Norwegian preaspiration in traditional and modern sources

Presented at the 13th Forum for Germanic Language Study

Transcript

1. Norwegian preaspiration in traditional and modern sources Pavel Iosad University of Edinburgh pavel.iosad@ed.ac.uk 13th Forum for Germanic Language Studies University of Edinburgh 12th January 2018 Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 1 / 41
2. Overview Preaspiration in North Germanic Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 2 / 41
3. Overview Preaspiration in North Germanic Preaspiration in Norwegian Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 2 / 41
4. Overview Preaspiration in North Germanic Preaspiration in Norwegian Traditional dialect descriptions Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 2 / 41
5. Overview Preaspiration in North Germanic Preaspiration in Norwegian Traditional dialect descriptions Newer acoustic sources and the pervasiveness of preaspiratio Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 2 / 41
6. Overview Preaspiration in North Germanic Preaspiration in Norwegian Traditional dialect descriptions Newer acoustic sources and the pervasiveness of preaspiratio Can we trust our sources? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 2 / 41
7. Preaspiration in North Germanic Outline 1 Preaspiration in North Germanic Crash introduction Preaspiration and areality 2 Norwegian Traditional sources Newer sources Casting the net wider 3 Discussion The true story How good are the traditional sources? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 3 / 41
8. Preaspiration in North Germanic Crash introduction Preaspiration What is preaspiration? Period of glottal or other voiceless frication before a voiceless consonant Normally a stop Traditional view: Cross-linguistically rare (Silverman 2003) But widespread in northern Europe (Wagner 1964, Salmons 1992, Blevins 2017) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 4 / 41
9. Preaspiration in North Germanic Crash introduction Preaspiration in Northern Europe I Icelandic: by far the best known and most studied Phonetic studies: Stefán Einarsson (1927), Sveinn Bergsveinsson (1941), Magnús Pétursson (1976), Löfqvist & Yoshioka (1981), Pind (1986), Ní Chasaide (1986), Þorsteinn G. Indriðason et al. (1990), Pétur Helgason (2002) Phonological studies: Haugen (1958), Höskuldur Thráinsson (1978), Kristján Árnason (1980, 1986, 2011), Jóhannes G. Jónsson (1994), Ringen (1999), Morén (2001), Gunnar Ólafur Hansson (2003), Gouskova (2004), Lodge (2007) Faroese: Jakobsen (1886), Lockwood (1955), Werner (1963), Zachariasen (1968), Pétur Helgason (2002), Gunnar Ólafur Hansson (2003), Höskuldur Thráinsson et al. (2012), Casserly (2012) Scottish Gaelic: Marstrander (1932), Wagner (1964), Borgstrøm (1974), Ó Baoill (1980), Ó Murchú (1985), Ní Chasaide & Ó Dochartaigh (1984), Ní Chasaide (1986), Bosch (2006), Ó Maolalaigh (2010) The Sámi languages: Engstrand (1987), Sammallahti (1977, 1998), Rießler (2008), Kusmenko (2008), Rießler & Wilbur (2007), Wilbur (2014) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 5 / 41
10. Preaspiration in North Germanic Preaspiration and areality Preaspiration as an areal feature Cross-linguistically rare but concentrated in northern Europe: an areal feature? Bilateral contacts (e. g. Marstrander 1932, Borgstrøm 1974, Gunnar Ólafur Hansson 2001, Rießler 2004, 2008, Kusmenko 2008) Common substrate (e. g. Wagner 1964, 1969) Internal developments (e. g. Ó Baoill 1980, Ó Murchú 1985, Ó Maolalaigh 2010) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 6 / 41
11. Preaspiration in North Germanic Preaspiration and areality Why is this interesting? Silverman (2003) Preaspiration is rare because it is perceptually weak Either lost or follows an exit route (e. g. segmentalizes, oralizes) That it should persist in unrelated languages is suspicious Blevins (2017): preaspiration spreads if it is perceptually salient, otherwise it tends to be lost Clayton (2010): little evidence that preaspiration is preferentially lost What are the consequences for the areal story? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 7 / 41
12. Preaspiration in North Germanic Preaspiration and areality Overarching question Is there an areal effect in the distribution of preaspiration? Is the evidence consistent with the hypothesis that preaspiration spread with the Vikings? To understand this, we need to understand how preaspiration functions in Scandinavia itself Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 8 / 41
