Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
ADAPTATION OF [ATR] IN ENGLISH LOANWORDS IN ÈWÙLÙ: THE CASE OF
ANAPTYCTIC HIGH-VOWELS
Don Chukwuemeka Utulu
Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria
dcutulu@delsu.edu.ng
Abstract
Like English loanwords of some studied Nigerian languages (NigLs), the anaptyctic vowels /i/ and /u/ are
employed in those of Èwùlù to simplify consonant clusters and open closed syllables. Previous studies have
shown that the choice of /i/ and /u/ is determined by Labial Harmony (LH) and Back/Rounding Harmony
(B/RH) rules. Interestingly, Èwùlù adopts additional anaptyctic high vowels /ɪ/ and /ʊ/, which are unmotivated
in other NigLs, specifically, Yoruba, Emai and Urhobo (YEU). We account for the four high vowels in the
Èwùlù English loans and show that, in addition to LH and B/RH effects, Advanced Tongue Root (ATR)
Harmony governs the choice of the inserted vowel. Accordingly, Èwùlù speakers/listeners insert [+ATR] /i/
and /u/ in the loans, if the source vowels are [i:, ɪ, eɪ] and [əʊ, u:, ʊ], respectively. They insert [-ATR] /ɪ/ and
/ʊ/, if the source vowels are [e, ɜ:, æ, ɑ:, aɪ, ɔɪ] and [aʊ, ʌ, ɔ:, ɒ], respectively. Given that the Èwùlù adapters
pronounce the English [i:, ɪ, eɪ, əʊ, u:, ʊ] and [e, ɜ:, ɑ:, æ, aɪ, ɔɪ, aʊ, ʌ, ɔ:, ɒ], in terms of their native [+ATR]
and [-ATR] systems, respectively, we suggest that the implementation of these native vowels in the adaptation
process takes place both in production and perception. Importantly, this study exposes the typology of vowel
insertion in loanword adaptations across (West) African languages described as type /1IU/ languages, which
have [ATR] contrast only in non-high vowels, and type /2IU/ languages, which have [ATR] contrast in two
sets of high vowels /i, u/ versus /ɪ, ʊ/.
Key words: ATR, Èwùlù, loanword, perception, production, anaptyctic vowels
Nwátàókwū
Dí̩ kà ókwúó̩ nú̩ ńdí̩ óyìbō dí̩ na ókwúń̩ nyépùté̩ nà ású̩ sú̩ óyìbō ńdí̩ Nigeria, ńdí̩ Èwùlù na éwèlī fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ ńtíyé,
ǹkè bù /i/ nà /u/, nà émé kú̩ má ókwú ású̩ sú̩ ńdí óyìbō kà ókwé ńdí̩ Èwùlù sú̩ ókwúń̩ nyépùté̩ . Rí̩ sáàchí̩ ńdí gàí̩ ní̩
kùnī sí̩ nà ókwú ású̩ sú̩ ńdí̩ óyìbō gó̩ sí̩ ní̩ sí̩ nà fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ /ɪ/ nà /ʊ/ dí̩ na Èwùlù á dí̩ nà na ókwú ású̩ sú̩ ńdí̩ Yòròbā,
Émàì and Ìshòbò. Ní mé rìsáàchì ǹkéwé̩ , ànyí̩ àbá sí̩ nà òfú ífé é̩ fú̩ nà èmé ńdí̩ ásùsū Nigeria, yá mènì ńdí Éwùlù
jì éwèlī fáwé̩ é̩ lì /i/ nà /u/ nà étí yé na ókwú ású̩ sú̩ ńdí̩ óyìbō. Ànyí̩ ábá sí̩ nà íléńwépùté nà íléńwébé̩ té̩ , ń̩ dí̩ óyìbō
nà àkpo Advanced Tongue Root (ATR) Harmony, na yá na èmé ńdí̩ Èwùlù nà éwèlí fáwé̩ é̩ lì /i/ kó̩ bú̩ /ɪ/, /u/
kó̩ bú̩ /ʊ/ na ètíyé na ókwú ású̩ sú̩ ńdí̩ óyìbō. Ń̩ chó̩ pú̩ tá rí̩ sáàchí̩ ǹkèé̩ bá gó̩ sí̩ nà ńdí̩ Èwùlù nà éyúùzùú fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩
[+ATR] /i/ and /u/ ó̩ bú̩ lú̩ nà fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ ńdí̩ óyìbō bú̩ [i:, ɪ, eɪ] and [əʊ, u:, ʊ]. Màna ó̩ bú̩ lú̩ nà fáwé̩ é̩ li ńdí̩ óyìbō bú̩
[e, ɜ:, ɑ:, æ, aɪ, ɔɪ, aʊ, ʌ, ɔ:, ɒ] ńdí̩ Èwùlù nà éyúùzùú [-ATR] /ɪ/ and /ʊ/. Ń̩ chó̩ pú̩ tá rí̩ sáàchí̩ ànyí̩ ábá sí̩ nà
òkwúkwúó̩ nú̩ nà ókwúó̩ nú̩ nú̩ , nà nwáné̩ bí̩ nà èmé ńdí̩ Èwùlù nà éyúùzùú fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ ńdí̩ óyìbō dika si na nwa bu
fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ ńdí̩ Èwùlù. Màkà élúé ńdí̩ Èwùlù nà éyúùzùú fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ ńdí̩ óyìbō fú̩, rí̩ sáàchí̩ ànyí̩ ábá sí̩ nà ású̩ sú̩ ńdí̩
ojii (West) Africa)) dí̩ íshú né̩ bí̩ : ńdí̩ wèní fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ é̩ bú̩ á sí̩ só̩ , yá bú̩ /i/ nà /u/, nà ń̩ dí̩ wèní fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ é̩ nó̩ , yá bú̩ /i,
u/ nà /ɪ, ʊ/.
Ísiókwū: ATR, Èwùlù, ókwúń̩ nyépùté̩ , ókwúó̩ nú̩ nú̩ , fáwé̩ é̩ lí̩ ńtíyé
1.
Introduction
Previous studies on English loanwords of African languages, referring particularly to
studies on adaptations in Nigerian West Benue-Congo (WB-C) languages have shown that the
/i/ and /u/ vowels are the two anaptyctic/epenthetic vowels adopted to break up consonant
clusters and open closed syllables of English vocabularies (Pulleyblank 1988, Egbokhare 1990,
1998, Akinlabi, 1993, Yip 1993, Ufomata 2004, Oyebade 2006, Aziza and Utulu 2006). We
draw a few examples from the English loanwords in WB-C languages: Yoruba, Emai, and
Urhobo (YEU, hereafter) to substantiate the fact in (1), as follows:
(1)
Source
Loanwords Gloss
bred
ʤi:p
búrɛ́dì
ʤíìpù
‘bread’
‘Jeep’
keɪk
mæp
ìkêkì
ìmâpù
‘cake’
‘map’
a.
Yoruba
i.
ii.
b.
Emai
i.
ii.
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
c.
Urhobo
i.
ii.
iii.
sleɪt
zəʊn
əlɑ:m
ìsìnétì
ìzónù
ànámù
‘slate’
‘zone’
‘alarm’
As can be noticed, the adoption of /i/ and /u/ is validated in (1). The researchers mentioned in
the foregoing have suggested that the two inserted vowels are governed by the principles of
Labial Harmony (LH) and Back/Round Harmony (B/RH). Accordingly, in Yoruba (1a, i & ii)
and Emai (1b, i & ii), the choice of /u/ is determined by the feature [labial], which is inherent
in the source coda. However, in the non-labial environment, /i/, which has been suggested to
be the basic form is chosen (Pulleyblank 1988 and Akinlabi 1993, Egbokhare 1998). Moreover,
in Urhobo, the choice between the two high vowels is governed by the feature [±round] or
[labial]. The former feature applies, if the source nucleus is a round vowel, as in (1c, ii).
Whereas, like in Yoruba and Emai, the latter feature applies, if the source consonant is labial,
as (1c, iii) shows. In contexts other than these two, the anaptyctic /i/ vowel is inserted, validated
by the form in (1c, i) (Aziza and Utulu 2006), compared the forms in (1a, i & 1b, i).
