On the Pronunciation of Postposition “râ”in Persian

زبانشناسی و گویش های خراسان

Article 2, Volume 9, Issue 16, November 2017, Pages 1-14   

Document Type: علمی - پژ‍وهشی

DOI: 10.22067/lj.v9i16.63687

Author

Bashir Jam^*

Shahrekord University

Abstract

Extended Abstract
1- Introduction
The word “râ”is the only postposition in Persian .Its formal pronunciationis never used in the spoken style. The postposition/r/ is pronounced [ro] after words ending with vowels and [o] when it occurs after words ending with consonants. That is because a preceding consonant triggers /r/ deletion. These phonological environments indicate that variation is arguably not random.
2- Methodology
This research aimed at analyzing various environments and phonological processes which change the pronunciation of /r/. In so doing, it came up with the inclusive rankings of the constraints to explain these different pronunciations within the optimality theory (OT) (Prince & Smolensky, 1993/2004).
Optimality theory is one of the most significant developments in generative grammar. The first detailed exposition of the theory appears in Prince and Smolensky's (1993) book, entitled ‘Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar’. Its goal is to explain the phonology of languages only by using a set of universal constraints. No phonological rule is being applied in its analyses because they generally explained the language-specific phenomena. In contrast, constraints in OT are not merely solutions to language-specific problems; they are claims about Universal Grammar (UG) seeking to explain phonological phenomena universally. Furthermore, there is no interaction between rules and constraints, i.e., OT is not a mixed theory. The principles of SPE phonology (Chomsky & Halle, 1968) namely rules and serial derivations between underlying representation (UR) and phonetic representation (PR) have been abandoned by OT; however, UR and PR which are renamed as input and output respectively, are being assumed in the classical sense.
This research deals with optionality also known as ‘free variation’ in the pronunciation of “râ”. Optionality is a case in which a single input is mapped onto two grammatical outputs, although their distribution is not under grammatical control. The fact that variation is ‘free’ does not imply that it is totally unpredictable, but only that no grammatical principles govern the distribution of variants. Nevertheless, a wide range of extra grammatical factors may affect the choice of one variant over the other, including sociolinguistic variables (such as gender, age, and class), and performance variables (such as speech style and tempo). Extra grammatical variables affect the choice of occurrence of one output over another.
In this research, free ranking is applied to explain optionality in the pronunciation of “râ”. According to Kager (1999) as a purely theoretical option to deal with optionality , free ranking was observed by Prince and Smolensky (1993), and has since been argued to be the OT counterpart of optional rule application. When two constraintsC1 and C2 are freely ranked, the evaluation procedure branches at that point. In one branch, C1 is ranked above C2, while in the other branch the ranking is reversed. Evaluation of the candidate set is split into two subhierarchies, each of which selects an optimal output. Free ranking preserves strict domination, which holds within each subhierarchy.
The ultimate goal of this research is to come up with inclusive rankings of the constraints which explain different pronunciations of /r/ in various phonological environments. The results section of this research includes several facts about the phonological processes involved in changing the pronunciation of /r/.
3- Discussion
The choice between /r/’s two allomorphs [ro] and [o] depends on the phonetic properties of the preceding word. If the preceding word ends with vowels [e], [a], and [], then /r/ obligatorily changes to [ro]. In this raising process the underlying low vowel // changes to [o]. However, if the preceding word ends with a consonant, then /r/ obligatorily changes to [o] due to vowel raising and /r/ deletion. The markedness constraints *Apopo and *C]rpopo trigger these two pronunciations respectively. Moreover, /r/ is optionally pronounced [o] after words ending with vowels [i], [u], and [o]. This is due to /r/ deletion which triggers glide insertion to resolve hiatus at an intermediate level between the underlying representation and the phonetic representation.
4- Conclusion
The significance of this research is that it is the first study which introduces different pronunciations of the Persian sole postposition /r/ in various phonological environments .It also discusses several facts about the phonological processes involved in changing the pronunciation of /r/.A significant feature of this paper is that it starts with a constraint ranking and ends with coming up with a single inclusive ranking of constraints that is capable of explaining all the different pronunciations of the postposition /r/. The inclusive ranking is in fact a combination of different constraint rankings

Keywords

Postposition /ra/; Feeding interaction; Vowel raising; Free variation; optimality theory

References

جم، بشیر (1394الف).راه‌کارهای برطرف کردن التقای واکه‌ها در زبان فارسی.مجله زبان‌شناسی و گویش‌های خراسان.سال هفتم، ش 1، پیاپی 12، بهار و تابستان. ص100- 79

جم، بشیر (1394ب).فرهنگ توصیفی فرایندهای واجی. تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.

حاجتی، عبدالخلیل(1358). فعل لازم و «را» در زبان فارسی. مجله دانشکده ادبیات وعلوم انسانی تربیت معلم. ش 5. ص211- 185.

دبیرمقدم، محمد (1369). پیرامون« را» در زبان فارسی.مجله زبان شناسی، س 7، ش1، ص 2-60.

دبیرمقدم، محمد (1392). رده‌شناسی زبان‌های ایرانی. تهران: سمت.

شقاقی، ویدا (1387). مبانی صرف. تهران: سمت.

صادقی، علی اشرف (1349). «را» در زبان فارسی امروز. نشریه دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی تبریز. ش مسلسل 93. ص 22- 9.

صادقی، علی اشرف (1365). التقای مصوت‌ها و مسأله صامت‌های میانجی. مجلة زبانشناسی،ش 6، 3 –22.

نجفی، ابوالحسن (1366). «را» پس از فعل. نشردانش. س7. ش 6.

Amherst: GLSA. Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993/2004). Optimality theory: constraint in generative grammar. MIT Press.

Anttila, A. (1995). Deriving variation from grammar: a study of Finish genitievs. MS., Stanford University. [ROA-63]

Anttila, A. (2002). Morphologically conditioned phonological alternations. NLLT 20.1: 1–42.

Baković, E. (2000).Harmony, Dominance and Control. Doctoraldissertation, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.

Boersma, P (1998). Functional phonology. Formalizing theinteractions between articulatory and perceptual drives. Utrecht:LOT.

Bussmann, H (1996), Routledge dictionary of language andlinguistics. London and New York: Routledge.

Faithfulness and reduplicative identity, InJ. Beckman; L. Walsh Dickey & S. Urbanczyk,‌(Eds.). University of Massachusetts occasional papers inlinguistics18: Optimality theory (249–384).

Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort.Boston:Addison Wesley.

Kager, R. (1994). Ternary rhythm in alignment theory. UnpublishedMs., Utrecht University. [ROA-35].

Kager, R. (1999). Optimality Theory. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Karimi, S. (1989). Aspects of Persian Syntax, Specificity, and theTheory of Grammar. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.

Katamba, F. (1993). Morphology. London: Macmillan press Ltd.

Kent, R.G. (1950). Old Persian: Grammar, Texts, Lexicon, NewHaven: American Oriental Society.

Kiparsky, P. (1993). Variable rules. Handout from RutgersOptimality Workshop I, October, Rutgers University, NewBrunswick, NJ. Lombardi, L. (1996). Positional Faithfulness and VoicingAssimilation in Optimality Theory. Ms., University ofMaryland, College Park.

MacBride, A. I. (2004). A constraint-based approach tomorphology, Doctoral dissertation, University of California. McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1995).

Reynolds, W. T. (1994). Variation and phonological theory.Doctoral dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Zipf, G. (1949).