13. Norwegian Outline 1 Preaspiration in North Germanic Crash introduction Preaspiration and areality 2 Norwegian Traditional sources Newer sources Casting the net wider 3 Discussion The true story How good are the traditional sources? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 9 / 41
14. Norwegian Traditional sources What about the mainland? Very often, Icelandic is seen as the prototypical preaspirating language But is this so, at least within Scandinavia? What do the dialect descriptions tell us? For earlier overviews, Liberman (1984), Pétur Helgason (2002) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 10 / 41
15. Norwegian Traditional sources Norwegian: the regions North Gudbrandsdalen Rogaland Northern Norway Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 11 / 41
16. Norwegian Traditional sources North Gudbrandsdalen Already in Bjørset (1899), Ross (1907), Storm (1908) Ross’ material analysed by Pétur Helgason (2002) See also: Horne (1917), Ekre (1960), Langleite (1974) Archaic dialect: preserves the ON contrast between CV(C) and CVCC syllables (Kristoffersen 2011) Preaspiration particularly associated with Old Norse pp tt kk (1) a. [let] ‘colour’ < ON litr b. [leʰt] ‘light’ < ON léttr Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 12 / 41
17. Norwegian Traditional sources Rogaland Mostly Mid and South Rogaland / Jæren Most prominently Oftedal (1947, 1972) See also Chapman (1962), Omdal (1967), Sandvik (1979) Though not in Berntsen & Larsen (1925) on Stavanger Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 13 / 41
18. Norwegian Traditional sources Focus on Rogaland I (Mostly) unlike Icelandic, Rogaland Norwegian shows a contrast between the fortis and lenis stop series after a long vowel (2) a. [rʉːda] rute ‘window glass’ (native) b. [rʉːta] rute ‘route’ (borrowed) Oftedal (1947): preaspiration is stronger (longer/clearer) after a long vowel than after a short vowel Also Oftedal (1947): Gjesdal has preaspiration, but Bjerkreim (Dalane) has postaspiration of geminate stops in all positions: (3) a. [ˈkʰattʰ] katt ‘cat’ b. [ˈkʰattʰa] katta ‘the cat’ Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 14 / 41
19. Norwegian Traditional sources Focus on Rogaland II How old is preaspiration in Rogaland? Oftedal (1947), Chapman (1962): archaic Omdal (1967): new, urban feature in Stavanger city Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 15 / 41
20. Norwegian Traditional sources Northern Norway Iversen (1913) on Senja: variable preaspiration, particularly frequent before [kk] Elstad (1982) on Vestvågøy: ‘weak’ preaspiration possible Liberman (1984) mentions a different, phrase-final devoicing phenomenon in many northern dialects as an instance of preaspiration Jahr (2008): preaspiration in L2 varieties spoken by Sámi speakers Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 16 / 41
21. Norwegian Newer sources Rogaland: Jæren Wolter (1965a) with a summary in Wolter (1965b): acoustic study of northern Jæren (Stavanger / Sandnes) Earliest acoustic study, focus on geminates and the duration of preaspiration Annear (2012): documents various aspects of preaspiration in Stavanger, argues that it is phonologized van Dommelen, Holm & Koreman (2011) use Stavanger data in their study Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 17 / 41
22. Norwegian Newer sources Rogaland: Dalane Annear (2012) also documents pervasive preaspiration in Helleland, in southern Rogaland Tengesdal (2015) documents preaspiration in Bjerkreim His results do not match the description of that dialect by Oftedal (1947): (3) is not what it looks like Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 18 / 41
23. Norwegian Newer sources Trøndelag More recently, extensive acoustic documentation of preaspiration in Trøndelag (Moxness 1997, van Dommelen 1998, van Dommelen, Holm & Koreman 2011, Ringen & van Dommelen 2013) van Dommelen, Holm & Koreman (2011) in particular provide some comparison: greater duration of preaspiration in Stavanger compared to Trøndelag Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 19 / 41
24. Norwegian Newer sources Incidental mentions Annear (2012): example from Kongsberg (Buskerud, eastern Norway) Allen (2016): some examples from Oslo Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 20 / 41
25. Norwegian Casting the net wider Just how rare is preaspiration? Tengesdal (2015) casts doubt on the reliability of the classic description by Oftedal (1947) How reliable is the absence of reporting in this case? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 21 / 41
26. Norwegian Casting the net wider Corpus data I Preaspiration has been documented in phonetic dialect corpora for Swedish (Tronnier 2002, Wretling, Strangert & Schaeffler 2002) Here: Nordic Dialect Corpus (Johannessen et al. 2009; http://tekstlab.uio.no/nota/scandiasyn/) Examples from traditionally ‘preaspirating’ areas Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 22 / 41
