Laurence Voeltzel - GLOW36 - Geminates: From Old Norse to Scandinavian Languages (handout)

7/28/2019 Laurence Voeltzel - GLOW36 - Geminates: From Old Norse to Scandinavian Languages (handout)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/laurence-voeltzel-glow36-geminates-from-old-norse-to-scandinavian-languages 1/12

1

Laurence Voeltzel

Université de Nantes, Lling EA 3827

Geminates: from Old Norse to Scandinavian Languages

0. Introduction

→ consonants of the Scandinavian languages (Icelandic, Faroese, Danish,Swedish and Bokmål) and the processes that affect them.

• Presentation of the history of the family: evolution from Proto-Germanic to the nowadays languages.Synchrony: main phonological processes that are active in theselanguages.

• Contrastive hierarchy method: Does the genetic similarity still hold

in the synchrony on the phonological level? Comparison of theconsonantal active material.• Gemination: Nordic consonant are treated differently in each

language, despite their alikeness.Reconstruction of the evolution of geminates from Old Norse totoday Scandinavian.

1. The Nordic family

1.1 Genetic typology

(Ottosson: 2002, Birkmann: 2002, Nielsen: 2002, Schulte: 2002a)

Proto-Germanic

(Common Germanic) 200

West Germanic North Germanic East Germanic

ancient Nordic

500

late ancient Nordic

800

Common Nordic

(d ǫnsk tunga)

1050

West Norse East Norse

(norrønt mál)1 (d ǫnsk tunga)

old Ice. old Far. old Norw. old Dan. old Swed. 1350 (unattested)2

middle Norw. middle Dan. middle Swed.

1530

Icelandic Faroese nynorsk / bokmål Danish Swedish

[Fig 1: General survey of the Nordic diachrony]

1 norrønt mál (Norwegian tongue); d ǫnsk tunga (Danish Tongue): names given by themedieval West Scandinavian authors for the languages spoken within the Scandinavianterritory at that time.2 Due to a lack of medieval texts, no standard grammar of Faroese has been proposed for this period (Schulte, 2002a: 875).

P r o t o - n o r d i c

O l d e

r F u t h a r k

Y o u n g e r F u t h a r k

O l d N o r d i c

c o n t i n u u m



2

North East/North West split

On a vocalic basis:a-umlaut, i-umlaut, u-umlaut, w-breaking, opening of e and retention of final full vowels in the western group (see Ottosson: 2002 and Birkmann:2002).

Consonantal phenomena (Schulte: 2002b, Ottosson: 2002):- /v/-drop in initial /vr/ clusters is the West (1a),- regressive assimilation in /N+C/ clusters in the West (1b),- initial /h/-retention in the West (1c).

(1) East Norse West Norse (a) Old Sw. vr æ þer

Old Sw. vr anger Old Sw. vr æka Old Sw. vr i þa

Old Ice. r eiðr Old Ice. r angr Old Ice. r eka Old Ice. r iða

angry false, incorrect avenge inf. twist

(b) Old Sw. bänk er Old Sw. klint er Old Sw. svamper Old Sw. ænk ia Old Sw. brant er

Old Ice. bekk r Old Ice. klett r Old Ice. svǫ ppr Old Ice. ekk jaOld Ice. bratt r

bench rock, crag mushroom

widow

steep

(c) Old Norw. níga Old Norw. l aupaOld Norw. r ósa

Old Ice. hníga Old Ice. hl aupaOld Ice. hr ósa

sink inf. run inf. praise

1.2. The Synchronic Data: Systems

(Árnason: 2011, Barnes & Weyhe: 2002, Basbøll: 2005, Braunmüller:2007, Kristoffersen: 2007, Lockwood: 1977, Rögnvaldsson: 1990,Thráinsson: 2002)

- All languages have the apical trill, except Danish that has the uvular one.- The interdental fricative [ð] can be found in Danish as an allophone of /d/

and in Icelandic as a phoneme (two possible realizations [ð] or [T]).

(2) labial coronal palatal velar glottal plosive p b t d k g

nasal m n

trill r (Ice, Far, Norw, Sw)

fricative f s ð (Ice) ʁ (Dan) h approximant j

lateral approx. l

1.3. The Synchronic Data: Processes1.3.1. Preaspiration

a) /pp, tt, kk/→ [hp, ht, hk] (see in (3a)) b) /pl, pn, tl, tn, kl, kn/→ [hpl, hpn, htl, htn, hkl, hkn] (see in (3b))

Swedish, Bokmål and Danish are not affected by preaspiration (see in (4),

(5) and next section).

