Studi e Saggi Linguistici

V. 56 N. 1 (2018)
Articoli

Sull’interfaccia fonetica-fonologia: l’assimilazione di sonorità nei dialetti emiliani come regola di implementazione fonetica

PDF
  • Edoardo Cavirani
Edoardo Cavirani
Meertens Institute
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4454/ssl.v56i1.230

Pubblicato 2018-04-06

Parole chiave

  • phonetics-phonology interface,
  • regressive voicing assimilation,
  • Emilian dialects,
  • BiPhon
Informativa sui diritti

Abstract

Recent studies show that linguistic perception is conditioned by phonology. In this study, this claim is tested against data coming from a set of Emilia dialects (Italy), which are reported to show regressive voicing assimilation (RVA). The hypothesis is that, in the case RVA is part of the phonological competence of the relevant speakers, consonant clusters whose segments display opposite voicing specification are misperceived as showing the same specification. This hypothesis is tested by means of a perception experiment, which followed the collection and acoustic analysis of production data. The analysis of both the production data and the perception experiment results show that RVA is less systematic than suggested by the relevant literature. Indeed, cases of RVA underapplication and partial (de)voicing can be found. Similarly, RVA is shown to variably condition perception: in the 58,54% of the cases, the participants perceive [b] instead of /p/ when latter is followed by a voiced plosive. The comparison with the perception results of a control group of Ukrainian speakers (81,2% of misperception) shows that RVA occurs in Ukrainian and Emilian with two different grammatical status: while in the former it is a categorical phonological rule, in the latter it represents a phonetic implementation process applying at the phonetics-phonology interface.

