Hubbry Logo
Sound changeSound changeMain
Open search
Sound change
Community hub
Sound change
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Sound change
Sound change
Sound change
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Sound change and alternation
Metathesis
Lenition
Fortition
Epenthesis
Elision
Transphonologization
Assimilation
Dissimilation
Sandhi
Synalepha
Other types
This article contains phonetic transcriptions in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA. For the distinction between [ ], / / and ⟨ ⟩, see IPA § Brackets and transcription delimiters.

In historical linguistics, a sound change is a change in the pronunciation of a language. A sound change can involve the replacement of one speech sound (or, more generally, one phonetic feature value) by a different one (called phonetic change) or a more general change to the speech sounds that exist (phonological change), such as the merger of two sounds or the creation of a new sound. A sound change can eliminate the affected sound, or a new sound can be added. Sound changes can be environmentally conditioned if the change occurs in only some sound environments, and not others.

The term "sound change" refers to diachronic changes, which occur in a language's sound system. On the other hand, "alternation" refers to changes that happen synchronically (within the language of an individual speaker, depending on the neighbouring sounds) and do not change the language's underlying system (for example, the -s in the English plural can be pronounced differently depending on the preceding sound, as in bet[s], bed[z], which is a form of alternation, rather than sound change). Since "sound change" can refer to the historical introduction of an alternation (such as postvocalic /k/ in the Tuscan dialect, which was once [k] as in di [k]arlo 'of Carlo' but is now [h] di [h]arlo and alternates with [k] in other positions: con [k]arlo 'with Carlo'), that label is inherently imprecise and must often be clarified as referring to either phonemic change or restructuring.

Research on sound change is usually conducted under the working assumption that it is regular, which means that it is expected to apply mechanically whenever its structural conditions are met, irrespective of any non-phonological factors like the meaning of the words that are affected. Apparent exceptions to regular change can occur because of dialect borrowing, grammatical analogy, or other causes known and unknown, and some changes are described as "sporadic" and so they affect only one or a few particular words, without any apparent regularity.

The Neogrammarian linguists of the 19th century introduced the term sound law to refer to rules of regular change, perhaps in imitation of the laws of physics,[1] and the term "law" is still used in referring to specific sound rules that are named after their authors like Grimm's law, Grassmann's law, etc. Real-world sound laws often admit exceptions, but the expectation of their regularity or absence of exceptions is of great heuristic value[further explanation needed] by allowing historical linguists to define the notion of regular correspondence by the comparative method.[citation needed]

Each sound change is limited in space and time and so it functions in a limited area (within certain dialects) and for a limited period of time. For those and other reasons, the term "sound law" has been criticized for implying a universality that is unrealistic for sound change.[2]

A sound change that affects the phonological system or the number or the distribution of its phonemes is a phonological change.

Principles

[edit]

The following statements are used as heuristics in formulating sound changes as understood within the Neogrammarian model. However, for modern linguistics, they are not taken as inviolable rules but are seen as guidelines.

Sound change has no memory: Sound change does not discriminate between the sources of a sound. If a previous sound change causes X,Y > Y (features X and Y merge as Y), a new one cannot affect only an original X.

Sound change ignores grammar: A sound change can have only phonological constraints, like X > Z in unstressed syllables. For example, it cannot affect only adjectives. The only exception is that a sound change may recognise word boundaries, even when they are unindicated by prosodic clues. Also, sound changes may be regularized in inflectional paradigms (such as verbal inflection), when it is no longer phonological but morphological in nature.[3]

Sound change is exceptionless: If a sound change can happen at a place, it will affect all sounds that meet the criteria for change. Apparent exceptions are possible because of analogy and other regularization processes, another sound change, or an unrecognized conditioning factor. That is the traditional view expressed by the Neogrammarians. In the past decades, however, this has been challenged by the theory of lexical diffusion, which argues that sound change need not necessarily affect all possible words. However, when a sound change is initiated, it often eventually expands to the whole lexicon. For example, the Spanish fronting of the Vulgar Latin [g] (voiced velar stop) before [i e ɛ] seems to have reached every possible word. By contrast, the voicing of word-initial Latin [k] to [g] occurred in colaphus > golpe and cattus > gato but not in canna > caña.

Sound change is inevitable: All languages vary from place to place and time to time, and neither writing nor media prevents that change.

Formal notation

[edit]
See also: Phonological rule

A statement of the form

A > B

is to be read as "Sound A changes into (or is replaced by, is reflected as, etc.) sound B". Therefore, A belongs to an older stage of the language in question, and B belongs to a more recent stage. The symbol ">" can be reversed, B < A, which also means that the (more recent) B derives from the (older) A":

POc. *t > Rot. f
means that "Proto-Oceanic (POc.) *t is reflected as [f] in Rotuman (Rot.)".

The two sides of such a statement indicate only the start and the end of the change, but additional intermediate stages may have occurred. The example above is actually a compressed account of a sequence of changes: *[t] first changed to [θ] (like the initial consonant of English thin), which has since yielded [f] and can be represented more fully:

t > θ > f

Unless a change operates unconditionally (in all environments), the context in which it applies must be specified:

A > B /X__Y
= "A changes to B when it is preceded by X and followed by Y."

For example:

It. b > v /[vowel]__[vowel], which can be simplified to just
It. b > v /V__V (in which the V stands for any vowel)
= "Intervocalic [b] (inherited from Latin) became [v] in Italian" (such as in caballum, dēbet > cavallo 'horse', deve 'owe (3rd pers. sing.)'