Interestingly, the same articulatory principles operative in YEU apply in Èwùlù-Igbo
(WB-C: Nigeria), as we will show and discuss in detail in the analyses Sections. However, we
consider the loan examples in (2 a, i & ii) and (2b, i & ii) as pilot data to illustrate the effect of
the constraints mentioned above:
(2)
Vowel anaptyxis in English loanwords in Èwùlù
English
Èwùlù Adaptation
Inserted vowel
Gloss
ai.
ii.
bleɪd
kəʊm
búléèdì
kóm̀bù
u~i
u
‘blade’
‘comb’
bi.
ii.
bed
fɔ:m
bɛ́ɛ̀dɪ̀
fɔ́ɔ̀mʊ̀
ɪ
ʊ
‘bed’
‘form’
Adopted from (Utulu 2019: 35)
It will be observed that in (2a, i & ii), the anaptyctic /u/ is inserted after /b/, motivated by the
LH principle. In (2b, ii), its back counterpart, the anaptyctic /ʊ/ is inserted in the context of
round vowels /ɔɔ/, triggered by the B/RH principle. Elsewhere, however, the respective front
counterparts of the round back vowels, that is, the /i/ and /ɪ/ are inserted.
The appearance of the /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ vowels in Èwùlù English loan adaptation, as in (2b, i
& ii) draws our curious attention, which raises two vital questions in this study. First, why do
Èwùlù speakers, in addition to adopting /i/ and /u/ for insertion to modify source deviant
syllables in loans, employ /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ for the same purpose? Second, why do they employ /i/ or
/ɪ/ and /u/ or /ʊ/ in certain definable contexts in the loans? Providing answers to these two
questions is the objective of this study, appealing to the CV phonology framework, an offshoot
of Goldsmith’s (1976) Autosegmental Theory proposed by Clements and Keyser (1983). The
reason for our choice of this framework over others is based on the fact that tongue root
harmony, also known as ATR harmony is a long-distance, assimilatory phonological
phenomenon (Rose and Walker 2004, Rose 2018), which can be fruitfully explained using the
Association Conventions of the Autosegmental Theory.
Èwùlù vowel inventory and advanced tongue root
The Èwùlù vowel inventory comprises nine vowels /i, ɪ, e, ɛ, a, ɔ, o, ʊ, u/ (Utulu 2020).
Of the nine vowels, there are four high vowels /i/, /ɪ/, /u/ and /ʊ/. The quantity of the high
2.
34
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
vowels, therefore, validates our grouping of Èwùlù as a type /2IU/ dialect, following Casali’s
(2017) sub-grouping of African languages, in terms of tongue root contrast in high vowels and
non-high vowels. Based on the notion of tongue-root harmony, the Èwùlù nine vowels are
divided into two sets: Set A vowels /i, e, o, u/ and Set B vowels /ɪ, ɛ, a, ɔ, ʊ/. The two divisions
are based on the degree of expansion of the pharynx in the articulation of the Set A vowels as
opposed to those of Set B in (3). The vowel patterns are similar to those found in languages
such as Central Igbo, Izon, Akan, and Dagbani (Lindau 1975, Emenanjo 1978, Hudu 2013,
2014). The first set of vowels is labeled [+ATR], given its higher degree of expansion of the
pharynx, while the second set is tagged [-ATR], due to its relatively lower degree of expansion
of the pharynx. The two sets of vowels are presented in (3), as follows:
(3) The Èwùlù 9-vowel inventory
Set A
Set B
[+ATR]
[-ATR]
i
u
ɪ
ʊ
e
o
ɛ
ɔ
a
NB - Vowels in bold print are the inserted vowels in the Èwùlù English loans
As the current working loan data show, the high vowels /i/, /ɪ/, /u/, and /ʊ/ in (3) are typically
used as anaptyctic vowels to simplify the source consonant clusters and to open its closed
syllables. As we mentioned earlier, the inclusion of the latter two high vowels reflects the
difference between the Èwùlù vowel system and the YEU systems, manifesting the observed
disparity in the number of high vowels employed in the epenthesisation of the loanwords
exemplified in (1) across some Nigerian languages versus Èwùlù in (2).
3.
English vowels
Owing to the contact between English, the source of the current loanword data, and the
indigenous/native languages of Nigeria, monolinguals most often borrow English items while
in dire need to converse or interact with people they consider to use English more often for
formal or informal conversations. But for reasons that might be hinged on some combination
of factors, such as the first-language-second-language system gap, and consideration of English
as a language of prestige, among others, the monolinguals invariably subject English items
used during communication process to some structural adjustments otherwise known as
“adaptation”. One such evidence is validated by the qualities of vowels employed in the
adaptation processing mirrored in the current data, and determined quite obviously by the force
of the first-language system. As we will show in this study, the Èwùlù speakers’ choice of an
inserted vowel, be it /i/ or /u/, /ɪ/ or /ʊ/, has direct mapping on the quality of the source (English)
vowel inventory. We, therefore, expect that accounting for such mapping would advance our
understanding of the role production and perception potentially play in loanword adaptation.
Featuring prominently in the current loanword data are the English source vowels of
varying qualities. The first set of vowels comprises twelve pure vowels [i:, ɪ, e, æ, ɑ:, ɒ, ɔ:, ʌ,
ɜ:, ə, ʊ, u:], eight diphthongs, divided into two: closing diphthongs [eɪ, aɪ, ɔɪ, əʊ, aʊ], and
centring diphthongs [ɪə, eə, uə]. Remarkably, however, there is no indication that ATR, which
features conspicuously in the current loanword data, is an overt feature of English which serves
as the donor language. Thus, the appearance of ATR in loanword phonology, as this study
attempts to reveal, becomes somewhat of a puzzle. However, when the notion of “adaptation”
in lexical borrowing is put in its proper perspective, the reason for the appearance of ATR in
nativisation becomes very obvious.
35
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
As this study will show, see particularly the chart in (14), the English source vocalic
inventory seems to determine the context where /i/ or /ɪ/, and /u/ or /ʊ/, is inserted in the
borrowed items. For ease of reference and analysis of the Èwùlù loanwords, we present the
approximate vowel space of each of the source (English) pure vowels in (4), following Roach
(2000):
(4) The English vowel inventory – pure vowels (Roach 2000)
i:
u:
ɪ
e
ʊ
ə
ɔ:
ɜ:
ʌ
æ
ɒ
ɑ:
In the adaptation processing, as we will show in Section 6, the source vowels in (4) appear to
find their individual correspondences from those of the borrowing language schematised in (3).
4.
Method
The data for this study were extracted from the English loanword corpora collected
between 2017, 2018, and 2020 from five Èwùlù native speakers, two adult male and three adult
female speakers, all monolinguals, who lack formal education. The source of the data came
from the speakers’ performance on code-mixing discourses that expressed nativised English
pronunciation technically known as loanwords. Owing to its scope, this study limited itself to
the investigation of English monosyllabic words with the CVC (e.g., bill), CCVC (e.g., break),
and CVNC (e.g., tank) syllables structures, domains where loanword vowel epenthesis
typically operates. In order to analyse the loan data in a very principled way, the framework of
the CV-Phonology, an offshoot the Autosegmental Phonology was used. The non-linear model
was chosen over other models because of it handles quite insightfully, and transparently, too
phonological phenomena like tongue-root harmony that exemplifies long-distance
assimilation/spread of the ATR feature within a local context like the root morpheme.
5.
Vowel anaptyxis
Vowel anaptyxis is a process whereby a vowel is inserted in positions other than the
initial position within the word (Crystal 2008). The vowel, also known as anaptyctic or parasite
vowel, is typically unmotivated for insertion processing in native phonology of borrowing
languages (Kenstowicz 2003, Peperkamp and Dupoux 2003), a fact that lends credence to
Èwùlù investigated in this study. For instance, in Èwùlù, the core syllable shape is the
consonant-vowel (CV) structure. Therefore, morphemes in the dialect are largely those with
syllables that maximally consist of a single C followed by a single V (Utulu 2020). Thus,
phonologically, no prosodic reasons should compel vowel anaptyxis to apply in the native
Èwùlù sound system in order to resolve complex syllable structures, even if marked structures
were generated due to morphological or syntactic considerations, which yield successive V
elements such as a /CV.V/ shape.
