Preaspiration in the Nordic Languages: Synchronic and Diachronic ...

phonological reorganisation for the change to be achieved. Instead, an
E/C change is achieved through the gradual drift of phonetic norms.
These ideas are an extension, and to some extent a reinterpretation of
Sapir’s (1921) ideas on phonetic drift.
First it should be clarified, that although a particular trait is nonnormative
in a language community it is, in most cases, still a part of
what is considered normal or native for that community. For example,
preaspiration may not be obligatory in CSw, but, nonetheless, it is
normal to have it—it is not normative, but still contained within the
norm. This same range of variation in the production of voiceless stops
may be “prohibited” in other languages. In Southern Icelandic, Faroese
and the Gräsö dialect, the synchronisation of voice offset with oral closure
in the production of voiceless stops is much more tightly controlled
than in CSw, apparently “because” they contrast with normatively preaspirated
stops. However, such an opposition is not a prerequisite for a
tight laryngeal–oral coordination. As suggested in the preceding section,
it seems probable that German and French speakers coordinate the laryngeal
and oral gestures at the onset of a stop much more tightly than do
Swedish speakers. There is no apparent reason for them to do so, other
than that this is how one initiates a voiceless stop closure in French and
German.
So, phonetic variation has a structure and is contained. This structure
is determined and constrained by physiology, system-internal factors and
convention. Since the variation is determined and constrained, in part, by
convention, it is subject to change. Phonetic variation is, in this sense,
dynamic. Not only can we observe that languages or dialects differ with
respect to the variation “allowed” in the production of a given type of
speech sound (say an open front unrounded vowel, or a voiceless stop),
but we should also be able to observe that this variation can change over
time. By shifting the focus from norms to phonetic variation it can be
argued that changes in norms can also be seen as changes in the structure
of phonetic variation. Phonetic variation is dynamic.
The shift from non-normative to normative preaspiration (or postaspiration,
for that matter) is an example of this. Our initial assumption is
that the phonetic variation in the production of PN fortis stops was
– 233 –