![Livonian vowels on the vowel chart. (1) Livonian i, a, u, o, and their long counterparts are pronounced like the corresponding short and long vowels in Estonian and Latvian (e.g., kilā 'village', kalā 'fish', lūdõ 'broom', kōgiņ 'for a long time'). Livonian o and ō are never pronounced as diphthongs. (2) Mid-high e and ē are pronounced as the corresponding sounds in Estonian and as the so-called narrow short and long e in Latvian (e.g., dek 'blanket', lēba 'bread'). (3) Low ä and ǟ are pronounced as a short and long ä in Estonian and as a short and long so-called wide [ȩ] in Latvian (e.g., käbā 'cone', sǟlga 'back, NSg'). (4) Livonian õ and ȭ are higher than Estonian short and long õ and more back than Russian ы (e.g., sõbrā 'friend', vȭrõz 'stranger'). Word-final õ may not be pronounced in the sentence when the following word starts with a vowel. Sometimes õ is also not pronounced at the end of the inessive and elative and in verb forms of plural 2nd and 3rd person.](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tuuli-Tuisk/publication/308133994/figure/fig1/AS:683059913433088@1539865582119/Livonian-vowels-on-the-vowel-chart-1-Livonian-i-a-u-o-and-their-long-counterparts_Q320.jpg)
Content uploaded by Tuuli Tuisk
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tuuli Tuisk on Oct 18, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
MAIN FEATURES OF THE LIVONIAN SOUND SYSTEM AND
PRONUNCIATION
Tuuli Tuisk
University of Tartu
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation Tuul i Tui sk
Abstract. The aim of this article is to give an overview of the Livonian sound system and
pronunciation. Regarding Livonian dialectal variation, the main difference is between
East and West Livonian, while Central Livonian forms a transition area. The basis of the
Livonian written language is the East Courland dialect. This article focuses on standard
pronunciation, with some discussion of variation. Vowels and consonants are treated
separately. In addition, Livonian prosodic features are discussed. Livonian stands out
as being a Finnic language that has been influenced by the Baltic language, Latvian.
Unlike many other Finnic languages, Livonian has voiced stops and fri catives, which
can occur as long geminates. There is a large number of short and long monophthongs,
diphthongs, and triphthongs in Livonian.
Keywords: consonants, vowels, tone, prosody, Livonian
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/jeful.2016.7.1.06
1. Introduction
The aim of the current article is to give a description of the Livonian
sound system and pronunciation. The Livonian language shares
similar features with the Finno-Ugric languages but also the Baltic and
Scandinavian languages. Its quantity system is above all similar to Esto-
nian (Lehiste 1960, 1997a). A significant phenomenon in Livonian word
prosody is the opposition of two pitch contours (Posti 1936; Vihman
1971; Viitso 1981). Livonian is the only Finnic language that differen-
tiates between two contrastive tones in stressed stem-initial syllables.
Such tone opposition is quite unusual for Finno-Ugric languages and
together with the temporal aspects leads to the special position of
Livonian among the languages spoken in the contact area around the
Baltic Sea. Livonian is unique among the Uralic languages in that it
contrasts short and long monophthongs, diphthongs, and triphthongs,
and also single and geminate consonants and word-final short and
ESUKA– JEFUL 2016, 7–1: 121–143
122 Tuuli Tuisk
long consonants. Additionally, differences in coda weight multiply the
number of possible sound patterns. These aspects are actively used in
Livonian inflectional morphology. Livonian also stands out among
Finnic languages in that it contrasts final short and long vowels in
stressed monosyllables. There is the gemination of voiced plosives and
fricatives in the language. The structure of consonant clusters in Livo-
nian is more complicated than in Finnish or Estonian.
Describing the Livonian sound system and the question of how to
represent this system in the Livonian literary language have been much
debated issues (for details see Ernštreits 2013). The Livonian language
has been written for over 100 years by linguists and researchers as well
as native speakers. The main interest for all of these groups has been
how to represent the Livonian language in the best written form. For
linguists and researchers, the primary concern has been the written
representation of the language with maximum phonetic precision. For
common users, the most important aspect has been how to write and
read the language in the best way. Therefore, both phonetic transcription
and standard written orthography have been used widely for writing
Livonian, though both of these systems are relatively closely connected.
Historically, the Livonian dialectal variants of Courland (Latvian
Kurzeme) and Livonia (Latvian Vidzeme) have been distinguished. The
area in the central and northwestern part of present-day Latvia, along
the Daugava, Gauja, and Salaca Rivers, and on the coast of the Gulf of
Rīga north of the Daugava up to the Estonian settlements was originally
called Livonia. Wars, diseases, and assimilation processes caused a
situation where by the 19th century the Livonian language was no longer
spoken in this area. There is evidence only of Salaca Livonian. Starting
from the second half of the 19th century, the linguistic focus has been
on Courland. Traditionally, Courland Livonian has been divided into
East (spoken in the villages of Ūžkilā, Sīkrõg, Irē, Kuoštrõg, Pitrõg,
Sǟnag, Vaid, Kūolka, and Mustānum), Central (Īra), and West Livonian
(the villages of Lūž and Pizā) dialects. The main difference is between
East and West Livonian, while Central Livonian forms a transition area.
The Livonian written language is based on the East Courland dialect
(e.g., Viitso 2008).
There are 36 letters in the modern Livonian alphabet: a ä b c d ḑ e f
g h i j k l ļ m n ņ o ȯ õ p q r ŗ s š t ţ u v w x y z ž. The letters c, q, w,
x, y occur only in foreign names, e.g., Bach, Wiedemann. The length
of a vowel is orthographically marked with a macron above the vowel:
lēņtš ‘southwest’, sīedõ ‘to eat, Inf’. Words with broken tone or stød
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 123
are usually marked with an apostrophe in transcriptions and learning
materials (e.g., ki’v ‘stone’, vie’ddõ ‘to carry’). In the orthography,
broken tone is left unmarked. There is no common agreement on how to
mark broken tone in IPA1, but the symbol used for a glottal con sonant (ʔ)
is sometimes proposed. The length of the vowel of the second syllable
after a short first syllable is also marked: jõvā ‘good’, katāb ‘he/she
covers’. Consonant length is denoted by writing the consonant either
with one or two letters as, e.g., ka’ggõl ‘neck’, võttõ ‘to take’.
