Asymmetries in /s/ cluster production and their implications for language learning and language teaching Marina Tzakosta University of Crete martzak@edc.uoc.gr Abstract: In this paper we demonstrate that different two-member cluster types exhibit different simplification strategies in Greek child speech. We argue that such differences mirror variable degrees of cluster coherence and, therefore, presuppose distinct phonological representations. We suggest that cluster coherence is due to the combination and satisfaction of specific factors; first, the position of each cluster member, i.e. whether it is the initial or the second member, second, the featural synthesis of the obstruent member of the cluster and, third, the satisfaction of the Sonority Scale. Keywords: cluster, coherence, phonological representation, sonority, affricate. 1. Introduction The majority of research studies in L1 phonological development demonstrate that clusters undergo simplification by means of reduction, epenthesis and fusion during language development (cf. Barlow 1997; Pater & Barlow 2003, for child English, Fikkert 1994; Jongstra 2003, for child Dutch, Lukaszewicz 2000, for child Polish, Kappa 2001; Tzakosta 1999; 2001, for child Greek). Cluster simplification facilitates the production of unmarked CV syllables. More specifically, it takes the form of, first, cluster reduction. Reduction is driven by either markedness (Gnanadesikan 2004), which is, in turn, governed by the so-called ‘sonority pattern’ (Barlow 2001a; 2001b; Gnanadesikan 2004; Goad and Rose 2004; Jongstra 2003; Ohala 1996; Pater & Barlow 2003), or contiguity (van der Pas 2004). If sonority determines cluster reduction, segments which are unmarked at the level of either place/ manner of articulation or voicing surface. This is exemplified in the English data in (1). In (1) the least sonorous, or else strongest, segment is retained. In case cluster simplification is driven by contiguity, the segment located closer to the syllabic nucleus is realized. This is illustrated in the Dutch data in (2). (1a) /dram/ → [dam] ‘drum’ (1b) /slip/ → [si:p] ‘sleep’ (From Gnanadesikan 2004) (2a) /blad/ → [lαt] ‘leaf’ (2b) /slá.pen/ → [lá.pε] ‘sleep’ (from van der Pas 2004) Epenthesis is a second strategy of cluster simplification. It takes the shape of either anaptyxis of a vowel in between a cluster or prothesis of a vowel immediately before a cluster. According to Fleischhacker (2000), anaptyxis applies to CL 1 while prothesis emerges in SC clusters. However, in the Greek data in (3), vowel anaptyxis is attested with CC clusters. In many cases in the Greek data, /æ/ is the inserted vowel placing 1 C stands for obstruents and L for liquids. © 2009. Selected Papers from the 18 th ISTAL