3 The reason why I postulate underlying geminates in these clusters will be exposed later,in section 3.

(3) Icelandic (4) Swedish (5) Bokmål

(a) /skrepp a/ [skrehp a] jump inf. /skeppa/ [Íep…a] ship inf. /lEpp ´/ [lEp… ´] lip /ɛkki/ [ɛhk i] not /ikk ´/ [ik… ´] not /ikk ´/ [ik… ´] not /nott / [noht ] night /mitt / [mit… ] my neut. /bitt r/̀ [bit… r`] bitter

(b) (opna) /opp na/3 [ohpn a] open inf. /Ppp na/ [Pp…n a] open inf

(epli) /ɛpp l i/ [ɛhp l i] apple /Epp l ´/ [Ep …l´] apple (vatn) /vatt n/ [vahtn ̥] water /lEtt na/ [lEt… na] lighten inf. (ætla) /a ̯itt la/ [a ̯iht la] intend inf. /sprAtt la/ [sprAt …l a] flounce inf.

( sakna) /sakkn a/ [sahkn a] miss inf. /tEkkna/ [tEk…na] draw inf. ( Hekla) /hekkl a/ [hehkl a] (volcano) /ekk lig/ [ek… l ig] disgusting



3

Faroese preaspirationBarnes & Weyhe (2002): mentioned, but no illustration of it is given.Braunmüller (2007): preaspiration occurs before long voiceless stops andin /p, t, k/+C clusters; nevertheless, length doesn’t appear in histranscriptions (see in (6a)). But it does in Lockwood (1977: 7) (6b) and inÁrnason (2011: 228) (6c).

(6) Faroese(a) (b) (c)/ʊppa/ [ʊʰpa] up /kɔppʊr/ [kɔʰpːʊr] cup /lappɪ/ [laʰp ːɪ] patch /lʊ ̯ ɪtlɪ/ [lʊ ̯ ɪʰtlɪ] little /mʊʏtt/ [mʊʏʰt ː] my neut. /hatt/ [haʰt ː] hat

/gakk/ [gaʰkː] go pret. /nakka/ [naʰk ːa] neck /bakki/ [baʰcːɪ] cliff

→ Preaspiration doesn’t have the same phonological status in Icelandicand in Faroese (as reflected in the transcriptions: full-fledged segment [h]in Icelandic vs. diacritic [h] in Faroese). Existence of preaspiration in Icelandic makes no doubt among the authors,

while its status in Faroese is not so clear:

In any case, this preaspiration is no more significant than theaspiration heard after Faroese k, p, t in some positions, i.e.[kʰ, pʰ, tʰ], as also in English. (Lockwood, 1977: 7 – 8)

1.3.2. Spirantization/occlusivization

- Icelandic /p, t, k/ surface [f, s, x] if they precede /t/ or /s/ (see in (7a’);- /f/ is pronounced [p] when it precedes /l/ or /n/ (see in (7b’)).

(7) Icelandic (a) /skip/ [scip] ship nom. (a’) /skip+s/ [scifs] ship gen. /ba ̯ut+ʏr/ [ba ̯udʏr] boat nom. /ba ̯ut+s/ [ba ̯usː] boat gen.

/θak/ [θak] roof nom. /θak+s/ [θaxs] roof gen. /ta ̯ip+ʏr/ [ta ̯ipʏr] risky masc. /ta ̯ip+t/ [ta ̯ift] risky neut. /rik+ʏr/ [rigʏr] rich masc. /rik+t/ [rix t] rich neut. /veik+ʏr/ [veigʏr] weak masc. /veik+t/ [veix t] weak neut. /ak+a/ [aːga] drive inf. /ak+tʏ/ [axtʏ] drive imp. 2PS

/a ̯ip+a/ [a ̯iːba] scream inf. /a ̯ip+tɪ/ [a ̯iftɪ] scream pret. 3PS /l ̥œy…p+a/ [l ̥œy…ba] run inf. /l ̥œy…p+tʏ/ [l ̥œyftʏ] run pret. 2PS

(b) /graf a/ [grava] burry inf. (b’) /graf nar/ [grapnar] burry past part. /haf a/ [hava] have inf. /hɛf la/ [hɛpla] plane inf.

Icelandic /g/ has various realizations according to the context:- [g]: word-initially before non-front vowels, word-finally after a

consonant or anywhere after a sonorant (8a).- [ Ô] 4 : word-initially before unrounded front vowels or /j/ (8b). - [j]: preceding a palatal segment (vowel or glide) (8c). - [ɣ]: If it precedes a voiced consonant or intervocalically (8d).- [x]: before a voiceless consonant (8e).

Faroese /g/ shows a similar behavior:- [g]: word-initially and before a consonant or non-front vowels (9a).- [ Ô]: before a front vowel (9b).- [j]: after a front vowel (9c). - [w]: after rounded velar vowels (9d). - [ʋ]: before non-round high vowel [ ¨] (9e).

