User:Urszag/Sandbox
Subpage: User:Urszag/Vowel_devoicing_in_Japanese
Subpage: User:Urszag/Onbin
Subpage: User:Urszag/Japanese_prosody
Old English
[edit]There is an alternative hypothesis that holds that (at least in later periods) ⟨h⟩ in these sequences was not pronounced as an independent consonant sound, but was only a diacritic marking the voicelessness of the following sonorant.[1] Original /xl, xn, xr/ would merge with plain /l n r/ by early Middle English.[2] The spellings ⟨hr⟩ and ⟨hn⟩ had both fallen out of use by around 1250.[2]
The digraphs ⟨lh⟩, ⟨rh⟩, and ⟨nh⟩ are attested to some extent in Middle English texts; e.g. the 12th-century Ormulum contains ⟨rhof⟩ but also includes forms spelled with simple ⟨r⟩. The Ayenbite of Inwyt (written in 1340 by a Kentish English speaker who was probably born during the thirteenth century)[3] contains spellings with ⟨lh⟩ and ⟨nh⟩ alongside spellings with ⟨l⟩ and ⟨n⟩ in words that had hl, hn in Old English.[4]
The merger of /xr/ and /r/ seems to have been completed earliest, by the middle of the eleventh century, based on frequent interchange of the spellings ⟨hr⟩ and ⟨r⟩ in glosses from that time period.[5] The merger of /xn/ and /n/ was probably complete by the start of the thirteenth century.[2] The merger of /xl/ and /l/ may have taken somewhat longer to complete, as the spelling ⟨hl⟩ and an alternative spelling ⟨lh⟩ are attested in some Middle English texts,[6] one of the latest being the Ayenbite of Inwyt.[3]
At least some of these mergers may have begun earlier. Old English scribes occasionally omitted the letter ⟨h⟩ in words starting with these clusters.[1] A merge of the cluster /xw/ with /w/ is also attested in some historical and many current varieties of English, but has still not been completed, as some present-day speakers distinguish the former as [ʍ]. There is evidence of alliteration between ⟨hw⟩ and ⟨w⟩ in some Old English poems.[7]
Diphthongs
[edit]The long diphthongs ēa, ēo, īo developed from Proto-Germanic *au, *eu, *iu. In addition, ēa, īo arose from breaking of Anglo-Frisian *ǣ, *ī before /x/. Early West Saxon īe developed from i-umlaut of ēa or īo. A controversial additional source of diphthongs was palatal diphthongization, an Early West Saxon sound change that replaced ǣ, ē with the diphthongs ēa, īe after a palatal consonant (if these were not simply spelling conventions). Examples of palatal diphthongization of ē are rare, but may include ġīe (a variant of ġē)[8] and ġīet/ġīt?[9]. ċēn?
| Anglo-Frisian (or PG?) | Early West Saxon | Late West Saxon | Anglian | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diphthong | *au | ēa | ēa | ēa (ēo), ē |
| *baum | bēam | |||
| *eu | ēo | ēo | ēo | |
| *hreud | hrēod | |||
| *iu | ēo (īo) | ēo | īo (ēo) | |
| PWGmc. *iuwar[10] | ēower | īower | ||
| Breaking | *ǣx | ēa(h) | ēa(h) | ēh, ēa |
| *īx | ēo(h) | ēo(h) | īh, īo | |
| Palatal diphthongization | ċ, ġ, sċ + *ǣ | ēa | ēa/ē | ē |
| *jār | ġēar | ġēar?/ġēr | ġēr | |
| Anglo-Frisian (or PG?) | Early West Saxon | Late West Saxon | Anglian | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diphthong + i-umlaut | *au + i/j | īe/ī | ȳ (ī) | ē |
| PG *hauzijaną[11] | hīeran,[11] hīran | hȳran | hēran[11] | |
| *iu + i/j | īe/ī | ȳ (ī) | īo (ēo) | |
| PNWGmc *diurijaz[12] | dīere[12] | dȳre | dīore[12] (dēore) | |
| Breaking + i-umlaut | *ǣx + i/j (rare) | īe(h)/ī(h) | ȳ (ī) | ēh, ē |
| PWG *nāhwist[13] | nīehst[13] | ? | nēst, nēhst[13] | |
| *īx + i/j | īe(h)/ī(h) | ȳ (ī) | ī(h) | |
| PNWGmc *linhtijaną[12] | (ā-, ġe-) lȳhtan[12] | |||
| PNWGmc *wrīhidi[14] | wrīehþ[14] | (ofer-)wrīð[14] | ||
| Palatal diphthongization + i-umlaut | ċ, ġ, sċ + *ǣ + i/j (rare) | *īe | ȳ | ē |
| PWGmc *kāsī[15] | *ċīese | ċȳse[16] | ċēse[15] | |
| Coalescence | *sijē | sīe/sī[9] |
Short diphthongs developed from Anglo-Frisian short *æ, *e, *i.
- Breaking:
- *æ, *e, *i > ea, eo, io before /x/
- Back mutation: *e, *i > eo, io before a back vowel
- Palatal diphthongization: *æ, *e > ea, ie after a palatal consonant.