When vowels occur in succession, however, the dialect has two options to adjust the
marked sequence. The first option is the deletion of one of the vowel clusters, in which, usually,
the first of the two sequences is the target. It is the operation of this rule that triggers the elision
of the juncture /á/ in /àdá + ùgò/ ‘a name’, thus yielding the phonetic form [àdȗgò]. The second
option is the de-syllabification of a final V element, usually the high vowel /i/, /ɪ/, /u/ or /ʊ/
(sometimes /o/ or /ɔ/), if preceded by a non-high vowel. The execution of this rule glides the
front high vowels to [j], and the back/round vowels to [w], in a process called Glide Formation.
36
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
For instance, the Èwùlù word /bɪá̀ / ‘come, affirmative’, becomes [bjǎ] phonetically in order to
avoid the occurrence of consecutive V elements that violate the core CV syllable structure of
the dialect. Syllable-based generalisations such as these make it inconceivable to expect the
native Èwùlù phonological rules to trigger the insertion of element(s) in order to simplify
lexically-/grammatically-motivated heterosyllabic vowel sequences.
6.
Descriptive Analysis
Below, we present the Èwùlù English loan data. They are divided into different
categories based on, first, the source syllable shapes, CVC, CCVC, CVNC; and second, the
quality of the inserted vowel.
6.1
Final /i/-insertion in CVC vocabulary
Our loanword data show that those with CVC shape are adapted as CVVCV by the
Èwùlù speakers. Apart from the noticeable vowel doubling phenomenon that takes place in the
Èwùlù adaptation processing, as in (5), motivated by the source neutral f0 contour (Utulu
2019), an anaptyctic final vowel /i/ is inserted to re-syllabify the source syllable shape. As a
rule, the epenthetic process in (5) is activated to open the source closed syllables:
( (5)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
CVC vocabulary and insertion of final anaptyctic /i/
English
Èwùlù adaptation
Gloss
bɪl
geɪt
keɪk
pɪn
feɪθ
fi:d
bíìlì
géètì
kéèkì
píìnì
féètì
fíìdì
'bill'
'gate'
‘cake’
‘pin’
‘faith’
‘feed’
As (5) indicates, the anaptyctic [+ATR] vowel /i/, and not its [-ATR] /ɪ/ counterpart, (not
[+ATR] /u/ or [-ATR] /ʊ/ either), is inserted. Given the adaptation pattern, see also that in (6)
through (13), we suggest that two interacting phonetic principles determine the choice of the
inserted vowel /i/, which also motivates the choice of the anaptyctic /ɪ/, /u/ and /ʊ/. The
principles are:
(i) perception, a processing system we advanced in this study also has a strong
influence on the Èwùlù speakers’ interpretation of the source nuclei as native
ATR-induced vocalic elements, following Silverman (1992), Peperkamp &
Dupoux (2003); and,
(ii) production, a gestural system that explains the influence the articulation of a
segment (consonant or vowel) in conjunction with the system in (i) has on the
articulation of a neighbouring segment (which is well-documented in the
literature on YEU English loanword adaptations).
6.1.1
Perception
Auditory perception as a psycholinguistic processing system plays an important role in
the choice of the four high vowels listed alternately in point (c), Section 6.1.2, for insertion in
loanwords. As we will show in the following Sections, see the chart in (14), the (c) factor
explains the Èwùlù speakers' pronunciation of the English vowels, in terms of their native ATR
system. With the interaction of the two principles in (i) and (ii) above in place, we can then
understand why the /i/-insertion process in (5) together with those described in (6) through (13)
takes place. Referring to the loan adaptation in (5), it will be noticed that the source coda
consonants and syllable nuclei are non-labial and non-round segments. Thus, both the coda
consonants and the nuclei vowels lack labiality and rounding. These two phenomena explain
why the non-round anaptyctic /i/ rather than the round anaptyctic /u/ is selected in the loan
phonology.
37
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
Moreover, the source vowels in (5), namely [ɪ], [eɪ], and [i:], which are found in the
periphery of the vowel space no. 1 of the cardinal vowel, are perceptibly similar to the Èwùlù
[+ATR] /i/ found in the similar vowel space. Consequently, we assume the Èwùlù speakers’
perception of the source vowels [i:, ɪ] and [eɪ] as equivalents of the native [+ATR] /i/ and /e/,
respectively compels them to insert the [+ATR] anaptyctic /i/ at the expense of its [-ATR]
counterpart /ɪ/, and the anaptyctic /u/ or /ʊ/ as well. Such interactions that take place between
perception and production, we will argue in this work, account for the quality of the inserted
vowel in Èwùlù loanword adaptation.
6.1.2
Production/articulation
With perception playing an important role in loan adaptation, we show that three
phonological rules (already alluded to in Section 6.1.1) interact with perception in (current)
loan adaptation. The rules are:
(a) Labial Harmony (LH), which selects /u/ or /ʊ/ over /i/ or /ɪ/, if a neighbouring
consonant is specified for the feature [labial], as opposed to [coronal] or [dorsal];
(b) Back/Round Harmony (B/RH), which determines the choice of the anaptyctic
/u/ or /ʊ/, if the source onset/coda consonants are specified with the feature
[labial], or if the source syllable nuclei are specified with the feature [+round],
otherwise /i/ or /ɪ/ are inserted; and
(c) ATR Harmony, which influences the choice of /i/ or /ɪ/, /u/ or /ʊ/, subject to the
quality of the source vowels vis-à-vis the native vowels.
6.2
6.2.1
Vowel insertion
Final /ɪ/-insertion in CVC vocabulary
Like in (5), source closed syllables in (6) are re-syllabified and opened in the loans,
where the selected anaptyctic vowel /ɪ/, rather than its counterpart /i/, is inserted word finally,
as follows:
(6)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e
f.
CVC vocabulary and the insertion of the final anaptyctic /ɪ/
English
Èwùlù adaptation
Gloss
taɪt
gæs
bʌkɪt
peg
tɔ:tʃ
ɔɪl
táɪt̀ ɪ̀
gáàsɪ̀
bɔ́kɛ́ɛ̀tɪ̀
pɛ́ɛ̀gɪ̀
tɔ́ɔ̀tʃɪ̀
ɔ́jɪl̀ ɪ̀
‘tight’
'gas'
‘bucket’
‘peg’
‘torch’
‘oil’
Like in (5), the Èwùlù insertion /ɪ/ in (6) is influenced by production and perception
considerations. On the influence of articulation, all the (6) source coda elements t, s, g, ʧ, l are
non-labial consonants. For this reason, the insertion of /u/ or /ʊ/ in this context is ruled out.
However, the example (6e) tɔ́ɔ̀tʃɪ̀ ‘torch’ runs contrary to our claim here, where /ʊ/ ought to be
inserted on the influence of the source round vowels /ɔ:/, which is produced as native /ɔ/, but
the non-round /ɪ/ is rather inserted in place of /ʊ/, which agrees in ATR with native /ɔ/. There
is a compelling phonetic reason for the choice of /ɪ/ over /ʊ/ in (6e). The feature [coronal]
specified for the affricate, [ʧ] seems to have an overridden influence over the feature [round].
Consequently, the /ɪ/ rather than /ʊ/ is inserted.
38
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
6.2.2
(7)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Final /u/-insertion in CVC vocabulary
Unlike in (5) and (6), the native round vowel /u/ is inserted in (7), as follows:
CVC vocabulary and the insertion of the final anaptyctic /u/
English
Èwùlù adaptation
Gloss
ru:f
fəʊn
tʃi:p
bʊk
pu:l
ju:θ
tʃi:f
kəʊk
rúùfù
fóònù
tʃíìpù
búùkù
púùlù
júùtù
tʃíìfù
kóòkù
'roof'
'phone'
‘cheap’
'book'
'pool'
‘youth’
'chief '
'Coke'
First, the Èwùlù English listeners’ or speakers’ selection of /u/ in (7) appears to be driven by
their perception of the source vowels [i:], [u:], [əʊ] and [ʊ] as the native /i/, /u/, /o/ and /u/,
respectively. However, we suggest that production obviously plays its own part too. For
instance, the selection of /u/ is traceable to the principle of LH (i.e., labiality) effect, enforcing
the source coda consonant [p] and [f], as in (7c) tʃíìpù and (7g) tʃíìfù to attract the anaptyctic
/u/, ruling out the insertion of /i/ and /ɪ/. Moreover, its choice is also linked to the RH (i.e.,
rounding), valid in the articulatory gestures of the source vowels [u:], [əʊ], and [ʊ]. Recall in
(3), these native vowels (7) /i/, /u/, /o/, and /u/ belong to the [+ATR] set of vowels. This
explains why the speakers insert anaptyctic vowel [+ATR] /u/, a context where [-ATR]
counterpart /ʊ/ is not at all expected to surface, as we will show in the next Section.
