1887
image of Variation and stability of American Norwegian /r/ in contact
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Sound patterns in heritage languages are often highly variable, potentially with influences from majority languages. Yet, the core phonological system of the heritage language tends to remain stable. This article considers variation in the phonetic and phonological patterns of /r/ in American Norwegian heritage language speakers from neighboring communities in western Wisconsin, in the Upper Midwestern United States. Drawing on acoustic data from speakers born between 1879 and 1957, I examine the distribution of four rhotic allophones, including an English-like approximant, over time. These data reveal an increase of approximants that is structured within the Norwegian phonological system and its processes. Furthermore, analyzing these changes with the proposed modular framework provides clarity for how heritage language sound systems do and do not change under contact and contributes to our understanding of the asymmetric phonetic and phonological heritage language patterns.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lab.20085.nat
2021-04-15
2021-05-10
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amengual, M.
    (2016) Acoustic correlates of the Spanish tap-trill contrast: Heritage and L2 Spanish speakers. Heritage Language Journal, 13(2), 88–112. 10.46538/hlj.13.2.2
    https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.13.2.2 [Google Scholar]
  2. Avery, P., & Idsardi, W.
    (2001) Laryngeal dimensions, completion and enhancement. InT. A. Hall (Ed.), Distinctive feature theory (pp.41–70). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110886672.41
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110886672.41 [Google Scholar]
  3. Avery, P., & Rice, K.
    (1989) Segment structure and coronal underspecification. Phonology, 6(2), 179–200. 10.1017/S0952675700001007
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700001007 [Google Scholar]
  4. Benmamoun, E., Montrul, S., & Polinsky, M.
    (2013) Heritage languages and their speakers: Opportunities and challenges for linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 39(3–4), 129–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D.
    (2020) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 6.1.16. www.praat.org/, accessedJune 22, 2020.
  6. Cavirani, E. & van Oostendorp, M.
    (2019) Empty morphemes in Dutch dialect atlases: Reducing morphosyntactic variation by refining emptiness typology. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 4(1), 88. 10.5334/gjgl.689
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.689 [Google Scholar]
  7. Dorian, N.
    (1993) Internally and externally motivated changes in language contact settings: Doubts about the dichotomy. InC. Jones (Ed.), Historical linguistics: Problems and perspectives (pp.131–155). Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dresher, B. E.
    (2009) The contrastive hierarchy in phonology. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511642005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511642005 [Google Scholar]
  9. Dresher, B. E., Piggott, G., & Rice, K.
    (1994) Contrast in phonology: Overview. InC. Dyck (Ed.), Toronto working papers in linguistics12 (pp.i–vi). Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fruehwald, J.
    (2017) The role of phonology in phonetic change. Annual Review of Linguistics, 3, 25–42. 10.1146/annurev‑linguistics‑011516‑034101
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011516-034101 [Google Scholar]
  11. Godson, L.
    (2004) Vowel production in the speech of Western Armenian heritage speakers. Heritage Language Journal, 2(1), 45–70. 10.46538/hlj.2.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.2.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hall, D. C.
    (2011) Phonological contrast and phonetic enhancement: Dispersedness without dispersion. Phonology, 28(1), 1–54. 10.1017/S0952675711000029
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675711000029 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hamann, S.
    (2003) The phonetics and phonology of retroflexes. [Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University]. Utrecht University Repository. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/627.
  14. Haugen, E.
    (1969) The Norwegian language in America: A study in bilingual behavior (2nd ed., Vols.1–2). University of Indiana Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Henriksen, N.
    (2015) Acoustic analysis of the rhotic contrast in Chicagoland Spanish: An intergenerational study. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(3), 285–321. 10.1075/lab.5.3.01hen
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.5.3.01hen [Google Scholar]
  16. Hjelde, A.
    (1996) Some phonological changes in a Norwegian dialect in America. InP. S. Ureland & I. Clarkson (Eds.), Language contact across the North Atlantic (pp.283–295). Max Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783110929652.283
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110929652.283 [Google Scholar]
  17. Howell, R. B.
    (1991) Old English breaking and its Germanic analogues. Max Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783111356501
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111356501 [Google Scholar]
  18. (1993) German immigration and the development of regional variants of American English: Using contact theory to discover our roots. InJ. Salmons (Ed.), The German language in America (pp.188–217). Max Kade Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hualde, J. I.
