Non-Teleological Approaches to Metathesis: Evidence from Dialects of Polish

Non-Teleological Approaches to Metathesis: Evidence from Dialects of Polish This paper discusses metathesis and other related processes attested in the North Mazovian dialects of Polish. Recently proposed functional approaches to sound change provide a framework for this analysis. It is argued that the transposition of segments with elongated phonetic cues is best analyzed as an instance of phonetically-based sound change. Copying a consonant across a rhotic finds a similar perceptual explanation involving the reinterpretation of the acoustic signal. In addition to perceptual metathesis, I consider cases that fall under coarticulatory metathesis and arise from varying degrees of gestural overlap. In comparison to previous approaches to metathesis, the role of syllable structure in driving metathesis is considerably diminished but not refuted. Structural optimization presumably operates in tandem with phonetic and perceptual factors. Language processing is called to attention in accounting for the long-distance transposition of similar segments. A connectionist approach that makes reference to activation and competition in a neural network of linguistic units is invoked to define this type of metathesis. On the whole, the Polish dialectal data support the hypothesis that sound change is fundamentally diachronic and non-optimizing.

[1]  Carlos Gussenhoven,et al.  Laboratory Phonology 7 , 2002 .

[2]  Juliette Blevins,et al.  The evolution of metathesis , 2004 .

[3]  W. Boryś.  Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego , 2005 .

[4]  J. Requin.  Attention and Performance VII , 1980 .

[5]  Stefan A. Frisch,et al.  Phonetically Based Phonology: Language processing and segmental OCP effects , 2004 .

[6]  P. Ladefoged.  A course in phonetics , 1975 .

[7]  M. Kenstowicz.  Paradigmatic Uniformity and Contrast , 2004 .

[8]  Donca Steriade,et al.  Phonetically Based Phonology: List of abbreviations , 2004 .

[9]  Donca Steriade,et al.  Papers in Laboratory Phonology: Gestures and autosegments: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper , 1990 .

[10]  L. Goldstein,et al.  Gestural overlap and recoverability: articulatory evidence from Georgian , 2001 .

[11]  Juliette Blevins,et al.  Evolutionary Phonology: The Emergence of Sound Patterns , 2004 .

[12]  Robert Kirchner,et al.  Phonetically Based Phonology , 2008 .

[13]  Donald G. MacKay,et al.  Repetition Deafness: Repeated Words in Computer-Compressed Speech Are Difficult to Encode and Recall , 1994 .

[14]  Maria Gouskova,et al.  Relational hierarchies in Optimality Theory: the case of syllable contact , 2004, Phonology.

[15]  Christina Y. Bethin,et al.  Slavic Prosody: Language Change and Phonological Theory , 2000 .

[16]  Rachel Walker,et al.  A Typology of Consonant Agreement as Correspondence , 2004 .

[17]  G S Dell,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. , 1986, Psychological review.

[18]  C. Browman,et al.  Papers in Laboratory Phonology: Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech , 1990 .

[19]  P. Smolensky,et al.  Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar , 2004 .

[20]  Alison Tunley,et al.  Coarticulatory influences of liquids on vowels in English , 1999 .

[21]  P. Kiparsky.  Universals Constrain Change; Change Results in Typological Generalizations , 2008 .

[22]  T. A. Hall,et al.  Paradigms in phonological theory , 2004 .