Hostname: page-component-66d9dcfd78-snrpb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-08-07T05:58:01.554Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Faithfulness Ranking Projected from a Perceptibility Scale: The Case of [+Voice] in Japanese

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Shigeto Kawahara
Shigeto Kawahara*
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts
*
Department of Linguistics, 226 South College, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA 01003, [kawahara@linguist.umass.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Within the framework of optimality theory (Prince & Smolensky 2004), Steriade (2001a,b) proposes the P-map hypothesis, whose fundamental tenet is that the rankings of faithfulness constraints are grounded in perceptual-similarity rankings. This article provides empirical support for this hypothesis. In Japanese loanword phonology, a voiced geminate, but not a singleton, devoices to dissimilate from another voiced obstruent within a single stem. Based on this observation, I argue that the [+ voice] feature is protected by two different faithfulness constraints, IDENT(+ voi)Sing and IDENT(+ voi)Gem, and they are ranked as IDENT(+ voi)Sing » IDENT(+ voi)Gem in Japanese. I further argue that this ranking is grounded in the relative perceptibility of [+ voice] in singletons and geminates, and this claim is experimentally supported. The general theoretical implication is that phonetic perceptibility can directly influence patterns in a phonological grammar.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 82 , Issue 3 , September 2006 , pp. 536 - 574
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adler, Allison N. 2006. Faithfulness and perception in loanword adaptation: A case study from Hawaiian. Lingua 116. 1024–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alderete, John. 1997. Dissimilation as local conjunction. North Eastern Linguistic Society 27. 17–32.Google Scholar
Amano, Shigeaki, and Kondo, Tadahisa. 2000. NTT database series: Lexical properties of Japanese: The 2nd release. Tokyo: Sanseido.Google Scholar
Anttila, Arto. 2002. Morphologically conditioned phonological alternations. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20. 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana, and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1994. Grounded phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baković, Eric. 2000. Harmony, dominance and control. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University dissertation.Google Scholar
Beckman, Jill. 1998. Positional faithfulness. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst dissertation.Google Scholar
Benkí, José. 2003. Analysis of English nonsense syllable recognition in noise. Phonetica 60. 129–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul. 1998. Functional phonology: Formalizing the interaction between articulatory and perceptual drives. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul, and Weenink, David. 2005. Praat (version 4.3.31). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. Online: http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat.Google Scholar
Browman, Catherine, and Goldstein, Louis. 1989. Articulatory gestures as phonological units. Phonology 6. 201–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casali, Roderic. 1997. Vowel elision in hiatus contexts: Which vowel goes? Language 73. 493–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Matthew. 1970. Vowel length variation as a function of the voicing of the consonant environment. Phonetica 22. 129–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail. 1993. Nasalization in English: Phonology or phonetics. Phonology 10. 43–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, Abigail, Ham, William; and Podesva, Robert. 1999. The phonetic realization of singleton-geminate contrasts in three languages of Indonesia. International Conference of Phonetic Sciences 99. 587–90.Google Scholar
Côté, Marie-Hélène. 2004. Syntagmatic distinctness in consonant deletion. Phonology 21. 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleischhacker, Heidi. 2001. Cluster-dependent epenthesis asymmetries. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 7. 71–116.Google Scholar
Flemming, Edward. 1995. Phonetic detail in phonology: Evidence from assimilation and coarticulation. Proceedings of the 1995 Southwestern Workshop on Optimality Theory, ed. by Suzuki, Keiichiro and Elzinga, Dirk, 39–50. Tucson: University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Fougeron, Cecile, and Keating, Patricia. 1997. Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106. 3728–40.Google Scholar
Fujimura, Osamu, Macchi, Marian; and Streeter, L. A. 1978. Perception of stop consonants with conflicting transitional cues: A cross-linguistic study. Language and Speech 21. 337–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gafos, Adamantios. 2002. A grammar of gestural coordination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20. 269–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelbart, Ben, and Kawahara, Shigeto. 2005. Psychological reality of sublexica in Japanese. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Amherst, ms.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 1976. Autosegmental phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Guion, Susan. 1998. The role of perception in the sound change of velar palatalization. Phonetica 55. 18–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Han, Mieko. 1994. Acoustic manifestations of mora timing in Japanese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 96. 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haraguchi, Shosuke. 2006. A theory of voicing. Urayasu: Meikai University, ms.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, Pierrehumbert, Janet; and Beckman, Mary. 2003. Speech perception, well-formedness, and the statistics of the lexicon. Papers in laboratory phonology 6, ed. by Local, John, Ogden, Richard, and Temple, Rosalind, 58–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce, Kirchner, Robert; and Steriade, Donca (eds.) 2004. Phonetically based phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce, and Steriade, Donca. 