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

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

www2.lingfil.uu.se
from www2.lingfil.uu.se More from this publisher
26.07.2013 Views

As to preaspirated stops in Chechen and Ingush, information is scarce indeed. Catford (1977:114) claims that preaspiration occurs in both languages, but does not go into detail regarding its distribution or phonetic character. The only other source of information is Hansson’s personal communication with Johanna Nichols (of the University of California, Berkeley) who “confirmed the existence of preaspiration in Ingush” (Hansson 1997:27; my translation). Turning now to Central Asia, Roos (1998) has described preaspiration in Western Yugur, an Eastern Turkic language spoken in the Gnsù province in the People’s Republic of China. Roos uses data from a variety of written sources, and has also made (impressionistic) analyses of a recording of a male Western Yugur speaker. According to Roos, most voiceless consonants in Western Yugur, including stops, affricates and fricatives, can be preaspirated. Also, voiceless liquids occur before voiceless consonants; this has been analysed as part of the preaspiration phenomenon. The phonetic shape of this preaspiration varies with context: In Western Yugur, preaspiration generally occurs as an h-like element [h], but before [q] as a fricative []; it may be realised as [] near the front high vowels, and as [] near []. […] Preaspiration may spread over the entire vowel, resulting in a completely whispered vowel, e.g. []; especially high vowels when occurring between [s, ] and a velar of uvular plosive [k, q] […] tend to be whispered. (Roos 1998:30) 1 The type of variation Roos describes here is very similar to that found in the preaspiration data reviewed in Chapter 4, especially the realisation of oral friction in lieu of aspiration proper. Roos cites numerous examples from the production of his informant, e.g: t / t ‘horse,’ kœp ‘many,’ sq ‘to squeeze,’ qq ‘to fear’ and ps ‘to press.’ 2 Historically, Roos explains that Common Turkic non-initial sequences of short vowel and fortis stop (*p, *t, *k) are reflected with preaspiration in Western Yugur. Fortis stops preceded by a long vowel are reflec- 1 The phonetic notation of the original has been kept in this citation. 2 These transcriptions are from Roos’s text (hence the use of the double brackets—cf. Chapter 3.1) and have been adapted to the current IPA notation. The following forms appear in the original: t / t, kp, sq, qq and ps. – 28 –

ted as voiceless unaspirated or postaspirated. The development of preaspiration before sibilants is less consistent. Thus a Common Turkic sequence of a short vowel and a sibilant does not always yield preaspiration, but at the same time it seems clear that a Common Turkic sequence of a long vowel and a sibilant never results in preaspiration. In addition to Western Yugur, Roos also cites examples from both Tuvan and Tofa 1 , which are fairly closely related to Western Yugur but are spoken in Russia, in a region northwest of Mongolia. Both Tuvan and Tofa have been reported to have “pharyngealised” consonants (cf., e.g., Schönig, 1998), and Roos points out that the distribution of pharyngealisation in these languages corresponds very well with the distribution of preaspiration in Western Yugur, so much so that they are bound to reflect a common origin. In fact, Roos transcribes his Tuvan and Tofa examples (again taken from several sources) as having preaspiration rather than some kind of a pharyngealised or glottalised element. For example, for Tuvan he offers the example t ‘grass’ with preaspiration, whereas, for example, Johanson (1998:98) offers t, with a glottalised stop. The sentiment that Tuvan and Tofa pharyngealisation is misrepresented is echoed in Liberman (1982:126ff; 300f). Like Roos, Liberman transcribes Tuvan examples with preaspiration rather than glottalisation. Further, Liberman claims that what has been described as pharyngealisation in the neighbouring language isolate Ket is also preaspiration. However, I have no true first-hand information confirming that pharyngealisation in Tuvan, Tofa and Ket is actually most appropriately described as preaspiration. Lastly, we turn to Halh Mongolian. Mongolian has two stop series, usually referred to as “strong” and “weak” (corresponding to fortis and lenis). Svantesson & Karlsson (2002) have shown that the “strong” stops of Ulaanbaatar Halh (i.e., the variety spoken in the Mongolian capital, Ulaanbaatar) are preaspirated. They also found that in sonorant + stop sequences, the “strong” series is expressed through partial voicelessness in the sonorant preceding a voiceless stop, while the “weak” series has a fully voiced sonorant before a voiceless stop. According to Svantesson & Karlsson, preaspiration in Ulaanbaatar Halh also occurs on word-initial 1 An alternate name is (Turkic) Karagas. – 29 –

