Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:47:30.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A diachronic look at the syllable: the case of Icelandic1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Kristján Árnson
Kristján Árnson
Affiliation:
University of Iceland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I. Like so many linguistic terms, the term syllable has been used in many different senses, and theoretical distinctions have been made, aimed at avoiding confusion. There is hardly any need to remind the reader of Pike's distinction between PHONETIC and PHONEMIC syllables: ‘the phonetic syllables must be analyzed into the structural phonemic syllables’ (Pike, 1947: 90). Although obviously beneficial, this division still leaves considerable room for confusion, both on the phonetic and on the phonological side. On the phonological side the syllable can be thought of as a unit of organization of smaller phonological units (cf. e.g. Bell (1977), Bell & Hooper (1978)) or as a unit defining the scope or environment for phonological processes, or as accounting for regularities of quantity and tonality (cf. e.g. Pike (1947: 90), and Hooper (1972)). On the phonetic side there are at least two approaches to the syllable. It has been looked on as defining units in speech production (cf. Stetson (1951), Catford (1977: 89–90)) or as a means of describing sonority variation in the phonetic signal (cf. e.g. Jespersen (1949/1934: 118–121)). This latter aspect relates to the perception of the linguistic signal by speakers and to the acoustic buildup of the phonetic medium. Finally, there are those who deny the usefulness of the concept altogether.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , September 1981 , pp. 221 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Árnason, K. (1977). Quantity in Icelandic: a historical and comparative study. Ph.D. thesis. Department of Linguistics, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Árnason, K. (1978). Palatalization in Modern Icelandic: a case for historicism in synchronic linguistics. Lingua 46, 185–203.Google Scholar
Árnason, K. (1980). Quantity in historical phonology: Icelandic and related cases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, A. (1977). The distributional syllable. In Juilland, A. (ed), Linguistic studies offered to Joseph Greenberg: Vol. 2. Phonology. (Studia Linguistica et Philologica 4.) Saratoga, California: Anma Libri. 249–262.Google Scholar
Bell, A. (1979). The syllable as a constituent versus organizational unit. In Hanks, W. F., Hofbauer, C. & Clyne, P. R. (eds), The elements: a parasession on linguistic units and levels. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Bell, A. & Hooper, J. B. (1978). Issues and evidence in syllabic phonology. In Bell, A. & Hooper, J. B. (eds), Syllables and segments. Amsterdam. North-Holland. 3–22.Google Scholar
Benediktsson, H. (1968). Indirect changes of phonological structure: Nordic vowel quantity. AL 11. 31–65.Google Scholar
Catford, J. C. (1977). Fundamental problems in phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Eliasson, S. (1979). Swedish quantity revisited. In Gârding, E., Bruce, G. & Bannert, R. (eds), Nordic prosody. (Travaux de l'Institut de Linguistique de Lund 13.) 111–122.Google Scholar
Eliasson, S. & LaPelle, N. Pelle, N. (1973). Generativa regler för svenskans kvantitet. Arkiv 88. 133–148.Google Scholar
Games, S. (1975). Perception, production and language change. In Papers from the Parasession on Functionalism. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 156–169.Google Scholar
Hoard, J. E. (1971). Aspiration, tenseness, and syllabication in English. Lg. 47. 133–140.Google Scholar
Hooper, J. B. (1972). The syllable in phonological theory. Lg. 48. 525–540.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1949/1934). Modersmålets fonetik (3rd edition, 2nd impression). Copenhagen: Gyldendaiske Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Kurylowicz, J. (1948). Contribution a Ia théorie de Ia syllabe. In Coseriu, E. (ed.), Esquisses Linguistiques I. München: Fink. 193–220.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. E. F. (1972). Phonetics and the description of language. In Rigault, A. & Charbonneau, R. (eds), Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of the Phonetic Sciences. The Hague, Paris: Mouton. 63–97.Google Scholar
Linell, P. (1979). The interaction of stress and quantity in Swedish. In Gårding, E.Bruce, G. & Bannert, R. (eds), Nordic Prosody. (Travaux de l'Institut de Linguistique de Lund 13) 123–136.Google Scholar
Orešnik, J. & Pétursson, M. (1977). Quantity in Modern Icelandic. Arkiv 92. 155–171.Google Scholar
Pike, K. (1947). Phonemics: a technique for reducing languages to writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Pulgram, E. (1970). Syllable, word, nexus. cursus. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurd, B. (1955). Rank order of consonants established by distributional criteria. SL 9. 8–20.Google Scholar
Stetson, R. H. (1951). Motor phonetics (2nd edition). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T. (1972). On the theory of syllabic phonology. LBer 18. 1–18.Google Scholar