Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Consonant gradation
View on WikipediaThis article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
| Sound change and alternation |
|---|
| Fortition |
| Dissimilation |
Consonant gradation is a type of consonant mutation (mostly lenition but also assimilation) found in some Uralic languages, more specifically in the Finnic, Samic and Samoyedic branches. It originally arose as an allophonic alternation between open and closed syllables, but has become grammaticalised due to changes in the syllable structure of the languages affected.
Definition
[edit]The term "consonant gradation" refers to a word-medial alternation of consonants between fortis and lenis realisations. The fortis strong grade appears in historically open syllables (ending in a vowel), while the lenis weak grade appears in historically closed syllables (ending in a consonant). The exact realisation of the fortis–lenis distinction differs between the branches. In the Samic languages it was realised through fortition, specifically lengthening, in the strong grade. In the Finnic and Samoyedic languages, there was instead lenition in the weak grade. Thus, the exact realization of the contrast is not crucial.
| Language | Alternation (strong : weak) |
Phonetic nature of alternation (strong : weak) |
|---|---|---|
| Estonian | sukk : suk-a /sukːː/ : /sukːɑ/ |
Length overlong : long |
| Finnish | sukka : suka-n /sukːɑ/ : /sukɑn/ |
Length long : short |
| Estonian | ait : aid-a /ɑit/ : /ɑid̥ɑ/ |
Tenseness tense voiceless : lax voiceless |
| Finnish | aita : aida-n /ɑitɑ/ : /ɑidɑn/ |
Voicing voiceless : voiced |
| Finnish | lampi : lamme-n /lɑmpi/ : /lamːen/ |
Manner of articulation stop : nasal |
| Karelian | mušta : mušša-n /muʃtɑ/ : /muʃːɑn/ |
Manner of articulation stop : fricative |
| Finnish | kylki : kylje-n /kylki/ : /kyljen/ |
Manner of articulation stop : semivowel |
| Nganasan | бахи : баби /bahi/ : /babi/ |
Voicing + manner and place of articulation voiceless glottal fricative : voiced bilabial stop |
| Finnish | teko : teon /teko/ : /te.on/ |
Presence of segment stop : zero |
| Northern Sami | Sápmi : Sámi /saːp.miː/ : /saː.miː/ |
Presence of segment pre-stopped nasal : plain nasal |
| Northern Sami | diehtaga : dieđa /tie̯h.ta.ka/ : /tie̯.ða/ |
Presence of segment + articulation preaspirated stop : fricative |
| Northern Sami | deadja : deaja /tea̯c.ca/ : /tea̯.ja/ |
Manner of articulation stop : semivowel |
| Northern Sami | ruoktu : ruovttu /ruo̯kː.tuː/ : /ruo̯vt.tuː/ |
Length + articulation long stop + singleton : short semivowel + geminate |
| Northern Sami | baste : bastte /pasː.te/ : /pas.te/ |
Length long : short |
| Nganasan | коӈху : комбу /koŋhu/ : /kombu/ |
Voicing + manner and place of articulation velar nasal + voiceless glottal fricative : bilabial nasal + voiced bilabial stop |
The language groups differ in regard to their treatment sequences of a vowel followed by j or w in Proto-Uralic. In the Samic languages, the second part of these remains phonologically a consonant, and can thus close the syllable before it, triggering the weak grade. It also takes part in gradation itself, lengthening in the strong grade. In Finnic, on the other hand, these were treated as diphthongs, and were equivalent to long vowels in terms of syllable structure. Consequently, they did not close the syllable and did not affect gradation.
Consonant gradation is understood to have originally been a predictable phonological process. In all languages that retain it, however, it has evolved further to a less predictable system of consonant mutation, of morphophonological or even purely morphological nature. This is a consequence of later changes in the structure of syllables, which made closed syllables open or vice versa, without adjusting the gradation. For example, in Northern Sami, the only difference between giella and giela ('language', nominative and genitive singular respectively) is the grade; the final consonant that originally closed the syllable in the genitive form, namely -n, has disappeared (the same happened in the history of Estonian and Nganasan). Even in Finnish, which is relatively conservative with respect to consonants, there are many cases of strong grades in closed syllables and weak grades in open syllables, e.g. sade and sateen ('rain', nominative and genitive singular). These, again, are the result of changes in syllable structure, with the original Proto-Finnic *sadek and *sategen following the rules more obviously. In addition, not all Finnish words that hypothetically could have gradation undergo it: for instance, the genitive form of auto 'car' is auton. Thus, the occurrence of gradation is not morphologically predictable anymore, it is a property of each individual word.
Historical connections
[edit]There is no consensus view on the ultimate origin of consonant gradation in the Uralic languages. Three broad positions may be distinguished:[1]
- Gradation in Finnic, Samic and Samoyedic are all connected to one another.
- Gradation in Finnic and Samic are connected; gradation in Samoyedic is an unrelated phenomenon.
- There is no connection between gradation in any of the three language groups, and the similarities are accidental.
In all three groups, consonant gradation has the same conditioning, the distinction between open and closed syllables. In this light, and in the absence of any evidence of the same system having existed in any unrelated language in the world, Helimski (1995) has argued that the latter two options should be rejected as implausible.[2]
If a connection exists, it is also disputed what its nature may be, again allowing for three broad positions:
- Gradation is common inheritance (from either Proto-Uralic or Proto-Finno-Samic).
- Gradation is an areal phenomenon that has developed through language contact.
- Gradation has developed independently in Finnic, Samic, and Samoyedic, based on a set of common preconditions inherited from Proto-Uralic.
The great geographical distance between the Finnic and Samic peoples on one hand, and the Nganasans on the other, leads Helimski to reject the second option of these.
Finnic languages
[edit]The original effect of gradation in the Finnic languages can be reconstructed as a lenition of the consonant at the beginning of a closed syllable. Lenition resulted in geminate (long) stops and affricates being shortened, and in short voiceless obstruents /*p *t *k/ becoming voiced, while short voiced obstruents /*b *d *g/ became fricatives:
- *pp [pː] → *p̆p [pˑ]
- *tt [tː] → *t̆t [tˑ]
- *cc [t͡sː] → *c̆c [t͡sˑ]
- *kk [kː] → *k̆k [kˑ]
- *p → *b
- *t → *d
- *k → *g
- b → *β
- d → *ð
- g → *ɣ
Only stops and affricates were affected, not other consonants. Moreover, only the last member of a consonant cluster was subject to gradation, and single stops and affricates were only affected if they were not adjacent to another obstruent. Thus, two-obstruent combinations like kt, st and tk did not undergo lenition, nor did obstruent-sonorant combinations like kl and tr. The voiced stops *b *d *g generally lenited to fricatives /β ð ɣ/ unless they were preceded by a nasal. This change may have occurred already in Proto-Finnic, but is not found in Livonian and Veps. The fricatives later underwent further changes, and the dental and velar fricatives have been lost altogether in most Finnic varieties.
The weakened grades of geminate consonants did not merge with the strong grades of the singleton consonants in Proto-Finnic, and still counted as geminates for the purposes of syllabification. There remained for a period an intermediate quantity, half-long *-t̆t-, which still closed the preceding syllable. Consequently, a syllable ending with a geminate in the weak grade still triggered a weak grade on the preceding syllable as well. In Finnish, the half-long consonants eventually merged with the strong-grade singleton consonants, but in most other Finnic languages, the strong-grade singletons underwent a secondary lenition which prevented this merger.
Gradation later expanded to include a pattern *s ~ *h, presumed to reflect a former pattern *s ~ *z.[3] This type of gradation only systematically appears in cases of word-final *s, which between vowels uniformly becomes *h: Finnish pensas 'bush' has the genitive pensaan < *pensahen. An example is also found after a stressed syllable, however, in the exceptional monosyllabic root *mees : *meehe- "man"; and in a fossilized form, in the postpositions lähellä "near" vs. läsnä "present", reflecting the adessive and the essive of a root *läse- "vicinity". In cases of root-internal *s, this pattern is not normally found (e.g. Finnish pesä 'nest' : plural pesät), though Votic later reintroduced a gradation pattern /s/ : /z/ here (pezäd).
Veps and Livonian have largely leveled the original gradation system, and reflect both weak and strong grades of single stops as /b d ɡ/; this may be an archaism or a substitution of voiced stops for fricatives due to foreign influence (Russian for Veps, Latvian for Livonian). Except for northernmost Veps dialects, both grades of geminate stops are also reflected as /p t k/.
Finnish
[edit]Finnish consonant gradation generally preserves the Proto-Finnic pattern fairly well. The conditioning of syllable structure is still visible in most cases, but it is no longer productive: gradation has become a grammatical feature.
Historical sound changes affecting realization of weak grades
[edit]- The weak grades *p̆p, *t̆t, *k̆k of geminates coincided with plain *p, *t, *k.
- The weak grades *mb, *nd, *ŋg of nasal+stop clusters were assimilated to geminate nasals /mm/, /nn/, /ŋŋ/ (ng).