27. Norwegian Casting the net wider Corpus data II Figure: Lom, Nord-Gudbrandsdalen: katt ‘cat’ (lom_04gk) Or from elsewhere (random examples) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 23 / 41
28. Norwegian Casting the net wider Corpus data III Figure: Evje, Setesdal, Aust-Agder fylke: [ɡʉʰtːɑn] ‘the boys’ (evje_02uk) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 24 / 41
29. Norwegian Casting the net wider Corpus data IV Figure: Kalvåg, Sunnfjord, Sogn og Fjordane fylke: [tʰɔxtːnhæm] ‘Tottenham’ (kalvaag_02uk) Curiouser and curiouser… Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 25 / 41
30. Norwegian Casting the net wider Acoustic study: Iosad (in preparation) Comparative acoustic study: Rogaland and Northern Norway Recordings in Stavanger and Tromsø Same word list across the two places, controlled for a variety of properties Aiming to verify: Reports of absence or otherwise of preaspiration Influence of factors reported significant (consonant place, vowel length…) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 26 / 41
31. Norwegian Casting the net wider Some results I How frequent is preaspiration? Very But also with lots of variation among speakers Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 27 / 41
32. Norwegian Casting the net wider Some results II VM1 VM2 VM3 NF6 NF7 VF1 VF2 VF3 NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4 NF5 Singleton Geminate Singleton Geminate Singleton Geminate Singleton Geminate Singleton Geminate 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 Consonant length Token count Voiceless preaspiration Absent Present Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 28 / 41
33. Norwegian Casting the net wider Some results III What are the durational properties? Again, lots of variation cutting across the west-north divide North West 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 VF1 VF2 VF3 VM1 VM2 VM3 NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4 NF5 NF6 NF7 Duration of voiceless preaspiration Speakers Consonant length Singleton Geminate Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 29 / 41
34. Norwegian Casting the net wider Some results IV Some traditional results hold up Jæren lenis /b d ɡ/ are fully voiceless (see also Annear 2012, Tengesdal 2015) Much more preaspiration in geminates / after short vowels On the other hand, we do find preaspiration after long vowels, too Others, less so No speaker has longer preaspiration in singletons than in geminates, contra Oftedal (1947) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 30 / 41
35. Norwegian Casting the net wider Some results V q q q q q q q q q q q q q 0.00924 0.27816 < 0.001 0.95665 0.97159 0.23325 0.12220 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.83477 0.13642 < 0.001 < 0.001 NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4 NF5 NF6 NF7 VF1 VF2 VF3 VM1 VM2 VM3 0 20 40 Estimated difference between geminates and singletons, ms Speaker Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 31 / 41
36. Discussion Outline 1 Preaspiration in North Germanic Crash introduction Preaspiration and areality 2 Norwegian Traditional sources Newer sources Casting the net wider 3 Discussion The true story How good are the traditional sources? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 32 / 41
37. Discussion The true story So how widespread is preaspiration? Pétur Helgason (2002, p. 207) is entirely correct: ‘the tendency to preaspirate, although it is not normative, permeates Scandinavian stop production’ In most mainland varieties, it is more variable and less obviously phonological than in Icelandic Icelandic preaspiration is probably a poor model for the past (Gunnar Ólafur Hansson 2001, Pétur Helgason 2002) Should this give us pause when considering possible areal effects? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 33 / 41
38. Discussion The true story How reliable are traditional descriptions? When traditional descriptions mention the existence of preaspiration, there is little reason to doubt them If a traditional description does not mention preaspiration, it is less clear that it is not there Traditional descriptions often do not fare well in judging the properties and conditioning of preaspiration Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 34 / 41