The dialectal differences of Courland Livonian are clearest if one
looks at vowels. In East Livonian there are 8 short and 9 long vowels
in syllables with primary stress, in Central Livonian (Īra) 8 short and
8 long vowels, and in West Livonian 6 short and 6 long vowels. In the
19th century, the short and long rounded front-vowels ü and ö were
in use, as well. These were replaced in all Courland Livonian dialects
with unrounded i and e at the end of the 19th century. East Livonian
(except Kūolka and Mustānum) differentiates long [ō] and [ǭ] (e.g.,
tōvaz ‘sky’ and sǭra ‘horn’). Orthographically, both vowels are marked
as ō. In paradigmatic alternation, the mid-high rounded back-vowel [ō]
can alternate with the diphthong ou and the low rounded back-vowel
[ǭ] can alternate with short a (e.g., tōvaz ‘sky, NSg’ : touvõd ‘skies,
NPl’ and tǭla ‘winter, NSg’ : tallõ ‘winter, PSg’). In West Livonian and
Īra, instead of [ǭ] there is [ā], which is somewhat labialized (e.g., sāra
‘horn’).
2. Consonants
There are 23 consonants in contemporary Livonian (subchapters
2 and 3 in the current article are based on Viitso 2008, Viitso and
Ernštreits 2012, Lehiste et al. 2008). Unlike many other Finnic
languages, Livonian has voiced stops /b d ḑ g/ and fricatives /z ž/.
Similar to Estonian, Livonian has palatalization of alveolar consonants
which has occurred in front of the historical /i/ and /j/. In contemporary
Livonian, /ḑ ţ ļ ņ ŗ/ have acquired phonemic status. When /i/ and
/j/ follow /š/, /tš/, /ž/, and /dž/, these consonants are pronounced as
palatalized.
1 The International Phonetic Alphabet.
124 Tuuli Tuisk
Table 1. Livonian consonants (corresponding IPA symbols are given
in parentheses).
Bila-
bial
Labio-
dental
Alveo-
lar
Post-
alve-
olar
Palat-
alized
Pala-
tal
Velar Glot-
tal
Plosive p b
[p b]
t d
[t d]
ţ ḑ
[tʲ dʲ]
k g
[k g]
Nasal m
[m]
n
[n]
ņ [nʲ]
Trill r [r] ŗ [rʲ]
Fricative f v
[f v]
s z
[s z]
š ž [ʃ ʒ ʃʲ ʒʲ]h [h]
Lateral l [l] ļ [lʲ]
Approxi-
mant
j [j]
2.1. Plosives
(1) The Livonian plosive s p, t, and k are pronounced as voiceless
consonants (e.g., padā ‘pot’), being similar to the corresponding
plosives p, t, and k in Estonian and Latvian.
(2) The palatalized plosive ţ is pronounced fully palatalized (e.g., kaţki
‘broken’). It is different from Estonian palatalized t, which is only
partly palatalized.
(3) The short plosives b, d, and g are voiced word-initially and in
voiced position (e.g., gārban ‘cranber ry’, tabār ‘tail’). In front of
p, t, ţ, k, and s and in word-final position b, d, and g are weak and
voiceless (or half-voiced) (e.g., la’gtõ ‘to lay out’, ke’g ‘cuckoo’).
(4) The plosive ḑ in voiced position is palatalized and voiced (e.g.,
sēmḑa ‘milk’). Preceding p, t, k, and š, ḑ is weak and voiceless
(e.g., ē’ḑtõ ‘to dress’). Word-final ḑ following a voiced sound is
half-voiced (e.g., lē’ḑ ‘leaf’).
2.2. Nasals
(5) The voiced nasal m is similar to Estonian and Latvian m (e.g., limā
‘mud’).
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 125
(6) The Livonian nasal n represents three different sounds. It is not
palatalized and usually pronounced as [n], much as n in Estonian
and Latvian (e.g., kanā ‘hen’). In front of k and g, within the same
morpheme, it is pronounced as [ŋ] (e.g., kǟnga ‘shoe’). Within
the cluster ngḑ, it is fully palatalized and pronounced as [ŋ́] (e.g.,
langḑi ‘yarn, PPl’).
(7) The nasal ņ is fully palatalized, being different from Estonian
palatal ized n and similar to Latvian ņ (e.g., keņgi ‘shoes, NPl’,
ka’ņki ‘chicken’).
2.3. Trills
(8) The alveolar consonant r is similar to Estonian and Latvian r (e.g.,
rānda ‘shore’).
(9) The consonant ŗ is fully palatalized in Livonian (e.g., kǭŗa ‘herd’).
In literary Estonian and Latvian, ŗ is unmarked.
2.4. Fricatives
(10) The word-initial s is similar to Estonian and Latvian s (e.g., sovā
‘stick’). Word-finally and in voiced position, Livonian single s is
longer and more intense, resembling Estonian long ss and Latvian
s (e.g., täsā ‘here’).
(11) The alveolar fricative z is fully voiced word-initially and in voiced
position (e.g., zēp ‘soap’, izā ‘father’).
(12) The word-initial fricative š is voiceless (e.g., širts ‘apron’).
(13)
The fricative ž is fully voiced in word-initial and voiced position
(e.g., ažā ‘thing’). ž is not palatalized after i and e, but palatalized
after other vowels. Word-final ž can become half-voiced or unvoiced.
In words with broken tone, ž is pronounced as iž after a short
monophthong or the diphthong uo (e.g., ke’ž ‘hand’, tuo’ž ‘truth’).
(14) The f ricatives f and h occur only in foreign and loan words (e.g.,
foto ‘photo’, härtsog ‘duke’). The consonant h occurs also in inter-
jections. The voiceless glottal fricative h is pronounced stronger
than Estonian h.
(15) The fricative v is voiced in word-initial or syllable-initial position
as well as in word-final or syllable-final position when following
a long vowel. In words longer than monosyllables, v can be
pronounced as [u] in word-final position and in non-initial syllables
126 Tuuli Tuisk
before consonants (e.g., pappov ‘fallow’ : pappovd ‘fallows, NPl’).
v in monosyllabic words with plain tone indicates that in other
word-forms v is between vowels and pronounced as [v] (e.g., kouv
‘well’ : kouvõ ‘well, PSg’). However, word-final v in mono syllabic
words with broken tone indicates that v alternates with vv and is
pronounced as [uvv] (e.g., kie’v ‘cough’ : kie’vvõ ‘cough, PSg’).