Velar fricatives (other sources)
[edit]The voiceless fricative [x] or [h] had been lost early on between voiced sounds word-medially (Kuhn 1970:32 dates this loss to the 7th-8th century), though before it was lost it caused certain sound changes such as breaking of preceding vowels.[17]
- The merge of final ⟨h⟩ and ⟨g⟩ is generally interpreted as an immediate consequence of the devoicing of [ɣ] to [x], since it is assumed that [x] was the preexisting pronunciation of word-final ⟨h⟩. However, Howell 1991 proposes an alternative timeline where ⟨h⟩ was originally pronounced as glottal [h] in final as well as initial position, and so remained distinct from final ⟨g⟩ when [ɣ] was first devoiced to [x]; their merger would in this case be the result of a separate sound change that caused final [h] to be strengthened to [x].
Moulton on /g/ and /h/. W. G. Moulton, "The Stops and Spirants of Early Germanic," Lg., XXX (1954), 1-42; Stockwell and Barritt, Lg., XXXVII, 79-80.
Velar fricatives
[edit]þweorh/feorh? beorg,
fóh, dróh? fāh, slāh? flēah, lēah, nēah vs. flēag, lēag
lēag 'lye' (cognate to German Lauge) vs. lēah 'clearing, meadow' (cognate to obsolete German "Loh"). But per BT, leáh, g. leáge; 'lea' also exists...
tēag vs. tēah?
burg No eolg words.
Old English did possess a voiced velar fricative sound [ɣ], but it is typically analyzed as a separate phoneme from /x/. Early Old English is assumed to have had a contrast in word-initial position between [h] and [ɣ], as in hōd 'hood' vs. gōd 'good', but no contrast between word-initial [ɣ] and [ɡ]. The fricative [ɣ] and stop [ɡ] (both written as ⟨g⟩) are assumed to be allophones of the same phoneme, which developed from Proto-Germanic *ɡ. It is assumed that this phoneme was pronounced [ɣ] in most positions, including word-initially, with a stop allophone [ɡ] used when it directly followed the nasal consonant /n/.
Palatals
[edit]"The velar and palatal sounds came to be in surface contrast before the vowel ⟨æ⟩ after the sound change of i-umlaut.[18]" Is this true since palatal diphthongization would have affected this before then?
Northumbrian and Mercian certainly have long /kǣ/. There is some attestation of forms like ġæt in Northumbrian.
Gloss: Accitulium , gæces sure (Corpus Glossary, Mercian) = ġeaces?
Notes on oe per Ringe and Taylor:
- Early Mercian has cellendre < coriandra.
- Most dialects should share examples like cenep, cempan, cennan (from umlaut of original *a before n).
Before unstressed vowels, c g (cg) sc can be palatal or velar depending on their etymological origin.
- The palatal versions can occur before an unstressed back vowel in words that originally contained an etymological *j or *i after the consonant, such as sēċan, drȳġan, leċġan, wȳsċan.
- The velar version can occur before an unstressed front vowel in words that end in -ian, and possibly in words that originally contained a labiovelar consonant (e.g. wīce and wicen, forms of wīcan).
- Before unstressed front vowels, sc is palatal. Before unstressed back vowels, velar /sk/ can be found.[19]
Before a consonant:
- Word-finally
| Dialect | ca | co | cu | cæ | ce | cy | ci | cea | ceo | cie | cio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EWS | k | k | k | k | tʃ | tʃ | tʃ | tʃ | |||
| LWS | k | k, tʃ | k, tʃ | ||||||||
| Northumbrian | k, tʃ | k, tʃ | k | tʃ | |||||||
| Mercian | tʃ, k | ||||||||||
| Kentish | tʃ, k | tʃ | |||||||||
Syllable-initial [ɣ] or [ɡ] is distributed like [k]. Syllable-initial [j] is generally distributed similarly to [tʃ], except [j] can also occur before back vowels (/ja jo ju/) in all dialects.
- ⟨c⟩ is always velar /k/ in stressed syllables before ⟨a o u⟩.
- Some stressed syllables apparently started with palatal /j/ followed by a back vowel, such as /junɡ/ 'young'.[20] These words were usually not spelled with ⟨ga go gu⟩. Instead, spellings such as ⟨gea geo geo⟩ can be found: based on the etymology and subsequent development of these words, it is inferred that ⟨e⟩ in this context did not indicate a diphthong, but was a diacritic marking the palatal quality of the preceding consonant letter. Spellings with initial ⟨i⟩ or ⟨gi⟩ are also found, such as ⟨iung giung giong⟩.[21] (Campbell p. 65 argues for real diphthongization rather than a diacritic spelling.)
- ⟨c g⟩ are velar /k ɣ/ before ⟨æ e y⟩ when these are derived from back vowels by i-umlaut.
- Velar cy, gy arose from the i-umlaut of cu, gu (e.g. cyning, gylden). (The i-umlaut of original /ju/ seems to have become unrounded early on, e.g ġingra.)
- Velar ce, ge arose from the i-umlaut of co, go or of ca, ga before a nasal (e.g. gēs, cennan, cempan). The original outcome of o in the context of i-umlaut was front rounded /ø(ː)/ (spelled "oe")
- Velar cǣ̆, gǣ̆ arose from the i-umlaut of cā̆, gā̆.
