Subject: sum : representing retroflex

summary : representing retroflex at the beginning of the month i posted a query that asked for information on an alternative way of representing retroflexed segments as dorsalized coronals instead of [ - anterior ] . warm thanks to those who responded : philip hamilton phamilto @ epas . utoronto . ca richard desrochers desrochr @ ere . umontreal . ca wechsler wechsler @ world . std . com suzanne urbanczyk suzanne @ oitunix . oit . umass . edu mark verhijde mark . verhyde @ let . ruu . nl stig eliasson stig . eliasson @ ling . uu . se here is a list of annotated references followed by contributors ' excerpts on the following topics : 1 . against dorsalization 2 . origins of coronal domination of retroflex : sanskrit evidence 3 . phonetic features of retroflex blevins 1994 . course notes from the 1994 australian linguistic institute . cho , y . 1990 . parameters of consonantal assimilation . phd thesis stanford about sanskrit retroflexed elements . the claim made here is that retroflexation equals the formation of segments that contain two place nodes , cor and dor , i . e . what some have defined as a " complex " place . interestingly , in assuming retroflexed segments as having two place nodes , some neutralization effects at right word edges fall out quite naturally . ( verhijde ) dixon no title given . 1980 . languages of australia assumes a feature [ + retroflex ] , as does hamilton 's 1993 toronto paper . eliasson , stig 1986 . sandhi in peninsular scandinavian . in : henning andersen ( ed . ) , sandhi phenomena in the languages of europe , 271-300 . berlin : mouton de gruyter . postalveolarization or retroflexion is a most important sandhi process in swedish and norwegian , and the major part of the above article is devoted to that problem . ( eliasson ) gnanadesikan , amalia no title given . nels 24 1993 . the feature geometry of coronal subplaces . university of massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics 1993 she argues against the feature [ anterior ] for defining coronals . i believe that retroflexes are represented as [ - distributed ] [ + back ] where [ back ] is dorsal . ( urbanczyk ) hamilton , philip 1993 . no title given escol 93 paper on coronal articulation 1993 . no title given toronto working papers in linguistics 1993 . keating , patricia 1991 . coronal places of articulation in the special status of coronals , paradis and prunet , eds . phonetic clues on coronal articulations prince & smolensky 1993 : 179 , citing kirchner 's university of maryland ma thesis . 1 . against dorsalization hamilton : i am currently working on a paper where i argue against dorsalisation more fully , based on a variety of evidence : retroflexes are transparent to + back vowel harmony ; all of the evidence for interaction between retroflexes and back vowels is from very low level phonetic facts ( there are no lexical alternations backing front vowels : / rti / going to [ rtu ] ) and there is never _ neutralisation _ of a lexical back / front contrast conditioned by retroflexes , all that is attested is that front vowels have backed allophones when beside a retroflex ; retroflexes are based represented with a feature dependent on an apical node , since the lack of heteroganic apical clusters may be elegantly expressed with an ocp constraint on adjacent apical nodes . 2 . origins of coronal domination of retroflex : sanskrit wechsler : the presently-orthodox account of retroflection being dominated by the coronal node receives a lot of its support from the sankrit " rnati " rule . in this rule , if i recall it correctly , n - > rn anywhere to the right of a retroflex consonant , but intervening non-nasal alveolars block the rule . this kind of interaction between retroflection and the coronal node appears in other places as well ; the one i ' ve studied is in warlpiri , where historically there was a rule that partially unretroflexed a retroflex stop unless it was closely followed by another retroflex . there are other reasons why you might want to avoid involvement with the dorsal tier - - all the vowels live there , and you would have to explain why they are transparent to assimilations involving anteriority . a 3 . phonetic origins desrocher : ladefoged ( 1974 [ 1971 ] : preliminaries . . . ) speaks of retroflexes ( rxs ) as apical postalveolar and gives the example of ewe . he adds : " in some south asian languages the retroflex consonant involve only the tip of the tongue and the back of the alveolar ridge , whereas in others there is contact between a large part of the underside of the tongue tip and much of the forward part of the hard palate " and elsewhere , he speaks of the " extremely retroflex sounds which occur in some indo - aryan languages " ( hindi , gujerati , penjabi , and so on , i guess ) and when characterizing everything with the spe features , describes rxs as [ - ant , + cor , + high , - back , - low , - dist ] . spe refers to zwicky ( 1965 , his dissert . ) as describing convincingly sanskrit s . as [ - ant ] ( actually , [ - comp ] ) and spe seems to favor the natural class apicals + rxs [ - dist ] as opposed to laminals + non - rxs [ + dist ] . they refer for these matters to ladefoged 1964 a phonetic study of w - afr languages , and maintain that distinction between dentals and rxs support a [ dist ] feature . malmberg ( 1974 , manuel de phonetique generale ) writes that rxs are produced with the tongue markedly curved backwards towards the hard palate , but his diagram , as ladefoged 's , indicates that this the very front of the palate , or the back of the ridge , that is touched by the apex , and mentions south - italians dialects and of course , india . hockett 1958 makes an interesting comment : he says that the same acoustical effect than in the rx in " bird " is achieved by some english speakers not by curling back the tip , but by a " peculiar contour of the central part of the tongue , the tip being held behind the lowe teeth " . further comments , corrections , and questions welcome - - beau