2.5. Laterals
(16) The Livonian voiced lateral l is similar to Estonian l, but can also
be pronounced like Latvian and Finnish l.
(17) The voiced lateral ļ is fully palatalized and differs from Estonian
palatalized l in its palatalization duration (e.g., nǭļa ‘joke’).
2.6. Approximant
(18) In word-initial and syllable-initial position, the approximant j
is pronounced similarly to Estonian and Latvian. In word-final,
syllable-final, and consonant-initial position, j is pronounced as
[i] (e.g., kǭj ‘spoon’, ka’ j ‘harm’).
2.7. Geminates and consonant clusters
In intervocalic position, there are short and long geminates2 in
Livonian (e.g., võtāb ‘he/she takes’, võttõ ‘to take’). Both the short
geminate and the long geminate close the preceding syllable. After a
long geminate, the second syllable vowel is significantly shorter than
after a short geminate. A distinctive feature of Livonian as compared
to other Finno-Ugric languages is the gemination of voiced plosives
and fricatives (e.g., ka’ddõ ‘to disappear’, i’zzõ ‘father, PSg’). Also, the
voiced trill can occur as a long geminate (e.g., kirrõd ‘axes’). The distin-
guishing of voiceless short and long plosive geminates is preserved in
words with more than two syllables, as well (Tuisk 2015a).
2 The criteria for gemination here is that the geminate sequence at the syllable boundary
is divided between two syllables.
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 127
The short geminates of voiceless stops are written, as in Estonian,
with a single letter, e.g., võtāb ‘he/she takes’. Single voiceless fricatives
in intervocalic position are also short geminates as, for example, in the
word täsā ‘here’.
The plosives p, t, ţ, k, fricatives s, š, f, h, nasals m, n, ņ, laterals l,
ļ and trills r, ŗ are always pronounced long in word-final position in
monosyllabic words with the plain tone and written with a single letter
(e.g., kik ‘rooster’, kaš ‘cat’, rõk ‘talk, speech’, tas ‘cup’). This is similar
to Estonian where these are written with two letters (e.g., kukk ‘rooster’,
kass ‘cat’).
The structure of consonant clusters in Livonian is more complicated
than, for example, in Finnish or Estonian. The consonants p, t, ţ, k, s, š,
f and m, n, ņ, l, ļ, r, ŗ are pronounced longer as the first component of
a consonant cluster than in corresponding Estonian consonant clusters
and even stretched in such words with plain tone as, e.g., maksõ ‘to
pay’, andõ ‘to give’, kuolm ‘three’, mõtlõ ‘to think’. The consonants
p, t, ţ, k, s, š, f are pronounced half-long as the first component of
a con sonant cluster in words with plain tone where there is a long
vowel in the second syllable, e.g., pitkā ‘long’, liestā ‘f lounder’, kaţļā
‘cauldron’. As for the duration of some consonant clusters in Livonian,
there is a similar correlation between the duration of the consonant
cluster and the following syllable as in Estonian. For example, in the
word mustā ‘black’ there is a short consonant cluster followed by a
half-long (or long) vowel, while in the word mustõ ‘black, PSg’ there is
a long con sonant cluster followed by a short vowel.
3. Vowels
Livonian has eight vowel phonemes, represented by the letters i õ u
e ȯ o ä a, which are pronounced as [i ɯ u e ɤ o æ ɑ]. There are nine long
vowels ā ǟ ē ī ō ȱ ȭ ū ǭ. Vowels are divided according to tongue height
as: high /i, õ, u/, mid-high /e, ȯ, o/, and low /ä, a/ vowels (see Table 2
and Figure 1). All vowels in primary stressed syllables occur as short
and long. Note that East Livonian differentiates long [ō] and [ǭ] (see
Table 3).
128 Tuuli Tuisk
Table 2. Livonian short and long monophthongs.
Front vowel Back vowel
High i īõ ȭu ū
Mid-high e ēȯ ȱo ō
Low ä ǟa āǭ
Figure 1. Livonian vowels on the vowel chart.
(1) Livon ian i, a, u, o, and their long counterparts are pronounced like
the corresponding short and long vowels in Estonian and Latvian
(e.g., kilā ‘village’, kalā ‘fish’, lūdõ ‘broom’, kōgiņ ‘for a long
time’). Livonian o and ō are never pronounced as diphthongs.
(2) Mid-high e and ē are pronounced as the corresponding sounds in
Estonian and as the so-called narrow short and long e in Latvian
(e.g., dek ‘blanket’, lēba ‘bread’).
(3) Low ä and ǟ are pronounced as a short and long ä in Estonian and
as a short and long so-called wide [ȩ] in Latvian (e.g., käbā ‘cone’,
sǟlga ‘back, NSg’).
(4) Livonian õ and ȭ are higher than Estonian short and long õ and
more back than Russian ы (e.g., sõbrā ‘friend’, vȭrõz ‘stranger’).
Wor d-f inal õ may not be pronounced in the sentence when the
following word starts with a vowel. Sometimes õ is also not
pronounced at the end of the inessive and elative and in verb forms
of plural 2nd and 3rd person.
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 129
(5) ȯ and ȱ are mid-high back vowels, being somewhat lower than
Estonian õ. The mid-high unrounded back-vowel /ȯ/ occurs only
in stressed syllables following the word-initial consonants /p, m,
v/ (e.g., pȯis ‘boy’, mȯizõ ‘manor’, vȯigõ ‘to swim’).
(6) ǭ is a long low back vowel (e.g., sǭdõ ‘to get’, rǭ’ ‘money’).
In addition, the results of the phonetic measurements of Livonian
vowels are presented in Figure 1 (according to the measurements by
Lehiste et al. 2008)
3
. The vowels were pronounced by one native male
speaker of Livonian.