Here is a second example:

PIr. [−cont][−voi] > [+cont] /__[C][+cont]
= "A preconsonantal voiceless non-continuant (voiceless stop) changed into corresponding a voiceless continuant (fricative) in Proto-Iranian (PIr.)" when it was immediately followed by a continuant consonant (a resonant or a fricative): Proto-Indo-Iranian *pra 'forth' > Avestan fra; *trayas "three" (masc. nom. pl.)> Av. θrayō; *čatwāras "four" (masc. nom. pl.) > Av. čaθwārō; *pśaws "of a cow" (nom. *paśu) > Av. fšāoš (nom. pasu). The fricativization did not occur before stops and so *sapta "seven" > Av. hapta. (However, in the variety of Iranian that led to Old Persian, fricativization occurred in all clusters: Old Persian hafta "seven".)

The symbol "#" stands for a word boundary (initial or final) and so the notation "/__#" means "word-finally", and "/#__" means "word-initially":

Gk. [stop] > ∅ /__#
= "Word-final stops were deleted in Greek (Gk.)".

That can be simplified to

Gk. P > ∅ / __#

in which P stands for any plosive.

Terms for changes in pronunciation

[edit]

In historical linguistics, a number of traditional terms designate types of phonetic change, either by nature or result. A number of such types are often (or usually) sporadic, that is, more or less accidents that happen to a specific form. Others affect a whole phonological system. Sound changes that affect a whole phonological system are also classified according to how they affect the overall shape of the system; see phonological change.

  • Assimilation: One sound becomes more like another, or (much more rarely) two sounds become more like each other. Example: in Latin the prefix *kom- becomes con- before an apical stop ([t d]) or [n]: contactus "touched", condere "to found, establish", connūbium "legal marriage". The great majority of assimilations take place between contiguous segments,[citation needed] and the great majority involve the earlier sound becoming more like the later one (e.g. in connūbium, m- + n becomes -nn- rather than -mm-). Assimilation between contiguous segments are (diachronically speaking) exceptionless sound laws rather than sporadic, isolated changes.[citation needed]
  • Dissimilation: The opposite of assimilation. One sound becomes less like another, or (much more rarely) two sounds become less like each other. Examples: Classical Latin quīnque /kʷiːnkʷe/ "five" > Vulgar Latin *kinkʷe (whence French cinq, Italian cinque, etc.); Old Spanish omne "man" > Spanish hombre. The great majority of dissimilations involve segments that are not contiguous, but, as with assimilations, the great majority involve an earlier sound changing with reference to a later one. Dissimilation is usually a sporadic phenomenon, but Grassmann's Law (in Sanskrit and Greek) exemplifies a systematic dissimilation. If the change of a sequence of fricatives such that one becomes a stop is dissimilation, then such changes as Proto-Germanic *hs to /ks/ (spelled x) in English would count as a regular sound law: PGmc. *sehs "six" > Old English siex, etc.
  • Metathesis: Two sounds switch places. Example: Old English thridda became Middle English third. Most such changes are sporadic, but occasionally a sound law is involved, as Romance *tl > Spanish ld, thus *kapitlu, *titlu "chapter (of a cathedral)", "tittle" > Spanish cabildo, tilde. Metathesis can take place between non-contiguous segments, as Greek amélgō "I milk" > Modern Greek armégō.
  • Lenition: "Weakening" of a consonant from one that takes more effort to pronounce (and more constriction in the vocal tract) to one that takes less, e.g. a stop consonant becoming an affricate or fricative.
  • Fortition: the opposite of lenition, "strengthening" a consonant, e.g. an approximant becoming an affricate or fricative.
  • Reduction: Whereas the weakening of consonants is called lenition, the weakening of vowels is called reduction. For example, in most varieties of English, unstressed vowels often reduce to a schwa, such as the two a's in arena.
  • Tonogenesis: Syllables come to have distinctive pitch contours.
  • Sandhi: Conditioned changes that take place at word-boundaries but not elsewhere. It can be morpheme-specific, as in the loss of the vowel in the enclitic forms of English is /ɪz/, with subsequent change of /z/ to /s/ adjacent to a voiceless consonant Frank's not here /ˈfræŋksnɒtˈhɪər/. Or a small class of elements, such as the assimilation of the /ð/ of English the, this and that to a preceding /n/ (including the /n/ of and when the /d/ is elided) or /l/: all the often /ɔːllə/, in the often /ɪnnə/, and so on. As in these examples, such features are rarely indicated in standard orthography. In a striking exception, Sanskrit orthography reflects a wide variety of such features; thus, tat "that" is written tat, tac, taj, tad, or tan depending on what the first sound of the next word is. These are all assimilations, but medial sequences do not assimilate the same way.
  • Haplology: The loss of a syllable when an adjacent syllable is similar or (rarely) identical. Example: Old English Englaland became Modern English England, or the common pronunciation of probably as [ˈprɒbli]. This change usually affects commonly used words. The word haplology itself is sometimes jokingly pronounced haplogy.
  • Elision, aphaeresis, syncope, and apocope: All are losses of sounds. Elision is the loss of unstressed sounds, aphaeresis the loss of initial sounds, syncope is the loss of medial sounds, and apocope is the loss of final sounds.
    • Elision examples: in the southeastern United States, unstressed schwas tend to drop, so "American" is not /əˈmɛɹəkən/ but /ˈmɚkən/. Standard English is possum < opossum.
    • Syncope examples: the Old French word for "state" is estat, but the s disappeared, yielding état. Similarly, the loss of /t/ in English soften, hasten, castle, etc.
    • Apocope examples: the final -e [ə] in Middle English words was pronounced, but is only retained in spelling as a silent E. In English /b/ and /ɡ/ were apocopated in final position after nasals: lamb, long /læm/, /lɒŋ ~ lɔːŋ/.
  • Epenthesis (also known as anaptyxis): The introduction of a sound between two adjacent sounds. Examples: Latin humilis > English humble; in Slavic an -l- intrudes between a labial and a following yod, as *zemya "land" > Russian zemlya (земля). Most commonly, epenthesis is in the nature of a "transitional" consonant, but vowels may be epenthetic: non-standard English film in two syllables, athlete in three. Epenthesis can be regular, as when the Indo-European "tool" suffix *-tlom everywhere becomes Latin -culum (so speculum "mirror" < *speḱtlom, pōculum "drinking cup" < *poH3-tlom). Some scholars reserve the term epenthesis for "intrusive" vowels and use excrescence for intrusive consonants.
  • Prothesis: The addition of a sound at the beginning of a word. Example: word-initial /s/ + stop clusters in Latin gained a preceding /e/ in Old Spanish and Old French; hence, the Spanish word for "state" is estado, deriving from Latin status.
  • Nasalization: Vowels followed by nasal consonants can become nasalized. If the nasal consonant is lost but the vowel retains its nasalized pronunciation, nasalization becomes phonemic, that is, distinctive. Example: French "-in" words used to be pronounced [in], but are now pronounced [ɛ̃], and the [n] is no longer pronounced (except in cases of liaison).

