Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 19 – uploaded by Katerina Iliopoulou

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
The three-consonant cluster [k8j] is not well-formed. There is rising sonority from the stop to the fricative but, according to the sonority scale proposed for SMG (cf. 3.3), [j] is more sonorous than [6 for SMG, but there is a sonority plateau in SA (cf. 3.2). When the stop is sy/labified as coda, the secon¢ syllable starts with a two-consonant cluster that is well-formed in SMG and accepted in SA (cf. (7)) However, in the data where voice assimilation is present, there is plateau sonority between C2 and C in both languages, so the second syllable starts with a two-consonant cluster that is ill-formed in bott SMG and SA., but this cluster ({O¢]) is accepted in SMG. Cf. (24) for the clusters accepted in word-initial word-medial, and word-final position in SA and SMG.

Table 19 The three-consonant cluster [k8j] is not well-formed. There is rising sonority from the stop to the fricative but, according to the sonority scale proposed for SMG (cf. 3.3), [j] is more sonorous than [6 for SMG, but there is a sonority plateau in SA (cf. 3.2). When the stop is sy/labified as coda, the secon¢ syllable starts with a two-consonant cluster that is well-formed in SMG and accepted in SA (cf. (7)) However, in the data where voice assimilation is present, there is plateau sonority between C2 and C in both languages, so the second syllable starts with a two-consonant cluster that is ill-formed in bott SMG and SA., but this cluster ({O¢]) is accepted in SMG. Cf. (24) for the clusters accepted in word-initial word-medial, and word-final position in SA and SMG.

Related Figures (57)

Selkirk (1982) advocates for sonority indices of segments (cf. (6) adapted from Kappa (2013: 57)). The higher the index, the higher the segment’s sonority, thus all segments with a 23 sonority index can occupy the nucleus position. Selkirk (1982) argues that syllable well-formedness is subject to the Sonority Sequence Generalization, according to which the sonority in a syllable must peak at the nucleus, increasing from onset to nucleus and decreasing from nucleus to coda. So, well-formed consonant clusters should contain segments of increasing sonority when in onset and decreasing sonority when in coda position.
Selkirk (1982) advocates for sonority indices of segments (cf. (6) adapted from Kappa (2013: 57)). The higher the index, the higher the segment’s sonority, thus all segments with a 23 sonority index can occupy the nucleus position. Selkirk (1982) argues that syllable well-formedness is subject to the Sonority Sequence Generalization, according to which the sonority in a syllable must peak at the nucleus, increasing from onset to nucleus and decreasing from nucleus to coda. So, well-formed consonant clusters should contain segments of increasing sonority when in onset and decreasing sonority when in coda position.
Florida and Participant 1 are related (twins). Although they have shared family background, their The self-assessments of the participants’ heritage language proficiency varied. Three (N=3) participants reported an average proficiency in the heritage language, one (N=1) reported advanced proficiency, and two (N=2) participants reported low proficiency, with receptive skills limited to oral language and rudimentary productive skills, fitting the description of an overhearer (cf. note 5).
Florida and Participant 1 are related (twins). Although they have shared family background, their The self-assessments of the participants’ heritage language proficiency varied. Three (N=3) participants reported an average proficiency in the heritage language, one (N=1) reported advanced proficiency, and two (N=2) participants reported low proficiency, with receptive skills limited to oral language and rudimentary productive skills, fitting the description of an overhearer (cf. note 5).
(21) Participants’ background information (control group) 4.3 Experimental stimuli The contro! group’s background information is presented in detail in (21) interactions. Both baseline participants have two children with whom they communicate in Gree (Alma reports some code-switching, sometimes using SA too with her children). They both report the their youngest children have low proficiency in SA, describing the proficiency level of overhearer: while their eldest have a better level of receptive and productive skills. Evelina’s eldest can speak i SA, but her proficiency is low, while Alma’s eldest has an advanced proficiency in SA, which she ascribe to longer visits to the homeland and, consequently, longest exposure to the language. At the time c the experiment, both baseline participants had undergone some formal teaching in Greek language Alma had Greek classes organized by a Non-Governmental Organization (Arsis), for one semeste while Evelina had 3 weeks of private tutoring with a SMG teacher, at the time of the experimen Evelina reports heavy attrition, forgetting words and not being able to pronounce SA phonemes th way she would like to. She also reported people commenting on her foreign accent during her visit to Albania. Alma (who lives closer to the border and visits family in Albania at least once a year) als reports little attrition. She affirms she forgets words, but her pronunciation is perceived as native b people in her homeland and does not report any comments on her accent. 38 As there are only two timing units in a syllable onset, in a C1C2C3 consonant sequence, C1 is attached to the syllable node as appendix (cf. 3.1), thus it cannot be part of the cluster. C2 and C3 form an onset cluster when there is rising sonority between them. For short, when referring to clusters in this thesis, all consonant sequences under the same syllable will be included.
