The first talk in our 2025-2026 McGill Linguistics Colloquium Series will be given by Dr. John Esling (University of Victoria) next Friday, October 3rd at 3:30pm at Sherbrooke 680 in room 1041. The details of the talk are given below.
Title: What Polynesian, Iroquoian, Semitic/Cushitic, Nilotic, West African (ATR), Tibeto-Burman and Germanic languages share in laryngeal articulation
Abstract: Many phonetic and phonological labels have been attributed to the sounds that emanate from postures of the laryngeal articulator mechanism. All of the parameters that represent constriction of the mechanism are expressions of the folding (vs. unfolding) of the laryngeal mechanism and of the compaction (vs. expansion) of the epilaryngeal tube. The various reflexes (or potentialities) of the laryngeal constrictor mechanism are the basis for binary oppositions – minimal contrasts – as well as for coarticulatory synergies in the phonologies of many different languages. Examples are [h] vs. [ʔ] (open glottis vs. closed glottis) in Polynesian or Iroquoian languages; “pharyngeal” consonant/vowel oppositions (quintessential aryepiglottic sphinctering, also interacting with larynx height) in Semitic/Cushitic languages; phonation, constriction and larynx-height contrasts in Nilotic languages; [+ATR] vs. [–ATR] (open vs. constricted/ raised-larynx quality, also interacting with vowel quality) in West African languages; “lax/tense” register (open-larynx vs. raised-larynx/ “pharyngealized” quality, often interacting with phonation type and tone) in Tibeto-Burman languages; and the prosodic incidence of stød (laryngeal constriction on certain syllable rhymes with long sonority) in Danish. These oppositions are all examples of an unconstricted (or less constricted) state of the larynx contrasting with a greater factor of constriction (often with accompanying synergies) of the laryngeal constrictor mechanism. Even where constriction reflexes are not phonological, they can occur paralinguistically, e.g. in Germanic languages. Some Tibeto-Burman languages are shown to emulate laryngeal-series contrasts by contrasting (lingual) postures in the oral vocal tract.