The phonology-syntax connection 9780226381008, 0226381005, 9780226381015, 0226381013

Citation preview

1.

...{

CSLI

The Phonology-Syntax Connection nta Connec P~onolo~y-~y T~e

CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE AND INFORMATION AND

x-----------=------x • 1 !

.(

by E d ited b y Edited

Zec Sharon Inkelas and Draga Zee

X X XXXX )

l 1

'.

'

The University of Chicago Press Chicago and London

. ~'

SHARON Sharon INIŒLAS I nkelas is assistant professor of linguistics linguistics at the University D raga ZEc Zec is University of Maryland. DRAGA assistant professor of linguistics linguistics at Yale assistant Yale University University and is a coeditor of Working Papers Papers in Discourse Structure, published by CSLI Grammatical Theory and Discourse CSLl in 1988 1988 and distributed distributed by the Press. Press.

C on ten ts Contents

vii

Contributors Contributors Preface Preface

xiii

Introduction Introduction

The University University of Chicago Clùcago Press, Chicago Clùcago 60637 60637 University of Chicago Clùcago Press, Ltd., London The University 1990 by the C Center © 1990 enter for the Study of Language and Information Leland Stanford Junior University University All rights reserved. Published 1990 1990 Ali o f America Printed in the United States of

99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90

xi

~/

1 Branching Branching N Nodes od es and ategories and Prosodic Prosodie C Categories 1

L e e BICKMORE B ic k m o r e LEE

ifr ^ 2

54321 54321

iy'3

The Phonology-syntax Phonology-syntax connection / edited by by Sharon Inkelas and Draga Zec. Zec. p. cm. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-226-38100-5. 0-226-38100-5.— - ISBN 0-226-38101-3 ISBN 0-226-38101-3(pbk.) (pbk.) 1. Phonology. 2. Grammar, 1. Grammar, Comparative and general— general-Phonology. general-Syntax. Comparative and general— Syntax. I. II. Zec, 1. Inkelas, Sharon. Il. enter for the Study oofLanguage f Language and Information (U.S.) Draga. III. C Center (U.S.) P217.3P54 1990 1990 P217.3P54 415— dc20 415-dc20 89-20582 CIP

What W hat M ust Phonology P honology Know K now About A b ou t Syntax? Syntax? Must

Syntax and Syntax and Phrasing Phrasing in Korean Korean 47

Y o u n g -m e e Y ho YOUNG-MEE Yuu C CHO

4

-j

19

MATTHEW M a t t h e w Y. Y . CHEN C hen

,

Sandhi R Rules Sandhi ules of Greek Greek and and Prosodic Prosodie Theory Theory 63

C le g C o n d o ra v d i CLEO CONDORAVDI

5 Precompiled Precom piled Phrasal Phrasal P honology Phonology

85

B ru c e H ayes BRUCE HAYES

6 Boundary Boundary Tonology Tonology and and the th e Prosodie Prosodic Hierarchy Hierarchy 109

L arry M ym an LARRY M.. H HYMAN

Toward a T 7 Toward ypology of P ostlexical R ules Typology Postlexical Rules paper used in this publication meets 0§ The paper the minimum minimum requirements requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences— Permanence of Sciences-Permanence Paper Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. P;iper for Printed Libraiy 239.48-1984.

127 127

E lle n M a is s e ELLEN M.. K KAISSE

s

Fod1sing on Phonological 8 Fochsing Phonologieal Phrases Phrases in Chichewa Chiehewa 145

JONNI JO N N I M. M . KANERVA K anerva

9

Chizigula Word Chizigula Tonology: Tonology: the th e W ord and and Beyond Beyond MICHAEL M i c h a e l KENSTOWICZ K e n s t o w i c z AND a n d CHARLES C harles K is s e b e r t h KISSEBERTH

a ?

V

163 163

vi Contents v1 Contents

Kiyaka 10 Syntax in Kiyaka Tone and Syntax 10 Tone MA KIDI LU K OOWA WA K id im a LUK

195

Tonology Chaga Tonology njo Chaga Kivu 11 he Phrasal ycle ivunjo e in K Cycl Phrasal C The 11 T McH B r i a nN D c HuGH ugh D.. M BRIA

217

Phonology hmicic Phonology^^^ Rhyt 12 hythm Prosodie and R Separation ooff Prosodic thee Separation On th 12 On 243 M a r iINA na N e s pPOR or NES MAR

C tors ntribuutors Coontrib

Kim in K s in Rule lexieal R Post 13 ules ostlexical ules imatuatus and P Rule Lexical R Syntax, Lexical 13 Syntax, umbi umbi 2259 59 ÜDD D a v i ID d O d d eEN n DAV Japanese Boundary in Japanese 14 ord-Internal Phrase Boundary d-Internal Phrase Wor 14 W ER POS W il l i a m JJ.. P o se r LIAM WIL

279

ology Phon Phrasal P thee Phrasal redicting ule D omains ains in th honology Dom Rule ieting R Pred 15 P D.. RRICE K e r eEN n D ic e KER

289

~ c-l

Chinese Shanghai Chinese omains ains in Shanghai Dom Prosodie D é_),. ,..,,. 16 Prosodic SHE G TON AND E l i s aABE b e t TH h S e l k i IRK rk a nd T o n g S h e nN SELK ELIS

j"

Phonology s in Phonology 17 antics Syntax and Semantic 1 7 Syntax KEN AN ISTV IIREN r e n eE V o g e l a n d I s t v a n K e n eESEI sei AND EL VOG Syntax onstrained trained Syntax Cons Prosodieally C oj^y { / 18 Prosodically D r a gGA a Z ec a nd S h a rRON o n IINKE n k e lLAS as SHA AND ZEC DRA Shapes Phonplogical Shapes 19 epresentations esentations and Phonplogical Repr Syntactic R 19 Syntactic A r n oOLD ld M w i cCKY ky M.. ZZWI ARN Bibliography Bibliography Index Index

of Texas at University of the University Lecturer at the currently currently a Lecturer Proso Pros­ yamb "Kin ed entitl dissertation, entitled Austin. Kinyambo completed his dissertation, recently completed He recently Austin. He

L ee B ic k m o r e Eis MOR BICK LEE

UCLA. ody,” ody," at UCLA. Calof Cal­ University of the University Professor Linguistics at the Professor of Unguistics MATTHE and ogy tonol de inclu interests include tonology and ifornia, research interests current research Diego. His current San Diego. ifornia, San interface. syntax-phonology syntax-phonology interface. is She is Universitr She Stanford University. Y O U N G -M EEE ho is student at Stanford graduate student is a graduate CHO Yuu C YOUNG-M E Y n". ilatio Assim tal onan Cons writing "Parameters of Consonantal Assimilation . entitled "Parameters dissertation entitled writing aa dissertation 9f area of Her area Univ:ersity. Her C l e o C o n dDOR v d i is student at Yale University. graduate student isI aa graduate CLEO CON o r a AVD semantics. specialty syntax and semantics. specialty is syntax

M a t t h e wWY h e nN is is Y.. CCHE

313 339 365

379 399

interests research interests UCLA: His research B r u c e H a y eES Linguisties at UCLA, Professor of Linguistics is Professor BRUCE HAY s is segment y, theor s stres ieal metr de beyond the topic of this volume include metrical stress theory, segment beyond the topie of this volume inclu meter. theory of meter. structure, structure, and the theory Caliof Cali­ University of y m aAN n is Linguisties at the University Professor of Linguistics is Professor M. HHYM LARRYM. and a omen phen die proso y sivel fornia Berkeley. He has worked extensively on prosodic phenomena and fornia, Berkeley. He has worked exten of grammar of and grammar phonology and varied issues in the phonology diachronie issues and diachronic synchronie and varied synchronic languages. aa wide N~ger-Congo languages. range of Niger-Congo wide range

L arry

421

of University of the University at the Linguisties at Professor Professor of Linguistics SHARON ns actio inter the interactions addresses the Maryland. dissertation addresses University dissertation Stanford University Her Stanford Maryland. Her ture. struc ctic synta between prosodic, morphological and syntactic structure. between prosodie, morphological University the University at the Linguistics at E l l e n M. K a i s sSE e is Professor of Linguistics Associate Professor is Associate ELI.,ENM. KAIS of of author of Connected Speech: the Interaction the author is the She is Washington. She of Washington. of y nolog postlexical-pho of works on the postlexical-phonology other works Syntax and Phonology and other / English. ana English. Greek, / Turkish and Greek, Turkish S h a r o n IINKE n k e lLAS a s is Assistant is Assistant

Syntax and Phonology

ConnectedSpeech: theInteraction of

UniIndiana Uni­ at Indiana Linguisties at Assistant Professor of Linguistics Assistant Professor JONNI M. sPhra and s entitled Focu versity. dissertation is entitled University dissertation Stanford University His Stanford versity. His x. synta and phoneties and syntax. in phonetics interests m ing in Chichewa Phonology; he also has interests JO N N I M . K a n eERV rv a A is is KAN

ingin ChichewaPhonology;

Focus andPhras­

viii

Contributors Contributors

Contributors Contributors

ix

HunUnversity of Szeged, Hun­ Associate Professoratat the Unversity Associate Professor of s of collection edited and gary. His main interest is syntax, and he has edited two collections syntax, interest gary. n. Hungaria papers syntax of Hungarian. papers on the syntax

The University. The Linguistics at Yale University. Assistant Professor of Linguistics Assistant Professor on ts Constrain dissertation is Sonority title University dissertation Stanford University title of her Stanford

of University of Linguistics at the University Professor Professor of Linguistics synand y phonolog Urbana-Champaign. He has research interests in the phonology and syn­ interests research . hampaign Urbana-C languages. African languages. tax of Slavic, Semitic and African

A rn o ld Z w i c k y is ZWICKY ARNOLD

IST VAN K e n e s e i Iis KENESE ISTVAN

M i c h a e l LK e n s t o wWICZ i c z is KENSTO MICHAE

completing aa a graduate student at UCLA. He is completing graduate student and accent in Kiyaka. dissertation dissertation on tone and L u k o w a AK i d i m a is KIDIMA LUKOW

D ra g a Z e c is ZEC DRAGA

Sonority Constraints on

Structure. P rosodic Structure, Prosodie

State Ohio State Linguistics at the Ohio University Professor of Linguistics University Professor y. Universit Stanford s Linguistic University and Visiting Professor of Linguistics at Stanford University. Professor University and gy, morpholo syntax, between He publishes widely on the interfaces between syntax, morphology, and interfaces He publishes theory in general. phonology linguistic theory phonology and on linguistic

University at the University Linguistics at C h a r l e s SW i s s e b e rRTH t h is Professor Professor of Linguistics KISSEBE W.. K CHARLE ed emphasiz recent of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. His work in recent years has emphasized . of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign . languages Bantu Southern and the tonal/accentual structure of Eastern and Southern Bantu languages. Eastern the tonal/accentua! structure UCLA University. His UCLA B ria n M c H u g h is Assistant Assistant Professoratat Temple University. McHUGH BRIAN implicaits and Chaga Kivunjo dissertation concerns phrasal cyclicity in Kivunjo Chaga and its implica­ phrasal n dissertatio Hierarchy theory. tions for Prosodic Prosodie Hierarchy Amsterdam. University of Amsterdam. Associate Associate Professoratat the University ponents (sub)com She interaction of the different (sub)components primarily on the interaction She works primarily grammar. of the grammar. M a rin a N e s p o r is NESPOR MARINA

at Linguistics at Department of Linguistics D a v id O d d e n is Assistant Professor in the Department Assistant Professor ODDEN DAVID grammar e descriptiv Ohio State University. He is currently working on a descriptive grammar currently Ohio State University. of Kimatuumbi. Kimatuumbi. UniStanford Uni­ Linguistics at Stanford is Assistant Professor of Linguistics Assistant Professor the interface, y /phonolog phonetics versity. His default interests are the phonetics/phonology interface, the interests default versity. Japanese. and Japanese. formal properties phonological rules, and properties of phonological

W illia m P oser POSER WILLIAM

of University of Linguistics at the University is Associate Professor of Linguistics Associate Professor Athaand theory ical phonolog area of phonological Toronto. theory and AthaToronto. Her work is largely in the area (Northern paskan author of A Grammar of Slave (Northern languages; she is the author paskan languages; Athapaskan). Athapaskan). K e re n R ic e RICE KEREN

A Grammar of Slave

Masof Mas­ University of E l i s a b e t TH h S e l k i r k is Professor Linguistics at the University Professor of Linguistics SELKIRK ELISABE The Syntax: and y Phonolog ns sachusetts at Amherst. Her publications publicatio Amherst. sachusetts Syntax The 1984), Press, (MIT Press, 1984), Structure Relation between Sound and PhonolDomains in Sentence Phonol­ "Derived Domains 1982) and “Derived of Words (MIT Press, 1982) in interest ing longstand ogy” (Phonology Yearbook 3, 1986) reflect her longstanding interest in 1986) ogy" (Phonology Yearbook syntax. and gy morpholo y, the interface between syntax. phonolog morphology between phonology,

Relation between Sound and Structure of Words

Phonology and Syntax: The The Syntax

of Institute of Research Institute Assistant Fellow at the Research Research Fellow Assistant Research and China, B~ijing, Linguistics, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, China, and s, Linguistic He Amherst. He Massachusetts at Amherst. aa Ph.D. University of Massachusetts candidate at the University Ph.D. candidate gy. dialectolo s linguistic specializes in phonology, Chinese linguistics and dialectology. y, phonolog s specialize T ong S h e n is SHEN TONG

of University of Linguistics at the University is Associate Professor of Linguistics Associate Professor postlexand lexical project on the Delaware. and postlexcurrently working on a project Delaware. She is currently Italian. ical phonology phonology of Italian. IIRENE re n e V ogel VoGEL

!

Preface P reface

emerged from a workshop on the phonology-syntax This volume emerged phonology-syntax connec­ connection, held in May, 1988 1988 at the Center for the Study tion, the Center Study of Language Language and Information at Stanford Stanford University. The design of the workshop was to Information assemble for the first time contributors contributors to the growing field of phonologysyntax interaction, interaction, with the stated stated aim of evaluating evaluating the role of the pro­ syntax prosodie hierarchy hierarchy therein. therein. sodic Sponsorship for the workshop came firom from two CSLI projects: Sponsorship projects: Gram­ Grammatical Theory Theory and Discourse Structme Structure (part (part of the Relational matical Relational Theories Language and and Action Action project), project), and Phonetics Phonetics and of Language and Phonology. Phonol~gy. The T-he workshop's ultimate ultimate success is due to the the collaborative collaborative efforts of the ex­ workshop’s ex;tended Stanford Stanford linguistics linguistics community. tended community. Of particular particular help in organizing organizing workshop were Elizabeth Elizabeth Bratt, the events of the workshop Bratt, Junko Junko Ito, Itô, Smita Smita Joshi, Joshi, Marcy Macken, K. P. Mohanan, Mohanan, Tara Tara Mohanan, Mohanan, and Bach-Hong Tran. Tran. sharing the substantial substantial burden burden of preparing preparing the volume for publica­ For sharing publicaJennifer Cole, Kristin Kristin Hanson, Kathryn Kathryn Henniss and John tion, Jennifer John Stonham Stonham special tribute. deserve special tribute. Our final acknowledgment acknowledgment belongs to two sets of people: to Joan Our Joan BresPaul Kiparsky, Kiparsky, for nourishing nourishing the original original seeds of the workshop; nan and Paul and to Dikran Dikran Karagueuzian Karagueuzian and Emma Emma Pease, for helping to harvest and harvest the book.

