[consonantal]

Counterpart

[nonconsonantal]

Feature System

Definition

The feature [consonantal] is used to describe phonemes that are produced via a partial or total obstruction in the midsagittal region of the vocal tract. This obstruction is not inherently so radical that it prohibits spontaneous voicing; it is entirely distinct from the feature [sonorant] (Chomsky & Halle 1968:302-303).

Purpose

The feature [consonantal] is used to distinguish stops, affricates, fricatives (excluding [h]), nasals, and liquids from vowels, glides, and [h] (Chomsky & Halle 1968:302).

For example, in Cypriot Greek and Räto-Romansh, a glide ([-consonantal]) assimilates to become a [+consonantal] segment when next to another [+consonantal] segment. Though the features that make up the root node are generally understood not to spread and/or delink (assimilate and/or dissimilate, respectively), [consonantal] proves it functions not only in tandem with, but also independently of, the root node (Kaisse 1998:316).

History

In their 1949 work, Notes on the French phonemic pattern, Jakobson & Lotz posited the opposition [vowel] / [consonant] saying only, “[t]he liquids r and l are complexes combining the consonantal characteristics with a vocalic one,” (Jakobson & Lotz 1949:427). However, the consonantal and/or vocalic characteristics that are being referred to go undefined.

In the 1952 Preliminaries, [consonantal] phonemes are said to be produced with a “barrier sufficient to produce either complete occlusion or a turbulent noise source,” (Jakobson et al. 1952:19-20). Liquids acoustically possess qualities of both the [consonantal] and [nonconsonantal] features, but since their onset intensity and overall intensity is markedly lower than that of vowels, l-sounds and r-sounds are considered to be [+consonantal] (Jakobson et al 1952:19).

In SPE, Chomsky and Halle note that the distinction of liquids and consonants from vowels and glides derives from the significance of the obstruction being “at least as narrow as that found in fricative consonants and must […] be located in the midsagittal region of the cavity,” (Chomsky & Halle 1968:302).

In their 1996 work, Reconsidering [consonantal], Hume and Odden question the necessity (or existence) of the feature. Since [consonantal] was a foundational feature posited by Jakobson & Lotz (1949) and was redefined in SPE, no argument had been made against the feature until this point. Hume and Odden argue that [consonantal] is not necessary for characterizing phonemic contrasts as it “never functions as the sole feature responsible for distinguishing segments,” (Hume & Odden 1996:348). They also argue that the feature is not “crucial” in characterizing a natural class of segment, saying it is “employed to characterise classes of segments,” (Hume & Odden 1996:350). Hume and Odden deny the existence and relevance of [consonantal] on the basis that, though it is functional, it is not crucial, and thereby should not be considered a feature of its own.

References

Chomsky, Noam, and Morris Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.

Hume, Elizabeth, and David Odden. 1994. Reconsidering [consonantal]. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 13.245-261.

Jakobson, Roman, and John Lotz. 1949. Notes on the French phonemic pattern. Word 5.151-158. Reprinted in 1962 in Selected writings: Vol. 1: Phonological studies, ed. by Roman Jakobson, 426-434. ’S-Gravenhage: Mouton.

Jakobson, Roman; Gunnar Fant; and Morris Halle. 1952. Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. (MIT Acoustic Laboratory Technical Report 13). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kaisse, Ellen. 1998. Can [consonantal] spread? Language 68.313-332.

Author

Ainsley Graf