Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:41:45.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Liquid Dissimilation in Bavarian German

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2009

Tracy Alan Hall
Tracy Alan Hall*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
*
Department of Germanic Studies, Ballantine Hall 644, Indiana University, 1020 Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, IN 47405–7103, [tahall2@indiana.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study investigates the instability of adjacent liquids in a variety of Southern Bavarian German. The focus is a synchronic process converting /r/ to [d] before or after /l/—a process argued to involve a dissimilation of the phonological feature [liquid], which itself is triggered by a specific OCP constraint, *[liquid][liquid]. In addition to providing evidence for the feature [liquid], the present article also supports a model of segment structure in which the traditional feature [sonorant] is replaced with the privative node [Sonorant Voice] (SV). The Bavarian dialect also displays a number of OCP-motivated constraints that ban other sequences of identical manner features, namely, [continuant], [nasal], [strident].*

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 1 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alber, Birgit. 2001. Regional variation and edges: Glottal stop epenthesis and dissimilation in standard and Southern varieties of German. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 20.3–41.Google Scholar
Alderete, John D. 1997. Dissimilation as local conjunction. Proceedings of the northeast linguistic society 27, ed. by Kusumoto, Kiyomi, 17–31. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistics Student Association.Google Scholar
Alderete, John D., & Frisch, Stefan A.. 2007. Dissimilation in grammar and the lexicon. Cambridge handbook of phonology, ed. by Lacy, Paul de, 379–398. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana. 1988. Aspects of underspecification theory. Phonology 5.183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery, Peter, & Rice, Keren. 1989. Segment structure and coronal underspecification. Phonology 6.179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 1994. A place for [lateral] in the feature geometry. Journal of Linguistics 30.301–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Cynthia. 1992. The feature geometry of lateral approximants and lateral fricatives. Leiden in last. HIL phonology papers I, ed. by Hulst, Harry van der & Weijer, Jeroen van de, 41–88. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 2004. Historical linguistics. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. 1990. The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. Papers in laboratory phonology I: Between the grammar and physics of speech, ed. by Kingston, John & Beckman, Mary, 283–333. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, George N. 1999. Affricates as noncontoured stops. Item order in language and speech, ed. by Fujimura, Osamu et al. , 271–299. Prague: Charles University Press.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail. 1992. The consequences of dissimilation in Sundanese. Phonology 9.199–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Stuart, & Shin, Seung-Hoon. 1999. The syllable contact constraint in Korean: An optimality-theoretic analysis. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8.285–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1972. The Dyirbal language of North Queensland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frigeni, Chiara. 2005. The development of liquids from Latin to Campidanian Sardinian: The role of contrast and structural similarity. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 24.15–30.Google Scholar
Green, Antony. 1997. The prosodic structure of Irish, Scots Gaelic, and Manx. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Hall, Tracy Alan 1995. Remarks on coronal underspecification. Leiden in last. HIL phonology papers I, ed. by van der Hulst, Harry & van de Weijer, Jeroen, 187–203. The Hague: Holland Academic.Google Scholar
Hall, Tracy Alan 2008. Middle High German rs > rʃ as height dissimilation. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 11.3.213–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Tracy A., & Scott, John H. G. 2007. Inflectional paradigms have a base: Evidence from s-dissimilation in Southern German dialects. Morphology 17.151–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ham, William H. 1998. A new approach to an old problem: Gemination and constraint reranking in West Germanic. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 1.225–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, John. 1994. English sound structure. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hathaway, Luise. 1979. Der Mundartwandel in Imst in Tirol zwischen 1897 und 1973. Wien: Wilhelm Braumüller.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1986. Inalterability in CV Phonology. Language 62.321–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hock, Heinz Henrich, & Joseph, Brian D.. 1996. Language history, language change, and language relationship. An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan. 1976. An introduction to natural generative phonology. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Hornung, Maria, & Roitinger, Franz. 2000. Die österreichischen Mundarten. Eine Einführung. Himberg/Wien: Öbv & htp.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 1993. Structure preservation and postlexical tonology in Dagbani. Studies in lexical phonology, ed. by Hargus, Sharon & Kaisse, Ellen, 235–254. San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, Gregory, & Salmons, Joseph. 1995. Aspiration and laryngeal representation in Germanic. Phonology 12.369–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, Fant, Gunnar, & Halle, Morris. 1952. Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [sixth printing, 1965].Google Scholar
