A unified account for the behaviour of Gallo

Philippe Ségéral
Université Paris 7
[email protected]
Going Romance 23
Workshop on Linguistic Change in relation to
Linguistic Theory
Tobias Scheer
CNRS 6039, Université de Nice
[email protected]
December 5th, 2009
Nice
this handout and some of the references quoted at
www.unice.fr/dsl/tobias.htm
A unified account for the behaviour of Gallo-Romance
glides in strong position
(1)
purpose
a. offer a unified account for the evolution of glides – yod and w – in Strong Position
in Gallo-Romance:
1. strengthening to a contour segment (affricate, gw) occurred in all cases
2. except in case the input configuration – the strong position of the glide – was
destroyed by independent processes before strengthening was active
b. ==> the key to the apparently anarchic behaviour of glides is this bleeding
relationship:
1. the chronology of the events allows for a phonologically exceptionless analysis.
2. any glide that was still present in Strong Position "late" undergoes
strengthening.
c. this analysis may also be extended to other sonorants if epenthesis is considered a
strengthening: cam(e)ra > chambre where the br is a contour segment (which is the
strong version of r).
(2)
roadmap
a. yod in initial position
b. yod in post-consonantal position
c. w in initial position
d. w in post-consonantal position
1. Yod in initial position: > dÉʒ without exception
(3)
lat.
jocu
jurare
# __
jeu [ʒø]
jurer [ʒyʁe]
coda
intervocalic
__ #
V __ V
maj(u) mai [mɛ] raja
raie [rɛ]
jejunu jeûn [jœn]
germ. *jok
ofr joc (> jucher)
*jehhjan ofr jehir, gehir, jeir
blending with géhenne produces mod fr. gêner, cf. Rey (1998) géhenne, gêne
-2-
2. Yod in post-consonantal position
(4)
origin: consonification of i,e in hiatus position
fiilia
> filja
fille
viinea
> winja
vigne
(5)
global picture
a. (almost) exceptionless strenthening after labials (rabia > rage)
b. a variety of evolutions elsewhere
1. strengthening
liineu > linge
2. persistence of yod
modiolu > ofr moiel
3. palatalization
glacia > glace
4. metathesis
baasiaare > baiser
(6)
important distinction: C+yod after vowels vs. after consonants
e.g. gj
a. always > yod in V__
regioone > ofr roion
b. always > strengthening in C__
Georgiu > Georges
2.1. Labial + yod
(7)
V__: strengthening
bj > dÉʒ (> ʒ)
vj > dÉʒ (> ʒ)
rabia
rage
cavea
cage
rubeu
rouge
leviu
liège
goobioone goujon abbreviaare abréger
mj > ndÉʒ (>~ʒ)
pj > tÉʃ (> ʃ)
vindeemia
vendange
apiu
ache
siimiu
singe
sapiam sache
*blasteemia a.fr. blastenge seepia seiche
(8)
C__: strengthening
Cbj > dÉʒ (> ʒ)
Cvj > dÉʒ (> ʒ)
Cmj > ndÉʒ (>~ʒ)
Cpj > tÉʃ (> ʃ)
longe
serviente
sergent
commeaatu congé *krippja crèche
*lumbea
cambiaare changer
*cervia
ofr. cerge
superbia
ofr. soverge *conserviu ofr. concerge
(9)
small paradigm where persistence is observed
the list below is about exhaustive
bj > dÉʒ (> ʒ)
vj > dÉʒ (> ʒ)
mj > ndÉʒ (>~ʒ)
habeo
ai
*aviolu
aïeul
–
–
deebeo
ofr. dei *gaveola
ofr. jaiole
*plovia
pluie
pj > tÉʃ (> ʃ)
