Grounded constraints and the consonants of Setswana

Maria Gouskova, Elizabeth Zsiga, One Tlale Boyer

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The article examines the phonology and phonetics of Setswana obstruents and the well known and controversial post-nasal devoicing rule, which has been cited as a counterexample to the claim that markedness constraints are phonetically grounded (Hyman, 2001). We re-examine the case of Setswana and argue that it must be analyzed in terms of grounded constraints. Our evidence comes from two sources. First, we report on the results of a phonetic study of six speakers of the Sengwato dialect of Setswana. We found that some of our speakers did not have voiced obstruents in any context. Those speakers that did devoice post-nasally also devoiced in other contexts. Thus, a phonetic examination of the purported counterexample to phonetically grounded constraints fails to support the traditional descriptions. Second, we examine the larger phonological context in which the Setswana alternations occur. Setswana has a gapped system of laryngeal contrasts, so the evidence for post-nasal devoicing comes almost entirely from labial stops. The language also has a series of so-called strengthening alternations that affect consonants such as liquids and fricatives post-nasally-alternations that we propose to analyze in terms of the Syllable Contact Law.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)2120-2152
    Number of pages33
    JournalLingua
    Volume121
    Issue number15
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Dec 2011

    Fingerprint

    phonetics
    phonology
    dialect
    evidence
    contact
    examination
    language
    Consonant
    Setswana
    Alternation
    Obstruents
    Counterexample
    Devoicing
    Nasal

    Keywords

    • Ejectives
    • Markedness
    • Phonetic scales
    • Post-nasal voicing
    • Prominence scales
    • Setswana
    • Substantive grounding
    • Syllable Contact Law
    • Tswana
    • Voicing

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Language and Linguistics
    • Linguistics and Language

    Cite this

    Gouskova, M., Zsiga, E., & Boyer, O. T. (2011). Grounded constraints and the consonants of Setswana. Lingua, 121(15), 2120-2152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.09.003

    Grounded constraints and the consonants of Setswana. / Gouskova, Maria; Zsiga, Elizabeth; Boyer, One Tlale.

    In: Lingua, Vol. 121, No. 15, 12.2011, p. 2120-2152.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Gouskova, M, Zsiga, E & Boyer, OT 2011, 'Grounded constraints and the consonants of Setswana', Lingua, vol. 121, no. 15, pp. 2120-2152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.09.003
    Gouskova, Maria ; Zsiga, Elizabeth ; Boyer, One Tlale. / Grounded constraints and the consonants of Setswana. In: Lingua. 2011 ; Vol. 121, No. 15. pp. 2120-2152.
    @article{e7e4ed1c99f645e7b7ad54b62ae0ed7c,
    title = "Grounded constraints and the consonants of Setswana",
    abstract = "The article examines the phonology and phonetics of Setswana obstruents and the well known and controversial post-nasal devoicing rule, which has been cited as a counterexample to the claim that markedness constraints are phonetically grounded (Hyman, 2001). We re-examine the case of Setswana and argue that it must be analyzed in terms of grounded constraints. Our evidence comes from two sources. First, we report on the results of a phonetic study of six speakers of the Sengwato dialect of Setswana. We found that some of our speakers did not have voiced obstruents in any context. Those speakers that did devoice post-nasally also devoiced in other contexts. Thus, a phonetic examination of the purported counterexample to phonetically grounded constraints fails to support the traditional descriptions. Second, we examine the larger phonological context in which the Setswana alternations occur. Setswana has a gapped system of laryngeal contrasts, so the evidence for post-nasal devoicing comes almost entirely from labial stops. The language also has a series of so-called strengthening alternations that affect consonants such as liquids and fricatives post-nasally-alternations that we propose to analyze in terms of the Syllable Contact Law.",
    keywords = "Ejectives, Markedness, Phonetic scales, Post-nasal voicing, Prominence scales, Setswana, Substantive grounding, Syllable Contact Law, Tswana, Voicing",
    author = "Maria Gouskova and Elizabeth Zsiga and Boyer, {One Tlale}",
    year = "2011",
    month = "12",
    doi = "10.1016/j.lingua.2011.09.003",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "121",
    pages = "2120--2152",
    journal = "Lingua",
    issn = "0024-3841",
    publisher = "Elsevier",
    number = "15",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Grounded constraints and the consonants of Setswana

    AU - Gouskova, Maria

    AU - Zsiga, Elizabeth

    AU - Boyer, One Tlale

    PY - 2011/12

    Y1 - 2011/12

    N2 - The article examines the phonology and phonetics of Setswana obstruents and the well known and controversial post-nasal devoicing rule, which has been cited as a counterexample to the claim that markedness constraints are phonetically grounded (Hyman, 2001). We re-examine the case of Setswana and argue that it must be analyzed in terms of grounded constraints. Our evidence comes from two sources. First, we report on the results of a phonetic study of six speakers of the Sengwato dialect of Setswana. We found that some of our speakers did not have voiced obstruents in any context. Those speakers that did devoice post-nasally also devoiced in other contexts. Thus, a phonetic examination of the purported counterexample to phonetically grounded constraints fails to support the traditional descriptions. Second, we examine the larger phonological context in which the Setswana alternations occur. Setswana has a gapped system of laryngeal contrasts, so the evidence for post-nasal devoicing comes almost entirely from labial stops. The language also has a series of so-called strengthening alternations that affect consonants such as liquids and fricatives post-nasally-alternations that we propose to analyze in terms of the Syllable Contact Law.

    AB - The article examines the phonology and phonetics of Setswana obstruents and the well known and controversial post-nasal devoicing rule, which has been cited as a counterexample to the claim that markedness constraints are phonetically grounded (Hyman, 2001). We re-examine the case of Setswana and argue that it must be analyzed in terms of grounded constraints. Our evidence comes from two sources. First, we report on the results of a phonetic study of six speakers of the Sengwato dialect of Setswana. We found that some of our speakers did not have voiced obstruents in any context. Those speakers that did devoice post-nasally also devoiced in other contexts. Thus, a phonetic examination of the purported counterexample to phonetically grounded constraints fails to support the traditional descriptions. Second, we examine the larger phonological context in which the Setswana alternations occur. Setswana has a gapped system of laryngeal contrasts, so the evidence for post-nasal devoicing comes almost entirely from labial stops. The language also has a series of so-called strengthening alternations that affect consonants such as liquids and fricatives post-nasally-alternations that we propose to analyze in terms of the Syllable Contact Law.

    KW - Ejectives

    KW - Markedness

    KW - Phonetic scales

    KW - Post-nasal voicing

    KW - Prominence scales

    KW - Setswana

    KW - Substantive grounding

    KW - Syllable Contact Law

    KW - Tswana

    KW - Voicing

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=82955173769&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=82955173769&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.09.003

    DO - 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.09.003

    M3 - Article

    VL - 121

    SP - 2120

    EP - 2152

    JO - Lingua

    JF - Lingua

    SN - 0024-3841

    IS - 15

    ER -