1887
image of Liquid polarity, positional contrast, and diachronic change
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Apparently disparate sound changes in Latin, involving both vowels and consonants but sensitive to /r/, can be explained by reconstructing a positional clear/dark contrast in /r/, motivated by the seldom-mentioned “liquid polarity” effect. Examining these diachronic processes together allows us to see a larger picture, providing evidence for the reconstruction of successive past synchronic states. Latin /r/ mirrored the behaviour of Latin /l/ up to the first century BC: /l/ was dark and /r/ was clear in codas, and /r/ was dark and /l/ was underspecified for tongue body position in onsets. Darkness in /r/ was partly implemented through the selection of r-type: dark onset approximant and clear coda tap. Later, coda /r/ became an approximant like onset /r/, and subsequently both became trills, resulting in the erosion of the positional contrast and the liquid polarity effect.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dia.17032.sen
2022-01-21
2022-05-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adams, James N.
    1977The Vulgar Latin of the Letters of Claudius Terentianus (P. Mich. VIII, 46772). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2007The regional diversification of Latin, 200 BC – AD 600. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511482977
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511482977 [Google Scholar]
  3. AE
    AE = L’Année Épigraphique.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Allen, W. Sidney
    1989Vox Latina. The pronunciation of Classical Latin. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Barry, William J.
    1997 Another r-tickle. Journal of the International Phonetic Association27. 35–45. 10.1017/S0025100300005405
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100300005405 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo
    2015 Amphichronic explanation and the life cycle of phonological processes. InPatrick Honeybone & Joseph C. Salmons (eds.), The Oxford handbook of historical phonology, 374–399. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bhat, D. N. S.
    1974 The phonology of liquid consonants. Working Papers on Language Universals16. 73–104.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bladon, R. Anthony W. & Ameen Al-Bamerni
    1976 Coarticulation resistance in English /l/. Journal of Phonetics4. 137–150. 10.1016/S0095‑4470(19)31234‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31234-3 [Google Scholar]
  9. Blevins, Juliette & Andrew Garrett
    1998 The origins of consonant-vowel metathesis. Language74. 508–556. 10.1353/lan.1998.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1998.0012 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bowman, Alan & David Thomas
    1994The Vindolanda writing tablets (Tabulae Vindolandenses II). London: British Museum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Camodeca, Giuseppe
    1999Tabulae Pompeianae Sulpiciorum. Edizione critica dell’archivio puteolano dei Sulpicii. Rome: Quasar.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Carter, Paul
    2003 Extrinsic phonetic interpretation: Spectral variation in English liquids. InJ. K. Local, R. A. Ogden & R. A. Temple (eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology 6: Phonetic Interpretation, 237–252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Carter, Paul & John Local
    2007 F2 variation in Newcastle and Leeds English liquid systems. Journal of the International Phonetic Association37. 183–199. 10.1017/S0025100307002939
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100307002939 [Google Scholar]
  14. Catford, John C.
    2001 On Rs, rhotacism and paleophony. Journal of the International Phonetic Association31(2). 171–185. 10.1017/S0025100301002018
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100301002018 [Google Scholar]
  15. Cathcart, Chundra
    2012 Articulatory variation of the alveolar tap and implications for sound change. UC Berkeley Phonology Lab Annual Reports8(8). 76–110. 10.5070/P79N00618C
    https://doi.org/10.5070/P79N00618C [Google Scholar]
  16. Chen, Matthew. Y. & William. S. Wang
    1975 Sound change: Actuation and implementation. Language51(2). 255–281. 10.2307/412854
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412854 [Google Scholar]
  17. CIL
    CIL = 1862– Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. Berolini: Apud Georgium Reimerum & Walter De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Clackson, James & Geoffrey Horrocks
    2011The Blackwell history of the Latin language. Malden (MA), Oxford & Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Delattre, Pierre & Donald C. Freeman
    1968 A dialect study of American r’s by x-ray motion picture. Linguistics44. 29–68. 10.1515/ling.1968.6.44.29
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1968.6.44.29 [Google Scholar]
  20. De Vaan, Michiel A. C.
    2008Etymological dictionary of Latin and the other Italic languages. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Denton, Jeanette M.
