Palatal vowels, glides and obstruents in Argentinian Spanish

Abstract

, two anonymous Phonology referees and audiences at the University of Rochester and the University of Washington for comments on earlier drafts. The usual disclaimers apply. Nativespeaker consultants for Argentinian and Castilian dialects are acknowledged in notes 37 and 77. 117 118 James W. Harris and Ellen M. Kaisse issues involved in the attempt to elucidate aspects of the mental representations that native Spanish speakers employ in their phonological computations. We undertake to raise the level of discourse concerning the problem at hand not only by redefining it but also by enlarging the set of data and descriptive issues brought to bear on it and by situating the discussion in a rich theoretical context. Our investigation begins with, and concentrates on, data from two dialects of Argentinian Spanish (AR) : the colloquial standard porteng o of Buenos Aires and that of Rı! o Negro province, some 1300 kilometres to the southwest. Later, we add material from standard Castilian, the national prestige norm of Spain. AR is instantly recognisable by the conspicuous and systematic use of strident [z) ] (as in English azure) in certain contexts where standard Castilian and all other major Spanish dialects use [j] (as in English yes) or the non-strident palatal fricative obstruent [y] (see § 2.1) ; for example, AR eT [z) ]a [z) ]egoT a[z) ]eT r ' she arrived yesterday ' (orthographic fella llego! ayerg) vs. eT [j]a [j]egoT a[j]eT r or eT [y]a [y]egoT a[y]eT r in other dialects. Even more strikingly, many innovative AR speakers replace voiced [z) ] with voiceless [s) ]: eT [s) ]a [s) ]egoT a[s) ]eT r. 1 In AR, [z) ] alternates systematically and obligatorily with [j] in both stems and affixes : (1) a. [j]-[z) ] alternation in stem Urugua! [j] ' Uruguay ' Urugua! [z) ]-o ' Uruguayan ' le! [j] ' law ' le! [z) ]-es ' laws ' b. [j]-[z) ] alternation in affix crec-[j]e! ndo ' growing ' cre-[z) ]e! ndo ' believing ' crec-[j]o! 's\he grew ' cre-[z) ]o! 's\he believed ' The instances of [j] in (1) are common to all dialects, but those of [z) ] are not : other dialects have [j] or [y] in these cases. The special contribution of AR can now be appreciated : thanks to the perceptual salience and obligatory distribution of AR [z) ], it is easy to recognise and characterise accurately distinctions in AR that are more subtle, variable or nonexistent in other dialects. Also, the phenomenon of aspiration in AR (roughly, realisation of \s\ as [h]), which many dialects lack, interacts in an instructive way-with slight but significant differences between the two dialects examined-with the processes that control the distribution of palatal vowels, glides and obstruents. For example, we show how the underlying phonological strings \deserto\ ' desert ' and \deserba\ ' weeding ' surface in AR with the strikingly different realisations de[sj]eT rto and de[hy]eT rba, respectively. Palatals in Argentinian Spanish 119 We propose that all of the non-consonantal segments (' vocoids ') [i j u w] and the consonantal segments that we transcribe as ...

Underlying and derived glides in Middle High German

“…Third, the proposed analysis of underlying glides as [+consonantal] is more explanatory than the alternative featural approach defended by Nevins & Chitoran (2008) which employs the feature [±vocalic]. Fourth, the treatment of derived glides in diphthongs supports the model of nuclear structure proposed by Harris & Kaisse (1999) on the basis of the patterning of glides in Argentinian Spanish. According to that model, a complex nucleus consists of a second projection of N, which is the locus of glides.…”

“…Following Levin (1985), Kenstowicz & Rubach (1987) and Harris & Kaisse (1999), I posit that the syllable is characterized as projections of the primitive category N (= nucleus). In that model the terms "coda" and "onset" are mere names for the complement of the first (N') and second (N'') projections of N. A word consisting of consonant plus vowel plus consonant (CVC) therefore has the representation in (8).…”

“…In that model the terms "coda" and "onset" are mere names for the complement of the first (N') and second (N'') projections of N. A word consisting of consonant plus vowel plus consonant (CVC) therefore has the representation in (8). Following Levin (1985), Kenstowicz & Rubach (1987) and Harris & Kaisse (1999), I posit that the syllable is characterized as projections of the primitive category N (= nucleus). In that model the terms "coda" and "onset" are mere names for the complement of the first (N') and second (N'') projections of N. A word consisting of consonant plus vowel plus consonant (CVC) therefore has the representation in (8).…”

“…the /w/ in /lewǝ/) cannot be alternatively captured by analyzing either one or both of the adjacent vowels as underlyingly nuclear and the surface glide as a segment lacking an underlying nucleus. Linguists who advocate the latter approach for glides with a phonologically deviant behavior in other languages include Levin (1995), Guerssel (1986), and Harris & Kaisse (1999). Third, the proposed analysis of underlying glides as [+consonantal] is more explanatory than the alternative featural approach defended by Nevins & Chitoran (2008) which employs the feature [±vocalic].…”

“…Both treatments in (4) have a number of adherents. Advocates of the underlying peak analysis include Levin (1985), Guerssel (1986) and Harris & Kaisse (1999). Some of the linguists who adopt some variant of the underlying glide approach are Hume (1994), Hyman (2003), Levi (2004), Hall (2006), Nevins & Chitoran (2008) and Levi (2011).…”