/

1 ion In trod u ction Introduct

interrelatedness of syntax and This collection of papers papers deals with the interrelatedness interaction among the phonology and, more generally, with the issue of interaction phothat pho­ structure. It has long been recognized that components of linguistic structure. under currently imder ways; what is currently non-trivial ways; nology interact in non-trivial syntax interact nology and syntax appropria te their most appropriate interactions, and their debate actual range of such interactions, debate is the actual grammar. formal representation representation in the grammar. well as a The papers papers in this volume address these general issues, as well phonoltheme--the phonol­ number of more specific specific topics relevant to its main theme—the t_\le mainîy on the focus mainly will focus we will introduction, we ogy-syntax connection. In the introduction, access to syntax. issue of whether whether or not phonology needs to have direct access issùe The stated stated theme of the workshop from which this book arose, this issue papèr practically every paper is touched upon, either either explicitly or implicitly, in practically herein. The volume as a whole whole throws some new light on this relatively old controversy. syntax is enormously rich, as The amount information present in syntax amount of information contribution. In a direct reference shown by, Zwicky's contribution. by, among others, Zwicky’s interactions, all phonology-syntax interactions, view of phonology-syntax model with an unconstrained unconstrained view conphonology. By con­ this information information should in principle be available to phonology. synthat the range of syn­ trast, approach believe that prosodie approach proponents of the prosodic trast, proponents restricted purposes of phonology can be restricted tactic information needed for the purposes tactic information new level proposa! consists of positing a new in a principled fashion. Their proposal niediator between of representation, structure, which serves as a mediator prosodie structure, representation, prosodic syntax, and provides a locale for the two components components of phonology and syntax, structure is typically Prosodie structure stating interaction. Prosodic restrictions on their interaction. stating restrictions releinformation rele­ syntactic information motivated on the following following grounds: (a) the syntactic patterns do patterns, and (b) these patterns vant for phonology exhibits recurring recurring patterns, (see, for characterization (see, syntactic characterization not always straightforward syntactic obtain a straightforward always obtain information 1986). The information Vogel 1986). example, 1978, and Nespor and Vogel example) Selkirk 1978, informaamounts to informa­ mapping amounts deemed necessary for syntax-phonology syntax-phonology mapping structure; bracketed structure; rank bracketed phrasal rank tion about configuration and phrasal arboreal configuration about arboreal about syntactic categories, or about about syntactic conspicuously absent is information information about terminal elements. morphological specifications of the terminal xin xiii B

xiv

Introduction Introduction

Introduction Introduction

A papers in the present present volume offer empirical empirical support support for number of papers A number analBickmore'ss anal­ the prosodie view. We find such confirming evidence as Bickmore the prosodic phrasal phonology of Kinyambo; ysis branching in the phrasal ysis of the effects of branching analCondoravdi's anal­ domains; Condoravdi’s sandhi domains; Cho’s external sandhi Korean external Cho's analysis of Korean boundary analysis of boundary Hyman's analysis ysis of juncture Modern Greek; Hyman’s juncture rules in Modern of Luganda and and Kinande; Kinande; Kanerva’s analysis of the influence of Kanerva's analysis tones in Luganda 's Kisseberth and Kisseberth’s Kenstowicz and syntactic phrasing in Chichewa; Kenstowicz syntactic focus on phrasing tonal of tonal Kidima's account demonstration account of phrasal rules in Chizigula; Kidima’s demonstration of phrasal domains for the tonal phrasal domains domains McHugh's analysis of phrasal domains in Kiyaka; McHugh’s by aa structure by metrical grid structure rules in Chaga; Nespor’s Nespor's move to derive metrical prefixes" "Aoyagi prefixes Poser's analysis of “Aoyagi mapping from prosodic structure; Poser’s prosodie structure; mapping and and Selkirk and Sanskrit; and and Sanskrit; in Japanese; Turkish and reanalysis of Turkish Rice's reanalysis Japanese; Rice’s authors may Shanghai Chinese. The authors Shen’s tonal domains may domains in Shanghai account of tonal Shen's account component, prosodie component, within the prosodic diverge regarding actual mechanics within regarding the actual an quite an appears to be quite what appears diminish what but these minor differences do not diminish but these view. prosodie view. support to the prosodic granting support results granting impressive set of results referindirect refer­ sort for indirect another sort This volume provides provides evidence of yet another viable against direct ence as well. well. Several papers papers argue against direct reference as a viable in only in captured only phenomena can be captured hypothesis certain phenomena that certain hypothesis by showing that relation, c-command the concerns prosodic terms. The first argument the c-command relation, argument terms. prosodie synstructural syn­ direct structural postulated in Kaisse 1985 1985 as sufficient to provide direct postulated the that domains. tactic characterization of phonological rule domains. Cho shows that the al phonologic ation tactic characteriz sandhi external purposes patternings syntactic information for the pmposes of external sandhi information syntactic of patternings terms in terms but not in terms, but prosodie terms, rules in Korean characterized in prosodic Korean can be characterized from cornes reference direct against of c-command. The next argument against direct comes from argument next The . c-command lexiis Japanese the paper by Poser, who argues that a group of Japanese prefixes is lexi­ that paper Under break. Under phrase break. prosodie phrase cally specified to introduce (postlexical) prosodic introduce a (postlexical) these within these al rules which apply within a direct approach, phonologic phonological direct reference approach, insyntactic relevant phrases would need to have access not only to the relevant syntactic in­ phrases is however, this, of structure formation but also to internal structure words; is internal the formation but and Third, approach. not necessary under the indirect reference approach. Third, Selkirk and indirect under necessary is words is phonological words Shen show that fonction words into phonological mapping of function that the mapping from follow that but status, not predictable from their syntactic status, but that it does follow from syntactic their predictable constituents. prosodie constituents. higher-level prosodic the creating higher-level procedures for creating mapping procedures the mapping terms in terms ed in characteriz to need Next, Zee and Inkelas that clitics be characterized that show Zec and syntacdislocated certain that of prosodic subcategorization frames; and that certain dislocated syntac­ ization prosodie subcategor solely expressible solely constraints expressible tic minimal size constraints satisfy minimal constituents have to satisfy tic constituents inlexical i in prosodic terms. Finally, Condoravdi observes cases where lexical in­ Condoravd prosodie terms. structure prosodie sertion is governed by prosodic conditions. In sum, prosodic structure conditions. prosodie sertion conditions stating the conditions appears to be the component for stating appropriate component the only appropriate appears processes. varying on a number number of widely varying information syntactic information array of syntactic that the array The view opposed opposed to this one is that successneeded for phonological rule domains is too varied to yield to any success­ domains phonological needed of number point particular, ful generalizations. Odden and Chen, in particular, point to a number of generalizations. Odden elude domains elude al rule domains cases in which the the syntactic syntactic properties properties of phonologic phonological framework. prosodie framework. the kinds of generalizations generalizations commonly made in the prosodic

xv

and arguments and between arguments Chen distinction between Chen argues for the relevance of the distinction candistinction groups, adjuncts in the creation of Xiamen tone groups, a distinction which can­ Xiamen creation the adjuncts presents Odden presents properties, while Odden not syntactic properties, other syntactic not be derived from any other whose Kimatuumbi whose phonological rules in Kimatuumbi several syntactically conditioned phonological syntactically conditioned propsyntactic random environments appear to be simply random collections of syntactic prop­ appear nts environme erties. problems potential problems the potential that one of the In light of this, it becomes obvious that relaregular highly that for the proponents of prosodic phonology is that the regular rela­ phonology prosodie proponents all cover propose they tion between syntax and phonology which they propose does not cover all and syntax between addressed interface. This problem the known cases of syntax problem is addressed syntax phonology interface. those residual cases, those account for the residual by Hayes, who offers an independent independent account rethe thus account which the prosodic phonology cannot account for, thus salvaging the re­ cannot prosodie , phonology d precompile sults that this framework achieved. In his precompiled phonology, has framework that direct that between Hayes proposes a principled distinction between rules that make direct distinction principled proposes doprosodie do­ reference to syntactic structure, and those which apply on prosodic syntactic structure, whose mains: the former class is reanalyzed reanalyzed by Hayes as lexical rules whose syntactic frames. application constrained by lexically specified syntactic application is constrained perThe syntax-phonology interface has been viewed mainly from the per­ interface The syntax-phonology question natural al phonologic spective of syntactic influences on phonological rules. A natural question syntactic of range of circumscribe the range domains circumscribe to ask is whether phonological rule domains whether phonological scope. interface syntax-phonology interface, or whether the interface has a wider scope. whether syntax-phonology interface, rule phonological rule beyond phonological In fact, several this volume go beyond papers in this the papers several of the a.nd Cho . phonology syntax domains in exploring the interface of syntax and phonology. Cho and interface exploring domains about or structure, prosodie about Kidima argue persuasively that facts about prosodic structure, or about that y Kidima argue persuasivel as serve as structure, can serve prosodie structure, the mapping syntactic and prosodic relates syntactic mapping which relates ·of virtue that, Kidima y. a diagnostic for syntactic constituency. Kidima shows that, by virtue of syntactic constituenc diagnostic whether detect it phrase bormded tonal rules in Kiyaka, is possible to detect whether aa phrase bounded tonal Furtherposition. postposed constituent is located within the VP or in postposed position. Fm-therlocated within constituent in existence in w:hose existence constituent, whose more, syntactic VP constituent, argues for the syntactic more, Cho argues evidence. prosodie of basis the on Korean prosodic controversy, solely Korean is an area of controversy, prosodie syntactic and the prosodic The between the syntactic relation between the relation nature of the exact nature The exact Inkelas. and Zec by and Kenesei, and components Zee Inkelas. Vogel addressed by Vogel components is addressed that nal, unidirectio strictly is relation Vogel that this relation strictly unidirectional, that contend that Vogel and Kenesei contend sy'ntax. influence cannot phonology syntax syntax. but phonology cannot syntax can influence phonology but berelation be­ bidirectional relation In Zec and Inkelas argue for a bidirectional contraposition, Zee In contraposition. within couched is proposa! Kenesei's proposal tween the two structures. within and Kenesei’s Vogel and structures. Vogel articis artic­ proposa! is Inkelas's proposal Zec and Inkelas’s a transformational framework, while Zee transformational framework, the of s component the which in ulated components of the nonderivational model within a nonderivational ulated within related. tionally transforma than transformationally grammar related. rather than co-present rather grammar are co-present phothe pho­ study of the trends in the study This volume thus thus suggests some new trends to response concerted a provides concerted response to nology-syntax connection. In doing so it provides nology-syntax connection. approach, reference direct the justifiable approach, proponents of the direct skepticism of proponents justi~able skepticism arguphonology to provide argu­ prosodie phonology who have challenged adherents of prosodic challenged adherents of avoidance the that go beyond ments of representation that ments for the new level of representation stating rule domains. redundancy redundancy in stating

t

1 and B ranching d es and nching N oodes Bra gories: P rosod ategories: Cate odieic C Pros yambobo Kin E vidence en ce from inyam from K Evid L ee B ic k m oRE re BICKMO LEE

wfth dealing with taken in dealing are taken appr61\ê junctures. The first appro'achh phonological phrasal junctures. phonological rules which refer to phrasal phtàse syntactic phrase maintains phonological rules have access to the syntactic that phonological maintains that in marker phrase marker in the phrase marker, aspects of the relevanL~~cts the relevant include the simply include and simply marker, and ap'direct' phonological rule. This ‘direct’ ap­ the of the given phonological oUhe descri_Q_t_i_on structural description the structural 1987, Odden 1987, 1985, Odden 1978, Kaisse 1985, s 1978, proach has been advocated by Clements Clement d advocate has proach the of much of the just how much constraints on just and can epropose constraints Tho'ûgh on~opos others. ThouglTone and others. direct that direct linguists have felt that certain linguists syntax phonology, certain the phonology, available to the is available syntax is powertoo nt compone gical access to syntax renders the phonological component much too power­ phonolo the renders syntax access have rules have phonologieal rules that phonological propose that ful. uneasiness has led some to propose This uneasiness ful. This phrase (and phrase phrases (and prosodie phrases rather to prosodic direct but rather syntax, but direct access not to syntax, but syntax, but eôasis boundaries) which Have b"een constructedTon lEFBasTs of the syntax, teaorïTh construc beên ve whiefina boundaries) One phrase. One syntactie phrase. existing syntactic which identical to any existing necessarily identical are not necessarily whieh are hierarchy. prosodie hierarchy. such approach theory of the prosodic approach is the theory received 1986, and has received This developed by Selkirk 1981a, 1986, theory was developed This theory 1989, Hayes 1986, 1983, 1982, subsequent attention in Nespor and Vogel 1982, 1983, 1986, Hayes 1989, and Nespor attention nt subseque direct-i:-eference Shih theorists allow a block of direct-reference Sorne theorists others. Some and others. 1986, and Shih 1986, hypothestronger at somewh rules to apply before the prosodic ones. A somewhat stronger hypothe­ prosodie the apply rules odie non-pros ference sis involves the elimination of all direct-reference rules, the non-prosodic direct-re ion eliminat sis involves ilation precomp means, other phrasal phenomena being handled by other means, such as precompilation handled na phi;asal phenome volume)). (see Hayes (this volume)). of phonology of phrasal phonology aspects of the phrasal In this paper several aspects describe several In this paper I describe y. hierarch prosodie the theory Kinyambo within a specific version of the theory of the prosodic hierarchy. version Kinyambo within C u r r e nTLY tly CURREN

l

t

•

.•

.,.

tTWO w o

m a i n aAPPROAC p p r o a cHES hes MAIN

0

1

Categories Prosodie Categories Branching and Prosodic Nades and Branching Nodes

Bickmore 2 Lee Bickmore crucial branchingness plays aa crucial In notion of branchingness that the notion particular, I will show that In particular, wh,ich ies boundar rase role in the construction of certain phonologicaL phrase boundaries which gicaLph phonolo certain role in the construction b2.:.., Kinyam o~y QhQnol are referred to in the postlexical phonology of Kinyambo. al postlexie ~ referred describe First, I will briefly describe The follows. First, paper is as follows. outline of the paper The outline discuss will I Second, here. assumed the I will discuss hierarchy assumed prosodie hierarchy the prosodic theory of the the theory prosothe phonological phrases in particular, and suggest how this level in the proso­ partieular, phonological phrases present ly. guistical dic hierarchy might be defined cross-linguistically. Finally, I will present cross-lin die hierarchy might of formulation of bear on the formulation they bear some and show how they Kinyambo and data from Kinyambo some data rule. tion construc phrase construction aa parameterized phonological phrase universal phonological parameterized universal

11

Hierarchy Description Prosodie Hierarchy the Prosodic Description of the

exhausis exhaus­ string is phonological string In hierarchy, the phonological prosodie hierarchy, theory of the prosodic the theory In the ntal fundame certain upon based upon certain fundamental tively phrases based prosodie phrases divided up into prosodic tively divided ref, example (for marker phrase marker aspects example, ref­ syntactic phrase and its syntactic string and of the string aspects of vely exhausti turn in are phras_es erence he^rM odic_phraS£s turn exhaustively odic The~ros to X, X', X"). T erence to larger t~n_ÇQmbined into still larger combined phrases, which are in tmn_combined larger phrases, into larger combined into prosoevery on parsed exhaustively parsed phrases, every proso­ string is exhaustively entire string until the entire etc., until phrases, etc., the Given the obtained. Given prosodie levels is obtained. dic hierarchy of prosodic this way a hierarchy level. In this die level. that and level, every at parsed constraints level, and that exhaustively parsed string is exhaustively that the string constraints that next the next phrase on the oiilyfuie phrase aa phrase one 3:nd and 6nIv~oiie li!.Yclmay belong to orîê one leyel on one phrase on 1984). (Selkirk layered' 'strietly layered’ higher the phrases 1984). phrases are said to be ‘strictly level, the higher level, there? are nd levels,,i' What, then, are the various prosodic levels^ n d how many are there? prosodie then What assume will Î levefs.-I will assume num6ers of levels. Different linguists have proposed proposed different numbers Different lingui~ts below. shown below. This that there are five levels, starting with the word. This is shown with starting five there that each of justification of each independent justification (For examples showing independent language-specific examples (For language-specific 1986.) Vogel 1986.) and Vogel level, see Nespor Nespor and Hierarchy: (1) The Prosodic Prosodie Hierarchy:

in phrases in The phonological rules may make use of these phrases that phonological daim is that The claim of aspect any to directly not refer directly their aspect of but may not descriptions, but structural descriptions, their structural certain a within apply within a certain the example, a rule could be said to apply For example, syntax. For the syntax. type This type prosodic prosodic phrases. phrases. This boundary of two prosodie phrase, or at the boundary prosodie phrase, given a of rules phonologieal phrasal phonological of of a given that the phrasal daim that theory makes the claim of theory distinct and distinct arbitrary and reference to arbitrary language individual reference will not each make individual language will into cluster to tend aspects cluster into that the rules will tend rather that but rather syntax, but the syntax, of the aspects of ally syntactie aa small referring to the same syntactically group referring groups, each group number of groups, small number phrase. constructed constructed phrase. is makes is theory makes that this theory daim that The interesting claim perhaps most interesting final and perhaps The final may phrases prosodie phrases may different prosodic that characterization of the different syntactie characterization the syntactic that the In parameterized. In be specified, or at least parameterized. cross-linguistically specified, to be crosS-linguistically able to be able gical phonolo respect to the phonological with respect this pursue this idea with paper I wish to pursue this paper (le). phrase phrase (Ic).