    2003 Reconstructing the articulation of Early Germanic *r. Diachronica20. 11–43. 10.1075/dia.20.1.04den
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.20.1.04den [Google Scholar]
  22. Flemming, Edward S.
    2003 The relationship between coronal place and vowel backness. Phonology20. 353–373. 10.1017/S0952675704000041
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675704000041 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gurevich, Naomi
    2011 Lenition. InMarc van Oostendorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology, 1559–1575. Malden (MA), Oxford & Chichester: Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0066
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0066 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gordon, Matthew K.
    2016Phonological typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199669004.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199669004.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hall, Tracy A. & Silke Hamann
    2010 On the cross-linguistic avoidance of rhotic plus high front vocoid sequences. Lingua120. 1821–1844. 10.1016/j.lingua.2009.11.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hartmann, Markus
    2005Die frühlateinischen Inschriften und ihre Datierung. Eine linguistisch-archäologisch-paläographische Untersuchung. Bremen: Hempen Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hassall, Mark W. C. & Roger S. O. Tomlin
    1977 Inscriptions. Britannia8. 426–449. 10.1017/S0068113X00013441
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X00013441 [Google Scholar]
  28. Heid, Sebastian & Sarah Hawkins
    2000 An acoustical study of long domain /r/ and /l/ coarticulation. Proceedings of the 5th ISCA Seminar on Speech Production: Models and Data, 77–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Herman, József
    2000Vulgar Latin. Translated byRoger Wright. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Honeybone, Patrick
    2012 Lenition in English. InTerttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 773–787. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Huld, Martin E.
    2011 Was there an Indo-European word for ‘pear’?Journal of Indo-European Studies39. 380–394.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Jackson, Kenneth H.
    1953Language and history in early Britain: A chronological survey of the Brittonic languages, first to twelfth century A.D. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Juret, Abel-Claude
    1938La phonétique latine. Second edition. Paris: Société d’Édition les Belles Lettres.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Kavitskaya, Darya
    2002Compensatory lengthening: Phonetics, phonology, diachrony. London & New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Keil, Heinrich
    1855–1880Grammatici Latini. Eight volumes. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Kelly, John & John Local
    1989Doing phonology: Observing, recording, interpreting. Manchester & New York: Manchester University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kent, Roland G.
    1932The sounds of Latin. A descriptive and historical phonology. Baltimore: Waverly Press. 10.2307/521970
    https://doi.org/10.2307/521970 [Google Scholar]
  38. Ladefoged, Peter & Ian Maddieson
    1996The sounds of the world’s languages. Oxford & Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Lawson, Eleanor, Jane Stuart-Smith, James M. Scobbie, Malcah Yaeger-Dror & Margaret Maclagen
    2011 Liquids. InMarianna di Paolo & Malcah Yaeger-Dror. (eds.), Sociophonetics: A student’s guide, 72–86. London & New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Leumann, Manu
    1977Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre. Second edition. München: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Lindau, Mona
    1985 The story of /r/. InVictoria A. Fromkin. (ed.), Phonetic Linguistics. Essays in honor of Peter Ladefoged, 157–168. London: Academic Press Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. LIV
    LIV = Helmut Rix & Martin Kümmel 2001Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben. Second edition. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Maniet, Albert
    1957L’évolution phonétique et les sons du latin ancien dans le cadre des langues indo-européennes. Third edition. Louvain & Paris: Éditions Nauwelaerts & Béatrice-Nauwelaerts.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Meiser, Gerhard
    1998Historische Laut- und Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Meyer-Lübke, Wilhelm
    2009Romanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Seventh edition. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Monteil, Pierre
    1970Éléments de phonétique et morphologie du latin. Paris: Fac. Fernand Nathan.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Nussbaum, Alan J.
    1999 *Jocidus: an account of the Latin adjectives in -idus. InHeiner Eichner & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds.), Compositiones Indogermanicae in memoriam Jochem Schindler, 377–419. Praha: Enigma Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 2016 A note on Latin syllables and anaptyxis. InAndrew M. Byrd, Jessica DeLisi & Mark Wenthe (eds.), Tavet Tat Satyam: Studies in honor of Jared S. Klein on the occasion of his 70th birthday, 214–227. Ann Arbor & New York: Beech Stave Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Ohala, John J.
