Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Phonological Trochaic Grouping in Language Planning and Language Change

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Prosodic Categories: Production, Perception and Comprehension

Part of the book series: Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory ((SNLT))

Abstract

Function words tend to cliticize onto lexical words which are themselves phonological words. Is there a preference for leftwards or rightwards attachment? Does this cliticization lead to recursive phonological words? Do simple compounds consisting of two phonological words constitute phonological words themselves? Grouping and prosodic units are our main concerns in this paper and we provide synchronic analyses, diachronic data and psycholinguistic evidence in support of trochaic grouping and leftwards attachment. We will first present a brief survey of phonological and accentual processes operating on cliticized versus compound-like constructions in English, Dutch, Swedish, Norwegian and Bengali. We then provide psycholinguistic evidence suggesting that the latencies in language planning and production operate on the level of phonological words which may constitute independent lexical words, function words cliticized leftwards, stressed function words, as well as compounds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    One further issue in Vogel’s approach is that although recursivity is forbidden, one can skip levels. For example, a prefix need not be a foot, clitic or a word, but may attach directly to the prefixed word.

References

  • Berendsen, E. 1986. The Phonology of Cliticization. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booij, G. 1995. The Phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Börjars, K. 1994. Swedish Double Determination in a European Typological Perspective, Nordic Journal of Linguistics 17: 219–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gussenhoven, C. 1983. Over de fonologie van Nederlandse clitica. (About the phonology of Dutch clitics) Spektator 15: 180–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempen, G., and E. Hoenkamp. 1987. An incremental procedural grammar for sentence formation.Cognitive Science 11: 201–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristoffersen, Gjert. 2000. The Phonology of Norwegian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, A. 2000. Hierarchical restructuring in the creation of verbal morphology in Bengali and Germanic: evidence from phonology. In Lahiri (ed.) Analogy, Levelling, Markedness, 71–123, Berlin: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, A., and J. Fitzpatrick-Cole. 1999. Emphatic clitics in Bengali. In R. Kager and W. Zonneveld (eds.) Phrasal Phonology, 119–144, Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, A., and F. Plank. 2007. On phonological grouping in relation to morphosyntactic grouping. Presentation to the Annual Meeting of the DGfS, AG 12: Phonological domains: Universals and deviations. Siegen, 28 February – 2 March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, A., A. Jongman, and J. Sereno. 1990. The pronominal clitic [der] in Dutch. Yearbook of Morphology 3: 115–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, A., A. Wetterlin, and E. Jo¨nsson-Steiner. 2005a. Sounds Definite-ly Clitic: Evidence from Scandinavian tone. Lingue e Linguaggio IV: 243–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, A., A. Wetterlin, and E. Jönsson-Steiner. 2005b. Lexical Specification of Tone in North Germanic. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 28: 61–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, A. and F. Plank. Phonological phrasing in Germanic: The judgement of history.Transactions of the Philological Society in press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. J. M. 1989. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. J. M., and L. R. Wheeldon. 1994. Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary? Cognition 50: 239–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nespor, M., and I. Vogel. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peperkamp, Sharon. 1997. Prosodic Words. HIL Dissertations 34. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plank, F. 2003. Double articulation. In F. Plank (ed.) Noun Phrase Structure in the Languages of Europe, 337–395. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plank, F. 2005. The prosodic contribution of clitics: Focus on Latin. Lingue e Linguaggio 4: 281–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plank, F., and A. Lahiri. 2009. When phonological and syntactic phrasing mismatch: Evidence from Germanic. Presentation to GLAC 15, Banff, Alberta, Canada, 30 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riad, T. 1998. The origin of Scandinavian tone accents. Diachronica XV(1): 63–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology.Phonology Yearbook 3, 371–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O. 1995. The prosodic structure of function words. In J. Beckman, L. Walsh Dickey, and S. Urbanczyk (eds.) Papers in Optimality Theory, UMASS Occasional Papers in Phonology, 439–469. Amherst, MA: GLSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E.O. 1996. The prosodic structure of function words. In J. Morgan and K. Demuth (eds.) Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition, 187–213. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, S., S. Monsell, R. L. Knoll, and C. E. Wright. 1978. The latency and duration of rapid movement sequences: comparisons of speech and typewriting. In G. E. Stelmach (ed.), Information Processing in Motor Control and Learning, 117–152. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, S., C. E. Wright, R. L. Knoll, and S. Monsell. 1980. Motor programs in rapid speech: Additional evidence. In R. A. Cole (ed.) The Perception and Production of Fluent Speech, 507–534. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweet, H. 1885. Elementarbuch des gesprochenen Englisch. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigário, M. 2003. The Prosodic Word in European Portuguese.Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigário, M. 2009. The Prosodic Word Group as a domain of prosodic hierarchy. Talk presented at OCP 6, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, I. 2009. The status of the Clitic Group. In J. Grijzenhout and B. Kabak (eds.) Phonological Domains: Universals and Deviations, 15–46. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, I., and L. R. Wheeldon. in prep. Units of speech production in Italian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetterlin, A. 2008. The Lexical Specification of Norwegian Tonal Word Accents. PhD dissertation. Universität Konstanz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeldon, L., and A. Lahiri. 1997. Prosodic units in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language 37: 356–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeldon, L., and A. Lahiri. 2002. The minimal unit of phonological encoding: prosodic or lexical word. Cognition 85: B31–B41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zonneveld, W. 1983. Lexical and phonological properties of Dutch voicing assimilation. In M. van der Broeke, V. van Hoeven and W. Zonneveld (eds.) Sound Structures,297–312. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwicky A., and G. K. Pullum. 1983. Cliticization versus inflection: English n't. Language 59: 502–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Aditi Lahiri

  2. School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

    Linda Wheeldon

Authors
  1. Aditi Lahiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Linda Wheeldon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aditi Lahiri .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Dept. Linguistica, Universidade de Lisboa, Alameda de Universidade, Lisboa, 1600-214, Portugal

    Sónia Frota

  2. , Letren Fakultatea, Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, Unibersitatearen ibilbidea 5, Vitoria-Gasteiz, 01006, Spain

    Gorka Elordieta

  3. Campus de la Communicació-Poblenou, Departament de Traducció i Ciències del, ICREA-UPF, Carrer Roc Boronat 138, Barcelona, 08018, Spain

    Pilar Prieto

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lahiri, A., Wheeldon, L. (2011). Phonological Trochaic Grouping in Language Planning and Language Change. In: Frota, S., Elordieta, G., Prieto, P. (eds) Prosodic Categories: Production, Perception and Comprehension. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0137-3_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation