References

Going Romance 2003, Nijmegen 20-22 November 2003
A look at the Gallo-Romance trouble
with muta cum liquida through the positional prism
Philippe Ségéral
Tobias Scheer
Université de Nice
Université Paris 7
[email protected]
[email protected]
this handout and more at www.unice.fr/dsl/tobias.htm
Purpose
- to show that there is no universal or cross-linguistically stable syllabification of obstruent-liquid clusters.
Gallo-Romance is particularly well suited to demonstrate the eternal trouble with TR sequences.
- while liquid-obstruent clusters (= RT) always represent Coda-Onset clusters, surface TR may be either
syllabified as a branching Onset or as a Coda-Onset sequence. We hold that this typology of TR-identities is
not sufficient in order to cover the Gallo-Romance situation. A third object is called, for, i.e. a mono-positional
"affricate".
- all three possible identities of TR are present in the lexicon, they are not derived by some Coda-capture or the
like. The classical Maximal Onset approach encodes a tendency/ markedness, but is irrelevant in the on-line
functioning of the grammar.
A. General framework
[1] Evolution of consonants from Latin to French. Overview :
a.
b.
c.
# __
C. __
__ .C
"word initial"
"post-consonantal"
d.
__ #
"Coda"
a. examples
p porta porte
talpa
taupe
rupta
b bene
bien
herba
herbe
cub(i)tu
t teela
d dente
k cor
ceera
*capu
g gula
gente
gamba
f fame
s sorte
r reege
toile
dent
cœur
cire
chef
gueule
gent
jambe
faim
sort
roi
cantare
ardoore
rancoore
merceede
arca
angustia
argentu
virga
infernu
versaare
terra
cam(e)ra
mer(u)la
cum(u)lu
arma
cornu
malva
chanter
ardeur
rancœur
merci
arche
angoisse
argent
verge
enfer
verser
terre
chambre
merle
comble
arme
corne
mauve
plat(a)nu
adveniire
facta
lup(u)
*cap(u)
coude
ub(i)
bib(o)
OFr plane mariit(u)
avenir
nuud(u)
faite
amiic(u)
rig(i)da
sagma
roide
somme
steph(a)nu
musca
barba
Etienne
mouche
barbe
alba
aube
l
luuna lune
m mare mer
n naasu nez
B viinu vin
route
gamba
jambe
cantaare
chanter
naav(i)gaare nager
w werra guerre *skarwahta échauguette
rabja
rage
j jocu jeu
1
leu
chef
où
OFr boif
mari
nu
ami
noos
cor
amaar(e)
fiil(u)
cuul(u)
fam(e)
noon
bov(e)
nous
cœur
aimer
fil
cul
faim
non
bœuf
maaj(u)
mai
e.
V __ V
"intervocalic"
*sapuutu
riipa
*nuuba
faba
viita
coda
locaare
liceere
paacaare
*agustu
paagaanu
su
rive
nue
fève
vie
queue
louer
loisir
payer
août
païen
deeforiis dehors
causa
chose
poire
pira
veela
voile
amaare
luuna
paavoone
lavaare
*cawa
raja
aimer
lune
paon
laver
OFr choue
raie
b. summary thereof
p
p
b
b
t
t
d
d
k
k/s/$
g
g/J
f
f
s
s
r
r
l
l
m
m
n
n
B
v
w
g
y
J
p
b
t
d
k/s/$
g/J
f
s
r / ÉPENTH.
l / ÉPENTH.
m
n
v
g
J
ø
ø
ø
ø
I
I/U
ø
ø
r
U
~ø
~ø
ø
ø/f
ø/f
ø
ø
ø
ø
r/ø
l /ø
~ø
~ø
ø/f
ø/v
ø/v
ø
ø
ø / I / Iz
ø/I
ø
z
r
l
m
n
ø/v
I
I
[2] Two different causalities :
a. "phonetic" : produces a segmental effect because of an interaction with neighbours (typically with adjacent
vowels) where melodic primes are exchanged : e.g. intervocalic p / b / B —> v, but —> ø if either the
preceding or the following vowel is o or u (yields more than one result in a given cell in [1]).
b. "positional" : produces a segmental effect because the consonant holds a particular position in the syllabic
structure.
c. crucially : "positional" > "phonetic" : no "phonetic" process can produce a result which is incompatible with
the "positional" regularity.
[3] The positional regularity :
a.
b.
# __
C. __
result ≥ original segment :
integrity or [max.] strengthening (fortition)
c.
d.
e.