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
50010001500200025003000
F1, Hz
F2, Hz
Short vowels, PF
Short vowels, SF
Long vowels, PF
Long vowels, SF
i
õ
u
e
ä
a
ȯ
o
Fi gure 2. Average formant values of short and long vowels in
stressed syllables of the male speaker VB (Lehiste et al. 2008:
85). (PF – words in phrase-fi nal position, SF – sentence-fi nal
position)
In the pronunciation of the speaker, both short and long vowels in
the stressed syllables can be grouped as follows: on the basis of F1 /i
õ u/ are high vowels, /e ȯ o/ mid-high vowels, and /ä a/ low vowels.
According to F2 /i e ä/ are front vowels and /õ u ȯ o a/ back vowels.
Compared to short vowels, long vowels /i ä/ are moved front and /a/
more back. Short /o/ and /ȯ/ are located quite close to each other.
The dialectal differences of Courland Livonian are clearest if one
looks at vowels. Table 3 shows short and long vowels in primary-stressed
3 These materials did not contain long /ȯ/ in stressed syllables.
130 Tuuli Tuisk
syllables in East, Īra (Central), and West Livonian. There is some
variation in East Livonian. Namely, the long low back-vowel ǭ is absent
in the villages of Kūolka and Mustānum. In Mustānum, the mid-high
back-vowels ȯ and ȱ are absent, as well. In East Livonian and Īra, the
diphthongs uo and ūo have been replaced with ȯ and ȱ after p, m, and
v. In the 19th century, the short and long rounded front-vowels ü and ö
were in use. These were replaced in the whole area with unrounded i
and e at the end of the 19th century.
Table 3. Vowels in the primary stressed syllable in Livonian dialects.
East Livonian Īra (Central Livonian) West Livonian
iõu īȭ ūiõu īȭūiuīū
e(ȯ)o ē(ȱ)ōeȯoēȱōeoēō
äa ǟā(ǭ)äa ǟā äa ǟā
In East Livonian, there are 4 short and 4 long vowels in the unstressed
syllables following the primary stressed syllable (Table 4), but there are
several restrictions and the occurrence of a particular vowel depends on
the structure of the primary-stressed syllable.
Table 4. Livonian unstressed syllable vowels following the primary-
stressed syllable.
East Livonian West Livonian
iõ īūiõu īū
eēeē
aāaā
In Figure 3, the results of the phonetic measurements of Livonian
short and half-long vowels in unstressed syllables are presented
(according to the measurements by Lehiste et al. 2008)4. Again, the
vowels were pronounced by the same native male speaker of Livonian.
4 The materials did not contain /e/ in unstressed syllables.
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 131
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
50010001500200025003000
F1, Hz
F2, Hz
Short vowels, PF
Short vowels, SF
Half-long vowels, PF
Half-long vowels, SF
i
õ
u
a
o
F igure 3. Average formant values of short and half-long vowels
in unstressed syllables of the male speaker VB (Lehiste et al.
2008: 87). (PF – words in phrase-fi nal position, SF – sentence-
fi nal position)
In the speech of the male speaker, the quality of the short high
vowels /i/ and half-long /i u/ of unstressed syllables do not vary much
in quality. Their quality is rather close to that of the same vowels in
stressed syllables. However, compared to the high vowel /õ/ in stressed
syllables, /õ/ in unstressed syllables has moved more to the center of
the vowel space.
Livonian diphthongs are classified as falling (opening) or rising
(closing) on the basis of the quality of their components (Viitso 1981,
2008). The falling diphthongs (see Table 5) are either short (ie and uo,
e.g., piezā ‘nest, NSg’, suodā ‘war, NSg’) or long (īe and ūo, e.g., sīedõ
‘eat, Inf’, kūona ‘frog, NSg’), with short falling diphthongs behaving
similarly to short monophthongs. The total duration of short diphthongs
usually equals the duration of short monophthongs. The phonetic
measurements by Lehiste et al. (2008) have shown that short diphthongs
can also be a little longer (e.g., V = 103 ms,
V
V = 146 ms) (Lehiste et
al. 2008: 41).
132 Tuuli Tuisk
Table 5. Livonian falling diphthongs.
ie
riek ‘road’
ie’
vie’d ‘water,
GSg’
īe
tīedõ ‘work, PSg’
ī’e
tī’edõ ‘to do’
uo
kuonnõ ‘frog,
PSg’
uo’
kuo’nnõ ‘at
home’
ūo
jūodõ ‘to drink’
ū’o
kū’oḑ ‘court of
justice’
Rising diphthongs (see Table 6) are long and have either a long (e.g.,
āi as in pāika ‘place, NSg’) or short (e.g., ei as in leibõ ‘bread, PSg’)
first component. In East Livonian, all rising diphthongs with a long
first component end in i (āi, ōi, ȭi, ȱi, ūi). Rising diphthongs with a
short first component end in i (ai, ei, õi, ȯi, ui) or u (äu, iu, ou, õu). The
great variety of the rising diphthongs is explained by the fact that j and
v are vowelized (examples presented in parentheses in Table 6). For this
reason, such combinations as e’ j, õ’ j, ȯ’j, a’ j, u’ j, o’ j, ū’j, ǭi, ǭ’j, ū’oj,
o’v, i’v, ie’v, ä’v, õ’v should be treated as diphthongs and triphthongs.
Livonian triphthongs developed through diphthongization of the
initial components of the diphthongs beginning with e and o, and partly
as a result of the loss of h and metathesis (Viitso 1981).
