1. An alternative pathway to the phonemicization of allophonic vowel length is the shift of a vowel of a formerly-different quality to become the short counterpart of a vowel pair. That too is exemplified by Australian English, whose contrast between /a/ (as in duck ) and /aː/ (as in dark ) was brought about by a lowering of the earlier /ʌ/.
2. The English language underwent a dramatic change in pronunciation between the fourteenth and the seventeenth centuries, so much so that Geoffrey Chaucer.

In historical linguistics, vowel breaking, vowel fracture,^[1] or diphthongization is the sound change of a monophthong into a diphthong or triphthong.

Types[edit]

Vowel breaking may be unconditioned or conditioned. It may be triggered by the presence of another sound, by stress, or in no particular way.

Assimilation[edit]

This is due to what is called The Great Vowel Shift. Beginning in the twelfth century and continuing until the eighteenth century (but with its main effects in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries) the sounds of the long stressed vowels in English changed their places of.

Vowel breaking is sometimes defined as a subtype of diphthongization, when it refers to harmonic (assimilatory) process that involves diphthongization triggered by a following vowel or consonant.

The original pure vowel typically breaks into two segments. The first segment matches the original vowel, and the second segment is harmonic with the nature of the triggering vowel or consonant. For example, the second segment may be /u/ (a back vowel) if the following vowel or consonant is back (such as velar or pharyngeal), and the second segment may be /i/ (a front vowel) if the following vowel or consonant is front (such as palatal).

Thus, vowel breaking, in the restricted sense, can be viewed as an example of assimilation of a vowel to a following vowel or consonant.

Unconditioned[edit]

Vowel breaking is sometimes not assimilatory and is then not triggered by a neighboring sound. That was the case with the Great Vowel Shift in English in which all cases of /iː/ and /uː/ changed to diphthongs.

Stress[edit]

Vowel breaking sometimes occurs only in stressed syllables. For instance, Vulgar Latin open-mid /ɛ/ and /ɔ/ changed to diphthongs only when they were stressed.

Examples[edit]

English[edit]

Vowel Sounds Chart

Vowel breaking is a very common sound change in the history of the English language, occurring at least three times (with some varieties adding a fourth) listed here in reverse chronological order:

Southern American English[edit]

Vowel breaking is characteristic of the 'Southern drawl' of Southern American English, where the short front vowels have developed a glide up to [j], and then in some areas back down to schwa: pat[pæjət], pet[pɛjət], pit[pɪjət].^[2]

Great Vowel Shift[edit]

The Great Vowel Shift changed the long vowels /iː uː/ to diphthongs, which became Modern English/aɪ aʊ/.

• Old English īs > Modern English ice/aɪs/
• Old English hūs > Modern English house/haʊs/

Middle English[edit]

In early Middle English, a vowel /i/ was inserted between a front vowel and a following /h/ (pronounced [ç] in this context), and a vowel /u/ was inserted between a back vowel and a following /h/ (pronounced [x] in this context).

That is a prototypical example of the narrow sense of 'vowel breaking' as described above: the original vowel breaks into a diphthong that assimilates to the following consonant, gaining a front /i/ before a palatal consonant and /u/ before a velar consonant.

Old English[edit]

In Old English, two forms of harmonic vowel breaking occurred: breaking and retraction and back mutation.

In prehistoric Old English, breaking and retraction changed stressed short and long front vowels i, e, æ to short and long diphthongs spelled io, eo, ea when followed by h or by r, l + another consonant (short vowels only), and sometimes w (only for certain short vowels):^[3]

• Proto-Germanic *fallan > Anglo-Frisian *fællan > Old English feallan 'fall'
• PG *erþō > OE eorþe 'earth'
• PG *lirnoːjan > OE liornan 'learn'

In late prehistoric Old English, back mutation changed short front i, e, æ to short diphthongs spelled io, eo, ea before a back vowel in the next syllable if the intervening consonant was of a certain nature. The specific nature of the consonants that trigger back umlaut or block it varied from dialect to dialect.

Old Norse[edit]

Proto-Germanic stressed short e becomes ja or (before u) jǫ regularly in Old Norse except after w, r, l. Examples are:

• PG *ek(a) 'I' → (east) ON jak, Swedishjag, Danish and Norwegian Bokmåljeg, and Icelandicek → ég (but Jutlandicæ, a, Nynorskeg).
  • Faroese has both. The standard form is eg, while the dialects of Suðuroy have jeg.
• PG *hertōn 'heart' → ON hjarta, Swedish hjärta, Faroesehjarta, Norwegian Nynorskhjarta, Danishhjerte
• PG *erþō 'earth' → Proto-Norse *erþū → ON jǫrð, Swedish, Danish, Norwegianjord, Faroesejørð

According to some scholars,^[4] the diphthongisation of e is an unconditioned sound change, whereas other scholars speak about epenthesis^[5] or umlaut.^[6]