__ #
V __ V
result ≤ original segment :
weakening (lenition) or [max.] integrity
__ .C
STRENGTH
WEAKNESS
[4] Framework :
a. syllabic structure : Government Phonology, in particular "CVCV" option (Lowenstamm 1996)
C
|
p
V
|
o
C
|
r
V
\
t
e
C
|
t
V
|
a
C
|
l
V
C
\
V
/
u
C
|
n
V
|
a
/
r
a
b. initial CV (Lowenstamm 1999) : the "beginning of the word", i.e. what phonologists use to refer to as "#", is
an empty CV unit.
c. lateral relations : Government (G), Licensing (L), both right-to-left
d. Empty Category Principle (ECP) : a Nucleus may remain phonetically unexpressed if it is 1) governed by a
following (full) Nucleus or 2) word-final (domain-final).
[5] Interpretation of consonantal "strength" / "weakness" (Ségéral & Scheer 2001a) :
a. three possible configurations of the two lateral forces Government and Licensing (the fourth logical possibility
* ø __ ø is ruled out independently, cf. 4d) :
i.
ii.
iii.
G
G
G
ø
__
V
Lic
V __
ø
V __ V
Lic
Lic
2
b. correspond to :
i. initial
ii. Coda
+ postconsonantal
__{#,C}
= {#,C}__
"Coda-miroir"
(Ségéral & Scheer 2001a)
iii. intervocalic
V__V
c. strength = "preceded by a governed empty nucleus" : only the word-initial and the post-consonantal position
correspond to this description
G
ø ___
B. "Branching onsets"
[6] C+yod (Ségéral & Scheer 2001b) :
a. are possible "branching onsets" (cf. modern French : rabiot ra.bjo not *rab.jo).
b. but always heterosyllabic in Gallo-Romance : rab.ja rage, not *ra.bja
i. in all cases (but tj) the fate of C+yod clusters can be interpreted as resulting from
• the regular weakening of C in Coda position
• the strengthening of yod in post-consonantal position, the result being either gemination
(modjolu > mojjolu > moyeu), or segmental fortition of yod to t$ / dJ (rubju > rouge [ruJ)
ii. the preceding tonic vowel develops as a checked vowel : rabja > rage, not *rège (compare with : arca
> arche but faba > fève).
[7] the trouble with mutae cum liquida (henceforth TR), type colubra:
a.
b.
i. colubra
cathedra
tenebras
tonitru
*taretra (?) [cl. terebra] taratru (Is.S)
ii. podagru
alacre
i. pullitra, -tru
feretru
ii. integru
palpebras
palpetra (Varr.)
iii. *presbytru [cl. presbyter, presbyteru]
c.
*colubra
*catedra
*teneblas
*tonitru
*taretra
*podagru
*alecru
---*integru
-*palpetra
-*presbytru
ad retro / de retro
couleuvre
OFr. chaiere
OFr teniebles
OFr tonoire
tarière
OFr pouacre
OFr (h)aliegre
poutre
OFr fiertre
OFr entre
entier
OFr paupres
paupière
prêtre
OFr prevoire, proarrière / derrière
it. puledro
Nota : retro > OFr riere
[8] The problem :
a. the fundamental trouble
i. stress moves one vowel right in ...vCvTRv# words (type colubra) : Fr. couleuvre, Sp. culebra.
ii. the tonic vowel is unchecked : e.g. diphtongization of short (open) e > ie in *catedra > Ofr chaiere,
*teneblas > Ofr teniebles, petra > pierre as in pede > pied (compare with herba > herbe).