Examples of specific sound changes in various languages

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Sound change

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Sound change is the systematic alteration in the pronunciation of within a or over time, serving as a primary driver of phonological evolution in . These changes can be unconditioned, affecting an entire class of sounds regardless of , or conditioned, occurring in specific phonological environments due to phonetic motivations such as articulation ease or perceptual factors. A cornerstone principle is the Neogrammarian hypothesis, which posits that sound changes are regular, exceptionless, and purely phonetically driven, operating like mechanical laws without exceptions or irregularities in their application. The study of sound change emerged prominently in the 19th century with the Neogrammarians, a group of linguists who revolutionized by emphasizing the predictability and uniformity of these shifts, enabling the to reconstruct ancestral languages like Proto-Indo-European. This approach contrasts with earlier views that attributed changes to external factors such as climate or physiological influences, which have largely been discredited in favor of internal linguistic mechanisms. Notable examples include , a set of unconditioned shifts in Proto-Indo-European stop consonants (e.g., *p > f in , as in Latin *pater to English ), which exemplifies regularity across an entire . Another classic case is the in English (roughly 1400–1700 CE), where long vowels were raised and diphthongized (e.g., /iː/ to Modern /aɪ/ in bite), illustrating conditioned chain reactions in vowel systems. Beyond phonetic regularity, modern research distinguishes Neogrammarian sound change—which is gradual, lexically uniform, and affects low-level phonetic rules—from processes like lexical diffusion, where changes spread unevenly through the vocabulary based on word frequency (e.g., high-frequency words like every undergoing schwa reduction to evry before low-frequency ones). Such diffusion often follows patterns from high- to low-frequency items due to articulatory automation, though perceptual reanalysis can reverse this. Sound changes interact with other linguistic processes like and borrowing, but their regularity underpins models and , revealing relationships among over 400 . Explanations now integrate sociolinguistic factors, such as community variation, with phonetic origins, moving beyond purely internal models to predict patterns like vowel chain shifts.

Fundamentals

Definition and Scope

Sound change refers to the systematic and regular shifts in the of that occur over time within a community, primarily affecting phonemes or their allophones in a consistent manner across relevant linguistic environments. These changes are a core mechanism of evolution, driven by natural phonetic processes rather than deliberate alteration, and they apply uniformly to all instances of the targeted under specified conditions. Unlike synchronic alternations, which represent rule-governed variations within a single state—such as morphological or phonological patterns observed at a given time—sound change is inherently diachronic, emerging unconsciously through historical developments in speech communities. Synchronic alternations may reflect the residues of prior sound changes but do not constitute change themselves, as they lack the temporal progression and community-wide diffusion characteristic of true sound shifts. The scope of sound change is limited to alterations in phonetic realization, without directly impacting semantic meaning, and it typically unfolds within cohesive speech communities where innovations spread through social interaction. Basic categories include shifts, such as the intervocalic voicing seen in Latin pater to Spanish padre, and gradations, like those in the ablaut patterns of . Sound changes are inevitable as part of linguistic drift, proceeding phonetically in gradual increments—such as subtle articulatory adjustments—yet resulting in phonemically abrupt outcomes, where new contrasts arise or existing ones merge suddenly in the system. This aligns with the Neogrammarian hypothesis, which posits exceptionless regularity in such transformations.

Historical Development

The concept of sound change emerged in the early 19th century through comparative philology, where scholars began identifying systematic shifts in sounds across related languages. Jacob Grimm formulated what became known as Grimm's Law in the second edition of his Deutsche Grammatik in 1822, describing regular consonant correspondences between Proto-Indo-European and Germanic languages, such as the shift from p to f (e.g., Latin pater to English father), which marked a foundational observation of predictable phonetic evolution. This groundwork was laid by earlier pioneers in during the 1810s to . , in his 1818 essay Undersøgelse om det gamle Nordiske eller Islandske Sprogs Oprindelse, documented cognate relationships and sound correspondences among , emphasizing methodical comparisons. Franz Bopp's Über das Conjugationssystem der Sanscritsprache in Vergleichung mit jenem der griechischen, lateinischen, persischen und germanischen Sprache (1816) established comparative grammar as a discipline by analyzing morphological and phonetic parallels, laying the basis for viewing changes as systematic rather than sporadic. , in works like his Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen (1861, with roots in 1850s research), advanced models and reconstructed proto-languages, solidifying the idea of regular sound laws governing linguistic evolution. In the , shifted focus by distinguishing diachronic (historical) from synchronic (contemporary) analysis of systems. , in his (1916, compiled posthumously), argued that diachronic study examines changes over time, while synchronic study treats as a static structure, influencing how sound changes were later conceptualized as alterations within relational systems. The Prague School, founded in 1926, integrated functionalism into , viewing phonological changes as driven by communicative efficiency and systemic balance, with scholars like emphasizing oppositions and in sound inventories. In modern linguistics, generative phonology reframed sound change as computational processes involving rule adjustments. and Morris Halle's (1968) proposed that historical shifts result from the addition, deletion, or reordering of phonological rules in underlying representations, integrating diachronic phenomena into a framework.

