Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 12:6 (2022) ► pp.816–844

Variation and stability of American Norwegian /r/ in contact

ORCID logo | University of Oslo
Sound patterns in heritage languages are often highly variable, potentially with influences from majority languages. Yet, the core phonological system of the heritage language tends to remain stable. This article considers variation in the phonetic and phonological patterns of /r/ in American Norwegian heritage language speakers from neighboring communities in western Wisconsin, in the Upper Midwestern United States. Drawing on acoustic data from speakers born between 1879 and 1957, I examine the distribution of four rhotic allophones, including an English-like approximant, over time. These data reveal an increase of approximants that is structured within the Norwegian phonological system and its processes. Furthermore, analyzing these changes with the proposed modular framework provides clarity for how heritage language sound systems do and do not change under contact and contributes to our understanding of the asymmetric phonetic and phonological heritage language patterns.
Keywords: Heritage language bilingualism, Norwegian, phonology, rhotics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1HL phonology and rhotic variation
    • 2.2Norwegian rhotics: Patterns and acoustics
    • 2.3The modular sound system in contact
    • 2.4Stability and variability in phonetic and phonological contact
    • 2.5Hypotheses on the effects of contact on the AmNo sound system
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Data collection, processing, and evaluation
  • 4.Results: AmNo rhotic patterns over time
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Contact effects on the AmNo sound system
    • 5.2Implications for HL sound patterns
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 15 April 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.20085.nat
References (57)
References
Amengual, M. (2016). Acoustic correlates of the Spanish tap-trill contrast: Heritage and L2 Spanish speakers. Heritage Language Journal, 13(2), 88–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Avery, P., & Idsardi, W. (2001). Laryngeal dimensions, completion and enhancement. In T. A. Hall (Ed.), Distinctive feature theory (pp. 41–70). Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Avery, P., & Rice, K. (1989). Segment structure and coronal underspecification. Phonology, 6(2), 179–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, E., Montrul, S., & Polinsky, M. (2013). Heritage languages and their speakers: Opportunities and challenges for linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 39(3–4), 129–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2020). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 6.1.16. [URL], accessed June 22, 2020.
Cavirani, E. & van Oostendorp, M. (2019). Empty morphemes in Dutch dialect atlases: Reducing morphosyntactic variation by refining emptiness typology. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 4(1), 88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dorian, N. (1993). Internally and externally motivated changes in language contact settings: Doubts about the dichotomy. In C. Jones (Ed.), Historical linguistics: Problems and perspectives (pp. 131–155). Longman. Google Scholar
Dresher, B. E. (2009). The contrastive hierarchy in phonology. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dresher, B. E., Piggott, G., & Rice, K. (1994). Contrast in phonology: Overview. In C. Dyck (Ed.), Toronto working papers in linguistics 121 (pp. i–vi). Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto. Google Scholar
Fruehwald, J. (2017). The role of phonology in phonetic change. Annual Review of Linguistics, 31, 25–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Godson, L. (2004). Vowel production in the speech of Western Armenian heritage speakers. Heritage Language Journal, 2(1), 45–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, D. C. (2011). Phonological contrast and phonetic enhancement: Dispersedness without dispersion. Phonology, 28(1), 1–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamann, S. (2003). The phonetics and phonology of retroflexes. [Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University]. Utrecht University Repository. [URL].
Haugen, E. (1969). The Norwegian language in America: A study in bilingual behavior (2nd ed., Vols. 1–21). University of Indiana Press. Google Scholar
Henriksen, N. (2015). Acoustic analysis of the rhotic contrast in Chicagoland Spanish: An intergenerational study. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(3), 285–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hjelde, A. (1996). Some phonological changes in a Norwegian dialect in America. In P. S. Ureland & I. Clarkson (Eds.), Language contact across the North Atlantic (pp. 283–295). Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howell, R. B. (1991). Old English breaking and its Germanic analogues. Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993). German immigration and the development of regional variants of American English: Using contact theory to discover our roots. In J. Salmons (Ed.), The German language in America (pp. 188–217). Max Kade Institute. Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I. (2005). The sounds of Spanish. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Iverson, G., & Salmons, J. (1995). Aspiration and laryngeal representation in Germanic. Phonology, 12(3), 369–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johannessen, J. B. (2015). The Corpus of American Norwegian Speech (CANS). In B. Megyesi (Ed.), Proceedings of the 20th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (pp. 297–300). Linköping University Electronic Press. Google Scholar
Johannessen, J. B., & Laake, S. (2012). Østnorsk som fellesdialekt i Midtvesten. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift, 30(2), 365–380. Google Scholar
Johannessen, J. B., & Vaux, B. (2013). Retroflex variation and methodological issues: A reply to Simonsen, Moen, and Cowen (2009). Journal of Phonetics, 41(1), 48–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kehoe, M. (2002). Developing vowel systems as a window to bilingual phonology. International Journal of Bilingualism, 6(3), 315–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). The development of rhotics: A comparison of monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(4), 710–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keyser, S. & Stevens, K. (2006). Enhancement and overlap in the speech chain. Language, 82(1), 33–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. Y., & Repiso Puigdelliura, G. (2019). Deconstructing heritage language dominance: Effects of proficiency, use, and input on heritage language speakers’ production of the Spanish alveolar tap. Phonetica, 77(1), 55–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kristoffersen, G. (2000). The phonology of Norwegian. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Kupisch, T. (2020). Towards modelling heritage speakers’ sound systems. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 29–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kupisch, T., Barton, D., Hailer, K., Klaschik, E., Stangen, I., Lein, T., van de Weijer, J. (2014). Foreign accent in adult simultaneous bilinguals. Heritage Language Journal, 11(2), 123–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladefoged, P., & Maddieson, I. (1996). The sounds of the world’s languages. Blackwell. Google Scholar
