Universal #922

Legacy number: 922

 Number  919
 Original  <img src="../img/graphics/922.gif" alt="">
 Standardized  IF there is the voiced velar fricative phoneme /©/, THEN there will be the voiceless velar fricative phoneme /x/.
 Formula  /©/ ⇒ /x/
 Keywords  velar, fricative, voice
 Domain  phonology
 Type  implication
 Status  achronic
 Quality  statistical
 Basis  languages in Gamkrelidze 1975 [1978] of worldwide distribution
 Source  <r>Gamkrelidze 1975: 251 [Gamkrelidze 1978: 31]

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Counterexamples
Languages with velar fricative /©/ that lack its voiceless correlate /x/: Tibetan (Tibeto-Burman), Bambara, Loma (both Mande, Niger-Congo) (Gamkrelidze 1975: 250, fn. 21)
Notes
1. In Gamkrelidze’s definition of a paradigmatic stop, positions are limited to bilabial, dental/alveolar, and velar. Palatal and uvular are excluded. Only stop systems with voicing contrast are considered in his analysis. In his terms of which segments can be considered legitimate members of the paradigm for stops, aspirated, glottalized and plain are allowed to fill the respective positions. Only phonemes are considered. The paradigm for fricatives includes only labial and velar positions, alveolar, palatal, interdental, and uvular are excluded.2. There is a statistical correlation in the velar series, whereby the relative frequency of the voiceless fricative /x/, exceeds that of the corresponding voiced fricative /©/ . (Gamkrelidze 1975: 251)3. Cf. Terentjev’s statement in #1679. 4. Cf. Nartey’s less restrictive claim (#799): If there is a voiced obstruent, then most likely its voiceless cognate is present as well.
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
1. In Gamkrelidze's definition of a paradigmatic stop, positions are limited to bilabial, dental/alveolar, and velar. Palatal and uvular are excluded. Only stop systems with voicing contrast are considered in his analysis. In his terms of which segments can be considered legitimate members of the paradigm for stops, aspirated, glottalized and plain are allowed to fill the respective positions. Only phonemes are considered. The paradigm for fricatives includes only labial and velar positions, alveolar, palatal, interdental, and uvular are excluded.

2. There is a statistical correlation in the velar series, whereby the relative frequency of the voiceless fricative /x/, exceeds that of the corresponding voiced fricative /©/. (Gamkrelidze 1975: 251)

3. Cf. Terentjev's statement in <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1679"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">.

4. Cf. Nartey's less restrictive claim (<a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=799"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">): If there is a voiced obstruent, then most likely its voiceless cognate is present as well.