Phonological changes from Classical Latin to Proto-Romance

As Latin developed into Proto-Romance it experienced numerous sound changes, an approximate summary of which is provided below.

General changes
  • /h/ deletes without a trace in all positions.[1]
    • If this results in a collision of two identical short vowels, they simply merge into a long vowel. Cf. /koˈhorte/ > /ˈkoːrte/.[2]
  • Final /m/ is lost in polysyllabic words.[3]
    • In monosyllables it tends to survive as /n/.[4]
  • Clusters consisting of a stop followed by a liquid consonant draw the stress position forward. Cf. /ˈinteɡram/ > /inˈteɡra/.[5]
    • Two apparent counterexamples are /ˈpalpebras/ and /ˈpullitra/, judging by the Old French outcomes palpres and poltre.[6]
  • /n/ is lost before fricatives, resulting in compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel. Cf. /ˈsponsa/ ‘fiancée’ > /ˈspoːsa/.[7]
    • /n/ was often retained, or restored, if it belonged to a prefix (in-, con-) or to a word which had alternate inflexions where a fricative did not follow the /n/ in question. Cf. French défense (not *défoise), thanks to the infinitive défendre and other conjugations.[8]
  • In certain rural areas, the diphthongs /ae̯/ and /au̯/ reduced to /eː/ and /oː/ respectively in Classical times. Thanks to influence from those dialects, various Latin words acquired monophthongized variants. Most words, however, remained unaffected by this. Later, 'mainstream' Latin experienced a general monophthongization of /ae̯/ to [ɛː] (and, similarly, /oe̯/ > [eː]), but /au̯/ remained intact for the most part.[9]
  • In hiatus, unstressed front vowels became /j/, while unstressed back vowels became /w/. Cf. /ˈfiːlius, ˈsapuiː/ > /ˈfiːljus, ˈsapwiː/.[10]
    • The same applies to stressed front and back vowels in antepenultimate position.[lower-roman 1] In such cases, primary stress subsequently shifts either to the following vowel, if the vowel that turned to a glide was front, or to the preceding syllable, if the vowel was back. Cf. /fiːˈliolus, teˈnueram/ > /fiːˈljolus, ˈtenwera/.[11]
    • If /w/ is formed after a geminate consonant, it is soon deleted. Cf. /batˈtuere/ > /ˈbattwere/ > /ˈbattere/.[12]
    • /w/ deletes before an unstressed back vowel; cf. /ˈkarduus, ˈunɡuoː/ > /ˈkardwus, ˈunɡwoː/ > /ˈkardus, ˈunɡoː/. After velar consonants it deletes before both stressed and unstressed back vowels; cf. /ˈkwoːmodo, ˈkokwoː/ > /ˈkoːmodo, ˈkokoː/. Occasionally it deletes before non-back vowels as well; cf. /februˈaːrius/ > /feˈbrwaːrjus/ > /feˈbraːrjus/.[13]
    • The sequences /je(ː)/ and /wo(ː)/ reduce to /eː/ and /oː/ respectively. Cf. /paˈrieteːs, duˈodekim/ > /paˈrjeteːs, ˈdwodeki/ > /paˈreːteːs, ˈdoːdeki/.[14]
    • /i(ː)/ in hiatus before an unstressed /i(ː)/ generally deletes. Cf. /au̯ˈdi.iː, konˈsili.iː/ > /au̯ˈdiː, koːˈsiliː/.[15]
    • If /j/ forms after /kw/, the resulting /kwj/ reduces to /kj/. Cf. /ˈlakweum/ > */ˈlakwju/ > /ˈlakju/.[16]
    • /j/ sometimes deletes a preceding /w/. Cf. /kaˈweola, ˈpluwia/ > /kaˈwjola, ˈpluwja/ > /kaˈjola, ˈpluja/ > Old French jaiole, pluie.[17]
    • Intervocalic /ɡj/ and /dj/ both merge with /j/.[18]