- The weak grades *lð, *rð of liquid+/t/ clusters were similarly assimilated to geminate liquids /ll/, /rr/.
- *β merged with *ʋ (v). This may have been lost later. For example, the 3rd person singular suffix *-pi is represented by a chroneme, i.e. a lengthening of the preceding vowel; e.g. *tule-βi 's/he comes' → Old Finnish tuleu → Modern Finnish tulee.
- Between two unstressed short vowels (i.e. in the weak grade of suffixal gradation), *ð and *h were lost (but not after a diphthong, cf. illative plurals in -oihin, verbs in -oida); these may be preserved in a variety of dialects.
- After a stressed vowel, *ð remained up until the dissolution of the Finnish dialects. It was lost entirely in Eastern Finnish, while Western Finnish dialects have varying reflexes: /ɾ/ or /r/ in multiple western dialects, /l/ in the old Tavastian dialects, /ð/ in archaic Southwestern and Northwestern dialects. As the area of /ð/ shrunk throughout the 17th—19th centuries, standard Finnish /d/ developed as a spelling pronunciation of orthographical d, modeled after other languages such as Swedish, German and Russian.
- *ɣ also remained until the dissolution of the Finnish dialects. It was generally lost, but in the western dialects it may have become /j/ (most widely between a liquid and /e/, as in kylki, järki below) or /ʋ/ (between two close labial vowels, as in puku below).
- The geminate affricate *cc : *c̆c (found in e.g. *meccä 'forest') was fronted to a dental fricative *θθ : *θ. This sound has been lost in most dialects. Widely in Eastern dialects, both grades became /ht/, leading to loss of gradation. Standard Finnish was left with an unalternating /ts/ (metsä : metsän), a spelling pronunciation similar to the case of /d/. Other patterns found include unalternating /tt/; alternating /tt/ : /t/ (coinciding with original *tt); alternating /ht/ : /h/ (in Eastern dialects, coinciding with original *ht); alternating /ht/ : /t/; and alternating /ss/ ~ /s/.
These changes have made qualitative gradation become more complex, especially in the case of k. In standard Finnish, k is the phoneme with the most possible changes. It can disappear as in jalka 'foot' → jalan 'foot-Gen', or:[4]
| Environment | Change | Strong | Weak |
|---|---|---|---|
| -uku- -yky- |
k→v | puku kyky |
puvun kyvyn |
| -lki- -rki- |
k→j | kylki järki |
kyljen järjen |
| -nk- /ŋk/ |
/k/→/ŋ/ | sänky /sæŋky/ |
sängyn /sæŋŋyn/ |
/j/ has been lost in this position in Southeastern Tavastian, Northern Bothnian and Eastern dialects, resulting in kurki (crane) : kuren (crane's) instead of the standard form kurjen.
Short t also has developed more complex gradation due to various assimilations. Patterns include t : d (tietää : tiedän), rt : rr (kertoa : kerron), lt : ll (pelto : pellon), and nt ~ nn (antaa ~ annan).
Alternation patterns for p include p : v (tapa : tavan) and mp : mm (lampi : lammen).
Analogical extension of gradation
[edit]The consonant clusters /ht/ and /hk/ were, comprising two obstruents, not originally subject to gradation (as is still the case for similar clusters such as /sp/, /st/, /tk/). However, gradation pairs ht : *hð and hk : *hɣ were at one point introduced. The first of these patterns remains common in modern Finnish, e.g. vahti : vahdit 'guard(s)'. The second is only found in a limited number of words, e.g. pohje : pohkeet 'calf : calves', but rahka : rahkat 'quark(s)'. Usage varies for some words with /hk/, e.g. for the plural of nahka 'leather, hide', both nahat and nahkat are acceptable.
Quantitative consonant gradation has expanded to include in addition to the pairs kk : k, pp : p, tt : t, also gg : g and bb : b (but not dd : d) in a number of recent loanwords, such as blogata : bloggaan 'to blog'; lobata : lobbaan 'to lobby'.
Historical sound changes affecting conditions of gradation
[edit]One important change was the loss of word-final *-k and *-h early on in the history of Finnish. This resulted in many open syllables with weak grades. In particular, the majority of nouns ending in -e are affected by this, with a weak grade in the nominative form. The imperative form of verbs also ended in a now-lost -k. For examples, side 'bandage', from *siðe, earlier *siðek (cf. Veps sideg, Eastern Votic sidõg); hakea 'to get' → hae! 'get! (imp.)' from *haɣe, earlier *haɣek. Traces of the original syllable closure can be seen in sandhi effects: these classes of words can still be analyzed to contain the assimilative word-final 'consonant' ˣ, realized as lengthening of the next word's initial consonant. Therefore, hae side varastosta 'get a bandage from storage!' is pronounced [hɑe‿sːide‿ʋːɑrɑstostɑ], where the weak grades indeed occur in closed syllables.
The loss of -k combined with loss of d gave rise to the modern Finnish infinitive ending, which was historically *-tak/täk. The final *-k triggered gradation, so that the ending normally became *-dak/däk. In turn, following the loss of d between unstressed vowels, and the loss of final *-k only *-aˣ/äˣ remained. Thus, hakea (originally *hakedak) has only -a as the d was lost. But in verbs like juo-da 'to drink' the /d/ remained since it followed a stressed syllable. In the case of verbs like tulla 'to come', the earlier form was *tul-ðak, but the *ð was assimilated to the /l/ according to the patterns described above. The original strong grade was preserved in verbs like hais-ta 'to stink' since gradation did not take place when a consonant followed /s/.
The situation appears differently in the many verbs ending in -ata/ätä. These verbs seem to have preserved the strong grade in the infinitive ending, going counter to the rules of gradation. However, historically it is in fact a weak grade: the stem of the verb itself ended in *-at/ät-, and this is still visible in the 3rd person imperative ending -atkoon/ätköön. Thus, when combined with the infinitive ending, the verb ended in *-attak/ättäk (similar to the origin of the -ton/tön suffix described above). The -k then weakened the consonant from a geminate *-tt- to a single *-t-, and later loss of -k resulted in the final form -ata/ätä. However, even though this is now a single consonant, it was originally a geminate and therefore triggers the weak grade on the syllable before it. So whereas the infinitive may be for example hypätä 'to jump', its original stem was *hyppät-, as can be seen in the first-person singular form hyppään 'I jump', from earlier *hyppäðen with loss of *-ð-.
An opposite effect was caused by the loss of *h and *ð between unstressed vowels. Loss of h affected nouns and adjectives ending in *-s or *-h, such as kuningas 'king'. In the nominative, this -s appeared as usual, and as the preceding syllable was closed, the weak grade ng appeared. But when a case ending such as the genitive -(e)n was added, the result was originally *kuninkasen, which was then weakened to *kuninkahen, and the loss of -h- then resulted in the modern form kuninkaan. The intermediate steps are seen in mies 'man'. Here, following a stressed syllable, the -h- was not lost, so that its genitive is miehen.
Similar changes affected the illative ending, which was -hVn where V was the same as the vowel preceding the ending. The h is preserved after stressed syllables, as in maahan 'into the land' (from maa), but lost otherwise as in kotiin 'into the home' (from earlier *kotihin, from koti). This explains why kotiin retains a strong grade even though a closed syllable follows it. The Pohjanmaa dialect of Finnish retains the -h-, however.
Words that now end in -e are in fact very similar to those ending in -s. These originally ended with -k or -h so that the nominative ended in a consonant just as kuningas and therefore the preceding syllable was in the weak grade. But after an ending was added, the weak grade g appeared, which eventually disappeared just as h did.
Analogical limitation of gradation
[edit]This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (February 2012) |
While syllabic gradation remains generally productive, the distortions of its original phonetic conditions have left it essentially a morphologically conditioned process. This is particularly visible in forms that display a strong grade where a weak would be historically expected, or vice versa. Possessive suffixes, in particular, are always preceded by the strong grade, even if the suffix may cause the syllable to be closed. For example, 'our bed' is sänkymme, not ˣsängymme.
Strong grades may also be found in closed syllables in contractions such as jotta en → jotten.
Several recent loans and coinages with simple /p, t, k/ are also left entirely outside of gradation, e.g. auto (: auton) 'car', eka (: ekan) 'first', muki (: mukin) 'mug', peti (: petin, sometimes pedin ) 'bed', söpö (: söpön) 'cute'. A number of proper names such as Alepa, Arto, Malta, Marko belong in this class as well.[5]
Suffixal gradation has been largely lost, usually in favor of the weak grade. While the partitive plurals of kana 'hen' and lakana 'bedsheet' still show distinct treatment of the original *-ta (kanoja, lakanoita), the partitive singulars in modern Finnish both have the weak grade (kanaa, lakanaa), although in several dialects of older Finnish the form lakanata occurred for the latter. Similarly the participle ending *-pa is now uniformly -va, even after stressed syllables; e.g. syö-vä 'eating', voi-va 'being able'. (The original forms may remain in diverged sense or fossilized derivatives: syöpä 'cancer', kaikki-voipa 'almighty'.)