Principles

Neogrammarian Hypothesis

The Neogrammarian hypothesis originated in the late 1870s as a in , spearheaded by German scholars including Karl Brugmann, Hermann Osthoff, August Leskien, and Hermann Paul. Emerging between 1875 and 1880, it represented a direct reaction against the earlier dominance of analogical explanations, which attributed irregularities in sound correspondences to or semantic associations rather than systematic phonetic processes. The foundational , co-authored by Osthoff and Brugmann in , explicitly rejected such analogies in favor of treating sound change as a predictable, law-governed . At its core, the hypothesis posits that sound changes are regular, occurring according to exceptionless phonetic laws that apply mechanically across all relevant linguistic environments. These laws are independent of semantics, morphology, or grammatical categories, affecting sounds solely based on their phonetic context and the physiological mechanisms of articulation and . As articulated in the 1878 preface, "Every sound change, inasmuch as it occurs mechanically, takes place according to laws that admit no exception," ensuring that all words containing the targeted sound in identical conditions undergo the change uniformly. This mechanical nature underscores the hypothesis's emphasis on sound change as a blind, physiological process devoid of or meaning-based influence. The Neogrammarians acknowledged that changes often begin with individual phonetic variations but emphasized their eventual regularization across the . A pivotal of the Neogrammarians was Leskien's 1876 declaration that "sound laws operate without exception," which served as a rallying to prioritize empirical rigor in identifying phonetic regularities over speculative analogies. This principle deliberately sidelined grammatical or lexical factors, insisting that apparent irregularities stemmed from incomplete identification of phonetic conditions rather than violations of the laws themselves. Hermann Paul further systematized these ideas in his 1880 Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte, where he argued that sound changes are regular processes driven by the inherent tendencies of , reinforcing the hypothesis's commitment to predictability and universality. This approach solidified the Neogrammarians' legacy as pioneers of methodical, evidence-based language reconstruction.

Regularity and Exceptions

The principle of regularity in sound change posits that phonological shifts occur uniformly and exceptionlessly across all relevant phonetic environments within a , operating mechanically without reference to a word's , meaning, or morphological role. This uniformity implies that once a sound change is initiated under specific conditions, it applies consistently to every eligible instance in the , treating the language as a impervious to historical "memory." Formulated by the Neogrammarians in the late 19th century, this principle revolutionized by emphasizing empirical predictability over explanations. Apparent exceptions to regularity arise from external or systemic factors that disrupt the uniform application of changes, rather than from the changes themselves being irregular. Borrowing introduces foreign words that may retain original , resisting native sound shifts; for instance, loanwords in English often preserve sounds like /θ/ and /ð/ from Greek or Latin origins despite later changes in native . can override phonetic regularity by reshaping forms to match paradigmatic patterns, as seen in the leveling of strong verb stems in . Dialect mixture further complicates uniformity, blending features from coexisting varieties and creating hybrid forms that deviate from expected outcomes. High-frequency items, such as irregular verbs (e.g., English "go-went" preserving an old ablaut pattern), may evade regularization due to entrenched usage, though this resistance is not absolute and diminishes over time. Sound change exhibits inevitability, as all speech sounds are subject to gradual modification over generations if articulatory, perceptual, or environmental pressures persist, ensuring that no phonological system remains static indefinitely. Unlike biological evolution, these changes lack teleology or purposeful direction; they emerge from probabilistic phonetic tendencies rather than adaptive goals, with outcomes determined by chain reactions in the sound inventory. From a perceptual and articulatory perspective, sound changes demonstrate phonetic gradualness, beginning as subtle allophonic variations—context-dependent realizations of phonemes that speakers may not consciously notice—before potentially triggering phonemic abruptness, where contrasts realign and new distinctions emerge in the language's inventory. This progression underscores the bridge between individual phonetic performance and collective phonemic restructuring, with gradual shifts accumulating until a tipping point alters the systemic oppositions.