6.2.3
Final /ʊ/-insertion in CVC vocabulary
Taking cognisance of the phonetic principles that determine the context of insertion of
the Èwùlù high vowels, the environment that attracts the anaptyctic /ʊ/ can be fully understood,
given the patterning of the examples in (8):
(8)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
CVC vocabulary and the insertion of the final anaptyctic /ʊ/
English
Èwùlù adaptation
Gloss
kʌp
bʌs
ʃɒp
paɪp
ʃaʊt
kɔ:t
kɔ́ɔ̀pʊ̀
bɔ́ɔ̀sʊ̀
ʃɔ́ɔ̀pʊ̀
páɪ̀pʊ̀
ʃáʊ̀tʊ̀
kɔ́ɔ̀tʊ̀
‘cup’
‘bus’
'shop'
‘pipe’
‘shout’
‘court’
In (8), /ʊ/ takes precedence over /u/ in the insertion process. Its preference over /u/, treated in
(7), is clearly governed by the principle of ATR harmony. Apart from the ATR effect, the
[+round] feature of the adjoining source nuclei [ʌ], [ɒ], [ɔ:] and [ʊ] in /aʊ/, and the [labial]
feature of the coda consonant [p] influence the choice of /ʊ/. Accordingly, we argue that the
speakers’ interpretation of the English vowels in (8), as perceptual correlates of native /ɔ/ and
/ʊ/, which are members of [-ATR] vowels, motivates the choice of anaptyctic [-ATR] /ʊ/ in
place of [+ATR] /u/.
However, the adaptation in (8d) páɪp
̀ ʊ̀ fails to sanction the anaptyctic /ɪ/ after /p/, as is
the case in (6a), in which the source nucleus is also [aɪ], but rather permits the anaptyctic /ʊ/.
The selection of anaptyctic /ɪ/ is unmotivated in (8d) because the feature [labial] inherent in the
source coda [p], functioning as an onset in the loan, appears to be more salient to the speakers
than the feature [-round] specified for the source complex vowel [aɪ].
39
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
6.2.4
Final and interconsonantal /i/-insertion in CCVC vocabulary
Influenced by the principles of perception and articulation, anaptyctic /i/ is inserted
between C-clusters and in final position, as in (9):
(9)
CCVC vocabulary: The interconsonantal and final anaptyctic /i/
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
English
gri:s
breɪk
frɪʤ
sleɪt
kreɪt
kredɪt
Èwùlù adaptation
gìríìzì
bùréèkì
fìríìʤì
sìléètì
kìréètì
kɪ́rɛ́díìtì
Gloss
'grease'
'brake'
‘fridge’
‘slate’
‘crate’
‘credit’
In (9), it will be observed that /i/ (and not /ɪ/) is the preferred inserted vowel. Again, as we
showed in the previous Sections, the choice of /i/ is navigated by the quality of the source
vowels [i:, ɪ] and [eɪ], which perceptually approximates to Set A vowels (3) /i/ and /e/,
respectively. Nonetheless, the form (9f) kɪ́rɛ́díìtì deserves our special attention here: the
anaptyctic vowel inserted between the clusters /k/ and /r/ is the [-ATR] /ɪ/, while the final
anaptyctic vowel is the [+ATR] /i/. The quality of the former extra vowel is governed by the
source [e], approximating closely to the cardinal vowel no. 3, which the Èwùlù adapters
articulate as the native [-ATR] /ɛ/. Consequently, the /ɪ/ specified for [-ATR] feature is inserted
between the two consonants. Whereas the quality of the latter extra vowel is governed by the
source [ɪ], pronounced by the speakers as the native [+ATR] /i/, which is why the [+ATR] /i/
is inserted. The point of interest here is that the (9f) example vis-à-vis those in (9a-e), advances
the understanding of the role the principles of perception and production (ATR harmony) play
in loan adaptation, especially in type /2IU/ languages/dialects like Èwùlù.
6.2.5
(10)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Final /ɪ/-insertion in CCVC vocabulary
Like (6), the [-ATR] /ɪ/ is the preferred anaptyctic vowel in loans (10):
CCVC vocabulary and the anaptyctic /ɪ/
English
Èwùlù adaptation
Gloss
klæs
glæs
brʌʃ
flʌʃ
klʌʧ
braɪt
kɪl̀ áàsɪ̀
gɪl̀ ààsɪ̀
bʊ̀rɔ́ɔ̀ʃɪ̀
fʊ̀lɔ́ɔ̀ʃɪ
kʊ̀lɔ́ɔ̀ʧɪ
bʊ̀ráɪt̀ ɪ
‘class’
‘glass’
'brush'
‘flush’
‘clutch’
'bright'
The rules that motivate the anaptyctic process in the forms in (5) through (9) are the same rules
that motivate that in the examples in (10). For instance, in (10a & b), both the interconsonantal
and final /ɪ/-insertion rules apply. In these two contexts, the /ʊ/-insertion rule is barred, thus,
permitting strictly only the application of the /ɪ/-insertion rule. The prevention of the
application of /ʊ/-insertion rule in the two cases is due to the fact that /k/ and /s/ are unspecified
for the feature [labial] which naturally triggers rounding, and, therefore, necessitates /ʊ/- or /u/insertion. As expected, in (10c, d, f), /ʊ/ is inserted interconsonantally, owing to the
assimilatory effect of the source labial consonants /b/ and /f/. The form in (10e) kʊ̀lɔ́ɔ̀ʧɪ
exhibits interconsonantal /ʊ/-insertion as well, even though the source preceding (onset)
consonant /k/ is unspecified for the feature [labial]. Quite differently, the insertion of /ʊ/
40
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
between the /k/ and /l/ in (10e) is motivated by the presence of the source /ʌ/, typically
pronounced as /ɔ/ in Nigeria English, our assumed proximate source of the loans. Presumably,
the presence of the native [-ATR] round vowel /ɔ/ is the reason the [-ATR] anaptyctic /ʊ/ is
adapted in (10e). More importantly, the fact that the native [-ATR] /ʊ/ is preferred to its round
[+ATR] /u/ counterpart in (9c-f), is motivated, first, by the Èwùlù speakers’ awareness of the
tongue-root contrast attested in their native phonology; and second, by perception, in which
the speakers perceive the acoustic image of the source /æ, aɪ/ and /ʌ/ and produce them as native
/a/ and /ɔ/ vowels, respectively. It will be recalled that the two native vowels belong to the
[-ATR] set of vowels in (3).
In the final description of the loans, we draw source vocabulary with the phonotactic
arrangement, Nasal-plus-Consonant (NC) cluster in order to widen the scope of data and,
therefore, shed further light on the impact perception and production have on high-vowel
insertion in Èwùlù loanword adaptation. We consider the pattern in (11), as follows:
(11)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
CVNC vocabulary and the anaptyctic /i/
English
Èwùlù adaptation
Gloss
ʤi:nz
sɪŋk
bi:nz
tʃeɪnʤ
pɪŋk
ʤíǹsì
síŋ̀kì
bíǹsì
tʃéǹʤì
píŋ̀kì
‘jeans’
‘sink’
‘beans’
‘change’
‘pink’
Featurally, the source vowels [i:], [ɪ] and [eɪ] are non-round vowels. This gesture, thus, rules
out /u/- or /ʊ/-insertion, as we have encountered so far. It will be recalled we attributed the
choice of /i/ instead of /ɪ/ to the speakers’ pronunciation of (11) [i:], [ɪ] and [eɪ] as perceptual
correlates of native [+ATR] /i/, and /e/. We argue that this constrains the speakers to select the
native anaptyctic /i/ in place of /ɪ/, its [-ATR] counterpart. As it were, these two adaptation
processing corroborate Silverman’s perceptual and operative levels. The pattern in (12) throws
more light on these principles, as follows:
(12)
CVNC vocabulary and the anaptyctic /ɪ/
English
Èwùlù adaptation
Gloss
a.
fens
fɛ́ǹsɪ̀
‘fence’
b.
dæns
dáǹsɪ̀
‘dance’
c.
sent
sɛ́ǹtɪ̀
‘scent’
d.
tæŋk
táŋ̀kɪ̀
‘tank’
e.
pænt
páǹtɪ̀
‘pant’
At the perceptual level, the acoustic image/input the Èwùlù speakers have of the source vowels
[e] and [æ] in (12), both of which approximate the cardinal vowels nos. 3 and 4, respectively,
are interpreted by them as the native [-ATR] /ɛ/ and [-ATR] /a/, respectively. This explains
why, unlike in (11), the [-ATR] anaptyctic /ɪ/ is inserted in place of /i/, its [+ATR] counterpart.
