Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T00:17:32.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palatal Vowel Harmony: A Perceptually Motivated Phenomenon?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Kari Suomi
Kari Suomi
Affiliation:
Department of Finnish and General Linguistics/Phonetics, Henrikinkatu 2, 20500 TURKU 50, Finland.
Get access

Abstract

The paper attempts to determine the motivating causes of palatal vowel harmony (PVH). Previously suggested causal explanations of PVH are critically evaluated, especially the progressive palatal assimilation view of the origin of PVH. Data on PVH restrictions from Finnish and Turkish are examined against a set of perceptually motivated working tendencies. It is shown that PVH and “labial harmony” are only special cases of a single, unitary type of restriction, statable acoustically in terms of the frequency of the second formant. A perceptual theory of the causes of PVH is proposed and general phonetic conditions for and against the development of PVH in a language are suggested. On the whole, the paper is an argument for a substance-based approach to phonology.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , June 1983 , pp. 1 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

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

Anderson, Stephen R. 1980: Problems and Perspectives in the Description of Vowel Harmony. In Vago, Robert M. (ed.) 1980: Issues in Vowel Harmony. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 1–48.Google Scholar
Bladon, R.A.W. and Lindblom, Björn 1981: Modeling the Judgment of Vowel Quality Differences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 69, 1414–1422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, Lyle 1980: The Psychological and Sociological Reality of Finnish Vowel Harmony. In Vago, Robert M. (ed.) 1980: Issues in Vowel Harmony. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 245–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, R., Granström, B. and Fant, G. 1970: Some Studies Concerning Perception of Isolated Vowels. Speech Transmission Laboratory — Quarterly Progress and Status Report (KTH, Stockholm) 2–3/1970, 19–40.Google Scholar
Cole, Ronald and Jakimik, Jola 1980: A Model of Speech Perception. In Cole, Ronald (ed.) 1980: Perception and Production of Fluent Speech. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 133–163.Google Scholar
Crothers, John 1978: Typology and Universals of Vowel Systems. In Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.) 1978: Universals of Human Language. Volume 2. Phonology. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, pp. 93–152.Google Scholar
Crothers, John and Shibatani, Masayoshi 1980: Issues in the Description of Turkish Vowel Harmony. In Vago, Robert M. (ed.) 1980: Issues in Vowel Harmony. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 63–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fant, Gunnar 1973: Speech Sounds and Features. Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
Flanagan, James L. 1955: A Difference Limen for Vowel Formant Frequency. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 27, 613–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groundstroem, Axel 1971: Studien zur phonologischen Komponente der modernen finnischen Hochsprache. Doctoral dissertation, University of Stockholm.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Lauri 1968: Suomen kielen rakenne ja kehitys. Third edition, Otava, Helsinki.Google Scholar
Häkkinen, Kaisa 1981: Die Stellung des genuinen Wortschatzes in der finnischen Sprache der Gegenwart. Finnish-Ugrische Mitteilungen 5, 177–199.Google Scholar
Itkonen, Erkki 1945: Onko kantasuomessa ollut keskivokaaleja? Virittäjä, 49, 158–182.Google Scholar
Itkonen, Erkki 1948: Vokaalikombinaatiot ja vartalotyypit. Virittäjä 52, 124–144.Google Scholar
Janhunen, Juha 1981: Uralilaisen kantakielen sanastosta. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 77, 219–274.Google Scholar
Karlsson, Fred 1971: Finskans rotmorfemstruktur: en generativ beskrivning. Publications of the Phonetics Department of the University of Turku 10, Turku.Google Scholar
Karlsson, Fred 1974: Centrala problem i finskans böjningsmorfologi, morfofonematik och fonologi. Suomi 117:2, Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura, Helsinki.Google Scholar
Kettunen, Lauri 1960: Suomen lähisukukielten luonteenomaiset piirteet. Mèmoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 119, Helsinki.Google Scholar
Lafon, Jean-Claude 1968: Auditory Basis of Phonetics. In Malmberg, Bertil (ed.) 1968: Manual of Phonetics. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 76–104.Google Scholar
Lewis, G.L. 1967: Turkish Grammar. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Liljencrants, Johan and Lindblom, Björn 1972: Numerical Simulation of Vowel Quality Systems: the Role of Perceptual Contrast. Language 48, 839–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindblom, Björn 1972: Phonetics and the Description of Language. In Rigault, André and Charbonneau, René (eds.) 1972: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn 1975: Experiments in Sound Structure. Paper read at the Eighth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Leeds.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn 1980: Economy of Speech Gestures. In MacNeilage, Peter (ed.) 1980: Speech Production. Springer, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn (forthcoming): Phonetic Universals in Vowel Systems. In Ohala, John (ed.): Experimental Phonology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn and Sundberg, Johan 1971: Acoustical Consequences of Lip, Tongue, Jaw and Larynx Movement. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 50, 1166–1179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linell, Per 1979: Psychological Reality in Phonology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Nearey, Terrance M. 1980: On the Physical Interpretation of Vowel Quality: Cinefluorographic and Acoustic Evidence. Journal of Phonetics 8, 213–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruhlen, Merrit 1975: A Guide to the Languages of the World. Language Universais Project, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Sammallahti, Pekka 1979: Über die Laut- und Morphemstruktur der Uralischen Grundsprache. Finnish-Ugrische Forschungen XLIII, 22–66.Google Scholar
Sammallahti, Pekka 1980: Introduction to a symposium on vowel harmony held at the Fifth International Finno-Ugric Congress in Turku 1980. In Ikola, Osmo (ed.) 1980: Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, Turku 20.-27. VIII. 1980, Pars III. Suomen Kielen Seura, Turku, pp. 3–7.Google Scholar
Sirén, Kirsti 1981: Difficulties in the Perception of English Vowels: A Contrastive/Error Analysis of English and Turkish. Unpublished Master's thesis, English Department, University of Oulu.Google Scholar
Suen, Ching Yee and Beddoes, Michael P. 1972: Discrimination of Vowel Sounds of Very Short Duration. Perception and Psychophysics 11, 417–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N.S. 1971: Grundzüge der Phonologie. Fifth impression. Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Göttingen.Google Scholar
Wiik, Kalevi 1965: Finnish and English Vowels. Annales Universitatis Turkuensis B 94, Turku.Google Scholar
Wiik, Kalevi 1975: Vokaalisoinnun ongelmia. Publications of the Phonetics Department of the University of Turku 14, Turku.Google Scholar
Zwicker, Eberhardt and Feldtkeller, Richard 1967: Das Ohr als Nachrichtenempfänger. Hirzel, Stuttgart.Google Scholar