Types of Sound Changes

Phonetic Processes

Phonetic processes represent a category of sound changes that arise from natural articulatory or perceptual pressures in , leading to gradual, gradient shifts in sound realization rather than abrupt categorical alterations. These changes often facilitate ease of articulation or enhance perceptual distinctiveness, occurring across languages as speakers adapt phonetic forms to physiological constraints without invoking abstract phonological rules. Key examples include and , which involve modifications in consonant strength, as well as and other reductive or reorganizational processes like metathesis and haplology. Lenition, or consonant weakening, is one of the most common phonetic processes, typically affecting stops or fricatives by reducing their articulatory effort, such as through voicing, spirantization, or approximantization. This weakening is frequently observed in intervocalic positions, where the lack of gestural tension between vowels promotes lenited variants. For instance, in the evolution from Latin to Spanish, the voiceless bilabial stop /p/ in intervocalic contexts underwent lenition to a voiced stop /b/, as seen in the form *sapere developing into saber 'to know'. Such changes are driven by aerodynamic factors, like the difficulty of maintaining voicelessness amid vocal fold vibration in vowel-flanked environments. In contrast, entails the strengthening of , increasing their articulatory force or duration to counteract weakening tendencies or emphasize prosodic positions, often resulting in affrication, , or increased closure. This process is less frequent than but appears in word-initial or stressed contexts across various languages. An example is initial in certain dialects, where a singleton consonant lengthens into a geminate for perceptual salience, as observed in morphological in like Welsh, where initial consonants fortify under specific syntactic conditions. thus serves to enhance consonant robustness in prominent positions, balancing elsewhere in the word. Dissimilation occurs when two similar sounds within a word become less alike, typically to avoid articulatory redundancy and improve perceptual clarity, affecting or vowels in proximity. This is sporadic but well-attested in historical changes, often involving liquids like /r/ and /l/. A classic case is the in Latin *peregrinus 'foreigner' to English *pilgrim, where the medial /r/ shifted to /l/ to differentiate the adjacent liquids, yielding forms like Old French pelegrin. thus reflects speakers' tendency to resolve phonetic similarity through targeted divergence. Among other phonetic processes, metathesis involves the swapping of adjacent sounds or segments, motivated by perceptual reanalysis or articulatory sequencing preferences, leading to reordered phonetic forms without loss of material. This rearrangement often affects consonant-vowel or liquid clusters for smoother transitions. For example, Old English *brid 'bird' underwent metathesis to become Modern English *bird, transposing the /r/ and /i/ for ease in articulation. Metathesis highlights how minor perceptual misfires can propagate as systematic changes over time. Haplology, a reductive process, eliminates one of two identical or similar adjacent syllables to simplify pronunciation and reduce articulatory redundancy, particularly in rapid speech or morphological contexts. This phonetic simplification targets repetitive sequences, preventing excessive lengthening. In English, for instance, *probably often reduces to *probly in casual utterance, dropping the medial /a.b/ syllable due to its similarity to the flanking vowels. Haplology exemplifies how phonetic economy drives segmental reduction in connected speech.

Phonological Processes

Phonological processes in sound change refer to transformations that reorganize the or distributional patterns of a , often leading to systemic shifts in the contrastive sound structure rather than isolated phonetic adjustments. These changes typically involve interactions among that maintain or alter the overall phonological balance, such as through coordinated movements or consolidations within the or systems. Unlike sub-phonemic variations, these processes affect contrasts directly, influencing lexical distinctions across the . Chain shifts represent a key phonological process where multiple phonemes adjust positions in the inventory in a linked sequence, often to preserve contrasts as one sound moves and creates pressure on adjacent elements. In such shifts, the movement can be pull-type, where a vacates a space attracting others, or push-type, where pressure from below propels upward changes. A classic example is the in English, a drag chain beginning in the Late period around the , where high vowels raised and diphthongized while mid vowels advanced to fill the gaps; specifically, the long high /i:/ shifted to /aɪ/, and the long high /u:/ to /aʊ/, with subsequent adjustments in mid vowels like /e:/ to /i:/ and /o:/ to /u:/. Mergers occur when two or more distinct become identical, reducing the number of contrasts in the system, while splits involve a single dividing into two or more based on conditioning environments, increasing contrasts. Mergers often simplify the but can lead to , as seen in the loss of Latin's quantity-based distinctions in the transition to , where long and short vowels of similar quality merged, such as Latin /e:/ and /ɛ/ both becoming /e/ in many daughter languages like French and Spanish. Splits, conversely, may arise from reanalysis of allophones, though they are less common and typically require external conditioning factors to become phonemic. Assimilation is a pervasive phonological process where a sound becomes more similar to a neighboring one in manner, place, or voice, often across morpheme boundaries and leading to systemic efficiencies in articulation. It can be progressive, where the first sound influences the following one, or regressive, where the second affects the preceding; for instance, in Latin, the prefix in- before a velar underwent regressive nasal assimilation in place of articulation, as in in- + capio yielding incipio with /n/ becoming /ŋ/ before /k/. Such changes frequently propagate through the lexicon, altering phoneme distributions without creating new contrasts. Vowel harmony involves the assimilation of vowels within a word to shared features like , backness, or , creating long-distance dependencies that reorganize phonological patterns across morphemes. Reduction processes, such as syncope—the deletion of unstressed vowels in medial positions—further streamline the system by eliminating weak syllables, as commonly observed in the historical development of many languages where apophonic alternations lead to phonemic mergers in reduced forms. These mechanisms collectively maintain phonological equilibrium while adapting to articulatory and perceptual pressures.

Notation and Representation

Standard Notation

In , the simplest way to represent a sound change is through the notation "A > B," where A denotes the original sound and B its or outcome in a descendant or stage. This convention indicates a diachronic development, as seen in the retention of the Proto-Indo-European bilabial stop *p as /p/ in Latin, exemplified by forms like *ped- yielding Latin ped- "foot." To distinguish between types of changes, directional arrows vary: the ">" specifically marks historical or diachronic sound shifts across language stages, while the right-arrow "→" is reserved for synchronic phonological derivations or rules within a single language variety. This distinction helps clarify whether the process reflects evolutionary change over time or active patterning in contemporary speech. Precision in notation relies on the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), which provides standardized symbols for transcribing sounds and their transformations. For example, a voiceless velar stop /k/ might evolve into a , as in the where /k/ developed into (or [ç] after front vowels), as in Proto-West Germanic *maken to Modern German machen [ˈmaxən]. IPA brackets [] denote narrow phonetic transcription for actual realizations, while slashes // indicate phonemic levels, allowing clear depiction of both broad and detailed shifts. Reconstructed forms from proto-languages are conventionally prefixed with an asterisk (*) to signal their hypothetical nature, based on comparative evidence rather than direct attestation. Thus, notations like *Proto-Indo-European *ḱ > Greek /k/ illustrate how a palatovelar stop developed into a plain velar in centum branches, distinguishing proto-forms from later, documented ones. This practice ensures transparency in representing unattested ancestral sounds.

