My research is in phonology and
phonetics, the study of human speech sound patternings.
My main language interest is Russian,
but my work is directed at an understanding of language in general. My other language
interests include Polish, Irish, and Catalan.
My work combines formal analysis,
usually within Optimality Theory, with experimental methodologies. I am
particularly interested in the role of contrast and perceptual distinctiveness
in phonetics and phonology.
My work on Russian includes analyses
of voicing assimilation and final devoicing (including the interesting behavior
of [v]); studies on the historical emergence and realizations of secondary
palatalizations as a funciton of contrast and context; phonetic and
phonological studies of Russian vowel reduction; the role of contrast in other
sound changes such as postvelar fronting and sibilant retroflexion; and exploration
of the vowel/glide distinction.
Recent
Papers
A
perceptual study of Polish fricatives, and its relation to historical sound
change (with Marzena Zygis, 2007)
This study probes the
perception of place distinctions among Polish sibilants using an AX
discrimination task, and compares results of thirteen Polish- and ten
English-speaking subjects. Besides providing information on the relative
discriminability of the sibilants, the perceptual study is designed to
investigate the claim that a particular kind of diachronic change which has
taken place in Polish and other languages, as well as related facts about
sibilant inventories, could be perceptually motivated. The results lend support
to this claim and to the general view that a principle of dispersion plays a
role in explaining sound change tendencies, and therefore in shaping
phonological tendencies, for consonants as well as vowels.
Glides,
vowels, and features
(To appear in an issue of Lingua about glides, edited by Ioana
Chitoran and Andrew Nevins)
Generative phonologists
usually take high vowels like [i,u] and glides like [j,w] to be identical
(respectively) in terms of distinctive features. The main argument for this
assumption comes from theoretical economy: since syllable theory independently
provides us with a means of distinguishing between vowels and glides – as
syllable nuclei and margins respectively – there is no need for a featural
distinction. This paper shows that in fact vowels must be featurally distinct
from glides. Evidence for this comes from phonological processes that
distinguish between the segment types, in a way that specifically diagnoses a
difference of constriction degree. I further show that the vowel vs. glide distinction is
part of a larger hierarchy of segmental distinctions based on constriction
degree, as indicated by cross-linguistic generalizations. The implications of
these conclusions for cases of high vowel vs. glide contrast are explored.
Contrast,
comparison sets, and the perceptual space (with Máire Ní Chiosáin)
(To appear in S. Parker,
ed., Phonological argumentation: essays on evidence and motivation, Equinox Publishing.)
In recent years a number of
researchers have argued that, in order to adequately explain contrast and its
effects, phonology must be systemic: evaluation of a form cannot occur in
isolation from unrelated contrasting forms, but must take such forms – what we
call a ‘comparison set’ – into account. This presents a formal and empirical challenge
for systemic approaches. This paper explores the comparison set within the
general approach of dispersion theory, focusing on two matters: the ‘problem of
infinity’ and idealisation. A further challenge for the theory, though one
shared by many non-systemic approaches too, involves substantiating claims
about perceptual distance that underpin the approach. Our discussion of the
latter issue focuses on secondary palatalisation contrasts in onset versus coda
position, with perceptual data from Irish. Our overall goal in this paper is to
clarify the nature of these challenges and to outline our own approach to them.
Adaptive
Dispersion Theory and phonological vowel reduction in Russian (with Marija
Tabain)
(Published version appears
in Phonetica 62,
2005, pp. 14-54.)
Russian exhibits a rich
pattern of phonological vowel reduction, by which some vowel contrasts are neutralized
in unstressed syllables. Recent work in phonology [Flemming 1995; to appear;
cf. Crosswhite 2001; to appear] suggests a mechanism by which phonetic vowel reduction – compression of
the overall vowel space due to target undershoot – might lead to patterns like
Russian. Presenting acoustic data from 9 speakers of Russian, we use Euclidean
distance measures, measures of F1-F0 and F2-F1, and Bayesian classification to
provide a basic picture of how the overall vowel space, as well as the
distribution of vowels, change as stress is reduced. We are particularly
interested in whether contraction of the vowel space in unstressed positions is
primarily due to raising, and in whether contrasting pairs of vowels are evenly
spaced within and across contexts. Our results provide qualified support for
the first hypothesis, but largely do not support the hypothesis of equal
spacing, in particular across contexts. Of additional interest, we find that
some impressionistically described neutralizations are incomplete.
Russian
vowel reduction and Dispersion Theory (2004)
(In Phonological studies
7, Kaitakusha,
Tokyo, pp. 81-96.)