b. syllabic translation
i. stress shift
ii. evolution of the tonic vowel
supposes
supposes
... C V T . R V #
... C V . T R V #
c. further related facts :
i. evolution of T :
supposes
... C V . T R V #
b > v in colubra > couleuvre as in faba fève, vs subtiile > OFr sotil, cub(i)tu > OFr cote, code
ii. final V > @ (= schwa) even when ≠ a
supposes
... C V . T R V #
*colubra > couleuvre, fabru > Ofr fevre, patre > Ofr pere vs arcu > arc
iii. the evolution of velars
supposes
... C V T . R V #
*integru > entier, sacramentu > Ofr sairement as facta > faite
3
[9] Numerous different proposals, of two main types :
a. stress placement depends on syllable structure
i. anaptyctic vowel (e. g. De Groot 1921), followed by syncope : colubra > colubera > colub(e)ra
ii. gemination followed by degemination :
• Fouché 1969: 152 (colubra > colubbra > colubra)
• Bourciez 1971 : 27 (colubra ("sermo cotidianus") X *collubra ("sermo rusticus") -> colubra
"moyen terme")
iii. successive or concomitant contrasting syllabification of TR :
• Timparano 1965 : 1093 "Piuttosto che ad una netta separazione tra una pronunzia popolare in-tégrum, mantenutasi dall'epoca preistorica fino al sorgere delle lingue romanze, e una pronunzia dotta ín-te-grum,
mantenutasi con altrettanta costanza almeno per tutta l'età classica, io credo a une prevalere ora dell'una ora dell'altra
accentazione (in conseguenza di sillabazioni diverse) in diverse epoche", and 1095-96,
• Loporcaro to app. : §3 "Se si ammette dunque per il latino arcaico e tardo l'eterosillabicità, si deve
ricostruire un'evoluzione in quattro fasi : a. lat. arcaico -VC.RV-, b. lat. class. -V.CRV-, c. lat. tardo/proto-rom. -VC.RV,
d. lingue rom. -V.CRV-«
b. evolution makes stress placement independent from syllable structure. The algorithm that assigns stress
changes under analogical pressure of various kinds. For example :
• Pope 1952 : 100 “...the rule for the position of the tonic stress is simplified for in Late Latin it may be
said that the penultimate syllable is stressed whenever it contains a long vowel, a diphtong,or a vowel of any kind
followed by any two consonants or a double consonant”,
• Ward 1951 : 484 “And our accent rule should read : the Latin accent falls on the penult not only when
that syllable is long, but also when it is short, provided that it consists of a short vowel followed by stop + l”,
• Steriade 1988 : 399 “I suggest then that the stress shift in integra was due to the reinterpretation of the
Latin Stress rule as : Stress the penult if it is followed by a consonant cluster”,
• Lahiri, Riad & Jacobs 1999 : 395 "trend towards paroxitony",
• Bullock 2001.
[10] Not only a Romance problem :
a. Latin vowel reduction in internal unstressed open syllables ("internal apophony")
i. open syllable
facio / conficio
= tonitru, pullitra, etc.
ii. checked syllable
factus / confectus
= tenebrae (*tenibrae), integru (*intigru)
b. metrical ambiguity in Latin (positio debilis). See Timparano 1965, Loporcaro to appear
[11] Our position : the problem is of syllabic nature, i.e. [9a] is correct.
The new accent rule advocated by Pope, Ward, Steriade... cf.[9b] is nothing but a linear way of saying that any
CC cluster has become heterosyllabic...
C. What is / can be TR ?
[12] Two known syllabic representations for TR clusters :
a. Coda + Onset
b. branching Onset
with consonantal interaction "<==" whereby the sonorant
establishes a lateral relation with the obstruent, i.e. roughly
a "branching Onset" (Scheer 1996,1999)
G
G
T
ø
R
v
T ø R
|
|
t <= r
v
N.B.: these are the representations that we actually assume. For the sake of exposition, though, we will be using
the familiar lingua franca "Coda-Onset and branching Onset" below.
[13] colubra -> colubra supposes that TR was [12b] in Classical Latin, and became [12a] in Late Latin. This is because
a. velar + r : soc(e)ra > OFr suire as cocta > cuite, opposed to locaare > louer cf [8.c.iii]
b. labial + l : tab(u)la > tôle [and Picard regular evolution of bl > ul] ; even in table < tab(u)la, the evolution of
the stressed vowel shows that it is in closed syllable (*tèble).
c. C + jod : rabia > rage supposes a fortition of j to dJ (analogous to the one of j in intial position : jocu > jeu)
which cannot be explained unless j is in "strong position", that is rabia is syllabified rab.ja
d. other Romance languages : evolution of tr/dr : creed(e)re > creire (Occ.), creure (Cat.), evolution of C+j in
italian > CCj, etc.
4
[14] Our claim : in subsequent evolution, i.e. in Gallo Romance, TR could not be a [12a] structure (Coda-Onset)
anymore. Its syllabic interpretation had to change : back to [12b] (branching Onset), or towards a third structure:
mono-positional TR, i.e. an "affricate".
MONO-positional
BI-positional
a.
b.
c.