    2003 Phonetics and historical phonology. InBrian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 669–686. Maldon (MA), Oxford & Victoria: Blackwell Publishing. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch22
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch22 [Google Scholar]
  50. Ohala, John J. & Maria-Josep Solé
    2010 Turbulence and phonology. InSusanne Fuchs, Martine Toda & Marzena Zygis (eds.), Turbulent sounds: An interdisciplinary guide. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 37–97. 10.1515/9783110226584.37
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226584.37 [Google Scholar]
  51. OLD
    OLD = P. G. W. Glare (ed.) 1996Oxford Latin dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Olive, Joseph P., Alice Greenwood & John Coleman
    1993Acoustics of American English speech: A dynamic approach. New York: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Painter, Robert K.
    2011 Acoustic and perceptual explanations for rhotacism in Latin and Germanic. PhD dissertation, University at Buffalo, State University of New York.
  54. Parker, Holt N.
    1988 Latin *sisō >serō and related rules. Glotta66. 221–241.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Petolescu, Constantin C.
    1985 Valerius Vivianus, Biercus. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik61. 238.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Phillips, Betty S.
    2006Word frequency and lexical diffusion. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230286610
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230286610 [Google Scholar]
  57. Pighi, Giovanni B.
    1964Lettere latine d’un soldato di Traiano. PMich467–472. Bologna: Zanichelli Editore.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Powell, Jonathan G. F.
    2007 A new text of the Appendix Probi. Classical Quarterly57. 687–700. 10.1017/S0009838807000638
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838807000638 [Google Scholar]
  59. Pultrová, Lucie
    2013 On the phonetic nature of the Latin R. Eruditio Antiqua5. 21–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Recasens, Daniel
    2006 Gradient weakening of syllable-final /s, r/ in Majorcan Catalan consonant clusters. InH. C. Yehia, D. Demolin, & R. Laboissiere (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Seminar on Speech Production, 11–18. Cefala: Belo Horizonte.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 2012 Coarticulation in Catalan dark [ɫ] and the alveolar trill: General implications for sound change. Language and Speech56. 45–68. 10.1177/0023830912440790
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830912440790 [Google Scholar]
  62. Recasens, Daniel, Jordi Fontdevila & Maria Dolors Pallarès
    1995 Velarization degree and coarticulatory resistance for /l/ in Catalan and German. Journal of Phonetics23(1,2). 37–52. 10.1016/S0095‑4470(95)80031‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(95)80031-X [Google Scholar]
  63. Recasens, Daniel & Maria Dolors Pallarès
    1999 A study of /ɾ/ and /r/ in the light of the ‘DAC’ coarticulation model. Journal of Phonetics27. 143–169. 10.1006/jpho.1999.0092
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1999.0092 [Google Scholar]
  64. Recasens, Daniel, Maria Dolors Pallarès & Jordi Fontdevila
    1997 A model of lingual coarticulation based on articulatory constraints. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America102. 544–561. 10.1121/1.419727
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.419727 [Google Scholar]
  65. RIB
    RIB = R. G. Collingwood & R. P. Wright 1965The Roman inscriptions of Britain. 1, Inscriptions on stone. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Ritchie, James A.
    1999 R-Myth-athesis: A perception-based approach at understanding some r-related sound changes. InIrmengard Rauch & Gerald F. Carr (eds.), New insights in Germanic linguistics I, 211–222. New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Rix, Helmut
    1995 Einige lateinische Präsensstammbildungen zur Seṭ-Wurzeln. InWojciech Smoczyński (ed.), Kuryłowicz memorial volume. Part One, 399–408. Krakow: Universitas.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Romero, Joaquín & Sidney Martín
    2003 Articulatory weakening as basis of historical rhotacism. InMaria-Josep Solé, Daniel Recasens & Joaquin Romero (eds.), 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain, August 3–9, 2003, 2825–2828. Barcelona: IPA.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Scobbie, James M., Reenu Punnoose & Ghada Khattab
    2013 Articulating five liquids: A single speaker ultrasound study of Malayalam. InLorenzo Spreafico & Alessandro Vietti (eds.), Rhotics: New data and perspectives, 99–124. Bolzano: Bozen-Bolzano University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Sen, Ranjan
    2009 Syllable and segment in Latin. D. Phil. thesis, Oxford University.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 2012 Reconstructing phonological change: Duration and syllable structure in Latin vowel reduction. Phonology29. 465–504. 10.1017/S0952675712000231
