Universal #1791
Legacy number: 1791
| Number | 1786 |
| Original | <img src="../img/graphics/1791.gif"alt=""> |
| Standardized | IF a vowel followed by a back velar nasal result in a nasal vowel, THEN a nasal vowel as the result of a vowel followed by a labial nasal already exists. |
| Formula | |
| Keywords | nasalization, nasal, vowel, velar, bilabial |
| Domain | phonology |
| Type | implication |
| Status | diachronic |
| Quality | statistical |
| Basis | survey of 600 Chinese dialects in Chen 1974; 8 North Italian dialects: Bolognese, Cairese, Imoloese, Lughese, Ravennate, Riminese, Milanese, Bergamese; Rhaeto-Romance (Taveschan dialect); Latin (Hajek 1997) |
| Source | Chen 1973c, Chen 1974: 912-13, Ruhlen 1973: 12, cited in Hajek 1997: 8, 161 |
Discussion
Counterexamples
Lightner (1973) and Foley (1975, 1977) argue the exact opposite: nasal deletion (and the distinctive nasalization that normally results) spreads progressively in an ordered fashion from “weakest” (the velar nasal) to “strongest” (the bilabial nasal).
Notes
Connel & Hajek (1991), discussing the claim that there is a hierarchy governing the attrition of nasals according to place of articulation, argue that other factors may need to be taken account of, before a true universal tendency, if one exists, can be established. Among others are the relative durations of the consonants in question, their position within the word, and possibly the degre of nasality.
Comment
Connel & Hajek 1991, discussing the claim that there is a hierarchy governing the attrition of nasals according to place of articulation, argue that other factors may need to be taken account of, before a true universal tendency, if one exists, can be established. Among others are the relative durations of the consonants in question, their position within the word, and possibly the degre of nasality.
Log in to join the discussion.