(8) Icelandic (9) Faroese

(a) /gata/ [gata] street (a) /gOava/ [gOava] gift /borg / [bor g] city, town /sprInga/ [sprINga] jump inf. /regla/ [reg la] rule, law /glEas/ [glEas] glass

(b) /gefa/ [Ôe…va] give inf. (b) /gIft¨r/ [ÔIft¨r] married masc. /gIlla/ [Ô Itla] golden inf. /genta/ [Ôenta] girl /gj¶{r/ [ Ô{…r] do

past part. /vEgg I/ [vEÔ …I] path dat.

(c) /lag ɪ/ [lajɪ] lay past part. (c) /stʊtligʊr/ [stʊtlijʊr] pleasant masc. /seg ja/ [sejːa] say inf. /ɛ ̯ iga/ [ɛ ̯ ija] eye

/deg i/ [deːjɪ] day dat.

4 Transcription mine; We can find [c] in some transcriptions (Rögnvaldsson: 1990,Thráinsson: 2002).



4

(d) /sag t/ [sax t] say past part. (d) /tjʉug ¨/ [tjʉuw ¨] twenty /sn{gg t/ [stn{xt]5 quickly /duːgir/ [duːwir] can 3PS

/drɔugu/ [drɔuwu] pull past part.

(e) /saga/ [saɣa] story nom. (e) /lɔagʊr/ [lɔaʋ ¨r] low /lag / [laɣ] law /hPːgʊr/ [hPːʋ ¨r] high /sagði/ [saɣði] say pret. /dɛagʊr/ [dɛaʋ ¨r] day nom.

Danish semi-vocalization:- /d/→ [D] (10a).- /g/→ [j] or [w] (10b).- /v/→ [w] (10c).

syllable-finally and before schwa

(10) Danish (a) (b) (c)/vʁɛd / [vʁɛð] angry /lœg / [lœj] layer /havn/ [haw ˀn] harbour /bidə/ [biːðə] bite inf. /lœgə/ [lœjə] play inf. /evnə/ [ewnə] ability /bad/ [baD] bath /s ɒg / [s ɒˀw] sorrow /ɑv lə/ [ɑwlə] breed /klod ´/ [kloD ´] planet /dÂAg ´/ [dÂA…w ´] go inf. /l ɒv / [l ɒw] law

Palatalization (spirantization) in Swedish (11a) and Bokmål (12):/k/→ [ç]/g/→ [j]

before front vowels.

Swedish /g/ may also lenify word-finally after a liquid (see in (12b)).(11) Swedish (12) Bokmål

(a) /k ind/ [çind] chin /k ino/ [çiːnu] cinema/kœr/ [çœːr] dear /kyss´/ [çys…´] kiss inf.

/genɔm/ [jeːnɔm] through /begynnə/ [bejynːə] begin inf. /g issa/ [j iːsA] pour inf. /g i/ [ji] give inf.

(b) /bœrg/ [bœrj] mountain /œlg / [œlj] moose

5 In this example, although he gives an underlying geminate, Rögnvaldsson (1990)transcribes a phonetically short consonant. The surfacing of /sn/ [stn] can be linked to a phenomenon called dissimilation that I won’t be talking about in this presentation.

1.3.3. Voicing of stops

- Icelandic (13) and Faroese (14): intervocalically.- Danish: syllable-finally and before schwa (see in (15)).Swedish (16) and Bokmål (17) are not subjected to voicing although itcould be expected.

(13) /ljɛku/ [ljɛgu] play pret. /tapa/ [taba] lose inf. /matur/ [madur] food (14) /tɛaka/ [tɛaga] take inf. /drepa/ [dreːba] kill inf. /sita/ [siːda] sit inf. (15) /kʌk/ [kʌg] rooster /kʌp / [kʌb] cup /blot ´/ [blo…d ´] sacrifice inf. (16) /sj¨kA/ [Í¨…kA] ill /skrapA/ [skra…pA] scrape in . /besl¨ta/ [besl¨…ta] decide(17) /kAk ´/ [kA…k ´] cake /ap´/ [ap´] ape /skyt ´/ [ Sy…t ´] shoot inf.

→ Scandinavian languages are genetically very close to each other, theyseem to use the same consonants and have phonological processes incommon.

Are their consonants organized exactly the same way in their respective phonological systems? Do they have the exact same behavior and can theyinteract the same way in each language?

2. Phonological behavior of the Nordic consonants 2.1. The constrastivist approach

Contrastive hierarchy (Dresher: 2011, Hall: 2007): reliable way to reachthe segments’ active material and to access the underlying mechanismsoperating in the phonological processes.

