Lecture 5 Syllable Complexity

Possibility & Existence plp kmp  ‘pulp’ ‘camp’ ‘kept’ (existing)  pIlp kImp  non-sense (possible) pIpl kIpm  (impossible)

Tripartite Distinction The dimensions of possibility and existence need to be kept carefully apart: Existing Words  Haphazard  lexical inclusion   Non-existent but Possible Words   Phonological  well-formedness   Non-existent and Impossible Words 

Possible vs. Impossible A liquid only occurs as a left sibling: Possible Impossible   plp, pIlp pIpl A left nasal sibling assimilates, in place, to its right sibling: kmp, kImp kInp

Why? Sonority Sequencing The sonority gap of two degrees is relaxed (pink, film, …). Assimilation The restriction follows from the rule of place assimilation in nasals. Two Stops Sonority Sequencing that requires a post vocalic fall in sonority is either too strong or that two stops do not constitute a complex coda. ?

No Rise Can we say that there are no sonority restrictions on English complex codas ? However, sonority does not rise in complex codas. What can we say about the words below, where only the first vowel, in spelling, has phonetic reality? Sonority funnel … nasal (2) > liquid (3) button … obstruent (1) > nasal (2) sickle … obstruent (1) > liquid (3)

Monosyllabic or Bisyllabic At first sight, such forms may seem to syllabify as: onset + simple nucleus + complex coda ( C V CC ) However, closer inspection reveals that those forms are not monosyllabic; they are bisyllabic: [f.nl] ‘funnel’ [b.tn] ‘button’ [sI.kl] ‘sickle’

Monosyllabic or Bisyllabic    O R O R O R N Cd N N s I l k s I k l

Sonority Profile The reason for the divergent syllabification is the syllable sonority profile shaped by the Sonority Sequencing Principle. A word like silk will comply with this principle, but a monosyllabic sickle will not.

One Syllable One Peak

One Syllable Two Peaks ?

Non-vocalic Nuclei The sonority trough on [k] prevents the consonant cluster [kl] from being a valid coda. English is a language that relaxes the requirement of vocalic nuclei. A sonorant consonant is allowed as nucleus.

Two Syllables Two Peaks

Semivowels The non-syllabic segments /w/ and /j/, in words like well and yes, are semivowels (glides or semi-consonants). They have the phonetic characteristics of vowels, but the phonological behaviour of consonants: produced without obstructing the airflow vowels always occurring in syllable margins, but never as nuclei consonants

Semivowels   O R O R N Cd N Cd t w a I n t w I n

Sonority Scale In the sonority scale, semivowels occupy an intermediate level between vowels and liquids: Most sonorous 5 Vowels  4 Semivowels  3 Liquids  2 Nasals Least sonorous 1 Obstruents

Minimum Sonority Distance The sonority distance restriction imposed on English onset siblings is set as a minimum not as a fixed value. The liquid obstruent difference of (2) is the minimum: 3 - 1 = 2 l p (pli:z) ‘please’ However, the semivowel obstruent difference is certainly higher: 4 - 1 = 3 w k (kwi:n) ‘queen’

Formalization  O R N x y Sonority Conditions: (i) y  4 (ii) y - x  2

Gaps Consider the following: twin tw --- pw dwell dw --- bw thwart w --- mw swell sw --- fw queen kw --- vw Gwyn gw Why ?

Place of Articulation Like many other languages, English dislikes siblings with an identical place of articulation. This is a phonologically motivated restriction. This offers a justification for those gaps. Both sounds in such clusters share the feature [labial].

The OCP This tendency of constituent siblings not to have similar places of articulation is stated formally in the OCP: Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP): Similar melodies are disfavoured as constituent siblings. The OCP is more of a tendency than a principle, and it is subject to a considerable number of exceptions.

Segment Parsing Segment parsing into syllabic subconstituents is guided by the sonority profile. English peaks require a sonority level of 5: N N N N N N    f I k n  p k I n p  m p k I n 5 5 5 5 5 5

Segment Parsing Segments to the left of the nucleus are parsed in the onset, and those to its right to the coda. Parsing is conditional on compatibility with the Sonority Sequencing:       O R O R O R O R O R O R N N Cd N Cd N Cd N Cd N Cd    f I k n  p k I n p  m p k I n 1 3 5 1 5 1 2 5 1 1 5 2 1 5 2 1 1 5 2

Onset Fulfilment An intervocalic consonant such as /f/ in traffic qualifies, in principle, as an onset or as a coda. However, languages show an overwhelming tendency to assign an intervocalic consonant to the onset. This situation is expressed in the principle of Minimal Onset Satisfaction: Minimal Onset Satisfaction Minimal satisfaction of onsets takes priority over satisfaction of codas.

Theory-internal Justification Minimal Onset Satisfaction maintains core syllable parsing: /VCVCV/  [V.CV.CV] *[VC.VC.V]

Empirical Justification In non-rhotic accents of English, the // is not phonetically realized in words like car , bar, … These accents do not admit [] in codas. However, the // is realized phonetically in words like carriage, barring, …, when parsed as an onset. Therefore, whenever the two positions are available, onset satisfaction takes priority over satisfaction of codas.

Empirical Justification    O R O R O R N N Cd N        ‘barring’ ‘bar’

Intervocalic Consonants Consider the forms below with intervocalic consonant clusters: comply contrive recline compress recruit Intuitively, the relevant syllable divisions are as follows: com.ply con.trive re.cline com.press re.cruit

Intervocalic Consonants However, the following divisions are also possible, as they incur no violation of Sonority Sequencing and maintain Minimal Onset Satisfaction: comp.ly cont.rive rec.line comp.ress rec.ruit Why not ?

Aspiration A voiceless stop, in English, is aspirated when it occurs in the onset of a stressed syllable. The marked are aspirated: comply contrive recline compress recruit So, they must qualify for the description, of occurring in an onset rather than a coda.

Onset Maximization Intervocalic consonant clusters are allotted to the onset, unless prevented by conditions on syllabification. This is formalized as follows: Onset Maximization Maximal formation of onsets takes priority over formation of codas.

Initial sC Clusters Consider the following forms: slow sl- (sonority distance 4 – 2 = 2) small sm- (sonority distance 3 – 2 = 1) snow sn- (sonority distance 3 – 2 = 1) spy sp- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) stay st- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) sky sk- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) sphere sf- (sonority distance 1 – 1 = 0) Why (Minimal Sonority Distance) ?

Initial sC Clusters Consider the following: gap [tl] gap [dl] gap [l] sleep [sl] Why (OCP) ?

Initial sC Clusters Consider the following: Initial three-consonant clusters in English:  [   Nucleus …]      Gaps: [spw], [stl], [stw] Why (three-member onsets) ?

Extrasyllabicity The facts considered provide strong motivation to treat word-initial [s] differently. Being initial, allows licensing by association to a higher domain (Prosodic Word), hence its extrasyllabic status: PW  O R N s p a I

Summing up Sonority Sequencing is operative throughout the syllable. Vowels will generally form syllable nuclei and consonants syllable margins. However, Sonority Sequencing may drive sonorant consonants into nuclei. Phonotactic discrepancies between C/w/ and C/l/ onsets are accounted for by the Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP) which disfavours similar melodies in constituent siblings. The parsing of word medial consonants is governed by two principles Minimal Onset Satisfaction imposes the formation of a minimal onset in preference to a coda to conform to the Core Syllable CV. Onset Maximization favours the parsing of word-medial clusters as onsets.

Next Week Mid-term Test