22

Phrases Phonological Phrases A Survey of Phonological Cross-linguistic Survey A Cross-linguistic

been have been phrases which have Let phonologieal phrases types of phonological examine the types now examine us now Let us from rules examine 1986 and Vogel 1986 examine rules from proposed Nespor and literature. Nespor the literature. proposed in the that stating phon~phrases,phrases, stating that aa number whieh refer to phonological languages which number of languages on elements all and X head include a head all and elements on minimally include phrases minimally phonological phrases all phonological ex(For x~ax. within which the o h -reciF a i^ iu d elh ea rw ^ ^ are still within (Forex­ heâct tlïe eT of riE rsiveside non-reêu the n the siàe ofofthe left sifie the left on the ample, nead:ïriifial languages,-·alI the material on in. 'Eead-rnifTarTanguageFr^rTheli^ ample, in phrase,) single a with the head in head ^ would be included phrase.) included with xmax within X“ head within livwhich lan­ paraméters along which In Nespor and Vogel suggest two parameters addition, Nespor In addition, ,ly optional include, obligatorily guages optionally language may obligatorily First, a language might differ. First, guages might loX head the of complement include, the head X lo­ obligatorily not include the first complement include, or obligatorily either complement either cated sicle of the head. Second, this complement recursive side the recursive on the cated on summarized below. may or may not branch. This is summarized not branch. and Nespor and (adapted from Nespor (3) honological h rase co n stru ctio tionn rule (adapted construc gical pphrase (3) PPhonolo 1986) Vogel 1986) the on the elements on Phonological contain: a head X and all elements phrases contain: Phonologieal phrases xmax. within still are whieh non-recursive within X™^. sicle of the head which non-recursive side

a. Utterance Utterance

Phrase b. Intonational Intonational Phrase Phrase c. Phonological Phonological Phrase

Parameters: Parameters:

Group d. d . Clitic Group

..

comfirst com­ inclusion of the first prohibited inclusion a. optional, or prohibited obligatory, optional, a. obligatory, X of sicle e recursiv side plement plement on the recursive

e. Word

is levels is prosodie levels parsed into prosodic A utterance parsed example of an utterance schematic example A schematic given in (2): Utterance (2) Utterance (2) Phrase Intonational Intonational Phrase Phrase Phonological Phrase gieal Phonolo Group Clitic Clitie Group Word

3

U u

12 12

Il 11 Pl PI Cll C wll w

P2 C2 w2 1\ w3

P3 C3 C4 C3 C4 w4 w5

I

P4 C5 w6 1\ w7

13 13 P5 C6 w8

branch or not b. this complement complement may branch logfive log­ are five there are construction rule, there Given phrase construction phonologieal phrase the above phonological Given the setheir to g accordin might s ical possibilities into which languages might fall, according to their se­ language ical pos~ibilities ized summar These ers. paramet lection of values of each of the two parameters. These are summarized lection of and Nespor and whieh Nespor below, followed by a list of rules which possibility being followed below, each possibility that of rule tion construc phrase gical Vogel phrase construction rule of that phonolo necessitate a phonological daim necessitate Vogel claim · type.

4

Categories Branching Prosodie Categories and Prosodic Branching Nodes and

Lee Bickmore

(6) Four Four logical logical possibilities: possibilities:

/1

(4) Five Five logical logical possibilities possibilities (page (page numbers numbers from from Nespor Nespor and and Vogel Vogel 1986):

I

( xmax Right-edge X"'^' a. Right-edge

[prohibited complement] complement] a. [prohibited 179) ^ a i s o n 'in in colloquial ^ ( p(p.. 179)^ French colloquial R V^ iLiaison k^Extra E w ejp. 180) . 180) i~.Ew,.Ç.(p. dist!"l_~utionm t~n~ distribution high tone VExtra high 183) Quechua (p. 183) Word-initial voicing assimilation assimilation in Quechua v{ord-initial Japan e ~n,.d_reduction ^•'''^Tone reduction in Japanese shiftinfü and assignment, tone shifting, Tone assignment, (p. 183) b. [02_tiqnal [optional compl!:)J_Il.~nt complement, -branching], -branching] , Italian (p. 165) 1V / Raddoppiamento Sintattico in Italian Radd'oppiamento Sintattico 174) Italian (p. 174) ^ /S tress retraction retraction in Italian VStress 177) English (p. 177) t/^Rhythm c../Rhythm rule in English 178) English (p. 178) lengthening in English Final lengthening V Final 178) English (p. 178) t^M onosyllable rule in English V-Monosyllable

, '

s

/'Â. NP

NP

NP

2The effect a r e lsuffixe u f f i x edf tto o are f 31n additio n onset positio o n s e ;;2 lt;“n,

b. Subject-Object Subject-Object b. kre-ka pap-il kae-ka pap-il mokninta makn inta ,et...yee~ about the interactionJjetween phrasal contributed insights about phrasal phonology, has contributed iin deve}ôped ah application. As develdped syntax postlexical rule application. syntax and phonology and postlexical 198~; 1986; and Hayes 198^) 1982, 1986; Vogel 1982, Selkirk 1980a, 1984, 1986; Nespor and Vogel 1984, 1986; :' daims: following basic claims: theory makes the following ~. the theory T h e tTHE0RY h e o r y oOF f pPR0S0DIC ro s o d ic THE

provided by the application are provided (1) a. The domains postlexical rule application domains for postlexical prosodie the structure, hierarchically pro so d ic hhierariera r­ prosodie structure, organized prosodic hierarchically organized chy. chy. indirect. The phonology is indirect. b. The role syntax syntax plays in sentence phonology structure extent of the influence of syntactic structure on phonology is in syntactic extent structure. determining prosodic structure. prosodie determining structure is highly c. The mapping prosodie structure syntactic and prosodic mapping between syntactic constrained.^ constrained. 1 dorrtain phonological rules whose doirtain Optimally, then, there should be no phonological then, there apparent Although some apparent syntax. Although of application directly by the syntax. provided directly application is provided discussions, aand many Zec for m D.. Zee T h a n k s to S. Inkelas, iparsky, aand nd D an y useful discussions, nd Kiparsky, lnkelas, P. K Thanks comments their to th nd K ice in pparticular, a rtic u la r, for th e ir com m ents on RiC"e K.. R audience, E. Selkirk aand thee NELS audience, mee firsti,pprompted who Odden, an oral ppresentation re sen ta tio n ooff th is w ork. I am ggrateful ra te fu l to D. O dden, w ho first, ro m p te d m work. this whose W.. PPoser, Greek, to look aatt th d h i pphenomena h en o m e n a of M odern G reek, aand n d to W oser, w hose class on Modern sandhi thee san these interest my PPhrasai h ra sa l Phonology ed m y in te rest in th ese issues. renewed Plionology renew 1 T h o u g h p ro p o n e n ts for a d irec t influence o would phonology w n ta x on phonology ould ddispute isp u te syntax off sy direct Though proponents (le).). formulated la ) and ((lb), lb ) , th ey w ould still ad h ere to aan n aappropriately p p ro p ria te ly fo rm u lated version ooff (Ic adhere would they , ((la) structure, syntactic limited ould be allowed to have only lim ited access to sy n ta ctic stru c tu re , would Phonological rules w ,: Phonological well. languages as well. at w ould bbe e sy ste m atic across languages systematic would that preferably one th :, preferably

63 63

1

'

64

Theory Prosodie Theory Sandhi Sandhi Rules of Greek and Prosodic

Condoravdi Cleo Condoravdi

reaninteraction have been successfully rean­ cases of direct syntax-phonology interaction direct syntax-phonology 4) or Yearbook Phonology cf. ( framework (cf. P hon ology alyzed either prosodie framework within a prosodic either within still cases problematic volume)), as precompiled precompiled lexical rules (Hayes (this volume)), problematic such one constitute Greek Modern remain. constitute sandhi rules of Modern external sandhi remain. The external treatment. prosodie treatment. they have been to a prosodic case, resilient as they unstressed non-high Greek has three distinct rules which delete an unstressed three distinct discusIn the discus­ word. followed by a vowel-initial word-final vowel if it is followed intriguing. particularly appears particularly intriguing. problem appears sions of Greek sandhi sandhi so far, the problem depends on Which of the three pair of words depends three rules applies to a given pair has however, relation, this relation, the syntactic between the two words; this relation between syntactic relation even express hard to nature, hard whimsieal nature, been argued rather whimsical argued to be of a rather terms. abstract terms. sufliciently abstract a)ld sufficiently general a^d syntactically syntactieally in any general that they sandhi rules and show that In this paper, reexamine the Greek sandhi paper, I reexamine mapping between treatment. The mapping are, in fact, amenable amenable to a prosodie prosodic treatment. expressible within turns out to be easily expressible syntax phonology in Greek turns and phonology syntax and Fur1987c. Fur­ 1986 and Chen 1987c. introduced in Selkirk 1986 the edge-based approach introduced edge-based approach organization the organization thermore, implications for the the Greek facts have implications thermore, as I show, the subcategorization prosodie subcategorization nature of prosodic of postlexical and for the nature phonology and postlexical phonology analysis, I argue for the and phrasal allomorphy. In the course of the analysis, phrasal allomorphy. phrase, minimal whieh I call the m introduction in im a l phrase, prosodie category, which introduction of a new prosodic prosodie phrasing. The new prosodic top-clown phrasing. and for a partly partly top-down bottom-up, partly partly bottom-up, constituent is motivated independent grounds: grounds: (a) it constitutes constitutes motivated on two independent constituent alphrasal al­ environment of phrasal a postlexical domain; (b) it serves as the environment postlexical rule domain; bottom-up is shown by the lomorphy. That strietly bottom-up cannot be strictly phrasing cannot That phrasing top-clown, partly top-down, phrasing is partly effect of focused elements phrasing. If phrasing elements on phrasing. clone successively for cannot be done then structure cannot prosodie structure building of prosodic then the building with the phonology. prosodic category cannot be intertwined intertwined with and cannot category and each prosodie phonology are filtered out. phrasal phonology As a consequence some theories theories of phrasal

Rules 1 External Sandhi Rules External Sandhi linguistic literahistory in the linguistic The sandhi phenomena litera­ had a long history phenomena have had The sandhi analysis. original 1905 Hadzidakis's 1905 ture starting with Hadzidakis’s Modern Greek, starting ture on Modern vowel coalescence are Yet the realization that the different processes of vowel realization that sensitive to the syntactic configuration of the words involved was late to syntactic configuration 2 systematically discussed in Kaisse come.^ phenomena were systematically sandhi phenomena corne. The sandhi them synthree of them operative, three syn­ 1977a, where seven rules were shown to be operative, 3 Deletion (Rule 1), UnVowel Deletion tactically First Vowel rules: First deletion rules:^ conditioned deletion tactieally conditioned 2 procoalescence pro­ ^In th e absence th is realization, realizatio n , the th e exact e x ac t number n um ber of the th e vowel coalescence absence ooff this In the 1978 Drachman cesses has been a ppoint o in t ooff ddisagreement. isagreem ent. As M a likouti-D rachmnan aand nd D rachm an 1978 Malikouti-Drachma Hadzinoted hierarchy, aalready have ppointed o in ted oout, u t, th o n tra d ic tio n in th lre ad y no ted by Hadzithee vowel hierarchy, thee ccontradiction syntacthee sy had th many dakis, and the th e ensuing e n su in g ddebates e b a te s would w ould in m any cases have been avoided had n tac­ thee that is th crucial ppoint "The account: “T into tic configuration ords been tak e n in to account: h e crucial o in t is a t th taken words thee w configuration ooff th hierarchy thee hierarchy that processes th synchronic a te ria l ooff th a t ddemonstrate e m o n stra te th coalescence processes thee vowel coalescence material synchronie m translation). my is heterogeneous n ta ctica lly aand n d sty listically” (p. 185, m y tra n sla tio n ). stylistically" syntactically heterogeneous sy 3 their clitics aand between applies betw ^O ne ooff th ain in g four, th o n tra ctio n , applies een clitics n d th e ir thee rule ooff ccontraction, remaining thee rem One thee them, One conditioned host, hile th th e r th re e aare re nnot o t sy n tactically co nditioned rules. O ne ooff th em , th syntactically three thee oother while host, w

65 65

Vowel First Vowel Sonorant First rounded Vowel Deletion (Rule 2) and Less Sonorant First Vowel rounded First 3). 4 s Deletion Deletion (Rule 3).'^s following in common: they do not delete All three three rules have the following vowels, and they are blocked stressed vowels, high vowels, vowels, they do not delete stressed stressed syllables to become if the deletion vowel would cause two stressed deletion of a vowel illustrated in (2), deletes the adjacent.® Vowel Deletion Rule, illustrated First Vowel adjacent. 5 The First vowel of initial vowel nature of the initial final vowel regardless of the nature vowel of the first word regardless word. 6 the second word.® érxète alo--yo 6rxete (2) a. to aloyo the horse-sg. come-sg. b. ta the

-+

érxete alo--y' drxete to aloy’

érxonde alo--y' erxonde -+ > ta aloy’ érxonde — alo--ya ^rxonde aloya corne-pl. horse-pl. come-pl.

o e a e

First illustrated in (3), is similar to First Unrounded Vowel Deletion, illustrated First Vowel Unrounded First deleted. not is o vowel the that Vowel vowel o Vowel Deletion except that (3) a. to fresko frésko the fresh-sg.