Coda+Onset
branching Onset
"affricate"
with "<=="
G
G
G
C
|
T
henceforth :
V
C
|
R
T•R
V
C V C
|
|
T <= R
T=R
V
C V
/|
T R
TR
[15] French epenthesis in CR clusters emerging from internal post-/pretonic vowel syncope :
in CR, C = i. a nasal (m/n) or l, ii. s/z
i. cam(e)ra
chambre
ii. *ess(e)re
être
sim(u)laare sembler
laz(a)ru
ladre
cin(e)re
cendre
spiin(u)la
épingle
moudre
mol(e)re
[16] In the case of epenthesis, T=R [12b] is excluded, because a CV unit would have to "fall from heaven" :
C V C V C V
=//=> * C V C V C V C V
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k a m
r a
k a m
b
r a
[17] Principled view on the origin of syllabic material:
a the insertion of syllabic space (i.e. x-slots) cannot be provoked by purely melodic reasons, i.e. the existence of
melodic information cannot trigger the appearance of a CV unit by itself
i. example of floating melody: French "consonne de liaison" :
C V C V
=//=> * C V C V C V
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
p @ t i t
p @ t i t
ii. floating tonal information cannot entail the appearance of a vowel
iii. morphemes without prosodic support / templatic effects : for an example in Romance languages (the
case of the Portuguese verbal conjugation, see Carvalho (in press).
b. CV-insertion can only be commanded by morphology
i. Latin : venit (pres.) vs ve:nit (pf)
ii. Greek : voc. sg. daîmon / nomin. sg. daímo:n
iii. Classical Arabic
iv. Muskogee (data from Haas 1940)
basic form (I)
katabcompletive tenseless (basic)
nisintensive (II)
kattabcompletive (immediate past tense) ní-h-sfrequentative (III) kaatabcompletive (remote pas tense)
nî:sh
k
t
b
n
s
|
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V
C V C V C V
|
|
|
a
a
i
c. or by prosodic events such as stress : e.g. Italian Tonic Lengthening /kasa/ -> [ka:sa]
C V C V C V
|
|
|
|
k a
s a
5
[18] => Epenthesis :
C
|
k
V
|
a
C
|
m
V
C
|
r
==>
V
|
a
C
|
k
V
|
a
C
|
m
V
C V
/| |
br a
[19] Representing TR as TR ("affricate") is not an original proposal : see Hirst 1985, Steriade 1994, Rennison 1998,
Lowenstamm 2003 for affricate analyses of TR clusters in various languages.
[20] A first generalization : internal C1 C2 C3 -> C1 C3 (except when C2 = s)
jaune
- l k t - kulk(i)ta
OFr coute
a.
- l b g - galb(i)nu
- m p t - komp(u)taare
conter
- n d t - vend(i)ta
vente
- r b t - derb(i)ta
OFr dert[r]e
- r m t - dorm(i)tooriu dortoir
- s t m - test(i)mooniu
témoin
- r k b - ark(u)ballista arbalète
charme
- r p k - erp(i)ke
herse
- r p m - *karp(i)mu
(See Fouché 1969 : 829 sqq ; Steriade 1988 : 392 ; Jacobs 1992 : 64 ; Lahiri, Riad & Jacobs 1999 : 307)
b.
-rdr-rtr-ndr-
c.
C
|
g
perd(e)re
turt(u)rilla
vend(e)re
V
|
a
C
|
l
V
-rkr-rgr-ngl-
perdre
OFr tortrele
vendre
C
V
C
|
(b) (i) n
V
|
u
C
|
p
V
|
e
kark(e)re
surg(e)re
ung(u)la
C
|
r
V
C
OFr chartre
sourdre
ongle
V
C V
/| |
(d) (e) d r e
d. CC is the maximal internal cluster that is tolerated by the grammar.
[20] On this analysis, TR is the strengthened version of [r]. This is in line with the general positional regularity [3] : the
strengthening at hand takes place in post-consonantal position (strong position), i.e. after a governed empty
Nucleus.
[21] naturalness of TR : the case of Madagascan
a. TR is necessarily TR ("affricate", monopositional)
i. Madagascan is CV on the surface : no word may end in a consonant *C#, and any sequence of two
consonants is prohibited *CC. Except for homorganic NC clusters and four other consonantal sequence
s: [ts], [dZ], [tr] and [dr].
consonantal inventory
p b
t d
k g
f v
s z
ç
h
m
n
N
r, l
ts, dZ
tr, dr
ii. examples of [ts], [dZ], [tr] and [dr]
#__
C__
V__V
ts tsahu
muntsana
katsaka
rumeur, broyé, maïs
bougie, pistache, lascif
dZ dZiru
vuandZu
dZedZu
tr
tranu
antra
tratra
maison, compatissant, poitrine
dr dredru
sendra
sedra
flagornerie, par hasard, épreuve
iii. on static grounds alone, [tr] and [dr] could hardly be interpreted as branching Onsets because this
would suppose the existence of labial and velar clusters as well: [pr], [br], [pl], [bl], [kr], [gr], [kl], [gl].
These, however, are absent.