Karelian
[edit]Karelian consonant gradation is quite similar to Finnish: *β *ð *ɣ have been lost in a fashion essentially identical to Eastern Finnish (and may have occurred in the common ancestor of the two), with the exception that assimilation rather than loss has occurred also for *lɣ and *rɣ. E.g. the plural of jalka 'foot' is jallat, contrasting with jalat in Finnish and jalad in Estonian.
Karelian still includes some gradation pairs which Finnish does not. The consonants /t k/ undergo consonant gradation when following a coronal obstruent /s š t/: muistua 'to remember' → muissan 'I remember', matka → matan 'trip' (nom. → gen.). This development may be by analogy of the corresponding liquid clusters. On the other hand, some Karelian dialects (such as Livvi or Olonets) do not allow for gradation in clusters beginning on nasals. Thus, the Olonets Karelian equivalent of Finnish vanhemmat (cf. vanhempi 'older') is vahnembat.
The Karelian phoneme inventory also includes the affricate /tʃ/ (represented in the orthography as č), which may be found geminated and is such subject to quantitative gradation: meččä 'forest' → mečäššä 'in (the) forest'.
Votic
[edit]Votic has two quantities for consonants and vowels, which basically match up with the Finnish counterparts. The Votic phoneme inventory includes a set of fully voiced stops, which Paul Ariste (A Grammar of the Votic Language) describes as being the same as in Russian. Thus, in addition to quantitative alternations between /pː tː kː/ and /p t k/, Votic also has a system of qualitative alternations in which the distinguishing feature is voicing, and so the voiceless stops /p t k/ are known to alternate with /b d ɡ/.
As in Estonian, Karelian, and Eastern dialects of Finnish, the weak grade *ð of /t/ in inherited vocabulary has been lost or assimilated to adjacent sounds in Votic; the weak grade *β of /p/ has similarly become /v/, or assimilated to /m/ in the cluster /mm/. However, the weak grade of /k/ survives, as /ɡ/ before a back vowel or /j ~ dʲ ~ dʒ/ before a front vowel.[6]
A noticeable feature of Votic is that gradation has been extended to several consonant clusters that were not originally affected. As in Finnish, this includes the clusters /ht/ and /hk/ with a voicing-neutral first member, but also further clusters, even several ones introduced only in Russian loans.
| Gradation | Example | Translation | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| s → z | isä → izässä | 'father' → 'father (elat.)' | |
| rs → rz | karsia → karzid | 'to trim' → 'you trim' | |
| hs [hs] → hz [ɦz] | lahsi → lahzõd | 'child' → 'children' | |
| tš /tʃ/ → dž /dʒ/ | retši → redžed | 'sleigh' → 'sleighs' | |
| ntš /ntʃ/ → ndž /ndʒ/ | tšentšä → tšendžäd | 'shoe' → 'shoes' | |
| ltš /ltʃ/ → ldž /ldʒ/ | jältši → jäldžed | 'footprint' → 'footprints' | |
| k → g | luku → lugud | 'number' → 'numbers' | From Proto-Finnic *k → *ɣ. |
| hk [hk] → hg [ɦɡ] | tuhka → tuhgassa | 'ash' → 'ash (elat.)' | |
| ŋk → ŋg | aŋko → aŋgod | 'pitchfork' → 'pitchforks' | Retained intact from Proto-Finnic *ŋk → *ŋg. |
| pk → bg | šāpka → šābgad | 'hat' → 'hats' | A recent Russian loanword. |
| tk → dg | mutka → mudgad | 'hook, curve' → 'hooks, curves' | |
| sk → zg | pǟsko → pǟzgod | 'swallow' → 'swallows' | |
| šk /ʃk/ → žg /ʒɡ/ | šiška → šižgad | 'rag' → 'rags' | A recent Russian loanword. |
| tšk /tʃk/ → džg /dʒɡ/ | botška → bodžgad | 'barrel' → 'barrels' | A recent Russian loanword. |
| lk → lg | jalka → jalgad | 'foot' → 'feet' | From Proto-Finnic *lk → *lɣ. |
| rk → rg | purkā → purgad | 'to take apart → you take apart | From Proto-Finnic *rk → *rɣ. |
The alternations involving the voiced affricate dž are only found in the Eastern dialects. In the Western dialects, there are several possible weak grade counterparts of tš:
| Gradation | Example | Translation | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| tš → ∅ | retši → rēd | 'sleigh' → 'sleighs' | |
| ntš → nď /ndʲ/ | tšentšä → tšenďäd | 'shoe' → 'shoes' | |
| ltš → ll | jältši → jälled | 'footprint' → 'footprints' | |
| rtš → rj | särtši → särjed | 'roach' → 'roaches' | |
| htš → hj | mähtšä → mähjäd | 'rye porridge' → 'rye porridges' | |
| stš → zz | iskeä → izzed | 'to strike' → 'you strike' |
Further minor variation in these gradation patterns was found down to the level of individual villages.
Votic also has a number of alternations between continuants which are short in the 'weak' grade, and geminates in the 'strong' grade (kassā 'to sprinkle/water' vs. kasan 'I sprinkle/water'), as well as more voicing alternations between palatalized stops, and the alternations between nasal+consonant~nasal+chroneme found in Finnish. Votic also includes alternations in which the 'strong' grade is represented by a short consonant, while the 'weak' grade is represented by a geminate: ritõlõn vs. riďďõlla. For comparison, the Finnish equivalents of these is riitelen 'I quarrel' vs. riidellä 'to quarrel'.
Estonian
[edit]Though otherwise closely related to Votic, consonant gradation in Estonian is quite different from the other Finnic languages. One extremely important difference is the existence of three grades of consonants (alternations like strong grade pada 'pot (nom.)', weak grade paja 'pot (gen.)', overlong grade patta 'pot (ill.)'). This can be said to generally correlate with the existence of three degrees of consonant length (e.g. d, t, and tt), but since the alternation d ~ t occurs only after heavy syllables, and the alternations d ~ tt and t ~ tt occur only after light syllables, there is no single paradigm that has this simple alternation. However, weak grades like v, j, or ∅ that alternate with stops like b, d, or g originate from the weak grade of these stops, and these may still synchronically alternate with the over-long grades (pp, tt, kk) within the same paradigm, giving paradigms with three underlying grades.
Another extremely important feature of Estonian gradation is that, due to the greater loss of word-final segments (both consonants and vowels), the Estonian gradation is an almost entirely opaque process, where the consonant grade (short, long, or overlong) must be listed for each class of wordform. So, for example, embus 'embrace' has the same form for all cases (e.g. genitive embuse), while hammas 'tooth' has weak grade mm in the nominative hammas and partitive hammast, but strong form mb in the genitive hamba and all other cases of the singular. There is a large number of cases in which inflectional endings are identical except for how they affect the consonant grade, e.g. leht 'leaf' belongs to a declension class in which both the genitive and the partitive singular are formed by adding -e, but the genitive takes the weak form (leh-e), while the partitive takes the strong form (leht-e). In the end, the types of generalizations that can be made are that some inflectional categories always take the strong form (e.g. partitive plural, -ma infinitive), some always take the weak form (e.g. -tud participle), some forms may take the overlong form (some partitive singulars, short illative singular), while other inflectional categories are underdetermined for whether they occur with weak or strong grade. In this last case, within a paradigm some forms are constrained to have the same grade and others are constrained to have the opposite grade; thus all present tense forms for the same verb have the same grade, though some verbs have strong (hakkan 'I begin', hakkad 'you begin', etc.) and others have weak (loen 'I read', loed, 'you read', etc.), and the -da infinitive has the opposite grade from the present (hakata 'to begin', lugeda 'to read').
The system of gradation has also expanded to include gradation of all consonant clusters and geminate consonants (generally quantitative), when occurring after short vowels, and vowel gradation between long and overlong vowels, although these are not written except for the distinction between voiceless stops and geminate voiceless stops (e.g. overlong strong grade tt with weak grade t). E.g. linn [linːː], 'city (nom.)' vs. linna [linːɑ] 'city (gen.)'. In consonant clusters, in the strong grade the first consonant is lengthened, e.g. must [musːt], 'black (nom.)' vs. musta [mustɑ] 'black (gen.)'. Before single consonants, long vowels and diphthongs also become overlong in strong forms and remain merely long in weak forms, e.g. kool [koːːl], 'school (nom.)' vs. kooli [koːli] 'school (gen.)'.
Samic languages
[edit]Gradation was present in Proto-Samic, and is inherited in most Samic languages. It is different from the gradation found in the Finnic languages in some important aspects:
- Gradation applies to all consonants, even consonant clusters.
- Geminate stops and affricates were realised with preaspiration in Proto-Samic, and were thus phonetically distinct from singletons in more than length alone.