German and Yiddish[edit]

The long high vowels of Middle High German underwent breaking during the transition to Early New High German: /iː yː uː/ → /aɪ̯ ɔʏ̯ aʊ̯/. In Yiddish, the diphthongization affected the long mid vowels as well: /ɛː oː øː iː yː uː/ → /ɛɪ̯ ɔɪ̯ ɛɪ̯ aɪ̯ aɪ̯ ɔɪ̯/

• MHG êwic → NHG ewig, Yiddish: אייביק‎‎, romanized: eybik ('eternal')
• MHG hôch → NHG hoch, Yiddish: הויך‎‎, romanized: hoykh ('high')
• MHG schœne → NHG schön, Yiddish: שיין‎‎, romanized: sheyn ('nice')
• MHG snîden → NHG schneiden, Yiddish: שנײַדן‎, romanized: shnaydn ('to cut')
• MHG vriunt → NHG Freund, Yiddish: פֿרײַנד‎‎, romanized: fraynd ('friend')
• MHG hût → NHG Haut, Yiddish: הויט‎, romanized: hoyt ('skin')

This change started as early as the 12th century in Upper Bavarian and reached Moselle Franconian only in the 16th century. It did not affect Alemannic or Ripuarian dialects, which still retain the original long vowels.

In Yiddish, the diphthongization applied not only to MHG long vowels but also to /ɛː oː/ in words of Hebrew (in stressed open syllables) or Slavic origin:

• Hebrew: פסח‎, romanized: pésach → Yiddish: פּסח‎, romanized: peysekh ('Pesach')
• Hebrew: מנורה‎, romanized: m'norá → Yiddish: מנורה‎, romanized: mnoyre ('menorah')
• Old Czech: chřěn → Yiddish: כריין‎, romanized: khreyn ('chrain')
• Polish: kosz → Yiddish: קויש‎, romanized: koysh ('basket')

Scottish Gaelic[edit]

Vowel breaking is present in Scottish Gaelic with the following changes occurring often but variably between dialects: Archaic Irish eː → Scottish Gaelic iə and Archaic Irish oː → Scottish Gaelic uə^[7] Specifically, central dialects have more vowel breaking than others.

Romance languages[edit]

Many Romance languages underwent vowel breaking. The Vulgar Latin open vowels e/ɛ/ and o/ɔ/ in stressed position underwent breaking only in open syllables in French and Italian, but in both open and closed syllables in Spanish. Vowel breaking was mostly absent in Catalan, in which /ɛ/ and /ɔ/ became diphthongs only before a palatal consonant: Latin coxa 'thigh', octō 'eight', lectum 'bed' > Old Catalan */kuoiʃa/, */uoit/, */lieit/. The middle vowel was subsequently lost if a triphthong is produced: Modern Catalan cuixa, vuit, llit (cf. Portuguese coxa, oito, leito). Vowel breaking was completely absent in Portuguese. The result of breaking varies between languages: e and o became ie and ue in Spanish, ie and uo in Italian and ie and eu/ø/ in French.

In the table below, words with breaking are bolded.

Romanian[edit]

Romanian underwent the general Romance breaking only with /ɛ/, as it did not have /ɔ/:

• Latin pellis > Romanian piele 'skin'

It underwent a later breaking of stressed e and o to ea and oa before a mid or open vowel:

• Latin porta > Romanian poartă 'gate'
• Latin flōs (stem flōr-) > Romanian floare 'flower'

Sometimes a word underwent both forms of breaking in succession:

• Latin petra > Early Romanian pietră > Romanian piatră 'stone' (where ia results from hypothetical *iea)

The diphthongs that resulted from the Romance and the Romanian breakings were modified when they occurred after palatalized consonants.

Quebec French[edit]

In Quebec French, long vowels are generally diphthongized in the last syllable.

• tard[tɑːʁ] → [tɑɔ̯ʁ]
• père[pɛːʁ] → [paɛ̯ʁ]
• fleur[flœːʁ] → [flaœ̯ʁ]
• fort[fɔːʁ] → [fɑɔ̯ʁ]
• autre[oːtʁ̥] → [ou̯tʁ̥]
• neutre[nøːtʁ̥] → [nøy̯tʁ̥]
• pince[pɛ̃ːs] → [pẽɪ̯̃s]
• onze[ɔ̃ːz] → [õʊ̯̃z]

Proto-Indo-European[edit]

Some scholars^[8] believe that Proto-Indo-European (PIE) i, u had vowel-breaking before an original laryngeal in Greek, Armenian and Tocharian but that the other Indo-European languages kept the monophthongs:

• PIE *gʷih₃wos → *gʷioHwos 'alive' → Gk.ζωός, Toch. Bśāw-, śāy- (but Skt.jīvá-, Lat.vīvus)
• PIE *protih₃kʷom → *protioHkʷom 'front side' → Gk.πρόσωπον 'face', Toch. Bpratsāko 'breast' (but Skt.prátīka-)
• PIE *duh₂ros → *duaHros 'long' → Gk.δηρός, Arm. *twār → erkar (Skt.dūrá-, Lat.dūrus).