Recent work on phonological
vowel reduction explains some of its properties by appeal to proposed
functional bases (Flemming 1995 [2002], to appear, Crosswhite 2001, to appear,
Barnes 2002). This paper explores the feasibility of a Dispersion Theory (DT)
account for Russian vowel reduction. No detailed analysis of a case of vowel reduction
exists in DT. Also new here is an attempt to base such an analysis on a careful
phonetic study, in this case a study of Russian vowel reduction due to Tabain
and Padgett (2003). The account succeeds in explaining many aspects of Russian
vowel reduction. However, though the phonetic data answers important questions,
it also raises difficult new ones.
The
evolution of sibilants in Polish and Russian (with Marzena Zygis)
(To appear in the Journal
of Slavic Linguistics.)
In this paper we provide an
account of the historical development of Polish and Russian sibilants. The
arguments provided here are of theoretical interest because they show that (i)
certain allophonic rules are driven by the need to keep contrasts perceptually
distinct, (ii) (unconditioned) sound changes result from needs of perceptual
distinctiveness, and (iii) perceptual distinctiveness can be extended to a
class of consonants, i.e. the sibilants. The analysis is cast within Dispersion
Theory, and we provide phonetic and typological data supporting the perceptual
distinctiveness claims we make.
Systemic
contrast and Catalan rhotics (2003)
Catalan
has two contrasting rhotics: a tap and a trill. The two sounds contrast only
between vowels, with the distribution otherwise being predictable. This paper
argues for an account of them cast within Dispersion Theory (Flemming 1995),
calling on constraints requiring that contrast be maintained, and on others
requiring that contrasts be perceptually distinct. The appeal to contrast leads
to a simpler and more explanatory account of Catalan rhotics compared to
previous ones. The analysis also illustrates how it is possible to incorporate
more systematic phonetic detail into phonology without predicting the
overgeneration of contrast. This is possible because Dispersion Theory proposes
constraints on the output that regulate contrast directly. The importance of
phonetic detail to uncovering phonological generalizations in other languages
is another emerging theme in recent phonology.
Constraint
conjunction versus grounded constraint subhierarchies in Optimality Theory
(2002)
One of the
fundamental original assumptions of Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky
1993) is that of strict domination: once a candidate is eliminated from
consideration by Eval, it cannot be resurrected, no matter how much better it
fares than its competitors on lower-ranked constraints. However, the well known
proposal of local constraint conjunction (Smolensky 1993, 1995, 1997) qualifies
this basic assumption. The basic idea of constraint conjunction is that two or
more violations of some constraint(s) may 'gang up' in a particular way,
violating a separate, higher-ranked constraint. Because it explicitly
relinquishes the assumption of strict domination, constraint conjunction represents
an important departure from the more restrictive original conception of
constraint ranking. Further, constraint conjunction faces well known challenges
of potential overgeneration. Though there have been several proposals about how
to address these challenges, no consensus has emerged. In this paper, I examine
several significant uses of constraint conjunction that have been proposed, and
suggest that they all can and should be subsumed under a notion independently
required, that of the universal constraint subhierarchy (Prince and Smolensky
1993). If this is correct, then constraint conjunction is not required of the
theory. In addition, following Prince and Smolensky, I take universal
subhierarchies to be derived from linguistically relevant scales. Assuming
these are phonetically or psycholinguistically grounded, then we have a
promising means by which to address the challenge of overgeneration.
Russian
voicing assimilation, final devoicing, and the problem of [v] (2002)
(To appear
in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.)
The
behavior of Russian [v] with respect to voicing assimilation and final
devoicing presents a well known puzzle. Though [v] undergoes voicing
assimilation and final devoicing, it fails to trigger voicing assimilation. The
best known accounts for this problem posit that [v] is underlyingly /w/. These
accounts presuppose (incorrectly) that all sonorants undergo voicing processes
without triggering them. Further, they presuppose a kind of derivational
opacity that cannot be recast in terms of any plausible model of derivational
levels (as in Lexical Phonology) or output-output faithfulness. I offer a new
account of Russian [v] that is entirely surface-oriented. This sound occupies a
category intermediate between other obstruents and sonorants, something I call
a narrow approximant. This fact, along with uncontroversial phonetic
principles, explains why [v] behaves just as it does with respect to voicing
processes. The account is supported by phonetic and typological observations,
and turns out to be both empirically and explanatorily superior to previous
accounts. An important consequence of the argument is that phonology must make
reference to more phonetic distinctions than are made available by distinctive
feature theory. I discuss how current approaches to contrast make this possible
without overgenerating potential contrasts.
The
emergence of contrastive palatalization in Russian (2003)
(In Eric
Holt, ed., Optimality Theory and language change, pp. 307-335,
Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht.)
The
pervasive palatalization contrast of Russian originated about a thousand years
ago, when the 'jer' (high, lax) vowels were dropped in certain weak positions.
At that time consonants were allophonically palatalized before front vowels.