- Rather than featuring lenition in the weak grade, the weak grade generally reflects the original consonant. Instead, it is the strong grade that was modified: single consonants were lengthened into half-long in the strong grade, geminate consonants were lengthened to overlong.
- It only applies in consonants at the end of a stressed syllable; consonants following unstressed syllables remain unlengthened and do not show grade alternations.
Similar to the cases of Veps and Livonian within Finnic, the Southern Sami language at the westernmost end of the Sami language continuum has lost all gradation. In the remaining Sami languages, the strong grade of the singletons merged with the weak grade of geminates, creating a three-quantity distinction between short, long and overlong consonants. In Kildin and Ter Sami, this merger did not affect stops and affricates, due to the additional preaspiration found on original geminates. In the others, the merger affected stops and affricates as well, with the strong grade of singletons receiving secondary preaspiration.
In the Western Samic languages, geminate nasals became pre-stopped, which affected the strong grade of singletons as well (outside Southern Sami) due to the historical merger of these grades. In the languages in closest contact to Finnic (Northern, Inari and Skolt), a number of developments towards the situation in Finnish and Karelian have occurred, such as the change of unlengthened *t to /ð/.
Northern Sami
[edit]Northern Sami has a system of three phonological lengths for consonants, and thus has extensive sets of alternations. Quantity 3 is represented as lengthening of the coda part of a geminate or cluster, which is absent in quantity 2. Quantity 1 consists of only an onset consonant, with the preceding syllable having no coda. In addition, most dialects of Northern Sami feature coda maximisation, which geminates the last member of a cluster in various environments (most commonly in two-consonant clusters of quantity 2, in which the first member is voiced).
Most sonorants and fricatives are only subject to quantitative gradation, but nasals, stops, affricates and the glide /j/ are subject to both quantitative and qualitative changes. Some words alternate between three grades, though not all words do. Note that the following apostrophe marking the over-long grade is not used in the official orthography, although it is generally found in dictionaries.
Some gradation triads include the following:
| Continuants | Quantity 3 | Quantity 2 | Quantity 1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| /ð/ | đˈđ /ðː.ð/ oađˈđi 'sleeper' |
đđ /ð.ð/ oađđit 'to sleep' |
đ /ð/ oađán 'I sleep' |
| /r̥/ | hrˈr /r̥ː.r̥/ skuhrˈri 'snorer' |
hrr /r̥.r̥/ skuhrrat 'to snore' |
hr /r̥/ skuhrai 'S/he snored' |
| /m/ | mˈm /mː.m/ cumˈmá 'kiss' |
mm /m.m/ cummát 'kisses' |
m /m/ namat 'names' |
| /s/ | sˈs /sː.s/ guosˈsi 'guest' |
ss /s.s/ guossit 'guests' |
s /s/ viesut 'houses' |
| /p/ | hpp /hː.p/ | hp /h.p/ | b /b/~/v/ |
| bb /bː.p/ | pp /p.p/ | ||
| /t/ | htt /hː.t/ | ht /h.t/ | đ /ð/ |
| dd /dː.t/ | tt /t.t/ | ||
| /k/ | hkk /hː.k/ | hk /h.k/ | g /k/~/∅/ |
| gg /ɡː.k/ | kk /k.k/ | ||
| /t͡ʃ/ | hčč /hː.t͡ʃ/ | hč /h.t͡ʃ/ | ž /t͡ʃ/ |
| žž /dː.t͡ʃ/ | čč /t.t͡ʃ/ | ||
| /t͡s/ | hcc /h:.t͡s/ | hc /h.t͡s/ | z /t͡s/ |
| zz /dː.t͡s/ | cc /t.t͡s/ |
Samoyedic languages
[edit]Nganasan
[edit]Nganasan, alone of the Samoyedic languages (or indeed any Uralic languages east of Finnic), shows systematic qualitative gradation of stops and fricatives. Gradation occurs in intervocalic position as well as in consonant clusters consisting of a nasal and a stop. Note that /h/ and /ŋh/ descend from historical /p/ and /mp/, respectively. Examples of Nganasan consonant gradation can be seen in the table below. The first form given is always the nominative singular, the latter the genitive singular (which was marked in Proto-Samoyedic by the suffix *-n, resulting in a closed syllable).
| Gradation | Example | Gloss |
|---|---|---|
| h : b | bahi : babi | 'wild reindeer' |
| t : ð | ŋuta : ŋuða | 'berry' |
| k : ɡ | məku : məɡu | 'back' |
| s : dʲ | basa : badʲa | 'iron' |
| ŋh : mb | koŋhu : kombu | 'wave' |
| nt : nd | dʲintə : dʲində | 'bow' |
| ŋk : ŋɡ | bəŋkə : bəŋɡə | 'sod hut' |
| ns : nʲdʲ | bənsə : bənʲdʲə | 'all' |
The original conditions of the Nganasan gradation can be shown to be identical to gradation in Finnic and Samic; that is, radical/syllabic gradation according to syllable closure, and suffixal/rhythmic gradation according to a syllable being of odd or even number, with rhythmic gradation particularly well-preserved.[2][7]
Selkup
[edit]A limited form of consonant gradation is found in the Ket dialect of Selkup. In certain environments, geminate stops can alternate with short (allophonically voiced) ones, under the usual conditions for radical gradation. E.g.:
| Gradation | Example | Gloss |
|---|---|---|
| pː : b | qopːə : qobən | skin, hide |
| tː : d | utːə : udən | hand |
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ Ravila, Paavo (1984) [1959]. "Kantakieli kielihistorian peruskäsitteenä". In Paunonen, Heikki; Rintala, Päivi (eds.). Nykysuomen rakenne ja kehitys. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. pp. 27–38. ISBN 951-717-360-1.
- ^ a b Helimski, Eugene. Proto-Uralic gradation: Continuation and traces - In: Congressus Octavus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum. Pars I: Orationes plenariae et conspectus quinquennales. Jyväskylä, 1995
- ^ Posti, Lauri (1953), "From Pre-Finnic to Late Proto-Finnic", Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen, 31: 62–65
- ^ Kimberli Mäkäräinen. "The diabolical k". Finnish Grammar. Retrieved 2009-01-24.
- ^ "VISK - § 44 Astevaihtelun ulkopuolelle jääviä sanoja". Kotimaisten kielten tutkimuskeskus. Retrieved 2016-10-24.
- ^ Kettunen, Lauri (1915). Vatjan kielen äännehistoria. Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seura.
- ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-10-02. Retrieved 2012-02-24.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
References
[edit]- Helimski, Eugene 1998. Nganasan. In: Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic Languages, pp. 480–515. London / New York: Routledge.