fruto elafr6 fnito frésk' elafro -+ » *to fresk’ elafro fruto — elafr6 friito fruit-sg light-sg. fruit-sg

fruta b. ta freska elafra fruta fréska elafra the fresh-sg. light-sg. fruit-sg

-+

fruta elafra friita frésk' elafra ta fresk’

e *O e *o

a e

illustrated in (5), differs from the Less Sonorant Deletion, illustrated Vowel Deletion, First Vowel Sonorant First mJ~~ previous two rules in that vowel, as well as the first, must meet that the second vowel, haye· well as Kaisse, haye" certain grammarians, as well Traditional grammarians, requirements. Traditional certain requirements. later.r. discussion late rule ooff vowel in atio n , w ill figure in oour u r discussion will degemination, vowel degem 4 adopt K them analysis ooff th '*! aisse’s nnaming a m in g for th re e rules aand n d her analysis e m as ddeletion eletion three thee th 1 adopt Kaisse's The analysis. T thee analysis. crucial to th rules since th x ac t phonological o t crucial he process involved is nnot phonological process thee eexact must dialect. II m Athenian thee A work this ddialect ialect described aisse 1977a aand n d in th is w ork is th th e n ia n dialect. ust Kaisse described in K thee terms thee nnumber note tthat h a t th e re is ggreat re a t ddialect iale ct vvariation a ria tio n in th u m b er ooff rules, aand n d in te rm s ooff th there Malikouti1972, M Newton Thumb elem ents affected aand n d th cu rrin g change (see T h u m b 1912, N ew ton 1972, alikoutiincurring thee in elements therein). references th D ra ch m a n aand nd D ra ch m a n 1978, ere in ). 1978, and references Drachman Drachman 5 initially word stressed w ®The a irs consist e n u ltim a tely stressed ord followed by aan n in itially consist ooff a ppenultimately relevant ppairs The relevant stressed stressed word: (Rule (a) i 7-yata d ta er 7 e te — 7 e te (R ule 1 blocked) ér-yete -yat' dr -+►*i •y&.V ér-yete th a t com e-3sg. come-3sg. thee ccat blocked) (Rule (b) frdska rim a fru ta — rim a f fruta ru ta (R ule 22 blocked) *frésk' d6rima -+> *fr6sk’ fruta fréska 66rima fruit-pl. ripe-pl. fruit-pl. fresh-pl. ripe-pl. (Rule 61a (R frut' 61a (c) ttaa friita 61a ta friit’ ule 3 blocked) -+►**ta 61a — fruta ail-pl. th it-p l. all-pl. fruit-pl. thee fru in blocked in otherwise syllables is not otherw stressed syllables Interestingly, ja ce n t stressed ise blocked adjacent twoo ad sequence ooff tw lnterestingly, a sequence Rule Rhythm English thee E th e re is no equivalent nglish R h y th m R ule in Greek: equivalent to th there language; th thee language; an8ropi 8ekatris in (e) S ro p i (e) fiekatrfs th irte e n ppeople eople thirteen an8ropi *ôékatris dnflropi (f) *56katris 6 with ®The eletio n is m arked w ith aan n aapostrophe. p o stro p h e. marked The site of ddeletion

66

Theory Prosodie Theory and Prosodic Sandhi Sandhi Rules of Greek and

Condoravdi Cleo Condoravdi

(4). 7 Less vowels shown in (4)7 hierarchy of vowels appealed "strength" hierarchy so-called “strength” appealed to a so-called the first the final vowel of the deletes the then, deletes Sonorant Deletion, then, Vowel Deletion, First Vowel Sonorant First than hierarchy, word if it is “weaker”, that is lower on the hierarchy, than the following "weaker", that vowel. vowel. (4) (4) o0

aa

“strong” "strong"

uu

i

"weak" “weak”

delete before o, a, u, i e may delete delete before before u, i, e a may delete delete o may nnot o t delete and (3) Examples (2) and environments. Examples The three apply in different environments. three rules apply distinguish Rule 1 from Rule 2. The The crucial crucial vowel sequences sequences are marked marked distinguish and both o and sequence of (2), both subject-verb sequence the subject-verb next sentence. In the next to each sentence. environment. In the this environment. a delete Therefore, Rule 1 applies in this delete before e. Therefore, adjective-adjective sequence sequence of (3), however, o does not n o t delete delete before e adjective-adjective this environment. while a does. Rule 2 applies applies in this environment. Examples distinguish Rule 2 from Rule 3. In the nounand (5) distinguish Examples (3) and verb-complepostnominal sequence of (5a) and (5b), or in the verb-comple­ modifier sequence postnominal modifier ment sequence of (5c) and and (5d) ,a does not n o t delete delete before e, but but it does ment environments. these environments. applies in these delete before o. Rule 3 appUes

61a k6mat' 61a ta komat’ b. ta * ta --+ k6mata 61a — ta komata the parties parties all the

akalipto frésko akalipto fruto to fresko servire to fruto b. to pe(5i pe8i servire akalipto frésk' akalipto --+ — y ... .. . fresk’ uncovered fruit the fresh uncovered the child served the fruit uncoveredi/i·' fruiti uncoveredj/j.’ ‘The 'The childi served the fresh fi-uify

within that w phonological words. Notice that All three ith in across phonological operate across three rules operate phonological postlexically phonological words, as in the postlexically formed phonological words phonological rather hiatus is resolved in rather of (7), traditionally traditionally known as clitic groups, hiatus vowel may delete, as in (7a); a does different ways. For example, example, a high vowel stressed vowel in a sequence, or a stressed not delete and the second vowel ?elete before o (7b); and (7c). 8 delete (7c).® vowel, vowel, may delete

ee

(5) a. a. ta ta komata komata ekina--+ ekma -+ *ta *ta komat' komat’ ekina ekma the parties parties those those the

67

*a *a e aa o

elafya efta elafya *kftaks' efta c. kitaksa efta » *kitaks’ --+ elafya — efta elafya kftaksa looked-at-lsg. looked-at-lsg. seven deer

*a *a e

elafya oxt6 elafya kftaks' oxto --+ elafya — d. kitaksa oxto » kitaks’ oxt6 elafya kftaksa looked-at-lsg. looked-at- lsg. eight deer

aa o

The rules are sensitive sensitive to the the syntactic syntactic configuration configmration of the the words The speccategory spec­ their lexical category involved, rather than, as Kaisse 1977a argues, their rather than, but adjectives, but sequence of adjectives, ification. (6a) and identical sequence contain an identical and (6b) contain the site of a different sandhi sandhi rule. In (6a) the the two adad­ each sequence is the the first belongs to an jectives whereas in (6b) the the same NP, whereas within the jectives are within phrase. In (6a) adjectival phrase. adjunct adjectival NP, while the second one belongs belongs to an adjunct 6b) Rule 1 applies. Rule 2 applies; in ((6b) (6) a. a. to to frésko fresko akalipto akalipto fruto friito --+ —» *to *to frésk' fresk’ akalipto akalipto fruto fnito fruit uncovered fruit the the fresh uncovered 7 It is unclear hierarchy is. I this h a t th phonological justification ju stific atio n for th is pparticular a rtic u la r hierarchy thee phonological what unclear w purposes. will, nevertheless, descriptive purposes. refer to it for descriptive nevertheless, refer

m' aa16rase --+ (7) a. mu aa16rase 7 orase — > m’ 7 orase bought-3sg. to-me bought-3sg. o8hisa b. ta o5i7isa » *t’ *t' o5i7isa --+ o8hisa — ta led- lsg. them led-lsg. them 'pa tû ’pa --+ ipa c. tu fpa —>tu said-lsg. to-him said-lsg. to-him domains formulation for the domains Kaisse 1985:124-125 gives the following formulation rules: three the of application of application three

,..,

'

t\vo a'.ny two between any Deletion Vowel D (8) a. U ncon dition al F irst Vowel ele tio n applies between First Unconditional and nonverb anci between a nonverb and between words separated bracket; and separated by an S bracket; phrasé. any adjacent adjacent word not in the same phrase. 8 Nespor ®Kaisse is ru le uunder n d e r th am e ooff ccontraction, o n tra ctio n , aand nd N espor and thee nname rule this discusses th Kaisse 1977a discusses domain. group clitic gro thee cUtic Vogel h a t it is a ru n c tu re rule hhaving aving th u p as its dom ain. juncture w ju assumee tthat Vogel 1986 assum thee their clitics and th A ctually, th h enom ena betw een clitics e ir hhosts osts aare re nnot o t th between coalescence pphenomena thee vowel coalescence Actually, thee clitic phonological word oorr th thee phonological resu ro d u c tiv e ppostlexical ostlexical ru le having having th rule resultlt ooff a fully pproductive sequence, group ain. W h e th e r a vowel deletes, p p ro p ria te vowel sequence, deletes, given aann aappropriate Whether domain. group as its dom belongs to. For thee vowel belongs thee clitic th ddepends ep en d s on th e n tity of th m or th item thee lexical ite identity thee id belongs augment exam ple, th ay delete m en t oorr belongs delete only if it is an aug may sequence m second vowel in a sequence thee second example, thee observe th Mackridge to som a rtic u la r lexical ite m (for a list ooff these see M aekridge 1985:34): observe item somee pparticular delete before may thee high vowel uu m ccontrast o n tra st betw een (7c) above aand n d (a) below. Also, th ay delete between personn clitic ppronoun, aa if it belongs ronoun, bbut u t nnot o t if article, or a 1st or 2nd perso gen.-sg. article, belongs to a gen.-sg. with thus (below)) th (b), it belongs ), (c) (below u s ccontrast o n tra st w ith pronoun: (7a) and (b person clitic pronoun: belongs to a 3rd person (d) (below (below).).

'posçé0ika *tu --+> * (a) ttuu iposgdSika — tu ’posgeSika iposçé0ika to -h im ppromised-lsg. rom ised-Isg. to-him (b) ssu u aa-y6rase y d ra se bought-3sg. to-you-sg. to-you-sg. bought-3sg.

--+ —»s' s ’ a-y6rase a y o rase

a-yoryu --+ (c) ay o ry ii — » tt'’ ayoryii a-yoryu (C) ttuu the-^en.-sg. boy-gen-sg. the-,gen.-sg. boy-gen-sg. (d) ttuu aa-y6rase y d ra se bought-3sg. to-h im bought-3sg. to-him

--+ —►**t't ’

aa-y6rase y d ra se

68 68

Theory Prosodie Theory Sandhi Sandhi Rules of Greek and Prosodic

Cleo Condoravdi Condoravdi

and verb and between aa verb Deletion b. ess S on o ra nt t F irst Vowel D eletio n applies between First Sonoran Less b. L . Deletion Vowel First ed Unround its complements, but is bled by Unrounded First Vowel Deletion. but ents, its complem its and its noun and between a noun c. nrounded irst Vowel D eletio n applies between Deletion First ed F Unround c. U or verb a between s, preceding complements and specifiers, and between a verb or specifier ents complem g precedin optiong, (includin ents complem preposition and its (following) complements (including, option­ ng) (followi ion preposit adverbs). ally, adverbs). disnon-overlapping dis­ require non-overlapping Given formulation, the rules seem to require Given this formulation, that theory that The theory stipulation. The junctive and an extrinsic ordering stipulation. extrinsic ordering domains and junctive domains Pl into aa PI gy phonolo al postlexie Kaisse develops admits a segregation of postlexical phonology into ion segregat admits develops Kaisse comPl the P I com­ into the naturally fall into and sandhi rules naturally component. The sandhi and aa P2 component. of n of predictio . structure ponent given their dependency on syntactic structure. The prediction syntactic ncy depende their given ponent the with the interact with phonological rule may interact such purely phonological that no purely such aa model is that It model. r particula sandhi rules. The prediction is not unique to this particular model. It n predietio The rules. sandhi to sensitive to (rules sensitive phonosyntactic rules (rules follows follows from any model in which phonosyntactic onents subcomp distinct onent syntactic structure) form a subcomponent distinct from subcomponents subcomp ) syntactie structure in outlined model , example of purely phonological rules, such as, for example, the model outlined in gieal phonolo of purely 1986. Selkirk 1986. allophonie The allophonic That however, is not borne out in Greek. The predietion, however, That prediction, unexpected an unexpected in an sandhi rules in rule interacts with the sandhi palatalization interacts of palatalization rule of palatals between palatals alternation between fashion ln Greek, the alternation volume)). In (this volume)). (Kaisse (this fashion (Kaisse are they when e palataliz nts consona and velars is not distinctive; velar consonants palatalize when they are ve; distincti and velars vowel: followed followed by a front vowel: (9) (9)

Jelyo -yielyo ‘laughter’ 'laughter'

7

7 ^ipsos -yiipsos ‘plaster’ 'plaster'

vs. vs.

-yala ala 'milk' ‘milk’

7

7

-yoma oma 'eraser' ‘eraser’

-yulya ulya 'sip' ‘sip’

7

axuri xora xari Qiros vs. xora axuri vs. xari çiros 'barn' 'country' 'favor' ‘country’ ‘pig’ ‘favor’ ‘barn’ 'pig' kuvas k^'eri ykiirios ir io s vs. kapa kora kuvas kieri 'bucket' 'crust' 'cape' ‘candle’ ‘gentleman’ ‘cape’ ‘crust’ ‘bucket’ 'gentleman' 'candle' folthe fol­ has the sandhi rules has The palatalization and the sandhi between palatalization interaction between The interaction palatalizing exercises its palatalizing vowel exercises lowing properties: (a) a vowel surprising properties: two surprising lowing two the of the vowel the sandhi effect before it is eliminated by sandhi (10a), and (b) the vowel of ed eliminat effect before (10b). sandhi (10b). after sandhi following consonant left final after word has no effect on the consonant following word Qeri çeri ‘hand’ 'hand'

1 ,11

li

axnize etro-yi -+ axnize — (10) 7 ^e axnize > . ... . . etro 7 ^ axnize etro-yie kreas pu etro (10) a. to kreas was-steaming-3sg. the meat ate-imp.-3sg. was-steaming-3sg. that ate-imp.-3sg. meat that steaming.' eating was steaming.’ ‘The that he was eating meat that 'The meat itan . ..... etro-y nostimo ->--+ . .•.• • etro b. 7 a itan 7 itan itan nostimo etro-ya to kreas pu etro b. to delicious the meat ate-imp.-lsg. was delicious that ate-imp.-lsg. meat that delicious.' eating ‘The meat that I was eating was delicious.’ that meat 'The palatalizaallophonie rule of palata,lizaThe sandhi rules with the allophonic interaction of the sandhi The interaction lexicon, the into sandhi rules tion the lexicon, "push" the sandhi cannot “push” we cannot that we also shows that tion also volume) (this treating volume).. precompiled rules, in the sense of Hayes them as precompiled treating them

69 69

syntacto syntac­ sandhi rules are sensitive to So that the sandhi then, we have seen that far, then, So far, they rule, ic allophon on interacti tic structure, and yet, given their interaction with an allophonic rule, they their tic structure, ly reasonab any take we cannot be phonosyntactic rules if we are to take seriously any reasonably phonosyntactic cannot nphonosy place gy, phonolo restrictive model of postlexical phonology, which would place phonosyn­ al postlexic restrictive Luckrules. Luck­ phonological rules. purely phonological than purely tactic derivation than earlier in the derivation rules earlier tactic rules domains The one. apparent ily, the paradox we are faced with is only an apparent one. The domains ily, the paradox we prosodie the prosodic by the provided by of sandhi rules are, in reality, provided application of the sandhi of application iate intermed , category prosodie hierarchy, enriched, however, with a new prosodic category, intermediate hierarchy, enriehed, however, phrase. gical phonolo and between the phonological word and the phonological phrase. phonological between environments: syntactic environments: following syntactic First Vowel Deletion applies in the following First Vowel (11) First Vowel Vowel Deletion D eletion (11) First NP --VV (Su --V) V) NP - Adv (D.O. - Adv) NP - S (topicalization) (topicalization)