Table 6. Livonian short and long diphthongs and triphthongs ending
with i and u (presented according to the initial component).
iiu
piukšõ
‘to tweet’
i’u (i’v)
i’ukšõ
‘to yell’
īu
pīu kan dõks
‘tweet’
ie ieu
kieuž ‘rope’
(ie’v)
eei
leibõ
‘bread,
PSg’
e’i (e’j)
te’iž
‘again’
ēi
klēibõ
‘to glue’
eu
reumatismõz
‘rheumatism’
e’u
re’uglõ
‘to
belch’
ääu
täuž ‘full’
(ä’v)
õõi
sõidõ
‘to
row’
õ’i (õ’j)
võ’ilõ
‘to
wave’
ȭi
sȭira
‘cheese’
õu
jõugõ ‘sand’
õ’u (õ’v)
kõ’uri
‘twisted’
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 133
ȯȯi
mȯistli
‘wise’
(ȯ’j) ȱi
vȱidatõ
‘to avoid’
aai
aigõ
‘time,
PSg’
a’i (a’j)
a’igõ
‘edge,
PSg’
āi
āiga
‘time,
NSg’
uui
luini
‘bony’
u’i
(u’j)
mu’idlõ
‘to
smile’
ūi
tūima
‘numb’
(ū’j)
uo uoi
luoimõ
‘warp,
PSg’
uo’i
kuo’igõ
‘ship,
PSg’
ūoi
lūoima
‘warp,
NSg’
ū’oi (ū’oj)
tū’oigõz
‘birch
bark’
ooi
knoijõ
‘to
prod’
o’i (o’j)
kno’ik
‘big
piece’
ou
kouv
‘water well’
o’u (o’v)
jo’ug
‘river’
ǭǭi (ǭj)
bǭik
‘light-
house’
ǭ’i (ǭ’j)
lǭ’igi
‘asunder’
Descriptions of Livonian monophthongs, diphthongs, and triph-
thongs (e.g., Pajupuu and Viitso 1986) show that they take part in
the quantity and quality paradigmatic alternation (see an example in
Table 7). In polyphthongs with a short initial component (e.g., in kuijõ-,
luoimõ-, ke’itõ-, kuo’igõ-type of words), the first two components have
more or less equal duration, whereas in polyphthongs with a long initial
component (in rūimõ-, lūoikõd-, tū’oigõz-, kīeta-type of words), the
first component is about twice as long as the second component (e.g.,
Pajupuu and Viitso 1986).
134 Tuuli Tuisk
Table 7. Livonian diphthongs and triphthongs.
Short fi rst component Long fi rst component
Short fi nal
component
Long fi nal
component
Broken tone Plain tone Broken
tone
aigā
‘edge, NSg’
aigõ
‘time, PSg’
a’igõ
‘edge, PSg’
āiga
‘time, NSg’
lǭ’igi
‘asunder’
kuoigīd
‘ships’
luoimõ
‘warp, PSg’
kuo’igõ
‘ship, PSg’
lūoima
‘warp, NSg’
tū’oigõz
‘birch bark’
4. Prosodic features
Livonian has preserved the main prosodic features characteristic of
Finnic languages, such as (a) word-initial stress and (b) the phonological
opposition of short and long phoneme duration. Particular charac-
teristics of Livonian are (a) the opposition of the plain tone and broken
tone (i.e., stød), (b) the differentiation of short and long diphthongs and
triphthongs, and (c) a wide difference in the structure of stressed and
unstressed syllables.
One of the features characterizing the quantity opposition in
Livonian is the duration ratio of syllables in a foot. Syllable durations in
stressed and unstressed syllables are commonly involved in establishing
three contrastive foot types in Livonian that resemble the three-way
contrastive feet of Estonian (e.g., Lehiste et al. 2008). However, such
a ternary opposition is not always realized in Livonian. For example,
Livonian disyllabic weak-grade words with a short first syllable and
a half-long second syllable (e.g., jõvā ‘good’) are similar to Estonian
Q1 words, but the duration of the half-long second syllable vowel in
Livonian is longer (which phonetically is rather a long vowel) than in
Estonian (syllable ratios 0.5–0.7, according to Lehiste et al. 2008 and
Tuisk 2012). Unlike in Estonian, Livonian can have a short diphthong
in the first syllable, which can be longer than a short vowel (e.g., piezā
‘nest’). The temporal characteristics of these Livonian words are rather
similar both in read speech and spontaneous speech. The prosodic
structure of Livonian weak-grade and strong-grade words with a long
first syllable consisting of voiced sounds (e.g., vȭrõz ‘stranger’, vȭrõd
‘strangers’) resembles that of Estonian disyllabic Q2 and Q3 words,
but there are differences in realizing these two word structures. The
duration of the first stressed syllable might not differ in weak- and
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 135
strong-grade words, but this difference becomes evident in the second
unstressed syllable duration (syllable ratios 1.0–1.8 and 2.4–3.2,
according to Lehiste et al. 2008). Unlike in Estonian in Livonian, the
long vowel and diphthong in the first syllable are closer in duration,
and the difference in the second vowel duration is somewhat greater. In
Estonian, there is a systematic difference in the first vowel duration and
unstressed second syllable vowel. The tendency towards foot isochrony
in Livonian indicated on the basis of data from controlled speech is
supported by the data from spontaneous speech (e.g., Lehiste et al.
2008, Tuisk and Teras 2009).
The structures of primary-stressed and secondary-stressed feet are
in principle alike (e.g., Tuisk 2015a). The syllable durations and duration
ratios of secondary-stressed feet in tetrasyllabic words (e.g., salāndõbõd
‘they steal’) are similar to those of primary-stressed feet in Livonian,
but the lengthening of the unstressed syllable is significantly larger in
a primary-stressed foot than in a secondary-stressed foot. The syllable
ratios in a trisyllabic secondary-stressed foot are similar to the ratios
in a primary-stressed foot if the secondary-stressed foot contains the
derivational affix -nikā (e.g., puŗŗõnikādõks ‘sailboat, InlPl’).
The question of tonal oppositions has been a much debated issue in
the research on Livonian prosody. In primary-stressed syllables, two
tones occur: the plain (or rising) tone, and the broken tone, which is
rising-falling or predominantly falling and is sometimes accompanied
by laryngealization. The main focus of the discussion has been on
broken tone or stød, which has equivalents also in Salaca Livonian and
in South Estonian dialects in Latvia.
The experimental research on Livonian was initiated mainly by
the interest in the broken tone. The first acoustic-phonetic studies on
Livonian word prosody were carried out in the phonetics laboratory of
the University of Tartu in the 1920s by professor Lauri Kettunen and
his student Paulopriit Voolaine. However, the special status of Livonian
tones was first noticed by the Estonian linguist Ferdinand Johann
Wiedemann and the Danish linguist Vilhelm Thomsen in the 19th
century. Wiedemann (1861) explained the existence of different tones
as specific vowel or consonant lengths similar to quantity contrasts in
Estonian. Thomsen (1890) described Livonian broken tone as similar to
that of Danish stød.
