Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 43:2 (2020) ► pp.310–347

The segmental phonetics and phonology of Hyow, A Tibeto-Burman language of Bangladesh

 | SOAS University of London
This paper presents a description and analysis of segmental phonetics and phonology of Hyow, a Tibeto-Burman language spoken by almost 4,000 people in the southeast of Bangladesh. Hyow demonstrates phonological features which are absent in other Chin languages of the Tibeto-Burman branch. Proto Kuki-Chin initial voiceless nasals are not only preserved in Mara and Central Chin languages (Van Bik 2009: 220), but also in Hyow. Unlike other Southern Chin languages, Hyow final liquids are sometimes preserved or developed into central approximants. In fact, final liquids are preserved in Bangladesh Hyow, and in two varieties of Laitu – Keyni and Myebon – and Laisaw in the Rakhine State of Myanmar. The salient and prevalent phonological process of re-syllabification in Hyow demonstrates that the glottal stop cannot be treated as a phonetic property of the coda-cluster sonorants, which is otherwise treated as glottalized in some Chin languages by scholars, e.g. Hakha Lai (Hyman & Van Bik 2002: 114). Hyow does not show a phonemic contrast between long and short vowels which is very often found in Chin languages. Though Mainland Southeast Asian Languages are profoundly known for having sesquisyllables or reduced syllables, in Hyow, vowels of initial syllables of disyllabic words carrying grammatical morphemes are harmonized with vowels of root-initial syllables, which confirms the absence of such type of reduced syllables in Hyow. The phonological description and analysis in this paper are furthermore supported by phonetic data and illustrations. Discussions of variant phonetic realizations of certain segments have also been included.
Keywords: Hyow, Chin, Tibeto-Burman, phonological processes, coda cluster, glottalized sonorants
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Syllable structure
    • 2.1Phonotactics
  • 3.Consonants
    • 3.1Articulatory features
      • 3.1.1Stops
      • 3.1.2Affricate
      • 3.1.3Fricatives
      • 3.1.4Nasals
      • 3.1.5Allophones of consonant phonemes
      • 3.1.6Approximants
      • 3.1.7Free variation
        • 3.1.7.1Post-alveolar fricative
        • 3.1.7.2Alveolar stops
        • 3.1.7.3Palatal approximant
    • 3.2Acoustic analysis
      • 3.2.1The process of measuring VOT
        • 3.2.1.1Correlations of acoustic and articulatory analysis
      • 3.2.2VOT of the affricate
        • 3.2.2.1Duration of voiced and voiceless sonorants
  • 4.Vowels
    • 4.1Articulatory features of vowels
    • 4.2Allophones of vowel phonemes
    • 4.3Acoustic analysis of vowels
      • 4.3.1Process of sampling
      • 4.3.2Vowel space
  • 5.Phonological processes
    • 5.1Vowel harmony
    • 5.2Resyllabification
    • 5.3Glottal stop deletion
    • 5.4Transphonologization
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 4 January 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.19006.zak
References (27)
References
Bernot, Denise & Lucien Bernot. 1958. Les Khyang des Collines de Chittagong (Pakistan oriental): materiaux pour l’etude linguistique des Chin. [L’Homme, Cahiers d’Ethnologie, de Geographie et de Linguistique, Nouvelle Serie, 3]. Paris: Librairie Plon.Google Scholar
Burling, Robbins. 1992. Patterns of language. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chao, Yuen-Ren. 1930. ə sistim əv toun-letəz [A system of tone-letters]. Le Mâitre Phonétique 451: 24–27.Google Scholar
Cho, Taehong & Peter Ladefoged. 1999. Variation and universals in VOT: evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics, 27(2): 207–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coupe, Alec. 2003. A phonetic and phonological description of Ao: A Tibeto Burman language of Nagaland, north-east India. [Pacific Linguistics 543]. Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Duanmu, San. 1994. Syllabic weight and syllabic duration: a correlation between phonology and phonetics. Phonology 11(1): 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, Charles. 1963. Assumptions about nasals: a sample study in phonological universals. In J. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of language, 53–60. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
So-Hartmann, Helga. 2009. A descriptive grammar of Daai Chin. Berkeley: Sino Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus Project.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry & Kenneth Van Bik. 2002. Tone and Stem2-Formation in Hakha Lai. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 25(1): 113–121.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1971. Phonetics. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. A course in phonetics (4th Ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt College Publishers.Google Scholar
. 2003. Validity of voice identification. The Journal of the Acoustical Society America 114(4): 2403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaPolla, Randy. 2003. Overview of Sino-Tibetan morphosyntax. In Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 22–42. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1984. Phonology: An introduction to basic concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laver, John. 1994. Principles of phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lisker, Leigh & Arthur Abramson. 1964. A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word 20(3): 384–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luján, Eugenio. 2014. Phonological change. In Georgios Giannakis (ed.), Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek language and linguistics, Volume 31, 83–87. Leiden, Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Lotven, Samson, Kelly Berkson, James C. Wamsley, Jillian Danaher, Kenneth Van Bik & Stuart Davis. 2020. The syllable in Kuki Chin. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics, 6(1): 1–17.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 1984. Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Glottalized consonants. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures, 34–37. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Meunier, Christine & Robert Espesser. 2011. Vowel reduction in conversational speech in French: The role of lexical factors. Journal of Phonetics 39(3): 271–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Okell, John. 1969. A reference grammar of colloquial Burmese. London: Oxford U.P.Google Scholar
Peterson, David. 2000. On the status of the southern Chin Subgroup. Paper presented at the 33rd ICSTLL, Bangkok, 2–6 October.
Van Bik, Kenneth. 2009. Proto-Kuki-Chin: A reconstructed ancestor of the Kuki Chin languages. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Weirich, Melaine & Adrian Simpson. 2014. Differences in acoustic vowel space and the perception of speech tempo. Journal of Phonetics 431: 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zakaria, Muhammad. 2018. A grammar of Hyow. Singapore: Nanyang Technological University Doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Terhiija, Viyazonuo & Priyankoo Sarmah
2024. Voice onset time in Angami. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 47:1 ► pp. 32 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.