} - C OnJ. NP S NP-PP N P-PP (LO. - D.O.) NP - NP (I.O. adjunct) NP - S' (S':complement (S':complement or adjunct) NP --AdjP AdjP AdjP - NP

.,, .

edge the edge they all involve the that they What environments have in common is that these environments What these n. projectio l maxima of a x i m a ll projection: projection: the first word belongs to a maximal projection maxima of aa m edgê; xmax an of g matchin of an which edge which does not include the second word. A matching sevfor sev­ demonstrated for already been demonstrated with constituent edge has already prosodie constituent with aa prosodic 1986 Selkirk by tion justifica eral Selkirk 1986 theoretical justification languages. It has been given theoretical eral languages. for available for information available syntactie information and that the syntactic 1987c, who argue that Chen 1987c, and Chen conthe of end left or right prosodic of the con­ terms of the right describable in terms phrasing is describable prosodie phrasing constituents levels those constituents and the different levels hierarchy and X- bar hierarchy of the X-bar stituents of ! stituents paramethe parame­ are the right edge are xma.x and right then, X*"®* correspond to. For Greek then, , correspond ical phonolog nt constitue prosodie constituent ter phonological delimitation of the prosodic settings for the delimitation ter settings phrases. phonological phrases. phrase. Deletion applies across phonological Vowel Deletion First Vowel phrase. First rules: 9 two rules:® other two the other Let environments of the Let us now look at the environments (12) Unroun Unrounded First Vowel Vowel Deletion D eletion ded First modifiers in an NP Between prenominal prenominal modifiers NP an NP in an N in Between a prenominal prenominal modifier and the head N V 10 Adv - V^o rule 9 P re p o sitio n s do n o t a p p e a r in which discern w to discern e to impossibl is im ® possible hich ru le thee list since it is Prepositions do not appear in th exception, one exception, with remainder The th ey w ould undergo. ost pprepositio re p o sitions n s are clitics. T h e re m a in d e ,r, w ith one Most undergo. M would they undergo to undergo eligible to The ith e r in onsonant or a stressed h e only pprepositio re p o sitionn eligible stressed vowel. T in aa cconsonant i;nd eeither ( ^nd les. sandhi_r.µ three al! deleted be sandhi is isam e ‘u p t o ’. Its final e w ould b e deleted by all th re e sa n d h i rples. would finale sandhi is isame 'up to'. Vowel 10 First onal Unconditi ^®Kaisse es th a t such a sequence n co n d itio n al F irs t Vowel sequence is a site ooff U that assumes 1977a assum Kaisse 1977a between h distinguis to evidence D eletion b u t acknow ledges th a t th e re is not sufficient evidence to d istin g u ish betw een there that ges De!etion but acknowled it hhapAss it Deletion. Vowel D d FFirst Unrounde U nconditional irs t Vowel eletion and U nro u n d ed irs t Vowel eletion. A ap­ Deletion Vowel D onal FFirst Unc~nditi sufficient provide sufficient these e re aare re aa few reek tthat h a t end in -o, aand n d th ese provide Greek adverbs in G few adverbs there pens, th . pens,

.,

~!

70

Theory Prosodie Theory and Prosodic Sandhi Sandhi Rules of Greek and

Condoravdi Cleo Condoravdi

(14) a. From Prom left to right right map material up to and and including including the lexical map all material phrasez.z. minimal phrase head of a maximal projection into a minimal maximal projection

(13) Less Less Sonorant Sonorant First First Vowel Vowel Deletion D eletion V -Adv V-Adv LO.) V - NP (Su, D.O., I.O.) V --AdjP AdjP V - adverbial adverbial clause V-S' V - S' V-PP V-PP modifier 11 N - postnominal postnominal modifier^^

right end of aa material up to the right b. Prom right map all material From left to right

2 W3 W z W4 W i ]]

In Greek, Greek, a V - Adv - [NP [np Adj N ] sequence, instantiates the the sequence, which instantiates schema in (17a), is organized organized into zz's’s in the way predicted predieted by the edgeschema based approach: approach: the the adverb adverb belongs to the the z delimited delimited by the based the nominal nominal head. As seen in (18), the the sandhi sandhi rule applying applying between between the head. the adverb adverb and and numeral modifler modifier in the the object object NP is Unrounded Unrounded First First Vowel the numeral Vowel Deletion. Deletion. (18) a. a. klotsise klotsise arba enya enya kolones kolones — ----. arb' en enya ... aa71arba * .... . . aa71arb’ ya... clumsily nine pillars kicked-3sg. clumsily pillars 'He clumsily clumsily kicked nine ‘He nine pillars.’ pillars.' klotsise enya kolones ----. —» **· . ... . li Ii71 '’ enya en ya... b. klotsise apo li71 0o enya ... kieked-3sg kicked-3sg DISTR D IST R little little nine pillars pillars 'He kicked nine pillars pillars a little little each.’ each.' ‘He

2

The Prosodic Prosodie Category Category z The

this section, section, I provide provide independent independent evidence evidence for the the inclusion inclusion of the In this minimal phrase in the inventory categories in Greek minimal phrase the inventory of prosodie prosodic categories Greek by argu~ng arguing ,'. • that environment of some phrasal that the the environment phrasal allomorphy requires reference the . allomorphy requires reference to the minimal minimal phrase. phrase. A long-standing long-standing puzzle puzzle for Greek Greek has been been the the distribution distribution of the the -nfil).al masc.-acc.-sing. form of certain certain pronominal fiqal masc.-acc.-sing. pronominal elements. elements. These These include include the following pronouns the y o s ‘who, pronouns and and pronominal pronominal modiflers:^'^ modifiers: 17 ppyos 'who, which’, which', aftos ‘he, this’, tu to s ‘this’, ekinos ‘he, that’, ka p yo s ‘someone, 'he, this', tutos 'this', ekinos 'he, that', kapyos 'someone, some’, some', olos ‘all, 'all, whole’, whole', alos ‘(someone) '(someone) else, other/another’, en as ‘someone, other/another', enas 'someone, one', oopyos one’, p yo s ‘who/whichever’, so s ‘such, 'who/whichever', to tosos 'such, so/as/th so/as/thatat much/many’, much/many', osos 'as much/many ‘as much/many as’.^® as' . 18 The The n-final n-final forms of these these pronominals pronominals are oblig­ obligatory when atory when the the following word begins begins either either with with a vowel or a voiceless voieeless stop, as in (19a,b), and (21a,b). (19a,b), (20a,b) (20a,b) and (21a,b). Mysteriously, Mysteriously, however, it is also obligatory other environments obligatory in some other environments as well. Consider Consider ppyos. y o s . While While in (19d) the the form without without the the final flnal n is acceptable, obligatory in acceptable, final n is obligatory (19c) and and (19e). An identical identical contrast contrast can can be observed observed for enas between between (20d) and and (20c,e), and and for opyos between between (21d) and and (21c,e). (19) a.a. pyon/ pyon/*pyo andra? *PYOandra? ‘which-acc. 'whieh-acc. man-acc.?’ man-ace.?' b. pyon/*pyo pyon/ *PYOkafe? ‘which-acc. 'whieh-acc. coffee-acc.?’ coffee-acc. ?' 17

In G Greek reek there th e re is no distinction d istin c tio n betw een free ppronouns ro n o u n s aand n d pro n o m in al m odifiers; between pronominal modifiers; pyos, example, means 'who-masc.' pyos, for exam ple, m eans bboth o th ‘w ho-m asc.’ aand n d ‘w hich-m asc.’ 'which-masc.' 18 The pronominal elements ^®The p ro nom inal elem ents are listed th e masc. m asc. nom. nom . sing. form. form . listed in the

,.'

74 74

Condoravdi Cleo Condoravdi c. pyon/*pyo voi0ises? pyon/ *PYOvoi^ises? help?' 'which-acc. one did you help?’ help?' or ‘which-acc. ‘which-acc. 'which-acc. did you help?’

filo su? d. pyo filo yours?' friend-acc. of yo\u:s?’ ‘which-acc. 'which-acc. friend-acc. voi0ises? e. filo pyon/ *PYOvoi^ises? filo su pyon/*pyo help?' ‘which-acc. friend-acc. of yours did you help?’ 'which-acc. friend-acc. andra (20) a. enan/*ena enan/ *ena andra man-ace.' ‘one-acc. 'one-ace. man-acc.’ b. enan/*ena enan/ *ena kafe coffee-acc.' ‘one-acc. 'one-ace. coffee-acc.’ c. ii5a enan/*ena na kapnizi i8a enan/=t=ena smoking' ‘I 'I saw someone-acc. smoking’ smoking' or ‘I one-ace. (of those) smoking’ 'I saw one-acc.

filo su d. ena filo yours' ‘one-acc. friend-acc. of yours’ 'one-ace. friend-acc. peôya enan/*ena sta petfya e. 5ose 8ose apo enan/*ena each' one-ace. (of those) each’ ‘give 'give the children one-acc. andra (21) a. opyon/*opyo opyon/*opyo andra ‘whichever-acc. man-ace.' 'whichever-acc. man-acc.’ b. opyon/*opyo opyon/ *Opyo kafe coffee-acc.' ‘whichever-acc. 'whichever-acc. coffee-acc.’ c. opyon/*opyo 8yaforetiko vris opyon/ *Opyo (5yaforetiko find' ‘whoever-acc. different you find’ 'whoever-acc. different find' 19® or ‘whichever-acc. 'whichever-acc. one different you find’^

8romo d. opyo Syaforetiko 8yaforetiko ^romo road-acc.' ‘whichever-acc. different-acc. road-acc.’ 'whichever-acc. different-acc. e. (5romo opyon/ *Opyo vris 8romo opyon/*opyo find' ‘whichever-acc. road-acc. you find’ 'whichever-acc. road-acc.

obligatory when the The generalization that the n-final form is obligatory generalization is that nominal head, · or the following element is (a) a pronoun, nominal pronoun, (b) a modifier following 20 why should the But head. (c) a modifier immediately preceding a null head.^° immediately preceding Syntactically statement? Syntactically generalization disjunctive statement? three-way disjunctive require a three-way generalization require terms, prosodie terms, however, (a), (b), and (c) have nothing nothing in common. In prosodic follows: they they can be unified as follows: 19 A p find might whoever/whichever ro p e r tr a n s la tio n ooff th is in E nglish is: h o ever/w hichever one you m ight find is: w English this translation proper different. th a t is diflferent. that 20 The equivalent This pro-form.. T ^®The nglish nom inal pro-form one is a null pro-form h is null nominal English thee E equivalent ooff th phrasing. must elem ent cconstitutes o n stitu te s a no m in al head an d , crucially, it m u st be visible in phrasing. and, nominal element

Theory Prosodie Theory Sandhi Sandhi Rules of Greek and Prosodic

75

pronominal element The n-final form is obligatory obligatory when the pronominal minimal phrase. 21 right end of a minimal is at the right distribution of the final-n accounts for the distribution This prosodic generalization accounts prosodie generalization pronominal If a pronominal element is a free follows. If form in environments environments (a-c) as follows. pronoun, constitutes the head of a NP. Since heads induce a then it constitutes pronoun, then that, if overt, they end follows that, minimal their right, it follows break on their phrase break minimal phrase immethe head is null, the imme­ up at the right minimal phrase; if the right end of a minimal phrase. minimal a of right end diately minimal preceding modifier ends up at the right diately preceding This covers environments environments (a) and (c). Finally, given clause (14c) of the maximal within a maximal head within right of the head phrasing material to the right algorithm, material phrasing algorithm, word, single a if therefore, minimal phrase; therefore, projection constitutes its own minimal projection constitutes (b). environment phrase. This covers environment (b). minimal phrase. right end of a minimal , it is at the right should we then accidental, then we If clustering of (a), (b), and (c) is not accidental, If the clustering inelements would in­ other elements expect that distribution of other description of the distribution that a description an not but complement, but their complement, together, or their clude either either (a), (b), and (c) together, preis This something else. arbitrary pre­ say, (a) and (c) and something combination, say, arbitrary combination, 'all-gen.-pl.' and 6lon ‘all-gen.-pl.’ allomorphs of olon cisely what restricted allomorphs what we find. The restricted 6lon has case. olon those-gen.-pl.' provide the desired case, 'them-gen.-pl., those-gen.-pl.’ ' ekinon ‘them-gen.-pL, so does and ( olon6n) distribution {o restricted distribution an allomorph lon on ) allomorph with a more restricted apolon6n ap­ ekm on {ek in o n ). As can be seen in examples (22) and (23), olonon (ekin6n). ekinon ekin6n but not (c), while ekinon pears in the familiar constellation, (a) and (b) but familiar constellation, appear only z-finally, olon6n can appear other words, olonon else. In other appears everywhere else. , appears z-firlal. l:., that is final-it not z-firial. position that while ekinon appear only in a position ekin6n can appear (22) olon/olon6n (22) a. ton filon olon/olonon friends-gen.' ‘all-gen.-pl. the-gen.-pl. friends-gen.’ 'all-gen.-pl. the-gen.-pl. b. dose olon/olonon olon/ olon6n psomi bread' ‘give 'give all-gen.-pl. bread’ c. olon/*olonon olon/ *Olon6n ton filon friends-gen.' the-gen.-pl. friends-gen.’ ‘all-gen.-pl. 'all-gen.-pl. the-gen.-pl. (23) ekin6n ton filon (23) a. ekinon ‘those friends-gen.' 'those fi:iends-gen.’ b. *ton filon ekinon ekin6n ‘those friends-gen.' 'those friends-gen.’ c. *dose ekinon ekin6n psomi bread' ‘give 'give those people bread’ 21 form,, n-final form thee n-final occurrence ooff th tte m p ts to ch ara cte riz e th b lig ato ry occurrence thee oobligatory characterize thee aattempts ail th Of all italics): translation.and (myy tra 1941:82 (m th e ost insightful h a t of T rian d ap h y llid is 1941:82 n sla tio n ^ a n d italics): Triandaphyllidis insightful is tthat most the m several ppronouns “T h e final n is asc.-acc.-sing. of several ronouns aand n d ppronominal ronom inal masc.-acc.-sing. thee m preserved in th is preserved "The [the it [the when following word or w hen th ey are not hen it connected with the following close/y connected not closely they when adjectives w ' adjectives can offer can that, analysis th The consonant." following word] sstarts ta rts w ith a vowel or sto n so n an t.” T h e analysis a b II offer stopp co with not words twoo w be aking th o tio n ooff “n o t closely co nnected” precise: tw ords are not connected" "not thee nnotion making be seen as m for accouots for also accounts analysis also This samee z. T thee sam closely connected e y are nnot o t ppart a r t of th h is analysis they connected if th element th hen th ronom inal elem ent is uutterance tte ra n c e final. relevant ppronominal thee relevant when thee case w