External links
[edit]Consonant gradation
View on GrokipediaOverview
Definition
Consonant gradation is a type of consonant mutation prevalent in several Uralic languages, involving the systematic alternation between strong (unlenited) and weak (lenited) grades of consonants, most commonly within inflectional and derivational morphology.[6] This phonological process typically affects stops and fricatives, resulting in changes to their quantity (length) or quality (articulatory manner), and is conditioned by morphosyntactic factors such as case marking or number agreement.[7] Key characteristics of consonant gradation include its occurrence in specific phonological environments, often linked to syllable structure: the strong grade appears in open syllables or before certain suffixes, while the weak grade emerges in closed syllables or when a suffix closes the preceding syllable.[6] The alternation primarily involves lenition processes, such as degemination of long consonants or spirantization/voicing of single stops, reflecting a sensitivity to prosodic boundaries and morphological concatenation.[7] A prototypical example from Finnish illustrates this: the noun kukka 'flower' exhibits the strong grade geminate /kk/ in the nominative singular, but shifts to the weak grade single /k/ in the genitive kukan 'of the flower'.[6] Similarly, pata 'pot' (strong /p/) alternates to padan in the genitive, where the stop voices to /d/ in the weak grade.[7] In distinction from other consonant mutations, such as the initial mutations in Celtic languages (e.g., Irish lenition triggered by preceding articles), Uralic consonant gradation is characteristically stem-internal rather than word-initial, and it combines quantitative alternations (e.g., long to short consonants) with qualitative ones (e.g., stop to fricative).[6] The primary triggers often revolve around quantity sensitivity, whereby geminates or consonant clusters in the strong grade simplify or lenite in the weak grade to resolve phonotactic constraints in inflected forms.[7]Types of gradation
Consonant gradation in Uralic languages is broadly classified into two primary types: syllabic (also known as radical) gradation and rhythmic (also known as suffixal) gradation.[1][8] Syllabic gradation primarily affects stem-internal consonants positioned between a stressed syllable and an unstressed one, altering them based on syllable structure within the word stem.[1] In contrast, rhythmic gradation involves alternations at the boundary between the stem and morphemes, particularly pre-morphemic positions where the consonant precedes certain affixes, often tied to prosodic foot boundaries or moraic rhythm.[8][1] The mechanisms underlying these types can be quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of both. Quantitative gradation involves changes in consonant length, typically shortening geminates to single consonants, as seen in alternations like pp > p.[1][8] Qualitative gradation, on the other hand, alters the manner of articulation, such as leniting stops to fricatives, approximants, or zero, exemplified by k > Ø or k > h.[1][8] Combined types integrate both length and quality shifts, resulting in more complex mutations that affect both duration and phonetic realization.[1] Phonologically, gradation operates in specific environments where the weak grade appears in closed syllables or before particular suffixes that close the preceding syllable, while the strong grade occurs in open syllables or in isolation.[8][1] This contrast is often conditioned by the presence of short vowels in the syllable and proximity to sonorants, leading to lenition in weaker prosodic positions.[1] Representative alternations include single stops such as p : b/v/∅, t : d/r/∅, and k : g/j/∅, where the weak form involves voicing, fricativization, or deletion.[8][1] Consonant clusters may also undergo gradation, for instance kt : ht, reflecting spirantization in the weak grade.[1] In morphology, these alternations are systematically triggered by the addition of suffixes, such as case endings or possession markers, which determine the syllabic or foot environment and thus the grade selection.[8][1] For example, certain possessive suffixes may inhibit gradation, preserving the strong grade, while nominative or genitive markers often induce the weak form.[8]Historical development
Origins in Proto-Uralic
Consonant gradation in the Uralic language family is reconstructed as an inherited allophonic feature originating in Proto-Uralic, where it functioned primarily as a lenition process affecting stop consonants in intervocalic or preconsonantal positions. Comparative evidence from daughter languages across the family supports this proto-level origin, with alternations involving the weakening of voiceless stops *p, *t, *k into voiced fricatives, approximants, or zero in weak-grade contexts, while strong grades retained the original stops. This pattern is evident in reconstructions where, for example, *k alternated with *γ or *x in intervocalic environments, as proposed in early comparative studies of Uralic phonology.[9] The process was closely tied to Proto-Uralic prosody, particularly its stress system, which placed primary emphasis on the initial syllable and divided words into alternating strong (odd-numbered) and weak (even-numbered) syllables. According to Janhunen (1981), this rhythmic stress pattern influenced syllable weight and conditioned gradation, with lenition occurring systematically in weak syllables—either open even syllables or closed syllables preceding them—leading to allophonic variations that later phonologized in branches. Helimski (1995) formalized this as two interrelated rules: one for rhythmic gradation weakening consonants after vocalic nuclei in weak syllables, and another for syllabic gradation in closed weak syllables, yielding voiced realizations such as fricatives intervocalically.[9][10] Distribution of gradation patterns across major Uralic branches, including Finnic and Samic in the west and Samoyedic languages like Nganasan and Selkup in the east, indicates inheritance from Proto-Uralic rather than independent development or convergence. Traces in Samoyedic, such as alternations in stop series under similar prosodic conditions, provide key evidence against a solely western Uralic innovation, as argued by Helimski (1995) and Kallio (2000). This widespread presence underscores gradation's role as a core phonological feature of the proto-language, with variations emerging only in later divergences.[9][11]Evolution across Uralic branches
While consonant gradation was present allophonically in Proto-Uralic, it was not a phonemic feature there; phonemic morphophonological alternations emerged as a post-Proto-Uralic development in several branches, diverging significantly after the family's dispersal around 2000 BCE. Scholarly debate persists on the exact mechanism, with proposals including direct inheritance of the proto-level process, parallel independent innovations from shared Proto-Uralic preconditions, or influences from language contact (though the latter is contested due to geographical separation).[9] In the Finnic branch, extensive quantitative gradation developed by the early 2nd millennium BCE, involving the alternation of geminate stops with singletons in closed syllables, as seen in the evolution from open-syllable strong grades to weak grades in closed environments. This process was triggered by internal syllable structure changes, such as the reduction of non-initial vowels, which created closed syllables and conditioned lenition.[12][13] The Samic branch expanded gradation to include qualitative aspects, particularly fricative alternations (e.g., voiceless to voiced), alongside quantitative changes, with a reversal in the conditioning compared to Finnic: strengthening occurs in closed syllables while weakening appears in open ones. This innovation likely arose in Proto-Samic around the late 2nd millennium BCE, reflecting adaptations to prosodic shifts and preaspiration developments unique to the branch. In contrast, the Samoyedic branch simplified gradation, retaining only limited alternations involving fewer consonants, primarily stops and sibilants, with evidence of early voicing distinctions that were later reduced in peripheral languages like Nganasan. Permian languages, such as Udmurt and Komi, show complete loss of gradation, accompanied by widespread intervocalic lenition of stops (*p, *t, *k > h or zero), representing a peripheral simplification without morphological conditioning.[12][11][13] Across branches, common innovations include analogical leveling, where gradation patterns spread from core nominal stems to verbs and adjectives through morphological analogy, enhancing paradigmatic consistency. Losses are prominent in peripheral groups like Permian and Ugric, where gradation was eliminated amid broader consonant weakening and cluster simplifications. Influencing factors encompass internal sound changes, such as vowel reduction creating closed syllables, and external contacts; for instance, early interactions with Balto-Slavic and Germanic languages in the Finnic-Samic area may have reinforced lenition patterns via substrate influence, as proposed in analyses of loanword adaptations.[12][9][14]| Proto-Uralic Form | Meaning | Finnic Reflex (e.g., Finnish) | Samic Reflex (e.g., Northern Sami) | Samoyedic Reflex (e.g., Tundra Nenets) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| *kota | house | kota (nom.) / kodan (gen.) | goahti (nom.) / gávddái (ill.) | xåta (nom.) / xåda (gen.) |
| *pata | pot | pata / padan | badji / baddji | pade / pada |
| *taka | behind | taka / takana | dakkár / daggái | toq / toγ |
Gradation in Finnic languages
General patterns in Finnic