Identifying the segments interacting: “integrated subsystems” (Basbøll,2005: 103) of labial segments in Icelandic:

(18) /b/ [b] / V _ V

/p/ [p] / _ l, n

[v] / V _ V

/f/ [f] / _ t, s



5

Segments that appear within an integrated subsystem have to stand under the same branch and thus share at least one specification.→ the more specifications segments share, the easier it is to figure outwhy they interact within processes.

2.2. One hierarchy to rule them all

Same features in the same order for every language:(19) [glottal] >> [compact] >> [grave] >> [Spread Glottis]6 >> [strident]>> ([voice])

[+glottal] [-glottal]

/h/

[+compact]7 [-compact]

[+SG] [-SG] [+grave] [-grave] /k/ [+strident] [-strident] [+SG] [-SG] [+SG] [-SG]

/j/ - /w/ /g/ /p/ /t/

[+strident] [-strident] [+strident] [-strident] /f/ /b/ /s/ /d/

[+voice] [-voice]/ð/ /s/

6 Halle & Stevens: 2002 [1971]7 I didn’t use the [±grave] contrast under the [+compact] specification – velar and palatalsegments stand thus under the same node. This correlates the fact that /k, g, j/ interact inthe phonology of Nordic languages (see section 1.3.2. on vocalization of /g/).Furthermore, the labio-velar glide /w/ appears under the same node for the same reason – it seems to share more with the velars/palatals than with the labials.

The features used here are the same as in Jakobson & Halle (1956).

Only Icelandic would need an extra contrast within the alveolar obstruents:it possesses an extra phoneme /ð/. In order to distinguish between the twocoronal fricatives, I introduce the feature [±voice].

2.3. Unifying and explaining the processes

Icelandic spirantization: see white arrows in (20).Voicing of stops (Icelandic, Faroese and Danish): see grey arrows in (20)).Every segment bearing the [+SG] feature can be affected by thesemechanisms.

(20)

[+glott] [-glott]

/h/

[+comp] [-comp]

[+SG] [-SG] [+gr] [-gr] /k/

[+strid] [-strid] [+SG] [-SG] [+SG] [-SG] /j/ - /w/ /g/ /p/ /t/

[+strid] [-strid] [+strid] [-strid] /f/ /b/ /s/ /d/

Icelandic preaspiration: delinking between the single consonant and thetwo slots it was attached to on the skeletal tier:

(21) V C . C V → V C . C V

x x x

After delinking, every C-slot (coda and onset) is associated to distinctelements: while the second stop is protected by the strong position it’s in



6

(onset), the first stop (coda) is subjected to structural change. The glottalfricative we have in preaspiration is in fact a voiceless stop that lost themajor part of its content.

→ In the hierarchy, this loss is illustrated by a pruning right under the firstnode describing a place of manner or of articulation: the [±compact] node.

(22) V C . C V → V C . C V

p h p

Same analysis for the /stop+sonorant/ clusters:

(23) Icelandic (opna) /oppn a/ [ohp na] open inf. (epli) /ɛpp li/ [ɛhp li] apple

(vatn) /vatt n/ [vahtn ] water (ætla) /a ̯itt la/ [a ̯ihtl a] intend , plan inf.

( sakna) /sakk na/ [sahkn a] miss inf. ( Hekla) /hekk la/ [hehkl a] (volcano)

Thráinsson (1978, according to (Árnason: 2011): underlying geminatesallow to explain why /stop+sonorant/ clusters undergo preaspiration.→ Proposal backed by diachrony of the family:

(24) Icelandic: /ɛppli/ [ɛhpli] apple Icelandic: /vattn/ [vahtn] water Swedish: äpple Swedish: vatten English: apple Old high German: wazzar 8 German: Apfel

→ and by the correlation between the contexts of preaspiration and thecontexts where geminates are allowed in Icelandic (never word-initially).

(25) V C . C C V → V C . C C V

p l h p l

8 Conzelmann: 2008.

Spirantization, voicing and preaspiration: apply to the whole hierarchy.Place of articulation doesn’t play a role (26a). Results depend on thetargeted segment (except for preaspiration, which always gives the sameresult, [h]).Occlusivization, vocalization: target specific consonants in specific branches (26b) and give specific results:

(26) (a) spirantization:[(-glottal, ±compact, ±grave), ±SG, -strident]→ [(…), +strident]

voicing:[[(-glottal, ±compact, ±grave), +SG]→ [(…), -SG, -strident]

preaspiration:[(-glottal, ±compact, ±grave), +SG]→[+glottal]

(b) occlusivization:[-glottal, -compact, +grave, -SG, +strident]→ […, +SG]

/g/ vocalization:[-glottal, +compact, -SG, -strident]→ […, +strident]

Semi-vocalization of /g/ (Icelandic, Faroese and Danish), Icelandicspirantization and palatalization of velars (Swedish and Bokmål):(27) [±SG, -strident]→ [-SG, +strident]

→ Unification of phenomena described as heterogeneous.