76 Cleo Condoravdi Condoravdi The formalization formalization of these these generalizations generalizations raises some interesting interesting theotheo­ retical retical questions. questions. While the the alternations alternations discussed discussed implicate implicate a postlexical postlexical prosodie prosodic category, category, they they don't don’t arise through through any postlexical postlexical rule appliappli­ cation. After ail, cation. After all, they they involve only a class of pronominal pronominal elements elements and and some isolated isolated forms like 6lon olon and and ekinon. ekm on. The The proper proper characterization characterization of these these alternations alternations must must be as lexically pprecompiled recom piled phrasal p h ra sa l allomorphy, allom orphy, in the sense of Hayes (this (this volume). Hayes, in an effort to eliminate eliminate all syntax-sensitive rules from postlexical postlexical phonology, develops a theory syntax-sensitive theory of lexically precompiled precompiled rules, that that is, lexical rules which create create allomorphs allomorphs for insertion insertion in certain certain phrasal phrasal contexts contexts (hence the the term term 'precompiling'). ‘precompiling’). While the the cases of phrasal phrasal allomorphy allomorphy discussed in Hayes ((this this volume) all involve some rather rather idiosyncratic idiosyncratic syntactic syntactic environments, environments, the cases of Greek allomorphy allomorphy are, in a sense, better better behaved, behaved, in that that they they exploit a 22 prosodie prosodic category, category, allowing for a simply stated environment.^^ There is stated environment. There nothing nothing surprising surprising about about this this as long as we assume assume that that lexical insertion insertion is subject subject both both to syntactic syntactic and and to prosodie prosodic well-formedness well-formedness conditions. conditions. In other words, at the point point of lexical insertion other insertion both both syntactic syntactic and and prosodic prosodie structures have been created, structures created, and lexical insertion insertion must must be in accord with well-formedness conditions conditions on both both sstructures. t r u c t u r e23s . TThe h e prosodic prosodie require­ requirements ments of allomorphs allomorphs can be represented represented by the familiar familiar subcategorization subcategorization frames. Olon6n O londn and and ekin6n, ekinon , therefore, therefore, would be accompanied accompanied by the following subcategorization subcategorization frames in their their lexical specification: (24) olon6n olondn ekin6n ekinon

___ ]z]z _ w

If If subcategorized subcategorized information information must must be local, then then the the specification__ specification _ww anything intervening between the the relevant relevant lexical item and would exclude anything intervening between the next w. 24 the For the class of pronominal pronominal elements showing the the n/0 n /0 alternation, alternation, we can utilize Hayes’s Hayes's phonological phonological instantiation instantiation frames and and assume that that the n-final form is inserted inserted in Frame 1. Frame 1.

(25) Frame Frame 1:

_

]z ]z

We have seen that postlexieal prosodie that postlexical prosodic categories categories enter enter the the lexicon as phrasa! phrasal environments. environments. Inkelas 1988, 1988, 1989a has argued argued for the the need of prosodie prosodic categories categories in the lexicon, both both lexical and and postlexical, postlexical, but but in her prosodie subcategorization subcategorization is a property view prosodic property solely of affixes affixes and clitics. 22 As Hayes H ayes points p o in ts oout, u t, these th ese idiosyncratic id iosyncratic environments e n vironm ents are a re the th e result re su lt of o f a restrucre stru c ­ turing thee residue residue of tu rin g of th o f aatt one point p o in t exceptionless exceptionless postlexical postlexical rules. rules. There T h e re is no reason, reason, in principle, principle, why restructuring w hy re s tru c tu rin g of o f an a n environment e nvironm ent should should not n o t exploit exploit the th e prosodic in­ prosodie inventory v e ntory of o f the th e language language and a n d thus th u s create crea te a more m ore regular reg u lar pattern. p a tte rn . 23 In a more ^®In m ore general general vein, vein. Zec Zee and a n d Inkelas Inkelas (this (th is volume) volum e) argue a rgue for bidirectionality b id irectio n ality in syntax-phonology syntax-phonology interactions, in te rac tio n s, always alw ays mediated m ed iated by prosodie prosodic stru c tu re . structure. 24 This case of allomorphy ^■^This allom orphy is interesting in te restin g for another a n o th e r reason. reason. The T h e more m ore restricted re stric te d allomorph allom orph does does not n o t induce induce blocking. blocking. The T h e non-restricted n o n -restric te d forms form s 6lon and a n d ekinon ekinon are not n o t simply sim ply the th e elsewhere elsewhere case but b u t the th e anywhere anywhere case.

Sandhi Rules of Greek and Sandhi and Prosodic Prosodie Theory Theory

77

other words, prosodic prosodie subcategorization subcategorization is tied to prosodic In other prosodie dependence. dependence. The analysis of the Greek facts forces a different different view: view: prosodic prosodie subcat­ subcategorization subsumes subsumes but egorization but is not identical identical to prosodic prosodie dependence. dependence. More prosodie subcategorization precisely, prosodic subcategorization is a representation representation of two things: prosodie dependence, dependence, in which case it is interpreted interpreted as building (a) prosodic building pro­ prosodie constituency, constituency, (b) prosodic prosodie allomorphy, in which case it serves as a sodic well-formedness condition condition on lexical insertion. insertion.

3

New View A New View on Phrasing Phrasing

formulation of the Greek phrasing The formulation phrasing algorithm algorithm reflects both both a bottombottomphrasing (clauses (14a,b)), (14a,b)), and a top-down up type of phrasing top-down type type of phrasing phrasing (clause (14c)). This will be justified justified in the present present section. phrasing, every language language has a phrasing In the common view of phrasing, phrasing al­ algorithm pper prosodie category^® gorithm e r prosodic category 25 and, crucially, a string string is submitted submitted to successive fullll parses parses with with respect respect to each prosodic a series of su ccessive fu prosodie category. other words, when category category A" xn is to be constructed, In other constructed, all categories categories of type, xn-m, m == 11,, 22,, ..... . , n must have already lower type, m already been constructed. constructed. theorists, furthermore, furthermore, phonological phonological rules having For some theorists, having as their their do­ docategories of lower type type have already already applied mains categories applied when A" xn is to be constructed. The phonology constructed. phonology is thus thus interspersed interspersed with prosodic prosodie structure structure formation. (For an explicit proposal, formation. proposa!, see McHugh (this volume)). •·· Underlying the view of exclusively bottom-up bottom-up parsing Underlying parsing is the assump­ assumpthat the formation formation of one prosodic tion that prosodie category category does not interact interact with wit~ that of any other other category, except except for the grouping grouping of that prosodic constituents of,prosodic constituents type A xn-I constituents of type type A". xn. In this section, I will show of type " “ ^ into constituents that this assumption assumption is untenable: untenable: the way a string that string is parsed parsed with respect respect prosodie category category m may depend on the way it is parsed to a given prosodic a y depend parsed with respect to a higher prosodic prosodie category. These top-down respect to p -d o w n effects are of the following two types: types: (a) a prosodic prosodie category category may be constructed, following constructed, either either partially, w fully or partially, ith in the domain within domain of a higher higher prosodic prosodie category, and (b} the conditions conditions defining the the span span of a given prosodic (b) prosodie category category may be overridden by those defining the span span of a higher higher prosodic overridden prosodie category. present three three cases to this effect; the first two are of type (a), and I will present and third is of type type (b). I will further the third further show that that top-down top-down effects entail entail that any exclusively bottom-up bottom-up phrasing phrasing algorithm algorithm will yield well-formed that structures only at the cost of redundancy redundancy and unnecessary structures unnecessary complexity. argument is independent independent of the way prosodic prosodie phrasing The argument phrasing is expressed. reconstruct phrasing Even if we reconstruct phrasing algorithms algorithms as constraints constraints imposed on prosodie parsing, parsing, it is only at the price of great prosodic great duplication duplication that that the wellwellconditions for a category category A" xn can be stated formedness conditions stated with'feference with'reference to xn-i exclusively. A ”~^ exclusively. necessary properties properties of well-formed prosodic In (26) are listed the necessary prosodie structures: structures: 25

At least least for th those categories th that o se categories a t are ooperative p e rativ e in th thee language. language.

•' *ascim’ onira — ascima onira [+FOC] [+FOC] dreams' ‘bad 'bad dreams’ b. ton an^ropo ekinon ekinon an0ropo the-acc. person-acc. that-acc. that-acc. persan-ace. the-ace. [+FOC] [+FOC] ‘that persan' 'that person’

----t

ekinon an0rop' ekinon *ton an0rop’ *ton

founfocused and a fo­ More generally, no sandhi between an unfocused apply between sandhi rules apply element focused introduced by a cused word. To see that element is break introduced the break that the degemination, consider the rule of vowel degemination, specifically a U must consider break, we must U break, domain. 35 Between largest domain.^^ which, as argued U as its largest Nespor 1987, has U argued in Nespor applies, as shown in (32a), a focused and element the rule applies, unfocused element and an unfocused hand, other hand, the other U.. On the within the same U both therefore, are within elements, therefore, both elements, unfocused and a between an unfocused apply between the rule rule does not apply as shown in (32b), the belong to the same z. ordinarily belong focused element, element, even when those would ordinarily 36 them. between them.^® break between Therefore, U break must be a [/ there must Therefore, there (32) a. 71ipsina ipsina aa1almata 7 almata [+FOC] [+FOC] ‘plaster statues' 'plaster statues’ b. 71ipsina ipsina aa1almata 7 almata [-I-FOC] [+FOC)

ipsin’ aa1almata 7 almata 1ipsin'

7

**ïipsin' 7 ipsin’ a 7 almata a1almata

(but sentence (b words twoo w ®^The em in atio n ru le applies een any tw ords in a sentence ut between applies betw rule degemination 35The vowel deg Nesp~r ex: (7) in N not w ith in a w ord), aand, n d , in som espor sentences (see ex. somee cases, even across sentences word), within 1f sequence if m a sequence thee second vowel in 1987:65). In th espor, th le deletes deletes th rule thee ru Nespor, analysis of N thee analysis thee first vowel if deletingg th it is unstressed. in k th le should bbee characterized characterized as deletin rule thee ru think unstressed. I th stressed syllables twoo stressed result it is uunstressed n stressed aand n d if th su ltin g sequence w ould nnot o t re su lt in tw would resulting thee re being ad ja ce n t (th o n stra in t as on sandhi sa n d h i rules). samee cconstraint (thee sam adjacent thee 36There is no pperceptible thee focused aand between that 3®There e rce p tib le pau se aatt th a t is betw een th n d th break, th thee U break, pause preceding ent. element. preceding elem

Themy G,eek and Prnsodic Sandhi Rules of Greek Prosodic Theory

83

! '·

The importance pre­ Greek lies p,eimpoctance of the phrasing of focused elements in Greek delimit the simply not does phrasing cisely in showing that delimit top-down phrasing that top-down ~:: higher ones so as to yield respect to higher construction categories with respect construction of lower categories categories higher categories delimits also it but kind delimits higher appropriate kind but the appropriate structures of the V / [[__ b. kikoloombe kik6loombe kjkolombe chaangu kik6lombe chaangu

shell' ‘cleaning shell’ 'cleaning shell' ‘my 'my cleaning shell’

couverts Shortening Formation, which converts with a rule of Glide Formation, interacts with Shortening interacts a prevocalic high tense vowel /) to a glide, at the same /i, yi;/) (transcribed /j, vowel (transcribed time lengthening vowel: lengthening the following vowel: (29) a. Kimatuumbi Formation Kimatuumbi Glide Formation

[y,w] VV +V--+ /i>y/ V — » [y,w] /i,i;/ + b. /ly -a te/ — lw-aaté --+» Iw-aate /li;-até/ cf. ly-to6na li;-to6iia

‘banana hand' 'banana hand’ ‘star’ 'star'

7 Innes 1962 Mutation applying derivable by apply formss derivable ^Innes o tes tthat h a t som roduce form in g M u ta tio n speakers pproduce somee speakers 1962 nnotes thee issues aatt respect with aafter fte r R e duplication: vembe-fembe. e u tra l w ith re sp ec t to th formss are nneutral vembe-fembe. Such form Reduplication: stake. recom pilation account ould assum a t for th ese speakers, eduplication Reduplication speakers, R these that assumee th would account w A pprecompilation stake. A precedes u ta tio n w ith in th rdering ooff lexical rules aappears p p e a rs to be thee oordering lexicon, since th thee lexicon, within Mutation precedes M largely idiosyncratic. idiosyncratic.

101 101

1·

occur vowels may occm: vowels, so long vowels Formation does not affect long vowels, Ghde Glide Formation position. freely in prevocalic position. interesting interacts in an interesting Formation interacts that Glide Formation Odden next shows that Odden Kimatuumbi levels he assumes for Kimatuumbi levels. The levels morphological levels. way with morphological (Odden 1986b, (3)): follows (Odden schematically as follows are shown schematically Kimatuumbi Verbs (30) a. Levels for Kimatuumbi

hhh derivation Jijajs object [ rROOT subject - tense - object subord. [ subject [ subord. o o t - derivation marker marker markers marker markers marker hhh ité ]i] kalaang - jte ki [ kalaang e.g., [ pa [ n - aa - kj 2 ]3 perfective past it fried when I past perfective it' 'when I fried it’ ‘when Kimatuumbi Nouns b. Levels for Kimatuumbi

hhh]4 derivation ]i] ROOT [ locative [ Class 5 [ noun class [ R O O T - derivation 2 ]3 ] 4 hhh]4 ki; [ [ mw [ aak - 1i ]i] e.g., [ ky 2 ]3 ] 4 hunt er CL 1 hunt to Cl. hunter' 'to the hunter’ ‘to level-finally, Formation applies level-finally, level, Glide Formation morphological level. Within a given morphological Within that sense that the in cyclic, also is Formation left-to-right. However, Glide Formation left-to-right. levels: morphological levels. it applies successively at the end of each of the four morphological differf vowels can surface differ-f As aà result, underlying sequence of vowels result, the same underlying structure involved. For example, morphological structure depending on the morphological ently, depending /i;iV the form [ my ] 2 ‘you w H yti (i.e., /y jV / mwjj'IJ,ti(i.e., it' surfaces as m should pull it’ 'you should hh i;ti ]i mi; ji [[yt( frog' surfaces 'in the frog’ hhh]4 ula ]i] mi; [ [ ji [ lila — 2 j3 ] 4 ‘in whereas the form [ my [wUV]);whereas --+’ [wUV]); Odden yyu u ld (i.e., /y jV / — taken from Odden [i;yV]). These forms are taken --+ > [yyV]). /i;iV m1Jyuul6. , as m Odden other references by Odden 1986b, derivations, see this and other 1986b, (9-11); for full derivations, Kimatuumbi that Kimatuumbi purposes is that present purposes cited above. The crucial point for present crucial point properties of a lexical rule: interGlide Formation Formation shows the classical properties .Glide morphological sensitivity to morphological morphology (i.e., cyclicity) and sensitivity (eaving !eaving with morphology levels. f. levels. Shortening. Formation and Shortening. Consider interaction of Glide Formation Consider now the interaction , Shortening, which following: the rule of Shortening, observation is the following: , Odden’s Odden's crucial observation ;;; ordered right in the middle of the lexical phrasal, must be ordered .·is obviously phrasal, after Glide ordered after phonology. In particular, particular, it applies only at Level 1, ordered i'.phonology. Formation, applications of Glide Formation, fedd by Level 1 applications Therefore, it is fe Formation. Therefore, 1 Formation. Formation at levels 2, 3, and applications of Glide Formation but is counterfed by applications [.but 8 /aa/ 4.® In the derivation a / derived vowel /a (23-4)) the vowel (Odden 1986b, (23-4)) derivation below (Odden :4. /aa/ vowel /a ,at Level 1 from /j + a / undergoes a/ but the vowel Shortening, but phrasal Shortening, undergoes phrasal /i+a/ "..at derived at 'Level y + a / does not. 'Level 2 from //i;+a/ :·derived 8 here: as a Level relevant here; also relevant probably also ®An Odden 1981a is probably noted in Odden fact noted additional fact An additional prefixes occur in prefixes that occur underlying long vowels that apply to underlying does not apply Shortening does , 1 rule, Shortening and 4. attached at levels 2, 3, and ·. attached

