Word-final /ɔ̃/ in Greater Poland Polish: A Cumulative Context Effect?

• Authors: Kamil Kaźmierski , Marta Szlandrowicz

Abstracts

EN

An empirical corpus-based study of the likelihood of realizing the Polish nasal vowel /ɔ̃/ word-finally as [ɔm] (i.e. of 'nasal stopping') is presented. The goal was to verify whether the phenomenon exhibits a cumulative context effect, with words typically occurring in an environment favoring a particular phonetic variant showing higher rates of that variant regardless of environment. The results show that nasal stopping is more likely before stop-initial words than before words beginning in other sounds, if there is no intervening pause. Results with regard to the hypothesis that words typically followed by stops will show higher likelihood of nasal stopping, however, remain inconclusive.

Keywords

EN

Polish; nasal vowels; cumulative context effect; corpus phonology

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Research in Language
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 18
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 381-394

Dates

published

2020

Contributors

author

Kamil Kaźmierski

• Adam Mickiewicz University

author

Marta Szlandrowicz

References

• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412.
• Baranowska, K. (2018). Nasal vowels in English and Polish. A comparative analysis and a sociolinguistic study (Master’s thesis). Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań.
• Baranowska, K., & Kaźmierski, K. (2020). Polish word-final nasal vowels: Variation and, potentially, change. Sociolinguistic Studies.
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
• Baumann, A., & Ritt, N. (2017). On the replicator dynamics of lexical stress: Accounting for stress-pattern diversity in terms of evolutionary game theory. Phonology, 34(03), 439–471. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952675717000240
• Biedrzycki, L. (1978). Fonologia angielskich i polskich rezonantów. Porównanie samogłosek oraz spółgłosek rezonantowych. Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
• Boersma, D., Paul & Weenink. (2018). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.0.41, retrieved 15 Aug 2018 from http://www.praat.org/
• Bybee, J. (2017). Grammatical and lexical factors in sound change: A usage-based approach. Language Variation and Change, 29(03), 273–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394517000199
• Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
• Dubisz, S., Karaś, H., & Kolis, N. (1995). Dialekty i gwary polskie. Warsaw: Wiedza Powszechna.
• Dukiewicz, L. (1967). Polskie głoski nosowe. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
• Dukiewicz, L., & Sawicka, I. (1995). Fonetyka i fonologia. Cracow: Instytut Języka Polskiego PAN.
• Dunaj, B. (2006). Zasady poprawnej wymowy polskiej. Język Polski, 3, 161–172.
• Eddington, D., & Channer, C. (2010). American English has goʔ a loʔ of glottal stops: Social diffusion and linguistic motivation. American Speech, 85(3), 338–351. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-2010-019
• Forrest, J. (2017). The dynamic interaction between lexical and contextual frequency: A case study of (ING). Language Variation and Change, 29(02), 129–156. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394517000072
• Fromont, R., & Hay, J. (2012). LaBB-CAT: An Annotation store. In Proceedings of the australasian language technology association workshop (pp. 113–117). Dunedin, New Zealand.
• Gahl, S. (2008). Time and thyme are not homophones: The effect of lemma frequency on word durations in spontaneous speech. Language, 84(3), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0035
• Gruchmanowa, M. (2006). Językoznawcze wędrówki nie tylko po Poznaniu. Poznańskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciół Nauk.
• Gussmann, E. (2007). The phonology of Polish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Jarosz, G., Calamaro, S., & Zentz, J. (2016). Input frequency and the acquisition of syllable structure in polish. Language Acquisition, 24(4), 361–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2016.1179743
• Jarosz, G., & Johnson, J. A. (2013). The richness of distributional cues to word boundaries in speech to young children. Language Learning and Development, 9(2), 175–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2011.641904
• Kaźmierski, K., Kul, M., & Zydorowicz, P. (2019). Educated Poznań speech 30 years later. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 136(4), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.19.021.11314
• Kul, M., Zydorowicz, P., & Kaźmierski, K. (2020). The Greater Poland Spoken Corpus: Data collection, structure and application. In M. Wrembel, A. Kiełkiewicz-Janowiak, & P. Gąsiorowski (Eds.), Approaches to the study of sound structure and speech. Interdisciplinary work in honour of katarzyna dziubalska-kołaczyk (pp. 198–212). New York: Routledge.
• Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x99001776
• Madejowa, M. (1987). Współczesna polska norma językowa w zakresie wymowy samogłosek nosowych. Studia Phonetica Posnaniensia, 1, 31–56.
• Madelska, L. (2005). Słownik wariantywności fonetycznej współczesnej polszczyzny. Cracow: Collegium Columbinum.
• Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., Wodniecka, Z., & Brysbaert, M. (2015). SUBTLEX-PL: Subtitle-based word frequency estimates for Polish. Behavior Research Methods, 47(2), 471–483.
• Ostaszewska, D., & Tambor, J. (1990). Fonetyka i fonologia współczesnego języka polskiego. Warsaw: PWN.
• Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. ROA-537.
• Raymond, W. D., Brown, E. L., & Healy, A. F. (2016). Cumulative context effects and variant lexical representations: Word use and English final t/d deletion. Language Variation and Change, 28(02), 175–202. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394516000041
• R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
• Seyfarth, S. (2014). Word informativity influences acoustic duration: Effects of contextual predictability on lexical representation. Cognition, 133(1), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.06.013
• Strycharczuk, P., & Scobbie, J. M. (2016). Gradual or abrupt? The phonetic path to morphologisation. Journal of Phonetics, 59, 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.09.003
• Tanner, J., Sonderegger, M., & Wagner, M. (2017). Production planning and coronal stop deletion in spontaneous speech. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology, 8(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.5334/labphon.96
• Wiśniewski, M. (2000). Zarys fonetyki i fonologii współczesnego języka polskiego. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika.
• Witaszek-Samborska, M. (1985). Regionalizmy fonetyczne w mowie inteligencji poznańskiej. Slavia Occidentalis, 17, 91–104.

Identifiers

DOI

10.18778/1731-7533.18.4.02

Biblioteka Nauki

1368378