When "e" represents original /e/, probably also /e:/: Northumbrian ġēr, forġētun; also preserved in Kentish and Mercian.[8] The word ċēn 'torch' (per Ringe :206, an Anglian form)
Anglian ġerd = EWS gierd); ċerran = ċierran; ċetel = *ċietil; ġest = ġiest; ċebis/ċefissa = ċiefes. (also Mercian ġelpan, ġēta = EWS ġielpan, ġīeta[22])
Long ċǣ, ġǣ should in theory have been eliminated by palatal diphthongization in Early West Saxon, and not existed in the first place in Anglian (e.g. Proto-Germanic *jērą 'year' became Proto-West-Germanic *jār, yielding Early West Saxon ġēar and Mercian, Northumbrian, Kentish ġēr[23]). Regardless, some spellings with ⟨æ⟩ are attested, such as ⟨gær⟩ in the eleventh-century Lambeth Psalter.
The late WS form cȳse is traditionally interpreted as showing that palatal diphthongization occurred before i-umlaut.
Another source of long ċǣ, ġǣ would be Anglian smoothing of the diphthong ēa before c g h (x) rc rg rh, but in fact this soon developed to ē (Fulk 119). In theory, Anglian "smoothing" could have occurred in ġēac; this seems to be attested in the Corpus Glossary as "gęces sure" (see Kuhn 1939).
No smoothed variant of "geogelere" seems to be attested either.
Unsorted: (In contrast, Fulk 2014:121 says Northumbrian did have palatal diphthongization, citing ċeastre, ġeaf.) In Mercian, original ċæ, ġæ underwent "second fronting" to ċe, ġe. In Kentish, æ and e would eventually merge (past 9th century per Hogg?).
- Long ċǣ, ġǣ did not occur in Northumbrian[24] or Mercian, rather ċē, ġē.
- Long æ? "Úre ġǽr" BT. But per Fulk, ġēr is the normal Mercian form, since this is a case of the monophthong from PWG *ā.
- ? gæt? Gæst?
Umlaut of a o u normally yields æ/e e y (short) or ǣ ē ȳ. Do the first ever contrast or merge with the diphthongs ea eo or ēa ēo from breaking? Breaking occurred for æ + h, rC, lC, for e + h, rC, lh, lc, w, and for ǣ + h.
So were there any words subject to umlaut that had ah, arC, alC; oh, orC, olh, olc, ow; or āh.
- A-restoration is generally dated after breaking, so ah, arC, alC would be expected to be absent. (Anglian had alC instead of breaking, and Anglian alC became ælC, much later elC, from i-umlaut).[25]
- wrōht has no umlaut? wolcn, folc. gold but gylden (from u).
- cyċene 'kitchen', cyssan, cȳþan, (ringe)
- Ringe :225: umlaut of short o rare: cellendre < coriandra
- Long oe: cēlan/coelan,
Codas
[edit]The coda at the end of a syllable could contain one or more consonants. The following table shows examples of single-consonant codas, as well as examples of words that would have the corresponding geminate codas: although geminate consonants seem to have generally become simplified early on to single consonants when not between vowels, there are sometimes historical differences in their development. For example, the affricate [dʒ], analyzed above as long /jj/, did not merge with single /j/ word-finally, but retained a distinct pronunciation. Although /j/ might be categorized as a resonant, it will be listed alongside obstruent consonants in the tables below since it had this non-resonant allophone.
| Length | Resonants | Obstruents | Examples | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Originally short | [m] | [n, ŋ] | /r/ | /l/ | [w] | [t] | [d] | /θ/ | [s] | [p] | — | /f/ | [k] | /ɣ~g/ | /x/ | /tʃ/ | [j] | — | lim, cran, bær, hwæl, snāw, sċip, fæt, blæd, bæc, trog, līċ, weġ, stæf, bæþ, græs, feoh |
| Originally long | /rr/ | /ll/ | — | /θθ/ | [b] | [dʒ] | [ʃ] | swam(m), man(n), feor(r), eal(l), cnæp(p), sib(b), sceat(t), bed(d), loc(c), cryċ(ċ), ecġ, blis(s), æsċ | |||||||||||
| Length | Resonants | Obstruents | Examples | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Originally short | /m/ | /n/ | /r/ | /l/ | /w/ | /t/ | /d/ | /θ/ | /s/ | /p/ | — | /f/ | /k/ | /ɣ~g/ | /x/ | /tʃ/ | /j/ | — | lim, cran, bær, hwæl, snāw, sċip, fæt, hlid, bæc, trog, līċ, weġ, stæf, bæþ, græs, feoh |
| Originally long | /mm/ | /nn/ | /rr/ | /ll/ | — | /tt/ | /dd/ | /θθ/ | /ss/ | /pp/ | /bb/ | /kk/ | /ttʃ/ | /jj/ | /ʃ/ | swam(m), man(n), feor(r), eal(l), cnæp(p), sib(b), sceat(t), bed(d), loc(c), cryċ(ċ), ecġ, blis(s), æsċ | |||
In general, Old English permitted similar kinds of clusters of coda consonants as modern English.[26] Most coda clusters in simple words started with a sonorant or /s/.[27] The tables below show some examples of coda clusters that could occur in Old English, while not necessarily constituting an exhaustive list.
| C1 \ C2 | /l/ | /n/ | /m/ | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| /r/ | /rl/ | /rn/ | /rm/ | ċeorl, þorn, wyrm |
| /l/ | /ln/ | /lm/ | eln, cwealm | |
| /n/ | ‡/nl/ | — | ‡ēarspinl | |
| /m/ | ‡/ml/ | /mn/ | ‡cuml, stemn | |
| /w/ | ‡/wl/ | — | — | sāwl |
‡The final /l/ in words ending in /nl/, /ml/, /wl/ could potentially become syllabic or have an epenthetic vowel inserted before it; see below. This possibly could apply also to the final /n/ in /ln/.
