Languages differ as to how many series of obstruents they distinguish by some laryngeal specification and what the phonetic manifestation of the contrast is. The course focusses on VOT-based binary systems, typically found in European languages and described in the SPE-style tradition in terms of [+/- voice]. The fundamental tenet of Laryngeal Realism (LR) (or “the narrow interpretation of [voice]”) is that a distinction must be drawn between (i) languages in which the contrast is based on vocal cord activity, i.e., voicing in the strict sense (the so-called voice languages, or Glottal Tension languages), and (ii) languages in which the obstruents traditionally analysed as voiced vs. voiceless actually contrast in negative or zero vs. positive VOT (the classical lenis vs. fortis distinction; in so-called aspiration, or [spread glottis], or Glottal Width languages). This is because the apparently phonetic difference between these two language types is of phonological relevance as it has serious consequences for the patterning of the whole system of obstruents (the exact mechanism of consonant lenition and voice assimilation; asymmetries in other voice-related phonological processes). While most of LR seeks to identify links between phonetic realisation (of, esp., utterance-initial plosives) and phonology, some of its strands, most notably the approach dubbed Laryngeal Relativism, adhere to a more (or purely) phonological interpretation of the language typology. The course discusses data from English, Hungarian, Swedish, Polish, Italian, Ukrainian and Basque, to survey claims and arguments put forth in laryngeally realistic and relativistic analyses.

Students are encouraged to bring along data from languages of their choice to test the theoretical claims.

Reading suggestions: (in chronological order)

Lisker, L. and A. S. Abramson. 1964. A cross-linguistic study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. WORD 20. 384–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830.

Iverson, G. K. and J. C. Salmons. 1995. Aspiration and laryngeal representation in Germanic. Phonology 12. 369–396. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700002566. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4420084.

Avery, P. and W. J. Idsardi. 2001. Laryngeal dimensions, completion and enhancement. In T. A. Hall (ed.) Distinctive feature theory. Mouton de Gruyter. 41–70. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110886672.41.

Van Rooy, B. and D. P. Wissing. 2001. Distinctive [voice] implies regressive voicing assimilation. In T. Hall (ed.) Distinctive feature theory. Mouton de Gruyter. 295–334. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110886672.295.

Ringen, C. and P. Helgason. 2004. Distinctive [voice] does not imply regressive assimilation: Evidence from Swedish. International Journal of English Studies 4(2). 53–71.

Honeybone, P. 2005. Diachronic evidence in segmental phonology: The case of obstruent laryngeal specifications. In van Oostendorp, M. and J. van de Weijer (eds.) The internal organization of phonological segments. Mouton de Gruyter. 319–354. Also available at http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/homes/patrick/diachev.pdf.

Cyran, E. 2012. Cracow sandhi voicing is neither phonological nor phonetic. It is both phonological and phonetic. In Cyran, E. et al. (eds.) Sound, structure and sense. Studies in memory of Edmund Gussmann. Wydawnictwo KUL. 153–184. https://www.kul.pl/files/30/publikacje/Cyran_2012_Cracow_voicing_in_neither….pdf.

Cyran, E. 2014. Between phonology and phonetics: Polish voicing. (Studies in Generative Grammar 118.) Mouton de Gruyter.

Balogné Bérces, K. and B. Huszthy. 2018. Laryngeal relativism predicts Italian. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting 4. 153–177. https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/yplm/article/view/yplm-2018-0007/28342.

Raimy, E. 2021. Privativity and ternary phonological behavior. In Bendjaballah, S. et al. (eds.) Perspectives on Element Theory. Mouton de Gruyter. 65–110. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110691948-004.

Starčević, A. 2024. Another fortis-lenis language: A reanalysis of Old English obstruents. Acta Linguistica Academica 71(3). 259–308. https://doi.org/10.1556/2062.2023.00705.