sapio
ofr. sai
-3(10) the yod is a geminate
consensual: e.g. La Chaussée (1974: 67, 171), Bourciez & Bourciez (1967: §40, §49-H),
Fouché (1966-73:256, 906, 909-R1)
a. lab + yod > yod only occurs after vowels
b. intervocalic yod regularly disappears: raja > raie
c. the labial is lost, which indicates that it stood in coda position
d. the evolution of the preceding tonic vowel follows the closed syllable paradigm:
sapio > ofr. sai, habeo > ofr ai
2.2. Yod after non-labials
solution 1: strengthening > dÉʒ, tÉʃ
V__
tj
–
–
dj
sj
kj
gj
nj
lj
rj
C__
Ctj porti(c)u
Perti(c)u
Aventi(c)u
excorti(c)at
ttj *matteuuca
Ctj hordeu
vir(i)diaariu
indeusque
gage
siège
piège
ofr. miege
ofr. forasche
–
ofr. domesche
–
Ckj *ankja
*nuskja
–
–
Cgj Georgiu
spongia
liineu
linge
mnj somniaare
étrange
somniu
extraaneu
laaneu
lange
*dom(i)nioone
*fanja
fange
*dom(i)niaariu
*mentioonia mensonge
Catalauni(c)u Chalonge
Santoni(c)u Saintonge
mani(c)u
ofr. mange
alveu
auge
–
salvia
sauge
*sturione
esturgeon
rrj *burrione
ceereu
ofr. cerge
sorooriu
ofr. serorge
*camoria
ofr. chamorge
baleaari(c)u ofr. baillarge
cleeri(c)u
ofr. clerge
*wadiu
*sedi(c)u
*pedi(c)u
medi(c)u
forasti(c)u
domesti(c)u
–
porche
Perche
Avenche
écorche
massue
orge
verger
ofr. enjosque
–
anche
ofr. nosche
Georges
éponge
songer
songe
donjon
danger
–
bourgeon
collier, bracelet
-4solution 2: persistence yod > yod
V__
ofr. moiel –
dj
modiolu
gaudia
joie
inoodiaare ennuyer
gj
regioone ofr. roion
–
exagiu
essai
corrigia
courroie
C__
–
–
solution 3: palatalization C+yod > tÉs (>s)
V__
C__
tj
ratioone
raison
Ctj cantioone
chanson
*latia
laize
fortia
force
*acutiaare
aiguiser
*linteolu
linceul
enfance
infantia
ktj *tractiare
tracer
factione
façon
lectione
leçon
suspectione ofr. sospeçon
frictione
frisson
maledictione maudisson
*districtia
détresse
kj
glacia
glace
Ckj arcioone
arçon
suspicioone soupçon
lancea
lance
*gloociaare glousser
calceaare
chausser
nj
viinea
vigne
Cnj hernia
ofr. hergne
oignon
Arvernia
Auvergne
uunioone
Burgundia
Bourgogne
*vernia
vergne
lj
palea
paille
–
–
taaliaare
tailler
melioore
meilleur
solution 4: metathesis C+yod > IC
V__
ssj
sj
baasiaare baiser
rj
paria
paire
C__
*bassiaare baisser
passione
paisson
–
–
(> soupçon)
-52.3. Analysis
(11) traditional analysis
Pope (1952:§203), La Chaussée (1974:79), Carton (1974:162), Zink (1986:101), Jacobs
(1993:149), Bourciez (1967:§171)
a. yod is particularly vigorous and cannot stand being in this position
b. it "tries to escape" by all means, which are:
1. destruction of the preceding consonant (= persistence): modiolu > ofr moiel
2. palatalization = it enters the preceding consonant
3. when neither is possible because of the nature of the preceding consonant, it
crosses this consonant
c. none of these strategies works with labials, which are particularly strong and
impalatalizable.
==> strengthening is a last resort if all other means fail.
d. strengthening after non-labials is the treatment of "late" or "retarded" words, i.e.
1. Germanic words that came in late: *wadiu > gage
2. words whose evolution was retarded due to extralinguistic reasons: learned,
liturgical vocabulary: liineu > linge
Bourciez (1967: §149-H, R1, §199-R3, §182-H)
La Chaussée (1974: 183) after labials: end 3rd, beginning 4th AD
La Chaussée (1974: 193) after other consonants: end 4th, beginning 5th AD
(12) same input, different development
exhaustive list of contexts
other
Vrj metathesis
paria
paire
Ckj palatalization arcioone
arçon
Vdj persistence
modiolu
ofr. moiel
Ctj palatalization cantioone
chanson
Vnj palatalization viinea
vigne
strengthening
*sturione
esturgeon
*ankja
anche
*wadiu
gage
porti(c)u
porche
liineu
linge
(13) all cases of strengthening are "late"
a. Germanic origin: *sturione, *ankja, *wadiu
Germanic vocabulary systematically undergoes strengthening by affrication
b. consonification had to "wait" for the loss of an intervocalic consonant
-Cti(c)u
porti(c)u > porche
-Vt/di(c)u
herbaati(c)u > herbage
medi(c)u > ofr. miege
c. extralinguistic reasons for inhibiting evolution: liturgical etc. vocabulary
liineu > linge
-6(14) labials vs. other consonants
a. labials resist longer in coda position than other consonants
b. recall the contrast between
cavea > cage
and
aviolu > aïeul
c. cavea > cage
is a strengthening in post-consonantal position: it supposes the PRESENCE of the
labial at the time when strengthening takes place.
d. aviolu > aïeul
is a gemination of the post-consonantal yod on the position that is vacated by the
labial. It supposes the ABSENCE of the labial at the time when strengthening takes
place.
σ
σ
σ
σ
σ
σ
|
|
|
|
|
|
R
R
R
R
R
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
O N C O N O N
O N C O N O N
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
x x x x x x
>
x x x x x x
| | | | | |
|
| | |
a v j o l u
a
j eu l
e.
f.
==> "persistence" is a form of strengthening:
1. the weak coda consonant is eliminated
2. the strong post-coda consonant spreads on its position
two types of strengthening
1. by affrication: yod > dÉʒ, tÉʃ
2. positional: (compensatory) gemination j > jj
(15) same contrast with Vdj
a. modiolu > ofr. moiel
vs.
*wadiu > gage
b. same analysis:
modiolu > ofr. moiel = loss of d in coda position, positional strengthening
*wadiu > gage = strengthening by affrication in post-d position, THEN loss of d in
coda position
-7(16) positional analysis
[building on Ségéral & Scheer 2001]
a. period 1
strengthening by affrication not active
metathesis, palatalization and positional strengthening active
b. which process C+yod clusters undergo depends on segmental factors:
1. only s,z,r allow for metathesis: paria > paire
2. other consonants do other things: d is lost in codas modiolu > ofr moiel etc.
b. period 2
strengthening by affrication active
metathesis (and palatalization, positional strengthening?) not active
c.
paria
modiolu glacia *wadiu
medi(c)u
liineu
period 1
–
–
–
metath. paire
–
–
–
strength gem.
mojjel
–
–
–
palataliz.
glace
–
–
–
period 2
strength affric
gage
miege
linge
d.
e.
all yods which were still present in post-coda position at the time when affricatestrengthening was active have undergone this process
Yods that escaped affricate-strengthening
1. were either no yods anymore at that time
2. or did not stand in strong position after an independent coda consonant anymore
==> affricate-strengthening is bled by processes that have applied earlier
(17) comparison
traditional analysis
a. yod is particularly vigorous:
it kills preceding consonants
b.
explanation of the contrast labials
vs. non-labials
labials are strong: they are
particularly resistant against
palatalization
positional analysis
yod is passive and opportunistic:
it spreads on the position of preceding
consonants once they die of age
explanation of the contrast labials vs. nonlabials
labials are strong: they are particularly
resistant in coda position
2.4. Loss of the medial consonant in C[C]C
(18) general process: loss of the medial consonant in a tri-consonantal cluster
[if none of the neighbours can build a branching onset]
-l[b]n- gal[b](i)nu
jaune
-l[k]t- cul[c](i)ta
ofr. coute
-m[p]t- com[p](u)taare conter
-n[d]t- ven[d](i)ta
vente
ofr. dert[r]e
-r[m]t- dor[m](i)tooriu dortoir
-r[b]tder[b](i)ta
-s[t]m- tes[t](i)mooniu témoin