Jessen, Michael, & Ringen, Catherine. 2002. Laryngeal features in German. Phonology 19.189–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kehrein, Wolfgang. 2002. Phonological representation and phonetic phrasing: Affricates and laryngeals. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1994. Phonology in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1985. Some consequences of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2.83–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1995. The phonological basis of sound change. The handbook of phonological theory, ed. by Goldsmith, John, 640–670. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kranzmayer, Eberhard. 1956. Historische Lautgeographie des gesamtbairischen Dialektraumes. Wien: Hermann Böhlhaus.Google Scholar
LaCharité, Darlene. 1993. The internal structure of affricates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ottawa, ON: University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1993. A course in phonetics. 3rd edn. Fort Worth: Harcourt & Brace College Publishers.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1988. Feature geometry and dependency: A review. Phonetica 43.84–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mielke, Jeff. 2005. Ambivalence and ambiguity in laterals and nasals. Phonology 22.169–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, Virgil. 1951. Frühneuhochdeutsche Grammatik. Band III: Lautlehre. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Murray, Robert, & Vennemann, Theo. 1983. Sound change and syllable structure[. Problems] in Germanic phonology. Language 59.514–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odden, David. 2005. Introducing phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John. 1993. The phonetics of sound change. Historical linguistics. Problems and perspectives, ed. by Jones, Charles, 237–278. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Piggott, Glyne. 1992. Variability in feature dependency: The case of nasality. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10.33–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1981. Morphologische (Ir-)regularitäten. Narr: Tübingen.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1990. Predicting rule domains in the phrasal phonology. The phonology-syntax connection, ed. by Inkelas, Sharon & Zec, Draga, 289–312. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1992. On deriving sonority. Phonology 9.61–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1993. A reexamination of the feature [sonorant]: The status of “sonorant obstruents.” Language 69.308–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, Keren. 2005. Liquid relationships. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 24.1–44.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren, & Avery, Peter. 1991. On the relationship between laterality and coronality. The special status of coronals. Internal and external evidence, ed. by Paradis, Carole & Prunet, Jean-François, 101–124. San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Sharon. 2000. Epenthesis positioning and syllable contact in Chaha. Phonology 17.397–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy. 1994. Affricates as strident stops in Polish. Linguistic Inquiry 25.119–143.Google Scholar
Russ, Charles V. J. 1982. Studies in historical German phonology. A phonological comparison of MHG and NHG with reference to modern dialects. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Schatz, Joseph. 1897. Die Mundart von Imst. Laut- und Flexionslehre. Strassburg: Trübner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatz, Joseph. 1955. Wörterbuch der Tiroler Mundarten. Innsbruck: Universitätsverlag Wagner.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1987. Redundant values. Chicago linguistics society. Papers from the parasession on autosegmental and metrical phonology, 339–362. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Keiichiro. 1998. A typological investigation of dissimilation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Tita, Fritz. 1965. Die Bublitzer Mundart. [Deutsche Dialektgeographie, ed. by Schmitt, Ludwig Erich, 35–105.] Marburg: N. G. Elwert Verlag.Google Scholar
Walsh Dickey, Laura 1997. The phonology of liquids. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Wiese, Richard. 1996. The phonology of German. Oxford: Clarendon Presss.Google Scholar
Wipf, Elisa. 1910. Die Mundart von Visperterminen im Wallis. Frauenfelder: Huber and Co [Beiträge zur Schweizerdeutschen Grammatik 2].Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 1988. The obligatory contour principle and phonological rules: A loss of identity. Linguistic Inquiry 19s.65–100.Google Scholar