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 (35)
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
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Page, B. Richard
2024. Homorganic lengthening in late Old English revisited. In Investigating West Germanic Languages [Studies in Germanic Linguistics, 8], ► pp. 14 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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.