Aproximación preliminar al sintagma fonológico en español

  1. Nuria Polo Cano 1
  1. 1 Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
    info

    Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02msb5n36

Revista:
Loquens : revista española de ciencias del habla

ISSN: 2386-2637

Ano de publicación: 2015

Número: 2

Páxinas: 1

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.3989/LOQUENS.2015.020 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso aberto editor

Outras publicacións en: Loquens : revista española de ciencias del habla

Obxectivos de Desenvolvemento Sustentable

Resumo

Although the prosodic hierarchy has been well established in phonological theory for decades, little empirical work on its higher constituents has been done on Spanish. This study examines two well-known phonological processes in Spanish (spirantization of voiced plosives and fricative sibilant voicing in coda position) as possible parameters in the delimitation of phonological phrases. The data analyzed have been gathered from two native Spanish speakers from the Central Peninsular variety of Spanish, who read 334 stimuli created for that purpose. The results suggest that there is a phonological phrase boundary between the subject and the verb, especially in long subjects. Other syntactic structures seem to be mapped as prosodic constituents of lower or higher levels (prosodic words and intonational phrases, respectively).

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Battaner, E., Carbó, C., Gil, J., Llisterri, J., Machuca, M. J., Madrigal, N., Marrero, V., de la Mota, C., Riera, M., & Ríos, A. (2007). VILE: Estudio acústico de la variación inter e intralocutor en espa-ol. En M. González González, E. Fernández Rei y B. González Rei (Eds.), Actas del III Congreso Internacional de Fonética Experimental (pp. 157–167). Santiago de Compostela: Xunta de Galicia.
  • Beckman, M. E., & Pierrehumbert, J. B. (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 255–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S095267570000066X
  • Benet Parente, A. (2012). El fraseig prosòdic en la parla espontània del català i del castellà (tesis doctoral). Universität Hamburg.
  • Booij, G. (1988). [Rese-a del libro Prosodic phonology, de Marina Nespor y Irene Vogel]. Journal of Linguistics, 24, 515–525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700011907
  • Campos-Astorkiza, R. (2010). Voicing assimilation and prosodic structure in Spanish. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128, 2288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.3508028
  • Campos-Astorkiza, R. (2014). Sibilant voicing assimilation in Peninsular Spanish as gestural blending. En M. H. Côté y E. Mathieu (Eds.), Variation within and across Romance languages: Selected papers from the 41st Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Ottawa, 5-7 May 2011 (17–38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/cilt.333.04cam
  • Campos-Astorkiza, R. (2015). Segmental and prosodic conditionings on gradient voicing assimilation in Spanish. En R. Klassen, J. M. Liceras y E. Valenzuela (Eds.), Hispanic linguistics at the crossroads: Theoretical linguistics, language acquisition and language contact. Proceedings of the Hispanic Linguistics Symposium 2013 (pp. 127–144). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ihll.4.07cam
  • Dresher, B. E. (1996). Introduction to metrical and prosodic phonology. En J. L. Morgan y K. Demuth (Eds.), Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition (pp. 41–54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Elordieta, G. (2014). The word in phonology. En I. Ibarretxe-Antu-ano y J. L. Mendívil-Giró (Eds.), To be or not to be a Word: New reflections on the definition of word (pp. 6–65). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Gili Gaya, S. (1950/1975). Elementos de fonética general (5.ª ed). Madrid: Gredos.
  • Goldsmith, J. A. (1981/2000). Las unidades subsegmentales en la fonología espa-ola: Enfoque autosegmental. En J. Gil Fernández (Ed., Trad.), Panorama de la fonología espa-ola actual (pp. 337–356). Madrid: Arco/Libros. (Traducción de Subsegmentals in Spanish phonology: An autosegmental approach. En W. W. Cressey y D. J. Napoli, Eds., Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 9, pp. 1–16. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press)
  • González, C. (2006). The phonetics and phonology of spirantization in North-central Peninsular Spanish. Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca «Julio de Urquijo»[ASJU], 40, 409–436. Disponible en http://www.ehu.eus/ojs/index.php/ASJU/article/view/4398
  • Harris, J. W. (1984/2000). La espirantización en castellano y la representación fonológica autosegmental. En J. Gil Fernández (Ed.), Panorama de la fonología espa-ola actual (pp. 357–371). Madrid: Arco/Libros. (Reimpresión de Estudis Gramaticals I. Working Papers in Linguistics, pp. 149–167. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)
  • Hayes, B. (1989). The prosodic hierarchy in meter. En P. Kiparsky y G. Youmans (Eds.), Phonetics and phonology, Vol. 1: Rhythm and meter (pp. 201–260). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-409340-9.50013-9
  • Hayes, B. (1995). Metrical stress theory: Principles and case studies. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Hualde, J. I. (2003). El modelo métrico y autosegmental. En P. Prieto (Coord.), Teorías de la entonación (pp. 155–184). Barcelona: Ariel.
  • Hualde, J. I., Shosted, R., & Scarpace, D. (2011). Acoustics and articulation of Spanish /d/ spirantization. En Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 17- Hong Kong, China), 906–909.
  • Hualde, J. I., Simonet, M., & Nadeu, M. (2011). Consonant lenition and phonological recategorization. Laboratory Phonology, 2(2), 301–329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2011.011
