三個臺語詞「金鴨」、「金仔」、「金馬」的語音表徵分析

Abstract

本文以Goldsmith (1976) 所提出的自主音段音韻學架構分析三個臺語詞彙「金鴨」、「金仔」、「金馬」的語音表徵形式。由語音聲學、發音、及聽覺感知分析結果顯示，三詞彙 [m] 時長在統計上呈現顯著性差異。然而， 莫拉理論在應用上卻有其侷限性； 它或許可解釋日語詞kita[ki(μ)][ta(μ)] 與kitta [kit(μ)( μ)][ta(μ)] 的時長差異，卻無法解釋臺語詞「金仔」[kim(μμ)ma(μ)] 與「金馬」[kim(μμ)][ma(μ)] 的時長差異。因此本文乃提出連音「二空缺」及「雙向同化規則」來解釋此時長差異，即：時長差異乃導因於不同韻律單位的語音轉折，因此三詞彙的 [m] 時長差異即為「金鴨」[kim][^?a?] vs.「金仔」[kim^(ma)a] vs.「金馬」[kim]^(mm)[ma]。

This paper examines the phonetic representations of the three Taiwanese words kim a? `golden duck`, kim a `gold`, and kim ma `place name` under the autosegmental framework (Goldsmith 1976). In accordance with the acoustic, articulatory, and perceptual analyses, the durational differences of the three [m]s across the three words have been shown to be different. However, the moraic theory may be limited to the contrast of the three words (e.g., [kim(μμ)ma(μ)] `gold` vs. [kim(μμ)][ma(μ)] `place name`) though it may be applicable to only the contrast of [CV(μ)][CV(μ)] (Japanese kita `arrived`) vs. [CVC(μ)(μ)][CV(μ)] (kitta `sliced`). As a result, the double-empty slots (xx-slots) and the bidirectional assimilation rule are proposed to explain such disparity. In my proposal, I state that the length differences are attributed to phonetic transition across different prosodic boundaries; the durational contrast of the consonant [m] therefore can explicitly be observed from the surface forms of [kim][^?a?] `golden duck` vs. [kim^(ma)a] `gold` vs. [kim]^(mm)[ma] `place name`.