English
[edit]| C1 | cluster | examples |
|---|---|---|
| /l/ | /lp/, /lb/, /lt/, /ld/, /ltʃ/, /ldʒ/, /lk/ | help, bulb, belt, hold, belch, indulge, milk |
| /lpt/, /lps/, /lfθ/, /lts/, /lst/, /lkt/, /lks/ | sculpt, alps, twelfth,[a] waltz, whilst, mulct, calx | |
| /lf/, /lv/, /lθ/, /ls/, /lz/, /lʃ/, (/lð/), /lm/, /ln/ | golf, solve, wealth, else, bells, Welsh, (stealth (v.)), film, kiln | |
| /lmd/ | filmed | |
| /r/ | /rp/, /rb/, /rt/, /rd/, /rtʃ/, /rdʒ/, /rk/, /rɡ/ | harp, orb, fort, beard, arch, large, mark, morgue |
| /rpt/, /rps/, /rts/, /rkt/, /rks/ | excerpt, corpse, quartz, infarct, irks | |
| /rf/, /rv/, /rθ/, /rð/, /rs/, /rz/, /rʃ/, /rm/, /rn/, /rl/ | dwarf, carve, north, birth (v.), force, Mars, marsh, arm, born, snarl | |
| /rst/, /rmd/, /rmθ/, /rnd/, /rld/ | horst, farmed, warmth, mourned, world | |
| /n/ | /nt/, /nts/, /ntθ/; /ntθs/, /nd/, /ntʃ/, /ndʒ/ | tent, chintz, thousandth; thousandths, end, lunch, lounge |
| (/nf/), /nθ/, (/ns/), /nz/ | (saunf), month, (prince), bronze | |
| /m/ | /mp/, /mpt/, /mps/, /mt/, /md/, /mf/, /mz/, /mθ/ | jump, prompt, glimpse; dreamt, hemmed, triumph, Thames, warmth |
| /ŋ/[b] | /ŋk/, /ŋd/, /ŋz/, /ŋθ/, /ŋkt/, /ŋks/, /ŋkθ/ | pink, hanged, songs, length, strength, distinct, jinx, length |
| /p/ | /pt/, /pts/, /pθ/, /ps/ | opt, opts, depth, lapse, |
| /k/ | /kt/, /kts/, /ks/, /ksθ/, /kst/, /ksθs/, /ksθt/, /ksts/ | act, acts, box, sixth, next, sixths, sixthed, texts |
| /s/ | /sp/, /st/, /sk/ | crisp, lost, ask |
| /f/ | /ft/, /fθ/, /fθs/ | left, fifth, fifths |
- Notes:
Remainder:
| /ʃt/, /θt/ | smashed, smithed |
| /zd/, /ðd/ | blazed, writhed |
| /bz/, /tθ/, /ts/, /dθ/, /dz/, /gz/ | ebbs, eighth, klutz, width, adze, eggs |
| Branch | Language | tj | kj | Examples | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| tj | kj | ||||
| Sardinian | Campidanese~Central Sardinian~Logudorese | t͡ːs~θː~tː | |||
| Western Romance | West/North Friulian | t͡ʃ | |||
| East Friulian | s | ||||
| Fassan | t͡s | t͡ʃ | *putjum > pot͡s[29] | *pikja > pit͡ʃ[29] | |
| Comelican | ð/θ | θ | |||
| Livinallonghese | t͡s | t͡ʃ | |||
| Surselvan, Sutselvan, Surmiran, Engadinian | t͡s | t͡ʃ | |||
| Venetian | s | s/θ | |||
| Ligurian | s (t͡s) | ||||
| Lombard | s | s/ʃ | |||
| Picard | ʃ | ||||
| French | jz | s | RATIONEM > raison[citation needed] | *fakja > face[30] | |
| Franco-Provençal | z (ʒ, θ) | s (ʃ, θ) | |||
| Auvergnat, Occitan | z | s | SATIONEM > Oc. sason[citation needed] | ||
| Catalan | z/ð[a] | s | RATIONEM > raó[citation needed] | ||
| Spanish | θ[b] | RATIONEM > razón[citation needed] | |||
| Portuguese | z | s | RATIONEM > razão[citation needed] | ||
| Other | Romanian | t͡s (t͡ʃ) | față | ||
| Vegliote | s | ||||
| Calabrese | t͡ːs | ||||
| Tuscan and Corsican | t͡ːs | t͡ːʃ | PALATIUM > It. palazzo[citation needed] | FACIA > It. faccia[citation needed] | |
Japanese phonology
[edit]Youngberg 2021 notes:
- Gives further examples of accented "deficient moras".