    (2005) The sounds of Spanish. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Iverson, G., & Salmons, J.
    (1995) Aspiration and laryngeal representation in Germanic. Phonology, 12(3), 369–396. 10.1017/S0952675700002566
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700002566 [Google Scholar]
  21. Johannessen, J. B.
    (2015) The Corpus of American Norwegian Speech (CANS). InB. Megyesi (Ed.), Proceedings of the 20th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (pp.297–300). Linköping University Electronic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Johannessen, J. B., & Laake, S.
    (2012) Østnorsk som fellesdialekt i Midtvesten. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift, 30(2), 365–380.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Johannessen, J. B., & Vaux, B.
    (2013) Retroflex variation and methodological issues: A reply to Simonsen, Moen, and Cowen (2009). Journal of Phonetics, 41(1), 48–55. 10.1016/j.wocn.2012.09.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2012.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kehoe, M.
    (2002) Developing vowel systems as a window to bilingual phonology. International Journal of Bilingualism, 6(3), 315–334. 10.1177/13670069020060030601
    https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069020060030601 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2018) The development of rhotics: A comparison of monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(4), 710–731. 10.1017/S1366728916001279
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728916001279 [Google Scholar]
  26. Keyser, S. & Stevens, K.
    (2006) Enhancement and overlap in the speech chain. Language, 82(1), 33–63. 10.1353/lan.2006.0051
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0051 [Google Scholar]
  27. Kim, J. Y., & Repiso Puigdelliura, G.
    (2019) Deconstructing heritage language dominance: Effects of proficiency, use, and input on heritage language speakers’ production of the Spanish alveolar tap. Phonetica, 77(1), 55–80. 10.1159/000501188
    https://doi.org/10.1159/000501188 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kristoffersen, G.
    (2000) The phonology of Norwegian. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Kupisch, T.
    (2020) Towards modelling heritage speakers’ sound systems. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 29–30. 10.1017/S1366728919000385
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000385 [Google Scholar]
  30. Kupisch, T., Barton, D., Hailer, K., Klaschik, E., Stangen, I., Lein, T., van de Weijer, J.
    (2014) Foreign accent in adult simultaneous bilinguals. Heritage Language Journal, 11(2), 123–150. 10.46538/hlj.11.2.2
    https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.11.2.2 [Google Scholar]
  31. Ladefoged, P., & Maddieson, I.
    (1996) The sounds of the world’s languages. Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Lindau, M.
    (1985) The story of r. InV. A. Fromkin (Ed.), Phonetic Linguistics: Essays in honor of Peter Ladefoged (pp.157–168). Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Lléo, C.
    (2018) Aspects of the phonology of Spanish as a heritage language: From incomplete acquisition to transfer. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(4), 732–747. 10.1017/S1366728917000165
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728917000165 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lléo, C., Kuchenbrandt, I., Kehoe, M., & Trujillo, C.
    (2003) Syllable final consonants in Spanish and German monolingual and bilingual acquisition. InN. Müller (Ed.), (In)vulnerable domains in multilingualism (pp.191–220). John Benjamins. 10.1075/hsm.1.08lle
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.1.08lle [Google Scholar]
  35. Natvig, D.
    (2019) Levels of representation in phonetic and phonological contact. InJ. Darquennes, J. Salmons & W. Vandenbussche (Eds.), Language contact: An international handbook (Vol.1, pp.88–99). De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. (2020) Rhotic underspecification: Deriving variability and arbitrariness through phonological representations. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1), 48. doi:  10.5334/gjgl.1172
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1172 [Google Scholar]
  37. Natvig, D., & Salmons, J.
    (2020) Fully accepting variation in (pre)history: The pervasive heterogeneity of Germanic rhotics. InP. C. Sutcliffe (Ed.), The polymath intellectual: A festschrift in honor of Robert D. King (pp.81–102). Agarita Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Oh, J., Au, T. K.-F., Knightly, L., Jun, S.-A.
