DIALECTS*
Inuit dialects that show palatalization all distinguish between ‘strong i ’ and ‘weak i’. This distinction descends from a contrast in the proto-language between */i/, which causes palatalization, and */ə / (the ‘fourth vowel’), which does not. All Inuit dialects that have completely lost the contra...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.579.3462 http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2008/CLA2008_Compton_Dresher.pdf |
| Summary: | Inuit dialects that show palatalization all distinguish between ‘strong i ’ and ‘weak i’. This distinction descends from a contrast in the proto-language between */i/, which causes palatalization, and */ə / (the ‘fourth vowel’), which does not. All Inuit dialects that have completely lost the contrast between these vowels also lack palatalization. This raises the question, why are there no /i a u/ dialects in which all i trigger palatalization? We propose that this typological gap is not accidental. According to the Contrastivist Hypothesis, only contrastive features can be active in the phonology. Contrastive features are determined by a contrastive hierarchy. We propose that the Inuit contrastive hierarchy is [low]> [labial]> [coronal]. It follows from these assumptions that i can trigger palatalization only if in contrast with a fourth vowel. |
|---|