Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T01:12:08.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 2 - Germanic Syllable Structure

from Part I - Phonology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2020

Michael T. Putnam
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
B. Richard Page
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Get access

Summary

We describe the syllable structure phenomena in modern Germanic languages, mostly in their standardized form – Afrikaans, Danish, Dutch, English, Faroese, Frisian, German, Icelandic, Norwegian, Swedish. The chapter concentrates on consonant cluster phonotactics at various positions in the word and compares the possibilities that languages have in these positions. It turns out that Germanic languages are extremely similar and all seem to use the same basic template with some minor variation.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alber, B. 2007. Einführung in die Phonologie des Deutschen. Verona: QuiEdit.Google Scholar
Alber, B. and Meneguzzo, M., 2016. “Germanic and Romance onset clusters – how to account for microvariation.” In Bidese, E., Cognola, F., and Moroni, M. C. (eds.), Theoretical Approaches to Linguistic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 2552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Árnason, K. 2011. The Phonology of Icelandic and Faroese. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basbøll, H. 2005. The Phonology of Danish. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Den Besten, H. 2012. “Speculations of [χ]-elision and intersonorantic [ʋ] in Afrikaans.” In van der Wouden, T. (ed.), Roots of Afrikaans: Selected Writings of Hans Den Besten. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 7993.Google Scholar
Chapman, K. G. 1962. “Icelandic-Norwegian linguistic relationships.” NTS, Suppl. 7.Google Scholar
Conradie, C. 1981. Die ontwikkeling van die Afrikaanse voltooide deelwoord I: 1652–1875. Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe 21: 275284.Google Scholar
Conradie, C. 1982. Die ontwikkeling van die Afrikaanse voltooide deelwoord I: 1875–1978. Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe 22: 97109.Google Scholar
Cutler, A. Mehler, J., and Norris, D. 1983. “A Language-Specific Comprehension Strategy,” Nature 304.5922: 159160.Google Scholar
Fabricius, A. 2002. “Ongoing change in modern RP: Evidence for the disappearing stigma of t-glottaling,” English World-Wide 23.1: 115136.Google Scholar
Fuchs, S., Brunner, J., and Busler, A. 2007. “Temporal and spatial aspects concerning the realizations of the voicing contrast in German alveolar and postalveolar fricatives.” Advances in Speech–Language Pathology 9.1: 90100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gick, B. 2002. “The American Intrusive L,” American Speech 77.2: 167183.Google Scholar
Goad, H. 2011. “sC Clusters.” In van Oostendorp, M., Ewen, C. J., Hume, E., and Rice, K. (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell: 11231142.Google Scholar
Goeman, T. 1999. T-deletie in Nederlandse dialecten. Kwantitatieve analyse van structurele, ruimtelijke en temporele variatie. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Guy, G. 1980. “Variation in the group and the individual: The case of final stop deletion.” In Labov, W. (ed.), Locating Language in Time and Space. New York: Academic Press: 136.Google Scholar
Guy, G. R. 1991a. “Explanation in variable phonology: an exponential model of morphological constraints,” Language Variation and Change 3:122.Google Scholar
Guy, G. R. 1991b. “Contextual conditioning in variable lexical phonology,” Language Variation and Change 3: 223239.Google Scholar
Hammond, M. 1999. The Phonology of English. A Prosodic Optimality-Theoretic Account. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, T. A. 1992. Syllable Structure and Syllable Related Processes in German. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamann, S. 2003. “German glide formation functionally viewed,” ZAS Papers in Linguistics 32: 137154.Google Scholar
Herzog, M., Kiefer, U., Neumann, R., Putschke, W., Sunshine, A., Baviskar, V., and Weinreich, U. 1992. The Language and Culture Atlas of Ashkenazic Jewry, Vol. I. Historical and Theoretical Foundations. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag and YIVO Institute for Jewish Research.Google Scholar
Hinskens, F. 1992. Dialect Leveling in Limburg: Structural and Sociolinguistic Aspects. Doctoral dissertation, University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Hinskens, F. 2009. “Zuid-Afrika en het Afrikaans. Inleidende notities over geschiedenis, taal en letterkunde.” In den Besten, H., Hinskens, F. L. M. P., and Koch, J. (eds.), Afrikaans. Een drieluik. Amsterdam and Münster: Stichting Neerlandistiek/ Nodus Publikationen: 933.Google Scholar
Issatschenko, A. 1974. “Das ‘schwa mobile’ und ‘schwa constans’ im Deutschen.” In Engel, U. and Grebe, P. (eds.), Sprachsystem und Sprachgebrauch. Festschrift für Hugo Moser zum 65. Geburtstag. Düsseldorf: Schwann: 141171.Google Scholar
Jacobs, N. G. 2005. Yiddish: A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kager, R. and Shatzman, K. 2007. “Phonological constraints in speech processing.” In Los, B. and van Koppen, M. (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2007. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 100111.Google Scholar
Keydana, G. 2011. “Evidence for non-linear phonological structure in Indo-European: The case of fricative clusters.” In Whitehead, B. N., Olander, T., Olsen, B. A., and Rasmussen, J. E. (eds.), The Sound of Indo-European –Selected Papers from the Conference Held in Copenhagen, April 16–19, 2009, Copenhagen Studies in Indo-European 4. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum: 223241.Google Scholar
Kooij, J. and van Oostendorp, M. 2004. Fonologie. Uitnodiging tot de klankleer van het Nederlands. Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Kraehenmann, A. 2001. “Swiss German stops: Geminates all over the word,” Phonology 18.1: 109145.Google Scholar
Kristoffersen, G. 1999. The Phonology of Norwegian. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1969. “Contraction, deletion and inherent variability of the English copula,” Language 45:715762.Google Scholar
Lass, R. 2002. “South African English.” In Mesthrie, R. (ed.), Language in South Africa. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Murray, R. M. and Vennemann, T. 1982. “Syllable contact change in Germanic, Greek and Sidamo.” Klagenfurter Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 8: 321349.Google Scholar
Noske, R. 1992. A Theory of Syllabification and Segmental Alternation. Ph.D. Thesis, Tilburg University.Google Scholar
Oostendorp, M. van 2000. Phonological Projection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Oostendorp, M. van 2003. “Ambisyllabicity and fricative voicing in West-Germanic dialects.” In Féry, C. and van de Vijver, R. (eds), The Syllable in Optimality Theory. Cambridge University Press: 304337.Google Scholar
Parker, S. 2011. “Sonority.” In van Oostendorp, M., Ewen, C. J., Hume, E., and Rice, K. (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology. London: Blackwell-Wiley.Google Scholar
Rácz, P. 2010. “On the phonotactic judgments of Czech native speakers.” In The Odd Yearbook 8: 7986.Google Scholar
Rice, C. 2002. “When nothing is good enough: Dialectal variation in Norwegian imperatives,” Nordlyd 31/2: 372384.Google Scholar
Szigetvári, P. 2016. “The curious case of Cj clusters in English.” In The Even Yearbook 12. Dept. of English Linguistics, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest. http://seas3.elte.hu/even/2016/16sz.pdf.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T. 1988. Preference Laws for Syllable Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vestergaard, T. 1968. “Initial and final consonant combinations in Danish monosyllables,” Studia Linguistica 21: 3766.Google Scholar
Visser, W. 1997. The Syllable in Frisian. The Hague: HAG.Google Scholar
Voyles, J. B. 1980. “Reduplicating Verbs in North-West Germanic,” Lingua 52: 89123.Google Scholar
Wells, J. 1982. Accents of English. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wiese, R. 1996. The Phonology of German. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wright, J. 1910. Grammar of the Gothic Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×