-r[k]b- ar[c](u)ballista
arbalète
-r[p]m- *car[p](i)mu
charme
-r[t]k- excor[t](i)cat
écorche
-8(19) hence all Cj clusters after consonants reduce:
C[C]j > Cj
loss of labials
loss of non-labials
longe
C[t]j por[t]i(c)u
C[b]j
*lum[b]ea
C[p]j
*krip[p]ja
crèche
C[d]j hor[d]eu
C[v]j
ser[v]iente sergent
C[k]j *an[k]ja
C[m]j
com[m]eaatu congé
C[g]j Geor[g]iu
C[n]j som[n]iaare
C[r]j *bur[r]ione
porche
orge
anche
Georges
songer
bourgeon
(20) hence
a. por[t]i(c)u > porche
hor[d]eu > orge
are NOT palatalizations of t,d, but affricate-strengthenings of a yod after an r
por[t]i(c)u = *sturione
b. voiceless tÉʃ > ʃ witnesses a chronology that goes through rç, rather than rj:
porti(c)u > por[t]ju > por[t]çu > porçu > porche
c. also attested: porge
supposes rj, i.e. witnesses the loss of t, which occurs before it can devoice j into ç
(21) reality of the loss of the medial C
n[d]j > ¯
vereecun[d]ia
vergogne
*retun[d]iaare rogner
Burgun[d]ia
Bourgogne
Compen[d]ia
Compiègne
m[n]j > ~dÉʒ
som[n]iaare
som[n]iu
*dom(i)[n]ioone
*dom(i)niaariu
songer
songe
donjon
danger
(22) benefits
a. apparent palatalization of t into tÉʃ
*foras[t]i(c)u > ofr. forasche (> farouche)
domes[t]i(c)u > ofr. domesche
1. classically two distinct palatalizations need to be assumed depending on the
palatal agent:
t > tÉs /__i
t > tÉʃ /__j
2. this is a mirage: the evolutions at hand concern sj, not tj:
s[t]j > sj > stÉʃ (>tÉʃ > ʃ)
3. this tells us that metathesis was not active anymore when sj was created.
b. the same goes for
al[v]eu > auge
sal[v]ia > sauge
the consonne d'appui is the l, not the v
c. the same goes for C-labial-yod
ser[v]iente > sergent
the consonne d'appui is the r, not the v
-9(23) metathesis was not active anymore in period 2
grey-shaded items have the relevant input for metathesis, but
because the relevant input context was created too late.
VCj
CCj
sj
baasiaare
baiser
ssj *bassiaare
sj
foras[t]i(c)u ofr. forasche
ttj
*matteuuca
rj
paria
paire
Ctj por[t]i(c)u
tj
ratioone
raison
Ctj infan[t]ia
do not effect metathesis
baisser
massue
porche
enfance
(24) chronology
a. 1. palatalization, metathesis (period 1)
2. reduction of triconsonantal clusters C[C]C (period 1)
3. affrication-strengthening (period 2)
b. doublets
(many more to be found in diatopic variation)
palatalization
affrication-strengthening
Vnj *fanja
fagne
fange
Vrj *camoria
chamorge
c.
metathesis
chamoire
the original form of the word persists alongside with its evolved version, both being
semantically or diatopically differentiated. By the time affrication-strengthening
enters the scene, the non-evolved C+yod version then undergoes this process.
2.5. Palatalization: a confetti analysis
(25) positional strengthening: gemination of post-coda yod
a.
gemination without coloration gemination with coloration
Vpj sapio
ofr. sai
Vnj viinea
vigne
Vbj deebeo
ofr. dei
Vlj palea
paille
Vvj *aviolu
aïeul
Vkj glacia
glace
ofr. moiel
Vdj modiolu
ofr. roion
Vgj regioone
b.
all items at hand are geminates
1. the preceding tonic vowel shows the effects of closed syllables
apj sapio
ofr. sai
agj glacia
glace
alj palea
paille
anj montanea montagne
2. the reflex of kj is tÉs, which resists intervocalic voicing: glacia > glace
it thus behaves like ttj: *matteuuca > massue
compare with singleton tj > tÉs that in addition voices: *latia > laize
- 10 (26) why does the coda consonant sometimes leave a (melodic) trace, but at other times
leaves the geminate colourless?
a. it cannot be argued that
- coloured geminates are based on palatalizable consonants: n,l,k
- while uncoloured geminates are based in non-palatalizable cons.: p,b,v,d,g
b. rather, coloration depends on the general behaviour of each individual consonant in
coda position:
1. labials and dentals are lost without leaving any trace:
rupta > route
cub(i)tu > coude
naav(i)gaare > nager
plat(a)nu > ofr. plane
adveniire > avenir
2. velars are resolved into yod, but which of course cannot make the geminate yod
more palatal than it is
facta > faite
rig(i)da > ofr roide
3. nasals nasalize leave a nasal trace on the preceding vowel
cantaare > chanter
in our case the nasality lands on the following consonant:
viinea > vigne
4. the same goes for the lateral
palea > paille
the leftovers of l are w in codas, but laterality here - why?
