1. Lenition of branching Onsets: Celtic, Gorgia Toscana, Gallo-Romance
Going Romance 24
Leiden, 9-11 December 2010
Lenition of branching Onsets:
Celtic, Gorgia Toscana, Gallo-Romance
(dialectal evidence from the ALF)
Tobias Scheer &
Guylaine Brun-Trigaud
Université de Nice – Sophia Antipolis, UMR 6039

2. The Strong Position in Phonology
(in Romance and elsewhere, Ségéral & Scheer 2001, 2008)
- {#,C}__ = Strong Position: PORTA > porte
TALPA > taupe
- V__V = weak position A: FABA > fève
- __{#,C} = weak position B (Coda): LUP(U) > l[u]
RUPTA > route
the mirror effect: {#,C}__ vs. __{#,C} are symmetric
- with respect to their position: mirror image
- with respect to their effect: strength vs. weakness

3. The Coda Mirror: Government & Licensing
analysis in CVCV (Lowenstamm 1996, Scheer 2004)
initial consonant #__
post-Coda consonant C.__ C V - … | R T
Gvt
the initial CV = #
represents the morphological information
« beginning of the word » #
relevant consonants:
the word-initial consonant
the consonant that occurs after a coda
Lic
P O RTA T A L P A
consonants in Strong Position occur
after an empty nucleus
ø __
consonants in Strong Position are
licensed
but ungoverned
Government
inhibits the segmental expression of its target
empty nuclei must be governed
Licensing
promotes the segmental expression of its target

4. The Coda Mirror: Government & Licensing
intervocalic position V__V C V |
Gvt
Lic
intervocalic V__V: the consonant is
not adjacent to any empty nucleus
licencensed and governed
in coda position: the consonant
occurs before an empty nucleus: __ø
is neither licensed nor governed
F A B A
internal coda __.C
final coda __# … V C
...
V # | R T
Lic
Gvt
R U P T A L U P (U)

5. The Coda Mirror: Government & Licensing
summary
Strong Position = {#,C}__ = ø__ = strength = ungoverned but licensed
Coda = __{#,C} = __ ø = weak A = ungoverned and unlicensed
intervocalic = V__V = V__V = weak B = governed and licensed

6. branching onsets in CVCV
worse than making a wrong prediction:
making NO prediction at all
what a branching Onset looks like (after a consonant)
Gvt
Lic
branching onset
<== IG C V | T R
the solidarity of the cluster is due to a relationship that is contracted by the (melodies of) the two consonants: IG (Infrasegmental Government)
the liquid R: licensed, but ungoverned ==> strong position
the obstruent T: target of neither Gvt nor Lic ==> ?? 

7. Locality in Syntax Relativized Minimality, Rizzi (1990)
given two classes of items A and B,
a relation between A1 et A2 is local iff no other A intervenes

8. ☺  Locality in Syntax three major classes of items in syntax:
- verbs (heads)
- arguments (A position)
- quantifiers (A’ position) ☺
Couldi John __i have come ?
head
John could have come
argument
head 
Havei John could __i come ?
head *
John could have come
argument
head

9.  Locality in Syntax a branching onset is a non-local structure:
- major classes of items in phonology are: onset and nucleus
- an internuclear relation exists whereby a third nucleus intervenes.
Lic
branching onset
<== IG
A M P L U S C V | T R
Gvt 

10. The trouble: summary 
no prediction made
2. violation of locality 

11. The cure: making branching onsets local
instead of having a non-local government relation
the intervening nucleus is the source of government
it is entitled to govern because it is not itself governed: it is unpronounced for a different reason (IG)
Lic
branching onset
<== IG C V | T R
Gvt
Gvt
consequence: the definition of what a good governor is owes nothing to phonetics
before: only nuclei with phonetic content can govern
now: a nucleus can govern iff it is not governed itself

12. local branching onsets: predictions
when the TR is preceded by an empty nucleus (Strong Position), the T will also be in Strong Position (licensed but ungoverned)
in case the TR is in intervocalic position, the T will also be in intervocalic position (licensed and governed)
TR in Strong Position
<==
TR in intervocalic positon
<== C V | T R
Gvt
Gvt C V | T R
Lic
Lic

13. local branching onsets: predictions
hence the following prediction:
the T of a TR group behaves exactly like a simplex T
- if the TR group is in Strong Position, T will be strong
if the TR group is in intervocalic position, T will be intervocalic
in other words:
given a branching onset TR, T behaves like if R were not there

14. testing the prediction
typologically speaking, branching onsets are rare
even rarer are languages that allow to test the reaction of TRs on lenition
==> the empirical situation is largely unexplored
we examine 4 cases:
- Celtic (in its prehistory)
- Gorgia Toscana
- French diachrony
- Gallo-Romance dialects as witnessed by the ALF
(Atlas Linguistique de la France)

