Examining the cluster status of Kurdish consonant sequences: A perceptual approach
Consonant clusters in Kurdish (particularly the Kurmanji regional dialect of Kurdish spoken
in northern Iraq) are generally described to contain maximally two consonants in syllable
initial (onset) and syllable-final (coda) positions. However, most of the... See more
Consonant clusters in Kurdish (particularly the Kurmanji regional dialect of Kurdish spoken
in northern Iraq) are generally described to contain maximally two consonants in syllable
initial (onset) and syllable-final (coda) positions. However, most of the readily accessible
literature on this Kurdish dialect phonology provides discrepant descriptions regarding the
cluster status of a number of onset and coda combinations, that is, whether the sequences
constitute actual clusters or if they are produced with an epenthetic vowel [7] [1] [3] [4].
The aim of this study is to assess the cluster status of such sequences from the perceptual
standpoint of native Kurmanji Kurdish speakers.
The organization of consonant elements in a cluster usually tends to be governed by the
Sonority Sequencing Principle (SSP) [6]. According to the SSP, the sonority of consonants
decreases the farther they are from the vowel or syllable nucleus (the sonority scale adopted
in this study is Hogg and McCully’s (1987), shown in Table 1). There are, however, cases
of consonant sequences that violate the SSP, despite their universal markedness [8]. Many
such examples that violate the SSP are reported for Kurmanji onset and coda clusters in [1].
They include onset sequences like fricative + stop (e.g. [spi] ‘white’), approximant + fricative
(e.g. [lvin]‘movement’), and nasal + fricative (e.g. [nveʒ] ‘prayer’) and coda sequences like
fricative + nasal (e.g. [ʤaӡn] ‘celebration’), fricative + approximant (e.g. [bafɾ] ‘snow’), stop +
approximant (e.g. [kakl] ‘core’), and stop + nasal (e.g. [tʰaqn] ‘mud’). In contrast, Shokri’s [7]
extensive analysis of Kurdish consonant clusters involves only one combination that does not
adhere to the SSP, namely /s/ + stop for onset clusters. This discrepancy in the literature is
partly due to differences in the theoretical, impressionstic and orthography-based analyses
of Kurmanji clusters given in these works. In fact, different sources also disagree regarding
the status of clusters that adhere to the SSP. To date, no experimental research has been
conducted to assess the actual status of onset and coda combinations in the Kurmanji dialect
spoken in northern Iraq.
The perception of Kurmanji Kurdish onset and coda clusters was examined by means of
a forced-choice goodness task with confidence ratings. In this task listeners were presented
with two productions of the same word, one with a full epenthetic vowel and one without it.
Participants were asked to select the option that sounded more Kurdish-like, and then provide
a confidence rating using a 6-point scale. The stimuli, included 15 words, were recorded by
a female native speaker of Kurmanji, who produced several repetitions of the two versions
of all the words, and the best tokens were chosen by two trained phoneticians. A total of 15
native Kurrmanji- speaking participants , residing in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, took part
in the task. The results of the perceptual task were analyzed in terms of the percentage of
time participants chose the option with an epenthetic vowel as the preferred pronunciation.
In most cases, the option with an epenthetic vowel was consistently perceived as more
natural/native-like (µ = 84%, SD = 0.36) than the option in which the vowel was elided. This
consistency was supported by high confidence ratings (µ = 5.6 out of 6, SD = 0.91). On the
other hand, and in contrast to what has been claimed for the Kurmanji regional dialect spoken
in neighbouring Turkey, the consonant sequence /s/+stop was perceived as more natural
(100% of the time) when the epenthetic vowel was elided. This finding is in accordance with
Öpengin & Haig’s [5] proposal that Kurmanji dialect lacks consistent strategies in handling
initial clusters across its different regional variations. Nevertheless, the overall results of
this study support the prediction that Kurmanji speakers in the Kurdistan region of Iraq will
perceive, as more natural/native, consonant clusters with epenthetic vowels.
References
[1] Hasan, A. M. (2009). Consonant clusters in Kurdish. Duhok University Journal, (1), 1-8.
[2] Hogg, R. & McCully, C. (1987). Metrical Phonology: A Coursebook. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
[3] Keshavarz, M.H (2017). Syllabification of final consonant clusters: A salient pronunciation
problem of Kurdish EFL learners. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 5 (2),
1-14.
[4] Omer, J.A.& Hamad, Sh,H (2016). Kurdish EFL learners’ strategies to break apart the
different L2 onset consonant clusters. Raparin University Journal, 3 (7), 187-196.
[5] Öpengin, E., & Haig, G. (2014). Regional variation in Kurmanji: A preliminary classification of
dialects. Kurdish Studies, 2(2), 143-176..
[6] Selkirk, E. (1984). On the major class features and syllable theory. In M. Aranoff, & R. T.
Oehrle (Eds.), Language sound structure: studies in phonology presented to Morris Halle by
his teacher and students (107–136). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
[7] Shokri, N. (2002). Syllable structure and stress in Bahdini Kurdish. STUF-Language
Typology and Universals, 55 (1), 80-97. Doi:10.1524/stuf.2002.55.1.80.
[8] Yavaş, M. (2013). What explains the reductions in /s/ cluster s: sonority or [continuant]?
Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 27(6-7), 394-403.