2004. Introduction: The phonetic bases of phonological markedness. In Hayes, et al., 1–33.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan Bybee. 1976. An introduction to natural generative phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Howe, Darin, and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 2004. Harmonic scales as faithfulness. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 49. 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hura, Susan, Lindblom, Björn; and Diehl, Randy. 1992. On the role of perception in shaping phonological assimilation rules. Language and Speech 35. 59–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Itô, Junko, and Mester, Armin. 1986. The phonology of voicing in Japanese: Theoretical consequences for morphological accessibility. Linguistic Inquiry 17. 49–73.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, and Mester, Armin. 1995. Japanese phonology. The handbook of phonological theory, ed. by Goldsmith, John, 817–38. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, and Mester, Armin. 1997. German truncation and sympathy theory. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 5. 117–39.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, and Mester, Armin. 1998. Markedness and word structure: OCP effects in Japanese. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz, ms.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, and Mester, Armin. 1999. The phonological lexicon. The handbook of Japanese linguistics, ed. by Tsujimura, Natsuko, 62–100. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, and Mester, Armin. 2001. Structure preservation and stratal opacity in German. Segmental phonology in optimality theory, ed. by Lombardi, Linda, 261–95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, and Mester, Armin. 2003. Japanese morphophonemics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, Jeri. 1978. Speech aerodynamics and phonological universals. Chicago Linguistic Society 14. 311–29.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1941. Kindersprache, Aphasie und allgemeine Lautgesetze. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Jun, Jongho. 2004. Place assimilation. In Hayes, et al., 58–86.Google Scholar
Katayama, Motoko. 1998. Loanword phonology in Japanese and optimality theory. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz dissertation.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto. 2005. Voicing and geminacy in Japanese: An acoustic and perceptual study. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 31. 87–120.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto. 2006a. Sonorancy and geminacy. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 32, to appear.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto. 2006b. Half rhymes in Japanese rap lyrics and knowledge of similarity. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, to appear.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, Patricia. 1996. The phonology-phonetics interface. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 92. 45–60.Google Scholar
Kingston, John, and Diehl, Randy. 1994. Phonetic knowledge. Language 70. 419–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchner, Robert. 1997. Constrastiveness and faithfulness. Phonology 14. 83–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohler, Klaus. 1979. Dimensions in the perception of fortis and lenis plosives. Phonetica 36. 332–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kohler, Klaus. 1990. Segmental reduction in connected speech: Phonological facts and phonetic explanation. Speech production and speech modeling, ed. by Hardcastle, William and Marchals, Alain, 69–92. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuroda, S-Y. 1965. Generative grammatical studies in the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Leben, Will. 1973. Suprasegmental phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Leslau, Wolf. 1976. The triradicals in the Gurage dialect of Endegeň. Israel Oriental Studies 14. 96–109.Google Scholar
Lisker, Leigh. 1957. Closure duration and the intervocalic voiced-voiceless distinction in English. Language 33. 42–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisker, Leigh. 1978. On buzzing the English /b/. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research SR-55/56.251–59.Google Scholar
Lisker, Leigh. 1981. On generalizing the rapid-rabid distinction based on silent gap duration. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research SR-65.251–59.Google Scholar
Lisker, Leigh. 1986. ‘Voicing’ in English: A catalog of acoustic features signaling /b/ versus /p/ in trochees. Language and Speech 29. 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisker, Leigh, and Abramson, Arthur. 1964. A cross-linguistic study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word 20. 384–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovins, Julie. 1973. Loanwords and the phonological structure of Japanese. Chicago: University of Chicago dissertation.Google Scholar
Macmillan, Neil, and Creelman, Douglas. 2005. Detection theory: A user's guide. 2nd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1986. OCP effects: Gemination and antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17. 207–63.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1999. Sympathy and phonological opacity. Phonology 16. 331–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John. 2003. Comparative markedness. Theoretical Linguistics 29. 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John, and Prince, Alan. 1986. Prosodic morphology. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, and New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, ms.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John, and Prince, Alan. 1995. Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18. 249–384.Google Scholar
Miller, George, and Nicely, Patricia. 1955. An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 27. 338–52.Google Scholar
Miura, Akira. 1993. English in Japanese. New York: Weatherhill.Google ScholarPubMed
