1. natural laboratories for the generative phonologist Ellen M. Kaisse University of Washington

2.  2013 Summer Institute on Universality and Variability; Hale lecture  publication of Labov et al., One Hundred Years of Sound Change in Philadelphia: Linear Incrementation, Reversal, and Reanalysis in Language

3.  Weinreich 1954 ‘Is a structural dialectology possible?’ Word  Moulton 1968 ‘Structural dialectology’ LSA presidential address, Language

4.  Two dialects of Spanish Argentinian, especially Rio Negro and Neuquén Pasiego, from Northwestern Spain  Five dialects of Finnish, most near Helsinki (Anttila, Paunonen)  Three dialect areas of Southeast Modern Greek, phenomenon related to the Finnish case

5. Vowel-glide-consonant alternations and variation in Spanish illuminated by Argentinian [ ʃ ] (Harris & Kaisse 1999

6. The problem distribution Non-Arg dialects: [ ʝ ate] ‘yacht’ but [jena]~[i.ena]’hyena’ No contrast intervocalically – klarabo ʝ a ‘skylight’

7. [ ʃ ] voiceless strident palato-alveolar fricative [ ʝ ]voiced non-strident palatal fricative (I omit affricated variants of [ ʃ ] and [ ʝ ] for ease of presentation) [j]voiced palatal (high front) glide [i]high front (palatal) vowel

8. There is subtle, variable, ill-distributed contrast or exception feature in (e.g.) Castilian Sp. resulting variously in [ ʝ ] [j] [i]. It’s utterly clear in Argentinian that there are two different underlying segments: (1) an [ ʃ ] ~ [j] (/i/) phoneme vs (2) one that alternates between [ ʝ ] and [j], call it /i./ 

11. u.ru. ˈ γ waju.ru. ˈ γ wa. ʃ -o Uruguayuruguay-ADJ.M.SG UruguayUruguayan lejle. ʃ -es lawlaw-PL lawlaws /i/  [j], [ ʃ ]

12. kre.s-jokre.- ˈʃ o/-io/ grow-PST.3SGbelieve-PST.3SG C-final stem kresV-final stem kre-

13. σ Ons Rhyme l e j kre.s[jo] rhyme /kres-io/σ Ons Rhyme l e ʃ e s kre. ʃ [o] rhyme /kre-io/

14. σ Ons Nuc Ons Nuc kr e s joσ OnsNucOns Nuc kr e ʃ o

15. /i/ is realized as [ ʃ ] in onset in rhyme (as an offglide or onglide) it is realized as [j] (and if no non-high vowel is adjacent, it is realized as [i])

16. /i/Ar. ˈʃ ate‘yacht’ (Cast. ˈʝ ate) “/i./”Ar. ˈʝ ena‘hyena’ (Cast. ˈ jena or i. ˈ ena) Argentinian minimal pair (Lozano 1979) ˈʃ erba ‘dried tea leaf ’ ˈʝ erba ‘herb’ /i//i./

17. /i/Arklara ˈ β o ʃ a skylight /i./Arpara ˈ no ʝ a or para ˈ noja paranoia (Cast. klara ˈ β o ʝ a para ˈ no ʝ a) (contrast invisible in this position) (Harris and Kaisse 1999)

18. /i/bi ˈ sjamos ‘we pollute’ bo ˈ njato‘sweet potato’ /i./basi ˈ amos ‘we empty’ di. ˈ a β lo‘devil’

19. We were able to reduce this syllabicity contrast to the same contrast that underlies ʃ in onset vs / ʝ / in onset in AR: /i/ vs /i/(what we called “i.” above) | Nuc

20. An informal experiment with nonce forms yields the predicted result. Spanish has a 3-syllable stress window at right edge of word. ta ˈ rabo ʃ a and words like it were judged acceptable ta ˈ raboja or ta ˈ rabo ʝ a were judged unacceptable. tara ˈ boja is fine.