  • Ito, J., & Mester, A. (2009). The extended prosodic word. En J. Grijzenhout y B. Kabak (Eds.), Phonological domains: Universals and deviations (pp. 135–194). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110219234.2.135
  • Ito, J., & Mester, A. (2013). Prosodic subcategories in Japanese.
  • Ladd, D. R. (1986). Intonational phrasing: The case for recursive prosodic structure. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 311–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000671
  • Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2529310 PMid:843571
  • Lleó, C. (2006). Early acquisition of nominal plural in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 5, 191–219.
  • Martínez Celdrán, E. (1984). Fonética. Barcelona: Teide.
  • Martínez Celdrán, E. (2013). Caracterización acústica de las aproximantes espirantes en espa-ol. Estudios de Fonética Experimental, 22, 11–35.
  • Martínez Celdrán, E., & Fernández Planas, A. M. (2007). Manual de fonética espa-ola. Barcelona: Ariel.
  • McCarthy, J. J., & Prince, A. S. (1986). Prosodic morphology. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts.
  • Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (1986/1994). La prosodia (A. Ardid Gumiel, Trad.). Madrid: Visor. (Trabajo original: Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris)
  • Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (2007). Prosodic phonology. With a new foreword. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110977790
  • Nibert, H. J. (2000). Phonetic and phonological evidence for intermediate phrasing in Spanish intonation (tesis doctoral). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/77481
  • Ortega-Llebaria, M. (2004). Interplay between phonetic and inventory constraints in the degree of spirantization of voiced stops: Comparing intervocalic /b/ and intervocalic /g/ in Spanish and English. En T. L. Face (Ed.), Laboratory approaches to Spanish phonology (pp. 237–254). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Pak, M. (2008). The postsyntactic derivation and its phonological reflexes (tesis doctoral). Disponible en http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3328631
  • Parrell, B. (2011). Dynamical account of how /b, d, g/ differ from /p, t, k/ in Spanish: Evidence from labials. Laboratory Phonology, 2(2), 423–449. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2011.016 PMid:23843928 PMCid:PMC3703669
  • Pater, J., & Paradis, J. (1996). Truncation without templates in child phonology. En A. Stringfellow, D. Cahana-Amitay, E. Hughes y A. Zukowski (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD 20), Vol. 2 (pp. 540–551). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
  • Peperkamp, S. (1997). Prosodic words. HIL Dissertations 34. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
  • Prieto, P. (2006). Phonological phrasing in Spanish. En F. Martínez- Gil y S. Colina (Eds.), Optimality-theoretic advances in Spanish phonology (pp. 39–61). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Quilis, A. (1981). Fonética acústica de la lengua espa-ola. Madrid: Gredos.
  • Quilis, A. (1993). Tratado de fonología y fonética espa-olas. Madrid: Gredos.
  • Real Academia Espa-ola (2011). Nueva gramática de la lengua espa-ola. Fonética y fonología. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.
  • Samuels, B. D. (2011). Phonological architecture: A biolinguistic perspective. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199694358.001.0001
  • Scheer, T. (2011). A guide to morphosyntax-phonology interface theories. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Schmidt, L. B., & Willis, E. W. (2011). Systematic investigation of voicing assimilation of Spanish /s/ in Mexico City. En S. M. Alvord (Ed.), Selected Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Laboratory Approaches to Romance Phonology (pp. 1–20).
  • Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
  • Selkirk, E. O. (1978/1981). On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. En T. Fretheim (Ed.), Nordic prosody II: Papers from a symposium (pp. 111–140). Trondheim: Tapir.
  • Selkirk, E. O. (1984). Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Selkirk, E. O. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 371–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000695
  • Selkirk, E. O. (2001). Syntax-phonology interface. En International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences [Linguistics section edited by B. Comrie], pp. 15407–15412. Amsterdam: Elsevier. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/02958-2
  • Selkirk, E. O. (2011). The syntax-phonology interface. En J. Goldsmith, J. Riggle y A. C. L. Yu (Eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, second edition (pp. 435–484). Oxford, UK: Wiley- Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444343069.ch14
  • Selkirk, E. O., & Tateishi, K. (1988). Constraints on minor phrase formation in Japanese. En L. MacLeod, G. Larson y D. Brentari (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 316–336). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
  • Selkirk, E. O., & Tateishi, K. (1991). Syntax and downstep in Japanese. En C. Georgopoulos y R. Ishihara (Eds.), Interdisciplinary approaches to language. Essays in honor of S.-Y. Kuroda (pp. 519–543). Dordrecht: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3818-5_28
  • Truckenbrodt, H. (1995). Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence (tesis doctoral). Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Disponible en http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/dm/theses/truckenbrodt95.pdf
  • Truckenbrodt, H. (1999). On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(2), 219–255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/002438999554048
  • Vigário, M. (2010). Prosodic structure between the prosodic word and the phonological phrase: Recursive nodes or an independent domain? The Linguistic Review, 27(4), 485–530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/tlir.2010.017
Fonte de datos: Dialnet