Correction by Focus: Cleft Constructions and the Cross-Linguistic Variation in Phonological Form

A challenging issue of cross-linguistic variation is that the same syntactic construction may appear in different arrays of contexts depending on language. For instance, cleft constructions appear with contrastive focus in English, but in a larger array of contexts in French. A part of the cross-linguistic variation may be due to prosodic differences, since prosodic possibilities determine the array of focus structures that can be mapped onto one and the same syntactic configuration. In the present study, we compare languages with flexible nuclear-accent placement (English, German), with languages that do not use this prosodic strategy (French, Mandarin Chinese). In a speech production experiment, we examine the prosodic realization of contrastive focus and identify prosodic reflexes of focus in all languages. The presence of different phonetic reflexes of focus suggests that – anything else being equal – the same syntactic constructions should be possible in the same array of contexts. In an acceptability study with written questionnaires, we examined the felicity of cleft constructions in contexts licensing a focus within the cleft clause. This focus structure is orthogonal to the preferred focus structure of cleft constructions and can appear in cases of second-occurrence foci (in contexts of correction). The obtained judgments reveal a distinction between languages with flexible nuclear-accent placement (English, German) and languages with other types of reflexes of focus (French, Chinese): languages of the former type have an advantage in using cleft constructions with a focus within the cleft clause, which shows that the array of contexts of using clefts in English and German is not a proper subset of the array of contexts applying to the same constructions in French and Chinese. The obtained differences can be explained by the role of prosodic devices and corroborate the view that prosodic reflexes of focus have different semantic-pragmatic import: it is easier to establish a focus structure that is orthogonal to the syntax in a language with flexible nuclear-accent placement (English, German); this does not hold for prosodic correlates of focus that reinforce the articulation of prosodic constituents (French) or the articulation of lexical tones (Chinese).

Fuzzy Lexical Representations in Adult Second Language Speakers

We propose the fuzzy lexical representations (FLRs) hypothesis that regards fuzziness as a core property of nonnative (L2) lexical representations (LRs). Fuzziness refers to imprecise encoding at different levels of LRs and interacts with input frequency during lexical processing and learning in adult L2 speakers. The FLR hypothesis primarily focuses on the encoding of spoken L2 words. We discuss the causes of fuzzy encoding of phonological form and meaning as well as fuzzy form-meaning mappings and the consequences of fuzzy encoding for word storage and retrieval. A central factor contributing to the fuzziness of L2 LRs is the fact that the L2 lexicon is acquired when the L1 lexicon is already in place. There are two immediate consequences of such sequential learning. First, L2 phonological categorization difficulties lead to fuzzy phonological form encoding. Second, the acquisition of L2 word forms subsequently to their meanings, which had already been acquired together with the L1 word forms, leads to weak L2 form-meaning mappings. The FLR hypothesis accounts for a range of phenomena observed in L2 lexical processing, including lexical confusions, slow lexical access, retrieval of incorrect lexical entries, weak lexical competition, reliance on sublexical rather than lexical heuristics in word recognition, the precedence of word form over meaning, and the prominence of detailed, even if imprecisely encoded, information about LRs in episodic memory. The main claim of the FLR hypothesis – that the quality of lexical encoding is a product of a complex interplay between fuzziness and input frequency – can contribute to increasing the efficiency of the existing models of LRs and lexical access.