As to preaspirated stops <strong>in</strong> Chechen <strong>and</strong> Ingush, <strong>in</strong>formation is<br />

scarce <strong>in</strong>deed. Catford (1977:114) claims that preaspiration occurs <strong>in</strong><br />

both languages, but does not go <strong>in</strong>to detail regard<strong>in</strong>g its distribution or<br />

phonetic character. The only o<strong>the</strong>r source of <strong>in</strong>formation is Hansson’s<br />

personal communication with Johanna Nichols (of <strong>the</strong> University of<br />

California, Berkeley) who “confirmed <strong>the</strong> existence of preaspiration <strong>in</strong><br />

Ingush” (Hansson 1997:27; my translation).<br />

Turn<strong>in</strong>g now to Central Asia, Roos (1998) has described preaspiration<br />

<strong>in</strong> Western Yugur, an Eastern Turkic language spoken <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Gnsù<br />

prov<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> People’s Republic of Ch<strong>in</strong>a. Roos uses data from a variety<br />

of written sources, <strong>and</strong> has also made (impressionistic) analyses of a<br />

record<strong>in</strong>g of a male Western Yugur speaker. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Roos, most<br />

voiceless consonants <strong>in</strong> Western Yugur, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g stops, affricates <strong>and</strong><br />

fricatives, can be preaspirated. Also, voiceless liquids occur before voiceless<br />

consonants; this has been analysed as part of <strong>the</strong> preaspiration phenomenon.<br />

The phonetic shape of this preaspiration varies with context:<br />

In Western Yugur, preaspiration generally occurs as an h-like element<br />

[h], but before [q] as a fricative []; it may be realised as [] near <strong>the</strong><br />

front high vowels, <strong>and</strong> as [] near []. […] <strong>Preaspiration</strong> may spread<br />

over <strong>the</strong> entire vowel, result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a completely whispered vowel, e.g.<br />

[]; especially high vowels when occurr<strong>in</strong>g between [s, ] <strong>and</strong> a velar<br />

of uvular plosive [k, q] […] tend to be whispered.<br />

(Roos 1998:30) 1<br />

The type of variation Roos describes here is very similar to that<br />

found <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> preaspiration data reviewed <strong>in</strong> Chapter 4, especially <strong>the</strong> realisation<br />

of oral friction <strong>in</strong> lieu of aspiration proper. Roos cites numerous<br />

examples from <strong>the</strong> production of his <strong>in</strong>formant, e.g: t / t ‘horse,’<br />

kœp ‘many,’ sq ‘to squeeze,’ qq ‘to fear’ <strong>and</strong> ps ‘to<br />

press.’ 2<br />

Historically, Roos expla<strong>in</strong>s that Common Turkic non-<strong>in</strong>itial sequences<br />

of short vowel <strong>and</strong> fortis stop (*p, *t, *k) are reflected with preaspiration<br />

<strong>in</strong> Western Yugur. Fortis stops preceded by a long vowel are reflec-<br />

1 The phonetic notation of <strong>the</strong> orig<strong>in</strong>al has been kept <strong>in</strong> this citation.<br />

2 These transcriptions are from Roos’s text (hence <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> double brackets—cf.<br />

Chapter 3.1) <strong>and</strong> have been adapted to <strong>the</strong> current IPA notation. The follow<strong>in</strong>g forms<br />

appear <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> orig<strong>in</strong>al: t / t, kp, sq, qq <strong>and</strong> ps.<br />

– 28 –

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!