Ambivalence and ambiguity in laterals and nasals

Abstract

Ambivalent segments are speech sounds whose cross-linguistic patterning is especially variable, creating contradictions for theories of universal distinctive features. This paper examines lateral liquids, whose [continuant] specification has been the subject of controversy because of their ability to pattern both with continuants and with non-continuants, and because phonetically they are situated in the contested ground between two different articulatory definitions for the feature [continuant]. Evidence from a survey of sound patterns in 561 languages shows that lateral liquids, like nasals, pattern with continuants about as often as with non-continuants. Ambivalent phonological behaviour is argued to be natural and expected for phonetically ambiguous segments in a theory of emergent distinctive features where features are the result of sound patterns, rather than the other way around.

Phonotactics and phonetic context in the perception of onset nasality in Taiwanese

“…Also, since the alveolar voiced 'stop' in Taiwanese is a lateral sound, there is an additional prediction that the difference between [l] and [n] may be harder to distinguish than between [b] and [m]: [l] and [n] often participate in synchronic alternations or diachronic sound change, for example, n-lateralization and l-nasalization are observed in Korean (Davis and Shin, 1999). It is also not uncommon for laterals and nasals to be in the same phonologically active natural class (Mielke, 2005). Another prediction, the 'phonotactics prediction', is that the participants would be equally good at discriminating attested contrasts regardless of the types of segments that are in the stimuli.…”

Alternatives to Stricture-Driven Assimilation

“…Padgett (1994) expresses this as a marking condition "If [+nas, +cons], then [-cont]", which Pulleyblank (1997) and Baković (2007) formalize as constraints banning continuant nasals. Recent work by Mielke (2005Mielke ( , 2008, however, has claimed that nasals are ambivalent with respect to the feature [continuant], and can pattern as either [-cont] or [+cont] on a language-specific basis. This stems from the fact that the phonetic cues to continuancy are ambiguous for these segment types.…”

“…Finnish is one of the languages identified by Mielke (2005Mielke ( , 2008 as having [+cont] nasal consonants. The argument for this specification comes from the patterning of the coronal sonorants /n, l, r/ and the fricative /s/ in triggering deletion of a following /e/ (specifically, in some infinitives, the passive, the second participle active, the imperative, and the potential; Sulkala & Karjalainen 1992:394).…”

Probing the unnatural

“…Mielke (2005: 184, fn. 5) acknowledges this possibility in response to a comment by an anonymous reviewer, but observes that "any pattern involving a featurally unnatural class can be reanalysed as two or more identical patterns involving only featurally natural classes. "…”