15. test case 1: Celtic
the classical scenario assumes 3 stages (e.g. McCone 1996)
stage 1: IE b,d,g > v,,ɣ / V__V et V__RV
V__V
IE Proto-Celtic Old Irish glose
b kladibos *klaivos klaiəv épée
d kladibos *klaivos klaiəv épée
g tegos *teɣos tieɣ maison
2. V__RV
b dubro- *duvro- dovər eau
d widwa: *wiwa: fiev veuve
g wegros *weɣros fe:r herbe
3. but resistance in Strong Position {#,C}__ and in gemination
N__ *windos fiind blanc
#__, gém *buggos bog mou

16. test case 1: Celtic
stage 2: as stage 1, but now also across word boundaries
stage 3: t,k > ,  / V__V and V__RV (there is no p)
V__V
Insular Celtic Proto-Irish Old Irish glose
t *ehja teɣah *eja eɣa ə ieɣ sa maison
k *inda: kloka: *inda: loa: iŋ lo la pierre
2. V__RV
t *bre:tra: *bre:rə briiaər mot
k *dakra *dærə die:r larme
3. but resistance in Strong Position {#,C}__ and in gemination
R__ *eisko- *eisk iask poisson
gém *makwkwos *makwkwah mak garçon

17. test case 2: Gorgia Toscana
Castellani (1960), Giannelli & Savoia (1978, 1979), Marotta ( )
p,b,t,d,k,g > ɸ,β,θ,,x/h/ø,ɣ / V__(R)V
V__V
Stand. It. Tuscan glose
p apɛrto aɸɛrto ouvert
t laato laaθo côté
k bruuko bruuxo, bruuho, bruuo worm
2. V__RV
p la piega la ɸjɛɛɣa le pli
t liitro liiθro litre
k la krɛɛma la xɾɛɛma, la hrɛɛma la crème
3. but resistance in Strong Position {#,C}__ and in gemination
R__ pɔrta pɔrta porte
#__ pjɛɛde pjɛɛe pied
gém. gatto gatto chat

18. v p p v b b p p v b b v test case 3: French
only labials and dentals are examined – the situation of velars is complicated by palatalizations (Bourciez 1967 etc.)
labials in TR groups
#__
Coda__
V__V pr pl
pruna prune
plenu plein
comprend(e)re comprendre
purp(u)ra pourpre
amplus ample
*temp(u)la temple
capra chèvre
pip(e)re poivre
duplu double
cap(u)lu afr chable br bl
brachiu bras
*blastimare blâmer
umbra ombre
arb(o)re arbre
germ *blād afr emblaver
umb(i)licus afr umblil
labra lèvre
rob(o)re rouvre —
fab(u)la fable v p p v b b
simplex Labials
#__
Coda__
V__V p
porta porte
talpa taupe
ripa rive b
bene bien
herba herbe
faba fève p p v b b v

19. t t d d ø ø t t ø d d ø test case 3: French dentals in TR groups
#__
Coda__
V__V tr
tres trois
tractare traiter
capistru chevêtre
alt(e)ru autre
petra pierre
it(e)rare errer dr
drappu drap
*dras(i)c drêche —
perd(e)re perdre
quadratu carré
rid(e)re rire t t ø d d ø
simplex dentals
#__
Coda__
V__V t
tela toile
cantare chanter
vita vie d
dente dent
ardore ardeur
coda queue t t ø d d ø

20. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
Atlas Linguistique de la France
Gilléron, Jules, and Édmond Édmont Atlas linguistique de la France. Paris: Champion, 9 vol., supplément 1920.
based on fieldwork , 639 points of inquiry.

21. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
prediction in a dialectal system
T alone and T in a TR cluster behave alike in every given system (dialect)
hence
for each obstruent and each position, the isoglosses of T alone and T in a TR cluster are identical.
==> not exactly a trivial or intuitive prediction
==> a prediction about 639 systems at the same time
examination of labials in intervocalic position
dentals are inconclusive for independent reasons (desolidarisation, see next slide), velars are blurred by palatalisations.

22. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
goal: comparison of
-P- with -PR-
-B- with -BR-
variation and its interpretation:
only actual branching onsets (solidary TR groups) are an input for the comparison. Hence non-solidary groups are counted out:
coda vocalisation betrays desolidarisation: V.TRV > VT.RV
(grey-shaded on the maps below)
example:
solidary TR group: FEBREM > fièvre, TAB(U)LA > table
non-solidary TR group: FEBREM > fewre, TAB(U)LA > tole

23. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
-B- vs. -BR-
syntheses
lexical basis ALF
level 0
B’L 0
BL 0
B’R 0
BR 0
B 0
level 1
BR 1
BL 1
B 1
level 2
BR 2
B 2
-B-
ABANTIARE > avancer
ABOCULUS > aveugle
FABA > fève
HIBERNU > hiver
-BR- (primary)
FEBREM > fièvre
-B’R- (secondary)
BIB(E)RE > boire
SCRIB(E)RE > écrire
-BL- (primary)
OBLITARE > oublier
-B’L- (secondary)
SAB(U)LU > sable
DIAB(U)LU > diable
STAB(U)LA > étable ?

24. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
-P- vs. -PR-
syntheses
lexical basis ALF
level 0
level 1
level 2
-P-
CREPANT > crèvent
NEPOTE > neveu
*ARRIPARE > arriver
TROPARE > trouver
LUPA > louve
SAPONE > savon
SAPA > sève
-PR- (primary)
APRILE > avril
-P’R- (secondary)
PIP(E)R > poivre
LEP(O)RE > lièvre
OP(E)RARIU > ouvrier
-PL- (primary)
DUPLU > double
-P’L- (secondary)
CAP(U)LU > câble
P 0
P 1
P 2 ?
PR 0
PR 1
P’R 0
PR 2
PL 0
PL 1
P’L 0

25. -P-
alone
intervocalic

26. -P-
in an intervocalic TR group

27. intervocalic -P- alone and in a group
Croissant
superposition:
intervocalic -P- alone and in a group
poitevin

28. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
Croissant
-P- alone spirantizes (-P- > -v-), but remains a stop in
-PR- (> -br-).
8 points of inquiry (503‑5, 600, 601, 800, 802, 803)
well-known zone of transition (Croissant).

29. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
poitevin
opposite pattern: P in PR spirantizes (> vr), but lexical variation is observed for isolated P (> b, v) (which however always voices)
24 points of inquiry (429, 448, 459, 479, , 515, 517, 518, 521, 525, , 533, 535, 536, 540, 621, 630, 632)
since ‑PR‑ always spirantizes, a fricative output is also expected for ‑P‑.
lexical basis ALF: 7 words
unexpected non-spirantization concerns only two words
two contravening words: LOPA > loube, SAPONE > sabon
LOPA: contravening in 19 out of 24 points, SAPONE in 17 out of 24. The five other words are well-behaved in all 24 points.
==> lexical inconsistency points to contact, rather than to regular evolution.

30. -B-
alone intervocalic

31. -B-
in an intervocalic TR group

32. intervocalic -B- alone and in a group
superposition:
intervocalic -B- alone and in a group
provençal

33. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
provençal
- there are no *vl, *vr at all
- hence -BL-, -BR- could not produce *vr, *vl (cf. *vl in oïl)

34. thank you
for your attention

35. References 1
Bourciez, Edouard & J. Bourciez Phonétique française. 9e édition Paris:
Klincksieck.
Brun-Trigaud, Guylaine & Tobias Scheer Lenition in branching onsets in
French and in ALF dialects. Development of Language through the Lens of
Formal Linguistics, edited by Petr Karlík, Munich: Lincom.
Castellani, Arrigo Precisazioni sulla gorgia toscana. Boletin de de Filologia
19,
Giannelli, Luciano & Leonardo Savoia L'indebolimento consonantico in
Toscana (I). Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia 2,
Giannelli, Luciano & Leonardo Savoia L'indebolimento consonantico in
Toscana (II). Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia 3-4,
Lowenstamm, Jean CV as the only syllable type. Current trends in
Phonology. Models and Methods, edited by Jacques Durand & Bernard
Laks, Salford, Manchester: ESRI.
Marotta, Giovanna Non solo spiranti. La gorgia toscana nel parlato di
Pisa. L'Italia Dialettale 62,
McCone, Kim Towards a relative chronology of ancient and medieval celtic
sound change. Maynooth: St. Patrick's College.
Rizzi, Luigi Relativized Minimality. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 16.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

36. References 2
Scheer, Tobias A Lateral Theory of Phonology. Vol.1: What is CVCV, and
why should it be? Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ségéral, Philippe & Tobias Scheer La Coda-Miroir. Bulletin de la Société
de Linguistique de Paris 96,
Ségéral, Philippe & Tobias Scheer The Coda Mirror, stress and positional
parameters. Lenition and Fortition, edited by Joaquim Brandão de Carvalho,
Tobias Scheer & Philippe Ségéral, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

37. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)
Dentals
oïl oc
-T- ø d
-TR- ør jr
-D-
d,z
-DR-
desolidarisation
j is the regular result of k,g in coda
postion:
aqua > oc aigue
agnellus > oïl agneau
desolidarisation ?
desolidarisation
zero is the regular result of
-D- in coda position:
MOD(U)LU > oïl moule
> oc mole
ADLUMINARE > oïl, oc allumer
RAD(I)CINA > oïl racine
> oc racina

38. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)

39. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)

40. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)

41. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)

42. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)

43. test case 4: Gallo-Romance dialects (ALF)