Consonant gradation in the Finnic languages represents a shared phonological inheritance from Proto-Finnic, where it emerged as a productive alternatory process affecting stem-final consonants in inflectional paradigms. This feature is present and functional in all Finnic languages except Veps and Livonian, which lack systematic gradation, though traces may appear in dialects of the latter.[6][1] The alternation typically involves weakening or simplification of consonants between a stressed syllable and a following syllable, reflecting a common Finnic strategy to avoid heavy consonant clusters in closed syllables. The core patterns target stops /p, t, k/ in both single and geminate forms, as well as select clusters such as /pt, tk, rt/. In the strong grade, these consonants appear as unreduced stops or geminates (e.g., *pp, *tt, *kk, *tk); in the weak grade, they simplify quantitatively to single consonants (e.g., *pp > *p, *tk > *k) or undergo qualitative lenition (e.g., *p > *v, *t > *d, *k > *∅ or *h).[15] Gradation is triggered specifically by a short vowel in the preceding syllable, which closes the syllable and conditions the alternation, a mechanism conserved across the branch from Proto-Finnic.[1] This process is morphologically driven, occurring predictably in nominal inflections like the genitive and partitive cases (e.g., Proto-Finnic *jalka 'leg' : *jalan genitive) and in verbal forms such as infinitives and the connegative mood.[6] Variations exist between Western and Eastern Finnic subgroups: quantitative gradation, emphasizing length reduction without major quality changes, predominates in Western languages like Finnish and Estonian, while Eastern varieties such as Karelian exhibit more qualitative shifts, including fricativization or deletion (e.g., *k > *h or ∅).[15] These patterns stem from divergent post-Proto-Finnic developments but maintain the core syllable-closing trigger. Exceptions are common in loanwords, which resist gradation and preserve strong-grade forms due to their exogenous phonology, and in certain dialects where gradation may be leveled or absent (e.g., some Vepsian varieties).[6][1] The following table illustrates representative reflexes of Proto-Finnic strong-grade consonants in weak-grade contexts, drawing on common outcomes across Finnic languages (examples from Finnish and Estonian for illustration):| Proto-Finnic Strong Grade | Weak Grade Reflex | Example (Finnish: strong : weak) | Example (Estonian: strong : weak) |
|---|---|---|---|
| *pp | *p | kuppi : kupin (cup: gen.) | kapp : kapi (cupboard: gen.) |
| *tt | *t | matto : maton (rug: gen.) | kott : koti (bag: gen.) |
| *kk | *k | takki : takin (jacket: gen.) | kukk : koku (rooster: gen.) |
| *p | *v | kypä : kyvän (helmet: part.) | tuba : toa (room: gen.) |
| *t | *d | katto : katon (roof: gen.) | katus : katuse (roof: gen.) |
| *k | *∅ / *h | maku : mau(n) (taste: gen.) | mägi : mäe (hill: gen.) |
| *tk | *k / *sk | takki : takin (as above) | tasku : tasku (pocket: nom./gen.) |
| *rt | *r | parta : parran (beard: gen.) | part : parti (beard: gen.) |
Consonant gradation in Finnish
In Finnish, consonant gradation is a morphophonological alternation that primarily affects voiceless stops (/p, t, k/) and their geminates (/pp, tt, kk/), as well as certain clusters involving these stops, within nominal and verbal stems. The strong grade occurs in open syllables (e.g., the nominative singular), while the weak grade appears when a suffix closes the final stem syllable, creating a phonotactic constraint against heavy onsets in closed syllables. This process encompasses quantitative gradation, where geminates shorten (e.g., matto 'mat' [ˈmɑtːo] in the nominative vs. maton [ˈmɑton] in the genitive), and qualitative gradation, where single stops lenite (e.g., mato 'worm' [ˈmɑto] vs. madon [ˈmɑdon], with /t/ > ). Clusters also participate, such as /ŋk/ alternating with /kk/ or /∅/ (e.g., pankki 'bank' [ˈpɑŋki] vs. pankin [ˈpɑŋin]). These alternations are conditioned by the syllable structure post-suffixation, applying as a filter in the phonological derivation.[16][17] Historically, Finnish consonant gradation evolved from Proto-Finnic lenition processes that targeted stops in the onsets of closed syllables, particularly those following short vowels in the penultimate syllable. Geminates simplified quantitatively (*pp > p, *tt > t, *kk > k), while single stops underwent qualitative weakening (*p > v or h/∅, *t > d, r, l, or j in dialects, *k > ∅, h, j, or v). Clusters followed suit, with developments like *mp > mp (strong) vs. mv or ∅ (weak), *nt > nt vs. nn or nv, and *ŋk > ŋk vs. ŋ or kk, and specifically *tk > sk > ∅ in some environments. These changes were originally phonologically driven by syllable weight and stress patterns in Proto-Finnic, where short-vowel conditions triggered the weak grade to resolve illicit heavy-heavy sequences. Over time, the process became morphologically conditioned, preserving Proto-Finnic vowel quantity distinctions in modern stems.[17][1] Analogical extension has spread gradation beyond its original phonological environments through paradigm leveling, particularly in verbs and adjectives. For instance, in verbal paradigms, strong-grade forms in the infinitive (e.g., pudota 'to drop' with /t/) alternate with weak-grade in inflected forms (e.g., pudon 'I drop'), extending the pattern to polysyllabic stems via analogy to disyllabic models. Similarly, adjectives like kylmä 'cold' show gradation in inflections (e.g., kylmää partitive), influenced by nominal paradigms. This leveling has introduced variability, with optional application in cases like the partitive plural (e.g., logiikka 'logic' → logiikkoja strong or logikoita weak).[16][17] In modern standard Finnish, analogical limitations restrict gradation's productivity, often by aligning irregular stems with ungradating patterns through analogy to frequent or loan forms (e.g., Amerikka 'America' typically remains ungradated as Amerikasta despite historical potential). This results in incomplete application, especially in neologisms or polysyllables. Dialectal variations further modulate these restrictions: Western dialects exhibit more extensive and stable gradation, with consistent lenition (e.g., /t/ > or ), while Eastern dialects show reduced gradation or alternative realizations (e.g., /t/ > or deletion, /k/ > before back vowels), as documented in dialect studies like Kettunen (1940) analyzing variants across ~70 areas. Research such as Lainio (1989) highlights variability in weak-grade realization, with multiple phonetic options in many dialects.[16][1] The following table illustrates a full paradigm for matto 'mat' (quantitative gradation of /tt/ > /t/) and mato 'worm' (qualitative gradation of /t/ > /d/), showing nominative (strong grade, open syllable) and selected inflected forms (weak grade, closed syllable). Note that not all cases trigger gradation due to suffix structure.| Case | matto (strong: matto) | mato (strong: mato) |
|---|---|---|
| Nominative | matto | mato |
| Genitive | maton | madon |
| Partitive | mattoa | matoa |
| Illative sg. | mattuun | mattoon |
| Inessive | matossa | madossa |
| Elative | matosta | madosta |
Consonant gradation in Estonian
Consonant gradation in Estonian is a morphophonological alternation where stem consonants shift between a strong grade (typically the basic, unlenited form) and a weak grade (featuring lenition) across inflected forms, serving to mark grammatical categories such as case and number. Inherited from Proto-Finnic, this process in Estonian combines quantitative changes (alterations in consonant length) with more extensive qualitative modifications, including degemination, fricativization, deletion, assimilation, and voicing, often accompanied by vowel lowering or harmony adjustments. Unlike the predominantly quantitative gradation in Western Finnic languages, Estonian's system shows Eastern Finnic influences, with weak grades triggered primarily by morphological contexts like genitive singular or present tense, rather than strict syllable structure due to historical apocope (loss of final vowels).[6][18] The rules follow similar triggers to other Finnic languages—closed syllables or specific suffixes—but extend to broader qualitative lenition, such as stops becoming fricatives or zero (e.g., k > h/∅ in clusters like hk > h- or deletion in tuba 'room' [strong nominative] vs. toa [weak genitive, t > ∅]). Sibilants and clusters like st undergo gradation, with innovations yielding alternations such as st > s/z in Southern varieties, reflecting post-Proto-Finnic developments influenced by Germanic contact. Strengthening gradation, unique to Estonian among major Finnic languages, reverses the process in certain nouns derived from verbs, where the nominative is weak and genitive strong (e.g., hinne 'mark' [weak nominative] vs. hinde [strong genitive]). These mixed types affect 14 noun and 10 verb inflections, with examples like pikk 'long' (overlong strong) vs. pika (long weak, quantitative degemination) or kandma 'to carry' (strong) vs. kannan (weak, assimilation nd > nn).[6][18][19] Historically, gradation arose in Proto-Finnic as phonological lenition between a stressed vowel and a closed syllable but evolved into a morphosyntactic rule in Estonian through apocope around the early Common Era, making alternations less phonologically predictable and more paradigm-dependent. Post-Proto-Finnic innovations include expanded application to sibilants and clusters, with overextension via analogical leveling to loanwords, adapting foreign stems to native patterns (e.g., Russian loans showing stop deletion or gemination). Recent analyses highlight this analogical spread in modern Estonian, where gradation productivity has increased in borrowed vocabulary, driven by morphological analogy rather than phonology alone.[6][19][20] Morphologically, gradation applies across all 14 cases for nouns, including possessive constructions (e.g., genitive triggers weak grade in aed 'garden' [strong nominative] vs. aia [weak genitive, d > ∅]), and in verb tenses like present indicative (weak) vs. infinitive (strong). Dialectal variations distinguish Northern Estonian (standard basis), where productivity is irregular and lexicalized due to prosodic shifts, from Southern Estonian, featuring more consistent alternations and retention of older Eastern traits (e.g., regular vaǵa 'sieve' [strong] vs. vagja [weak plural]). In Northern dialects, gradation is less productive in some clusters, while Southern shows heightened regularity, underscoring Estonian's internal diversity.[18][19][6]Consonant gradation in other Finnic languages