Phonological similarity is reinforced by the unique architecture of theobstruents inventories. Variation is although possible: the more language-specific a contrast is, the lowest it appears in the hierarchy (with no impacton the upper part of the structure, which represents the core structure of thefamily (Compton and Dresher: 2011)).

Nordic consonants have the same content; they thus may undergo the samechanges.



7

Preaspiration: parameterized in Icelandic (and Faroese) and blocked in theother standard Scandinavian languages (but not totally excluded)→ During a previous field study (Voeltzel: 2011), I could record phenomena that was not planed:

(28) Swedish /trettio/ [trehtio] instead of [tret… io] thirty /jɛttə/ [ jɛht ə] “ “ [ jɛt… ə] giant (x 2) /stakk ar ən/ [stahkarən] “ “ [stak…arən] poor thing /vakk ert/ [vahkaʈ ] “ “ [vak… aʈ ] beautifully /papp a/ [pahpa] “ “ [pap… a] daddy (x 2)

(29) Bokmål /stakk aʁs/ [stahkaʁs] “ “ [stak…aʁs] poor thing /nitt ´n/ [nihtn]̀ “ “ [nit…n]̀ nineteen

→ Norwegian and Swedish speakers produced preaspiration where there

are underlying long voiceless stops: same mechanism as in Icelandic.→ unique hierarchy is supported: preaspiration is applicable to the wholefamily but blocked in standard Swedish and Bokmål. It remains however reachable and can be activated anytime.

3. Geminates?

Contrastive hierarchy: very convenient if we stay at the segmental level, but not enough to justify the triggering of processes.→ no view on the syllabic level where the conditions of applications are to

be found.

How to deal with long segments? The hierarchy, as it is in (20), doesn’tallow representing the particular situation of geminates.

3.1. Gemination in Danish

Gemination of voiceless stops9 may vary from a language to another:

(30) V /pp/ V V /tt/ V V /kk/ V

Swedish /lappa/ [lapːa] patch inf. /fatta/ [fatːa] catch inf. /takka/ [takːa] thank inf.

Bokmål /lappe/ [lapːə] patch inf. /fatte/ [fatːə] catch inf. /takke/ [takːə] thank inf.

Icelandic /lappa/ [lahp a] patch inf. /fatta/ [faht a] catch inf. /θakka/ [θahka] thank inf.

Faroese /lɛappi/ [lɛaʰpːi] rag /kɛttəɹ/ [ʧɛʰtːəɹ] cat pl. /tɛakka/ [tɛaʰk ːa] thank in

Danish10

(lappe) /lɑpə/ [lɑbə] patch inf.

(fatte) /fatə/ [fadə] catch inf.

(takke)/takə/ [tɑgə] thank inf.

Old Norse inherited geminates are pronounced long in Swedish andBokmål. Icelandic (and Faroese) has preaspiration.→ In Danish single voiced stops are produced.

I posit (contra Basbøll who represents voicing at the phonological level)simple voiceless consonants in the Danish underlying representations, andnot geminates.

No long consonants in Danish, except (according to Basbøll, 2005: 276)across the boundary between themembers of a compound or betweenstem and inflectional ending […].

→ geminates are only graphic: double consonants are treated the same waya single consonant would be.

9 Stops are mainly the only consonants that may exhibit a particular behavior when theyare long in Nordic languages. However, Icelandic long sonorant may also undergo aspecific phenomenon called dissimilation (/ll, nn/ surface [dl, dn]) (see Voeltzel: 2012b).10 I give orthographic forms for Danish. This will be relevant later.



8

(31) (a) (b)phoneme context realization examples phoneme realization examples

/p/

V_V [p] ( papir ) /pap iÂ/ [papiå8/] paper

?/pp/

[p] (apportere) /ApÅteÂ´/ [ApÅte/ ø] retrieve inf. _ ´ [b] ( gispe) /gisp ´/ [gisb ´] gasp inf. [b] (dryppe) /dÂ{p ´/ [dÂ{b ´] drip inf. #_ [p] (padde) /pad´/ [pad´] amphibian

_# [b] (krop) /kÂøp / [kÂøb] body [b] (app) /ap/ [ab] app(plication)

/t/

V_V [t] (citation) /sitasjon/ [sitaÇo/n] quotation

?/tt/

[t] (attak ) /atAk/ [atAg] attack _ ´ [d] (blote) /blot ´/ [blo…d ´] sacrifice inf. [d] ( flytte) /flPt ´/ [flPd ´] move in/out #_ [t] (tid ) /tid/ [t iD/] time _# [d] ( skat ) /skat/ [sgad] tax