(21) Participants’ background information (control group) 4.3 Experimental stimuli The contro! group’s background information is presented in detail in (21) interactions. Both baseline participants have two children with whom they communicate in Gree (Alma reports some code-switching, sometimes using SA too with her children). They both report the their youngest children have low proficiency in SA, describing the proficiency level of overhearer: while their eldest have a better level of receptive and productive skills. Evelina’s eldest can speak i SA, but her proficiency is low, while Alma’s eldest has an advanced proficiency in SA, which she ascribe to longer visits to the homeland and, consequently, longest exposure to the language. At the time c the experiment, both baseline participants had undergone some formal teaching in Greek language Alma had Greek classes organized by a Non-Governmental Organization (Arsis), for one semeste while Evelina had 3 weeks of private tutoring with a SMG teacher, at the time of the experimen Evelina reports heavy attrition, forgetting words and not being able to pronounce SA phonemes th way she would like to. She also reported people commenting on her foreign accent during her visit to Albania. Alma (who lives closer to the border and visits family in Albania at least once a year) als reports little attrition. She affirms she forgets words, but her pronunciation is perceived as native b people in her homeland and does not report any comments on her accent. 38 As there are only two timing units in a syllable onset, in a C1C2C3 consonant sequence, C1 is attached to the syllable node as appendix (cf. 3.1), thus it cannot be part of the cluster. C2 and C3 form an onset cluster when there is rising sonority between them. For short, when referring to clusters in this thesis, all consonant sequences under the same syllable will be included.
(22) Consonant clusters used in this experiment, grouped by cluster type All clusters were word-medial and all nonce-words were disyllabic. Half nonce-words were stresse¢ 1 the first syllable (in this case, the penultimate) (N=66) (cf. (23a)) and half nonce-words were stresse 1 the final syllable (N=66), in order to control for stress effects (cf. (23b, c)). The stress in SA wort ypically falls on the two final syllables and its position is subject to vowel quality and to syllable weigh ypically, closed final syllables are stressed, unless they contain a schwa [a] (e.g. [ar.’mik] ‘enemy’, bi a.far] ‘near’) . Open final syllables are also stressed, provided that they contain a high or a low vow >.g. [cer.‘fi] ‘cherry’). If they contain a mid-vowel [e, 0, a], the stress falls on the penultimate (e. ba.bo] ‘midwife’) (Trommer and Grimm, 2004).*°. For this reason, the nonce-words created for th xperiment end in a closed syllable, or an open syllable containing [a] or [i] when they are stressed 1e final syllable. Nonce-words that are stressed in the penultimate have an open final syllab ontaining [e] or [o]. for each other cluster, with the sole difference of the cluster in the second syllable onset.
(22) Consonant clusters used in this experiment, grouped by cluster type All clusters were word-medial and all nonce-words were disyllabic. Half nonce-words were stresse¢ 1 the first syllable (in this case, the penultimate) (N=66) (cf. (23a)) and half nonce-words were stresse 1 the final syllable (N=66), in order to control for stress effects (cf. (23b, c)). The stress in SA wort ypically falls on the two final syllables and its position is subject to vowel quality and to syllable weigh ypically, closed final syllables are stressed, unless they contain a schwa [a] (e.g. [ar.’mik] ‘enemy’, bi a.far] ‘near’) . Open final syllables are also stressed, provided that they contain a high or a low vow >.g. [cer.‘fi] ‘cherry’). If they contain a mid-vowel [e, 0, a], the stress falls on the penultimate (e. ba.bo] ‘midwife’) (Trommer and Grimm, 2004).*°. For this reason, the nonce-words created for th xperiment end in a closed syllable, or an open syllable containing [a] or [i] when they are stressed 1e final syllable. Nonce-words that are stressed in the penultimate have an open final syllab ontaining [e] or [o]. for each other cluster, with the sole difference of the cluster in the second syllable onset.