39. Discussion The true story The case of Oftedal (1947) Jæren has preaspiration, particularly of fortis stops and even more particularly of geminates Confirmed (e. g. van Dommelen, Holm & Koreman 2011, Annear 2012, Iosad in preparation) Jæren lenis stops are fully voiceless Confirmed (Annear 2012, Iosad in preparation) Bjerkreim has no preaspiration but postaspiration instead  Disconfirmed (Tengesdal 2015) Preaspiration is longer after long vowels ? Preliminary result (Iosad in preparation) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 35 / 41
40. Discussion How good are the traditional sources? Fieldworker disagreements Curiously, the same Oftedal (1956) has no problem hearing preaspiration in Lewis Gaelic Perhaps because he was expecting it, on the basis of Marstrander (1932), Borgstrøm (1937, 1940, 1941)? Many sources note preaspiration in Stavanger, but it is not mentioned by Berntsen & Larsen (1925) Elstad (1982) notes preaspiration on Vestvågøya but no mention of it by Christiansen (1933) on Gimsøya (next island along) Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 36 / 41
41. Discussion How good are the traditional sources? A cautionary tale Kristoffersen (2016) describes the discovery of the lack of tonal accent distinctions in strilemål (rural dialects around Bergen) The earliest descriptions almost uniformly treat these varieties as having the general Norwegian system of two tonal accents The lack of the distinction was not discovered until the 1940s and did not become received knowledge until the 1960s Kristoffersen (2016) identifies two factors: Involvement of native speakers of the dialects concerned Increased penetration of structuralist thinking and use of contrast / minimal pair criteria Nativeness? Oftedal grew in Sandnes and had family links in Gjesdal, got Bjerkreim wrong Christiansen did not comment on preaspiration in Lofoten but Elstad did: both native speakers! Fieldworker isoglosses are hard to prove Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 37 / 41
42. Discussion How good are the traditional sources? Why is preaspiration less visible? I Other than in north Gudbrandsdalen and Jæren, preaspiration seems to have gone quite unnoticed Could preaspiration be simply longer / louder in these regions? Perhaps van Dommelen, Holm & Koreman (2011): Stavanger preaspiration is sufficiently different (longer) from Trøndelag to be visible in sociophonetics North Gudbrandsdalen has (some) oralization (Bjørset 1899, Oftedal 1947) Distinctive function? Annear (2012): preaspiration is the only cue to /p t k/ vs. /b d ɡ/ contrast Other dialects (e. g. Helleland in his data, Northern Norwegian in mine) show some voicing of lenis stops In North Gudbrandsdalen preaspiration cues geminate vs. singleton after short vowel ([leʰt] = [let]) But we do not have reliable closure duration data there Less noticed when less essential for contrast? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 38 / 41
43. Discussion How good are the traditional sources? Why is preaspiration less visible? II Plausible but needs more work! In general: most fieldworkers were not expecting to find preaspiration, so they ignored it? Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 39 / 41
44. Discussion How good are the traditional sources? Conclusions Preaspiration is probably hugely underreported in traditional descriptions of Norwegian dialects Omission of any mention of preaspiration cannot be taken as evidence for its absence We need to rethink preaspiration as a ‘rare’ feature whose clustering in northern Europe is an explanandum Accounts of the history and areal distribution of preaspiration may need to consider factors beyond perceptual salience Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 40 / 41
45. Discussion How good are the traditional sources? Conclusions Preaspiration is probably hugely underreported in traditional descriptions of Norwegian dialects Omission of any mention of preaspiration cannot be taken as evidence for its absence We need to rethink preaspiration as a ‘rare’ feature whose clustering in northern Europe is an explanandum Accounts of the history and areal distribution of preaspiration may need to consider factors beyond perceptual salience Thank you! Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 40 / 41
46. Discussion How good are the traditional sources? Acknowledgements The research reported in Iosad (in preparation) was funded by the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland Jan Kristian Hognestad (Stavanger) and Øystein Vangsnes (Tromsø) for help with fieldwork and Josef Fruehwald (Edinburgh) for statistics ideas Jade Jørgen Sandstedt (Edinburgh) for the acoustic material mark-up The National Library of Norway for access to their digital collections Pavel Iosad Norwegian preaspiration FGLS13 41 / 41