/k/

V_V [k] (økolog ) /Pkolog/ [Pkolo/] environmentalist

?/kk/

[k] (bakkanal ) /bAkanœl/ [bAkanœ/l] bacchanals _ ´ [g] (båke) /bOk ´/ [bO…g´ ] beacon [g] ( snakke) /snAk ´/ [snAg ´] chat inf. #_ [k] (kage) /kœg´/ [kœ…j´] cake _# [g] (tryk ) /tÂ{k / [tÂ{g] pressure

/b/

V_V [b] ( global ) / globœl/ [globœ/l] global

?/bb/

[b] (hobby) /høb i/ [høb i] hobby

_ ´ [b] (håbe) /hOb ´/ [hO…b ´] hope inf. [b] ( gnubbe) /gnOb ´/ [gnOb ´] rub inf. #_ [b] (bade) /bœd´/ [bœ…D´] bathe inf. _# [b] ( skab) /skœb/ [skœˀb] shelf

/d/

V_V [d] (adoptere) /ad øpteÂ´/ [ad øbte/ ø] adopt inf.

?/dd/

[d] (addition) /ad isjon/ [ad iÇo/n] addition _ ´ [ð] (lyde) /lyd ´/ [ly…D ´] sound inf. [ð] (hedde) /hed ´/ [heD ´] be called inf. #_ [d] (dej) /dAj/ [dAj/] dough _# [ð] (ud) /ud/ [uD] out

/g/

V_V [g] (liga) /liga/ [li…ga] league

?/gg/

[g] (buggy) /bøgi/ [bøgi] buggy

_ ´ [w, j](kage) /kœg ´/ [kœ…j ´] cake(koge) /kOg´/ [kO…w´] boil inf.

[g](begge) /bEg ´/ [bEg ´] both

#_ [g] ( gispe) /gisp´/ [g isb´] gasp inf. _# [w, j]

( sprog ) /spÂOg / [sbÂOw] language (lag ) /læg/ [lœ/ j] layer

[g]( gløgg ) /glPg/ [glPg] mulled wine



9

Danish false geminates:

(32) Danish (a) (billøs) /bil+lPs/ [bi…ll P/s] carless

(brunnakke) /bÂun+nak´/ [bÂu…nn ag´] widgeon (b) (uddannelse) /ud+dann+else/ [uDdan/ ´ls´] education

(baggrund ) /bAg+gÂOnd/ [bAwgÂOn

/

] background (ettal ) /et+tal/ [edtal] number one

→ Each consonant is attached to its own consonantal slot and behavesindependently, like it’s alone.

True geminates (31b): if we posit phonologically long consonants, i.e.ambiguous consonants that are in coda and in onset, then we wouldexpect either:

- that the whole structure behaves like it is syllable-final: /pp, tt,kk/→[b…, d…, g…], /dd, gg/→[D… , j…, w…],

- or, that the whole structure behaves like it’s syllable-initial: /pp,tt, kk/→ [p:, t:, k:], /d, g/→ [d…, g…].→ none of these results is attested in Danish. Exception made of /gg/, allstops have the exact same behavior when they are doubled as when theyare single.

How comes that a stop in a protected situation (gemination) getslenified? Danish “geminates” systematically go through a degemination,followed by a weakening of the remaining consonant.Underlying geminate > single weakened stop is “too big of a jump” (Lass(1984: 334)).→ there must be intermediate stages.

(33) pp b*p

3.2. Gradualness of change and minimal moves

The canonical trajectory a consonant follows when lenifying (Lass(1984: 178)).

(34) aspiratedvoiceless stop orale fricative glottal fricative

affricate

Ø

voiced stop affricate fricative approximant

opening 11

- movement to the right and/or to the bottom of the hierarchy = lenitionmechanism,- movement to the left and/or the top of the hierarchy = fortition

mechanism.- movement can start from anywhere on the hierarchy (except from Ø)- once a segment started to weaken, it hardly can go back and re-strengthen.- aspirated and affricate stages are optional and many occlusive >fricative changes are attested across world languages12.

There are minimal moves operating on the lenition/fortition scale. Soundchanges are gradual .

11

Weakening occurs on two scales: opening and sonorization. Segments on the left sideof the figure have an articulation with a very narrow airflow. The more we get to theright, the wider the airflow is. Constriction’s opening is often accompanied by aspontaneous voicing, which is represented on the vertical axis of the figure.12 Lass gives the examples of Latin /b/ which evolved into a fricative in the nowadaysroman dialects: [v] or [ B] (see corpus in (35) below). The High German consonant shift illustrates this as well, with the transition from Germanic voiceless stops to Germanvoiceless fricatives. I also mentioned earlier the Icelandic spirantization, where /p, t, k/surface [f, s, x] before /s/ or /t/.

s o n o r i z a t i o n



10

When a weakening consonant seems to skip steps and goes beyond theimmediate next stage:

- whether we face a synchronic active phonological process,- or the stages that seem to be skipped are simply “missing from

the record” (Lass (1984: 179)).-

→

missing links (Lass (1984: 337)).