In other Finnic languages such as Karelian, Votic, and Ingrian, consonant gradation retains core Proto-Finnic patterns of lenition and degemination but exhibits varying degrees of innovation, extension to new consonant types, and dialectal erosion due to language contact and endangerment. These languages share with Finnish and Estonian the alternation between strong (geminate or unreduced) and weak (single, fricativized, or deleted) grades, typically triggered by suffixes creating closed syllables, but productivity differs: Karelian maintains high regularity akin to Finnish, while Votic applies it innovatively to loanwords, and Ingrian shows partial leveling in some dialects.[6] Karelian consonant gradation closely resembles that of Finnish but incorporates Eastern Finnic influences, such as extended application to fricatives and affricates, with quantitative gradation affecting geminate sibilants (e.g., ss > s) and affricates alongside standard stops. Unlike Finnish, Karelian does not geminate /ŋ/ in certain forms, as in kengät 'shoes' pronounced [ˈkeŋɡæt] rather than [ˈkeŋŋæt]. Qualitative gradation primarily involves voiceless stops like t and k, which lenite to fricatives or zero in weak grade, as in kieli 'tongue' (strong) versus kielen 'of the tongue' (weak). This system is highly productive across dialects like Livvi-Karelian, though some Eastern varieties show minor assimilations not found in Western Finnish.[21][22] Votic displays the most innovative gradation among Finnic languages, extending the process beyond Proto-Finnic stops to clusters and even recent loanwords, with loss of some quantitative distinctions in favor of qualitative changes like voicing or deletion. Gradation affects stops and stop-containing clusters productively, including sibilants, and can occur independently of suffixes in some cases, as in genitive päzgō from nominative päsko 'swallow'. An example of cluster innovation is pk > bg in šāpka 'hat' (strong) versus šābgad 'hats' (weak), a development not seen in Finnish. This heightened productivity reflects Votic's historical contact with Russian, applying lenition to borrowed forms, though endangerment has led to variability in speaker data from the 2020s.[6][23] Ingrian features a transitional gradation system with radical, suffixal, and cluster-specific types, including historical shifts like kt > ht, but dialects exhibit partial loss and complex gemination patterns due to Russian influence. In the Soikkola dialect, radical gradation lenites geminates (e.g., pp : b, tt : d, kk : g), as in infinitive taBella 'to fight' from nominative singular oppi 'school'; suffixal gradation affects verb stems, such as kanappia 'to stick' versus first-person present indicative kanaBin. Unique traits include ts gradation (ku³sua 'to invite' > ku²sun 'I invite') and l/n-loss (sanōÂa 'to say' > saon 'I say'), alongside extensive strengthening via gemination after long syllables or in trisyllabic words (e.g., partitive singular kallā from genitive kala a 'fish'). The Lower Luga dialect shows more assimilation and deletion, like vihko 'notebook' (strong) > vihon (weak genitive), contrasting with Finnish's simpler stop-focused system and Estonian's quantity-based alternations; recent 2020s studies highlight underdocumentation, with only partial coverage in linguistic datasets.[24][25] These languages preserve Proto-Finnic gradation's phonological basis in lenition between stressed and closed syllables but diverge in scope: Karelian aligns closely with Finnish in regularity, Votic innovates on clusters and loans unlike Estonian's more restricted quantitative focus, and Ingrian introduces strengthening and losses absent in major languages. Productivity remains high in Karelian but wanes in endangered Votic and Ingrian dialects, as evidenced by 2020s fieldwork on variability.| Language | Key Gradation Type | Representative Example (Strong > Weak) | Comparison to Finnish/Estonian |
|---|---|---|---|
| Karelian | Quantitative on sibilants/affricates; no /ŋ/ gemination | kieli 'tongue' > kielen 'of the tongue' | Similar to Finnish stops/fricatives; less gemination than Finnish, more extension than Estonian |
| Votic | Innovative on clusters/loans; qualitative voicing/deletion | šāpka 'hat' > šābgad 'hats' | Broader than Finnish (includes loans); unlike Estonian's quantity-only in non-stops |
| Ingrian | Radical/suffixal with ts and gemination; partial dialectal loss | vihko 'notebook' > vihon 'of the notebook' | More complex strengthening than Finnish; kt > ht shift absent in Estonian |
Gradation in Samic languages
General patterns in Samic
Consonant gradation in the Samic languages represents an inherited phonological process from Proto-Uralic, where it originally affected consonant clusters at syllable boundaries, but the branch developed distinctive innovations such as pre-aspirated stops in the strong grade (grade III), alternating with voiced stops or fricatives in the weak grade, e.g., ht (strong) alternating with đ (voiced dental fricative, weak). This feature distinguishes Samic gradation from simpler alternations in other Uralic branches, incorporating both quantitative (length-based) and qualitative (voicing or frication) changes across stops, affricates, fricatives, and sonorants, including the fricative *s in certain clusters.[4] The process is triggered by morphological operations that alter syllable structure, such as closing an open syllable in inflectional forms like possessives and verbs, leading to weak-grade realizations; this syllable-based mechanism extends beyond nominals to verbal paradigms, affecting medial consonants in ways intertwined with quantity systems. Samic gradation manifests as a mix of quantitative pairs (e.g., geminate vs. singleton) and qualitative shifts (e.g., pre-aspirated *ppʰ : *b), with Northern Sami exhibiting around 34 quantitative and additional qualitative patterns, while Lule Sami shows a broader set of 57 quantitative alternations. These patterns are present across all nine Samic languages, though with varying degrees of complexity and preservation.[4][26] A representative example is the Proto-Samic noun *koatē 'hut/house', which yields modern forms like Northern Sami goahti (strong grade, nominative) alternating with goađi (weak grade, genitive), illustrating the quantitative geminate-to-singleton shift alongside qualitative voicing in the stop. Variations occur branch-wide, with stronger, more elaborate gradation in Western Samic languages like Northern and Lule Sami, where pre-aspiration and three-way quantity contrasts (short, half-long, overlong) are robustly maintained, compared to reduced forms in Eastern Samic due to historical contact with Finnic languages, which simplified certain alternations like *pm : *m to *mm : *m. This reduction reflects broader evolutionary divergence within Uralic, where contact effects modulated the inherited system without eliminating it.[4][27][26]Consonant gradation in Northern Sami
Consonant gradation in Northern Sami, the most widely spoken Sami language with approximately 20,000–25,000 speakers primarily in Norway, Sweden, and Finland, involves systematic alternations between strong and weak grades of consonants in the stem, affecting nearly all nouns, adjectives, and verbs across inflectional paradigms. These alternations typically occur at the boundary between the first and second syllables, where the strong grade appears in closed syllables (e.g., nominative singular for consonant stems) and the weak grade in open syllables (e.g., genitive singular or plural forms). Unlike simpler systems in some Finnic languages, Northern Sami gradation encompasses three quantity grades: grade I (single consonants, weak), grade II (geminate consonants or clusters, strong), and grade III (preaspirated or extended clusters, super-strong), with qualitative changes such as devoicing or fricativization.[28][18] The core rules feature strong-weak alternations, often with pre-aspiration in grade III forms, such as riegádu ('train', strong grade II: /ˈrie̯ɡaːdu/) alternating to riegádut (plural, weak grade I: /ˈrie̯ɡaːdut/), where the cluster simplifies. Other patterns include quantitative shifts like guovssu (dawn, grade III: /ˈɡuːfːsu/) to guovssat (weak, grade II: /ˈɡuːfːsat/), or qualitative ones like čappes (cap, strong: /ˈt͡ʃahːpːes/) to čavves (genitive: /ˈt͡ʃaʋːes/), involving stop-fricative changes. Gradation is triggered morphologically by cases like the genitive singular, illative (e.g., goahtii 'into the house' from goahti), and plural forms, but not in essive or comitative, reflecting its integration into the language's quantity-sensitive phonology.[28][29][30][27] Historically, Northern Sami gradation evolved from Proto-Samic through phonological innovations, including the development of pre-aspiration in grade III (e.g., Proto-Samic *keaðkē > Northern Sami gearrat 'stone', with cluster simplification in weak contexts) and fricative alternations absent in eastern Sami branches. Analogical restrictions emerged in compounds and loan adaptations, where gradation was leveled (e.g., restricting full alternation in Scandinavian borrowings like skuvla 'school', genitive skuvla), preserving strong grades to avoid irregularity. These changes postdate Proto-Samic diversification around 200–700 AD, with Northern Sami innovating laryngeal features like /h/ insertion not uniform across the family.[31][32][33] Morphologically, gradation permeates all four noun declensions and verbal conjugations, with stems classified as even (vowel-final, strong in singular nominative) or odd (consonant-final, weak in singular nominative). For example, the paradigm of gotka ('ant', odd stem, grade II-I alternation) illustrates full integration:| Case | Singular | Plural |
|---|---|---|
| Nominative | gotka (strong II) | gotkkat (weak I) |
| Genitive | gotkkis (weak I) | gotkkáid (weak I) |
| Accusative | gotkká (weak I) | gotkkáid (weak I) |
| Illative | gotkkii (weak I) | gotkkáide (weak I) |
Gradation in Samoyedic languages
General patterns in Samoyedic
Consonant gradation in Samoyedic languages is a simplified lenition process inherited from Proto-Uralic, restricted to the voicing of singleton stops—p alternating with b, t with d, and k with g—without the geminate or complex cluster alternations characteristic of Finnic and Samic branches. This reduction stems from the Proto-Samoyedic consonant inventory, which lacked long consonants and featured mergers of fricatives and affricates, limiting gradation to basic obstruent weakening in specific phonological environments.[38] The alternation is primarily triggered by morphological suffixation, such as possessive markers (e.g., third-person singular -ta) and case endings, and is conditioned by syllable structure: weak-grade forms appear in the onset of closed syllables or post-unstressed positions, reflecting both syllabic (quantity-based) and rhythmic (stress-based) patterns. In contrast to the stricter morphological triggers in Finnic, Samoyedic gradation shows less rigid syllable conditioning due to innovations in stress and vowel systems.[6][39] Gradation is unevenly distributed across Samoyedic subgroups, fully preserved in Northern Samoyedic (notably Nganasan, with combined syllabic-rhythmic types) but appearing as relics in Nenets and Enets, where it affects only certain suffixes like gerunds; in Southern Samoyedic, it is altered or lost, though Ket Selkup dialects retain a broader application to all obstruents in closed syllables. This variation reflects branch-specific developments, including potential influences from neighboring Siberian languages on phonetic realizations.[38][6] A representative example is Proto-Samoyedic *kopå 'skin, fur', which shows no alternation in open-syllable nominative forms but lenites in suffixed contexts: Nganasan kuhu (nominative) alternates to kubuq (plural), illustrating *p > b in a closed syllable. Similarly, in Selkup, forms like qattə 'hand' yield qadən (locative), with *tt > d.[38]| Subgroup | Strong Grade Examples | Weak Grade Triggers/Examples | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Northern (Nganasan) | p, t, k (e.g., kuhu 'skin, fur') | b, d, g in closed syllables/suffixes (e.g., kubuq) | Full system; rhythmic + syllabic |