Livonian broken tone or stød requires a certain minimum amount
of voiced material in the syllable rhyme in order to be realized. The
so-called stød-basis is a long stressed syllable with a long vowel,
136 Tuuli Tuisk
diphthong, triphthong, or a short vowel followed by a voiced geminate
consonant or consonant cluster (e.g., rǭ’dõ ‘money, PSg’, kuo’igõ
‘ship, PSg’, ka’ddõ ‘to disappear’, ka’ļḑi ‘fish, PPl’). This phenomenon
must not be ignored, as stød has a phonological role in differentiating
meaning (e.g., kallõ ‘island, PSg’, ka’llõ ‘fish, PSg’). Livonian broken
tone or stød is to a large extent predictable from syllabic and morpho-
logical structure.
Livonian stød has been described as the breaking of the voice in the
middle or the end of the sound (e.g., Kettunen 1925). However, some
researchers have found it odd that the so-called breaking of the voice,
which is such an important factor in Livonian, can often be completely
absent (e.g., Posti 1936). It has also been proposed that there are three
intonations in Livonian, i.e., rising, broken and falling (Posti 1936)5.
A comparison of words with the plain tone and broken tone by
Seppo Suhonen (1982) showed that in disyllabic words with a closed
first syllable the short vowel is longer in words with the broken tone,
while in mono- and trisyllabic words the vowel is shorter. Regarding
long monophthongs and diphthongs, the vowels in disyllabic words with
broken tone are shorter than the vowels with plain tone.
Differences in the pronunciation across generations of Livonian
speakers have been studied (e.g., Lehiste et al. 2008), concluding that
the phonological opposition between the presence and absence of
stød has almost disappeared from the language. The acoustic features
characteristic of the broken tone were evident in the pronunciation of
the older generation, while the middle and youngest generation differed
among themselves and sometimes the characteristic features were
absent entirely.
The question of acoustic features of Livonian broken tone or stød is
unquestionably intriguing. It has been pointed out (e.g., Vihman 1971,
Pajupuu and Viitso 1986, Teras and Tuisk 2009, Tuisk 2015b) that the
most characteristic acoustic features of Livonian stød are (1) a relatively
early fundamental frequency (F0) fall, (2) variation in intensity, and
(3) irregular vibrations of the vocal folds. The absolute correlation
between level intonation and the absence of stød would appear to
confirm the suggestion that the overall pitch contour functions as part
of the perceptual cue for stød in Livonian. Livonian stød becomes more
apparent from the intensity contour as well as the pitch contour.
5 Posti used the terms traditionally used for Latvian tones.
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 137
The characteristic patterns may be more evident in read speech than
in spontaneous speech, but some features are still stable in spontaneous
speech, as well. Studies on broken tone or stød suggest that not only
the syllable carrying stød but also the following syllable might cue the
difference between words with and without stød (e.g., Tuisk 2015b).
In spontaneous speech, the first syllable durations in disyllabic words
with broken tone and plain tone may get neutralized. In read speech, the
durations of the second syllable are the same in words with broken tone
and plain tone, but in spontaneous speech there is a significant decrease
of second syllable duration in words with broken tone.
The most stable and characteristic feature of words with broken tone
is an early location for the F0 turning point and intensity turning point
within the stressed syllable along with the characteristic shape of the
pitch and intensity contours (see Figures 4 and 5).
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
Frequency (Hz)
Duration (ms)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
F igure 4. Fundamental frequency (in Hz) in words with stød
(dashed line) and without stød (solid line) for three female
speakers (black squares) and three male speakers (black triangles).
The fi ve points are at the S1 rhyme beginning, F0 peak, S1 rhyme
end, S2 rhyme beginning, S2 rhyme end. (Tuisk 2015b)
Characteristic laryngealization is realized more often in read speech
than in spontaneous speech. In spontaneous speech, this characteristic
feature tends to weaken or disappear. However, even if the laryn-
gealization is absent in words with broken tone, the pitch peak is earlier
in the stressed syllable.
138 Tuuli Tuisk
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65 600 650 700 750 800 850 900
Intensity (dB)
Duration (ms)
Fi gure 5. Intensity contours (in dB) in S1 in the word mǭdõ ‘land,
PSg’ (solid line) and in the word mǭ’zõ ‘down, Adv’ (dashed line)
from one female speaker. (Tuisk 2015b)
There have been discussions on the origin of Livonian broken tone.
The most general question is whether Livonian broken tone is a Latvian
influence (as suggested for instance by Winkler 1999, 2000) or if it has
arisen independently in Livonian and Latvian, with apocope, syncope,
and syllable contraction being the main reasons for its development in
Livonian (as proposed, for instance, by Posti 1942).
In Livonian disyllabic weak-grade words with a short first syllable
followed by a half-long second syllable (e.g., jemā ‘mother’), the F0
turning point is at the beginning of the second syllable and there is a
correlation between the duration of the unstressed syllable and the F0
turning point location (longer unstressed syllable duration is closely
related to a late F0 turning point). There is no reason to apply charac-
teristic tonal patterns of words characteristic to those of Estonian Q2
and Q3 words to Livonian, as these patterns are not as clear in Livonian.
Words without stød can have a late pitch peak in weak-grade words
(e.g., lēba ‘bread’), while in strong-grade words (e.g.. leibõ ‘bread, PSg’)
the F0 peak can vary in the first stressed syllable. Thus, while pitch is a
decisive factor between Q2 and Q3 in Estonian, it is not that important
in Livonian. In Livonian, the tonal characteristic is more evident in the
opposition of words with and without stød. In terms of pitch, strong-
grade words with stød (e.g., mie’rrõ ‘sea, IllSg’) are characterized
above all by an early pitch peak. Even when the peak occurs later in the
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 139
first syllable, it is still earlier than the late peak in strong-grade words
without stød.
Phenomena similar to the Livonian broken tone or stød have been
described in other neighboring languages such as Latvian, Lithuanian,
and Danish. Syllable intonations or tones are part of the prosodic system
of Latvian (e.g., Kariņš 1996, Markus and Bond 2010). The difference
between intonations
6
finds its realization in all long syllables. Latvian
is known as a language with three syllable intonations – falling, level
or drawn, and broken. However, there is great variation in Latvian
dialects with a tendency to replace the broken intonation with falling
intonation and to combine the falling and the drawn intonations into
a single level intonation. It has been concluded that the use of Latvian
syllable into nation is not important in communication (e.g., Markus and
Bond 2010) and such ternary oppositions are realized only in a few
word triplets.