6
b. [dr] is 1) monopositional and 2) the strong version of [r]
i. composition: [word 1 + word 2] whereby the final -a of word 1 is lost, and the initial consonant of word
2 strengthens (see Ali 2003 for details).
word 1 word 2 composition gloss word 1 gloss word 2 gloss composition
f > p fufuna
fati
fufumpati
odeur
cadavre
odeur fétide
v > b fufuna
vadi
fufumbadi
odeur
époux
fiancé
l>d
fufuna
luza
fufunduza
odeur
malheur
pressentir le mal
r > dr manana reni
manadreni avoir
mère
avoir une mère
s > ts fufuna
savuni
fufuntsavuni odeur
savon
odeur du savon
avoir
droit
avoir le droit
z > dZ manana zu
manandZ
Zu
h > k uluna
hala
personne
détesté
ennemi
uluNkala
ii. strengthening occurs in post-consonantal position. [dr] thus represents one single consonant, and
moreover is the strong version of [r].
D. TR and T=R
[22] An interpretation of occasional French r-Metathesis in the light of [20] :
a. data (from Pope 1952 : §124 ; Fouché 1969 : 751-3 ; Bourciez 1971 : §178,180)
i. from post-cons TR --> #T__
iii. from R in Coda --> #T__
temp(e)raare tremper
torc(u)lu
treuil
fimbria
frange
*berbiice
brebis
*formaat(i)cu
fromage
*fim(o)riaare Ofr frambaier
fund(u)la
fronde
*turb(u)laare
troubler
*torsaare
trousser
ii. from intervoc. TR --> #T__
*bertjolu
Ofr breçuel
germ. *thorp
troupe / trop
*bib(e)raat(i)cu breuvage
*tursum (< thyrsum)
Ofr tros
néerl. versch
friche
furloone (< frk *hurslo frelon
b. two regularities :
i. migrating R always docks on a word-initial T.
ii. in an overwhelmingly majority of cases, the origin of migrating R is a Coda position.
(lists a.i. and a.ii. are probably not very far from being exhaustive, list a.iii. could be continued (cf.
frelater < Neerl. verlaten), cravache (< Germ. Karbatsche), cramoisi (< Sp. carmesí), calembredaine (/
calembourdaine), fripe (OFr frippe, ferpe, felpe from *faluppa), fredaine (< fard-), etc.)
c. if the initial TRs created are TR, metathesis makes sense :
i. unlinking (= lenition) of r in weak position (Coda) : in line with the tendency of r to weaken in wordfinal Codas (e.g. -er infinitive > [-e]) and even sporadically in internal Codas (OFr berfroi, mod.
beffroi [befrwa], pop. [mEkr@di] for mercredi] (cf. Bourciez 1971 : §180),
ii. tendency to preserve the original segmental information. In the case of metathesis, this is achieved by
the creation of TR clusters. Numerous parallels in French phonology. For instance :
• preservation of nasality : n in (final and internal) Codas is unlinked (= lenites), but the
segmental information is partially preserved : nasality docks on the preceding vowel.
bonne
bon
bonté
[bOn@]
[bÕ]
[bÕte]
N
N
b O n @
b O n
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C V C V
C V C V
• conservation of word-final unlinked (= lenited)
"consonnes de liaison".
b O n
t e
|
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V
obstruents as floating segments = the
d. no migration of R from intervocalic TR : TR is not TR in intervocalic position ? (The lenition of intervocalic
TR leads to weakening of T, not to R loss).
7
[23] Parasitic r in French [all periods]
a. data (from Fouché 1969 : 756-760 ; Bourciez 1971 : §178)
i. #T__ V
iii. C.T__V
vitiicula
vrille
perdiice
trésor
*cardoone (< carduus)
thesauru
Neerl. tingel
tringle
celt. *derb(i)ta
*term(i)te
ii. V.T__V
*can(a)pu
patte X dial. gadrouiller patrouille
encaustu
Flemish pleute (??)
pleutre
spelta
pol(y)pu
arcuballista
calendaariu
regesta
rusticu
mite (< neerl.) + -aille
Mod. Fr. tarte
perdrix
OFr chardon / chardron
dartre
tertre
chanvre
encre
épeautre
pieuvre
arbalète, but arbalétrier
calendrier
registre
rustre
OFr mistraille (mod. mitraille)
pop. -> "l'Entartreur"
b. docking-site : overwhelmingly post-consonantal (or initial).
c. interpretation : creation of a TR cluster.