| Northern (Nenets/Enets) | p, t, k | Relics in gerunds (e.g., *kåjå 'year' > xɔjə) | Vestigial, suffix-limited |
| Southern (Selkup) | tt, pt, kt (e.g., qattə) | d, bd, gd in cases (e.g., qadən) | Modified; applies to clusters in some dialects |
Consonant gradation in Nganasan
Nganasan, a Northern Samoyedic language spoken by around 30 fluent speakers as of the 2020s on the Taymyr Peninsula in Russia, exhibits one of the most systematic and complex systems of consonant gradation among Uralic languages east of the Finnic branch. This process involves lenition alternations between strong and weak grades of consonants, primarily affecting stops and fricatives in stem-final positions, and is triggered by morphological suffixation that alters syllable structure or rhythmic position. Unlike more innovative Southern Samoyedic languages, Nganasan retains qualitative gradation close to its Proto-Samoyedic origins, with minimal analogical leveling, making it the most conservative living representative in this regard. The language is classified as critically endangered, with accelerating speaker loss documented in recent corpora (2024–2025).[40] Consonant gradation in Nganasan operates through two intertwined mechanisms: rhythmic gradation (RG), which depends on the word's syllable count and stress rhythm, and syllabic gradation (SG), which is conditioned by whether a syllable is open or closed. In RG, strong-grade consonants appear after odd-numbered syllables, while weak-grade forms occur after even syllables; in SG, strong grade prevails in open syllables, and weak grade in closed ones or those historically closed by suffixes. Key alternations include /k/ > /g/, /t/ > /ð/, /s/ > /ď/, and for clusters /nt/ > /nd/, /ŋk/ > /ŋg/, often triggered by case markers (e.g., accusative -m, genitive -ŋ) or number suffixes that close syllables or insert historical "empty slots" from Proto-Samoyedic consonants. These changes apply productively in both nominal and verbal inflection, reflecting the language's agglutinative morphology without heavy reliance on analogical reforms seen in other Samoyedic varieties.[41] In nominal paradigms, gradation is evident in stems ending in obstruents or clusters, such as məku 'back' appearing as məku in the nominative singular (strong grade, open syllable) but məgu in the accusative (weak grade, closed by -m). Similarly, kətu 'claw' shows kətu (nom. sg., strong) versus kəðu (gen. sg., weak via -ŋ creating historical closure), and bəntu 'root' alternates to bəndu in the nominative plural due to SG in the closed syllable. For the noun ŋod’a 'reindeer', the paradigm illustrates this in forms like ŋod’a (nom. sg., strong) shifting to ŋod’a-ŋu (gen. pl., weak grade in cluster if applicable), highlighting how number and case markers induce lenition while preserving Proto-Samoyedic patterns. Verbal stems follow analogous rules, as in kunduaxuətu 's/he sleeps' (strong) reducing to kunduaxðuŋ in the second person singular, where RG enforces weak grade after an even syllable. A distinctive feature of Nganasan gradation is its interaction with palatalization, where palatal consonants or vowels trigger additional assimilations, such as /sʲ/ > /ď/ or /ńsʲ/ > /ńď/ in clusters before front vowels. For instance, in palatalized stems like basa 'iron', gradation yields baďa in the plural, blending lenition with regressive palatal effects from suffixes. This complexity, documented through extensive fieldwork in the early 2000s, underscores Nganasan's retention of archaic Uralic morphophonology, though recent post-2020 documentation reveals variability in speaker production due to language shift. The endangered status of Nganasan, classified as critically endangered with accelerating speaker loss, poses challenges to the productivity of gradation, as younger semi-speakers may irregularize alternations under Russian influence or simplify paradigms.[42] Fieldwork since 2020 has captured these shifts, emphasizing the urgency of preserving gradation data before full obsolescence.[43]Consonant gradation in Selkup
Consonant gradation in Selkup, a Southern Samoyedic language of the Uralic family, is a restricted lenition process inherited from Proto-Samoyedic, limited primarily to the obstruent stops /t/ and /k/, which alternate between a strong grade of geminate voiceless consonants (/tt/, /kk/) and a weak grade of single voiced consonants (/d/, /g/). This alternation occurs mainly in closed syllables, where the weak grade appears when the syllable is shortened or closed by a suffix, reflecting a historical prosodic conditioning similar to other Samoyedic languages. Unlike the more extensive systems in Northern Samoyedic branches, Selkup gradation does not affect clusters like /nt/ or /ŋk/ productively across all dialects, and it is often subject to leveling through analogy, reducing its regularity.[38] The process applies morphologically chiefly in nominal inflections, particularly possessive suffixes and certain case forms, where stem-final strong-grade geminates weaken to trigger the alternation. For instance, in the Ket dialect, Proto-Samoyedic *kətå 'hand, fingernail' yields nominative qattə (strong grade) but genitive qadən and 1SG possessive qattōm ~ qadōm (weak grade), illustrating the shift in closed syllables. Similarly, *timə 'tooth' appears as tiwwə in the nominative but tiwən in the genitive. These patterns highlight gradation's role in fusing stem and suffix, though incomplete application leads to optional or dialect-specific realizations.[38] Historically, Selkup gradation derives from Proto-Samoyedic obstruent weakening in non-initial syllables, but extensive vowel reductions and shifts—such as the merger of short vowels into schwa (/ə/)—have opened many closed syllables, causing widespread loss of the weak-grade trigger and analogical restoration of strong forms in paradigms. In southern dialects like Upper Ob Selkup, gradation is entirely absent due to these prosodic changes, defining the dialect negatively against northern varieties. Northern dialects (Taz and Tym) and the southern Ket dialect retain higher productivity, with analogical extensions spreading the alternation to non-etymological contexts, such as reverse gradation in some possessives (e.g., Ket čoppərən from čobər 'edge'). This divergence reflects ongoing leveling amid vowel instability.[38][44] Recent studies from the 2020s emphasize the remnants of gradation in endangered Selkup dialects, documenting its reduced productivity in speaker corpora and attributing further erosion to contact-induced language shift and incomplete acquisition. In Ket and Taz Selkup, gradation persists in conservative idiolects for core nominals like body parts and kin terms, but analogical pressures from leveled forms dominate in innovative speech, contrasting with fuller retention in Nganasan. These analyses underscore gradation's role as a marker of Samoyedic inheritance amid dialectal fragmentation.[44][38]Gradation in other language families
Consonant gradation in Siouan languages
Consonant gradation in Siouan languages refers to the alternation of fricatives, particularly alveolar, postalveolar, and velar ones, in specific morphological contexts to encode semantic distinctions such as intensity or scale. This phenomenon, often termed spirant gradation, is a form of inherited sound symbolism reconstructed for Proto-Siouan, the ancestor of the family spoken approximately 3,000 years ago.[45][46] It primarily affects the Mississippi Valley Siouan subgroup, including languages like Umóⁿhoⁿ and Paⁿka (Omaha-Ponca), where it manifests in verb stems and derived forms without linking to diminutive or augmentative morphology, unlike in some other families.[46] In Umóⁿhoⁿ and Paⁿka, gradation involves systematic alternations triggered by prefixes, such as instrumental prefixes like ba- or ga-, leading to changes in fricative quality while maintaining voicing consistency within sets. For example, the root ké s (as in Mandan 'scratch') alternates with ké x ('scrape, rake'), and similar patterns appear in Umóⁿhoⁿ-Paⁿka forms like ga-skápói ('clapping sound') versus ga-shkápói ('slapping sound'), illustrating how gradation differentiates nuanced actions in onomatopoeic or sensory verbs. Recent corpus-based analyses of 106 such alternating roots from historical data confirm its historical productivity in lexical derivation, though it is no longer productive in modern usage and documentation relies heavily on historical fieldwork due to language endangerment.[46][46] Historically, these patterns are reconstructed through comparative evidence across Siouan languages, showing preservation in some branches (e.g., Dhegiha) but loss or reduction in others, with no evidence of geminate consonants involved—unlike typological parallels in Uralic gradation, where suffix-triggered lenition is more common. This prefix-dominant, symbolism-driven process highlights an independent evolution in Siouan, expanding the understanding of consonant mutation beyond Uralic families. Occurrences in nearby Muskogean languages remain debated but lack confirmed parallels to Siouan-style gradation.[46][46]Consonant gradation in historical Danish
Consonant gradation in Danish refers to a series of historical sound changes, beginning around 1400 CE, involving lenition of stops and fricatives, particularly in post-vocalic positions. This process, also known as klusil- & spirantsvækkelsen, affected obstruents by shifting them toward weaker realizations, such as devoicing or reduction in word-final positions, contributing to the modern Danish phonological system where initial and final obstruents show asymmetric patterns. Unlike the morphological triggers in Uralic or Siouan, Danish gradation was primarily phonetically conditioned by syllable structure and prosody, though it influenced morphology indirectly through historical alternations in inflection.[47][48]References
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/goahti
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ant