- Claims initial CVJ syllables may show HH pitch (p. 9).
| Bilabial | Alveolar | Alveolo- palatal |
Palatal | Velar | Uvular | Glottal | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nasal | m | n | (ɲ) | (ŋ) | (ɴ) | ||
| Voiceless plosive or affricate | p | t (ts) | (tɕ) | k | |||
| Voiceless fricative | (ɸ) | s | (ɕ) | (ç) | h | ||
| Voiced plosive | b | d | ɡ | ||||
| Voiced fricative~affricate | z~(dz) | (ʑ~dʑ) | |||||
| Liquid | r | ||||||
| Semivowel | w | j | |||||
| Special moras | /N/ /Q/ | ||||||
Affricates
[edit]Voiceless coronal affricate
[edit]The affricate [ts] originated as a contextual variant of the plosive /t/. In the history of Japanese, the coronal plosives /t d/ were changed into phonetic affricates before the high vowels /i u/: as a result, original /tu/ developed to [tsɯ]. In core vocabulary, [ts] and [t] are in complementary distribution: [t] never occurs before /u/, whereas [ts] occurs only before /u/.
Therefore, [ts] can be analyzed as a conditioned allophone of /t/ before /u/.[31]
| /t/ > [ts] | /tuɡi/ > [tsɯɡi] | 次, tsugi, 'next' |
In loanwords, however, [ts] can occur before other vowels:[32] examples include [tsaitoɡaisɯto] ツァイトガイスト, tsaitogaisuto, 'zeitgeist'; [eɾitsiɴ] エリツィン, Eritsin, 'Yeltsin'. There are also a few marginal native forms with [ts] before a vowel other than /u/, such as otottsan, 'dad'[33][34][35] (the standard form of this word is otōsan).[32] Based on dialectal or colloquial forms like these, as well as the phonetic distance between plosive and affricate sounds, Hattori (1950) argues that the affricate [ts] is its own phoneme, represented by the non-IPA symbol /c/.[36] In contrast, Shibatani (1990) disregards such forms as exceptional, and prefers analyzing [ts] as an allophone of /t/ rather than as a distinct affricate phoneme.[37]
Before the high vowel /i/, original /t/ was both affricated and palatalized, developing to the alveolo-palatal affricate [tɕ]. This can be regarded as the palatalized counterpart of [ts]: thus, analysts like Hattori treat [tɕ] as a palatalized allophone of /c/[36] (a phonemic affricate /ts/), whereas analysts like Shibatani treat [tɕ] as a palatalized allophone of /t/.[37] (A third group of analysts treat /tɕ/ as its own phoneme, distinct from both /t/ and /ts/, due to the coalescence of original /tj/ sequences to [tɕ], which created a contrast between [tɕa tɕo tɕɯ] and [ta to tsɯ].)
Voiced affricate vs. fricative
[edit]Like /t/, the voiced plosive /d/ historically underwent affrication before /u/, which caused /du/ to become [dzɯ]. Therefore, [dz] initially functioned as an allophone of /d/ before /u/. However, the distinction between the voiced affricate [dz] and the voiced fricative [z] is neutralized in Standard Japanese and in most (although not all) regional Japanese dialects. The result of this merger is a phonetically variable [(d)z] sound that can be transcribed phonemically as /z/,[38] though some analyze it as /dz/, the voiced counterpart to [ts].[39] The distinction between [dʑ] and [ʑ], which were originally palatalized allophones of /d/ and /z/, is likewise neutralized in Standard Japanese, resulting in a phonetically variable [(d)ʑ] sound.
A 2010 corpus study found that in neutralizing varieties, the fricative pronunciations [z ʑ] and the affricate pronunciations [dz dʑ] could both be found in any position in a word, but the likelihood of an affricate pronunciation was increased in phonetic conditions that allowed for greater time to articulate the consonant: voiced affricates were found to occur on average 60% of the time after /N/, 74% after /Q/, and 80% after a pause.[40] In addition, the rate of fricative realizations increased as speech rate increased.[41] In terms of direction, these effects match those found for the use of plosive vs. non-plosive pronunciations of the voiced stops /b, d, ɡ/; however, the overall rate of fricative realizations of /(d)z/ (including both [dz~z] and [dʑ~ʑ], in either intervocalic or postnasal position) seems to be higher than the rate of non-plosive realizations of /b, d, ɡ/.[42]
As a result of the neutralization, the historical spelling distinction between these sounds has been eliminated from the modern written standard except in cases where a mora is repeated once voiceless and once voiced, or where rendaku occurs in a compound word: つづく[続く] /tuzuku/, いちづける[位置付ける] /itizukeru/ from |iti+tukeru|. The use of the historical or morphological spelling in these contexts does not indicate a phonetic distinction: /zu/ and /zi/ in Standard Japanese are variably pronounced with affricates or fricatives according to the contextual tendencies described above, regardless of whether they are underlyingly voiced or derived by rendaku from /tu/ and /ti/.[43]
Some dialects, e.g. Tosa,[44] retain the distinctions between /zi/ and /di/ and between /zu/ and /du/, while others distinguish only /zu/ and /du/ but not /zi/ and /di/. Yet others merge all four, e.g. north Tōhoku.[44]
Vowels
[edit]/u/ is the most difficult vowel to phonetically characterize.[45] Broad phonetic transcriptions often represent it as [ɯ]; in narrow transcription, its value has been suggested to range over [ɨ], [ɯ̟],[46] [ʉ].[47]
There is particular inconsistency in descriptions of its lip position. It is commonly described as unrounded. Akamatsu 1997 lays particular emphasis on its lack of rounding.[48] However, some descriptions state that it is not entirely unrounded,[49] at least on the phonological level.[47] Others state that it is unrounded but not spread[50] or compressed but not protruded (with compression optional in conversational tempos).[51] In contradiction to the preceding descriptions, Nogita and Yamane found the lips to be rounded and protruded, not compressed, during the pronunciation of /u/ in a study that recorded the lips of Japanese speakers, and propose that the transcription [ʉ̜] is more accurate than [ɯ] (comparing it to the quality of Norwegian /yː/); they suggest that the perceptual impression of unroundedness could in part be a result of its fronted articulation.