    • Any remaining /j/ palatalizes an immediately preceding consonant.[19]
      • Palatalized /t k n l/ become [tsʲ c ɲ ʎ].[20]
  • Initial and intervocalic /j/ undergo fortition, perhaps to [ɟ] in the former case and [ɟ] or [ʝ~ɟɟ] in the latter.[23]
    • After /r/ and /n/, /dj/ variably yields [ɟ] or [dzʲ]. Cf. /ˈhordeum/ > /ˈordju/ > French orge, Italian orzo.[24]
      • The sequence [ɲɟ] sometimes assimilates to [ɲɲ]. Cf. /wereːˈkundia/ > Portuguese vergonha, Italian vergogna (but compare Spanish vergüenza, Old Portuguese vergonça).
  • /u/ raises before /i(ː)/ or /j/. Cf. [ˈkʊi̯, ˈfʊiː] > [ˈkui̯ ˈfuiː]> Italian cui, fui (not *coi, *foi).[25]
  • /ɡ/ before /n/ appears to spirantize to [ɣ].[26][lower-roman 2]
  • /ɡ/ before /m/ vocalizes to /u̯/. Cf. /fraɡˈmenta, ˈsaɡma/ > /frau̯ˈmenta, ˈsau̯ma/.[27]
  • Word-initial and intervocalic /w/, together with intervocalic and post-liquid /b/, merge as the fricative /β/.[28]
  • Intervocalic /β/ in contact with a back vowel tends to disappear. Cf. /ˈriːwus/ > /ˈriːβus/ > /ˈriːus/.[29]
    • It is often retained, or restored, when other inflexions of the word in question have a non-back vowel following /β/, in this case e.g. the nominative plural /ˈriːβiː/.[30]
  • Final /t/ is often confused with /d/.[31]
    • It is often dropped before other consonants, especially if it is also preceded by a consonant. Cf. post me > pos me ‘after me’.[32]
  • Before or after a consonant, as well as word-finally, /ks/ reduces to /s/. Intervocalically, it sometimes metathesizes to /sk/.[33]
  • Words beginning with /sC/ receive an initial supporting vowel, unless preceded by a word ending in a vowel. Cf. [ˈskɔla] > [ɪsˈkɔla].[34]
  • Compound verbs stressed on a prefix are generally reformed with stress on the following syllable, a process which eliminates any previous vowel reduction. Cf. /ˈdispliket/ (etymologically dis- + placet) > */disˈplaket/.[35]
    • /ˈrekipit/ simply yields /reˈkipit/ (rather than */reˈkapit/), perhaps because the verb, while recognizable as a compound, was not easy to identify with the original capere.
    • Some words such as /ˈkolliɡoː/ 'fasten' were apparently not recognized as compounds at all and so remain unchanged.
  • Monosyllabic nouns ending in a consonant receive an epenthetic final /e/. Cf. /ˈkor/ > /ˈkore/ > Italian cuore or /ˈrem/ > /ˈren/ > /ˈrene/ > French rien.[36]
  • As a result of the shortening of all vowels in unstressed syllables, together with the lengthening of all vowels in stressed open syllables, the Classical system of phonemic vowel length collapses by the fifth century AD. This leaves quality as the distinguishing factor between vowels; accordingly, the vowel inventory shifts from /iː i eː e aː a o oː u uː/ to /i ɪ e ɛ a ɔ o ʊ u/, with no distinction between the former /aː/ and /a/.[37]
    • Unstressed /ɛ/ and /ɔ/ merge with /e/ and /o/ respectively.[38]
    • In unstressed word-internal position, /i/ and /u/ merge with /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ respectively.[39]
    • Lengthened /ˈɛ/ and /ˈɔ/ are perhaps realized as the incipient diphthongs [eɛ, oɔ] if followed by a syllable with a close vowel (/i/ or /u/).[lower-roman 3]

