Re: vowel harmony

Mark J. Reed sikyal:

> On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 11:16:46AM -0700, JS Bangs wrote:
> > Under most analyses (perhaps all, actually), central vowels are not  a
> > separate backness from back vowels. In terms of features, I would describe
> > this system thus:
> >
> > -back  |  +back, -round  | +back, +round
> > ------------------------------------------
> >  i     |       1         |      u
>
> So where do } (central rounded) and  M (back unrounded) fit in, then?
> I don't think the central/back distinction can be identified with
> a rounded/unrounded distinction within back vowels.
Neither did I, at first, but this is the mainstream linguistic analysis.

First, consider co-occurence. How many languages have both /M/ and /1/
contrastively? How many have both /y/ and /}/? In the absence of such
contrasts, it makes sense to say that both /y/ and /}/ are [-back +round],
while /M/ and /1/ are [+back -round], with the specific articulation
specified phonetically, not phonemically. Other features might come in,
too--depending on how a sound patterns, /}/ might also be a [-tense]
version of /u/.

There is only one language that I know of that challenges this theory:
Standard Swedish. Or maybe Norwegian. I forget. Anyway, it has all of /i y
} 1 u/, I believe, and so cannot be accomodated under this system. But
there is also a significant difference in *lip* position between /y/ and
/}/, implying that the real featural difference might have to do with
types of rounding. In any case, one kind-of-marginal counterexample isn't
quite strong enough to dissuade most linguists.


Jesse S. Bangs jaspax@u.washington.edu
http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/
http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/blog

Jesus asked them, "Who do you say that I am?"

And they answered, "You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground
of our being, the kerygma in which we find the ultimate meaning of our
interpersonal relationship."

And Jesus said, "What?"

Replies