However, the hypothesis has not been widely adopted.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

1. ^The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
2. ^Kathryn LaBouff, Singing and Communicating in English, Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 268.
3. ^Robert B. Howell 1991. Old English breaking and its Germanic analogues (Linguistische Arbeiten, 253.). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer
4. ^J. Svensson, Diftongering med palatalt förslag i de nordiska språken, Lund 1944.
5. ^H. Paul, 'Zur Geschichte des germanischen Vocalismus', Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Kultur 6 (1879) 16-30.
6. ^K. M. Nielsen, Acta Philologica Scandinavica 24 (1957) 33-45.
7. ^Martin John Ball, James Fife (1993). The Celtic Languages. p. 152. ISBN9780415010351.
8. ^F. Normier, in: Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 91 (1977) 171-218; J.S. Klein, in: Die Laryngaltheorie und die Rekonstruktion des indogermanischen Laut- und Formensystems, Heidelberg 1988, 257-279; Olsen, Birgit Anette, in: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Armenian linguistics, Cleveland's State University, Cleveland, Ohio, September 14–18, 1991, Delmar (NY) 1992, 129-146; J.E. Rasmussen, in: Selected Papers on Indo-European Linguistics, Copenhagen 1999, 442-458.

• Crowley, Terry. (1997) An Introduction to Historical Linguistics. 3rd edition. Oxford University Press.

[Ed. Note: I’m on vacation till Saturday, July 30th, so I’m publishing some old posts that I drafted but never published for various reasons. Some of these might be a little rough around the edges. Also note that it may be difficult for me to respond to comments. But feel to discuss!]

I frequently use the term “vowel shift” on this site. I’d like to take a moment to explain what a vowel shift is, and more importantly, why there are so many of them in the English language.

If you’re just joining us, a vowel shift happens when the vowel sounds of a particular accent (or language) move from one part of the vowel space to another. It’s best to look at an example: In Chicago and other Great Lakes cities, the vowel in pot moves toward the vowel in pat. The pat vowel, in turn, moves toward the vowel in pet. Hence these vowels “shift” from one position to another.

English has many such vowel shifts. The language you’re currently reading (Modern English) wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for a shift that occured hundreds of years ago (The Great Vowel Shift). In recent centuries, we’ve seen the London Vowel Shift, the Australian/New Zealand Vowel Shift, the Northern Cities (Great Lakes) Vowel Shift, the American Southern shift, the Canadian shift, and the California shift.

Vowel Shift Linguistic Meaning

So why all the shifts? What is it about English that creates this game of linguistic musical chairs?

Let’s start off by stating the obvious: English has a lot of vowels. A lot of vowels. This partially explains why English vowels might shift radically in a generation, while Spanish vowels have barely budged for hundreds of years.

To use a silly metaphor, imagine that Spanish is a train car with only five riders, while English is a car packed with thirteen people. The five people in the “Spanish” car are likely to remain put for the entire journey (there’s so much room!) The thirteen people in the “English” car, however, tend to jostle around, move to less crowded parts of the train, make room for people as the enter, etc. Simply put, they’re more likely to shift.

But how do particular vowel shifts begin in the first place? What gets the ball rolling?

There are two ways a vowel shift can be described. The first is as a “pull chain.” Extending the above metaphor, imagine that a passenger on our crowded car train notices an open space a few feet down, so he moves. A second rider moves into the empty space that the first passenger left behind, then another person moves into passenger #3’s space. And so on and so forth.

Turning again to the Northern Cities Vowel Shift, this would mean that the vowel in “pet” moves first. Next the vowel in “pat” shifts into the empty space left behind by “pet,” then “pot” moves to the empty space left by “pat.”

A “push chain,” on the other hand, means the opposite: turning again to our “train,” this means an obnoxious train rider pushes another rider out of the way, that rider stumbles and pushes a third person out of the way as well. In real terms, this means that “pot” moves toward the vowel in “pat,” pushing it toward the vowel in “pet.”

But what precipitates these shifts? That’s a far greyer area. For some vowel shifts, we don’t even know whether they’re a “push chain” or a “pull chain” to begin with, much less the cultural factors that caused them. I’ve heard any number of explanations for why vowel shifts happen. The Northern Cities Vowel Shift is often attributed to 19th-century immigrant groups; the Canadian vowel shift sometimes blamed on Scottish influence. Theories abound.

I don’t have many hypotheses myself. Such processes often occur for reasons too complex to be pinned down. But it’s fun to speculate. Heard any theories for how vowel shifts start?