|
Conditions: |
|
a. Metathesis applies across a morpheme
boundary, but not a word boundary.
b. Following segment:
Metathesis applies before any consonant.
| __ stop |
mezge |
meksk |
meksti |
knit; 3rd
past, imper. sg., inf. |
| __fricative |
triSko |
trikSta
(< triSk-sta; see
Related processes
) |
|
sprout; present, past |
| __liquid |
nyurzgya |
nyurgzli:s |
|
growl; 3rd pres., agent
noun |
c. Preceding segment:
i. Metathesis occurs when the fricative/stop
sequence is preceded by a vowel. Also, although there are no alternations
showing metathesis when a nasal consonant precedes, all surface sequences
with a preceding nasal reveal the same order as would be expected had metathesis
applied, i.e. VN(k)[fric]C, not *Vn[fric]kC, e.g. bruN(g)zge, bruN(k)sk
'grinding stone; 3rd sg. past, imper.sg.'.
ii. Metathesis occurs
when the fricative/stop sequence is preceded by a liquid, e.g. urzge, urksk,
urksti ‘to grumble; 3rd sg. past, imper.sg., infin.’
d. Stress plays no role; metathesis
applies regardless of whether the adjacent context is stressed or unstressed,
e.g. mézge, méksk, méksti, megzlí:s ‘knit; 3rd
past, imper. sg., infin., agent noun’. Compare Faroese metathesis in
which stress is relevant.
e. As a synchronic phonological
process, the direction of change in metathesis is: [fricative] [stop]
-> [stop][fricative], when preceded by a sonorant and followed by a consonant,
e.g. /plyesk-ti/ -> [plyeksti] 'to flash
intensely', cf. [plyeske]. See Seo & Hume 2000 for evidence
supporting this direction.
|
|
Motivation: |
|
Perceptual optimization (Seo
& Hume 2000; Steriade 2000): In the expected (but non-occurring) unmetathesized
form (VSkC), the stop would be flanked by consonants and thus, be in a context
with poor perceptual cues (absence of vowel formant transitions, potential
absence of release burst, compressed duration (masking) of phonetic cues).
Metathesis serves to improve the global perceptibility of the context; reversing
the order of the fricative and stop positions the weaker stop in a more robust
context, i.e. post-vocalic. The gain in perceptibility achieved by moving
the stop to postvocalic position outweighs any potential loss incurred by
shifting the fricative to interconsonantal position. Given the fricative's
stonger internal cues, it fares better in interconsonantal position. |
|
Related processes: |
|
a. Phonotactics of Lithuanian: No
monomorphemic word has a sequence of [fricative] + [stop] + [stop].
b. Adjacent sibilants contract,
i.e. S, Z + s -> S.
c. Voicing assimilation: All obstruent
clusters are either voiceless or voiced, depending on the voicing of the
last element.
|
|
References: |
|
Ambrazas, Vytautas (ed.). 1997.
Lithuanian Grammar. Lithuanian: Institute of the Lithuanian Language.
Bond, Z. S. 1971. Phonological
Rules in Lithuanian and Latvian. OSU Working Papers in Linguistics, 9. 218-232.
Dambriunas, Leonardas. 1964.
A General Characterization of the Lithuanian Language. Lituanus: Baltic States
Quarterly of Arts & Sciences, 10:3-4. 16-26.
Hume, Elizabeth. 1998. The Role
of Perceptibility in Consonant/Consonant Metathesis. In Blake, Susan, Eun-Sook
Kim, and Kimary Shahin (eds.), WCCFL XVII Proceedings. Stanford: CSLI. 293-307.
Kenstowicz, M. J. 1971. Lithuanian
Phonology. Ph. D. dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Seo, Misun, and Elizabeth Hume.
2000. A comparative OT account of metathesis in Faroese and Lithuanian.
In E. Hume, N. Smith & J. van de Weijer, Surface Syllable Structure
and Segment Sequencing. Leiden, NL: HIL.
Steriade, Donca. 2000.
Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: a perceptual account.
In E. Hume and K. Johnson (eds.), The Role of Speech Perception in Phonology.
New York: Academic. (In press.)
|