It is notably fronter than cardinal [u][46] and can be described as central or near-back. It may be especially fronted after /s, z, t/ and palatalized consonants (/Cj/),[47] and possibly also after /n/.[52]
Vance (2008) suggests it can be narrowly transcribed as [ɨ] after [s, z, n] and [ɯ̟] elsewhere.
Long vowels and double vowels
[edit]All vowels display a length contrast: short vowels are phonemically distinct from long vowels:
[obasaɴ] 小母さん, obasan, 'aunt' [obaːsaɴ] お婆さん, obaasan, 'grandmother' [keɡeɴ] 怪訝, kegen, 'dubious' [keːɡeɴ] 軽減, keigen, 'reduction' [çirɯ] 蛭, hiru, 'leech' [çiːrɯ] ヒール, hiiru, 'heel' [tokai] 都会, tokai, 'city' [toːkai] 倒壊, tōkai, 'destruction' [kɯ] 区, ku, 'district' [kɯː] 空, kū, 'void'[53]
Long vowels are pronounced with around 2.5 or 3 times the phonetic duration of short vowels, but are considered to be two moras long at the phonological level.[54] In normal speech, a "double vowel", that is, a sequence of two identical short vowels (for example, across morpheme boundaries), is pronounced the same way as a long vowel. However, in slow or formal speech, a sequence of two identical short vowels may be distinguished from an intrinsically long vowel:[55]
[satoːja] 砂糖屋, satō-ya, 'sugar shop' [satoːja]~[sato.oja] 里親, sato-oya, 'foster parent'[55]
In the above transcription, [.] represents a hiatus between vowels; sources differ on how they transcribe and describe the phonetic realization of hiatus in Japanese. Labrune (2012) says it can be "a pause or a light glottal stop", and adopts the transcription [ˀ].[55] Shibatani (1990) states that there is no complete glottal closure and questions whether there is any actual glottal narrowing at all.[56] Vance describes it as vowel rearticulation (a drop in intensity) and transcribes it as [ˀ][57] or [*].[58]
In addition, a double vowel may bear pitch accent on either the first or second element, whereas an intrinsically long vowel can be accented only on its first mora.[59] The distinction between double vowels and long vowels may be phonologically analyzed in various ways. One analysis interprets long vowels as ending in a special segment /R/ that adds a mora to the preceding vowel sound[60] (a chroneme). Another analysis interprets long vowels as sequences of the same vowel phoneme twice, with double vowels distinguished by the presence of a "zero consonant" or empty onset between the vowels.[61] A third approach also interprets long vowels as sequences of the same vowel phoneme twice, but treats the difference between [oː] and [oo] as a matter of syllabification, with the long vowel consisting of the phonemes /oo/ pronounced in one syllable, and the double vowel consisting of the same two phonemes split across two syllables.[62]
For the most part, double vowels (as opposed to long vowels) are found only across a morpheme boundary.[63] However, exceptions may exist: for example, some speakers may pronounce the word 炎, honoo, 'flame' with a double vowel /o.o/, even though this word is arguably monomorphemic in modern Japanese.[63]
Vowel sequences and (quasi)diphthongs
[edit]Any pair of non-identical vowel phonemes can occur in sequence within a word or phrase (although [only a subset of vowel sequences] can be found within a morpheme in native or Sino-Japanese vocabulary).
Japanese is often described as having no diphthongs. There is consensus that sequences such as [ai] do not constitute unitary vowel phonemes in Japanese (unlike English /aɪ/). However, some analysts use the term diphthong[64] or quasi-diphthong[65] to refer to a sequence of two different vowel phonemes pronounced in the same syllable, as opposed to a sequence of two vowel phonemes separated by a syllable boundary. (The existence of the syllable as a unit of Japanese prosody is itself controversial; Labrune (2012) argues against the syllable as a unit of Japanese phonology and thus concludes that no vowel sequences ought to be analyzed as diphthongs.[66])
It has been argued that diphthongs, like long vowels, cannot bear a pitch accent on the second mora.[67][68] By this criterion, the three vowel sequences /ai/, /oi/, /ui/[69] usually behave as diphthongs (as well as /ei/ to some extent, although it is not stably distinguished from the long vowel [eː][70]); other vowel sequences do not constitute diphthongs, as they can freely bear accent on the second mora. The distinct accentual behavior of vowel sequences ending in /i/ compared to other vowel sequences can be seen in the following contexts:
- A generalization can be made that when the dictionary form of a Japanese verb has an accent, it almost always falls on the second-to-last syllable. The form [haꜜiru] has accent on the third-to-last mora, which is consistent with this generalization if /ai/ is a diphthong here. (The accentuation of some other verbs, such as [oiꜜru], [kuiꜜru], [siiꜜru], indicates that even vowel sequences that could validly constitute a diphthong or long vowel may potentially be pronounced with hiatus in this context.)[71]
Some other evidence has been put forward to support the analysis of /ai oi ui/ as diphthongs:
- they are sometimes set to a single note in music:
There is some conflicting evidence in regard to the status of /ae/ and /oe/. Certain verbs have dictionary forms that end in /aꜜeCu/ or /oꜜeCu/ (where /C/ is some consonant): according to the generalization discussed above, accent on the third-to-last mora is unexpected if /ae/ and /oe/ are in separate syllables here, so it can be interpreted as a sign that these sequences can constitute diphthongs. However, Vance argues that these are better interpreted as containing /a.e/ /o.e/ in hiatus with exceptional accent placement, rather than diphthongs.[72] It is possible that verbs with accent on the first mora of /ae/ or /oe/ acquired this accentuation pattern as a result of having variant pronunciations with /ai/ or /oi/; although currently nonstandard,[73] such pronunciations may have been historically prevalent.