On the final description of vowel anaptyxis in the Èwùlù loanword adaptation, we
consider a set of data exhibiting the insertion of /ʊ/ in (13), while leaving out /u/, since our
current working data, accidentally, do not include final /u/-insertion in CVNC vocabulary, apart
from the source vocabulary kəʊm ‘comb’, in which the English ‘silent’ <b> is sounded in
Èwùlù, most probably due to the speakers’ innovation stemming from imitation of educated
pronunciation by close acquaintances, and is, therefore, realised as kóm̀bù. The /ʊ/-insertion
process is as follows:
41
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
(13)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
CVNC vocabulary and the anaptyctic /ʊ/
English
pɒnd
saʊnd
pʌmp
kæmp
bɒm
Èwùlù adaptation
pɔ́ǹdʊ̀
sáʊ́ǹdʊ̀
pɔ́m̀pʊ̀
kám̀pʊ̀
bɔ́m̀bʊ̀
Gloss
‘pond’
‘sound’
‘pump’
‘camp’
‘bomb’
As can be seen, the same processes governing the different shades of vowel anaptyxis that we
have encountered so far are operative in (13). Here, the quality of the source vowels /ɒ/, /(a)ʊ/,
/ʌ/ and /æ/, typically pronounced as Èwùlù [-ATR] vowels /ɔ/, /ʊ/, /ɔ/ and /a/, respectively,
coupled with the labial specification for the coda consonants /p/ and /b/, induces /ʊ/-insertion.
It will be noticed that, in (13a) and (13b), the coda consonant is unspecified for the feature
[labial], yet /ʊ/ is inserted. The choice of the inserted round vowel is motivated by the
assimilatory effect of the source [ɒ] realised as the native /ɔ/ and the source /ʊ/ in /aʊ/ realised
as the native /ʊ/. Thus, in (13a) and (13b), the nuclei motivates the quality of vowel inserted
and not the source coda consonant. In (13d), however, it is the source coda /p/ that triggers /ʊ/insertion, in a context where the source /æ/, pronounced as native /a/, is naturally unmotivated
to trigger rounding which characteristically drives the /ʊ/-insertion rule.
In (14), we present a chart shedding some light on the vowels of English, the Donor
Language (DL) and those of Èwùlù, the Borrowing Language (BL). The chart simply relates
vowels of the DL, as the input that the Èwùlù speakers pronounce as their native ATR-bound
vowels. The vowel quality correspondences are exemplified, as follows:
(14) A Chart Showing Èwùlù Listeners’ Active Perception/Acoustic Image Mapping of
English Vowels to their Native ATR-induced Vowels
Donor language
Borrowing language
Perceptual level
vowels
Vowels
(the inserted vowel)
a.
b.
i:
ɪ
eɪ
əʊ
u:
ʊ
e
o
e
ɜ:
ɛ
ɑ:
æ
a
*aɪ
*ɔɪ
aɪ
ɔɪ
*aʊ
aʊ
ʌ
ɔ:
ɒ
ɔ
i
[+ATR]
i or
u
Operative
level (the inserted vowel)
[-ATR]
ɪ or
ʊ
Operative
level (the inserted vowel)
u
KEY
Perceptual level
Operative level
42
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
* The source [ɪ] in the diphthongs [aɪ] and [ɔɪ] is pronounced as the native [-ATR] /ɪ/, while the source [ʊ] in [aʊ]
is pronounced as the native [-ATR] /ʊ/. However, the source [ɪ] and [ʊ], functioning as pure vowels, are
characteristically pronounced as the native [+ATR] /i/ and [+ATR] /u/, respectively (see the first two vowels and
the last two in (14a). We assume the speakers’ common pronunciation of the source [a] and [ɔ] as the perceptual
approximates of native [-ATR] /a/ and /ɔ/ compels them to adopt [-ATR] anaptyctic vowels in the specific loans,
see, for example, (6a, f), (8d), (10f) and (13b). Lastly, the choice of the anaptyctic /u/ or /ʊ/ may be driven by the
LABIAL feature specification for a surrounding source consonant or the ROUND feature specification for a source
round vowel.
Relating to the vowel inventories in (3) and (4), the schema in (14) espouses the interaction
between the perception and articulation effects governing the insertion of /i, ɪ, u, ʊ/ in the
English loanwords in Èwùlù in (5) through (13). The chart paints a picture of the correlation
between the quality of the DL vowels and those of the BL divided into two, as in (14a) and
(14b), based on the speakers’ (or listeners’) pronunciation of the foreign elements. The broken
and solid lines at the extreme right of the schema indicate the appropriate levels (perceptual
and operative levels) that underlie the quality of high vowels inserted in the nativisation
process. The solid lines indicate that the insertion of /i/ or /u/, and vice versa; /ɪ/ or /ʊ/, and vice
versa, is coordinated by three harmony principles: LH, B/RH, and ATR harmony. However,
the broken lines reflect the speakers’ interpretation of the English vowels in terms of their
native specified [±ATR] feature, in which /i/ or /ɪ/, and vice versa; /u/ or /ʊ/, and vice versa,
may be selected in the insertion process.
7.
Exceptions to the patterns
If the representation in (14a) is considered closely, it will be noticed that Èwùlù inserts
/i/ in the incorporated items biili ‘bill’, piini ‘pin’, (5a, d); firiiʤi ‘fridge’ (9c); and siŋki ‘sink’,
piŋki ‘pink’ (11b, e). In these forms, we expect that the native /ɪ/ would be adopted in the loans,
since, on perceptual grounds, the source [ɪ] and the native /ɪ/ occupy the periphery of the vowel
no. 1. If this is necessarily true, the compelling question is: why do the Èwùlù speakers select
/i/ instead of /ɪ/ in the insertion process in (5a) bíìlì ‘bill’, (5d) píìnì ‘pin’, (9c) firiiʤi ‘fridge’,
(11b) síŋ̀kì ‘sink’, and (11e) píŋ̀kì ‘pink’? We provide two possible explanations. First, we
assume that Nigeria English (a language that developed through contact between Nigerians and
the British colonial masters) is the proximate source for the loans (see Kenstowicz 2006 for a
similar view on tone loans). Accordingly, Nigerian English speakers (including its subvarieties, e.g. Urhobo English) usually “under-differentiate” the native English tense vowel /i:/
and its lax counterpart, /ɪ/. A consequence of the under-differentiation is the neutralization of
the two phonemes as [i], or [i:] (Adejare 1995, Utulu 2014, Utulu & Akinjobi 2015). Second,
the speakers/listeners appear to be affected by “phonological deafness”, using Peperkamp’s
and Dupoux’s (2003) terminology, whereby, during the “imitation process”, they, being
monolinguals, seem to be limited in their ability to perceive tense-lax contrast that exists
between /i:/ and /ɪ/, as the forms in (5a), bíìlì ‘bill’, (5d) píìni ‘pin’ versus (5f), fíìdì ‘feed’;
(9a) gìríìzì ‘grease’ versus (9c) fìríìʤì ‘fridge’; and (11a) ʤíǹsì ‘Jeans’, (11c) bíǹsì ‘beans’
as opposed to (11e) píŋ̀kì ‘pink’.