J

Phrasa! Phonology Precompiled Precompiled Phrasal

102 102 Bruce Hayes

itûumbili (31) [ ty i ] 2 itiiumbili ak-i-an-a ]hh tl} [ ak-i-an-a

[ ak-j-an-a h ak-i-an-a ]i [ akyaana akyaana ]i )i [ akyana akyana ]i [ ty 2 akyana ]h tl} akyana [ twaakyana twaakyana ]h2

itûumbili twaakyana twaakyana jtuumbili

‘inf.-net hunt-for-recipr.-final 'inf.-net hunt-for-recipr.-final = vowel monkeys' = vowel ## monkeys’ ‘to net-hunt monkeys for each 'to net-hunt other’ other' affixation Level 1: affixation Glide Formation Formation (triggered Shortening Shortening (triggered context, by phrasal phrasal context, jt(mmbili) itu w n b ili) affixation Level 2: affixation Formation Glide Formation (Shortening (Shortening is Level 1 only) output output

l~xithat lexi­ remarkable facts is that The Odden draws from these remarkable that Odden The lesson that ex~ected interact cal rules and phrasal rules do not always interact in the expected fashion, phrasal cal phonology that the lexical phonology and that must be revised so that theory must grammatical theory that grammatical . . syntax. can apply after the syntax. after the facts Kimatuumbi facts t?at the Kimatuumbi point that I agree fully with Odden’s Odden's general point phonology phrasal s require us to revise our conceptions of how lexical and phrasal phonology conception require O~den's account. Odden’s are related. problems with his specific account. there are problems related. But there also it also ?ut grammar, the s_of theory doesn’t just reshuffie the components of the grammar, but it component the just theory doesn't the particular, al phonologic radically extends our notion of the phonological cycle. In particular, the notion extends radically the ~ave al phonologic 1, theory claims that in course of Level 1, the phonological rules have the that theory daims m order c~nt~xt, in phrasa! context, power m p letely ooutside u tsid e the w ord to the phrasal word completely power to look co the applicable. to establish whether Shortening is applicable. Once this is done, the Shortening whether to establish 4. and _2, le:els t? applying cycle returns to the word-internal context, applying to levels 2, 3, and 4. context, al word-intern the cycle returns m?st ~n application This procedure violates the notion of cyclic rule appUcation in the most notion This procedure violates mformation fundamental fondamental way: the rules on a given cycle may refer to information cycles unt~l ion representat that does not actually appear in the representation until several cycles appear actually that cycle the of not10n later in the derivation. If this is allowed, the whole notion of the cycle derivation. later _and larg~r grammar becomes a much weaker one, allowing the grammar to access larger and becomes idea ~ en~ails, what smaller domains in arbitrary order. Given what it entails, Odden s idea arbitrary smaller domains appealmg. ~ess appealing. syntax is less follow the syntax of ordering phonology to follow ordering the lexical phonology t? aar?ue mstead taken II believe that the Kimatuumbi facts should be taken instead to rpe bi believe that the Kimatuum is aa Shorte~mg t~at sup~ose we for precompilation theory. Specifically, if we suppose that Shortening is y, Specificall for precompilation theory. rule le~ical relat10ns precompiled rule, then its intimate ordering relations with the lexical rule ordering intimate then precompiled a~al~pecific_anal­ !he specific of unremarkable. The immediately become unremarkable. Formation immediately Glide Formation of Glide n instantiat10 al phonologic ysis goes as follows. Kimatuumbi permits the phonological instantiation permits bi follows. Kimatuum ysis frame under under (32). )x Y )x, (32) FVamei Frame 1:. -[[ ..... . [[ -_ ]xY]x'

Y ::f.0 Y

that positions that insertion in head positions That allomorphs are derived for insertion That is, special allomorphs complement. precede an overt complement. 1: Shortening Shortening is a lexical rule, which applies only at Level 1:

103 103

(precompiled version) (33) Shortening (precompiled Kimatuumbi Shortening (33) Kimatuumbi VV .. , - • • • ][Frame i] --+ V / [ -----------VV —

for net-hunt monkeys for 'to net-hunt jtuumbili The derivation a akyan a itu u m b ili ‘to twaakyana derivation for the form tw stem the 1, Level At follows. as proceed each other’ follows. 1, the stem other' (from (31)) would proceed other the other 1], the marked for [Frame 1], akiana allomorphs, one marked generates two allomorphs, akjana generates specially the for derivation serving as the elsewhere case. The lexical derivation speciadly that exception that marked essentially as Odden has it, with the exception proceeds essentially marked form proceeds yet context such no (indeed, context Shortening context yet phrasa! context Shortening does not refer to a phrasal the to refers Shortening Rather, exists, since we are still in the lexicon). Rather, Shortening to the form output form the output restricts the phonological instantiation frame of (32), which restricts phonological instantiation al phonologic After t. complemen After phonological to head positions followed by an overt complement. positions followed result. correct the yields instantiation, correct instantiation, this rule maintained: no rule The upshot that the basic idea of the cycle is maintained: upshot" is that the which on cycle the on present refers to information which the that is not yet present information that is rules syntactic before rule applies. The universal syntactic rules is ordering of lexical universal ordering 9 preserved. also preserved.® is theory is precompilation theory daim of precompilation To summarize summarize this section: a basic claim lexiactually are sensitive' 'syntax sensitive’ that actually lexi­ that have been called ‘syntax that many rules that phrasa! particular phrasal insertion in particular cal rules, which precompile allomorphs for insertion precompile allomorphs may lexical, being that this class of rules, contexts. lexical, may prediction of this is that contexts. A prediction the by confirmed. is prediction apply before ordinary confirmed .by the ordinary lexical rules. The prediction bi. Kimatuum and Kimatuumbi. facts of Hausa, Mende, and 6.4

s Argument thee A Sum m ary ooff th rgum ents Summary

1985. Kaisse 1985. proposa! made by Kaisse related to a proposal My overall argument argument is closely related comrule two rule com­ phonology is divisible into two Kaisse suggests that postlexical phonology that postlexical rules lexical rules properties of lexical ponents, Pl rules have all the properties Pli and P2. PI ponents, called P structure exhibit structure they exhibit boundaries: they other within word boundaries: confinement within than confinement other than exlexical ex­ restrictions, have lexical preservation, morphological restrictions, subject to morphological preservation, are subject postlexical cyclically. P2 rules are the classical postlexical ceptions, and may apply apply cyclically. properties. rules, and lack all of these properties. give to give attempts to but attempts bifurcation, but this bifurcation, Precompilation accepts this theory accepts Precompilation theory My lexicon. My PlI rules in the lexicon. placing the P it a principled actually placing principled basis by actually were they were if they Pli rules act as if view is that explanation for why P simplest explanation that the simplest they are lexical. that they lexical is to assume that

Hierarchy? Prosodie Hierarchy? Whither the Prosodic Whither the

7

theoboth theo­ theory are both hierarchy theory prosodie hierarchy Since precompilation and prosodic theory and precompilation theory whether level, one wonders whether phrasa! level, ries of phonological alternation at the phrasal phonological alternation 9

'myy yaangu ‘m bo6ksj yadngu cf. books} borrowings: ®O dden notes tthat hat S h o rte n in g hhas a s eexceptions xceptions in borrow ings: cf. Shortening Odden rules ooften lexical rules (25)). Since lexical (Odden box’ n d bakteeliya a c te ria ’ (O d d en 1986b, (25)). ften 'myy bbacteria' yaangu ‘m bakteéljya yadngu box' aand Odden's to O (common thee claim (com fail p p ly to borrow ed form s, th ese ddata a ta ssupport u p p o rt th m on to d d e n ’s these forms, borrowed to aapply fail to rule. is a lexical rule. Shortening account nd m ine) th at S h o rte n in g is that mine) account aand

Phonology Phrasa! Phonology Precompiled Precompiled Phrasal

104 Bruce Hayes

belatter. I be­ validity of the latter. the adoption adoption of the the former impinges on the validity supporting number lieve this is not so, although admittedly a number of supporting cases admittedly although lieve precompiled. reanalyzed as precompiled. disappear when reanalyzed for prosodic hierarchy theory theory disappear prosodie hierarchy hierarchy prosodie Below, I briefly review the basic arguments for prosodic hierarchy theory, arguments the 1986; 1982, and drawing on Selkirk 1980a, 1986; Nespor and Vogel 1982, 1986; and Hayes Nespor 1986; drawing 1989. 1989. than one rule refers to the same a. In a number languages, more than number of languages, equivalent to syntactic phrasal domains, domains, where the domains domains are not not equivalent syntactic phrasa! phonology can syntactic effects in phonology constituents. that syntactic constituents. This suggests that appears hierarchy appears prosodie hierarchy be mediated ctu re, for which the prosodic structure, mediated by a stru to be an appropriate representation. appropriate representation. naturally strength emerge naturally junctural strength b. Typological about junctural patterns about Typological patterns juncture apply before a juncture that apply from the hierarchy. particular, rules that hierarchy. In particular, strength; greater junctures of a certain strength apply before all junctures of greater strength; apply strength certain strength apply across juncture strength and apply across a given juncture that apply and rules that hiprosodie hi­ under prosodic all junctmes of weaker strength. These fall out under strength. junctures erarchy theory from Strict Layering and from the ways rules are Strict erarchy theory allowed to refer to edges (Selkirk 1980a). Manforthcoming) argue for Man­ 1985 and and McHugh (this (this volume, forthcoming) c. Shih 1985 phonological rules can apply that phonological darin respectively that Chaga respectively and Chaga darin and that we find is phrase. But the cycle that cyclically at the level of the phrase. ever-larger reapplying on ever-larger not the predicted by SPE, with rules reapplying the cycle predicted apparently the phrasa! cycle is apparently syntactic Rather, the phrasal constituents. Rather, syntactic constituents. formation phrase formation with phrase result of an interleaving interleaving of phonological phonological rules with result results in lexical phonology rules, just word-internal cycle results just as the word-internal forwith rules of word for­ from the interleaving phonological rules with interleaving of phonological mation. mation. languages show world's languages d. The rules of phrase formation found in the world’s phrase formation theory is on that suggesting an encouraging family resemblance, suggesting that the theory resemblance, encouraging abstraction formation the right track in isolating phrase formation as a level of abstraction isolating phrase right track made. be at which valid generalizations generalizations can theprecompilation the­ adopting precompilation There number of cases in which adopting There are a number theory, by hierarchy theory, prosodie hierarchy ory actually actually provides additional support support for prosodic provides additional examHypothesis. For exam­ Strict Layer Hypothesis. removing apparent violations of the Strict apparent violations Xiamen tone required by Xiamen domains required ple, Chen 1987c that the domains points out that 1987c points sandhi has two Xiamen tone sandhi sandhi phrases. Xiamen intonational phrases. with intonational sandhi overlap with properties precompiled rule (see below for discussion of suggest it is a precompiled that suggest properties that must have recourse these diagnostics): diagnostics): it may apply apply across pause, and and it must argument/adjunct particular, the argument/adjunct to fairly rich syntactic information, in particular, syntactic information, Xiamen would insert distinction. precompilation analysis for Xiamen plausible precompilation distinction. A plausible projections, maximal projections, non-adjunct maximal ‘basic’ right edges of non-adjunct the right allomorphs at the 'basic' allomorphs environments have syntactic environments ‘sandhi’ allomorphs elsewhere. These purely syntactic 'sandhi' allomorphs

105 105

indetermine in­ that determine principles that no necessary connection _with with the prosodic prosodie principles ne_cessaryhco~nec~ion 1phrasing 'd dh" t one sandhi th e tone Xiamen. m tonational in Xiamen. Thus the overlap of the ‘do­ rasmg p tonat1ona san 1 o. . · , ·h • Strict Layer about the Strict nothing about mains’ phrasmg says nothing mtonat10nal phrasing w~t intonational mams with · d omam. prosodie domain. sandhi does not refer to a prosodic Hypothesis, HypothesIS, because tone . sandhi I n ke1as has As S. h ~ pointed S . Inkelas Sh9rtening As out to me, Hausa Shqrtening (16) is a similar Hausa tome, pomted Shortening if that would be diagnosed by Shortening case. phrases that ph~nolog1cal phrases case. The phonological contradict we regarded it as a true phrasal rule would contradict the phonological true phrasa! we regar~ed 1t distribution particular phrases diagnosed by other means, in particular by the distribution of the other p~_ases · w recognize when we disappears when contradiction disappears 1988). The contradiction clitic cht1c fa (Inkelas 1988). e recogmze • • h t Sh genuinel fa of distribution that Shortening is precompiled, whereas the distribution o f f a is genuinely t a .. ortenmg 1spr~compiled, y phrasing. phonolog1cal phrasing. sensitive to phonological Dresher pointed out by Dresher A third Tiberian Hebrew, is pointed third example, from Tiberian plausibly state, 1983. Here, the phonology of the construct state, which would plausibly th~ c~nstruct phonol~gy 1983. trul the truly with the domains with overlapping domains m overlapping apphes in precomp1led, applies be analyzed as precompiled, y phrasa! phonology. phrasal theory are valid, hierarchy theory prosodie hierarchy If both t~eory and prosodic preco~pilation theory b~th precompilation relevant is theory which is anses the obvious theory relevant for a given rule. that arises quest10n that obv1_ousquestion component of the which component determine in which we determine To put way, how do we ano~her way, 1t another put it alterphrasa! alter­ creating rule a grammar creating phrasal postlexical phonology) (~ex1calvs. postlexical gra~mar (lexical · • worth is it question this consider we Before res1des? nations question,, worth examining nations resides? exammmg . h . f th · historical change. thee issue from v1ewpomt of historical t e viewpoint rom the

8

Reanalysis Change and Reanalysis Historical Historical Change

l

*

(An-· phonological rules (An­ evolution of phonological historical evolution Consider charac~eristic historical Consider the characteristic ;i~wpoint derson 1985:73-9), interpreted from the viewpoint of lexical phonology de~son 1985:73-~), mterpret_ed crysthen crys­ phonetically, then ongmate phonetically, Typ1cally rules originate (Kiparsky 1982b.56-8). Typically (Ki~arsky 1982b:56-8). of With postlexical tallize as categorial, exceptionless postlexical rules. With the passage of exceptionless categorial, t~lhze critical some at until irregularity, and time, irregularity, critical exceptions accumulate exceptions tI~e, they accumulate Ultigeneration as lexical rules. Ulti­ point ctu red by a new generation restructured pomt they are restru from disappear rules lexical processes, other mately, through disappear through leveling and other grammar. the grammar. onl regarded as valid only normally regarded restructuring is normally The above account account of restructuring t~ held are alternations phrasa! for rules that to within words, since phrasal alternations ~hat apply within th correct is theory precompilation if But be exclusively precompilation theory correct, then postlexical. exclus1vely postlexical. th:; histor/ they p l^ ^ al rules can ca~ be viewed as having essentially the same history: P~~al acquire rules, postlexical categorial postlexical cr~~tallize into categorial phonet~cally, crystallize ongm~te phonetically, : originate restructure ctu re as 1r~egulant1es, and at some crucial stage restru ex~eptions and irregularities, ; exceptions other and leveling through ter' La precompiled. Later, through other is, as precompiled. rules-that_ is, . lexical rules-that be can rules precompiled of death gradua! death processes, precompiled ~1e out. The gradual proc~sses, they die mutations. Celtic the and seen in mutations. m the case of French liaison m progress in Restructuring Excursus: Inflectional R estructuring Excursus: 'lnflectional restrucsecondd restruc­ undergo a secon alternations sometimes undergo precompiled alternations Mo:ibund precompiled , Moribund partiemark particinflectional morphology, which mark turmg: they become rules of inflectional : turing:

.,

.