[24] One more observation regarding [22] and [23] :
a. the observation : R never migrates or appears next to an intervocalic T (that is, all intervocalic TRs seem to be
either inherited or resulting from syncope). This is understandable when T is lenited to ø or to a vocalic
element (case of t, d or k, g), but not when T is a labial, in which case lenition produces the obstruent v) :
i. no migrating r landing on an intervocalic v : travée -/-> *tavrée, brève -/-> *bèvre, trêve -/-> *tèvre,
*gavrement for gravement...
ii. no parasitic r ever lands on an intervocalic v : *rivre for rive, *fèvre for fève, *touvre for trouve,...
b. interpretation : TR is prohibited in intervocalic position.
c. as a consequence of the general prohibition of T•R [14], TR in French is either TR or T=R, but
i. TR is the only possibility in post-consonantal position (cf. epenthesis), and probably more generally
speaking.
ii. T=R seems the only possibility in intervocalic position : cf. metathesis / parasitic r
[25] Evidence for bi-positional T=R in French, alongside with TR : the evolution of intervocalic tr/dr
a. examples
i. r < postonicTR
ii. rr < pretonic TR
araatru
OFr. arere
atramentu
OFr. arrement
*catedra
OFr. chaiere
*atrapica
OFr. arrache
buut(y)ru
OFr. bure
/ burre <=
buut(y)raariu
OFr. burrier
OFr. pere
/ perre
*patriinu
OFr. parrin
patre
maatre
OFr. mere
/ merre
*matriina
OFr. marrine
matriice
OFr. marris
matriculaariu
OFr. marreglier
OFr. veire
/ veirre <=
vitraariu
OFr. verrier
vitru
latro
OFr. lere
/ lerre <=
latroone
OFr. larron
latrociiniu
OFr. larrecin
petra
OFr. pierre
*petraariu
OFr. perrier
OFr. perron
*petroone
*petrosiiliu
OFr. perresil
foodr (frk) OFr. fuerre
/ fuere, foare
*fodraaticu
OFr. forrage
retro
OFr. riere
ad+retro
arrière
OFr. toneire
/ toneirre
quadraatu
OFr. carré
*tonitru
*quadrifurcu
OFr. carreforc
ed(e)ra
OFr. ierre
/ iere, eire, ere Theod(e)riicu
OFr. Tierri
lootr (frk)
OFr. loire
/ luerre
*Bit(u)riigu
OFr. Berri
rire
/ => rirra *riid(e)rat
OFr. rirra
riid(e)re
claud(e)re
OFr. clore
/ => clorra *claud(e)rat
OFr. clorra
creed(e)re
OFr. creire
/ => crera *creed(e)rat
OFr. crerra
*nutriire
OFr. norrir
OFr. porrir
*putriire
8
/ arement
/ arace
/ parin
/ peresil
/ OFr ariere
b. graphic ambiguity : Pope 1952 : §372, Fouché 1966 : 721-2 (rq.1), Bourciez 1971 §144-2 + H.
c. despite wavering orthography due to further levelling between r and rr under analogical pressure and / or
merging of r and rr into [r], it seems that
i. tr/dr has become either r or rr
ii. both outputs are in complementary distribution :
TR > r in post-tonic position
TR > rr in pre-tonic position
latro > lere [Nom. sg]
latroone > larron
d. if this is correct, rr is to be analyzed as a compensatory lengthening following the normal loss of t. Such a
compensatory lengthening implies that TR is bi-positional :
l
|
C
a
|
V
t
|
C
V
r
|
C
o
|
V
n
|
C
e
|
V
e. remaining question : why no compensatory lengthening in latro, that is in postonic position ?
*larro > laro :
*
l
|
C
Lic
a
|
V
C V
[stress]
larrone :
t
|
C
Lic
V
r
|
C
o
|
V
Lic
l
|
C
a
|
V
t
|
C
V
r
|
C
=>
l
|
C
a
|
V
t
C V C
[stress]
V
r
|
C
o
|
V
Lic
o
|
V
C V
[stress]
n
|
C
e
|
V
f. => French : both TR and T=R available for TR
E. Tentative Romance typology
[26] Different configurations ? (1) : Italian
a. intervocalic gemination of TR
i. C+j (and C+l > Cj) : => CCj : rabia > rabbia, oc(u)lu > occhio, etc.
ii. C+r : gemination of br : fabru > fabbro, labru > labbro, etc., (but not of other TRs — with or without
voicing : capra, vetro, quadro, lacrima, padre, magro...)
b. r-metathesis (cf. Rohlfs 1966 : I.§322) : in dialects, one landing site, i.e. word-initial T as in French, cf. [22.b.i]
i. --> #T__
Rohlfs' comments
• from post-consonantal TR comprare -> crompare (e. g. Elba) "tanto raro in testi letterari
• from intervocalic TR
capra -> crapa (e. g. Elba)
quanto è frequente nei dialetti"
• from R in Coda
dormire -> dromire (Marche)
"con una certa facilità"
but :
ii --> Coda
• from word-initial TR
fratello -> fardelo (Rovig.)