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675712000231 [Google Scholar]
  72. 2015Syllable and segment in Latin. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660186.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660186.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  73. Sihler, Andrew
    1995New comparative grammar of Greek and Latin. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Solé, Maria-Josep
    2002 Aerodynamic characteristics of trills and phonological patterning. Journal of Phonetics30. 655–688. 10.1006/jpho.2002.0179
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.2002.0179 [Google Scholar]
  75. 2010 Effects of syllable position on sound change: An aerodynamic study of final fricative weakening. Journal of Phonetics38. 289–305. 10.1016/j.wocn.2010.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  76. Solin, Heikki & Paola Caruso
    2014 Dai nomi alle aree sepolcrali. Memorie beneventane in epigrafi note e inedite. Oebalus. 9. 63–89.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Spajić, Siniša, Peter Ladefoged & Peri Bhaskararao
    1996 The trills of Toda. Journal of the International Phonetic Association26. 1–21. 10.1017/S0025100300005296
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100300005296 [Google Scholar]
  78. Sproat, Richard & Osamu Fujimura
    1993 Allophonic variation in English /l/ and its implications for phonetic implementation. Journal of Phonetics21. 291–311. 10.1016/S0095‑4470(19)31340‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31340-3 [Google Scholar]
  79. Steriade, Donca
    2001 Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: A perceptual account. InElizabeth V. Hume & Keith Johnson (eds.), The role of speech perception in phonology, 220–250. San Diego; London: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Stuart-Smith, Jane
    2004Phonetics and philology: Sound change in Italic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199257737.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199257737.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  81. Sturtevant, Edgar H.
    1968The pronunciation of Greek and Latin. Second edition. Groningen: Bouma’s Boekhuis N. V. Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Tunley, Alison
    1999 Coarticulatory influences of liquids on vowels in English. PhD dissertation, Cambridge University.
  83. Vijūnas, Aurelijus
    2018 The mechanism for rhotacism re-visited: A typological parallel from East Asia. InDieter Gunkel, Stephanie W. Jamison, Angelo O. Mercado & Kazuhiko Yoshida (eds.), Vina diem celebrent: Studies in linguistics and philology in honor of Brent Vine, 415–425. Ann Arbor & New York: Beech Stave Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Weiss, Michael
    2009Outline of the historical and comparative grammar of Latin. Ann Arbor & New York: Beech Stave Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. . Forthcoming. Pig, cake and sun: Observations on the iúvila inscriptions. InSatoko Hisatsugi ed. Die italischen Sprachen – neue Aspekte in linguistischer und philologischer Hinsicht. Zur Erinnerung an Albert Debrunner. Hamburg: Baar-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. West, Paula
    1999 Perception of distributed coarticulatory properties of English /l/ and /ɹ/. Journal of Phonetics27. 405–426. 10.1006/jpho.1999.0102
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1999.0102 [Google Scholar]
  87. Westbury, John R., Michiko Hashi & Mary J. Lindstrom
    1998 Differences among speakers in lingual articulation for American English /ɹ/. Speech Communication26. 203–226. 10.1016/S0167‑6393(98)00058‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(98)00058-2 [Google Scholar]
  88. Wiese, Richard
    2011 The representation of rhotics. InMarc van Oostendorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology, 711–729. Malden (MA), Oxford & Chichester: Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0030
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0030 [Google Scholar]
  89. Wilson, David R. & Richard Pearson Wright
    1968 Roman Britain in 1967. Journal of Roman Studies58. 176–214. 10.2307/299706
    https://doi.org/10.2307/299706 [Google Scholar]
  90. Wright, Richard
    2004 A review of perceptual cues and cue robustness. InBruce Hayes, Robert Kirchner & Donca Steriade (eds.), Phonetically based phonology, 34–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486401.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486401.002 [Google Scholar]
  91. Zair, Nicholas
    2017 The origins of urC for expected orC in Latin. Glotta93. 255–289. 10.13109/glot.2017.93.1.255
    https://doi.org/10.13109/glot.2017.93.1.255 [Google Scholar]
  92. Zawadzki, Paul A. & David P. Kuehn
    1980 A cineradiographic study of static and dynamic aspects of American English /r/. Phonetica37(4). 253–266. 10.1159/000259995
    https://doi.org/10.1159/000259995 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/dia.17032.sen
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.17032.sen
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error