Sounds 61

Table 2.6 Palatalization assimilation and place of articulation

		recommended pronunciation
context	example	(Avanesov 1972)	Usage (Krysin 1974)
ZD˛	cl†kfnm ‘do’	[z˛d˛]	38%
ZB˛	bp,∫nm ‘beat’	[z˛b˛] [zb˛]	32%
VB˛	d,t;ƒnm ‘run in’	[v˛b˛] [vb˛]	16%
VD˛	dl†kfnm ‘set’	[vd˛]	---

than before front. Because back vowels have a lower F2, their F2 is affected more by palatalized consonants than is the F2 of front vowels, whose high F2 has less room to change in the vicinity of palatalized consonants.

2.3.4 Palatalization assimilation

In sequences of two consonants in which the second is palatalized, the first may or may not be palatalized by assimilation. This is just a question of the timing of the articulatory gesture of palatalization. If the raising of the blade of the tongue occurs anticipatorily as the first consonant is formed, assimilation has taken place; if raising occurs within the sequence of consonants, then assimilation has not occurred. Whether palatalization extends over both consonants or begins in the middle of the cluster depends on the extent to which the two consonants are articulatorily linked in other respects. The more linked the two consonants, the more likely it is that palatalization will extend throughout the cluster. There is variation, and the trend is very much towards losing assimilation.49

One way to approach the variation is to examine the recommendations of Avanesov (1972) for one morphological context in which most combinations occur, specifically the context of prefix and following root. To see the effect of place of articulation, we may examine combinations of fricative plus stop in Avanesov’s recommendations and compare them with Krysin’s (1974) survey of usage, in which younger speakers (the last two decades, born between 1930--39 and 1940--49) represent half of the speakers interviewed.

Avanesov does not explicitly mention the combination of labial followed by dental, nor does Krysin (1974) consider it, an indication that assimilation is out of the question in this context. From Table 2.6 we derive a hierarchy of likelihood of assimilation: T¸T ≥ TP¸ ≥ PP¸ ≥ PT¸.50 Comparing the first two terms to the last

49 See Drage 1967[a], 1967[b], 1968, on factors. Contemporary speakers have rather less -- if any -- assimilation than was reported by Drage and Krysin (in the mid-1960s).

50Krysin (1974:82) states the hierarchy as TT¸ ≥ PP¸ ≥ TP¸ (and then presumably ≥ PT¸), based on the overall incidence of palatalization in all types of morphological contexts. The hierarchy artefactually reflects the kinds of examples tested. Many of the examples of dental plus labial involve prefixes

62A Reference Grammar of Russian

Table 2.7 Palatalization assimilation and manner of articulation

		recommended pronunciation
context	example	(Avanesov 1972)	Usage (Krysin 1974)
ZV˛	bpdby∫nt ‘excuse!’	[zv˛] ± [zv˛]	35%
ZB˛	bp,∫nm ‘beat’	[z˛b˛] ±[zb˛]	32%
DB˛	jn,∫nm ‘repel’	[db˛] ?[d˛b˛]	---
DV˛	gjld=k ‘subsumed’	[dv˛] ?[d˛v˛]	04%

two, we note that dentals, as targets, undergo assimilation better than labials. Comparing the first two terms (T¸T ≥ TP¸ ) leads to the result that the same place of articulation in the source and target consonants favors assimilation, because there is no shift in the place of articulation internal to the cluster.

Before velars assimilation is restricted. Labials no longer assimilate; thus in kƒgrb ‘paws’, the pronunciation [pk˛] that occurred at the end of the nineteenth century gave way long ago to [pk˛]. Assimilation of dentals to velars is out of the question: nf,k†nrb ‘tablets’ [tk˛], ukƒlrbvb ‘smooth’ [tk˛].51 Velars before velars once assimilated (vz´urbq [x˛k˛] ‘soft’), but the tendency is again towards hardness ([kk˛]).

Table 2.7 shows the effect of manner of articulation.