"piú raro"
• from intervocalic TR
aprire -> arví (Lig, Romagn.)
"neppure comune"
iii. --> intervocalic T
• from word-initial TR
pratica -> pàtriga (OPadov.)
"ancora piú raro"
• from R in Coda
erba -> evra (Nap. "dei secoli passati") "rarissimo"
[Note : intervocalic R to word-initial T, e.g. craíno / carino (Elbano di Marciana) : "niente affatto comune".]
9
c. la r parassita (Rohlfs 1966 : I.§333)
i. #T__
taverna traverna (Velletri)
tesoro
trisoru (Sicil.)
tuono
tròno (Umbr.)
stella
strela (Emil.)
ii. C.T__
genista
balista
encaustu
-mente
ginestra
balestra
inchiostro
-mentre (OLomb...)
iii. V.T__
*anata
vitice
siepe
*arbitu
anatra
vetrice
scepre(Lucch.)
árbatro (Pis.)
d. thus, intervocalic T is a possible landing site for parasitic R. Compare with French [24b] where it is not.
[27] Different configurations ? (2) : Gascon
a. r-metathesis (Rohlfs 1935 : §399, Baldinger 1958 : 246, Dumenil 1987)
i. from post-cons TR --> #T__
ii. from intervoc. TR --> #T__
compraare
croumpa
paup(e)re
praube
(ex)combraare
escrumba
capra
crabo
ventre
brente
cup(e)raare croba
furunc(u)lu
hloronc
coop(e)riire crubi
proubo
*tuuf(e)ra
truho
pulv(e)re
fenestra
hrieste
*wiip(e)ra
gripo
capistru
crabeste
febre
hrebe heure
castroone
creston
fabru
haure
brespes
tab(u)la
taulo
vesp(e)ras
ep ten(e)ru
trende
patriinu
payri
ep cam(e)ra
crambo
latraare
layra
ep spiin(u)la
esplingo
ep mem(o)raare
bremba
ep pess(u)lu
plesc
ep cing(u)la
sinclo
ep gen(e)ru
jendre
ep num(e)roosi
numbrubi
hirund(u)la
hurounglo
iii. from R in Coda --> #T__
dormiire
droumi
firmu
hrém
forma
arroumo
formiica
arroumigo
[shadowed cells : no R-metathesis]
b. converging movement towards #T__
c. note that TR clusters resulting from T-epenthesis (indicated by ep in i.) undergo R-metathesis as well.
d. intervocalic TR : either R-metathesis or (when initial C ≠ T) T•R maintained with consecutive lenition of T
(shadowed cells in a.ii)
[28] Tentative interpretation :
a. Early Romance : * T•R => TR is either TR or T=R
b. different distributions according to the position
STRONG
#__
C.__
TR
T=R
TR
T=R
French
Italian
Gascon
?
?
*?
?
?
?
(TR)
*
*
*
WEAK
V__V
TR
T=R
*
*
*
*
i. French : TR in strong position, T=R in weak position
ii. Italian : only TR in weak and strong (post-consonantal) positions
iii. Gascon : neither TR not T=R in weak position, avoidance of TR in strong post-consonantal position.
Tendancy to "no-TR" ? Note frequent vowel epenthesis in initial TR : branc > baranc (Rohlfs 1935 :
§401) : strong evidence for initial TR being T=R and for a tendency to eliminate this structure...
10
[29]
F. Conclusion
a. there is no way out of the Gallo-Romance trouble without acknowledging a mono-positional "affricate" TR. It
goes without saying that the affricate TR does not solve all problems. However, it allows for a fresh look at
known data through a new prism.
b. for example, epenthesis (cam(e)ra > chambre) and metathesis can be interpreted as positional phenomena that
imply lenition and fortition.
c. "affricate" TR call for a principled management of syllabic space : nothing falls from heaven.
d. the early generative conception whereby syllabification is dynamic and operates over a lexically unsyllabified
string does not make sense : the identical phonetic object [TR] enjoys two different syllabic interpretations.
The back-bone of this approach, the Maximal Onset principle, is but the expression of a tendency and/ or
markedness: most, but not all TR clusters are branching Onsets. When they are Coda-Onset sequences, Codacapture is applied. One could surely think of some transformation that makes them mono-positional structures
as well, but what it this good for? TR clusters are not anything per se or in Universal Grammar. They enjoy
different syllabic interpretations in various languages, and these are recorded in the lexicon.
