N I

C I

k

u

J

There is also an onset sequence /tB/, which, however, occurs only extra-linguistically in the noise for calling chicks, [tai]. 4

28

Here I adopt the model proposed by Booij and Rubach ( 1984) and attach the appendix to the Prosodic Word. Furthermore, appendices are typically limited in a language to a small set of possible segments (Kenstowicz 1994: 260-1 ). In Homshetsma, the set of possible two-consonant onsets is limited to those beginning with /ts/ or /tf/. We know that the initial consonant of these /CC-/ onsets is an appendix, then, because it only occurs in word-initial position and is limited to a small set of possible phonemes. In considering these sequences, it should be noted that my informant inserts a brief excrescent [.J] (in contrast to the epenthetic [e]) between the first and second second segment of the sequence, e.g. [tsakhuJ]. However, because excrescent vowels are only inserted at the end of the phonological component, they do not play any role in appendix assignment or other syllabification processes 5 (cf. Levin 1987: 1, 5-6). It is possible, however, that speakers use this additional method to deal with difficult two-consonant, word-initial sequences. This implies that there are two levels of complexity for word-initial clusters. At the first level, complex word-initial clusters such as /tsk/ and /tsv/ are allowed, while at the second level they are disallowed and rriust be _resolvedthrough the epenthesis of an excrescent vowel. However, since this vowel does not participate in the phonology, this proposed second level can probably be characterized as a physiological one in which the speaker's mouth struggles with the phonetics of the form. Excrescent vowels, as opposed to epenthetic vowels, are extremely short and do not participate in the phonology of the language. The claim that the short schwas we hear in words such as [tsi:lvonnuf] are excrescent rather than than epenthetic is strongly supported by the fact that these segments to do not surface as [e], the form taken by the epenthetic vowel in Homshetsrna. Further evidence is provided by the process of pluralization. When Homshetsma speakers suffix the plural morpheme to a root word to form a plural, they differentiate 5 Note that the informant never writes the excrescent vowel, e.g. /tskuf/ is written