Trends in Phonetics and Phonology

This volume was inspired by the 9th edition of the Phonetik and Phonologie conference, held in Zürich in October 2013. It includes state of the art research on phonetics and phonology in various languages and from interdisciplinary contributors. The volume is structured into the following eight sections: segmentals, suprasegmentals, articulation in spoken and sign language, perception, phonology, crowdsourcing phonetic data, second language speech, and arts (with inevitable overlap between these areas).

Internet-mediated Phonetics

Facebook is a medium of social interaction producing its own style. The present study analyses how users from Malaga create this style through phonetic features of the local Spanish variety and how they reflect on the use of these features. Moreover, the use of non-standard variants by users from Malaga is examined and compared to an oral corpus. Results demonstrate that social factors work differently in real and virtual speech. Thus, the electronic medium constrains the phonetics of the local variety employed on Facebook. Facebook communication is seen as a style serving to create social meaning and to express linguistic identity.

Личните и географските имена в българския и сръбския превод на Стишния пролог (по материал от месец март)

The paper presents a comparative study of the personal and geographic names in the two complete Slavic translations of the Byzantine Versified Synaxarion, namely the Bulgarian and Serbian Prolog Stišnoj, which appeared around the first half of the 14 th century. On the basis of the March texts in seven South Slavic manuscripts, the differences in the rendering of the personal names are analysed on the level of phonetics, orthography, morphology and word formation. The data allow the following conclusions: 1) The differences in the forms of these names in the Bulgarian and Serbian Prolog Stišnoj give further arguments supporting their independent origin; 2) Several specific tendencies are noted which more or less differentiate them. The Bulgarian translation reproduces more accurately the graphics of the original names, allows dativus possessivus, often replaces the Greek anthroponyms and toponyms with adjectives, presents many local names in the plural, and sometimes retains Greek nominative endings in masculine personal names. The Serbian translation, on the other hand, follows more often the Byzantine pronunciation of the names, complies more strictly with their grammatical characteristics (case, number), separates more often the ending -ς from the stem, and incorporates the accusative ending -ν into the stem of certain anthroponyms several times. 3) The tendency towards Slavicisation of the personal names is nearly the same in both translations and cannot be viewed as peculiar of either of them.