Fruehwald, Josef
Email Address
ORCID
Disciplines
4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Publication The Spread of Raising: Opacity, lexicalization, and diffusion(2007-11-11) Fruehwald, Josef TCanadian Raising is typically described as the centralization of the nucleus of /ay/ before voiceless segments. However some recent studies in areas affected by Raising have shown that the current conditioning factors are not as regular as reported previously (Vance, 1987; Dailey-OCain, 1997; Hall, 2005). This paper explores the status of Raising in Philadelphia. Examining data from 12 boys, ages 14 to 19, it appears that Raising has lexicalized here as well. While Raising occurs before a number of voiced stops and nasals, the words which experience Raising most regularly suggest that it has spread due to its opaque applications.Publication Redevelopment of a Morphological Class(2012-05-01) Fruehwald, Josef TCoronal stop deletion (or‚`TD Deletion‚`) is the paradigm sociolinguistic variable. It was first described in African American English (Labov et al., 1968) as a rule whereby word final /Ct/ and /Cd/ clusters simplify by deleting the coronal stop. It has since been found in many dialects and varieties of English. Aside from the very regular phonological and phonetic factors which condition whether TD Deletion applies, morphological structure also appears to have an effect. The three morphological categories of primary interest are (i) monomorphemes}, (ii) regular past tense verbs and (iii) semiweak past tense verbs. In almost every dialect studied, the order of morphological classes from least favoring deletion to most favoring deletion is as given in (1). (1) monomorphemes > semiweak > regular past tense In this paper, I will be focusing on the difference between semiweak and regular past tense. I will pursue a revised version of the analysis in Guy & Boyd (1990), casting it in terms of Competing Grammars and Distributed Morphology. Specifically, I will propose that the rate of phonological TD Deletion is the same for the regular past and the semiweak. What leads to higher TD Absence in the semiweak verbs is variable morphological absence of /t/, i.e., there is a competing morphological analysis where the past tense of keep is simply "kep", instead of "kept".Publication The Spread of Raising: Opacity, Lexicalization, and Diffusion(2008-11-22) Fruehwald, JosefThe centralization of the low upgliding diphthong (typically called Canadian Raising, here just Raising), is frequently cited as an example of phonological opacity. Conditioned by a following voiceless segment, Raising continues to apply when an underlying unstressed /t/ is flapped on the surface. Dialects which have both Raising and Flapping, then, maintain the distinction between "writer" and "rider" in the quality of the vowel, rather than the voicing of the stop. Exceptions to the simplest formulation of Raising have been reported on in the past. Underapplication of Raising in pre-voiceless environments can possibly be accounted for by prosodic structure (Chambers, 1973, 1989; Jensen, 2000; Vance, 1987). However, a few reports from the Inland North (Vance, 1987; Dailey-O’Cain, 1997) and Canada (Hall, 2005) suggest that the regularity of Raising’s conditioning has deteriorated, allowing raised nuclei before underlyingly voiced segments. The distribution of these raised variants is unpredictable within a speaker’s phonology, but stable for given words, suggesting that Raising has lexicalized, and is undergoing diffusion to new environments. This paper focuses on the phonological status of Raising in Philadelphia. Raising was identified as an incipient sound change in progress in the LCV study of the 1970s, and has been revisited for study in connection with its masculine association (Labov, 2001; Conn, 2005; Wagner, 2007). After examining data from 12 boys, ages 14 through 19, it appears that Raising has lexicalized here as well. [^y] frequently appears before underlyingly voiced stops, as well as before nasals, but not in a phonologically predictable manner. Certain words seem to be selected for consistent overapplication however. "Spider" and "cider" are lexical items with raised nuclei for which there is broad agreement between speakers. However, there are also a number of lexical items which show more interspeaker variation, such as "tiny", produced variably as [tayni] or [t^yni]. Importantly, across all of the data, the effect of the lexical item on overapplication of Raising is stronger and more significant than the effect of surrounding phonological environment.Publication The Phonological Influence on Phonetic Change(2013-01-01) Fruehwald, JosefThis dissertation addresses the broad question about how phonology and phonetics are interrelated, specifically how phonetic language changes, which gradually alter the phonetics of speech sounds, affect the phonological system of the language, and vice versa. Some questions I address are: (i) What aspects of speakers' knowledge of their language are changing during a phonetic change? (ii) What is the relative timing of a phonetic change and phonological reanalysis? (iii) Can a modular feed-forward model of phonology and phonetics account of the observed patterns of phonetic change? (iv) What are the consequences of my results for theories of phonology, phonetics, and language acquisition? (v) What unique insight into the answers to these questions can the study of language change in progress give us over other methodologies? To address these questions, I drew data from the Philadelphia Neighborhood Corpus [PNC] (Labov and Rosenfelder, 2011), a collection of sociolinguistic interviews carried out between 1973 and 2013. Using the PNC data, I utilized a number of different statistical modeling techniques to evaluate models of phonetic change and phonologization, including standard mixed effects regression modeling in R (Bates, 2006), and hierarchical Bayesian modeling via Hamiltonian Monte Carlo in Stan (Stan Development Team, 2012). My results are challenging to the conventional wisdom that phonologization is a late-stage reanalysis of phonetic coarticulatory and perceptual effects (e.g. Ohala, 1981). Rather, it appears that phonologization occurs simultaneously with the onset of phonetic changes. I arrive at this conclusion by examining the rate of change of contextual vowel variants, and by investigating mismatches between which variants are expected to change on phonetic grounds versus phono- logical grounds. In my analysis, not only can a modular feed-forward model of phonology and phonetics account for observed patterns of phonetic change, but must be appealed to in some cases. These results revise some the facts to be explained by diachronic phonology, and I suggest the question to be pursued ought to be how phonological innovations happen when there are relatively small phonetic precursors.