Another sequence that shows some conflicting evidence of being a diphthong is /au/.
- Evidence of hiatus:
- When the particle の is placed after the dictionary form of an unaccented verb, it causes the preceding syllable to be accented. This accent falls on /u/ in [kauꜜno],[74] indicating that /au/ in this context is separated by a syllable boundary.
- Accent is placed on /u/ in the compounds /donauꜜgawa/ "River Donau", /riNdauꜜzin "people of Lindau"[75]
- However, in the accentuation of foreign city names, /au/ can behave like a diphthong.[76]
Some prior descriptions based on criteria other than unaccentability of the second mora have reached incompatible conclusions about which vowel sequences can constitute diphthongs. For example, some prior literature has described sequences such as /ae/, /ao/, /oe/, /au/ as diphthongs when they occur within a morpheme.[77]
Assuming the pitch-accent criterion is adopted, the presence or absence of a morpheme boundary does not consistently correspond to whether a vowel sequence is a diphthong or not. In some contexts, a VV sequence that could form a valid diphthong is separated by a syllable break that corresponds to a morpheme boundary, as in /kuruma.iꜜdo/ 'well with a pulley', composed of /kuruma/ 'wheel, car' and /iꜜdo/ 'well'.[78] However, in other cases, it seems to be possible for a VV sequence to be pronounced in one syllable even across a morpheme boundary. For example, 歯医者, haisha, 'dentist' is morphologically a compound of 歯, ha, 'tooth' and 医者, isha, 'doctor' (itself composed of the morphemes 医, i, 'medical' and 者, i, 'person'); despite the morpheme boundary between /a/ and /i/ in this word, they seem to be pronounced in one syllable as a diphthong, making it homophonous with 敗者, haisha, 'defeated person'.[79] Likewise, the morpheme /i/ used as a suffix to form the dictionary form (or affirmative nonpast-tense form) of an i-adjective is almost never pronounced as a separate syllable; instead, it combines with a preceding stem-final /i/ to form the long vowel [iː], or with a preceding stem-final /a/, /o/ or /u/ to form a diphthong.[80]
When followed by /N/, there is a tendency for /ai/, /oi/, /ui/ to be split across syllables rather than pronounced as diphthongs. Hiatus seems to be usual when the vowels are separated by a morpheme boundary (as they always are in the context of Sino-Japanese words).[81] Kubozono argues that these sequences are usually syllabified as /a.iN/, /o.iN/, /u.iN/ even when they occur within a single morpheme in words of foreign origin.
In general, it is not so rare for a heterosyllabic sequence of two non-identical vowels to occur within a morpheme.[63]
In contexts where the accentual criterion cannot be applied (as when neither vowel is accented) it can be difficult to distinguish between a diphthong and a vowel sequence:
Another environment where it may sometimes be difficult to determine whether /ai/, /oi/, /ui/ constitute diphthongs is when they are preceded or followed by another vowel.
- 多い /oꜜRi/ 'numerous' (also pronounced [ooꜜi])[82]
- 遠い /toRi/ 'far'[82]
- 可愛い /kawaiꜜi/
- Vance cites /pureiboHiꜜša/ as an example of unambiguous /oH.i/.[83]
Aside from the dispute about their prosodic status, whether or how diphthongs differ phonetically from vowel sequences is another point of discussion.
- Youngberg 2021 states that diphthongs, like long vowels, cannot normally be pronounced with a glottal stop or vowel rearticulation between their two moras, whereas this may optionally occur between two vowels that belong to separate syllables.[84]
- In contrast, Labrune (2012) states that a pause or glottal stop may intervene between the two vowels of a putative diphthong in slow, careful speech. Labrune also suggests that there is normally not a gradual transition between the qualities of the first and second vowel; instead, the two vowel qualities are pronounced distinctly.[85]
Onbin
[edit]Stuff that isn't secure enough to be in the article yet:
- Some other consonant-vowel sequences could sporadically be reduced to dependent moraic sounds in the evolution of particular words, such as *papaki > pauki > Modern Japanese hōki 'broom'.
- The segment following the vowel was also relevant: onbin changes could occur before /p t k s b d ɡ z m n/,
but not before /r w y/.[86]
(Is that accurate? What about 候う/侍う?)