Contextual Rules

In historical linguistics, sound changes that are conditioned by specific phonetic environments are formalized using contextual rules to precisely describe the contexts in which the changes apply. The conventional format for such rules is A > B / X__Y, where A represents the original sound or class of sounds, B the resulting sound or class, and / X__Y specifies the environment conditioning the change, with the double underscore (__) indicating the position of the affected sound—immediately after X and before Y. This notation extends basic representations of unconditional changes by incorporating environmental constraints, allowing for accurate modeling of phonetically motivated shifts. The underscores serve as placeholders to denote the exact locus of the change within a sequence, enabling rules to capture dependencies on adjacent or nearby sounds; for example, if the environment is absent (indicated by / —), the change is unconditioned and applies broadly. Variables simplify the description of general patterns: # marks word boundaries (e.g., initial or final position), C stands for any , and V for any , permitting concise notation for recurring contexts like intervocalic or word-initial positions. A clear illustration is Latin rhotacism, where s > r / V__V between vowels, as in *honos (genitive *honosis) > honor (genitive honoris). In Italian, intervocalic lenition changes /b/ to between vowels, written b > v / V__V; for instance, Latin *tabula evolves to Italian tavola through this rule, with /b/ shifting in the V-b-V context while remaining stable elsewhere. Grimm's Law, the systematic consonant shift distinguishing Proto-Germanic from Proto-Indo-European, exemplifies rule application through its three parallel components, each unconditioned but formally notated for derivation: (1) voiceless stops p, t, k > f, θ, h / —; (2) voiced stops b, d, g > p, t, k / —; (3) voiced aspirated stops bh, dh, gh > b, d, g / —. To derive forms, these rules apply sequentially or simultaneously to relevant consonants in a word; for Proto-Indo-European *pṓds 'foot', the initial *p > f yields Proto-Germanic *fōts, with the stem vowel adjusting separately but the consonant shift complete in one step. Similarly, for *bʰréh₂tēr 'brother', *bh > b and *t > θ produce *brōþēr, demonstrating how the rules transform the entire consonant inventory systematically across derivations.

Examples

Indo-European Languages

One of the most prominent examples of sound change in the Indo-European family is Grimm's Law, also known as the First Germanic Sound Shift, which systematically altered the stop consonants from Proto-Indo-European (PIE) to Proto-Germanic around the 1st millennium BCE. This law involved three main shifts: voiceless stops (*p, *t, *k) became voiceless fricatives (*f, *θ, *x > h); voiced stops (*b, *d, *g) became voiceless stops (*p, *t, *k); and voiced aspirated stops (*bʰ, *dʰ, *gʰ) became voiced fricatives or stops (*β > b, *ð > d, *ɣ > g). A classic illustration is PIE *pṓds 'foot' evolving into Proto-Germanic *fōts and English foot, contrasting with Latin pēs. Apparent exceptions to were later explained by , proposed in 1875, which accounted for voicing of the resulting fricatives in specific environments related to PIE accentuation. Under , voiceless fricatives (*f, *θ, *x) voiced to (*v, *ð, *ɣ) if they were non-initial and followed an unstressed syllable in PIE, with the accent shifting later in Germanic. For instance, PIE *bʰréh₂tēr 'brother' (with accent on the second syllable) yielded Proto-Germanic *brōþēr > English brother with a voiced *ð, rather than the expected voiceless *θ from alone. Another key divergence within Indo-European is the Centum-Satem split, an isogloss dividing Western (Centum) and Eastern (Satem) branches based on the treatment of palatovelar consonants (*ḱ, *ǵ, *ǵʰ) around the 2nd millennium BCE. In Centum languages like Latin and Greek, palatovelars merged with plain velars (*k, *g, *gʰ), preserving a velar sound, while in Satem languages like Sanskrit and Avestan, they palatalized to sibilants (*s, *z, *ʃ). This is exemplified by PIE *ḱm̥tóm 'hundred' developing into Latin centum (with /k/) in the Centum group and Avestan satəm (with /s/) in the Satem group. In the Romance branch, descending from Latin, palatalization processes transformed consonant clusters, particularly in from the CE onward. Sequences like /kl/ underwent gestural blending, evolving into palatal laterals or affricates depending on the daughter language; for example, Latin clāvis 'key' became Italian chiave (/ˈkjaːve/, with palatal /kj/) and Spanish llave (/ˈʎaβe/, with /ʎ/). This change typically progressed through intermediate stages such as /kʎ/ to /çʎ/ before simplifying to a single palatal [ʎ] in Ibero-Romance varieties.