The three-consonant clusters used in the experiment, the two-consonant clusters that can result
The three-consonant clusters used in the experiment, the two-consonant clusters that can result
(26) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [mbl] (%) (27) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [mbl] (%)
(26) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [mbl] (%) (27) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [mbl] (%)
(29) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [mpl] (%)
(29) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [mpl] (%)
(30) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [mpl] (%) (31) Total syllabification patterns for [mpl] (%)
(30) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [mpl] (%) (31) Total syllabification patterns for [mpl] (%)
The three-consonant clusters [mbl] and [mpl] are ill-formed. The sonority falls from C; to Ca, risin again from the stop to the liquid. While the Maximal Onset Principle calls for syllabifying the thre consonants in onset position, the Sonority Sequencing Principle dictates that the nasal be syllabifie as coda in the first syllable, while the second syllable should start with a two-consonant cluste [stop+tliquid] in the onset, that is well-formed, as the sonority rises. Abiding by the Sonority Sequencin Principle can also lead to syllabification of the nasal and the stop in coda position ([mb.I]). In this case the sonority falls in the coda and the cluster is well-formed. However, this option is more marked, a it leads to a complex coda. Fusion also results in a well-formed cluster ([bl]) in onset position and to coda-less, hence unmarked, first syllable. As [mpl] sequences are extremely marked“, the voiceles obstruent should be assimilated (voicing). Fusion could also be a strategy to avoid [nasal+voiceles obstruent] sequences. Cf. (24) for the clusters accepted in word-initial, word-medial, and word-finc position in SA and SMG. as coda in the first syllable, while the second syllable should start with a two-consonant cluster
The three-consonant clusters [mbl] and [mpl] are ill-formed. The sonority falls from C; to Ca, risin again from the stop to the liquid. While the Maximal Onset Principle calls for syllabifying the thre consonants in onset position, the Sonority Sequencing Principle dictates that the nasal be syllabifie as coda in the first syllable, while the second syllable should start with a two-consonant cluste [stop+tliquid] in the onset, that is well-formed, as the sonority rises. Abiding by the Sonority Sequencin Principle can also lead to syllabification of the nasal and the stop in coda position ([mb.I]). In this case the sonority falls in the coda and the cluster is well-formed. However, this option is more marked, a it leads to a complex coda. Fusion also results in a well-formed cluster ([bl]) in onset position and to coda-less, hence unmarked, first syllable. As [mpl] sequences are extremely marked“, the voiceles obstruent should be assimilated (voicing). Fusion could also be a strategy to avoid [nasal+voiceles obstruent] sequences. Cf. (24) for the clusters accepted in word-initial, word-medial, and word-finc position in SA and SMG. as coda in the first syllable, while the second syllable should start with a two-consonant cluster
(33) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [ndj] (%, (34) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [ndj] (%)
(33) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [ndj] (%, (34) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [ndj] (%)
(35) Total syllabification patterns for [ndj] (%)
(35) Total syllabification patterns for [ndj] (%)
(36) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [mbj] (%)
(36) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [mbj] (%)
Like the clusters of the type [nasal+stop+liquid] (cf. 5.1.1), the three-consonant clusters [ndj] and [mbj] are ill-formed. The sonority falls from C1 to C2, rising again from the stop to the fricative. While the Maximal Onset Principle calls for syllabifying the three consonants in onset position, the Sonority Sequencing Principle dictates that the nasal be syllabified as coda in the first syllable, while the second syllable should start with a two-consonant cluster [stop+fricative] in the onset, that is well-formed, as the sonority rises. Abiding by the Sonority Sequencing Principle can also lead to syllabification of the nasal and the stop in coda position ([nd.j] or [mb.j]). In this case, the sonority falls in the coda and the cluster is well-formed. However, this option is more marked, as it leads to a complex coda. Fusion also results in a well-formed cluster ([bj]) in the onset of o2 and to a coda-less, hence unmarked, first syllable. Both [bj] and [dj] are legal onsets in SA (cf. (7)). Sequencing Principle dictates that the nasal be syllabified as coda in the first syllable, while the second