References
Ali, F. (2003), Les positions fortes et faibles des consonnes en malgache, DEA thesis, Université de Nice.
Baldinger, K. (1958), "La position du Gascon entre la Galloromania et l'Ibéroromnia", Revue de Linguistique Romane 22 : 241-289.
Bullock, B. E. (2001), "Double prosody and stress shift in Proto-Romance", Probus 13 : 173-192.
Carvalho, J. Brandão de (in press), " Templatic morphology in the Portuguese verb", in Nouveaux départs en phonologie. Actes du
XVII. Deutscher Romanistentag (Munich, 7-10 octobre 2001) (T. Meisenburg & M. Selig éds), Tübingen (Gunter Narr).
Dumenil, A. (1987), "A rule-accent of metathesis in Gascon", Linguisticae Investigationes 11,1 : 81-113.
Groot, A. W. de (1921), Die Anaptyxe im Lateinischen, Göttingen (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Haas, M. R. (1940), "Ablaut and its function in Muskogee", Language 16,2 : 141-150.
Hirst, D. (1985), "Linearisation and the Single-Segment Hypothesis", in Grammatical Representation (Jacqueline Guéron, Hans
Obenauer & Jean-Yves Pollock eds) : 87-100, Dordrecht (Foris).
Jacobs, H. (1992), "Evolution of French foot and syllable structure in the evolution from Classical Latin to Old French", in Theoretical
Analyses in Romance Linguistics (Ch. Laeufer & T. A. Morgan eds) : 55-79, Amsterdam / Philadelphia (Benjamins).
Jacobs, H. (1993). La palatalisation gallo-romane et la représentation des traits distinctifs, in Architecture des représentations
phonologiques (Bernard Laks et Annie Rialland éds), Paris : CNRS Editions.
Lahiri, A., T. Riad & H. Jacobs (1999), "Diachronic Prosody", in Word Prosodic Systems in the Languages of Europe (H. van der
Hulst ed.) : 335-401, Berlin / New York (Mouton de Gruyter).
Loporcaro, M. (to appear), "La sillabazione di Muta cum liquida dal latino al romanzo".
Lowenstamm, J. (1996), "CV as the only syllable type", in Current Trends in Phonology (Durand, J. & B. Laks, eds), vol. 2: 419-441,
Salford / Manchester (ESRI).
Lowenstamm, J. (1999), "The beginning of the word", in Syllables ?! (Rennison, J. & K.Kühnhammer eds) : 153-166, La Haye
(Holland Academic Graphics).
Lowenstamm, J. (2003), Remarks on Mutae cum Liquida and Branching Onset, [ms] University Paris 7.
Rennison, J. (1998), "Contour segments without subsegmental structure", in Structure and Interpretation. Studies in Phonology (E.
Cyran ed.), Lublin (Wydawnictwo Folium).
Rohlfs, G. (1935), Le Gascon. Etudes de philologie pyrénéenne, Halle (Niemayer).
Rohlfs, G. (1966), Grammatica Storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti, vol. 1 Fonetica, Turin (Einaudi).
Scheer, T. & Ph. Ségéral (2001), "Les séquences consonne + yod en gallo-roman", Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 30 : 87-120.
Scheer, T. (1998), "Governing domains are head-final. Structure and Interpretation", in Studies in Phonology (E. Cyran ed.) : 261-285,
Lublin (Folium). Downloadable at http://www.unice.fr/dsl/tobias.htm
Scheer, T. (1999), "A theory of consonantal interaction", Folia Linguistica 32, 201:237. Downloadable at
http://www.unice.fr/dsl/tobias.htm
Ségéral, Ph. & T. Scheer (2001), "La Coda-Miroir", Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 96,1 : 107-152. [Older English
version downloadable at http://www.unice.fr/dsl/tobias.htm
Steriade, D. (1988), "Gemination and the Proto-Romance Syllable Schift", in Advances in Romance Linguistic (David Birdsong &
Jean-Pierre Montreuil eds) : 371-409, Dordrecht (Foris).
Steriade, D. (1994), "Complex Onsets as Single Segments : The Mazateco Pattern", in Perspectives in Phonology (Jennifer Cole &
Charles Kisseberth eds) : 203-291, Stanford (CSLI).
Timparano, S. (1965), "Muta cum liquida in poesia latina e nel latino volgare", Rivista di cultura classica e mediovale 7 : 1075-1104.
Ward, R. L. (1951), "Stop plus liquid and the position of Latin accent", Language 27 : 477-484.
11