Danish geminates: we can’t start from a voiceless geminate and directlyend in a simple voiced stop. We ought to expect an intermediate singlevoiceless stop stage.→ the intermediate stage does exist, in the actual Danish phonologicalform of Old Norse inherited geminates.

Danish has moved a step further than its sister languages on the path of evolution from Old Norse and degemination already occurred in thediachrony.

Such a situation is not isolated:(35) Latin stad. Italian stand. French stand. Spanish

-b- -v- -v- -ß-

(habere) (avere) (avoir ) (haber ) have inf. -d- -d- Ø Ø

(credere) (credere) (croire) (créer ) believe inf. -g- -ÿ - Ø Ø

(legere) (leggere) (lire) (leer ) read inf.

→

the input (Latin voiced stops) didn’t cross the same distance on thelenition scale and didn’t reach to the same output in the nowadayslanguages. It doesn’t mean that Latin stops should or will arrive at thesame point in each daughter languages in the future – while the trajectoryfollowed by the consonant in the weakening process is common to everylanguage, the rhythm of the evolution or the simple fact to move from astate to another is particular to each language.

3.3. From Old Norse to Scandinavian

(36) Icelandic *TT→ hT (→ T→ D) Faroese *TT→ hT (→ T→ D)Swedish *TT→ TT (→ hT → T→ D)

Bokmål *TT→

TT (→

hT →

T→

D) Danish *TT (→ hT→ T)→ D

“T” = voiceless stop, “D” = voiced counterpart.Bold elements = attested forms“hT”: unexpected preaspiration in Swedish and Bokmål (see (28) and(29)).“T”: unexpected single voiceless stop in Danish (extracted from my previous field study (Voeltzel: 2011)):

(37) Danish

(ikke) /ekə/ [ek] instead of [eg] not (x 3)(klokken) /klokən/ [klokn] “ “ [klogn] clock (lappe) /lapə/ [lapə] “ “ [labə] patch inf. ( fatte) /fœtə/ [fœtə] “ “ [fœdə] catch inf. ( flyttede) /flyt´D´/ [flyt ´D] “ “ [flyd ´D] move out pret. ( flytte) /flyt´/ [flyt ´] “ “ [flyd ´] move out inf.

→ Speaker produced single voiceless stops: voicing would then not be anobligatory synchronic mechanism and the underlying segment surfaceswithout any change.

missing links : historical stages we can reasonably posit for but for whichwe don’t have any attested data.→ can be supported with help of the synchrony (individual synchronicvariations)

That is, if a speaker controls the possibility of ‘goingfrom’ one segment to another lower down the hierarchy



11

[…] this movement may be taken as a possible quantum or basic unit: a move of that size is a ‘possible soundchange’. (Lass (1984: 333))

What speakers individually produce may correspond to an undocumenteddiachronic stage that occurred in their language.

Danish data in (37) could possibly reveal the missing link we expect onthe trajectory from Old Norse geminate to today simple voiced stop.Unexpected preaspirated stops in Swedish and Bokmål may represent a phonological change in progress.If Danish represents the most advanced language in the family, it notexcluded that other languages also undergo degemination and maybevoicing.

Conclusion

→ genetic similarity still holds today between Nordic languages: they

have similar consonants with identical phonological content. They can beaffected exactly the same way by mechanisms concerning the wholefamily.→ Nordic languages all seem to follow the same trajectory from Old Norse. This trajectory is unique but the stage each language is at varies.→ I have explored the possibility of reconstructing the diachrony withthe help of the synchrony (finding missing links in the particular or unexpected productions made by the speakers).

References

ANDERSSON E. (2002). “Swedish”, in EKKEHARD K . & VAN DER

AUWERA J., The Germanic Languages. Routledge, London - NewYork: 271-312.

ANDREASEN P. & DAHL A. (1997). Mállæra. Føroya Skúlabókagrunnur,

Tórshavn.ÁRNASON K . (2011). The Phonology of Icelandic and Faroese. Oxford

University Press, New York.BARNES M P. & WEYHE E. (2002). “Faroese", in EKKEHARD K . & VAN

DER AUWERA J., The Germanic Languages. Routledge, London - New York: 190-218.

BASBØLL H. (2005). Phonology of Danish. Oxford University Press, New York.

