Cover not available
Part of
Studies on Variation in Portuguese
Edited by Pilar P. Barbosa, Maria da Conceição de Paiva and Celeste Rodrigues
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 14] 2017
► pp. 49–80

Chapter 2
Glide insertion to break a hiatus across words in European Portuguese

The role of prosodic, geographic and sociolinguistic factors

 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
Glide insertion to breakhiatus has long been reported in the literature to occur in the Northern and Central varieties of Portuguese but this has not been systematically investigated before. From a larger corpus of speech material collected in several locations in the North and Center of Portugal, we selected for analysis a sample coming from six locations in the Northwest of Portugal and one location in the Center. The effects of several linguistic and extralinguistic factors were evaluated, namely, prosodic domain, level of prominence in the second vowel, prosodic status of first word (W1), region, task, and age. A binary logistic regression model showed that all factors considered are good predictors of the presence of the glide, some considered in isolation (prosodic status of W1 and task), and some in interaction with others (prosodic domain*region, prominence level*task, prominence level*age).
Keywords: prosodic variation, epenthesis, hiatus resolution, prosodic constraints, extralinguistic factors, European Portuguese
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
  • 3.Method and materials
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Domain for glide insertion
    • 4.2Prominence configuration
    • 4.3Phonological status of Word 1
    • 4.4Age as a factor
    • 4.5Predictive power of linguistic and extralinguistic factors
  • 5.General discussion
  • 6.Final remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 2 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.14.02oli
References (66)
References
Aguiar, J. (2008). Unidades e processos fonológicos no falar da região da Terra Quente: Contributos para a Linguística Forense. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal.Google Scholar
Alba, M. (2006). Accounting for variability in the production of Spanish vowel sequences. In N. Sagarra & A. J. Toribio (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 9th Hispanic linguistics symposium (pp. 273–285). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Álvarez, R., & Xove, X. (2002). Gramática da lingua Galega. Vigo: Editorial Galaxia.Google Scholar
Anderson, S. (2005). Aspects of the theory of clitics. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderson, A., Bader, M., Bard, E., Boyle, E., Doherty, G. M., … & Weinert, R. (1991). The HCRC map task corpus. Language and Speech, 34, 351–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barros, N. (2014). Fraseamento prosódico em Português: Uma análise entoacional de construções parentéticas e tópicos em duas variedades do Português Europeu. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Lisbon.Google Scholar
Bayley, R. (2013). The quantitative paradigm. In J. K. Chambers & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (2nd ed., pp. 85–107). Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergman, R. (1971). Vowel sandhi and word division in Igede. Journal of West African Languages, 8, 13–26.Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2007). Praat – Doing Phonetics by Computer. (Version 5.3.56). Available from <[URL]>
Boléo, M. de P., & Silva, M. H. S. (1961). O mapa dos dialectos e falares de Portugal continental. Boletim de Filologia, III, 85–112.Google Scholar
Booij, G. (1995). The phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Brissos, F. (2015). Dialectos Portugueses do centro-Sul: Corpus de fenómenos e revisão do problema da (des)unidade. In Zeitschrift fur Romanisch Philologie, 131(4), 999–1041. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2001). Frequency effects on French liaison. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 337–359). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cabré, T., & Prieto, P. (2005). Positional and metrical prominence effects on vowel sandhi in Catalan. In S. Frota, M. Vigário & M. J. Freitas (Eds.), Prosodies (pp. 123–157). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Casali, R. (1997). Vowel elision in hiatus contexts: Which vowel goes? Language, 73, 493–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Hiatus resolution. In M. van Oostendorp, C. Ewen, E. Hume, & K. Rice (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to Phonology (Vol. 3, pp. 1434–1460). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chitoran, I., & Hualde, J. I. (2007). From hiatus to diphthong: The evolution of vowel sequences in Romance. Phonology, 24, 37–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cintra, L. F. (1971). Nova proposta de classificação dos dialectos galego-portugueses. Boletim de Filologia, 22, 81–116.Google Scholar
Coetzee, A. (2009). An integrated grammatical/non-grammatical model of phonological variation. In Y.-S. Kang, J.-Y. Yoon, H. Yoo, S.-W. Tang, Y.-S. Kang … & H.-K. Kang (Eds.), Current issues in linguistic interfaces (Vol. 2, pp. 267–294.). Seoul: Hankookmunhwasa.Google Scholar
Colina, S. (1997). Epenthesis and deletion in Galician: An optimality-theoretic approach. In F. Martínez-Gil & A. Morales-Front (Eds.), Issues in the phonology and morphology of the major Iberian languages (pp. 235–267). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cruz, M. (2013). Prosodic variation in European Portuguese: Phrasing, intonation and rhythm in Central-Southern varieties. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Lisbon.Google Scholar
Elimelech, B. (1976). A tonal grammar of Etsako (UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 35). Los Angeles CA: University of California.Google Scholar
Elordieta, G., Frota, S., & Vigário, M. (2005). Subjects, objects and intonational phrasing in Spanish and Portuguese. Studia Linguistica, 59(2–3), 110–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Florêncio, M. (2001). Dialecto alentejano – Contributos para o seu estudo. Lisboa: Colibri.Google Scholar
Frota, S. (1995). Os domínios prosódicos e o Português Europeu: fenómenos de sandhi. In Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (1995) Actas do X Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (pp. 221–237). Lisboa: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística; Colibri.Google Scholar
(2000). Prosody and focus in European Portuguese. Phonological phrasing and intonation. New York, NY: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
(Coord.) (2012–2015). Interactive atlas of the prosody of portuguese. <[URL]>
(2014). The intonational phonology of European Portuguese. In S. Jun (Ed.), Prosodic typology II (pp. 6–42). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frota, S., Oliveira, P., Cruz, M., & Vigário, M. (2015). P-ToBI: Tools for the transcription of Portuguese prosody. Lisboa: Laboratório de Fonética, Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa / Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa. Available at <[URL]>
Frota, S., Cruz, M., Fernandes-Svartman, F., Collischonn, G., Fonseca, A., Serra, C., Oliveira, P., & Vigário, M. (2015). Intonational variation in Portuguese: European and Brazilian varieties. In S. Frota & P. Prieto (Eds.), Intonation in Romance (pp. 235–283). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frota, S., Cruz, M., Castelo, J., Barros, N., Crespo-Sendra, V., & Vigário, M. (2016). Tune or text? Tune-text accommodation strategies in Portuguese. In Proceedings of the Speech Prosody 2016. Boston MA: Boston University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, M. (1995). The intonation of interrogation in Palermo Italian; Implications for intonation theory. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, N. (2011). Vowel epenthesis. In M. van Oostendorp, C. Ewen, E. Hume, & K. Rice (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology (Vol. 3, pp. 1576–1596). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Acoustic differences between lexical and epenthetic vowels in Lebanese Arabic. Journal of Phonetics, 41(2), 133–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, J. (1991). Conservatism versus substratal transfer in Irish English. In Peter Trudgill & J. K. Chambers (Eds.), Dialects of English: Studies in grammatical variation (pp. 192–213). Harlow, Essex: Longman.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1990). Precompiled phrasal phonology. In S. Inkelas & D. Zec (Eds.), The phonology-syntax connection (pp. 85–108). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, B., & Lahiri, A. (1991). Bengali intonational phonology. Natural Language Linguistic Theory, 9(1), 47–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York city. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
(1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Kutsch Lojenga, C. (1994). Ngiti: A central-sudanic language of Zaire (Nilo-Saharan: Linguistic Analysis and Documentation 9). Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Lopo, J. (1895). Linguagem popular de Valpaços. Revista lusitana, III, 326.Google Scholar
Maia, C. (1975). Os falares do Algarve (inovação e conservação). Revista Portuguesa de Filologia, XVII(I, II), 37–205.Google Scholar
Martins, A. M., & Vitorino, G. (1989). Palatalisation et vélarisation conditionnées de la voyelle tonique dans certains dialectes portugais: Evolutions identiques dans lʹespace roman. In Espaces romans: Etudes de dialectologie et de géolinguistique offertes à Gaston Tuaillon (Vol. 2, pp. 330–356). Grenoble: Ellug, Université Stendhal.Google Scholar
Mascaró, J. (2007). External allomorphy and lexical representation. Linguistic Inquiry, 38(4), 715–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mithun, M. (1992). The substratum in grammar and discourse. In E. Jahr (Ed.), Language contact: Theoretical and empirical studies (pp. 103–115). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, D., & Nevis, J. (1987). Inflected prepositions in Italian. Phonology Yearbook, 4, 195–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (2007). Prosodic phonology (2nd ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter(original work published 1986). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, P. (2016). A prosódia da iode epentética para quebrar hiatos em variedades do Português. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Lisbon.Google Scholar
Oliveira, P., Paulino, N., Cruz, M., & Vigário, M. (2014). Onde ainda([j])há o fenómeno. Contributo para o estudo da inserção de glide entre vogais centrais. In A. Moreno, F. Silva, I. Falé, I. Pereira, & J. Veloso (Eds.), Textos selecionados do XXIX Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (pp. 419–436). Lisbon: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística; Colibri.Google Scholar
Paulino, N., & Frota, S. (2015). Variação prosódica no Português Europeu: Análise comparada de fenómenos de sândi vocálico. In A. Moreno, F. Silva & J. Veloso (Eds.) Textos selecionados do XXX Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (pp. 435–448). Porto: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística.Google Scholar
Payne, D. L. (1981). The phonology and morphology of Axininca Campa. Arlington, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Peperkamp, S. (1997). Prosodic words (HIL Dissertations 34). The Hague: HAG.Google Scholar
Pereira, A. (1908). Tradições populares e linguagem de Vila Real. Revista Lusitana, IX, 229–258.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, C. (2003). Lisboa e Braga: Fonologia e variação. Lisboa: Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia; Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.Google Scholar
Roseano, P., Vanrell, M. M., & Prieto, P. (2015). Intonational Phonology of Friulian and its dialects. In S. Frota & P. Prieto (Eds.), Intonation in romance (pp. 101–139). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Santos, F. (1897). Linguagem popular de Trancoso. Revista Lusitana, V, 161–173.Google Scholar
Segura, L. (2013). Variedades dialectais do Português Europeu. In E. Raposo, M. B., Nascimento, M. A. Mota, L. Seguro & A. Mendes (Eds.), Gramática do Português (Vol. 1, pp. 85–142). Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian; Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1984). Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook, 3(37), 1–405.Google Scholar
Tenani, L. (2002). Domínios prosódicos no Português. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidade de Campinas, São Paulo.Google Scholar
Vasconcellos, J. L. (1892). Dialectos alentejanos. Revista Lusitana, II, 15–45(original work published 1890).Google Scholar
(1896). Dialectos alentejanos. Revista Lusitana, IV, 13–77.Google Scholar
(1987). Esquisse dʹune dialectologie portugaise (3rd ed.). Lisboa: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Científica; Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa(original work published 1901).Google Scholar
Vigário, M. (2003). The prosodic word in European Portuguese. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Prosodic structure between the prosodic word and phonological phrase: Recursive nodes or an independent domain? The Linguistic Review, 27(4), 485–530. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, U., Labov, W., & Herzog, M. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In W. Lehman & Y. Malkiel (Eds.), Directions for historical linguistics (pp. 95–188). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Nkollo, Mikołaj
2022. Artigos definidos variáveis no português europeu dialetal. Revue Romane. Langue et littérature. International Journal of Romance Languages and Literatures 57:2 ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.