Sporadic changes
  • Vowels other than /a/ are often syncopated in unstressed word-internal position, especially when in contact with liquid consonants or, to a lesser degree, nasal consonants or /s/. Cf. /ˈanɡulus, ˈkalida, ˈspekulum/ > /ˈanɡlʊs, ˈkalda, ˈspɛklu/.[40]
    • In a few words, unstressed initial syllables followed by /r/ are deleted. Cf. /kwiriːˈtaːre, diːˈreːktus/ > /kriˈtare, ˈdrektus/.[41]
    • If this results in /aβ/ (</ab, aw/) being followed by a consonant, the /β/ may vocalize to /u̯/. Cf. /ˈfabula/ > */ˈfau̯la/ > Italian fola.[42]
    • If syncope results in /tl/, the cluster is generally replaced by /kl/. Cf. /ˈwetulus/ > /ˈβɛklʊs/.[43]
  • In cases where a long vowel is followed by a geminate consonant, one of the elements often shortens unpredictably, sometimes leading to such doublets as /ˈkuppa~ˈkuːpa/ > /ˈkʊppa~ˈkupa/ > Spanish copa and cuba, French coupe and cuve.[44]
    • Long vowels sometimes shorten in closed syllables in general, even if followed by two different consonants, leading to variations such as /ˈuːndekim~ˈundekim/ > /ˈundekɪ~ˈʊndekɪ/.[45]
  • Pretonic vowels sporadically assimilate to, or dissimilate from, the stressed vowel of the following syllable.[46]
    • /a/ can dissimilate to /o/ before a following /a/. Cf. /naˈtaːre/ > /noˈtare/.
    • /iː/ can dissimilate to /e/ before a following /iː/. Cf. /diːˈwiːnus, wiːˈkiːnus/ > /deˈβinus, βeˈkinʊs/.
    • /au̯/ can dissimilate to /a/ before a following /u(ː)/. Cf. /au̯ˈɡustus, au̯skulˈtaːre/ > /aˈɡʊstʊs, askʊlˈtare/.
    • /o/ can dissimilate to /e/ before a following back vowel. Cf. /roˈtundus, soˈroːre/ > /reˈtʊndʊs, seˈrore/.
    • /i/ can assimilate to a following /a(ː)/. Cf. /silˈwaːtikus/ > /salˈβatɪkʊs/.
    • /eː/ can assimilate to a following /oː/. Cf. */reːniˈoːne/ > */roˈnjone/.
    • /iː/ can assimilate to a following /eː/. Cf. /diːˈreːktus/ > */deˈrektʊs/.
  • Before /u(ː)/ or /w/, the vowels /u oː/ can become low-mid. Cf. /ˈoːwum, ˈpluere/ > */ˈɔβu, ˈplɔβere/ > Italian uovo, piòvere.[47]
  • /a/ after /j/ tends to be raised. Cf. /jakˈtaːre/ > */jekˈtare/.[48]
  • /r/ assimilates to a following /s/ in a number of cases. Cf. /ˈdorsum/ > /ˈdɔssu/.[49]
    • After a long vowel, the resulting /ss/ reduces to /s/. Cf. /ˈsuːrsum/ > /ˈsusu/.
  • Initial /k/ and /kr/ sometimes voice. Cf. /ˈkrassus/ > /ˈɡrassʊs/.[50]
  • There is occasional loss or assimilation of final /s/, but it is nowhere regular until a much later period.[53]
  • The cluster [ŋk] may lengthen preceding vowels. Cf. /ˈkwinkwe/ > /ˈkwiːnkwe/ > /ˈkinkwe/.[54]
  • When two neighbouring syllables each contain /r/, one /r/ frequently dissimilates to /l/ or deletes.[55]

