Icelandic phonology


Unlike many languages, Icelandic has only very minor dialectal differences in sounds. The language has both monophthongs and diphthongs, and many consonants can be voiced or unvoiced.
Icelandic has an aspiration contrast between plosives, rather than a voicing contrast, similar to Faroese, Danish and Standard Mandarin. Preaspirated voiceless stops are also common. However, fricative and sonorant consonant phonemes exhibit regular contrasts in voice, including in nasals. Additionally, length is contrastive for consonants, but not vowels. In Icelandic, the main stress is always on the first syllable.

Consonants

The number and nature of the consonant phonemes in modern Icelandic is subject to broad disagreement, due to a complex relationship among consonant allophones.

Major allophones

Even the number of major allophones is subject to some dispute, although less than for phonemes. The following is a chart of potentially contrastive phones, according to one analysis :
includes three extra phones, namely the glottal stop, voiceless velarized alveolar lateral approximant and its voiced counterpart.
A large number of competing analyses have been proposed for Icelandic phonemes. The problems stem from complex but regular alternations and mergers among the above phones in various positions.

Alternations

Examples of alternations across different positions:
Voiced consonants are devoiced word-finally before a pause, so that dag is pronounced, bauð is pronounced, and gaf is pronounced. Even sonorants can be affected: dagur , ketil

Restrictions

Dorsal consonants (velar, palatal, glottal)

The "glottal fricative" only occurs initially before a vowel, and following a vowel in the sequences. These latter sequences are sometimes said to be unitary "pre-aspirated" stops; see below.
The voiceless velar fricative occurs only between a vowel and or, and initially as a variant of before. Because it does not contrast with in either position, it can be seen as an allophone of. However, it also alternates with, occurring before a pause where would be pronounced otherwise.
There are two sets of palatal sounds. "Alternating palatals" alternate with the velars, while "non-alternating palatals" do not. Note that appears twice here; these two 's behave differently, occur in different distributions, and are denoted by different letters. This suggests that they may belong to different phonemes, and that is indeed a common analysis.
In general, the alternating palatals are restricted to appearing before vowels. Velars are restricted to appearing everywhere except before front vowels. In other words: Before back vowels and front rounded vowels, both palatals and velars can appear; before front unrounded vowels only palatals can appear; before consonants only velars can appear.
For the non-alternating palatals : Both can appear at the beginning of a word, followed by a vowel. Elsewhere, only one can occur, which must occur after a non-velar, non-palatal consonant. occurs before a vowel, and occurs in a few words at the end of a word following.
The velars and alternating palatals are distributed as follows:
Although the facts are complex, it can be noticed that only ever contrasts with one of the two velar stops, never with both, and hence can be taken as an allophone of whichever one doesn't appear in a given context. Alternatively, following the orthography, can be taken as an allophone of, where is taken as an allophone of either or depending on context, following the orthography.

Alveolar non-sibilant fricatives

In native vocabulary, the fricatives and are allophones of a single phoneme. is used morpheme-initially, as in þak , and before a voiceless consonant, as in maðkur . is used intervocalically, as in iða and word-finally, as in bað , although it is devoiced to before pause. Some loanwords have introduced the phone in intervocalic environments, as in Aþena .
The phone is actually a laminal voiceless alveolar non-sibilant fricative. The corresponding voiced phone is similar, but is apical rather than laminal.

Voiceless sonorants

Of the voiceless sonorants, only occur in word-initial position, for example in hné . Only in initial position do the voiceless sonorants contrast with the corresponding voiced sonorants. Finally, before aspirated consonants and after voiceless consonants only the voiceless sonorants appear; elsewhere, only the voiced sonorants appear. This makes it clear that are non-phonemic. Recently, there has been an increasing tendency, especially among children, to pronounce initial hn as voiced, e.g. hnífur rather than standard.

Palatal and velar nasals

The palatal nasals appear before palatal stops and the velar nasals before velar stops; in these positions, the alveolar nasals do not occur. appears also before, and through the deletion of in the consonant clusters , and through the coalescence of the consonants and in the consonant clusters . The palatal nasals are clearly non-phonemic, although there is some debate about due to the common deletion and coalescence of.

Aspiration and length contrasts (medial and final)

Modern Icelandic is often said to have a rare kind of stops, the so-called pre-aspirated stops , which occur only after a vowel and do not contrast with sequences . note that phonetically, in Icelandic pre-aspirated stops the aspiration is longer than in normal post-aspirated stops, and is indistinguishable from sequences occurring in other languages; hence, they prefer to analyze the pre-aspirated stops as sequences. For example, Icelandic nótt, dóttir correspond to German Nacht, Tochter.
Following vowels there is a complex alternation among consonant length, vowel length and aspiration. The following table shows the alternations in medial and final position :
In most analyses, consonant length is seen as phonemic while vowel length is seen as determined entirely by environment, with long vowels occurring in stressed syllables before single consonants and before certain sequences formed of a consonant plus, and short vowels occurring elsewhere. Note that diphthongs also occur long and short.