BIRKMANN T. (2002). "From Ancient Nordic to old Nordic : Definitionand Delimitation of the Period", in BANDLE O. & al., The Nordic

languages. Volume 1. de Gruyter, New York - Berlin: 691 – 698.BRAUNMÜLLER K . (2007). Die skandinavischen Sprachen in Überblick.

Francke, Tübingen – Bâle.CONZELMANN, J. (2008). “Erläuterungen zur mittelhochdeutschen

Grammatik”. (http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/2075/)COMPTON, R . & DRESHER , B.E. (2011), “Palatalization and ‘strong i’

across Inuit dialects” The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revuecanadienne de linguistique, Vol. 56 No. 2: 203–228.

DRESHER B. E. (2009). The Contrastive Hierarchy in Phonology. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Ms.

GORDON E. V. (1981). An Introduction to Old Norse. Oxford UniversityPress, New york.

HALL D. (2007). The role and representation of contrast in phonological theory. Thesis Ms, University of Toronto.

HALLE, M. & STEVENS, K . N. (2002 [1971]). “A note on laryngealfeatures”, in HALLE M. From Memory to Speech and Back. Papers on Phonetics and Phonology 1954 – 2002. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.



12

HAUGEN O. E. (2008). Nørron grammatikk i hovuddrag. University of Bergen. (http://folk.uib.no/hnooh/grammatikk/NorrGramm-v5.pdf).

HAYES B. (1986). “Inalterability in CV Phonology", in Language, Vol.62, num. 2: 321 – 351.

HELGASON P. (2002). Preaspiration in the nordic languages. synchronicand diachronic aspects. Thesis Ms, University of Stockholm.

JAKOBSON R . & HALLE M. (1956). Fundamentals of Language. deGruyter, Berlin – New York.

KEER E. (1998). Icelandic Preaspiration and the Moraic Theory of Geminates. Ms, University of Rutgers, New Bruinswick.

KRISTOFFERSEN G. (2000). The Phonology of Norwegian. OxfordUniversity Press, New York.

LASS R . (1984). Phonology. An Introduction to basic Concepts.Cambridge University Press.

LOCKWOOD W. D. (1977). An Introduction To Modern Faroese. FøroyaSkúlabókagrunnur, Tórshavn.

NEVINS A & VAUX B. (2006). Underlying Representations that do not Minimize Grammatical “ Violations “. Ms.OTTOSSON K . (2002). “Old Nordic: a definition and delimitation og the

period.", in BANDLE O. & al., The Nordic languages. Volume 1. deGruyter, Berlin – New York: 787 – 793.

NIELSEN H. F. (2002). “Delimitation of Ancient Nordic From CommonGermanic and Old Nordic", in BANDLE O. & al., The Nordiclanguages. Volume 1. de Gruyter, Berlin – New York: 615 – 619.

RIAD T. (2002). “The phonological systems of Old Nordic II: OldSwedish and Old Danish.", in BANDLE O. & al., The Nordic

languages. Volume 1. de Gruyter, Berlin – New York: 896 –911.RÖGNVALDSSON E. (1990). Íslensk hljóðfræði handa framhaldsskólum.Ms University of Reykjavik.

SCHEER T. & SEGERAL P. (2001). “La coda-miroir", in Bulletin de laSociété de Linguistique de Paris, num. 96: 107 – 153.

SCHULTE M. (2002a). “The various old Nordic dialects, their systemsand their typology: A general survey of the classical Old Nordic of the

High Middle Age.", in BANDLE O.O& al., The Nordic languages.Volume 1. de Gruyter, Berlin – New York: 871 – 882.

SCHULTE M. (2002b). “The phonological systems of Old Nordic I: OldIcelandic and Old Norwegian.", in BANDLE O. & al., The Nordiclanguages. Volume 1. de Gruyter, Berlin – New York: 882 – 895.

THRAINSSON H. (2002). “Icelandic", in EKKEHARD K . & VAN DER

AUWERA, J., The Germanic Languages. Routledge, London - NewYork: 142-189.

VENÅS K . (2002). “Previous attempts at establishing periods in Nordiclanguage history", in BANDLE O. & al., The Nordic languages.Volume 1. de Gruyter, Berlin – New York: 31 – 38.

VOELTZEL L. (2011). Hiérarchie contrastive: une typologie desobstruantes dans les langues scandinaves. Master Ms, University of Nantes.

VOELTZEL L. (2012a). Aspects de la morpho-phonologie des langues scandinaves: hiérarchie, complexité, latéralité. Master Ms, University

of Nantes.VOELTZEL L. (2012b). La dissimilation des clusters de sonantes enislandais et en féroïen, 10th meeting “Réseau Français dePhonologie”, Paris.

Documents

Laurence Voeltzel - GLOW36 - Geminates: From Old Norse to Scandinavian Languages (handout)