PDF

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. BACKLEY, P. (2011), An introduction to element theory. Edinburgh University Press.
  2. BAFILE, L. (2003), Syncope, epenthesis and syllable structure: the case of some Italian dialects, in «Rivista di grammatica generativa», 28, pp. 19-29.
  3. BERENT, I. (2013), The phonological mind, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  4. BERENT, I., STERIADE, D., LENNERTZ, T., E VAKNIN, V. (2007), What we know about what we have never heard: Evidence from perceptual illusions, in «Cognition», 104(3), pp. 591-630.
  5. BERENT, I., LENNERTZ, T., E SMOLENSKY, P. (2011), Markedness and misperception: It’s a two-way street, in CAIRNS, C. E. E RAIMY, E. (a cura di, 2011), Handbook of the Syllable, Brill, Leiden, pp. 373-394.
  6. BERMÚDEZ-OTERO, R. (2013), Amphichronic explanation and the life cycle of phonological processes. HONEYBONE, P. & J. C. SALMONS (a cura di, 2013), The Oxford handbook of historical phonology, Oxford University Press, Oxford [disponibile all’indirizzo http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001679].
  7. BERMÚDEZ-OTERO, R. (in preparazione), Stratal optimality theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  8. BERTONI, G. (1925), Profilo storico del dialetto di Modena, Leo S. Olschki, Génève.
  9. BERTINETTO, P. M. E LOPORCARO, M. (2005), The Sound Pattern of Standard Italian, as Compared with the Varieties Spoken in Florence, Milan and Rome, in «Journal of the International Phonetic Association», 35, pp. 131-151.
  10. BLEVINS, J. (1995), The syllable in phonological theory, in Goldsmith, J. (a cura di, 1995), The handbook of phonological theory, Blackwell, Cambridge, pp. 206-244.
  11. BOERSMA, P. (2007), Some listener-oriented accounts of h-aspiré in French, in «Lingua», 117, pp. 1989-2054.
  12. BOERSMA, P. (2009), Cue constraints and their interactions in phonological perception and production, in
  13. BOERSMA, P. E HAMANN, S. (a cura di), Phonology in perception, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 55-110.
  14. BOERSMA, P. E WEENINK D. (2017), Praat: doing phonetics by computer. Versione 6.0.25, [ http://www.praat.org/].
  15. BUTSKA, L. (1998), Faithfulness to [voice] in Ukrainian: An analysis of voicing alternations within Optimality Theory, in «RuLing Papers», 1, pp. 59-73.
  16. CANEPARI, L. E VITALI, D. (1995). Pronuncia e grafia del Bolognese, in «Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia», 19, pp. 119-164
  17. AUTORE (2012), Riflessioni sulla computazione in Fonologia Generativa: Regole o Vincoli?, in ARDONETTI, I. E COMINETTI, F. (a cura di), Proceeding of: Animals, Humans, Machines. The Whereabouts of Language, Corisco, Roma, pp. 99-112
  18. AUTORE (2015a), Brief history of the concept of constraint in Generative Phonology. ms., Meertens Institute [http://www.academia.edu/1727433/Brief_history_of_the_ concept_of_constraint_in_Generative_Phonology].
  19. AUTORE (2015b), Modeling phonologization. Vowel reduction and epenthesis in Lunigiana dialects. Utrecht: LOT publishing.
  20. AUTORE (2017), The distribution of GENDER and NUMBER in Lunigiana nominal expressions, in D’ALESSANDRO, R. E PESCARINI, D. (a cura di, 2017), Advances in Italian dialectology. Sketches of Italo-Romance grammars. Brill, Leiden, pp. 13-51.
  21. AUTORE E VAN OOSTENDORP, M. (2017), On silent markedness, in SAMUELS, B. (a cura di, 2017). Beyond Markedness in Formal Phonology. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, pp. 101-120.
  22. AUTORE E VAN OOSTENDORP, M. (in stampa), Degrees of Emptiness in Dutch Dialect Atlasses, in «Glossa».
  23. AUTORE E HAMANN, S. (in preparazione), The perception of Regressive Sonority Assimilation: a BiPhon account.
  24. CHOMSKY, N. E HALLE, M. (1968), The Sound Pattern of English. Harper and Row, New York.
  25. COCO, F. (1970), Il dialetto di Bologna. Forni, Bologna.
  26. CUTLER, A. E NORRIS D. (1979), Monitoring sentence comprehension, in COOPER, W. E. E WALKER, E. C. T. (a cura di, 1979.), Sentence Processing: Psycholinguistic Studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Erlbaum, New Jersey, pp. 113-134.
  27. CUTLER, A., MEHLER, J., NORRIS, D. E SEGUI, J. (1987), Phoneme identification and the lexicon, in «Cognitive Psychology», 19(2), pp. 141-177.
  28. CYRAN, E. (2014), Between Phonology and Phonetics: Polish Voicing. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlino.
  29. DAVIS, S. (2011), Geminates, in VAN OOSTENDORP, M.,
  30. EWEN, C. J., HUME, E. E RICE, K. (a cura di, 2011), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA e Oxford, pp. 837-859.
  31. DUPOUX, E., KAHEKI, K., HIROSE, Y., PALLIER, C. E MEHLER J. (1999), Epenthetic vowels in Japanese: a perceptual illusion, in «Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance», 25, pp. 1568-1578.
  32. DURVASULA, K. & KAHNG, J. (2015), Illusory vowels in perceptual epenthesis: the role of phonological alternations, in «Phonology», 32, pp. 385-416.
  33. DURVASULA, K. & KAHNG, J. (2016), The role of phrasal phonology in speech perception: What perceptual epenthesis shows us, in «Journal of Phonetics», 54, pp. 15-34.
  34. FORESTI, F. (2010), Profilo linguistico dell'Emilia-Romagna. Laterza, Bari.
  35. GARRETT, A. E JOHNSON, K. (2013), Phonetic bias in sound change, in YU A. (a cura di, 2013), Origins of Sound Change: Approaches to Phonologization, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 51-97.
  36. HALLE, M. (1971). The sound pattern of Russian: A linguistic and acoustical investigation, Walter de Gruyter.