Like the clusters of the type [nasal+stop+liquid] (cf. 5.1.1), the three-consonant clusters [ndj] and [mbj] are ill-formed. The sonority falls from C1 to C2, rising again from the stop to the fricative. While the Maximal Onset Principle calls for syllabifying the three consonants in onset position, the Sonority Sequencing Principle dictates that the nasal be syllabified as coda in the first syllable, while the second syllable should start with a two-consonant cluster [stop+fricative] in the onset, that is well-formed, as the sonority rises. Abiding by the Sonority Sequencing Principle can also lead to syllabification of the nasal and the stop in coda position ([nd.j] or [mb.j]). In this case, the sonority falls in the coda and the cluster is well-formed. However, this option is more marked, as it leads to a complex coda. Fusion also results in a well-formed cluster ([bj]) in the onset of o2 and to a coda-less, hence unmarked, first syllable. Both [bj] and [dj] are legal onsets in SA (cf. (7)). Sequencing Principle dictates that the nasal be syllabified as coda in the first syllable, while the second
(40) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [k®j] (%)
(40) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [k®j] (%)
(44) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [zvj] (%) (45) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [zvj] (%) No effect of stress position or environment was found in this dataset.
(44) Heritage speakers’ syllabification patterns for [zvj] (%) (45) Baseline’s syllabification patterns for [zvj] (%) No effect of stress position or environment was found in this dataset.
(50) Total syllabification patterns for [stop+fricative+stop] clusters (%)
(50) Total syllabification patterns for [stop+fricative+stop] clusters (%)
The Maximal Onset Principle calls for syllabifying the three consonants in onset position, but the three-consonant clusters of the type [stop+fricative+stop] are not well-formed. There is rising sonorit) from the first stop to the sibilant, but reversed sonority between the sibilant and the stop that follows As the sibilant is in the middle of the three-consonant cluster, it cannot form a well-formed cluste. even if one of the marginal consonants is not part of the cluster. This means that, if the sibilant form: a complex coda with the first stop of the [stop+fricativet+stop] cluster (Ci), this coda will have risinc sonority and will, thus, be i//-formed. Additionally, if the sibilant forms a complex onset with the seconc stop of the [stop+fricativetstop] cluster (C3), this onset will have reversed sonority and thus, be ill formed. However, in SMG reversed sonority is accepted in onsets, when the first consonant is < fricative (cf. 3.3)
The Maximal Onset Principle calls for syllabifying the three consonants in onset position, but the three-consonant clusters of the type [stop+fricative+stop] are not well-formed. There is rising sonorit) from the first stop to the sibilant, but reversed sonority between the sibilant and the stop that follows As the sibilant is in the middle of the three-consonant cluster, it cannot form a well-formed cluste. even if one of the marginal consonants is not part of the cluster. This means that, if the sibilant form: a complex coda with the first stop of the [stop+fricativet+stop] cluster (Ci), this coda will have risinc sonority and will, thus, be i//-formed. Additionally, if the sibilant forms a complex onset with the seconc stop of the [stop+fricativetstop] cluster (C3), this onset will have reversed sonority and thus, be ill formed. However, in SMG reversed sonority is accepted in onsets, when the first consonant is < fricative (cf. 3.3)
(52) Percentages for syllabification patterns and of the occurrences of fusion and/or assimilation for each heritage speaker (experimental group)
(52) Percentages for syllabification patterns and of the occurrences of fusion and/or assimilation for each heritage speaker (experimental group)
Figure 1. Patterns % of syllabification of the experimental stimuli by heritage speakers (experimental group) Figure 2. Patterns (% of the heterosyllabic data) of heterosyllabic syllabification of the experimental stimuli by heritage speakers (experimental group)
Figure 1. Patterns % of syllabification of the experimental stimuli by heritage speakers (experimental group) Figure 2. Patterns (% of the heterosyllabic data) of heterosyllabic syllabification of the experimental stimuli by heritage speakers (experimental group)
Figure 3. Occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of heritage speakers (experimental group), percentage of the relevant data, where fusion and/or assimilation could be applied
Figure 3. Occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of heritage speakers (experimental group), percentage of the relevant data, where fusion and/or assimilation could be applied
(54) Percentages for syllabification patterns for each baseline participant (contro! group) and of the occurrences of fusion and/or assimilation
(54) Percentages for syllabification patterns for each baseline participant (contro! group) and of the occurrences of fusion and/or assimilation
Figure 4. Patterns % of syllabification of the experimental stimuli by the baseline (control group) Figure 5. Patterns (% of the heterosyllabic data) of heterosyllabic syllabification of the experimental stimuli by the baseline (control group)
