Cover not available
Part of
Spanish Phonetics and Phonology in Contact: Studies from Africa, the Americas, and Spain
Edited by Rajiv Rao
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 28] 2020
► pp. 163–206

Chapter 7
Rhotics in Shipibo-Konibo Spanish

A phonetic study

| Stony Brook University
This chapter presents a phonetic study of the trill /r/ and the tap /ɾ/ in Shipibo-Konibo Spanish, examines their characteristics, and compares them to those found in monolingual Peruvian Amazonian Spanish. The study shows that L2 Shipibo-Konibo Spanish is not a uniform phenomenon, but rather is comprised of different varieties defined by speakers’ levels of proficiency and type of Spanish with which they are in contact. It identifies speakers of Type-I, who do not have a high level of proficiency in Spanish; speakers of Type-II, who show an advanced level as a result of their contact with rural Amazonian Spanish; and speakers of Type-III, who also have a high level of proficiency in Spanish that results from contact with urban monolingual Spanish.
Keywords: Spanish rhotics, L2 transfer, Peruvian Amazonian Spanish, Shipibo-Konibo Spanish
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Rhotics in monolingual Amazonian Spanish from the city of Pucallpa
  • 3.‘r’ in Shipibo-Konibo: The voiced retroflex affricate /ɖʐ/
  • 4.Rhotics in Shipibo-Konibo Spanish
    • 4.1Type-I Shipibo-Konibo Spanish
    • 4.2Type-II Shipibo-Konibo Spanish
    • 4.3Type-III Shipibo-Konibo Spanish
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgement
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 6 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.28.07eli
References
Bakovic, E.
(1994) Strong onsets and Spanish fortition. In C. Giordano & D. Ardron (Eds.), Proceedings of 6th Student Conference in Linguisitics (SCIL 6, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 23). Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Blecua Falgueras, B.
(2001) Las vibrantes del español: Manifestaciones acústicas y procesos fonéticos (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
Bonet, E., & Mascaró, J.
(1997) On the representation of contrasting rhotics. In F. Martínez-Gil & A. Morales-Front (Eds.), Issues in the phonology and morphology of the major Iberian languages (pp. 103–126). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Colina, S.
(2010) Rhotics in Spanish: A new look at an old problem. In C. Borgonovo, M. Español-Echevarría, & P. Prévost (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 12th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 75–86). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Elías-Ulloa, J.
(2000) El acento en Shipibo (Unpublished thesis of licenciatura). Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
(2005) Variable syllable weight and quantity-insensitive allomorphy in Shipibo. In L. Bateman & C. Ussery (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 35, pp. 171–186). Charleston, SC: BookSurge Publishing.Google Scholar
(2011) Una documentación acústica de la lengua Shipibo-Conibo (Pano), con un bosquejo fonológico. Lima: Fondo Editorial, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.Google Scholar
(2015) The intonational patterns of yes-no questions in the Amazonian Spanish of Shipibo-Konibo speakers. PAPIA: Revista Brasileira de Estudos do Contato Linguístico, 25(1), 47–75.Google Scholar
(2017) Stress adjustments in Shipibo-Konibo: Noun loanwords from Spanish. Amerindia, 39(1), 83–104.Google Scholar
Galarreta, A.-P., Melgar, A., & Oncevay-Marcos, A.
(2017) Corpus creation and initial SMT experiments between Spanish and Shipibo-Konibo. In R. Mitkov & G. Angelova (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing, RANLP 2017 (pp. 238–244). Varna, Bulgaria: INCOMA.Google Scholar
García, M.
(2011) The intonational patterns of the Peruvian Amazonian Spanish (PAS) (Unpublished master’s thesis). Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY.
(2016) The intonation of Peruvian Amazonian Spanish: Rising accents and segmental factors (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
García, R.
(1971) Aspectos sociales y económicos del área de Pucallpa. Lima: Gobierno del Perú, Ministerio de Trabajo.Google Scholar
García Rivera, F.
(1994) Aspectos de la fonología del Shipibo (Unpublished thesis of licenciatura). Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
Gili Gaya, S.
(1921) La r simple en la pronunciación española. Revista de Filología Española, 8, 271–280.Google Scholar
Guevara, S.
(2009) Ucayali: análisis de situación en población. Lima: Fondo de Población de las Naciones Unidas (UNFPA) and Consorcio de la Investigación Económica y Social (CIES).Google Scholar
Hall, N.
(2006) Cross-linguistic patterns of vowel intrusion. Phonology, 23(3), 387–429. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, J.
(1969) Spanish phonology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2002) Flaps, trills and syllable structure in Spanish. MITWPIL, 42, 81–108.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I.
(2005) The sounds of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I., Olarrea, A., & Escobar, A. M.
(2001) Introducción a la lingüística hispánica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
INEI, Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática del Perú
(2008) Censos Nacionales 2007: XI de Población y VI de Vivienda. Lima, Perú: Centro de Edición de la Oficina Técnica de Difusión del INEI.Google Scholar
(2012) Perú: Estimaciones y Proyecciones de Población Total por Sexo de las Principales Ciudades, 2000–2015. Lima, Perú: Gobierno del Perú.Google Scholar
Lenz, R.
(1892) Chilenische studien. Phonetische Studien, 5, 272–293.Google Scholar
Lewis, M., Simons, P., Gary, F., & Fennig, D. C.
(Eds.) (2016) Ethnologue: Languages of the world (19th edn). Dallas, TX: SIL International.Google Scholar
Lipski, J.
(1990) Spanish taps and trills: Phonological structure of an isolated opposition. Folia Linguistica, 24, 153–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, B.
(1965) Estudios de fonética hispánica. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Instituto Miguel de Cervantes.Google Scholar
Navarro Tomás, T.
(1918) Diferencias de duración entre las consonantes españolas. Revista de Filología Española, 5, 367–393.Google Scholar
(1957) Manual de pronunciación española. New York, NY: Hafner.Google Scholar
Proctor, M. I.
(2009) Gestural characterization of a phonological class: The liquids (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
Sánchez, L., Camacho, J., & Elías-Ulloa, J.
(2009) Shipibo-Spanish: Differences in residual transfer at the syntax/morphology and the syntax/pragmatics interfaces. Second Language Research, 26(3), 329–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sánchez, L., Mayer, E., Camacho, J., & Rodríguez Alzza, C.
(2018) Linguistic attitudes toward Shipibo in Cantagallo: Reshaping indigenous language and identity in an urban setting. International Journal of Bilingualism, 1–22.Google Scholar
Schmeiser, B.
(2009) An acoustic analysis of intrusive vowels in Guatemalan Spanish /rC/ clusters. U. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 15(1), 193–202.Google Scholar
Solís Fonseca, G.
(2003) Lenguas de la amazonía peruana. Lima: Visual Service Publisher.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, P., Márquez-Pinedo, L., & Maddieson, I.
(2001) Shipibo. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 31(2), 281–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Elias-Ulloa, Jose Alberto
2020. Chapter 8. Interrogative intonation in monolingual Amazonian Spanish. In Amazonian Spanish [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 23], ► pp. 192 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2023. 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.