  37. HAMANN, S. (2009), The learner of a perception grammar as a source of sound change, in BOERSMA, P., E HAMANN, S. (a cura di, 2009), Phonology in Perception, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlino, pp. 111-149.
  38. HAMANN, S. (2011), The Phonetics-Phonology Interface, in Kula, N., Botma, B. e Nasukawa, K. (a cura di, 2011), Continuum Companion to Phonology, Continuum, Londra, pp. 202-224.
  39. HAMANN, S. E COLOMBO, I. (2017), A formal account of the interaction of orthography and perception, in «Natural Language & Linguistic Theory», 35(3), pp. 683-714.
  40. HUSZTHY, B. (2016), Arguments against the heterosyllabicity of/sC/clusters in Italian phonology, in «Proceedings of the CECIL’S Olomouc: Palacý University», pp. 74-85.
  41. KIPARSKY, P. (2000), Opacity and cyclicity, in «A review of Optimality Theory. Special issue, The Linguistic Review», 17(2-4), pp. 351-67.
  42. IVERSON, G. K. E SALMONS, J. C. (1995), Aspiration and laryngeal representation in Germanic, in «Phonology», 12, pp. 369-96.
  43. JAKOBSON, R., FANT, C. G., & HALLE, M. (1951). Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  44. JESPERSEN, O. (1904), Phonetische Grundfragen. Teubner, Lipsia.
  45. LEPSCHY, A. L. E LEPSCHY, G. (2013). The Italian Language Today. London: Routledge.
  46. LOPORCARO, M. (1998), Syllable structure and sonority sequencing: evidence from Emilian, in LIPSKI, J. M.,
  47. SCHWEGLER, A., TRANEL, B., E URIBE-ETXEBARRIA, M. (a cura di, 1998), Romance Linguistics: Theoretical Perspectives, pp. 155-170.
  48. LOPORCARO, M. (2005), I dialetti dell’Appennino tosco-emiliano e il destino delle atone finali nel(l’italo-)romanzo settentrionale, in «L’Italia Dialettale», 66, pp. 69-122.
  49. LOPORCARO, M. (2009), Profilo linguistico dei dialetti italiani. Laterza, Bari.
  50. LOPORCARO, M. (2011b), Phonological processes, in Maiden, M., Smith, J. C. e Ledgeway, A. (a cura di, 2011), The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 109-154.
  51. MUNSON, B. E SOLOMON, N. P. (2004), The influence of phonological neighborhood density on vowel articulation, in «Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research», 47, pp. 1048-1058.
  52. OHALA, J. J. (1981), The listener as a source of sound change, in MASEK, C. S., HENDRICK, R. A. E FRANCES MILLER, M. (a cura di, 1981), Papers from the parasession on language and behavior (Chicago Linguistic Society 17), Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago, pp. 178-203.
  53. OOSTENDORP, M. VAN (in stampa), History of Phonology: Optimality Theory, in DRESHER, B. D. E VAN DER HULST, H. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the history of phonology.
  54. PARKER, S. (2011), Sonority, in VAN OOSTENDORP, M., EWEN, C., HUME, E. E RICE, K. (a cura di, 2011), The Blackwell companion to phonology, Volume II, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp. 1160-84.
  55. PASSINO, D. (2013), The phonotactics of word-initial clusters in Romance: typological and theoretical implications, in BAAUW, S., DRIJKONINGEN, F., MERONI, L. E PINTO, M. (a cura di, 2013), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory V. Benjamins Publications, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 175-192.
  56. PELLEGRINI, G. (1977), La Carta dei Dialetti d'Italia. Pacini editore, Pisa.
  57. POLIVANOV, E. D. (1931), La perception des sons d’une langue étrangère, in «Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague», 4, pp. 79-96.
  58. PRINCE, A. E SMOLENSKY, P. (1993[2004]), Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in Generative Grammar. Blackwell, Londra.
  59. RAMSAMMY, M. (2015), The life cycle of phonological processes: accounting for dialectal microtypologies, in «Language and Linguistics Compass», 9(1), pp. 33-54.
  60. REPETTI, L. (1996), Syllabification and Unsyllabified Consonants in Emilian and Romagnol Dialects, in PARODI, C., QUICOLI, C., SALTARELLI, M. E ZUBIZARRETA, M. L. (a cura di, 1996), Aspects of Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages XXIV. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC, pp. 373-382.
  61. ROHLFS, G. (1966), Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. Fonetica. Einaudi: Torino.
  62. SCHMID, S. (2016), Segmental Phonology, in Ledgeway, A. e Maiden, M. (a cura di, 2016), The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 471-483.
  63. SEIDENBERG, M. S. E TANENHAUS, M. K. (1979). Orthographic effects on rhyme monitoring, in «Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory», 5(6), pp. 546-554.
  64. SIEVERS, E. (1881), Grundzüge der Phonetik. Breitkopf und Hartel, Lipsia.
  65. STERIADE, D. (1995), Positional neutralization, ms., Università della California, Los Angeles.
  66. STERIADE, D. (2001), Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: A perceptual account, in HUME, E. E JOHNSON, K. (a cura di, 2001), The Role of Speech Perception in Phonology, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 219-250.
  67. VITALI, D. E PIOGGIA, D. (2014), Dialetti Romagnoli. Pronuncia, ortografia, origine storica, cenni di morfosintassi e lessico. Confronti coi dialetti circostanti. Pazzini, Verucchio.
  68. WRIGHT, R. (2001), Perceptual cues in contrast maintenance, in HUME, E. E JOHNSON, K. (a cura di, 2001), The Role of Speech Perception in Phonology, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 251-277.
  69. ZIEGLER, J. C. E FERRAND, L. (1998), Orthography shapes the perception of speech: The consistency effect in auditory word recognition, in «Psychonomic Bulletin & Review», 5, pp. 683-689.
  70. ZIMMERER, F. E REETZ, H. (2014), Do listeners recover “deleted” final /t/ in German?, in «Frontiers in Psychology», 5.