Figure 4. Patterns % of syllabification of the experimental stimuli by the baseline (control group) Figure 5. Patterns (% of the heterosyllabic data) of heterosyllabic syllabification of the experimental stimuli by the baseline (control group)
Figure 6. Occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of the baseline (control group), percentage of the relevant data, where fusion and/or assimilation could be applied
Figure 6. Occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of the baseline (control group), percentage of the relevant data, where fusion and/or assimilation could be applied
Figure 7. Average syllabification patterns of the baseline (control group) and the heritage speakers (experimenta group) % Figure 8. Average patterns of heterosyllabic syllabification in the baseline (control group) (experimental group) and in heritage speakers %
Figure 7. Average syllabification patterns of the baseline (control group) and the heritage speakers (experimenta group) % Figure 8. Average patterns of heterosyllabic syllabification in the baseline (control group) (experimental group) and in heritage speakers %
Figure 9. Average occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of the heritage speakers (experimental group) and the baseline (control group), percentage of the relevant data, where fusion and/or assimilation could be applied Figure 9. Average occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of the heritage speakers (experimental group)
Figure 9. Average occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of the heritage speakers (experimental group) and the baseline (control group), percentage of the relevant data, where fusion and/or assimilation could be applied Figure 9. Average occurrence of fusion and assimilation in the data of the heritage speakers (experimental group)
(55a) Example of an OT tableau (55) constraint 1 >> constraint 2, constraint 3>> constraint 4
(55a) Example of an OT tableau (55) constraint 1 >> constraint 2, constraint 3>> constraint 4
(56) CONTIG-IO, ONSET, NO-CODA, *COMPLEX°°? >>*COMPLEX°%S >> *APPENDIX-LEFT
(56) CONTIG-IO, ONSET, NO-CODA, *COMPLEX°°? >>*COMPLEX°%S >> *APPENDIX-LEFT
Fusion in [mbl] and [mpl] clusters of the type [nasal+stop+liquid] cannot happen when faithfulness constraints are ranked higher than well-formedness constraints, as in (61). Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after UNIFORMITY-IO and CONTIGUITY-IO, depending on the syllabification of the output (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°S, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. Voicing in [mpl] clusters is the result of the constraint ranking in (62), where *NC, UNIFORMITY-IC (which is violated by fusion), and CONTIGUITY-IO (which is violated by epenthesis or deletion) are highly ranked. \n (62a), there is an example with a nonce-word from the experimental stimuli for the cluster [mpl] that ends with an open syllable. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are no relevant here and can be at any ranking after IDENT-IO(voice), depending on the output (cf. (56)-(58 for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°?, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°S, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET fo each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified.
Fusion in [mbl] and [mpl] clusters of the type [nasal+stop+liquid] cannot happen when faithfulness constraints are ranked higher than well-formedness constraints, as in (61). Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after UNIFORMITY-IO and CONTIGUITY-IO, depending on the syllabification of the output (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°S, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. Voicing in [mpl] clusters is the result of the constraint ranking in (62), where *NC, UNIFORMITY-IC (which is violated by fusion), and CONTIGUITY-IO (which is violated by epenthesis or deletion) are highly ranked. \n (62a), there is an example with a nonce-word from the experimental stimuli for the cluster [mpl] that ends with an open syllable. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are no relevant here and can be at any ranking after IDENT-IO(voice), depending on the output (cf. (56)-(58 for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°?, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°S, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET fo each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified.
Voicing in [k6j] clusters is the result of the constraint ranking in (64), where AGREE[voice]ogst is ranked higher than faithfulness constraints. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after IDENT-IO(ObsVce), depending on the syllabification of output (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°S, *APPENDIX- LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. When assimilation is not applied in [nasal+voiceless obstruent] clusters, it is a result of the constraint ranking shown in (63), where *NC is ranked lower than faithfulness constraints. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after *NC, depending on the output (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEXS, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified.