Lindau, M. (1985). The story of r. In V. A. Fromkin (Ed.), Phonetic Linguistics: Essays in honor of Peter Ladefoged (pp. 157–168). Academic Press. Google Scholar
Lléo, C. (2018). Aspects of the phonology of Spanish as a heritage language: From incomplete acquisition to transfer. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(4), 732–747. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lléo, C., Kuchenbrandt, I., Kehoe, M., & Trujillo, C. (2003). Syllable final consonants in Spanish and German monolingual and bilingual acquisition. In N. Müller (Ed.), (In)vulnerable domains in multilingualism (pp. 191–220). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Natvig, D. (2019). Levels of representation in phonetic and phonological contact. In J. Darquennes, J. Salmons & W. Vandenbussche (Eds.), Language contact: An international handbook (Vol. 11, pp. 88–99). De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar
(2020). Rhotic underspecification: Deriving variability and arbitrariness through phonological representations. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1), 48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Natvig, D., & Salmons, J. (2020). Fully accepting variation in (pre)history: The pervasive heterogeneity of Germanic rhotics. In P. C. Sutcliffe (Ed.), The polymath intellectual: A festschrift in honor of Robert D. King (pp. 81–102). Agarita Press. Google Scholar
Oh, J., Au, T. K.-F., Knightly, L., Jun, S.-A. (2003). Holding on to childhood language memory. Cognition, 86(3), B53–B64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, M. (2018). Heritage languages and their speakers. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, M., & Scontras, G. (2020). Understanding heritage languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 4–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Purnell, T., & Raimy, E. (2015). Distinctive features, levels of representation and historical phonology. In P. Honeybone & J. Salmons (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of historical phonology (pp. 522–544). Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Putnam, M. T., Kupisch, T., & Pascual y Cabo, D. (2018). Different situations, similar outcomes: Heritage grammars across the lifespan. In D. Miller, F. Bayram, J. Rothman, & L. Serratrice (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language: The state of the science across its subfields (pp. 251–279). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Putnam, M. T., Perez-Cortes, S., & Sánchez, L. (2019). Language attrition and the feature reassembly hypothesis. In B. Köpke & M. Schmid (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language attrition (pp. 18–24). Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL].
Rice, K. (2009). Nuancing markedness: A place for contrast. In E. Raimy & C. E. Cairnes (Eds.), Contemporary views on architecture and representations in phonology (pp. 311–321). Cambridge, MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, H. R. (1907). Norske Bygdemaal: III–IV: Oust-Telemaal o Numedalsmaal; Hallingmaal o Valdresmaal; Gudbrandsdalsmaal; Upplandsmaal. A.W. Brøggers. Google Scholar
Rothman, J. (2009). Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 155–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salmons, J. (2016). Rhotics in language contact: Phonetics and phonology of variation in real time. 7th Workshop on Immigrant Languages in the Americas , Athens, GA.
(in press). Sound change. Edinburgh University Press. DOI logo
Salmons, J., & Purnell, T. (2020). Contact and the development of American English. In R. Hickey (Ed.), The handbook of language contact (2nd ed., pp. 361–383). Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiller, N. O. (1999). The Phonetic Variation of German /r/. In M. Butt & N. Fuhrhop (Eds.), Variation und Stabilität in der Wortstruktur: Untersuchungen zu Entwicklung, Erwerb und Varietäten des Deutschen und anderer Sprachen (pp. 261–287). Georg Olms Verlag. Google Scholar
Stevens, K., Keyser, S., & Kawasaki, H. (1986). Toward a phonetic and phonological theory of redundant features. In J. S. Perkell & D. H. Klatt (Eds.), Invariance and variability in speech processes (pp. 426–449). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar
Tanner, J., Sonderegger, M., & Stuart-Smith, J. (2020). Structured speaker variability in Japanese stops: Relationships within versus across cues to stop voicing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 148(2), 793–804. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. S. (1969). Principles of phonology (C. A. M. Baltaxe, Trans.). University of California Press. (Original work published 1939). Google Scholar
Van Coetsem, F. (1988). Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Foris Publications USA. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, U., Labov, W., & Herzog, M. I. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In W. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (Eds.), Directions in historical linguistics (pp. 97–195). University of Texas Press. Google Scholar
Wilkerson, M. E., & Salmons, J. (2008). “Good old immigrants of yesteryear” who didn’t learn English: Germans in Wisconsin. American Speech, 83(3), 259–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Restrepo-Ramos, Falcon
2024. Tap/trill variation and change across generations of Spanish-Creole bilinguals in San Andrés, Colombia. Linguistic Variation DOI logo
Holmstrom, Sarah & Joseph Salmons
2023. 1. The History of North American English. Publication of the American Dialect Society 108:1 ► pp. 8 ff. DOI logo
D'Alessandro, Roberta, David Natvig & Michael T. Putnam
2021. Addressing Challenges in Formal Research on Moribund Heritage Languages: A Path Forward. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Natvig, David
2021. Modeling Heritage Language Phonetics and Phonology: Toward an Integrated Multilingual Sound System. Languages 6:4 ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.