Non-Indo-European Languages

Sound changes are not confined to but occur universally across language families, demonstrating the broad applicability of phonetic and phonological processes in . In , such as , pharyngealization—a involving constriction in the —has spread historically from pharyngeal consonants to emphatic coronals, altering their realization from original glottalized forms. For instance, emphatic consonants like /ṭ/ developed pharyngealization through contact with adjacent pharyngeals, as seen in alternations in roots where the emphatic spreads to neighboring segments, a documented in dictionary analyses of over 10,000 entries showing patterned co-articulation. This spread exemplifies assimilation, where the pharyngeal feature propagates rightward or bidirectionally within words, contributing to the emphatic series (/ṣ, ḍ, ṭ, ẓ/) in . In Austronesian languages, vowel metathesis and changes in patterns illustrate reordering and simplification over time. Historical vowel metathesis in Philippine branches, including forms ancestral to Tagalog, involved swapping adjacent s in disyllabic roots, such as Proto-Austronesian *suiab '' developing into Cebuano huy?ab via metathesis of initial vowels and syncope, a change that regularized syllable structure in related languages like Tagalog. This process, common in Austronesian for resolving vowel clusters, reflects perceptual misparsing in rapid speech leading to permanent reorderings. Additionally, — a hallmark of Proto-Austronesian for deriving plurals or intensives—has undergone losses, with partial CV reduplicants eroding in some descendants; for example, in Tagalog, certain historical CV- patterns (e.g., from *ma-RED 'plural') simplified or were replaced by affixation due to and consonant loss in unstressed positions. These shifts highlight gradual erosion of morphological marking through sound change. Sino-Tibetan languages, particularly Sinitic, exhibit tonal splits arising from the loss of syllable-final consonants in (ca. 1250–250 BCE), which conditioned pitch distinctions preserved in modern Mandarin. Final stops like *-p, *-t, *-k split the original level tone into rising, falling, and checked categories; for example, words with Old Chinese final *-k developed into Mandarin's entering tone (now merged into tones 2 and 4), while loss of nasals and stops overall created four contrastive tones through chain shifts in voicing and aspiration of initials. This tonogenesis, where lost codas like *-k left residual evolving into high-rising tones (e.g., Mandarin tone 2 from voiced initials post-loss), affected over 80% of the , transforming a non-tonal system into a tonal one by (ca. 600 CE). In , prefixes drive alternations via nasal assimilation, a historical process rooted in Proto-Bantu. Classes 9 and 10, originally marked by *mu- and *ni-, lost their vowels through , yielding nasal prefixes that assimilated to following obstruents; in , this results in forms like m-bwa '' (class 9, /m/ → [mb]) or n-dizi 'banana' (class 10, /n/ → [nd]), where the underspecified nasal /N/ adapts homorganically to prevent illicit clusters. This regressive assimilation, operative since deletion around 2000–1000 BCE, reinforces morphology while exemplifying place assimilation as a regular sound change across over 500 .

Theoretical Advances

Lexical Diffusion

Lexical diffusion refers to the process by which sound changes propagate gradually through the lexicon of a , rather than applying simultaneously and exceptionlessly to all relevant phonological environments. This theory posits that a sound change is typically phonetically abrupt—occurring categorically within affected words—but lexically gradual, spreading word by word over time. Proposed by William S.-Y. Wang in , the model suggests that such changes often begin in high-frequency words and extend to lower-frequency ones, challenging the traditional view of sound change as mechanically regular. A classic example of lexical diffusion is the FOOT-STRUT split in the history of English, where the Middle English short vowel /ʊ/ unrounded and lowered to /ʌ/ in certain lexical items, such as strut and cut, but remained /ʊ/ in others like put and foot. This differential spread occurred gradually from the 17th century onward, primarily in southern varieties of English, without a clear phonetic conditioning factor that could explain the uneven application across the vocabulary. The result is a phonemic split where the distribution of /ʊ/ and /ʌ/ appears irregular at any given historical stage, illustrating how lexical diffusion can create apparent exceptions to phonological rules. In contrast to the Neogrammarian hypothesis of strict, exceptionless regularity in sound change, lexical diffusion views regularity as a statistical outcome achieved over the long term, after the change has fully diffused through the . This gradual mechanism implies challenges for , particularly in dating sound changes, as intermediate stages may show incomplete application, making it difficult to pinpoint the exact onset without dense diachronic data. Wang's framework thus reconciles observed irregularities by attributing them to the temporal and lexical dimensions of change implementation. Modern empirical support for lexical diffusion comes from sociolinguistic studies, such as those by in 1981, which demonstrate age-grading effects in ongoing changes—where younger speakers exhibit more advanced stages of diffusion in their speech patterns compared to older generations. Labov's analysis of vowel shifts and splits, including aspects of the FOOT-STRUT distinction, shows that while phonetically conditioned changes tend toward regularity, lexically diffused processes exhibit word-by-word progression influenced by frequency and social factors, thereby validating Wang's proposal within a broader resolution of the Neogrammarian controversy.

Sociolinguistic Influences

Sociolinguistic influences on sound change highlight how social structures, identities, and interactions shape phonetic and phonological evolution within speech communities. The variationist paradigm, established by , emphasizes that sound changes do not occur uniformly but are stratified by social variables such as class, ethnicity, and local prestige. In Labov's seminal study of , the centralization of the diphthongs /aɪ/ and /aʊ/—manifesting as raised and centralized nuclei—was most pronounced among working-class fishermen and year-round residents, groups embodying local prestige and resisting mainland tourist influences by accentuating traditional island speech patterns. This demonstrated how sound change can serve as a marker of social identity, propagating from prestige subgroups outward. Gender and age further modulate the trajectory of sound changes, with women frequently leading innovations, particularly in vowel shifts, while younger speakers accelerate their adoption. Labov's research across urban dialects reveals that women advance ahead of men in most ongoing linguistic changes, a pattern attributed to their greater sensitivity to social prestige and stylistic variation. In the Northern Cities Shift—a chain shift affecting short vowels in cities like and —lower-middle-class women pioneered the initial stages, including the raising of the TRAP vowel (/æ/ toward /ɛ/) and fronting of LOT (/ɑ/ toward /a/), as observed in apparent-time studies comparing age cohorts. Age gradients show younger speakers, especially adolescents, amplifying these shifts through peer networks, underscoring intergenerational transmission as a key driver. Language introduces borrowing and substrate effects that alter sound inventories and realizations, often simplifying or adapting features absent in recipient languages. In standard varieties of English, the /θ/ is retained, but contact with non-fricative-dominant languages leads to substitutions in global Englishes; for instance, in , /θ/ frequently realizes as due to Malay and Chinese substrate influences, reflecting simplification in postcolonial settings. Similarly, in , /θ/ shifts to or under Yoruba or Igbo phonological constraints, illustrating how contact accelerates convergence while preserving core lexical borrowing. These changes highlight contact as a catalyst for rapid, socially stratified innovation, differing from internal drift in isolated varieties. Twenty-first-century sociolinguistic research reveals how migration and expedite sound change in global Englishes, fostering hybrid forms amid increased mobility. Migration disrupts traditional boundaries, accelerating feature borrowing; for example, in urban migrant communities in , competition between local dialects and standard Mandarin leads to hybrid sound changes, such as mergers, driven by prestige and . Media platforms, including , amplify this by exposing speakers to diverse accents, promoting leveling and innovation; studies from the 2020s show and online interactions reshaping English diversity, with rapid spread of glottal stops and fronting in global contexts. These dynamics integrate with lexical patterns, where social networks facilitate uneven across words.