Besides, we need to explain the motivation for the final insertion of the /u/ vowel in
‘book’ bʊk, pronounced búùkù (7d), where we expect the Èwùlù speakers to insert /ʊ/, the
correspondent of the source /ʊ/. We might attribute the ‘mismatch’ to the influence of
“analogical pronunciation”, in which the digraph <oo> is often thought by educated and semieducated Nigerian bilinguals to correspond with /u/-pronunciation, applicable to the forms,
pool, cool, fool, loop. We assume this innovation might have found its way into the adaptation
processing, as the Èwùlù monolinguals attempt to model the English accent of the educated
bilinguals.
Also, we need to account for the motivation behind the modification of source [eɪ] and
[əʊ] as native /e/ and /o/, respectively, particularly in the respective loans we exemplified in
(5b) géètì ‘gate’, (5c) kéèkì ‘cake’, (5e) féètì ‘faith’, (9b) búréèkì ‘brake’, (9d) sìléètì ‘slate’,
(9e) kìréètì ‘crate’, (11d) tʃéǹʤì ‘change’, and (7b) fóònù ‘phone’, (7h) kóòkù ‘Coke’.
43
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
Relating to the obvious vowel reduction (monophthongisation) rule operative in these forms,
Utulu (2014a, 2014b) suggests that the English closing diphthongs appear to be simplified in
NigE (which implicates the current Èwùlù English loan data) because the sonority distance
between the first vowel [e] and the second vowel [ɪ], the first vowel [ə] and second vowel [ʊ]
is minimal. As it were, the minimal sonority distance between the units, he argues, violates the
principle of Maximum Perceptual Differentiation (Katamba 1989).
Aside from the fact that the first and the second units of the closing diphthongs are
perceptually indistinct for Nigerian speakers of English, we assume the substitution of English
[eɪ] and [əʊ] for /e/ and /o/, respectively is influenced by orthography, in which letter <a>/<ai>
in (5b) gate, (5c) cake, (5e) faith, (9b) brake, (9d) slate, (9e) crate, (11d) change and letter <o>
(7b) phone and (7h) Coke tend to be employed in the respective closing dipththongs (Utulu
2014b). Spelling-induced pronunciation of these sorts in second language acquisition has been
suggested to play a part in loan adaptation (Peperkamp & Dupoux 2003). Given that the Èwùlù
informants are monolingual, we assume their “basilect” English accent might have been
influenced by what Hawkins (1984) refers to as “ear borrowings”, in which they consciously
or unconsciously incorporate English-sourced items by imitation from their educated Nigerian
interlocutors with whom they socialised.
Against this backdrop, we may establish two key facts here. First, the Èwùlù speakers
appear to retrieve the input of the loanwords from their mental dictionary for the English items
heard from educated English pronunciation in their local environment and then derive the
output of the borrowed English items in the course of conversing in Èwùlù. Our assumption
here is corroborated by the speakers’ conversion of the source vowel quality to that which
agrees with their native vowel quality, in terms of the Èwùlù complete ATR harmony system,
which contrasts markedly with the partial ATR harmony system noted for YEU. Second, the
borrowed items express a “foreign accent”, resulting from the fact that the Èwùlù speakers
know the English language poorly, or not at all. The borrowed items are, therefore, adapted by
adjustments on the basis of phonetic minimality, in which both the native vowels in (14), and
consonants in (5) through (13) approximate the acoustic image of those of the source (see also
15 -20). Crucially, following Boersma and Hamann (2009), we might assume that Èwùlù
nativisation process supports the view that, through production mechanisms, loanword
adaption is phonological as well as perceptual in nature; the two merely interact with each other
to implement loanword processing.
8.
Theoretical analysis: CV phonology
In this section, we proceed to capture the perceptual-cum-production effects on the
inserted vowels /i/, /ɪ/, /u/, and /ʊ/ in the Èwùlù English loan data we posited in (5) through
(13). Since we assume the vowel anaptyxis explored in the foregoing as purely assimilation or
spread of features from neighbouring consonants and vowels, we appeal to the CV-Phonology
proposed by Clements and Keyser (1983). We adopt the association conventions of the
Autosegmental Phonology developed by Goldsmith (1976) in order to link the various
harmonic features to the CV and segmental tiers.
8.1
Final /i/-insertion
To begin with, we adopt the exemplar form in (5a), bíìlì ‘bill’ for a CV-Phonology
analysis. We analyse the (5a) form in (15a), which exhibits a left-to-right featural spread effect,
as follows:
(15a) Adaptation of bill
(15b)
Èwùlù adaptation
English vocabulary
[-round]
C
V
C
b
ɪ
l
[-round, +ATR]
→
C
V
V
C V
b
i.
i.
l ( )
[-round, +ATR]
→
C V
b
í.
V
C
ì. l
bíìlì ‘bill’
V
ì
44
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
As (15a) demonstrates, the Èwùlù speakers introduce the anaptyctic [+ATR] /i/ pronounced as
the source /ɪ/ to re-syllabify the source closed syllable, indicated by the parenthesis symbol
‘( )’ to accommodate the anaptyctic /i/, the acoustic input/image of the English /ɪ/. In (15b),
the intended insertion of /i/ unspecified for the feature [+round] is fully executed in the third
column (15b), as the solid association lines indicate. However, it should be noted that in source
vocabularies like ‘bill’, the labial input from the onset /b/ is unmotivated. This is why the
possibility that the [+ATR]-bound anaptyctic /u/ would be inserted in this context is
implausible. Rather, in the bill example, it is the vowel feature [-round] that is more salient to
the speakers than the labial feature which induces /u/-insertion. The source vocabulary ‘bright’,
as in (10f) bʊ̀ráɪt̀ ɪ, (see also 18a, b), in which the labial input from the onset /b/ is active,
triggering the insertion of a round anaptyctic vowel corroborates our claim here.
8.2
Final /ɪ/-insertion
The approach in (15a & b) will explain (16a & b), also exhibiting a left-to-right featural
spread. We take the first example in (6) táɪt̀ ɪ̀ ‘tight’ for analysis. In (16b) insertion is intended,
re-syllabifying the source vocabulary. The empty V slot shows this process, which will
accommodate the native low-high vowel /ɪ/, the perceptual/acoustic correlate of source /ɪ/ in
[aɪ], as follows:
(16a) Adaptation of tight
(16b)
Èwùlù adaptation
English vocabulary
[-round]
[-round, -ATR]
C
V
V
C
t
a
ɪ
t
→
[-round, -ATR]
C
V
V
C V
t
a.
ɪ.
t ( )
→
C V
V
V
C
á. ɪ.̀
t
ɪ̀
táɪtɪ ‘tight’
t
As (16b) shows, the Èwùlù pronunciation of the English [aɪ] as the native /a/ and /ɪ/, both
patterning as [-ATR] vowels, calls up the non-round anaptyctic [-ATR] /ɪ/ in the loan
phonology in the third column. It will be noticed that the source adjacent consonants and the
source complex vowels are unspecified for the features [labial] and [+round], respectively. The
absence of labiality explains why the anaptyctic /ʊ/ would not be inserted here but rather its
non-round counterpart /ɪ/. In fact, the issue of significance here is that the example (16), like
that in (15) paints a picture of the interaction of the two parses principles of perception, RH
and ATR Harmony.
8.3
Final /u/-insertion
Taken the first example in (7) rúùfù ‘roof’, we also show the context under which the
anaptyctic /u/ is employed in the loans, autosegmentally, as in (17a, b):
(17a) Adaptation of roof
(17b)
Èwùlù adaptation
English vocabulary
[+tense, +round]
C
V
r
u: f
C
[+round, +ATR]
→
C
V
V
r
u. u.
