著者
早田 輝洋
出版者
日本音声学会
雑誌
音声研究 (ISSN:13428675)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2, no.1, pp.25-33, 1998-04-30 (Released:2017-08-31)

This paper rejects Matsumoto's (1984, 1995) arguments that o1 and o2 in Old Japanese (OJ) are allophones of the phoneme /o/. Matsumoto claims that a restricted distribution of the phonetically unmarked o1, its low frequency, and the anomalous direction of its merger with o2 should be regarded as denoting their status as allophones, rather than two different phonemes. The phonological distinction of vowel quantity in OJ and pre-OJ, and Short-mid-vowel-raising in pre-OJ (Hattori 1976, 1979a, b) and Vowel-shortening, which shortens the vowel of the first syllable in a disyllabic morpheme containing two long vowels in pre-OJ, can explain all the alleged anomalies and serve to invalidate Matsumoto's arguments.

言及状況

外部データベース (DOI)

Twitter (6 users, 6 posts, 3 favorites)

最初に読んで分からなっかたけど後で読んだら…って、パターンは早田輝洋先生のこの論文。いや、全部を理解したわけでもないけど。 https://t.co/SdgyWrHqyr
例えば。https://t.co/f5AAwKR82M https://t.co/vuApamvIPd
早田輝洋「上代日本語の音節構造とオ列甲乙の別」『音声研究』第2巻第1号 1998年4月 https://t.co/SzxqapF1IL

収集済み URL リスト