Phonemes

As discussed above, the phones, probably, and debatably are non-phonemic. Beyond this, there is a great deal of debate both about the number and identity of the phonemes in Icelandic and the mapping between phonemes and allophones.
There are a number of different approaches:
Phonetic vs. orthographic:
  1. The "phonetic" approach. This approach tries to stay as close as possible to the phonetics. This would assume, for example, that and should be consistently analyzed in all contexts as phonemic and, respectively, and that is a phonemic sequence .
  2. The "orthographic" approach. This approach takes the orthography as approximately indicative of the underlying phonemes. This approach generally assumes, for example, phonemes and which occur in accordance with the orthography, where has allophones, and depending on the context, and has allophones, and. is analyzed as or, while is analyzed as, again consistent with the orthography. A variant would assume that and merge into an archiphoneme in contexts where the two cannot be distinguished, e.g. before or, where both would be pronounced. Note that in this approach, a particular phone will often be an allophone of different phonemes depending on context; e.g. would be taken as initially, but between vowels.
Maximalist vs. minimalist:
  1. The "maximalist" approach. This approach generally takes the contrasting phones as unit phonemes unless there is a good reason not to. This would assume, for example, that the palatal stops, voiceless sonorants and perhaps the velar nasal are separate phonemes, at least in positions where they cannot be analyzed as allophones of other unitary phonemes.
  2. The "minimalist" approach. This approach analyzes phones as clusters whenever possible, in order to reduce the number of phonemes and better account for alternations. This would assume, for example, that the palatal stops, voiceless sonorants and velar nasal are phonemic clusters, in accordance with the orthography. In structuralist analyses, which passed out of vogue starting in the 1960s as generative approaches took off, even more extreme minimalist approaches were common. An example is. Although he presents more than one analysis, the most minimal analysis not only accepts all the clusters indicated in the orthography, but also analyzes the aspirates as sequences,, and reduces all vowels and diphthongs down to a set of 6 vowels.
The main advantage of the phonetic approach is its simplicity compared with the orthographic approach. A major disadvantage, however, is that it results in a large number of unexplained lexical and grammatical alternations. Under the orthographic approach, for example, all words with the root sag-/seg- have a phonemic, despite the varying phones occurring in different lexical and inflectional forms, and similarly all words with the root sak- have a phonemic, despite the varying phones. Under the phonetic approach, however, the phonemes would vary depending on the context in complicated and seemingly arbitrary ways. Similarly, an orthographic analysis of three words for "white", hvítur hvít hvítt as allows for a simple analysis of the forms as a root plus endings and successfully explains the surface alternation, which would not be possible in a strictly phonetic approach.
Assuming a basically orthographic approach, the set of phonemes in Icelandic is as follows:
The parentheses indicate phonemes present in a maximalist analysis but not a minimalist analysis.
There is a particular amount of debate over the status of and. A maximalist analysis sees them as separate phonemes, while in a minimalist analysis they are allophones of and before front unrounded vowels, and of the sequences and before rounded vowels, in accordance with the orthography. The maximalist approach accords with the presence of minimal pairs like gjóla vs. góla and kjóla vs. kóla , along with general speakers' intuitions. However, the minimalist approach accounts for some otherwise unexplained gaps in the system, as well as otherwise unexplained alternations between palatals and velars in e.g. segi vs. sagði . On the other hand, the number of such alternations is not as great as for stop vs. fricative alternations; most lexical items consistently have either velars or palatals.
The voiceless sonorants are straightforwardly taken as allophones of voiced sonorants in most positions, because of lack of any contrast; similarly for vs.. On the other hand, do contrast with in initial position, suggesting that they may be phonemes in this position, consistent with a maximalist analysis. A minimalist analysis, however, would note the restricted distribution of these phonemes, the lack of contrast in this position with sequences and the fact that similar sequences do occur, and analyze as, in accordance with the orthography.
The velar nasal is clearly an allophone of before a velar stop. When it occurs before or as a result of deletion of an intervening, however, some scholars analyze it as a phoneme, while others analyze it as a sequence, e.g..

Vowels

There is less disagreement over the vowel phonemes in Icelandic than the consonant phonemes. The Old Icelandic vowel system involving phonemic length was transformed to the modern system where phonetic length is automatically determined by the syllable structure. In the process of eliminating vowel length, however, relatively few vowel distinctions have been lost, as the loss of phonemic length has been offset by an increase in the number of quality distinctions and diphthongs.
FrontBack
Mid to close •
Open to close

has a front onset,, while has a back onset,.

Vowel length

is mostly predictable in Icelandic. Stressed vowels are long:
Before other consonant clusters, stressed vowels are short. Unstressed vowels are always short.
An exception occurs, if there is a t before the infix k. Examples are e. g. notkun and litka. There are also additional exceptions like um and fram where the vowel is short in spite of rules and en, where the vowel length depends on the context.