Because laterality cannot land on a vowel, and w cannot land on a yod.
(27) the confetti analysis
a. when a consonant is eliminated
- either in coda position
- or as the medial consonant of a triconsonantal cluster C[C]C
pieces of its melody may hook on the remaining items
b. viinea > vigne
is not a palatalization of n, but a nasalization of jj
palea > paille
is not a palatalization of l, but a lateralization of jj
consonification
O N O N O N
| | | |
|
p a l e
a
[le]
>
O N O N O N
| | |
|
p a l j
a
[lj]
1. loss of coda l
2. gemination
>
O N O N O N
| |
| |
p a l
j a
lateralization of
the geminate
>
O N O N O N
| |
|
p a l+j a
[ʎʎ]
- 11 consonification
O N O N O N
| | | |
|
gl a c i
a
[ki]
>
O N O N O N
| | |
|
gl a c j
a
[kj]
1. loss of coda l
2. gemination
>
O N O N O N
| |
| |
gl a c
j a
combination of
k and yod
>
O N O N O N
| |
|
gl a k+j a
[tÉs]
3. W in initial position
(28) origin of Gallo-Romance w
a. lat w
servire > servir
b. consonification
malua > mauve
c. Germanic
*wërra > guerre
additional cases, but which are different in kind
d. Gallo-Romance w
La Chaussée (1974: 51, 151f)
in V__V: b,p > β with an intermediate stage w before o,u
e. lat. -qu- [kw]
(29) spontaneous sound shift w > v
consensus:
there was an evolutionary stage where the language lacked w altogether:
a. lat w and w from consonification were already v
b. Germanic w had not arrived yet
La Chaussée (1974: 146)
(30) Latin initial w: two paradigms
lat. w > v
valere
valoir
ventre
ventre
vinu
vin
voce
voix
vacca
vache
valle
val
vanu
vain
veela
voile
veena
veine
vendere
vendre
venire
venir
ventu
vent
voleere
vouloir
lat. w > gw (>g)
vadu
gué
vagina
gaine
vastare
gâter
Vasconia
Gascogne
*veractu
guéret
vespa
guêpe
vipera
guivre
viscu
gui
- 12 (31) explanations offered in the literature
==> all extra-grammatical
a. lexical concurrence
Bourciez (1967: §163-R1), Fouché (1966-73: 559-R2-3).
b. analogy
Bourciez (1967: §163-R1)
c. double borrowing: Gallo-Romance > Germanic > Gallo-Romance
Fouché (1966-73: 559-R4)
d. Celtic substrate for lat w > gw
Alinei (2000:934f)
(32) Germanic initial w: strengthening to gw without exception
*wardôn
garder
*warnjan
garnir
*wërra
guerre
*wîsa
guise
*want
gant
*wahtôn
guetter
*waigaro
guère
*Wilihelm
Guillaume
etc.
4. W in post-consonantal position
(33) lat w and w from consonification > v
a. lat w
w from consonification
servire
servir
ianuariu
janvier
cervisa
cervoise
tenue
ofr. tenve
advenire
avenir
vidua
veuve
servier
malua
mauve
cervariu
calva
chauve
*cerwiice
ofr. cerviz
b. lat. w and from consonification is lost
1. as medial C of a triconsonantal cluster C[C]C
2. in certain cases after CC clusters and before a long vowel: CC__VV
after lat. l pinguis
after consonant clusters
*pulw(e)re ofr. poldre (> poudre)
battualia
battalya
*solw(e)re ofr. soldre (> absoudre)
*ingwiine
ofr. eine
*volw(e)re ofr. voldre
*victwaalia
ofr. vitaille
*solw(i)ta ofr. solte
*fluctwaare
ofr. floter
*volw(i)ta ofr. volte
*paskwaaticu ofr. pascage
*kwerkwedula sarcelle
(> aine)
victuaille
flotter
pacage
- 13 (34) Germanic w
almost no evidence
a. germ Cw > Cv
one serious etymology
*sparwâri > ofr. esparvier (> épervier)
Fouché (1966-73: 485,696)
b. germ Cw > gw
one serious etymology
*skârwahta > ofr. eschargaite (> échauguette)
Fouché (1966-73: 699)
c. a number of unexploitable candidate cases
1. écarver < old nord. skarv- ?