See also

Notes
  1. Grandgent points out that this was likely by analogy with related forms which have the vowel in question in atonic position. For instance tenúeram may have been affected by ténui, filíolus by fílius, etc.
  2. Opinions differ on what happened next, but the ultimate result of /ɡn/ in most of Romance is /ɲ(ɲ)/. Exceptions include Balkan Romance and Vegliote, where it turned to /mn/; Sardinian, where it turned to /nn/; and various parts of mainland southern Italy, where it turned to /u̯m/ or /i̯m/.
  3. This is the view of Ferguson (1976: §7) as well as, grosso modo, that of Lausberg (1970: §§193–198). That diphthongization initially required the final syllable of the word to contain a high vowel was challenged by Loporcaro (2011), whose arguments have, in turn, been rebutted by Maiden (2016).

References
  1. Grandgent 1907: §§249–250; Pope 1934: §155.1
  2. Lausberg 1970: §251
  3. Pope 1934: §§156.2
  4. Hall 1976: 180; Lausberg 1970: §530
  5. Pope 1934: §§214.2; Lausberg 1970: §149.1
  6. Grandgent 1907: §134
  7. Allen 1965: 27–29
  8. Grandgent 1907: §31; Jensen 1972: 74
  9. Allen 1965: 60–62; Lloyd 1987: 105–107
  10. Grandgent 1907: §224; Lausberg 1970: §251
  11. Grandgent 1907: §§136–137; Lausberg 1970: §149.2
  12. Lausberg 1970: §251
  13. Grandgent 1907: §226; Pope 1934: §§187.b
  14. Grandgent 1907: §225; Lausberg 1970: §251
  15. Grandgent 1907: §227
  16. Lausberg 1970: §479
  17. Pope 1934: §§187.c
  18. Gouvert 2016: 43; Zampaulo 2019: 87
  19. Lausberg 1970: §251; Gouvert 2015: 83
  20. Gouvert 2015: 86, 92, 111, 115; Zampaulo 2019: 97–98
  21. Lausberg 1970: §§463–464, 468–469; Gouvert 2015: 95, 111, 115
  22. Lausberg 1970: §454; Wilkinson 1976: 11–14
  23. Gouvert 2015: 83–91; Zampaulo 2019: 83–88
  24. Lausberg 1970: §§457–458
  25. Lausberg 1970: §187.2
  26. Chambon 2013
  27. Grandgent 1907: §268; Pope 1934: §§156.3
  28. Pope 1934: §§155; Gouvert 2016: 48
  29. Grandgent 1907: §324; Pope 1934: §§163.7
  30. Pope 1934: §§188
  31. Grandgent 1907: §282
  32. Grandgent 1907: §285; Adams 2013: §3.4.1
  33. Grandgent 1907: §255
  34. Lloyd 1987: 148–150; Hall 1976: 128
  35. Grandgent 1907: §139; Lausberg 1970: §149.6
  36. Lausberg 1970: §189
  37. Leppänen & Alho 2018: 21–22
  38. Ferguson 1976: 78; Gouvert 2015: 73–76
  39. Gouvert 2015: 78–81
  40. Lloyd 1987: 113–114; Penny 2002: 59
  41. Grandgent 1907: §229; Lausberg 1970: §265
  42. Grandgent 1907: §325; Lausberg 1970: §245
  43. Grandgent 1907: §234; Pope 1934: §§156.5
  44. Grandgent 1907: §163; Lausberg 1970: 218
  45. Grandgent 1907: §166
  46. Grandgent 1907: §229; Lausberg 1970: §§257–258
  47. Grandgent 1907: §217; Lausberg 1970: §238
  48. Grandgent 1907: §229.1; Lausberg 1970: §259
  49. Grandgent 1907: §291; Lausberg 1970: §410
  50. Grandgent 1907: §257; Pope 1934: §202
  51. Lausberg 1970: §321
  52. Elcock 1960: 33
  53. Politzer 1953: 34–35, 50
  54. Grandgent 1907: §172
  55. Grandgent 1907: §292

Bibliography
  • Adams James Noel. 2007. The regional diversification of Latin. Cambridge University Press.
  • Adams, James Noel. 2013. Social variation and the Latin language. Cambridge University Press.
  • Allen, William Sidney. 1965. Vox Latina: A guide to the pronunciation of Classical Latin. Cambridge University Press.
  • Chambon, Jean-Pierre. 2013. Notes sur un problème de la reconstruction phonétique et phonologique du protoroman: Le groupe */ɡn/. Bulletin de la Société de linguistique de Paris. CVIII, 273–282.
  • Elcock, William Dennis. 1960. The Romance languages. London: Faber and Faber.
  • Ferguson, Thaddeus. 1976. A history of the Romance vowel systems through paradigmatic reconstruction. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • Gouvert, Xavier. 2015. Reconstruction phonologique. In Buchi, Éva & Schweickard, Wolfgang (eds.), Dictionnaire étymologique roman 1, 61–128. Berlin: De Gruyter
  • Gouvert, Xavier. 2016. Du protoitalique au protoroman: Deux problèmes de reconstruction phonologique. In Buchi, Éva & Schweickard, Wolfgang (eds.), Dictionnaire étymologique roman 2, 27–51. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • Grandgent, Charles Hall. 1907. An introduction to Vulgar Latin. Boston: D.C. Heath & Co.
  • Hall, Robert Anderson. 1976. Proto-Romance phonology. New York: Elsevier.
  • Jensen, Frede. 1972. From Vulgar Latin to Old Provençal. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
  • Lausberg, Heinrich. 1970. Lingüística románica, I: Fonética. Madrid: Gredos.
  • Leppänen, V. & Alho, T. 2018. On the mergers of Latin close-mid vowels. Transactions of the Philological Society 116. 460–483.
  • Lloyd, Paul M. 1987. From Latin to Spanish. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.
  • Loporcaro, Michele. 2011. Phonological processes. In Maiden, Maiden & Smith, John Charles & Ledgeway, Adam (eds.), The Cambridge history of the Romance languages, vol. 1, 109–154. Cambridge University Press.
  • Loporcaro, Michele. 2015. Vowel length from Latin to Romance. Oxford University Press.
  • Maiden, Martin. 2016. Diphthongization. In Ledgeway, Adam & Maiden, Martin (eds.), The Oxford guide to the Romance languages, 647–57. Oxford University Press.
  • Penny, Ralph. 2002. A history of the Spanish language. Cambridge University Press.
  • Politzer, Robert L. 1953. Romance trends in 7th and 8th century Latin documents. Chapel hill: University of North Carolina Press.
  • Pope, Mildred K. 1934. From Latin to French. Manchester University Press.
  • Wilkinson, Hugh E. 1976. Notes on the development of -kj-, -tj- in Spanish and Portuguese. Ronshu 17. 19–36.
  • Zampaulo, André. 2019. Palatal sound change in the Romance languages. Oxford University Press.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.