Patterns of persistence and diffusibility in the European lexicon

This article investigates to what extent the semantics and the phonological forms of lexical items are genealogically inherited or acquired through language contact. We focus on patterns of colexification (the encoding of two concepts with the same word) as an aspect of lexical-semantic organization. We test two pairs of hypotheses. The first pair concerns the genealogical stability (persistence) and susceptibility to contact-induced change (diffusibility) of colexification patterns and phonological matter in the 40 most genealogically stable elements of the 100-items Swadesh list, which we call “nuclear vocabulary”. We hypothesize that colexification patterns are (a) less persistent, and (b) more diffusible, than the phonological form of nuclear vocabulary. The second pair of hypotheses concerns degrees of diffusibility in two different sections of the lexicon – “core vocabulary” (all 100 elements of the Swadesh list) and its complement (“non-core/peripheral vocabulary”). We hypothesize that the colexification patterns associated with core vocabulary are (a) more persistent, and (b) less diffusible, than colexification patterns associated with peripheral vocabulary. The four hypotheses are tested using the lexical-semantic data from the CLICS database and independently determined phonological dissimilarity measures. The hypothesis that colexification patterns are less persistent than the phonological matter of nuclear vocabulary receives clear support. The hypothesis that colexification patterns are more diffusible than phonological matter receives some support, but a significant difference can only be observed for unrelated languages. The hypothesis that colexification patterns involving core vocabulary are more genealogically stable than colexification patterns at the periphery of the lexicon cannot be confirmed, but the data seem to indicate a higher degree of diffusibility for colexification patterns at the periphery of the lexicon. While we regard the results of our study as valid, we emphasize the tentativeness of our conclusions and point out some limitations as well as desiderata for future research to enable a better understanding of the genealogical versus areal distribution of linguistic features.

On the etymology of the Japanese plural suffix and its possible connection to Korean

This paper presents an etymological analysis of the Japanese plural suffix tachi, Old Japanese tati. I propose that tati originates from a grammaticalization of an earlier Pre-Old Japanese phonological form *totwi, the non-bound reflex of which is the Old Japanese quasi-collective marker dwoti ‘fellow (person), everyone, together’. The reconstruction of a Pre-Old Japanese stem *totwi (Pre-Proto-Japanese /*tətəj/) with quasi-collective and plural function clarifies the possible connection of the Japanese plural suffix to the Korean plural suffix tul (Middle Korean tólh), which Whitman (1985, p. 217) proposed to be cognates but which has since been criticized on phonological and distributional grounds. I show that reconstructing the earliest form of the Japanese plural suffix as /*tətəj/ resolves each of the three phonological issues with the Japano-Koreanic comparison, creates a better morphosyntactic match between the two languages, and rules out a loanword relationship of the Japanese and Korean forms.

Factors affecting Thaumetopoea pityocampa emergence in laboratory conditions

To investigate the factors affecting the emergence of the pine processionary moth (Thaumetopoea pityocampa) in laboratory conditions, a number of 1487 larvae, prepupae and pupae were collected in the period February-May 2019 from five pest habitats: Fotinovo and Kandilka villages (inhabited by a summer phenological form), Sandanski and Klisura towns (winter phonological form occurs) and Sarnak village (both forms occur). At the date of collection, the rate of parasitism was very low (0-0.1%). Throughout the study, significant differences in the characteristics of pupal stage and mortality between both phenological forms were established. The rate of emerged adults varied from 21.4% to 77.6% in the observed habitats. The sex ratio between female and male specimens was almost equal. Only 0.6% of samples emerged in the second year, after diapause. In four localities (Fotinovo, Kandilka, Sandanski and Sarnak), the rate of infection by entomopathogens was between 6.0% and 20.8%, and the parasitism caused by tachinids – between 0.9% and 3.4%. The flight period of the summer and winter phenological forms of T. pityocampa were clearly differentiated with about a month. In summer form, the flight began in late May and ended in the last decade of June, and in winter form – from early July to the end of August. The duration of the flight period in both forms lasted 30 to 50 days with an equal number of emerged male and female specimens.

Eye-tracking as a window into assembled phonology in native and non-native reading

The past 30 years of reading research has confirmed the importance of bottom-up processing. Rather than a psycholinguistic guessing game (Goodman, 1967), reading is dependent on rapid, accurate recognition of written forms. In fluent first language (L1) readers, this is seen in the automatic activation of a word’s phonological form, impacting lexical processing (Perfetti & Bell, 1991; Rayner, Sereno, Lesch & Pollatsek, 1995). Although the influence of phonological form is well established, less clear is the extent to which readers are sensitive to the possible pronunciations of a word (Lesch & Pollatsek, 1998), derived from the varying consistency of grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences (GPCs) (e.g., although ‘great’ has only one pronunciation, [ɡɹeɪt], the grapheme <ea> within it has multiple possible pronunciations: [i] in [plit] ‘pleat’, [ɛ] in [bɹɛθ] ‘breath’; Parkin, 1982). Further, little is known about non-native readers’ sensitivity to such characteristics. Non-native readers process text differently from L1 readers (Koda & Zehler, 2008; McBride-Chang, Bialystok, Chong & Li, 2004), with implications for understanding L2 reading comprehension (Rayner, Chace, Slattery & Ashby, 2006). The goal of this study was thus to determine whether native and non-native readers are sensitive to the consistency of a word’s component GPCs during lexical processing and to compare this sensitivity among readers from different L1s.