Lithuanian is a language with two contrastive tones: the sharp falling
or acute tone and the smooth rising or circumflex tone (e.g., Balode and
Holvoet 2001). The distinction between tones is clearest in the western
part of Lithuania, especially in Northern Žemaitian dialects, where the
main acute tone is realized as a broken (glottalized) tone. The broken
tone has been described as having an initial rise of pitch and intensity,
after which a glottal stop intervenes and the remaining part of the
vocalic segment is much lower in intensity and pitch.
The basic acoustic and perceptual properties of Danish stød are
well documented (e.g., Grønnum et al. 2013). In Danish, stød has
traditionally been characterized as a kind of creaky voice, i.e., non-
modal voice with aperiodic and irregular amplitude, often accompanied
by a fundamental frequency perturbation, and an abrupt and brief
dip in fundamental frequency. Danish stød has also been explained
by phonation type as a brief dynamic voice quality movement in the
direction of more compressed voice and back, rather than involving a
specific voice quality such as creak (Hansen 2015).
One complicated aspect of descriptions of the broken tone or stød
in Livonian is the use of different terms. This is most likely due to
the different interpretation of the phenomenon as well as the use of
the language to describe it, and the tradition of the particular research
group. Thus, for segmental characteristics, English glottal stop,
German der Bruch der Stimme, Stimmbruch, Stosslaut or Bruchlaut,
6 Latvian phonetic tradition generally uses the term intonation.
140 Tuuli Tuisk
Danish stød, Finnish katko, French coup de glotte, Estonian katke-
häälik, etc. are used. In referring to tone or intonation, English broken
tone, glottalized tone, broken intonation, German Stosston (Stoßton),
Bruchintonation, gestossene Intonation, Danish stød, Finnish katko-
intonaatio, Estonian katketoon, etc. are used. English glottalization,
laryngealization, or creaky voice have been used to describe irregular
vibrations of the vocal folds. The question of terminology becomes
more confusing when a particular term covers all acoustic features,
which in order to simplify the understanding of the description should
be treated separately. Despite the question of terminology, there always
seems to be agreement regarding the existence of an opposition in the
presence or absence of this phenomenon.
5. Summary
This article describes the main features of Livonian sound system
and pronunciation. The Livonian written language is based on the
Eastern Courland dialect. Regarding Livonian dialectal variation, the
main difference is between East and West Livonian. Central Livonian
forms a transition area. Livonian stands out as being a Finnic language
that has been influenced by the Baltic language, Latvian. Livonian is
interesting in several respects in particular. These include the presence
of voiced stops and fricatives, which can occur as long geminates in
Livonian, as well as a large number of short and long monophthongs,
diphthongs, and triphthongs. Many possible sound patterns, syllable and
foot structures, and the distinguishing of tone as well as the historical
background of Livonian certainly serve to characterize it as one of the
most unique languages in the contact area of the Baltic Sea.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the projects IUT2-37 and Livonian
grammar and databases financed by the Estonian Ministry of Education
and Research. The author is very grateful to Uldis Balodis for editing
the language of this paper.
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 141
Address
Tuul i Tu isk
Institute of Estonian and General Linguistics
University of Tartu
Jakobi 2–409
51014 Tartu, Estonia
E-mail: tuuli.tuisk@ut.ee
Abbreviations
Adv – adverb, dB – decibels, F1 – first formant, F2 – second
formant, GSg – genitive singular, Hz – hertz, IllSg – illative singular,
Inf – infinitive, InlPl – instrumental plural, IPA – International Phonetic
Alphabet, ms – milliseconds, NSg – nominative singular, PF – phrase-
final, PSg – partitive singular, SF – sentence-final, S1 – first (primary-
stressed) syllable of a word, S2 – second syllable of a word, V – short
monophthong, VV – short diphthong.
References
Balode, Laimute and Axel Holvoet (2001) “The Lithuanian language and its dialects”.
In Östen Dahl, Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm, eds. Circum-Baltic Languages. Volume
I: Past and Present, 41–79.
Ernštreits, Valts (2013) Liivi kirjakeel. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Grønnum et al. 2013 = Grønnum, Nina, Miguel Vazquez-Larruscaín, Hans Basbøll
(2013) “Danish Stød: Laryngealization or Tone”. Phonetica 70, 66–92.
Hansen, Gert Foget (2015) Stød og stemmekvalitet. En akustik-fonetisk undersøgelse
af ændringer i stemmekvaliteten i forbindelse med stød. Ph.d.-af handling. Det
Humanistiske Fakultet, Københavns Universitet.
Kariņš, Arturs Krišjānis (1996). The Prosodic Structure of Latvian. PhD dissertation.
University of Pennsylvania.
Kettunen, Lauri (1925) Untersuchung über die livische Sprache I. Phonetische Einfüh-
rung. Sprachproben. (Acta et Commentationes Universitatis Dorpatensis B VIII.
3). Ta r t u.
Lehiste, Ilse (1960) “Segmental and syllabic quantity in Estonian”. In Thomas A.
Sebeok (Ed.), American Studies in Uralic Linguistics, 21–82. (Uralic and Altaic
Series vol. 1). Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.
Lehiste, Ilse (1997a) “Search for phonetic correlates in Estonian prosody”. In Ilse
Lehiste, Jaan Ross, eds. Estonian Prosody: Papers from a Symposium, 11–35.
Tallinn: Institute of Estonian Language.
142 Tuuli Tuisk
Lehiste et al. 2008 = Lehiste, Ilse, Pire Teras, Valts Ernštreits, Pärtel Lippus, Karl
Pajusalu, Tuuli Tuisk, Tiit-Rein Viitso (2008) Livonian Prosody. (Mémoires de la
Société Finno-Ougrienne 255). Helsinki.
Markus, Dace and Zinny Bond (2010) “Continuing Research on Latvian Syllable Into-
nations”. Žmogus ir Žodis. Mokslu darbai. Vol. 12 (1), 52–61. Vilnius: Vilniaus
pedagoginis universitetas.
