| 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.)
|