C
V
f ( )
[+round, +ATR]
→
C V
r
V
C
V
ú. ù. f
ù
rúùfù ‘roof’
45
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
Again, in a left-to-right fashion, the source [+tense, +round] vowel [u:], interpreted by the
Èwùlù informants as their native [+ATR] vowel /u/, takes a /u/-quality anaptyctic vowel. At
the operative/articulatory level, ATR harmony, specifically the [+ATR] feature, induces the
choice of an anaptyctic vowel, which selects /u/, leaving out its [-ATR] counterpart /ʊ/ in this
context. Moreover, it will be noticed that the principle of RH (and not LH) is that which triggers
the insertion of /u/ rather than /i/. The overridden effect of RH over LH can be accounted for,
if we consider the forms such as ju:θ ‘youth’ and bu:θ ‘booth’ forms, becoming the Èwùlù
júùtù and búùtù, respectively. In these examples, the source /u:/ triggers the choice of
anaptyctic /u/, unlike in the loanword tʃíìfù ‘chief’ taken from (7c), where the source labial
consonant /f/ is the trigger of /u/-insertion. We proceed to explore the structure of tʃíìfù in (18a,
b) to show why /i/ is not inserted finally, unlike the examples júùtù and búùtù:
(18a) Adaptation of chief
(18b)
Èwùlù adaptation
English vocabulary
[labial]
C
V
C
[labial, +round]
→
C
V C
V
[labial, +round]
→
V
C
V
V C
V
í. ì. f
ù
ʧíìfù ‘chief’
In the usual left-to-right direction spread, (18) shows autosegmentally the spread of labial,
(round), giving rise to /u/-insertion rather than /i/-insertion. The (18) example vis-à-vis the
júùtù and búùtù examples, suggests that the trigger of the quality of the inserted vowel could
be the input gesture of the source coda or that of the source vowel nucleus. Similarly, the form
in (7g) tʃíìpù ‘cheap’, where the source [p] is the trigger of the /u/-insertion, and not the coronal
consonant [θ], pronounced as the native /t/ in júùtù and búùtù sheds light on our observation
here.
ʧ
i:
ʧ
f
i. f
i.
ʧ
( )
8.3
Final /ʊ/-insertion
The insertion of final /ʊ/, like its higher counterpart /u/, is also determined by (i) the
quality of the source vowel; (ii) the place articulation of the coda-turned onset; and (iii) the
perceptual input that the speakers have of the English vowels, based on the native ATR
phenomenon, as the chart in (14) exemplifies. We further take the theoretical machinery of
CV-phonology to demonstrate the speakers’ selection of /ʊ/ at the expense of /u/ in (19). The
interaction of these rules is demonstrated, as follows, as we consider the form, ‘cup’ in (8a),
the source /kʌp/ becoming the Èwùlù English /kɔ́ɔ̀pʊ̀/:
(19a) Adaptation of cup
(19b)
Èwùlù adaptation
English vocabulary
[-round]
C
V
C
ʌ
p
[+round, -ATR]
→
C
V
V
C V
ɔ.
ɔ.
p ( )
[+round, -ATR]
→
C V
V
C
V
ɔ́. ɔ̀. p
ʊ̀
kɔɔpʊ ‘cup’
In the light of the patterning of páɪp
ʊ
‘pipe’,
also
listed
in
(8),
precisely
in
(8d),
we argue that
̀ ̀
the choice of the inserted vowel /ʊ/ in kɔ́ɔ̀pʊ̀ is motivated by the source [ʌ], typically
pronounced as the Èwùlù /ɔ/, but doubled to accommodate the source falling f0 (L%), as
pointed out in the literature (see Utulu, 2019, Utulu et al 2020). While the motivation of /ʊ/insertion in kɔ́ɔ̀pʊ̀ is the vowel quality of the source, the trigger of it in páɪp
̀ ʊ̀ is the source
coda, the labial consonant [p], similar to the effect in (18). Besides, the speakers’ ATR
k
k
k
46
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
interpretation of the source [ʌ] as the native /ɔ/ necessitates the specification of [-ATR]. This
fact is validated by (3), where we show /ɔ/ as a member of the Set B vowels specified with the
[-ATR] feature. Thus, it is no coincidence the [-ATR] anaptyctic vowel /ʊ/ is inserted in (19)
at the expense of its [+ATR] counterpart, /u/.
To shed further light on the role perception and production play in the Èwùlù loanword
adaptation from the non-linear approach we are working with here, we explore the inserted
high vowels occurring between consonant-consonant (CC) clusters in the next Sections.
9.
Vowel insertion between onset clusters
Insertion of the /i/ vowel (together with the /ɪ/, /u/, and /ʊ/ vowels) is not limited to the
final position in the loans, as the forms in (9) and (10) exemplify. In (9), for example, the
anaptyctic /i/ does occur between CC clusters in the source CCVC vocabulary. We consider
the source (9a) vocabulary gri:s ‘grease’ becoming the Èwùlù gir̀ íìzì in (20), appealing to the
association conventions of the Autosegmental Phonology, as follows:
(20a) Adaptation of grease
(20b)
Èwùlù adaptation
English vocabulary
[-round]
C C V C
g r i: s
[-round, +ATR]
→
CVCVVC V
g ( ).r i. i. z ( )
[-round, +ATR]
→
CVCVVC V
g i. r í. ì. z ì
gìríìzì ‘grease’
At the operative level (third column), the /i/ is inserted in two empty slots to simplify the source
complex syllables, indicated by two parentheses. First, the front high vowel is inserted between
/g/ and /r/. Second, it is inserted finally after /z/ (in the second column). Its insertion at the
expense of the /u/ (and not the /ʊ/, or even the /ɪ/) is informed by the quality of the source
[-round] [i:] vowel, which is pronounced as the Èwùlù [+ATR] /i/ by the Èwùlù informants, as
we have demonstrated so far. Basically, the choice of the inserted /i/ is due to the fact that the
source [i:] is neither a round vowel that may drive /u/-insertion nor is it a vowel quality that
closely approximates the native [-ATR] vowels illustrated in (3), which may trigger /ɪ/insertion. In other words, the interaction of both the principles of RH and ATR harmony,
selecting the relevant vowel quality and tongue root feature [+ATR], evolving from the
perceptual and production levels, triggers the choice of the anaptyctic /i/ in this context.
Autosegmentally, the structure of the association lines clearly explains the pattern. The solid
and broken association lines (second column, (20b)) demonstrate the fact that the featural
assimilation, the spread of [-round] and [+ATR] features, began from the adapted /i/, the
perceptual (or acoustic) image of the source [i:], spreading “bi-directionally” to the
interconsonantal anaptyctic /i/, at its left, and subsequently to its duplicate at the right, and
lastly to the final anaptyctic /i/.
Furthermore, the source vocabulary in (9b) breɪk ‘break’, adapted as bùréèkì, poses
three interesting patterns that can further advance the understanding of the influence the
perceptual and operative/production level has on foreign vocabulary in the second language
context. We present the patterns in (21) as follows:
47
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
(21a) Adaptation of brake
(21b)
Èwùlù adaptation
English vocabulary
[labial]
CC VV C
b r e ɪ k
[labial, +round]
→
CVCVVC V
b ( ). r e. e. k ( )
[labial, +round]
→
CVCVVC V
b ù. r é. è. k ì
[+ATR]
[+ATR]
bùréèkì ‘brake’
In (21), the feature labial, specified for the /b/, that is, the initial C of the CC cluster, triggers
/u/-insertion process between it and its counterpart /r/ (see the first and last columns). We
assume here that the rule of LH is operative here. The LH inserts /u/ in place of /i/, contrary to
what is applied in (20), where the trigger of the anaptyctic /i/ is not the /g/ but rather the native
/i/ doubled as /ii/. Also, it will be observed that the feature [+round], specified for the inserted
interconsonantal /u/ vowel after /b/, does not spread beyond the re-syllabified /bu./-syllable.
The truncation of the round feature within the locality that /bu./ occurs, as it were, is captured
by the “delink” notation ‘=’, suggesting the unspecified features [labial] and [+round] for the
/éè/ and the anaptyctic /i/. That the labial-round spread does not go beyond bu., implies that
only the anaptyctic vowel /i/ and not the /u/ can be inserted in this environment, and this is
exactly the case in (21b).
However, it will be observed that, in spite of the confinement of the labial-roundspread-rule to bu., the [+ATR] feature spreads bidirectionally, from the simplified native /e/,
the perceptual image of the source complex vowel [eɪ] to the entire inserted vowel elements
that flank it on the left and the right. As in (20) and (21), a close observation of the patterning
of the inserted vowels /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ both interconsonantally and finally in (10), would reveal
similar operating principles, which motivate the choice of the inserted vowel. Interestingly, the
choice of the inserted vowel in (11) through (13) is determined by the same constraints
interacting with one another.
10.
