1. Adaptations of English coda [m] in Standard Mandarin loanwords
To epenthesize or not?
Adaptations of English coda [m] in Standard Mandarin loanwords
Ho-Hsin Huang & Yen-Hwei Lin
Michigan State University
Intro. and Research Questions
Vowel Epenthesis
Ongoing Experiments
Introduction:
Standard Mandarin (SM) does not allow [m] in coda positions. English coda [m] is adapted into SM loanwords in three ways:
With vowel epenthesis: [m] [muː].
Without vowel epenthesis: [m][n/ŋ].
Variable adaptations: [m][muː] or [n/ŋ].
Research questions:
In what environment is the coda [m] adapted with vowel epenthesis in SM?
What are the possible phonetic/perceptual and phonological factors that modulate the adaptation process?
Why is running experiments necessary?
Goals: To test corpora generalizations and the proposed analysis.
Hypothesis: SM loanword outputs are perceptually similar to English inputs.
Tasks: Online adaptation, rating, ABX.
Subjs: 33 mandarin monolinguals.
18 Mandarin-English bilinguals.
Materials: 45 test items & 90 fillers.
Word-medial and word-final coda [m]: [ˈlimdi], [ˈlidim], [lim]
Coda [m] in homorganic contexts: [ˈlimbi] & [ˈɡaumbi]
Prelim. Monolingual ABX results: Less consistent epenthesis generally, but more epenthesis in homorganic contexts.
In Progress: We are currently testing Mandarin-English bilinguals to compare.
English coda [m] in word-medial and word-final positions
1. Word-medial coda [m] (not next to labials)
e.g. Camrose[khaː.muː.lwoː.sɤː]
Camlin [khaː.muː.lin]
2. Word-final coda [m]
e.g. Beckham[pei.khɤː.han.muː]
Tom[thɑŋ.muː]
Vowel epenthesis is motivated by SM native phonology to fix the illicit coda.
It is preferred for the sake of segment preservation (cf. Paradis and LaCharité 1997).
Feature faithfulness: Both nasality and labiality of [m] are preserved.
The V may match the consonant release of [m] (cf. Kang 2003, Peperkamp et al. 2008).
No Vowel Epenthesis & Exceptions
English coda [m] in homorganic contexts: [m]+labials
1. [m] in word-medial homorganic contexts:
e.g. Columbia[ke.lun.piː.jaː]
Humphrey[han.fuː.lai]
[m] in word-final homorganic contexts:
e.g. Camp[khan.pu:]
Triumph[tai.an.fən]
Exceptions: Pre-[m] vowel is long/diphthong.
Shaumberg[ʂau.muː.pɑu], Bloomfield [pu:.lu:muː.fei.ər.tə]
[m][n/ŋ] is motivated by SM native phonotactic constraints. Why is it not [m][muː]?
Consonant release is weak/not audible in homorganic contexts (Henderson & Repp 1982, Browman & Goldstein 1990), hence no vowel epenthesis.
But long vowels/diphthongs can take the priority over VN to satisfy the μμ rime in SM.
Standard Mandarin
Nasals & Vowels (Lin 1989, 2007)
Three nasals: [m, n, ŋ]
Vowel phonemes /i, y, u, ə, a/
Diphthongs: [ai, ɑu, ei, ou]
SM Syllable Structure
Maximal syllable: CGVX
Coda consonants: [n] and [ŋ]
[m] is only in onset
Conclusion
Variable Adaptations
Our analysis proposes both phonological and phonetic/perceptual explanations.
Vowel epenthesis fixes the illicit coda in SM outputs to better match the features and release of [m] in the English inputs.
[m][n/ŋ] in homorganic contests fixes the illicit coda to better match the weak/no audible [m] release.
Variable adaptations are attributed to inconsistent [m] release in some consonant sequences (Malécot 1958).
The discrepancy displayed in the monolingual ABX results may be due to variation in auditory loanword adaptations (Smith 2006, Davidson 2007).
English coda [m] followed by non-labial obstruents
Camden[khaː.muː.təŋ]~[khən.tun]
Binghamton[pin.han.muː.tun]~[pin.han.tun]
Both [m][mu] and [m][n/ŋ] fix the illicit coda.
[m] release is inconsistent/not stable (Selkirk 1982, Crystal & House 1988, Kang 2003).
Various degrees of consonant release in different contexts in English (Davidson 2011).
Corpora
Vowel Epenthesis Numbers and Percentage
Dictionary: More than 2400 American and British given names and surnames.
Google Maps: Around 2000 American and Canadian city names.
Public Media: Magazines, movies, newspapers.
Numbers
Vowel epenthesis
Word-final
80/100
80%
Word-med
130/167
77%
Homorganic (regular)
0/86 0%
Homorganic (long/diph.)
2/2
100%
Total
212/355
60%