Removed from intro, too technical:
- The sound changes can be subcategorized as i-onbin, u-onbin, N-onbin or Q-onbin based on whether the outcome is spelled in modern Japanese with the kana い/イ (i), う/ウ (u), ん/ン (N), or っ/ッ (Q). (The symbols ⟨N⟩ and ⟨Q⟩ are used in Japanese linguistics to transcribe 'moraic consonant' segments that have no single phonetic realization.) For words that underwent i-onbin or u-onbin, it is possible to reconstruct an initial contrast between oral vowels [i u], which developed when the lost consonant was oral, and nasalized vowels [ĩ ũ], which developed when the lost consonant was nasal or prenasalized. The nasalized vowels [ĩ ũ] and the moraic nasal consonant N caused following obstruent consonants to become prenasalized, which developed into modern Japanese voiced consonant phonemes /b d g z/. Nasalized [ĩ ũ] merged with plain /i u/ by Late Middle Japanese, and the sequences /au iu ou eu/ underwent coalescence in this period, becoming [ɔː juː joː joː], which developed into contemporary Japanese [oː jɯː oː joː] (phonemically /oo juu oo joo/).
Notes
[edit]- ^ Subsequently changed further: in modern Catalan, Latin intervocalic -TJ- and Latin -C- followed by E or I were ultimately lost between vowels (e.g. RATIONEM > raó; VECINUM > veí) and vocalized to /w/ word-finally or before a consonant (e.g. PALATIUM > palau, PUTEUM > pou, PRETIUM > preu; DECEM > deu, VICEM > veu). This is identical to the outcome of Latin intervocalic -D-.
- ^ In most of European Spanish; Latin America instead has /s/.
- ^ a b Fulk 2014, p. 73.
- ^ a b c Minkova 2014, §5.1.3.
- ^ a b Lass & Laing 2010, p. 361.
- ^ Gradon 1979, pp. 45–46.
- ^ Goossens 1969.
- ^ "§8. "Middle English Spelling". XIX. Changes in the Language to the Days of Chaucer. Vol. 1. From the Beginnings to the Cycles of Romance. The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes (1907–21)". www.bartleby.com. 30 October 2024.
- ^ Minkova 2014, §4.1.1, §5.1.3.
- ^ a b Hogg 2011, p. 108.
- ^ a b Hogg 2011, p. 193.
- ^ Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 174.
- ^ a b c Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 245.
- ^ a b c d e Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 249.
- ^ a b c Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 247.
- ^ a b c Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 317.
- ^ a b Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 216.
- ^ Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 246.
- ^ Lass 1994, pp. 75–76.
- ^ Ringe & Taylor 2014, p. 204, 214.
- ^ Fulk 2014, p. 104.
- ^ Lass 1994, p. 78.
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=_hcY6CZ0-s0C&pg=PA145
- ^ Fulk, p. 119.
- ^ Ringe & Taylor, p. 216.
- ^ Hogg 2011, p. 107.
- ^ Ringe & Taylor, p. 231.
- ^ Hogg 1992, pp. 96–98.
- ^ Minkova 2014, §7.5.1.1.
- ^ First four columns adapted from Recasens 2020, §3.1.1, Table 1a
- ^ a b Weiss 2009, p. 513.
- ^ Kerkhof 2018, p. 129.
- ^ Itō & Mester (1995), p. 825.
- ^ a b Vance (2008), p. 84.
- ^ Labrune (2012), p. 68.
- ^ Hattori (1950), p. 102.
- ^ Vance (1987), pp. 23, 41.
- ^ a b Hattori (1950), pp. 100–102.
- ^ a b Shibatani (1990), p. 164–165.
- ^ Vance (2008), pp. 85–86.
- ^ Smith (1980), §3.1.1.
- ^ Maekawa (2010), p. 365.
- ^ Maekawa (2010), p. 371.
- ^ Kitagawa & Albin (2023), p. 29.
- ^ Kitagawa & Albin (2023), pp. 16–18.
- ^ a b Jeroen van de Weijer; Kensuke Nanjo; Tetsuo Nishihara (2005). Voicing in Japanese. Walter de Gruyter. p. 150. ISBN 978-3-11-019768-6.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 54.
- ^ a b Vance (2008), p. 56.
- ^ a b c Labrune (2012), p. 25.
- ^ Akamatsu (1997), p. 31.
- ^ Pintér (2015).
- ^ Okada (1999), p. 118.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 55.
- ^ Vance (2008), pp. 54–56.
- ^ Labrune (2012), p. 39.
- ^ Labrune (2012), p. 40.
- ^ a b c Labrune (2012), p. 45.
- ^ Shibatani (1990), p. 162.
- ^ Vance (1987), p. 15.
- ^ Vance (2022), p. 76.
- ^ Labrune (2012), p. 47.
- ^ Labrune (2012), p. 44.
- ^ Labrune (2012), p. 46.
- ^ Vance (2008), pp. 59–60.
- ^ a b c Vance (2008), p. 62.
- ^ Kubozono (2015b), p. 215.
- ^ Vance (2017), p. 26.
- ^ Labrune (2012), pp. 53–56.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 135.
- ^ Kubozono (2015b), p. 216.
- ^ Kubozono (2015a), pp. 5–6.
- ^ Vance (2008), pp. 63–66, 134.
- ^ Vance (2008), pp. 164–165.
- ^ Vance (2008), pp. 165–166.
- ^ Vance (1987), p. 74.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 164.
- ^ Kubozono (2015b), p. 221.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 136.
- ^ Labrune (2012), pp. 54.
- ^ Youngberg (2021), p. 240.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 63.
- ^ Vance (2008), pp. 174–175.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 133.
- ^ a b Vance (2008), p. 175.
- ^ Vance (2008), p. 137.
- ^ Youngberg (2021), p. 228.
- ^ Labrune (2012), pp. 54–55.
- ^ Frellesvig (2010), p. 196.