    (2003) Holding on to childhood language memory. Cognition, 86(3), B53–B64. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(02)00175‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00175-0 [Google Scholar]
  39. Polinsky, M.
    (2018) Heritage languages and their speakers. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781107252349
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107252349 [Google Scholar]
  40. Polinsky, M., & Scontras, G.
    (2020) Understanding heritage languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 4–20. 10.1017/S1366728919000245
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000245 [Google Scholar]
  41. Purnell, T., & Raimy, E.
    (2015) Distinctive features, levels of representation and historical phonology. InP. Honeybone & J. Salmons (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of historical phonology (pp.522–544). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Putnam, M. T., Kupisch, T., & Pascual y Cabo, D.
    (2018) Different situations, similar outcomes: Heritage grammars across the lifespan. InD. Miller, F. Bayram, J. Rothman, & L. Serratrice (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language: The state of the science across its subfields (pp.251–279). John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.54.12put
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.54.12put [Google Scholar]
  43. Putnam, M. T., Perez-Cortes, S., & Sánchez, L.
    (2019) Language attrition and the feature reassembly hypothesis. InB. Köpke & M. Schmid (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language attrition (pp.18–24). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Rice, K.
    (2009) Nuancing markedness: A place for contrast. InE. Raimy & C. E. Cairnes (Eds.), Contemporary views on architecture and representations in phonology (pp.311–321). Cambridge, MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262182706.003.0015
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262182706.003.0015 [Google Scholar]
  46. Ross, H. R.
    (1907) Norske Bygdemaal: III–IV: Oust-Telemaal o Numedalsmaal; Hallingmaal o Valdresmaal; Gudbrandsdalsmaal; Upplandsmaal. A.W. Brøggers.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Rothman, J.
    (2009) Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 155–163. 10.1177/1367006909339814
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006909339814 [Google Scholar]
  48. Salmons, J.
    (2016) Rhotics in language contact: Phonetics and phonology of variation in real time. 7th Workshop on Immigrant Languages in the Americas, Athens, GA.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. (in press). Sound change. Edinburgh University Press. 10.1093/obo/9780199772810‑0098
    https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0098 [Google Scholar]
  50. Salmons, J., & Purnell, T.
    (2020) Contact and the development of American English. InR. Hickey (Ed.), The handbook of language contact (2nd ed., pp.361–383). Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781119485094.ch18
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119485094.ch18 [Google Scholar]
  51. Schiller, N. O.
    (1999) The Phonetic Variation of German /r/. InM. Butt & N. Fuhrhop (Eds.), Variation und Stabilität in der Wortstruktur: Untersuchungen zu Entwicklung, Erwerb und Varietäten des Deutschen und anderer Sprachen (pp.261–287). Georg Olms Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Stevens, K., Keyser, S., & Kawasaki, H.
    (1986) Toward a phonetic and phonological theory of redundant features. InJ. S. Perkell & D. H. Klatt (Eds.), Invariance and variability in speech processes (pp.426–449). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Tanner, J., Sonderegger, M., & Stuart-Smith, J.
    (2020) Structured speaker variability in Japanese stops: Relationships within versus across cues to stop voicing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 148(2), 793–804. 10.1121/10.0001734
    https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0001734 [Google Scholar]
  54. Trubetzkoy, N. S.
    (1969) Principles of phonology (C. A. M. Baltaxe, Trans.). University of California Press. (Original work published 1939).
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Van Coetsem, F.
    (1988) Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Foris Publications USA. 10.1515/9783110884869
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110884869 [Google Scholar]
  56. Weinreich, U., Labov, W., & Herzog, M. I.
    (1968) Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. InW. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (Eds.), Directions in historical linguistics (pp.97–195). University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Wilkerson, M. E., & Salmons, J.
    (2008) “Good old immigrants of yesteryear” who didn’t learn English: Germans in Wisconsin. American Speech, 83(3), 259–283. 10.1215/00031283‑2008‑020
    https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-2008-020 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lab.20085.nat
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.20085.nat
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: rhotics; phonology; Heritage language bilingualism; Norwegian
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