Is the English writing system phonographic or lexical/morphological? A new look at the spelling of stems

The graphemic distinctiveness of simple word stems in written English (henceforth stems) is usually discussed in terms of the discrimination of homophones: Two or more distinct stems that share a phonological form each have a unique graphemic form (e.g., meat / meet; pair / pear / pare) and in some cases we cannot ascribe the different spellings to etymology: scent ‘should’ be spelled sent given its history (borrowed from French sentir and Latin sentire). The lists in Carney (1994) and Venezky (1999) of heterographic words show that there is a considerable number of homophones that are discriminated in spelling. But there are also many homographic cases (e.g., bank, can), so any stipulated ‘principle of heterography’ is not universal. In this paper, we determine the scope and limitations of this principle empirically. Using the CELEX corpus as well as printed dictionaries, we first determine the number of homophonous simple stems in our data (like bank / bank or pair / pear / pare). Of these, we determine the fraction that has a distinct spelling (like pair / pear / pare). The overall ratio is well below 50%, which means that the principle is not as far-reaching as often assumed. Historically, it appears that in many cases we are not dealing with a graphemic differentiation of stems, but with a conservation of spellings. As a consequence, most distinctive spellings probably corresponded to distinctive sound forms at some point in their history. Sound change then led to homophony, but the graphemic form often remained distinct (as with e.g. loan / lone). Expressing lexical differences in the written form of stems does not seem to be overly important to English writers; there is no widespread lexical or morphological principle at work when it comes to the spelling of English stems.

The Morphome

The term morphome (to be distinguished from morpheme), and the notion that there exist autonomous morphological phenomena synchronically independent of phonological or functional conditioning, has occupied a central place in morphological theory. This article reviews some characteristics of morphomic (i.e., autonomously morphological) structures that are assumed in recent studies. Taking a diachronic perspective, it asks whether these properties (typological uniqueness, phonological heterogeneity, syncretism, systematicity, predictiveness) are inherent or only contingent. It concludes that typological uniqueness is not inherent and that the belief that it is so is a misunderstanding. Phonological heterogeneity, a repeatedly observed concomitant of some of the best-known types of morphome, proves merely contingent since alternations firmly anchored in a particular phonological form can be morphomic. Syncretism may be a precondition for, but is not necessarily characteristic of, the historical emergence of morphomes. Contrary to widely held assumptions, systematicity and predictiveness are acquired (not inherent) characteristics of morphomes.

VERB AGREEMENT WITH PREVERBAL (NON) SYNCRETIC COORDINATED SUBJECTS

This paper examines the effects which contribute to the agreement of the verb with only one of the conjuncts of different values for gender and number as opposed to resolved agreement. Bošković (2009) claims that resolved agreement is the only available pattern of agreement. New experimental research on a Slovenian sample (Marušič, Nevins, and Badecker 2015) confirms that a verb can agree with the plural conjunct as well. These authors, as well as Willer Gold et al. (2016) attest that agreement occurs in phonological form in Slovenian and Serbian. This study is based on an elicited production experiment and acceptability judgments experiments to verify what happens when a verb is in agreement with pre-verbal (non)syncretic coordinated conjuncts of different values for gender and number. The results indicate that resolved agreement is far less frequently used when the verb is in agreement with a syncretic coordinated subject than with a non-syncretic one, as well as that agreement with the last plural conjunct is a stable and available agreement pattern whether or not a verb is in agreement with a (non)syncretic coordinated subject. The results support the hypothesis that agreement occurs in phonological form.