Article published in:
Linguistics in the Netherlands 2014
Edited by Anita Auer and Björn Köhnlein
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 31] 2014
► pp. 145–164

Erring on the side of phonology

| Queen Margaret University
| Utrecht University
Speakers of Standard Dutch increasingly realise coda /r/ (e.g. paar) as a bunched or retroflex approximant. This coda variant is categorically distinct from onset /r/ (e.g. reizen), which is typically pronounced as a uvular trill or fricative, or an alveolar trill or tap. In this study, we investigate whether coda and onset /r/ in Dutch behave as distinct phonological categories. We present new articulatory and acoustic data on the realisation of /r/ in sandhi contexts, including the fake geminate context (e.g. paar reizen). Ultrasound data show that the presence of an onset /r/ conditions the deletion of a bunching gesture (typical of the coda /r/ realisation) from /r#r/ sequences. Nevertheless, the presence of a coda /r/ in such sequences is still acoustically traceable. We interpret these findings as a result of shared phonological identity between onset and coda /r/, and discuss them in the context of the place of allophony within models of grammar.
Keywords: Standard Dutch, Rhotics, fake geminate, sandhi, ultrasound, categorical allophony, contrast
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 10 November 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.31.11str

Full-text

Erring on the side of phonology
References
Articulate Instruments Ltd
2008 ultrasound stabilisation headset users manual: Revision 1.1. Edinburgh, UK: Articulate Instruments Ltd.Google Scholar
2010 Articulate assistant advanced ultrasound module user manual, revision 2.14. Edinburgh, UK: Articulate Instruments Ltd.Google Scholar
Avery, Peter, B. Elan Dresher & Keren D. Rice
(eds.) 2008 Contrast in phonology: Theory, perception, acquisition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald
2011 languageR: Data sets and functions with “Analyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics”. http://​cran​.r​-project​.org​/web​/packages​/languageR​/index​.html (15 January 2014)Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & David Weenink
2009 Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 5.1.12. http://​www​.praat​.org/ (15 October 2009).
Browman, Catherine P. & Louis Goldstein
1992 Articulatory phonology: An overview. Phonetica 49. 155–180. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Daniel Currie
2007 The role and representation of contrast in phonological theory. PhD diss., University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Delattre, Pierre & Donald C. Freeman
1968 A dialect study of American rs by x-ray motion picture. Linguistics 6. 29–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan
2009 The contrastive hierarchy in phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Herd, Wendy, Allard Jongman & Joan Sereno
2010 An acoustic and perceptual analysis of /t/ and /d/ flaps in American English. Journal of Phonetics 38. 504–516. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, Daniel
1980 Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Keyser, Samuel J. & Kenneth N. Stevens
2006 Enhancement and overlap in the speech chain. Language 82. 33–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kingston, John & Avis H. Cohen
1992 Extending articulatory phonology. Phonetica 49. 194–204. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert
2006 ‘Distinctive phones’ in surface representation. In Louis M. Goldstein, Douglas. H. Whalen & Catherine T. Best (eds.), Laboratory Phonology 8, 3–26. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lodge, Ken
2003 A declarative treatment of the phonetics and phonology of German rhymal /r/. Lingua 113. 931–951. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel
1986 Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J.
1990 There is no interface between phonology and phonetics: A personal view. Journal of Phonetics 18. 153–171.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet, Mary Beckman & D. Robert Ladd
2000 Conceptual foundations of phonology as a laboratory science. In Noel Burton-Roberts, Philip Carr & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Phonological Knowledge, 273–303. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Plug, Leendert & Richard Ogden
2003 A parametric approach to the phonetics of postvocalic /r/ in Dutch. Phonetica 60. 159–186. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team
2005 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. http://​www​.R​-project​.org (30 October 2013)Google Scholar
Ramsammy, Michael
2013 Word-final nasal velarisation in Spanish. Journal of Linguistics 49. 215–255. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scobbie, James M.
2007 Interface and overlap in phonetics and phonology. In Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, 17–52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scobbie, James M. & Koen Sebregts
2010 Acoustic, articulatory, and phonological perspectives on allophonic variation of /r/ in Dutch. In Rafaella Folli & Christiane Ulbrich (eds.), Interfaces in Linguistics. New Research Perspectives, 257–277. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sebregts, Koen, Evie Tops, Renée van Bezooijen, Hans van de Velde, Roeland van Hout, Roland Willemyns & Wim Zonneveld
2003 Socio-grafische en linguïstische variatie in de uitspraak van de ‘r’. Een onderzoek in Nederlandse en Vlaamse grote steden. In Tom Koole, Jacomine Nortier & Bert Tahitu (eds.), Artikelen van de Vierde Sociolinguistische Conferentie, 375–385. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. & Samuel J. Keyser
1989 Primary features and their enhancement in consonants. Language 65. 81–106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Quantal theory, enhancement and overlap. Journal of Phonetics 38. 10–19. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N., Samuel J. Keyser & Haruko Kawasaki
1986 Toward a phonetic and phonological theory of redundant features. In Joseph S. Perkell & Dennis H. Klatt (eds.), Invariance and Variability in Speech Processes, 426–449. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Strycharczuk, Patrycja, Marijn van ‘t Veer, Martine Bruil & Kathrin Linke
2013 Phonetic evidence on phonology-morphosyntax interactions. Sibilant voicing in Quito Spanish. Journal of Linguistics. Available on CJO 2013 Crossref.Google Scholar
Turton, Danielle
2013 An ultrasound investigation of /l/-darkening in varieties of English. Paper presented at the 23rd Manchester Phonology Meeting, University of Manchester.
Van de Velde, H.
1996 Variatie en verandering in het Gesproken Standaard-Nederlands (1935-1993). Nijmegen: KUN.Google Scholar
Westbury, John R., Michiko Hashi & Mary J. Lindstrom
1998 Differences among speakers in lingual articulation for American English /ɹ/. Speech Communication 26. 203–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, Jiahong & Mark Liberman
2009 Investigating /l/ variation in English through forced alignment. Tenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association , 2215–2218.