References

  1. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2019/ling001/language_change.html
  2. https://web.stanford.edu/~kiparsky/Papers/workshop.pdf
  3. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED399783.pdf
  4. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~gene/courses/2041/10ie.html
  5. http://ling.unm.edu/assets/documents/bybee2012patternslexdif.pdf
  6. http://tscheer.free.fr/scan/Campbell%2098%20-%20Historical%20Linguistics.%20An%20Introduction.pdf
  7. https://home.uni-leipzig.de/muellerg/1001/ogrady.pdf
  8. https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/books/reader/5-j-grimm
  9. https://people.umass.edu/sharris/general/HEL_Linguists.pdf
  10. https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/books/reader/8-a-schleicher
  11. https://www.uv.es/uvweb/master-language-literature-research/en/blog/linguistic-synchrony-diachrony-according-saussure-lyons-1285949653239/GasetaRecerca.html?id=1285972406340
  12. http://www.ling.fju.edu.tw/phono/prague.htm
  13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2613069_Sound_Change_In_Functional_Phonology
  14. https://web.mit.edu/morrishalle/pubworks/papers/1968_Chomsky_Halle_The_Sound_Pattern_of_English.pdf
  15. https://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Found/ostbrugessay.html
  16. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-history-of-linguistics/neogrammarians-and-their-role-in-the-establishment-of-the-science-of-linguistics/C35BD964138453E43EDD8876979F00A4
  17. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110348842/html
  18. https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/books/reader/14-h-osthoff
  19. https://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~kjohnson/papers/Garrett-Johnson_2012.pdf
  20. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/phonology/article/lenition-perception-and-neutralisation/DEBA20F2778E2FCD9F7445CB3123CF40
  21. https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/i.e.mackenzie/cons.htm
  22. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/phonology/article/lenition-fortition-and-the-status-of-plosive-affrication-the-case-of-spontaneous-rp-english-t/8168BC78DD68D4E746FC3DE3A43D1C09
  23. https://www.sfu.ca/~alderete/pubs/alderete2003_dissimilationIELArticle.pdf
  24. https://www.etymonline.com/word/pilgrim
  25. https://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~garrett/Blevins-Garrett-2004.pdf
  26. https://ojs.tnkul.pl/index.php/rh/article/download/5874/5669
  27. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110219135.107/html
  28. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2472474
  29. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34562/chapter/293276752
  30. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/new-cambridge-history-of-the-english-language/phonological-change/FF904BA520617195188B27CAED2B1E08
  31. https://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/silke/articles/Hamann_2014_Routledge.pdf
  32. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00310.x
  33. https://web.stanford.edu/~kiparsky/Papers/labov.pdf
  34. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-715
  35. http://martinweisser.org/courses/phonetics/connect/assimilation.html
  36. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110550283-004/html
  37. https://julietteblevins.ws.gc.cuny.edu/files/2016/10/Blevins2012_EPHolisticApproachTypology.pdf
  38. https://www.samzukoff.com/_files/ugd/4141c6_e697e01e721947a4a115ebe87d6b64cf.pdf?index=true
  39. http://grammar.ucsd.edu/courses/lign150/phonetic-symbols.PDF
  40. https://www.uvm.edu/~jbailly/courses/Indo-European/FortsonIntro.pdf
  41. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~gene/courses/2041/09g.html
  42. http://www.csun.edu/~sk36711/WWW2/engl400/gmcsoundchanges.pdf
  43. https://pradeepkumardas.info/hcl/lsc.pdf
  44. https://www.academia.edu/109816283/Chapter_1_Grimm_s_Law_and_Verner_s_Law
  45. https://www.academia.edu/28061867/Centum_and_satem_languages
  46. https://digilib.phil.muni.cz/sites/default/files/pdf/131584.pdf
  47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/368715030_Palatalizations_in_the_Romance_Languages
  48. https://www.academia.edu/1945459/The_origins_of_Pharyngealization_in_Semitic
  49. https://cl.indiana.edu/davis/The_Typology_of_Pharyngealization_in_Arabic_Dialects.pdf
  50. https://www.sil.org/system/files/reapdata/10/88/32/108832647108074037055554628963854628159/Wolff.pdf
  51. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11525-009-9142-9
  52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40726239
  53. https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/downloads/02870w54m?locale=en
  54. http://www.lingref.com/cpp/acal/44/paper3125.pdf
  55. https://www.jstor.org/stable/411748
  56. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/english-language-and-linguistics/article/footfronting-and-footstrut-splitting-vowel-variation-in-the-east-midlands/F2CA2668460B36CCD9EDF633681F437F
  57. https://www.jstor.org/stable/413692
  58. http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/Labov1963.pdf
  59. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-364
  60. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~wlabov/Papers/DFLC.htm
  61. https://read.dukeupress.edu/pads/article-pdf/84/1/1/451987/PADS84Chap1.pdf
  62. https://web.stanford.edu/~eckert/PDF/ThreeWaves.pdf
  63. https://uogbooks.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/36790083-world-englishes-the-study-of-new-linguistic-varieties.pdf
  64. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/communication/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2022.1029561/full
  65. https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/250/article/963400/pdf
  66. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391696759_Dialect_Diversity_and_Social_Change_New_Approaches_in_Sociolinguistics
  67. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lnc3.12452
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.