Article published in:
Theoretical Approaches to Linguistic Variation
Edited by Ermenegildo Bidese, Federica Cognola and Manuela Caterina Moroni
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 234] 2016
► pp. 25–52

Germanic and Romance onset clusters – how to account for microvariation

| University of Verona
| University of Verona
In this paper the restrictions imposed on onset clusters in Standard German and Standard Italian are compared to the – minimally different – restrictions in the Germanic dialects of Tyrolean, Mòcheno and Lusern Cimbrian, and the Romance dialects of Trentino. Both standard varieties allow onset clusters with a sonority distance (SD, computed according to the sonority indexes proposed in Parker 2011) of 4, marginally 3 intervals, while the corresponding dialects allow for SD = 2. The observed pattern of microvariation can be understood as minimal variation between grammars. We give a precise measure of this minimal grammatical difference by performing a typological analysis in the framework of Optimality Theory, yielding the typological properties of the system, understood as the necessary and sufficient ranking conditions generating every single language of the typology (Alber & Prince, in preparation, see also Alber, DelBusso & Prince 2016). Minimal grammatical difference can then be defined as minimal change of the property values defining each language.
Keywords: Cimbrian, consonant clusters, microvariation, Mòcheno, sonority, Trentino dialects, typological analysis, Tyrolean
Published online: 01 December 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.234.02alb
References

References

Alber, Birgit
2001 Regional variation and edges. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 20(1): 3-41.Google Scholar
2014 Obstruent systems of Northern Italy. In Approcci diversi alla dialettologia italiana contemporanea [Numero speciale de L’Italia Dialettale, LXXV, serie terza, XI], Roberta D’Alessandro et al. (eds), 13-36. Pisa: Università di Pisa.Google Scholar
Alber, B., DelBusso, N. & A. Prince
2016 From intensional properties to universal support. Language 92(2). e88-e116. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alber, Birgit. & Lanthaler, Franz
2004 Der Silbenonset in den Tiroler Dialekten. In Perspektiven Eins. Akten der 1. Tagung Deutsche Sprachwissenschaft in Italien (Rome, 6th-7th February 2004), Claudio Di Meola et al. (eds), 75-88. Rome: Istituto Italiano di Studi Germanici.
Alber, Birgit
Prince, Alan. In preparation. Typologies. Ms. Università degli Studi di Verona and Rutgers University, New Brunswick NJ.
Benware, Wilbur A.
1996 Processual change and phonetic analogy: Early New High German<s> > <sch>. American Journal of Germanic Linguistics and Literatures 8(2): 265-287. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brasoveanu, Adrian & Prince, Alan
2011 Ranking & necessity: The fusional reduction algorithm. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29(1): 3-70. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Butt, Matthias
1992 Sonority and the explanation of syllable structure. Linguistische Berichte 137: 45-67.Google Scholar
Cavirani, Edoardo
2015 Modelling Phonologization. Vowel Reduction and Epenthesis in Lunigiana Dialects. PhD dissertation, University of Pisa and University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Clements, George Nick
1990 The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Papers in Laboratory Phonology, I: Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech, John Kingston & Mary Beckman (eds), 283-333. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cordin, Patrizia
(ed.) 2005 L’ Archivio lessicale dei dialetti trentini [Labirinti 84]. Trento: Editrice Università degli Studi di Trento.Google Scholar
Danis, Nick
2014 Deriving Interactions of Complex Stops. Ms. Rutgers University. [ROA-1220]Google Scholar
de Lacy, Paul
2002 The Formal Expression of Markedness. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Amherst MA: GLSA. [ROA-542]Google Scholar
Duden
1996 Deutsches Universalwörterbuch A-Z. 3., neu bearbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Revised by Günther Drosdowski and the Dudeneditorial staff. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Graffi, Giorgio & Scalise, Sergio
2002 Le lingue e il linguaggio. Introduzione alla linguistica. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Hall, Tracy Alan
1992 Syllable Structure and Syllable-Related Processes in German [Linguistische Arbeiten 276]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000 Phonologie. Eine Einführung. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ito, Junko & Mester, Armin
1999 The structure of the phonological lexicon. In The Handbook of Japanese Linguistics, Tsujimura, Natsuko (ed.), 62-100. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul
2014 New perspectives in historical linguistics. In The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds), 64-102. New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Krämer, Martin
2009 The Phonology of Italian. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Loporcaro, Michele
2009 Profilo linguistico dei dialetti italiani. Roma: Editori Laterza.Google Scholar
Morelli, Frida
1999 The Phonotactics and Phonology of Obstruent Clusters in Optimality Theory. PhD dissertation, University of Maryland at College Park. [ROA-420]Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina
1993 Fonologia. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Panieri, Luca
(ed) 2014 Zimbarbort. Börtarpuach Lusérnesch-Belesch / Belesch-Lusérnesch. Dizionario del cimbro di Luserna. Kulturinstitut Lusérn.Google Scholar
Parker, Steve
2011 Sonority. In The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, Vol. 2, Mark van Oostendorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds), 1160-1184. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Paul, Hermann
1881[2007] Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik. 25. Auflage, neu bearbeitet von Thomas Klein, Hans-Joachim Solms, Klaus-Peter Wegera. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan
2002 Entailed ranking arguments. Ms. [ROA-500].Google Scholar
1999 Paninian relations. Handout of talk at the University of Marburg . http://​ruccs​.rutgers​.edu​/~prince/
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul
1993/2004 Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Blackwell. [ROA-537].Google Scholar
Prince, Alan, Tesar, Bruce & Merchant, Nazarré
2007-2016 OTWorkplace. https://​sites​.google​.com​/site​/otworkplace/
Rohlfs, Gerhard
1949[1966] Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti [Traduzione di Salvatore Persichino]. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elizabeth
1984a On the major class features and syllable theory. In Language Sound Structure, Mark Aronoff & Richard T. Oehrle (eds), 107-136. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
s kloa’ be.be
2009 Piccolo vocabolario mòcheno. Bersntoler Kulturinstitut.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca
1982 Greek Prosodies and the Nature of Syllabification. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Tyroller, Hans
2003 Grammatische Beschreibung des Zimbrischen in Lusern. Wiesbaden: Steiner.Google Scholar
van Oostendorp, Marc
In preparation. Variation in Generative Grammar. Ms., Meertens Instituut Amsterdam.
Vennemann, Theo
1972 On the theory of sillabic phonology. Linguistische Berichte 18: 1-18.Google Scholar
Wiese, Richard
1996 The Phonology of German. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Wiltshire, Caroline & Maranzana, Elisa
1999 Geminates and clusters in Italian and Piedmontese: A case for OT ranking. In Formal Perspectives on Romance Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 185], Marc Authier, Barbara Bullock & Lisa Reed (eds), 289-303. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zec, Draga
2007 The Syllable. In The Handbook of Phonology, Paul de Lacy (ed.), 161-194. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

van Oostendorp, Marc
2020.  In The Cambridge Handbook of Germanic Linguistics, ► pp. 33 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 december 2020. 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.