Moreton, Elliot. 2002. Structural constraints in the perception of English stop-sonorant clusters. Cognition 84. 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreton, Elliot, and Amano, Shigeki. 1999. Phonotactics in the perception of Japanese vowel length: Evidence for long-distance dependencies. EUROSPEECH '99.2679–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, Scott. 1997. Expressing phonetic naturalness in phonology. Derivations and constraints in phonology, ed. by Roca, Iggy, 125–52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Myers, Jerome, and Well, Arnold. 2003. Research design and statistical analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishimura, Kohei. 2003. Lyman's law in loanwords. Tokyo: University of Tokyo, ms.Google Scholar
Odden, David. 1986. On the role of the obligatory contour principle. Language 62. 353–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John. 1983. The origin of sound patterns in vocal tract constraints. The production of speech, ed. by MacNeilage, Peter, 189–216. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padgett, Jaye. 2002. Constraint conjunction versus grounded constraint hierarchy in optimality theory. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz, ms.Google Scholar
Padgett, Jaye. 2006. Russian voicing assimilation, final devoicing, and the problem of [v]. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, to appear.Google Scholar
Parker, Ellen, Diehl, Randy; and Kluender, Keith. 1986. Trading relations in speech and non-speech. Perception and Psychophysics 39. 129–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pater, Joe. 1999. Austronesian nasal substitution and other NC effects. The prosody-morphology interface, ed. by Kager, Rene, van, Harry Hulst, der, and Zonneveld, Wim, 310–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1990. Phonological and phonetic representation. Journal of Phonetics 18. 375–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Port, Robert, and Dalby, John. 1982. Consonant/vowel ratio as a cue for voicing in English. Perception and Psycholinguistics 32. 141–52.Google ScholarPubMed
Prince, Alan, and Smolensky, Paul. 2004. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raphael, Lawrence. 1981. Duration and contexts as cues to word-final cognate opposition in English. Phonetica 38. 126–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Nathan. 2003. Opacity and sound change in the Polish lexicon. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz dissertation.Google Scholar
Slis, Imas. 1986. Assimilation of voice in Dutch as a function of stress, word boundaries and sex of speaker and listener. Journal of Phonetics 14. 311–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Jennifer. 2006. Loan phonology is not all perception: Evidence from Japanese loan doublets. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 14, ed. by Vance, Timothy J. and Jones, Kimberly A., 63–74. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Smolensky, Paul. 1995. On the structure of the constraint component Con of UG. Paper presented at University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Spaelti, Philip. 1997. Dimensions of variation in multi-pattern reduplication. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz dissertation.Google Scholar
Stampe, David. 1973. A dissertation on natural phonology. Chicago: University of Chicago dissertation.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1995. Positional neutralization. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, ms.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1997. Phonetics in phonology: The case of laryngeal neutralization. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, ms.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 2000. Paradigm uniformity and the phonetics/phonology boundary. Papers in laboratory phonology 5, ed. by Broe, Michael and Pierrehumbert, Janet, 313–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 2001a. Directional asymmetries in place assimilation. The role of speech perception in phonology, ed. by Hume, Elizabeth and Johnson, Keith, 219–50. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 2001b. The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, ms.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth, and Blumstein, Sheila. 1981. The search for invariant acoustic correlates of phonetic features. Perspectives on the study of speech, ed. by Eimas, Peter and Miller, Joanne, 1–38. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Takagi, Naoyuki, and Mann, Virginia. 1994. A perceptual basis for the systematic phonological correspondences between Japanese loan words and their English source words. Journal of Phonetics 22. 343–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsuchida, Ayako. 1995. English loans in Japanese: Constraints in loanword phonology. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 10. 145–64.Google Scholar
Tsuchida, Ayako. 1997. Phonetics and phonology of Japanese vowel devoicing. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University dissertation.Google Scholar
Walker, Rachel. 2001. Round licensing, harmony, and bisyllabic triggers in Altaic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19. 827–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehr, Hans. 1971. A dictionary of modern written Arabic. 3rd edn. New York: Spoken Language Services.Google Scholar
Westbury, John. 1979. Aspects of the temporal control of voicing in consonant clusters in English. Austin: University of Texas, Austin dissertation.Google Scholar
Zhang, Jie. 2000. Non-contrastive features and categorical patterning in Chinese diminutive suffixation: Max[F] or Ident[F]? Phonology 17. 427–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Jie. 2004. The role of contrast-specific and language-specific phonetics in contour tone distribution. In Hayes, et al., 157–90.Google Scholar
Zsiga, Elizabeth. 1995. An acoustic and electropalatographic study of lexical and post-lexical palatalization in American English. Papers in laboratory phonology 4, ed. by Connell, Bruce and Arvaniti, Amalia, 282–302. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zsiga, Elizabeth. 1997. Features, gestures, and Igbo vowels: An approach to the phonology-phonetics interface. Language 73. 227–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuraw, Kie. 2005. The role of phonetic knowledge in phonological patterning: Corpus and survey evidence from Tagalog reduplication. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, ms.Google Scholar