21. ta ˈ rabo ʃ a /taraboia/ → ta.ra.bo.ja *ta ˈ raboja or/tarabo i a/ → ta.ra.bo.i.a *ta ˈ rabo ʝ a | Nuc Postlexical rules then yield the surface form where.i. is realized as [j] in [taraboja]

22. The contribution of Northwestern Iberian Spanish: Vowel harmony in Pasiego Spanish: evidence for the syllabic position of glides (Penny 1969, 2009; Hualde 1989, Kaisse & Levi 2004, Kaisse forthcoming)

27. Mid vowels are raised to high when a stressed high vowel follows (Penny 1969; Hualde 1989) be ˈ b-erbi ˈ b-is /beb-e/ drink-INFdrink-2PL ko ˈ m-erkum-i ˈ ria/kom-e-/ eat-INFeat-COND

28. A glide in a stressed syllable will also trigger the process. (Penny 1969) /merend-/ meren ˈ d-ermir ˈ jend- ɐ snack-INFsnack-fem

29. Harmony applies between a function word and the next word: el pánil k ʊ r ˈ d ɪ r ʊ the breadthe lamb el ga ˈ nawil ˈ mjew /el/ the cattlethe fear

30. But the palatal allophone in onset (our Argentinian ʃ, Pas. [ ʝ ]) does not trigger harmony (Kaisse & Levi 2004; Kaisse forthcoming) el ˈʝ elsu‘the plaster’ ne ʝ ó‘nor I’ (forms from Penny)

31. Dialects of Modern Greek in Rhodes and the southeast; dialects of Finnish. The treatment of *ea and *ia

32. What can happen (and what doesn’t happen) when small changes are made in the grammar (rule ordering; constraint ranking, partial ordering)

33. *ea >> *ia; F AITH (don’t mess with UR) Coalescence to [ee] eliminates non- optimal sequences Partial pairwise ordering allows for a limited pattern of variation / usea – mp – i – a / many-COMP-PL-PAR ˈ useampia ~ ˈ useempia ~ ˈ useampii ~ ˈ useempii in Helskinki

34. 5 Finnish dialects explained simply by partially ordering 3 constraints and assuming there is a fixed ranking: *ea >>*ia so /ia/ hiatus is eliminated in a dialect only if /ea/ hiatus is as well FAITH may or may not be ranked between the other two constraints.

35. ia hiatus is eliminated in a dialect only if ea hiatus is as well Due to modulation? (Ohala and Kawasaki- Fujimuri (1997); Henke, Kaisse and Wright 2012)

36. /ea/ /ia/ Literary Finnishea General Hämeee Töölö(Helsinki ea~ee older upper class females Western Uusimaaee Colloquial Helsinkiea~ee ia ia~ii

41.  Virtually all Modern Greek dialects underwent sound changes (which may still be alive as phonological rules) Height dissimilation (ea > ia; eo >io oa >ua; ) *rome-os > romios (cf. rome-ikos) ‘Greek’ Glide formation (iV > jV, Vi> Vj) *romeos > romios > romjos *pe  i-a > pe  ja ‘foot-PL’ (cf. pe  i ‘foot’SG)

42. *fleva > flea ‘vein’ *ro  a > roa ‘grape Then what? Conservative dialects of SE Greek, including Chios do nothing more Somewhat innovative dialects of Rhodes and other SE dialects apply height diss. Very innovative dialects of central Rhodes apply diss. and glide formation (Andriotis 1939, Tsopanakis 1940; Newton 1972; Kaisse 1976)

43. No dialect changes new ia to [ja] but leaves new ea intact. Compare to Finnish

44. Other Greek flevakrivo Cyprus, fleakrio Chios Dodecanese,fliakrio conserv. Rhodes innov. Rhodesfljakrjo

45. All these rules may be involved in synchronic alternations ˈ spiti ˈ spitjahouse SG, PL rom ˈ jos ro ˈ meikos Greek (N, ADJ) o ˈ askalos ton ˈ  askalo / ˈ  askalo/ DET-nom teacher DET-acc teacher

46. New hiatus undergoes height dissimilation New hiatus undergoes height dissimilation and gliding New hiatus undergoes height dissimilation Chios: new hiatus undergoes no process

47. In the somewhat innovative dialects of Rhodes:  Height Dissimilation < Glide formation (feeding)  Glide Formation < Fricative Deletion (counter-feeding)  Fricative Deletion < Height dissimilation (feeding)

48.  Rule reordering (height dissimilation and gliding are both old, pan-Greek rules that come to apply to new sequences in some dialects)  Functional/modulatory explanations; fixed rankings (Kaisse 1976, Anttila 2009)  Ordering paradox (Anderson 1974)  Scattered rule (Robinson 1976)  Counter-feeding from the past (Wolf 2010)

49.  The meticulous documentation of dialects provides future researchers with invaluable data the original scholar may never have anticipated. (Keep good lab notebooks!)  Working on related dialects allows linguists to leverage their knowledge. Most of what has already been figured out is applicable to another dialect.