Voicing in [k6j] clusters is the result of the constraint ranking in (64), where AGREE[voice]ogst is ranked higher than faithfulness constraints. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after IDENT-IO(ObsVce), depending on the syllabification of output (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°S, *APPENDIX- LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. When assimilation is not applied in [nasal+voiceless obstruent] clusters, it is a result of the constraint ranking shown in (63), where *NC is ranked lower than faithfulness constraints. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after *NC, depending on the output (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEXS, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified.
When voicing assimilation is not applied in [voiceless fricativet+voiced fricative] clusters, it is a result of the constraint ranking shown in (65), where AGREE[voicelosst is ranked lower than faithfulness constraints. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after AGREE[voice]losst, depending on the syllabification of output. (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX®°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°%S, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. ranking after AGREE[voice]ogst, depending on the syllabification of output. (cf. (56)-(58) for the
When voicing assimilation is not applied in [voiceless fricativet+voiced fricative] clusters, it is a result of the constraint ranking shown in (65), where AGREE[voicelosst is ranked lower than faithfulness constraints. Constraints that are violated by syllable structure are not relevant here and can be at any ranking after AGREE[voice]losst, depending on the syllabification of output. (cf. (56)-(58) for the different rankings of *COMPLEX®°°, NO-CODA, *COMPEX°%S, *APPENDIX-LEFT, and ONSET for each syllabification pattern). As syllabification is not relevant here, the output candidates in the tableaus are not syllabified. ranking after AGREE[voice]ogst, depending on the syllabification of output. (cf. (56)-(58) for the
5.4 Interpretation of the results According to the data presented in detail in this chapter, the vast majority of the heritage speaker: who participated in this study (with the sole exception of Aggeliki) usually complies with grammar (57 CONTIG-IO, ONSET, *COMPLEX°°>>*APPENDIX-LEFT >> *COMPLEX°S, NO-CODA, syllabifying three: consonant clusters as heterosyllabic consonant sequences, with a simple coda in the first syllable anc a complex onset in the second syllable (e.g. [tun.dje], Vasiliki). However, at the same time, they alsc comply with two additional, peripheral grammars, at a low statistical frequency: the one in (56 CONTIG-IO, ONSET, NO-CODA, *COMPLEX°°? >>*COMPLEX°%S >> *APPENDIX-LEFT, which dictate: open syllables (e.g. [ko.zvjo], Thodoris) and the one in (58) CONTIG-IO, ONSET, *COMPLEX°NS *APPENDIX-LEFT >> NO-CODA, *COMPLEX®°, which results in complex codas (e.g. [piks.ce], Alex) Additionally, they are not settled as to whether use phonological processes (fusion and assimilation)
5.4 Interpretation of the results According to the data presented in detail in this chapter, the vast majority of the heritage speaker: who participated in this study (with the sole exception of Aggeliki) usually complies with grammar (57 CONTIG-IO, ONSET, *COMPLEX°°>>*APPENDIX-LEFT >> *COMPLEX°S, NO-CODA, syllabifying three: consonant clusters as heterosyllabic consonant sequences, with a simple coda in the first syllable anc a complex onset in the second syllable (e.g. [tun.dje], Vasiliki). However, at the same time, they alsc comply with two additional, peripheral grammars, at a low statistical frequency: the one in (56 CONTIG-IO, ONSET, NO-CODA, *COMPLEX°°? >>*COMPLEX°%S >> *APPENDIX-LEFT, which dictate: open syllables (e.g. [ko.zvjo], Thodoris) and the one in (58) CONTIG-IO, ONSET, *COMPLEX°NS *APPENDIX-LEFT >> NO-CODA, *COMPLEX®°, which results in complex codas (e.g. [piks.ce], Alex) Additionally, they are not settled as to whether use phonological processes (fusion and assimilation)
APPENDIX II - EXPER/MENTAL STIMULI
APPENDIX II - EXPER/MENTAL STIMULI
Related topics:
Phonetics and PhonologyHeritage Language SpeakersPhonology and Phonotactics
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved