Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Historical Linguistics
Vol. 10:1 (2020) ► pp.87–110

Homorganic Cluster Lengthening, Pre-Cluster Shortening and Preference-based change in Early English

| Arizona State University

This paper discusses the processes of Homorganic Cluster Lengthening (HCL) and Pre-Cluster Shortening (PCS) occurring in the late Old English and Early Middle English periods. These processes are responsible, respectively, for vowel-lengthening before voiced homorganic consonant clusters (OE bindan, feld, hund > LOE/EME bīnd, fēld, hūnd) and vowel shortening before other clusters (OE cēpte, fīfta, brōhte > ME kepte, fifte, brohte). This paper builds on reassessments of data by Minkova (2014) to contribute an account of HCL within the system of “preference laws” articulated by Vennemann (1988). This account attributes the motivation for HCL to preferences for syllable-internal transitions between nucleus and coda in order to explain the fine details of HCL; namely, the fact that HCL applies with higher frequency to high vowels followed nasals than to low/mid vowels and in a sporadic manner to front vowels followed by /l/ compared to back vowels. These differences are attributed to the application of the Coda and Nucleus Laws (Vennemann 1988: 25, 42), with additional proposals about the effect of velarization of /l/ in Old English, with comparison to PCS providing important context throughout.

Keywords: Old English, Middle English, homorganic cluster lengthening, pre-cluster shortening, preference laws, sound change
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Homorganic Cluster Lengthening
    • 2.2Pre-Cluster Shortening (PCS)
    • 2.3Summary
  • 3.Prior accounts
    • 3.1Optimal syllable weight and compensatory lengthening
    • 3.2Direct phonetic motivations
    • 3.3Syllable cut
    • 3.4Summary
  • 4.Major proposals
    • 4.1Preference-based change
    • 4.2Preferability of HCL contexts
    • 4.3Application to HCL
    • 4.4Application to VCCC contexts
    • 4.5What about Pre-Cluster Shortening?
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 25 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.18028.kru
References
Campbell, Alistair
1959 Old English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eliason, Norman E.
1948 Old English Vowel Lengthening and Vowel Shortening before Consonant Groups. Studies in Philology 451.1–20.Google Scholar
Hogg, Richard M.
1992 A Grammar of Old English: Vol I. Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan B.
1976 An Introduction to Natural Generative Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Howell, Robert B.
1991 Old English Breaking and its Germanic Analogues. Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huber, Daniel
2008 Velars and Processes: Their Treatment in Phonological Theory. Doctoral Dissertation, Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE), Budapest.Google Scholar
Krupatkin, Y. B.
1970 From Germanic to English and Frisian. Us Wurk 19:3.49–71.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger
1994 Old English: A Historical Linguistic Companion. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehiste, I.
1972 Manner of Articulation, Parallel Processing, and the Perception of Duration. Working Papers Linguistics and Computer and Information Science Research Center, Ohio State University 121.33–52.Google Scholar
Liberman, Anatoly
1992 Vowel Lengthening before Resonant + Another Consonant and Svarabhakti in Germanic. On Germanic Linguistics: Issues and Methods ( Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 68) ed. by I. Rauch, G. F. Carr & R. L. Kyes, 163–215. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luick, Karl
1898 Beiträge zur Englischen Grammatik III. Die Quantitätsveränderungen im Lauf der englischen Sprachentwicklung. Anglia 201.335–362.Google Scholar
1914–1940 Historische Grammatik der englischen Sprache. Leipzig [Repr. 1921. Stuttgart: Tauchnitz].Google Scholar
Lutz, Angelika
1986 The Syllabic Basis of Word Division in Old English Manuscripts. English Studies 671.193–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mailhammer, Robert
2009 Thoughts on the Genesis and the Development of Syllable Cut in English. Anglia 1271.261–282.Google Scholar
Mailhammer, Robert, David Restle & Theo Vennemann
2015 Preference Laws in Phonological Change. The Oxford Handbook of Historical Phonology ed. by J. Salmons & P. Honeybone, 450–466. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Malsch, Derry L.
1976 Syllable, Mora, and Length in the Development of English. Current Progress in Historical Linguistics: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Historical Linguistics ed. by W. M. Christie, 83–93. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Minkova, Donka
2014 A Historical Phonology of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Minkova, Donka & Robert P. Stockwell
1992 Homorganic Clusters as Moric Busters in the History of English: The Case of -ld, -nd, -mb . History of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Linguistics ed. by M. T. Rissanen, O. Ihalainen, T. Nevalainen, and I. Taavitsainen, 191–207. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moon, An-Nah
2004 Constraints on Homorganic Cluster Lengthening in Early English: A Unified Account of Vowel Lengthening and Shortening. Language Research 40:2.353–376.Google Scholar
Morsbach, Lorenz
1888 Ueber den Ursprung der neuenglischen Schriftsprache. Heilbroon: Henniager.Google Scholar
Murray, Robert W.
2000 Syllable Cut Prosody in Early Middle English. Language 761.617–654. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murray, Robert W. & Theo Vennemann
1982 Syllable Contact Change in Germanic, Greek and Sidamo. Klagenfurter Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 81.321–349.Google Scholar
1983 Sound Change and Syllable Structure in Germanic Phonology. Language 591.514–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parker, Stephen G.
2002 Quantifying the Sonority Hierarchy. University of Massachusetts, Doctoral Dissertation.Google Scholar
Phillips, Betty S.
1981 The Phonetic Basis of a Late Old English Sound Change. Phonologica 1980 ed. by W. U. Dressler, O. E. Pfeiffer & J. R. Rennison, 337–341. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar
1983 Constraints on Syllables and Quantitative Changes in Early English. Linguistics 211.879–895.Google Scholar
Prokosch, E.
1939 A Comparative Germanic Grammar. University of Pennsylvania: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Restle, David
2003 Silbenschnitt – Quantität – Kopplung: Zur Geschichte, Charakterisierung und Typologie der Anschlußprosodie. München: Fink.Google Scholar
Ritt, Nikolaus
1994 Quantity Adjustment: Vowel Lengthening and Shortening in Early Middle English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sievers, Eduard
1901 Grundzüge der Phonetik: Zur Einführung in das Studium der Lautlehre der indogermanischen Sprachen. 5th ed. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Haertel.Google Scholar
Smirnitsky, A. I.
1946 Problems of Phonology in the History of the English Language (Russian). Vestnik MGU 21.81–90.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, Nikolaj
1939 Grundzüge der Phonologie. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo
1988 Preference Laws for Syllable Structure. Berlin & New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2000 From Quantity to Syllable Cuts: On So-called Lengthening in the Germanic Languages. Italian Journal of Linguistics 121.251–282.Google Scholar
Wyld, Henry C.
1929 A Short History of English. 3rd ed. London: John Murray.Google Scholar