Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T23:19:02.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Icelandic umlaut in Optimality Theory1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Courtenay St. John Gibson  and
Catherine O. Ringen
Courtenay St. John Gibson
Affiliation:
Department of English, Coe College, Cedar Rapids, IA 52402, USA.
Catherine O. Ringen
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
Get access

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis of Icelandic umlaut in Optimality Theory. We account for umlaut in sal[œ]t-[Y]m ‘lettuce’ (dat. pl.) and d[œ:]g-[Y]m ‘day’ (dat. pl.), in which /a/ is fronted and rounded when followed by [Y], as well as forms such as j[œ]kli ‘glacier’ (dat. sg.) and b[œ]rn ‘child’ (ace. pl.) with an umlauted vowel, but no overt trigger. We explain why there is no umlaut in forms such as dal-n[Y]m ‘valley’ (def.), kakt[Y]s ‘cactus’ (nom. sg.), or d[a:]g-[Y]r ‘day’ (nom. sg.) despite the fact that /a/ occurs in the umlaut environment. We also explain why there is one umlauted vowel in sal[œ]t-[Y]m ≪ /salat + Ym/, but two umlauted vowels in f[œ]t-n[Y]ð-[Y]m ≪ /fat + nað + Ym/ ‘clothing’ (dat. pl.) and why the umlauted vowel is sometimes [Y] and sometimes [œ].

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , June 2000 , pp. 49 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2000

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, S. 1972. Icelandic u-umlaut and breaking in a generative grammar. In Firchow, E. S., Grimstad, K., Hasselmo, N. & O'Neil, W. (eds), Studies for Einar Haugen Presented by Friends and Colleagues. The Hague: Mouton, 13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, S. 1974. The Organization of Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Àrnason, K. 1988. Problems in the Lexical Phonology of Icelandic. In Dressier, W. U., Luschützky, H. C., Pfeiffer, O. E. & Rennison, J. R. (eds), Phonologica 1988. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 5–14.Google Scholar
Beckman, J. 1997. Positional Faithfulness, Positional Neutralisation, and Shona Vowel Harmony. Phonology 14.1, 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckman, J. 1998. Positional Faithfulness. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts. [published by Garland in the Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics Series, 1999.]Google Scholar
Benua, L. 1995. Identity Effects in Morphological Truncation. In Beckman, J., Dickey, L. W. & Urbanczyk, S. (eds), Papers in Optimally Theory, UMOP 18. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, 77–136.Google Scholar
Einarsson, S. 1945. Icelandic. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, T. M. 1995. Phonological Derivation in Optimality Theory. Unpublished ms., University of Edinburgh.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, C. St. J. 1997. Icelandic Phonology in Optimality Theory. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Iowa.Google Scholar
Hung, H. 1993. The Rhythmic and Prosodic Organization of Edge Constituents. Ph.D. dissertation, Brandeis University.Google Scholar
Itô, J. 1986. Syllable Theory in Prosodic Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Karvonen, D., & Sherman, A. 1997. Sympathy, Opacity, and U-Umlaut in Icelandic. Phonology at Santa Cruz 5, 37–48.Google Scholar
Kaun, A. 1995. The Typology of Rounding Harmony: An Optimality Theoretic Approach. Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, , 1985. Some consequences of Lexical Phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2, 85–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, T. 1995. Umlaut in Optimality Theory. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1996. Remarks on Phonological Opacity in Optimality Theory. In Lecarme, J., Lowenstamm, J. & Shlonsky, U. (eds), Studies in Afroasiatic Grammar. Papers from the Second Conference on Afroasiatic Linguistics, Sophia Antipolis, 1994. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics, 215–243.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1997. Sympathy and Phonological Opacity. Paper presented at the Johns Hopkins Optimality Theory Workshop/Maryland Mayfest, Johns Hopkins University, 05 1997.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J., & Prince, A. 1993. Prosodic Morphology I: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction. Unpublished ms., University of Massachusetts and Rutgers University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J., & Prince, A. 1995. Faithfulness and Reduplicative Identity. In Beckman, J., Dickey, L. W. & Urbanczyk, S. (eds), Papers in Optimality Theory, UMOP 18. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, 249–384.Google Scholar
Orešnik, J. 1985. Modern Icelandic U-Umlaut from the descriptive point of view. In Pétursson, M. (ed.), Studies in the Phonology and Morphology of Modern Icelandic. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag, 111–147.Google Scholar
Ottósson, K. G. 1988. Fragments of the Lexical Morphology and Phonology of Icelandic. Unpublished ms., University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Pater, J. 1999. Austronesian Nasal Substitution and Other NÇ Effects. In Kager, R., van der Hulst, H. & Zonneveld, W. (eds), The Prosody–Morphology Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 310–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Technical Report #2 of the Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Ringen, C., & Vago, R. 1998. Hungarian Vowel Harmony in Optimality Theory. Phonology 15.3, 393–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. 1995. The Prosodic Structure of Function Words. In Beckman, J., Dickey, L. W. & Urbanczyk, S. (eds), Papers in Optimality Theory, UMOP 18. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, 439–469.Google Scholar
Spaelti, P. 1994. Weak Edges and Final Geminates in Swiss German. NELS 24, 573–588.Google Scholar
Thráinsson, H. 1994. Icelandic. In König, E. & van der Auwera, S. (eds), The Germanic Languages. New York: Routledge, 142–189.Google Scholar
Zoll, C. 1996. Parsing Below the Segment in a Constraint Based Framework. Ph.D. dissertation, U.C. Berkeley. [Published in 1998, Stanford, CA: CSLI.]Google Scholar