Pajupuu, Hille and Tiit-Rein Viitso (1986) “Livonian polyphthongs”. In Arvo Eek, ed.
Estonian Papers in Phonetics 1984–1985, 96–130. Tallinn.
Posti, Lauri (1936) “Liivin kielen intonaatioista”. Virittäjä 40, 314–326, 384.
Posti, Lauri (1942) Grundzüge der livischen Lautgeschichte. (Mémoires de la Société
Finno-Ougrienne LXXXV). Helsinki.
Teras, Pire and Tuuli Tuisk (2009) “The characteristics of stød in Livonian”. In Martti
Vainio, Reijo Aulanko, Olli Aaltonen, eds. Nordic Prosody. Proceedings of the Xth
Conference, Helsinki 2008, 217–226. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
Thomsen, Vilhelm (1890) Beröringer mellem de finske og de baltiske (litauisk-lettiske)
Sprog. København.
Tuisk, Tuuli (2012) “Tonal and Temporal Characteristics of Disyllabic Words in Spon-
taneous Livonian”. Linguistica Uralica XLVIII 1, 1–11.
Tuisk, Tuuli (2015a) “The Temporal Structure of Tri-, Tetra- and Pentasyllabic Words
in Livonian”. Linguistica Uralica LI 3, 177–195.
Tuisk, Tuuli (2015b) “Acoustics of stød in Livonian”. In The Scottish Consortium
for ICPhS 2015, ed. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic
Sciences. Paper number 356, 1–5. Glasgow: the University of Glasgow. Available
online at <http://www.icphs2015.info/pdfs/Papers/ICPHS0356.pdf>. Accessed
08.06.2016.
Tuisk, Tuuli and Pire Teras (2009). “The role of duration ratios and fundamental
frequency in spontaneous Livonian.” Linguistica Uralica XLV 4, 241–252.
Vihman, Marilyn May (1971) Livonian Phonology, with an Appendix on Stød in
Danish and Livonian. Unpublished dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction
of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics in the
Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley.
Viitso, Tiit-Rein (1981) Läänemeresoome fonoloogia küsimusi. Tallinn: ENSV TA
KKI.
Viitso, Tiit-Rein (2008) Liivi keel ja läänemeresoome keelemaastikud. Tar tu–Tallinn:
Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.
Viitso, Tiit-Rein and Valts Ernštreits (2012) Līvõkīel-ēstikīel-leţkīel sõnārōntõz.
Liivi-eesti-läti sõnaraamat. Lībiešu-igauņu-latviešu vārdnīca. Tartu–Rīga: Tartu
Ülikool. Latviešu valodas aģentūra.
Wiedemann, Ferdinand Johann (1861) Joh. Andreas Sjögren’s Livische Grammatik
nebst Sprachproben. Joh. Andreas Sjögren’s Gesammelte Schriften, Band II, Theil
I. St. Petersburg.
Winkler, Eberhard (1999) “Katkeintonatsiooni tekkimisest läänemeresoome keeltes”.
In Karl Pajusalu, Tõnu Tender, eds. Õdagumeresoomõ veeremaaq. Lääne-
meresoome perifeeriad, 201–206. (Võro Instituudi Toimõtiseq 6). Võro.
Features of the Livonian sound system and pronunciation 143
Winkler, Eberhard (2000) “Zum Stoßton im Ostseefinnischen”. In Jochen D. Range,
ed. Aspekte baltischer Forschung, 344–363. (Schriften des Instituts für Baltistik.
Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald 1). Essen.
Ko kkuvõte. Tuuli Tuisk: Liivi keele häälikusüsteemi ja häälduse põhi-
jooned. Käesolevas artiklis antakse ülevaade liivi keele häälikusüsteemist.
Kuramaa liivi murrete seisukohalt on suurim erinevus ida- ja lääneliivi
vahel, samas kui keskliivi ehk Īra kujutab endast üleminekuala. Tänapäeva
liivi kirja keel põhineb Kuramaa idaliivi murdel. Artiklis kirjeldatakse liivi
standard hääldust, tuues paralleelselt välja ka mõned murdeerinevused.
Vokaale ja konsonante kirjeldatakse eraldi. Lisaks antakse ülevaade liivi
prosoodiasüsteemist. Liivi keel on läänemeresoome keelte seas mõneti ainu-
laadses olukorras, kuna keeles on mõjutusi balti keelte hulka kuuluvast läti
keelest. Erinevalt teistest läänemeresoome keeltest esinevad liivi keeles heli-
lised klusiilid ja frikatiivid, mis võivad ilmneda ka pikkade geminaatidena.
Samuti on liivi keel huvitav lühikeste ja pikkade monoftongide, diftongide ja
triftongide rohkuse poolest.
Märksõnad: konsonandid, vokaalid, toon, prosoodia, liivi keel
Kubbõvõttõ k s. Tuul i Tui sk : L īvõ kīel kilūd sistēm ja īeldõm pǟummitõd.
Sīe kēra võttõksõks um iļļõvaņtļimi līvõ kīel kilūd sistēmst ja īeldõmst.
Kurmǭ līvõ mūrdõd sūŗimi vait um um idā- ja lǟndlīvõd vail, sidāmi jag agā
Īra um iļlǟdõb murd. Tämpiz līvõ kērakīel pūojõks um idālivõ murd. Kēras
sǭb vaņțõltõd līvõ kīel standardīeltõmi, paralel ulzõ tūodsõ ka mingizt murd-
vaitõd. Īžkillijid ja īņõzkillijid sōbõd vaņtõltõd īžkiz. Vel sǭb vaņțõltõd līvõ
kīel prozodij sistēmõ. Līvõ kēļ um vāldamiersūomõ kīeld siegās eņtšvīți, ku
kīelsõ um mȯjtõkši lețkīelstõ. Tuoistiz ku sūrs jags vāldamiersūomõ kēļši, līvõ
kīelsõ ātõ īelkõks vizād ja ȭrdõd īņõzkillijid, mis võibõd jeddõ tūlda ka kui
pitkād kǭdkõrdizt kilūd. Līvõ kīelsõ um ka pǟgiņ lītiži ja pitkīdi īdkõrdiži,
kǭdkõrdiži ja kuolmkõrdiži īžkiļļijidi.