Fouché (1966-73: 700)
2. *farwida > ofr. farde (> fard) (Fouché 1966-73: 149)
*farwidan > *farwidare (> farder) (Fouché 1966-73: 495)
regular loss of post-tonic i, hence of w as the medial consonant of C[C]C
3. initial sw- > sufrom vha swehur, swigar, Fouché (1966-73: 716) derives
*swegaro > ofr. suegre
*sweɣuru > ofr. suevre
4. Tw- > tu: þwahlja > touaille
Fouché (1966-73: 693, 930)
5. fr. gaillard
a host of vague and unreliable etymologies, one of which is based on
got. walwjan > *gwalardo > gaillard
Fouché (1966-73: 562f)
6. (loup-)garou < *werwulf ?
obscure: Fouché (1966-73: 560)
- 14 -
5. Conclusion
(35) summary distributional situation
+ = strengthening observed
– = no strengthening observed
yod
lat.
germ.
#__
+
+
C__
+/–
+
w
#__
C__
lat.
+/–
–
germ.
+
(+)
(36) yod and w in Strong Position:
a simple generalization
a. all glides present in Strong Position at the times when strengthening by affrication
became an active phonological process in the language undergo this process:
yod > tÉʃ,dÉʒ
w > gw
b. the strengthening process is actually not affrication: strengthening of yod and w
share the fact of producing a contour structure
affricates
gw
mono-positional muta cum liquida
O
O
O
O
t ʃ
c.
d.
e.
d ʒ
g w
d r
contour-segment strengthening occurred "late" (i.e. in the 3rd, 4th centuries)
concordant evidence
1. from yod: strengthening is "late"
2. from w: Germanic w strengthens systematically
glides that escape contour-segment strengthening
1. either were not glides anymore at the relevant point in time
yods that undergo metathesis, palatalization, w > v
2. or were not in post-coda position anymore, i.e. with an independent consonant
to their left
==> geminate yod in modiolu > ofr moiel of course does not strengthen: it is
already strong.
asymmetries between yod and w are due to independent factors
1. w > v
2. w in C__: absence of exploitable evidence, but we know that contour-segment
strengthening is possible: *skârwahta > échauguette
3. various things happened to yod in post-coda position because of the presence of
the preceding coda
==> metathesis, palatalization, gemination
there is no preceding consonant in word-initial position, hence word-initial yods
are never altered and enter the strengthening period as such.
- 15 References
Alinei, Mario 2000. Origini delle lingue d'Europa. Vol.2 Continuità dal Mesolitico all'età del
Ferro nelle principali aree etnolinguistiche. Bologna: Mulino.
Bourciez, Edouard & Jean Bourciez 1967. Phonétique française. 9e édition Paris:
Klincksieck.
Carton, Fernand 1974. Introduction à la phonétique du français. Paris: Bordas. siteGGHF.
Fouché, Pierre 1966-1973. Phonétique historique du français. Trois vols. Paris: Klincksieck.
Jacobs, Haike 1993. La palatalisation gallo-romane et la représentation des traits distinctifs.
Architecture des représentations phonologiques, edited by Bernard Laks & Annie
Rialland, 147-171. Paris: CNRS Editions.
La Chaussée, François de 1974. Initiation à la phonétique historique de l'ancien français.
Paris: Klincksieck.
Pope, Mildred 1952. From Latin to Modern French with especial Consideration of AngloNorman. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Rey, Alain (ed.) 1998. Dictionnaire historique de la langue française. Paris: Robert.
Ségéral, Philippe & Tobias Scheer 2001. Les séquences consonne + yod en gallo-roman.
Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 30: 87-120. WEB.
Zink, Gaston 1986. Phonétique historique du français. Paris: PUF.