Conclusion
The insertion of anaptyctic /i/ and /u/ in English loanword adaptation has been
previously accounted for in the literature, specifically from the perspective of Nigerian
linguistics. However, this study has suggested that, within the Nigerian context, some
languages/dialects show that, in addition to /i/ and /u/, /ɪ/ and /ʊ/, the lower counterparts of the
former high vowels, feature prominently in loan adaptation. This differentiates Èwùlù, the
dialect investigated in this study, from languages like Yoruba, Emai, Urhobo (YEU), thus,
validating Casali’s (2017) classification of languages like YEU as /1IU/ systems and Èwùlù,
among others as a /2IU/ system. Accordingly, YEU has only two phonological high vowels /i/
and /u/ in their native vowel systems, while Èwùlù has four contrastive high vowels /i/, /ɪ/, /u/
and /ʊ/ in its native vowel system, thus necessitating the number of high vowels these
languages potentially insert in loanword adaptation. Importantly, however, this study has
shown that vowel insertion in Èwùlù loanword phonology, as in YEU, is governed by the
principles of Labial Harmony (LH) and Back/Round (B/RH) Harmony. Crucially, the novelty
of the presented study is two-fold. First, it shows that, in addition to the principles of LH and
B/RH, ATR Harmony, which is unmotivated in YEU, drives the choice of the inserted vowel
in the loans, where /i/ or /ɪ/ may be inserted and vice versa; /u/ or /ʊ/ inserted and vice versa.
Second, it suggests that both production and perceptual considerations influence the choice of
the inserted vowel. This is because the Èwùlù speakers pronounce the English vowels [i:, ɪ, eɪ,
əʊ, u, ʊ] and [e, ɜ:, ɑ:, æ, aɪ, ɔɪ, aʊ, ʌ, ɔ:, ɒ] in terms of their native [+ATR] and [-ATR]
systems, respectively. Whereas, as shown in the loanword adaptation literature, the YEU
English speakers display no such four-way adaptation of the source vowels in terms of tongue48
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
root harmony. In sum, this study, following Boersma and Hamman (2009), has attempted
to advance the understanding that adaptation of source vowels in native pronunciation
is computed by the phonological system of the BL and that it also takes place in
perception. A second implication is that the study exemplifies the typology of vowel
insertion in loanword adaptations across (West) African languages, which have been described
as types /1IU/ and /2IU/ languages (Casali 2017), the two groupings respectively having [ATR]
contrast only in non-high vowels and in two sets of high vowels /i, u/ versus /ɪ, ʊ/.
Abbreviations
ATR advanced tongue root
LH
labial harmony
B/RH back/round harmony
NigLs Nigerian languages
1IU a notation used for representing languages with only two phonemic high vowels
/i/ and /u/
2IU a notation used for representing languages with extra phonemic high vowels /i/, /ɪ/
and /u/, /ʊ/
WB-C West Benue-Congo
YEU Yoruba, Emai and Urhobo
DL
donor language
BL
borrowing language
References
Adejare, O. (1995). Communicative competence in English as a second language. In Bamgbose A., A.
Banjo and A. Thomas (eds.). New Englishes: A West African perspective, pp. 153-177. Ibadan:
Mosuro Publishers and Booksellers.
Akinlabi, A. (1993). Underspecification and the phonology of Yoruba /r/. Linguistic Inquiry 24 (1),
139-160.
Aziza, R. O., and Utulu, D. C. 2006. Loanword phonology: English in Urhobo and Yoruba. Journal of
West African Languages, 33 (2), 3-21.
Boersma P. and Hamann S. (2009). Loanword adaptation as first-language phonological perception. In
Calabrese Andrea and Wetzels W. Leo (eds.) Current issues in linguistic theory: Loanword
phonology, 307, 11-58.
Casali, R. F. (2003). [ATR] value asymmetries and underlying vowel inventory structure in NigerCongo and Nilo-Saharan. Linguistic Typology 7, 307-382.
Casali, R. F. (2008). ATR harmony in African languages. Language and Linguistics Compass 2/3, 496549.
Casali, R. F. (2017). High vowel patterning as an early diagnostic of vowel inventory type. Journal of
West African Language, 44 (1), 79-122.
Clements, G. N. and Samuel J. K. (1983). CV phonology: a generative theory of the syllable.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Crystal, D. (2000). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Blackwell: Blackwell Publishing.
Emenanjo, E. N. (1978). Elements of modern Igbo grammar: a descriptive approach. Ibadan: Oxford
University Press.
Egbokhare, F. O. (1990). A phonology of Emai. Ibadan: University of Ibadan (PhD Thesis)
Egbokhare, F. O. (1998). Vowel insertion in Emai loanword phonology. Afrika and Übersee, Band 81,
239-251.
Goldsmith, J. (1976). Autosegmental phonology. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Published 1979. New
York: Garland Press.
Hawkins, P. (1984). Introducing phonology. London: Hutchinson and Company Publishers Ltd.
Hudu, F. (2013). Dagbani tongue-root harmony: Triggers, targets and blockers. Journal of African
Languages and Linguistics, 34 (1), 47-73.
Hudu, F. (2014). [ATR] feature involves a distinct tongue root articulation: Evidence from ultrasound
imaging. Lingua 143 (2), 36-51.
Katamba, F. (1989). An introduction to phonology. London: Longman.
Kenstowicz, M. (2003). Review article: the role of perception in loanword phonology (A review of Les
emprunts linguistiques d’origine europeenne en Fon by Flavien Gbeto, Koln: Rudiger Koppe
Verlag, 2000). Studies in African Linguistics, 32 (1), 95-112.
Kenstowicz, M. (2006). Tone loans: The adaptation of English loanwords into Yoruba. In J. Mugane et
al (eds.). Selected Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, 13
49
Journal of West African Languages
Anniversary Volume 50 (2023)
Lindau, M. (1975). [Features] for vowels. UCLA working papers in phonetics. Los Angeles: University
of California.
Oyebade, F. O. (2006). Prosodic structure preservation and English loanwords in Yoruba: A constraintbased account. A paper presented at the 25th Linguistic Association of Nigeria (LAN),
NERDERC, Abuja, Nigeria.
Peperkamp, S. and Emmanuel D. (2003). Reinterpreting loanword adaptation: the role of perception.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285861679
Pulleyblank, D. (1988). Vocalic underspecification in phonetics. Phonology 5, 275-292
Roach, P. (2000). English phonetics and phonology: a self-contained, comprehension pronunciation
course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rose, S. (2018). ATR vowel harmony: new patterns and diagnostics proceeding of AMP 2017, 1-12.
Rose, S. and Rachel W. (2004). A typology of consonant agreement as correspondence. Language 80,
475-531.
Silverman, D. (1992). Multiple scansions in loanword phonology: Evidence from Cantonese.
Phonology 9, 289-328
Ufomata, T. (2004). Tone and stress in contact: the example of English loanwords in Yoruba. In K.
Owolabi and A. Dasylva, (eds.). Forms and functions of English and indigenous languages in
Nigeria: A festschrift in honour of Ayo Banjo, pp. 577-592. Ibadan: Group Publishers.
Utulu, D. C. (2014a). A phonetic analysis of educated Urhobo English segmentals. Ibadan (University
of Ibadan PhD thesis).
Utulu, D. C. (2014b). Diphthong simplification as effect of vowel sonority profile: evidence from
Educated Urhobo English. Abraka Humanities Review. A Journal of the Faculty of Arts, 6 (2),
199-213.
Utulu, D. C. (2019). Vowel doubling in Urhobo: The case of loanword. Journal of West African
Languages, 46 (1), 32-46.
Utulu, D. C. (2020). Syllable constraints, repair strategies and segmental processes in Èwùlù. Sapientia
Global Journal of Arts, Humanities and Development Studies, 3 (4), 141-155.
Utulu D. C. and Adenike Akinjobi (2015). Acoustic analysis of Standard British English contrastive
vowel length in educated Urhobo English. Ibadan Journal of Humanities Studies, the Faculty
of Arts. 24, 195-209.
Utulu, D. C., Emuobonuvie M. Ajiboye and Chika, K. Ajede (2020). Tonal adaptation strategies in
Èwùlù and Ùrhòbò loanword phonologies. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and
Translation (IJLLT), 3 (9), 87-96.
Yip, M. (1993). Cantonese loanword phonology and Optimality Theory. Journal of East Asian
Linguistics, 2, 261-291.
50
Dr Utulu Don