50.  A less studied dialect (e.g. Argentinian Spanish) may hold just enough clues to clarify an otherwise intractable problem in a well-studied relative  Sometimes you can go out and find a dialect that will test a prediction you’ve made (Pasiego) 

51.  Adjacent dialects can embody a typology, suggesting what may be possible vs impossible changes or states of optional vs obligatory alternation (Finnish monophthongization)  Comparing such typologies (between SE Greek and Finnish, for instance) can reveal unsuspected similarities (ea is a worse hiatus than ia, solved differently)

52.  Adjacent dialects give insight into diachronic developments and how they may be reflected in synchronic grammars (SE Greek)  To find cases such as might distinguish HS vs OT, the little laboratories of adjacent (Greek) dialects provide a great opportunity for finding that the right experiment has been done.

53. Anderson, Steven R. (1974) The organization of phonology. Academic Press, San Diego. Andriotis, N. P. (1939) De quelques faits phonetiques du dialecte moderne de Samothrace. Archeinon tou Thrakikou laographikou kai glossikou thesaurou 6:153- 208. Anttila, Arto (2007) Variation and optionality. In Paul De Lacy, ed. The Cambridge handbook of phonology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 519-536. Anttila, Arto (2009) Derived environment effects in colloquial Helsinki Finnish. In Kristin Hanson and Sharon Inkelas, eds. The nature of the word: essays in honor of Paul Kiparsky. Cambridge: MIT Press.

54. Harris, James W. and Ellen M. Kaisse (1999) Palatal vowels, glides and obstruents in Argentinian Spanish. Phonology 16.2, 117-190. Henke, Eric, Ellen M. Kaisse and Richard Wright (2012). Is the sonority hierarchy an epiphenomenon? In Steve Parker, ed., The sonority controversy. De Gruyter. Hualde, Jose I. (1989) A.tosegmental and metrical spreading in the vowel harmony systems of Northwestern Spain. Linguistics 27:773-805. Hulst, Harry van der and Jeroen van der Weijer (1995) Vowel harmony, in Handbook of phonological theory, ed. by John Goldsmith. 495-534. Kaisse, Ellen M. (1976) Rule reordering, local order, and the function of rules. CLS 12, 321-336.

55. Kaisse, Ellen M. (forthcoming) Glides in Pasiego vowel harmony. In Rafael A. Núñez Cedeño (ed.) The Syllable in Romance Languages: Studies in Honor of James W. Harris. Boston: Mouton de Gruyter Kaisse, Ellen M. and Susannah V. Levi (2004) Vowel harmony: nucleus to nucleus or vocalic node to vocalic node. Annual Meeting of the LSA, Boston Labov, William, Ingrid Rosenfelder and Josef Fruehwald (2013) One Hundred Years of Sound Change in Philadelphia: Linear Incrementation, Reversal, and Reanalysis. Language 89: 30-65

56. Lozano, Maria del Carmen (1979) Stop and spirant alternations: fortition and spirantization processes in Spanish. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University. Moulton, William (1968) Structural dialectology. Language 44:451-456.Navarro Tomas, Tomas (1965) Manuel de pronunciacion española. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Madrid. Newton, Brian (1971) Ordering paradoxes in phonology. Journal of Linguistics 7:1, 31-53. Newton, Brian (1972b) The generative interpretation of dialect: a study of Modern Greek phonology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

57. Ohala, John J. and Haruko Kawasaki-Fukimori (1997) Alternatives to the sonority hierarchy for explaining segmental sequencing constraints. In Stig Eliasson and Ernst Håkon Jahr (eds.), Language and its ecology: essays in honor of Einar Haugen. 343-366. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. Paunonen, Heiki (1995) Suomen kielin Helsigissä, Helsinki. Penny, Ralph (1969) El habla pasiega: ensayo de dialectologia montañesa. Tamesis Books Ltd., London. Penny, Ralph (2009) Vowel Harmony and Metaphony in Iberia: A Revised Analysis. Estudos de lingüística galega 1: 113-134

58. Robinson, Orin W. (1976) A ‘scattered’ rule in Swiss German. Language 52:1. 148-162 Tsopanakis, A.G. (1940). Essai sur le phonetique des parlers du Rhodes. Verlagder Byzantinisch- Neogriechischen Jahrbucher, Athens. Weinreich, Uriel (1954) Is a structural dialectology possible? Word 10: 388-400. Wolf, Matthew (2010) On the existence of counterfeeding from the past. Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Baltimore.