On Perception and Sonority in Cluster Simplification: Consonant Deletion in Icelandic Preterites

Abstract

This article investigates the motivations for consonant cluster simplification through an analysis of consonant deletion in Icelandic, in clusters of three consonants created by the addition of the preterite suffix -ti/-di/-∂i directly to the verb stem. It is argued that deletion is driven by perceptual factors interacting with sonority requirements. Deletion targets stops and nonstrident obstruents and its likelihood correlates with similarity in manner and place of articulation between the consonants and their adjacent segments. These two generalizations are elucidated in terms of perceptual cues, and an optimality-theoretic analysis is developed in which more perceptible consonants are protected from deletion by higher-ranked faithfulness constraints. * Introduction.The simplification of consonant clusters in Icelandic has served to illustrate an approach to consonant deletion in terms of syllabic wellformedness. In analyzing the data in 1 Itô (1986) assumes that Icelandic allows only one consonant in the coda and that all other consonants go in the onset. In 1a the syllabification [m.pr] is possible and all the consonants in the sequence are licensed. But in 1b-c the medial consonant is lost since neither [pt] nor [vn], according to Itô, are acceptable onsets given their sonority profile. These sequences show up in the infinitive kemba 'comb' and the nominative hálfur 'half', in which the stem is followed by a vowel-initial suffix.

Phonetically and syntactically based reanalysis in the development of verbal better

“…Major place of articulation distinctions in stops have stronger phonetic cues in CV transitions than in VC transition; thus place of articulation in stops is relatively non-salient in coda position (Steriade 2001); when a stop is unreleased before another stop, as here, post-consonantal place cues in the first stop are completely eliminated. Côté (2004) argues that weak transitional cues to consonants (especially obstruents) in clusters are a major contributor to the deletion of consonants in Icelandic consonant clusters [check that summarizing accurately]. This makes it highly plausible that a speaker could intend to say e.g.…”