Avanesov’s discussion of these combinations of dentals and labials implies a two-way grouping of ZV¸ ≈ ZB¸ ≥ DB¸ ≈ DV¸ .52 His discussion of combinations involving labials implies VV¸ ≥ VB¸ ≥ BB¸ ≈ BV¸ , and his discussion of combinations involving only dentals implies a hierarchy of SS¸ (bccz´ryenm ‘dry up’ [s˛s˛]) ≥ ST¸ (hfpl†k ‘division’ [z˛d˛] [zd˛]) ≥ TT¸ (gjllth;ƒnm ‘support’ [d˛d˛] ±[dd˛]) ≥ TS¸ (jnc†xm ‘hack off’ [ts˛]). Combining the various kinds of information leads to the hierarchy (using the symbols for dentals as general symbols): SS¸ ≥ ST¸ ≥ T¸T ≥ TS¸. That hierarchy encodes two principles: fricatives are more likely to assimilate than stops (the first two terms of the hierarchy as opposed to the last two), and consonants that have the same manner of articulation assimilate better than those that have heterogeneous manner (the first and third terms as opposed to the second and fourth). Thus identity of manner, when there is a single elongated articulation without an internal change in manner, favors assimilation.

or even prepositions (,tp d∫krb ‘without a fork’, c g∫djv ‘with beer’), in which no more than 10 percent of speakers use palatalized dentals. These examples depress the extent of palatalization with dental targets. Among morphologically comparable examples, the 16 percent of d,t;ƒnm (the only example of labial fricative before labial at a prefix boundary) compares unfavorably with bpdby∫nt (35%), bp,∫nm (32%), or even djpd=k (22%).

51Matusevich 1976:203.

52Trubetzkoy (1975:184) noted in 1930 that there was no palatalization across prefix boundaries in jnd=hnsdfnm, though there would be assimilation internally in ,hbndtyysq.

Sounds 63

In combinations of dentals, dental stops do not assimilate to a following lateral [l˛] (assimilation to [r˛] is out of the question), because there is a shift to a different mode of articulation (lateral) within the cluster. Dental obstruents assimilate better to dental nasals [n˛], presumably because the oral component of a dental nasal is effectively just [d˛].

Additional factors have emerged in other investigations. Clusters in which voicing is maintained throughout seem to assimilate better (pd†hm ‘beast’ 30%, ld†hm ‘door’ 30% in Krysin’s survey) than clusters in which voicing switches and introduces an internal articulatory boundary (nd†hm 17%) or than in voiceless clusters (cg∫yrf ‘back’ 15%). Intervocalic position favors assimilation over absolute initial position (ktcy∫r ‘forester’ 49%, dj cy† ‘in sleep’ 54%, but cy†u ‘snow’ 28%).

The position before [j] is a special case. Dentals within words assimilate well to [j]. Assimilation to [j] of a dental in a prefix is possible but not obligatory (c(†k ‘ate up’ [s˛j], bp(znm ‘extract’ [z˛j] [zj], gjl(=v ‘ascent’ [dj]) and infrequent in a prepo-

sition (bp z´vs ‘from the pit’: [ìzja5 mï], outmoded [ìz˛ja5 mï], only jn =krb ‘from
the fir tree’ [ tjo5 lk˛ì]).53	⁄	⁄
	With labials before [j] within words, assimilation still pre-
⁄

dominates (over 50% of speakers with gj,m=v ‘we’ll beat’ and djhj,mz´ ‘sparrow’), but assimilation is unlikely in prefixes (j,(†[fnm ‘drive around’ [ bj†ö x´t˛]).

2.3.5 The glide [j]

The glide [j] has realizations ranging from strong to weak to weakest.54 It is pronounced as a relatively strong, more consonantal [j] before a stressed vowel: z´vf

‘pit’ [ja5 m´], z´rjhm ‘anchor’ [ja5 k´r˛]. In other positions it is a weaker, less conso-
⁄	⁄

nantal [i8]: zpßr ‘language’ [i8ìz˝!k] (initially before unstressed vowel), l†kf/n ‘they

do’ [d˛e5 l´i8√t] (medially before unstressed vowel), [jpz´qrf ‘mistress of the house’

⁄

[xøz˛a558k´i] (after vowel before consonant), cnƒhjq ‘old’ [stƒr´8i] (after a vowel, not

⁄

before a consonant).

There is a third, even weaker, pronunciation, and that is nothing. The glide [j] [i8] is, after all, just an extended [i]-like transition to or away from a vowel. It remains a segment only if it is distinct for a significant interval of time. The glide [j] merges into the adjacent vowel. It is normally lost in verbs of the e-

Conjugation: pyƒtim ‘you know’ [zna5ìs], l†kftim ‘you do’.55 It is often inaudible

⁄‹

in declensional endings: c edf;†ybtv ‘with respect’ [ì8´i ] [ì´]; cnƒhjt ‘old’ [´8´i ] [´´]; uhj´pyjt ‘threatening’ [´8´i ] [´´]; jhé;bt ‘weapon’ [ï8´i ] [ï´].