This allophonic palatalization was retained on consonants before the front jer,
after that jer deleted, so that palatalization became phonemic. At the same
time, the 'i-backing' allophonic rule (discussed below) was born. Building on
the phonetic study below, this paper provides a formal analysis of 'i-backing'
as velarization of the preceding consonant before i, and shows how this originated
as a consequence of the phonemicization of palatalization. The framework
adopted crucially incorporates constraints appealing to the perceptual
distinctiveness of contrast.
Download references for this paper in pdf format
Contrast
and post-velar fronting in Russian (2003)
(In Natural
Language and Linguistic Theory 21.1, pp. 39-87)
An
in-depth study of another allophonic rule of Russian by which velars can be
followed by the vowel i but not its backed counterpart. The rule reflects a
sound change that occurred earlier in Russian, and this paper focuses on this
sound change. Like other papers just above and below, this is part of a larger
program investigating the extent to which Russian allophonic rules, and
allophonic rules generally, can be explained by appeal to perceptual
distinctiveness of contrast and neutralization avoidance.
Contrast
dispersion and Russian palatalization
(In
Elizabeth Hume and Keith Johnson, eds., The role of speech perception in
phonology, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp.187-218, 2001.)
Based on an
instrumental phonetic study, argues that a well known rule of 'i-backing' in
Russian is instead an instance of velarization of the preceding consonant
before the vowel i. In this way Russian behaves as other languages do with a
palatalization contrast, in either recasting the palatalized versus plain
contrast as plain versus velarized (respectively) before front vowels, or
neutralizing the contrast there. Most generally, this paper argues that
allophonic processes can be better understood than they typically are, and that
an appeal to functional phonetic grounding is crucial.
To see the
data for Russian and Irish speakers 2 and 3, supplementing figure 3 of the
paper, click here.
(This is the data mentioned in footnote 14.)
Markedness,
segment realization, and locality in spreading (with Maire Ni Chiosain)
(version 2001)
(In Linda
Lombardi, ed., Constraints and representations: segmental phonology in
Optimality Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 118-156, 2001.)
A much
reworked version of an older paper by the same name (see below). Recommended
for those who struggled through any earlier version. This paper argues that
given a theory of phonology with an explicit functional phonetic basis, certain
classes of "transparency" to feature spreading disappear. (That is,
they are seen as artifacts of traditional formal theories.) The point is
demonstrated for consonantal transparency in vowel harmony, focusing on
Turkish.
The unabridged feature classes
in phonology
(A shorter
version appeared in Language 78.1, 2002)
A
consolidation of earlier work ('Feature classes' and 'Partial class behavior
and nasal place assimilation'). Certain features recurrently pattern together
in phonological rules, including place features, laryngeal features, and vowel
color features (backness and roundness). This paper argues for a conception of
feature class behavior distinct from that offered by Feature Geometry. This
version provides fuller and improved analyses of color harmony (in Turkish) and
nasal place assimilation, as well as background discussion of previous
approaches to feature classes in generative phonology.
Perceptual
distance of contrast: vowel height and nasality
(In Rachel
Walker, Motoko Katayama, and Daniel Karvonen, eds., Phonology at Santa Cruz
5,
Linguistics Research Center, UC Santa Cruz, pp.63-78, 1997.)
In
languages that contrast oral and nasalized vowels, the inventory of nasalized
vowels is always equal to or smaller than that of oral vowels. In addition, it
is most typically vowel height that is neutralized or altered when vowels are
nasalized. This paper examines these facts from the perspective of Dispersion
Theory, and shows how a natural account depends on direct reference to the
perceptual distinctiveness of contrast.
Markedness,
segment realization, and locality in spreading (with Maire Ni Chiosain)
(version 1997)
(Report
no. LRC-97-01, Linguistics Research Center, Department of Linguistics, UC Santa
Cruz.)
An older version
of the paper above by the same name. As the later paper does, this paper argues
that given a theory of phonology with an explicit functional phonetic basis,
certain classes of "transparency" to feature spreading disappear.
(That is, they are seen as artifacts of traditional formal theories.) The
theoretical approach is less well worked out here than in the later paper, but
this paper includes discussion of other kinds of harmony, including coronal
consonant harmony.
Inherent
VPlace (with Maire Ni Chiosain)
(Report
no. LRC-93-09, Linguistics Research Center, Department of Linguistics, UC Santa
Cruz, 1993.)
Place of
articulation features of consonants and vowels sometimes interact with each other,
and sometimes seem to be entirely independent of each other. This paper is
couched in feature geometry theory, and proposes that, while vowel place
features are geometrically independent of consonant places features, many
consonants bear redundant vowel place feature specifications. Effects of plain
consonants on vowels are due to these redundant vowel place features. This
approach to vowel-consonant interaction explains a major asymmetry: while
consonants can alter major place features of vowels by assimilation, the
reverse generally does not occur. (The major exception is palatalizing
mutations, which we discuss.)
Download in pdf format (warning: hi-res
scan, about 5 MB)
Return to Jaye Padgett's home page