! !

!"##$

1+2(

!"#$%&'()&*(+(
,&-#.*(/0#-(
((((((

$%&'()*&+,!-.!/.,0(1!2!3)4&*56&'&7)(*! 8"9"!:!;<11<=<.),<+!(%!(%*(&>%(?(%+!-(*!=<%>.(*!*(14%-(*! @AB5C"8D!EF4%(+&1*!

$

;(%4&+!$*4%!

E)40=(?!G(+!HC!

ANG-1072!

E)40=(?!G(+!C!
!

!"#$%&%
%

Target form [sikyatra] [kapitan] [pakistan] [kaliman] ! CI

Surface form [sitryaka] [pakitan] [kapistan] [kamilan]

a. J%! +F(! 1<*(! 4K! +F(! +<)>(+! K4)?! [sikyatra] and the surface form [sitryaka], a swap of syllabic features occurs which triggers a speech error or slip-of-the-tongue. This swapping of features occurs in the internal structure of the syllable, more precisely at the onset level. Swapping allows the interchange of similar syllabic features. For example, an onset will swap with another onset feature of a different syllable. In the case of [sikyatra] - [sitryaka], the onsets of the fourth and second syllables have swapped. b. In the case of +F(! +<)>(+! K4)?! [kapitan] and the surface form [pakitan], the same speech error phenomenon occurs; a swap of syllabic features occurs which triggers a speech error or slip-of-thetongue. This swapping of features occurs in the internal structure of the syllable, more precisely at the onset level. Swapping allows the interchange of similar syllabic features. For example, an onset will swap with another onset feature of a different syllable. In the case of [kapitan]-[pakitan], the onsets of the second and first syllables have swapped. c. In the case of +F(! +<)>(+! K4)?! [pakistan] and the surface form [kapistan], a slip of the tongue phenomenon occurs; a swap of syllabic features occurs which triggers a speech error or slip-of-thetongue. This swapping of features occurs in the internal structure of the syllable, more precisely at the onset level. Swapping allows the interchange of similar syllabic features. For example, an onset will swap with another onset feature of a different syllable. In the case of [pakistan]-[kapistan], the onsets of the second and first syllables have swapped. d. In the case of +F(! +<)>(+! K4)?! [kaliman] and the surface form [kamilan], the same speech error phenomenon occurs; a swap of syllabic features occurs which triggers a speech error or slip-of-thetongue. This swapping of features occurs in the internal structure of the syllable, more precisely at the onset level. Swapping allows the interchange of similar syllabic features. For example, an onset will swap with another onset feature of a different syllable. In the

;(%4&+!$*4%!

E)40=(?!G(+!HC!

ANG-1072!

! case of [kaliman]-[kamilan], the onsets of the second and third syllables have swapped. DI The preceding data provides evidence for the possible swapping of positions with the onset phoneme of the syllable. In these cases, the onset consonants have swapped positions with another syllable onset phoneme. It is more common for onset phonemes to swap with another onset phoneme of a different syllable.

!"#$%&&% %

1. In order to make a Jerga Spanish word, one must recreate a new syllable after every existing syllable in the original word. This new syllable takes into account the vowel, or nucleus of the preceding syllable and conserves it in the newly created syllable. A is inserted in the onset position of the newly created syllable. 2. In Jerga Spanish, the nucleus or vowel of the syllable is copied, or conserved, for the following syllable that will be created. a. An example would be the word puerta (door in English) to make it Jerga Spanish we would have to break down the word into syllables and apply the [p] phoneme with copied nucleus of the preceding syllable. Ex. i. puerta --- pu.pu.er.pe.ta.pa ---- door ii. ojo ----------- o.po.jo.po -------------- eye iii. agua --------- a.pa.gu.pu.a.pa------ water 3. There are distinctively two parts that seem to play a role in the creation of a Jerga Spanish word. One part is the invariable [p] phoneme, which is positioned in the onset of the newly created syllable. Another part is the nucleus, which is copied from the previous syllable in the word. 4. The only part of the syllable not taken into consideration is the coda of the syllable. As in the case of Alberto, the nucleus and coda are present but only the [p] phoneme is added and the [a] is copied from the first syllable Al- to form a new syllable. In the second syllable ber-, a coda is present but is not reproduced or is discarded in the conception of the new syllable, thus proving that the coda is not required in the making of Jerga Spanish syllables.

!"#$%&&&%
1. Through the observation of the data in Part I, theory 2, which claims that not only are the phonemes of a word grouped together within syllables, but that that syllables have particular internal structures that determine how phonemes are placed within the syllable seems to best support the data presented. The data shows a particular pattern within each syllable. These syllables are represented by a consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) or CV pattern. The slips of the tongue or speech errors found in part 1 suggest that

;(%4&+!$*4%!

E)40=(?!G(+!HC!

ANG-1072!

! rules can be derived from these errors. For example, the swaps in all examples are not random. They occur at a specific area in the syllable as suggested by the hierarchical theory. It would be impossible to determine rules or patterns according to a linear structure. It is virtually impossible to pinpoint the first phoneme (onset) of the second syllable of any word and replace it with the onset of the third syllable with a linear structure. It would not be a spontaneous error, therefore impossible to set specific rules in accordance to syllabification. For example, in kapitan pakitan within a linear structure, we would swap phoneme 1 with phoneme 3 and in kaliman kamilan we would swap phoneme 3 with phoneme 5. No rule is possible to derive from this assumption, whereas in a hierarchical structure, all we need to swap are the onsets of both syllables. Hence, a rule can clearly be defined through this assumption. As for the data presented in Part II, theory 2, which claims that not only are the phonemes of a word grouped together within syllables, but that that syllables have particular internal structures that determine how phonemes are placed within the syllable, also seems to best support the data presented. In this case, a new syllable must be created in order to respect the language presented. In a linear structure, it would be impossible to insert a new syllable without modifying the numbering sequence of every phoneme. In the pattern presented, a vowel is copied and added to a [p] phoneme. A linear structure would not recognize the vowel being copied. Thus rules could not be respected without obstructing the original linear pattern. A hierarchical structure facilitates the recognition of CVC or CV patterns and differentiates between syllables. Each pattern (CVC or CV) is assigned a particular role within the syllable, hence rule application is possible to conserve syllabification. For example, in the case of the proper noun Maria in a linear structure, in order to make it Jerga, we would have to insert a [p] phoneme between phoneme 2 and phoneme 3, then copy phoneme 2 and add it between the new [p] phoneme and phoneme 3. Again, no specific rule can be derived from this assumption. On a different note, in a hierarchical structure, since syllables are divided and structured under a hierarchical structure, it is simple to pinpoint in every syllable what needs to be copied (ie. the nucleus) and where the [p] phoneme should be inserted (onset position).