The glide is also absorbed after a vowel before a following stressed [í].56 Forms

like vjz´ ‘my’ [møja5 ], cnj÷ [støju5 ] ‘I stand’ imply stems {moj-}, {stoj-} including

⁄ ⁄

53In reference to hard [vo]: “the pronunciation [. . .] [dj˙y´uf] cannot be considered correct” (p. 127), a statement which applies to a third of the population, including those with higher education.

54	Isaˇcenko 1947:145--48, 1959.	55 Avanesov (1971:367) restores the [i8] only in careful speech.
56	SRIa 1.109.

64 A Reference Grammar of Russian

[j], but that [j] is not pronounced before [í]: vj∫ [m í], cnj∫im [st ís]‹. However,

[j] is maintained after a consonant before stressed [í]: xm∫ ‘whose’ [c˛jí], djhj,m∫

‹

‘sparrows’ [b˛jí].

In words that begin with {i}, there is no [j] left at all. As a result, when initial {i} is put after a prefix or independent word ending in a consonant, the vowel

that is pronounced is [í-] (unstressed [ï]): d b[ lj´vt ‘in their house’ [vï do5m˛ì],

⁄

lƒk bv ‘he gave to them’ [dƒlïm], d B´ylb/ ‘to India’ [v˝!nd˛ì8i ]. Interestingly, [j] is maintained before [ì] that derives from a non-high vowel -- Zhjckƒdkm [8ìr slƒvl˛],

to= ‘still’ [8ìs˛o5], d tuj´ [vi8ìvj´], not [vïvj´].57

‹⁄

2.3.6 Affricates

The affricates [c] and [c˛] begin, like stops, with a sudden initial closure, which is

‹

followed by a static interval of closure, but the closure is released more gradually than with an ordinary stop, in a fashion similar to the release of a fricative. To indicate their mixed character as part stop, part fricative, it is sometimes convenient to write the affricates as combinations of two symbols: [c] as [ts],

[c˛] as [t˛s]˛.58 Affricates are not, however, simply clusters. They are not appreciably

‹ ‹

longer than fricatives [s s]‹. The affricate [c] does not palatalize before {e} (d rjyw†) as might be expected if it were composed of [t] plus [s], inasmuch as [s] does

(j k†ct). The affricate [c˛] does not condition a vowel in unstressed imperatives

‹

like true clusters: gkƒxm ‘cry!’, yt véxm ‘don’t torment!’.

While affricates in Russian are units, clusters of consonants result in phonetic sequences like affricates.59 Word-internally, a dental stop [t] that is followed by [c] or [s] ([s˛]) will become a single consonantal complex consisting of a stop onset, a long static interval of closure (written here as “tt°”), and a fricative-like release: gen sg ,hƒnwf ‘chap’ [bratts°´], cnhtv∫nmcz ‘strive’ [tts°´], identically 3sg prs

cnhtv∫ncz [tt°s´]. Similarly, a dental stop [t] plus [c˛] becomes an affricate with an

‹

elongated closure: dj´nxbyf ‘patrimony’ [vo5ˇìn´t˛t˛s˛]. If such a combination is placed

⁄‹

before an obstruent, the long closure will be shortened, becoming equivalent to the affricate [ts] = [c]: Gtnhjpfdj´lcr [vj´tsk] = [vj´ck].

When combinations of stops and fricatives arise at prefixes, they maintain the duration of the fricative of the following root while the preceding hard stop develops the release of an affricate: jncbl†nm ‘sit out’ [csˇ] = [tsˇs˛], yflpbhƒntkm

‘overseer’ [Zz˛] = [dzz˛], jni∫nm ‘rebuff’ [cs] = [tss], jn;∫nm ‘become obsolete’ [Zz] =
ˇ ˇ	ˇ‹ ˇ ‹	ˇ‹
[dzz].
ˇ‹

This [Zˇz]‹or [dzˇz]‹-- a dental stop onset of normal duration followed by the release of an affricate to a full hard alveo-palatal fricative -- is the recommended pro-

nunciation for orthographic ≤l;≥ in borrowings: l;fp [dzzas], l;tv [dzzem].60
	ˇ‹⁄	ˇ‹⁄
57	Trubetzkoy (1975:237).
58	In other systems of notation, one could write [c] = [ˇts ], [c˛‹] = [ˇ‹t˛s˛] or [ˇt˛S˛].	59 SRIa 1.106--7.
60	Avanesov 1972:166, Jones and Ward 1969:102.