J

106 106 Bruce Hayes

demonstrated ular categories by phonological phonological means. This is demonstrated inflectional categories ular inflectional certain language, certain this language, clearly by Rotenberg Modern Irish. In this Rotenberg 1978 for Modern mutation that the mutation dropped, so that tense-marking particles have dropped, pre-verbal particles tense-marking pre-verbal Similarly, verbal tense. Similarly, marker of verbal they behind becomes the sole marker they leave behind mutation triggers mutation gender triggers cases in which a noun in a particular particular case and gender that so that agreement, so adjective agreement, on a following reanalyzed as adjective adjective get reanalyzed following adjective muget mu­ follow the noun to get the immediately follow adjective no longer has to immediately the adjective French in French restructuring can be found in tated. inflectional restructuring Other cases of inflectional tated. Other Pullum 1983), liaison (Morin and 1983), and Kaye 1982), English nn't’t (Zwicky and Pullum 1987). and prepositions (Napoli and Nevis 1987). Italian inflected prepositions and Italian precomtreating aall possibility of treating E. ll precom­ suggested to me the possibility E. Selkirk has suggested reof re­ merit of proposai has the merit piled phonology as inflection. While this proposal it ducing the apparatus needed in the theory, I disagree with it because it apparatus ducing and phonology d precompile would obscure important differences between precompiled phonology and obscure important by appears not to be influenced by inflection. First, morphology appears inflectional morphology First, inflectional Anderson string. the phonological form of nearby words in the string. Second, as Anderson nearby phonological on aa morphology is based on inflectional morphology 1988 suggested, inflectional others have suggested, and others 1988 and d precompile relations, ffairly a ir ly restricted set of syntactic structural relations, whereas precompiled structural syntactic restricted oriits ori­ that reflect its environments that phonology can involve rather haphazard environments rather haphazard appears precompiled phonology appears Third, precompiled gins in true phonology. Third, phrasai phonology. true phrasal for context triggering t: requiremen to be subject to a strict locality requirement: the triggering context for strict subject Such adjacent a precompiled allomorph must always lie in an adjacent word. Such aa must precompiled allomorph whlocality requirement clearly is not placed on inflection: for example, whlocality requirement they bind trace they words properties of a trace according to the properties are often inflected according words are elsewhere in the sentence. supported phonology is supported The separation precompiled phonology inflection from precompiled separation of inflection that suggests analysis by that the Irish 1978 work on Irish. His analysis Rotenberg's 1978 by Rotenberg’s nonpotentially as (hence mutations potentially non­ reanalyzed as inflection mutations have been reanalyzed syntactic to amenable data were amenable local) syntactic just those cases in which the data local) in just reinflectional processes. In the re­ reinterpretation other inflectional agreement or other reinterpretation as agreement as terms, my process-in maining terms, as persists as a local process-in mutation persists contexts, mutation maining contexts, precompiled phonology. precompiled phonology.

9

.

--,,:~}·.

l

(L

. it •

Rules ed R Precompil D iagnostics piled ules s for Precom Diagnostic (cf. a. Only precompiled precompiled rules can precede rules of lexical phonology (cf. above). bi Hausa Kimatuum Hausa and Kimatuumbi

:::w

Mende (cf. Mende morphological rules (cf. b. Only precompiled precompiled rules can precede morphological in above, as well as the Leurbost Scots Gaelic case discussed in the Leurbost 1981). Thomas-FIinders Thomas-Flinders 1981).

'j::,.

differently categories differently parallel X' categories treat parallel c. Only precompiled precompiled rules can treat French liaison). (Hausa, (Hausa, French traces that traces 1987) that d. If we assume (following Berendsen 1985, McHugh 1987) Berendsen 1985, phophrasai true prior deleted and other empty categories are deleted prior to true phrasal pho­ categories other empty d precompile categories nology, then sensitivity to empty categories diagnoses a precompiled empty nology, then sensitivity sensitivity al phonologic rule. Berendsen notes several phonological rules whose sensitivity Berendsen or 'Pl'I ’ or are ‘P they are whether they depending on whether to trace predicted depending trace can be predicted or d precompile they whether P2, or in our terms depending on whether they are precompiled or terms depending 'P2,' phonology. true phrasai phonology. true phrasal Phonology Phrasal P D iagnostics honology True Phrasal s for True Diagnostic »

postlexical rules. follow postlexical a. Only true phrasai rules may follow true phrasal preservation. structure preservation. b. Only true phrasai rules may violate structme true phrasal interphrasai cyclicity; i.e., the inter­ c. phrasai rules may involve phrasal true phrasal c. Only true construction. phrase construction. leaving of phonology phonology and phrase autosegspreading of autoseg­ particularly spreading d. spreading, particularly phonological spreading, d. Rules of phonological to ments over multiple syllables, would in many cases be impossible to multiple ments true analyzed treat as precompiled, and thus would have to be analyzed as true precompiled, and thus treat Chaga phonology of Chaga tonal phonology phrasal phonology. A good example is the tonal phrasal phonology. (McHugh (forthcoming)). (McH ugh (forthcoming)).

Problem The Diagnosis Problem The Diagnosis

rules phrasai rules precompiled phrasal that precompiled To thread: the fact that main thread: return to the main To return that the diagnosis means that originate phrasal phonology means true phrasal historically as true originate historically precompiled particular, precompiled of nontrivial. In particular, precompiled or not is nontrivial. of aa rule as precompiled environments, because prosodie environments, rules they have prosodic rules may look very much like they enviprosodie envi­ that did have prosodic they restructured versions of older rules that they are restructured ronments. ronments. parallel essentially parallel phrasai rules is essentially Note problem for phrasal that the diagnosis problem Note that rules, al word-intern ) to the diagnosis problem (lexical vs. postlexical) for word-internal rules, postlexical problem to the itself a controversial and difficult topic. al controversi diagnostics As problem, I suggest the following diagnostics attack on the problem, initial attack As an initial

107 107

postlexical. precomp1led or postlexical. 1s precompiled for whether phrasai rule is whether a phrasal

1 ;;,;'

1

Precompiled Phrasai Phonology h~ompHed Phrasal

insensitive to pause, e. instantiation is insensitive phonological instantiation that phonological Assuming that e. Assuming phrasai phonology true phrasal then then any rule blocked by pause is a rule of true 1978). (cf. Rotenberg Rotenberg 1978). speakf. instantiation is not sensitive to speak­ phonological instantiation that phonological Assurning that f. Assuming speaking greater speaking domains at greater ing that apply in larger domains then rules that rate, then ing rate, precompiled. 10 and not precompiled.^® rates phrasal rules, and true phrasal rates must be true 10

that in th unusual in which liaison, w H ere it orth nnoting o tin g th rench liaison, hich is highly unusual at thee case ooff FFrench 'worth is ‘w it is Here believe due, II believe, is due, This careful speech styles. T it p an d s its ddomain om ain in slower, m ore careful h is is more expands 1t ex of use of make speakers m speech, FFrench careful speech, to piled sstatus ta tu s of liaison: rench speakers ake use liaison: in careful precompiled thee precom to th by preserved by artificially preserved which frames, largely s ta n tia tio n fram es, w hich aare re artificially instantiation phonological in ç,bsolete phonological large!)'. obsolete pressure. eeducation d u ca tio n aand n d social pressure. .

, } . ,,

1

11

1

JI

108 108 Bruce Hayes

i.e., diagnostic holds; i.e., II am whether the converse of this diagnostic am not sure if whether led. precompi domain, it is precompiled. whether invariant domain, whether if a rule applies in an invariant do~bt on ~ast doubt The (forthcoming)) cast Chaga (McHugh (forthcoming)) phrasal rules of Chaga The phrasal (c) cs (c) diagnosti by but domains but this, diagnostics invariant domains they apply in invariant that they this, in that phrasal rules. and (d) are true true phrasal phonologiac_cessphonologi­ canno_t access g. instantiation cannot phonological instantiation that phonological Assuming that g. Assuming fol~ierarchy, or fol­ prosodie hierarchy, cal that refers to the prosodic phrasing, any rule that cal phrasing, phrasal true a hierarchy, is true phrasal lows prosodie hierarchy, that refers to the prosodic lows a rule that conrule. assumption is not a necessary con­ background assumption that the background Note that rule. Note phrase and insta~tiation_ sequence phrase phonological instantiation both phonological theory: both sequence of the theory: hes between that lies component that formation 'interface component’ within the ‘interface formation fall within ~f ~orne _fo~ms principle, some syntax forms of phonology. In principle, phrasal phonology. true phrasal and true syntax and this withm format10n within phrase formation phonological follow phrase instantiation might follow phonological instantiation prosodie domains. component, thus be able to refer to prosodic component, and thus is theory is that the theory ~sthat The proposed_above is diagnostics proposed joint effect of the diagnostics The joint for agree should cs diagnosti quite testable empirically: ideally, all of the diagnostics should agree for quite testable empirically: on dep_end_on diagnostics depend all that many of the diagnostics the rules. Note, however, that of the all of hierpro~~dic theory_ additional assumptions about precompilation theory and prosodic hier­ lation additional assumptions about precompi abov~. ex~hcit above. assumptions explicit archy tried to make these assumptions theory. I have tried archy theory. it what Just d Counterevidence must therefore be considered carefully for just what it considere Counterevidence must therefore counterexemplifies. counterexemplifies.

10

Conclusion Conclusion

'--

phenomena phonological phenomena phrasal phonological To that all phrasal proposa! is that summarize: my proposal To summarize: precomunder theory hierarchy can be analyzed either under prosodic hierarchy theory or under precom­ prosodie under analyzed either can syntax t~ directly that pilation theory. As a result, the class of rules that refer directly to syntax r~l~s result, pilation theory. theical phonolog d elimmate in their structural descriptions can be eliminated from phonological thens in their structural descriptio ory. 11 . f . ory. m a , in A ter all, result. After earth-shakmg result. On hardly an earth-shaking On the surface, this is hardly h~d have ical phonolog order to eliminate one class of rules from phonological theory, we have had order to eliminate prosodie together, prosodic taken together, that taken to point is that others. The real point introduce two others. to introduce of account structured theory hierarchy theory and precompilation theory form a stru ctu red account of lation precompi hierarchy theory and and other, t_he th~ory the data: every phrasal rule must fit into one theory or the other, and fit must phrasal the data: as II reqmrements, as for theory, it must meet specific requirements, fit into a theory, rule to fit for aa rule approach over~ll. Thus have tried to show in the preceding section. Thus the overall approach preceding have tried to ~ard to contra~t, it is hard has predictions. In contrast, making falsifiable predictions. virtue of making the virtue has the that said that theory imagine an observation that would falsify a theory that simply said that fals~fy observation that imagine . structure. syntactic structure. phonological phonological rules may refer to syntactic wordfrmt borne already This kind of compartmentalization has already borne fruit for wordon compartmentalizati This kind precomadding y. phonolog internal rules, as the theory of lexical phonology. By adding precom­ theory internal rules an develop an inte~t is to develop pilation hierarchy theory, my intent prosodie hierarchy theor'.r to prosodic pilation theory phrasal the at ns alternatio theory equally articulated, hence predictive theory of alternations at the phrasal predictive equally articulated, level. level.

6 and logy and Tono B ou ndary d ary T onology Boun archy Hier th ro so d ic H ierarchy odie Pros thee P HYMAN L arry M. H yman LARRY

rules phonological rules in phonological deliterattire The t. constituen a that literattire de­ right edge of constituent. that apply at the left or right bé-·, the at vowels or and/ ts consonan and/or vowels at the be­ scribes numerous processes affecting consonants scribes numerous stop' glottal stop 'initial' glottal unit: ‘initial’ other unit: ginning 'phrase,' or other 'word,' ‘phrase,’ ginning or end of a ‘word,’ 1980a,b; Selkirk forth. so and deletion insertion, 1980a,b; 'final' deletion devoicing, ‘final’ 'final' devoicing, iilSertion, ‘final’ conthese con­ that these proposed that others have proposed 1984, 1986, and others Vogel 1986, 1984, Nespor and Vogel hierarchy ical phonolog a into organized stituents prosodic domains’ phonological hierarchy domains' are organized stituents or 'prosodie phonological which, largest domain, includes the phonological smallest to largest which, going from smallest intonational (PP), phrase (PP), intonational word phonological phrase group (CG), phonological (PW),), clitic group word (PW 1 . (U) utterance phrase (IP) and utterance (U).^ phrase any of any position of initial or final position Processes which are restricted restricted to the initial the to referring of Instead referring to the 'domain-limit' rules. Instead termed ‘domain-limit’ domain are termed such domain , such rules mit domain-li frameworks, domain-limit rules boundary symbols of earlier frameworks, junctures or boundary r. junctures above the above of the 'layer' of constituent at any ‘layer’ target right edge of a constituent target the left or right hierarchy. prosodic prosodie hierarchy. in than in evident than domain-limit rules more evident Nowhere is the need for such domain-limit prosoa of end or beginning the of a proso­ that apply at the beginning the area of tone. Tone rules that segmental their segmental dic extremely common and, as in the case of their domain are extremely die domain this In this processes. In recurrent processes. few recurrent around a few coimterparts, cluster around tend to cluster counterparts, tend 'boundas rules domain-limit rules as ‘bound­ tonal domain-limit study collectively to such tonal study I shall refer collectively (to Pulleyblank (to Archangeli and Pulleyblank ary framework of Archangeli Adopting the framework tonology.' Adopting ary tonology.’ (1). in seen in (1). boundary tones are seen appear), parameters of boundary sdme of the parameters appear), some interested P h o n o l o OGISTS g i s t s hHAVE a v e lLONG o n g bBEEN e e n interested PHONOL

1

should bbee nnoted it should domains, ^T hough in is ppaper a p e r I am in te rested only in pphrasai h ra sal dom ains, it o ted interested this in th Though smaller progressively sm thee progressively ta th hierarchy eextends th a t th u th o rs propose a t th x ten d s to aller thee hierarchy that propose th samee aauthors tqee sam that domains. foot aand n d syllable ains. '' syllable dom

109 109

i'1

'1

1

•I

l

.

,,,

"

1

110 llO

Hierarchy Prosodie Hierarchy Boundary Boundary Tonology and the Prosodic

Hyman M. Hyman Larry Larry M.

(1) ( 1) a. b. c. d. e.

domain domain edge function fonction trigger trigger conditions target target conditions

: : : : :

PW, CG, PP, IP, U left, right spread, delink insert, insert, delete, spread, High, Low, etc. tone-bearing specific tone(s) and/or and/or tone-bearing units units (TBUs)

remains CG remains is non-tonie nouns, lacking an IV, the whole GG placed before non-tonic is placed IV, the IV, with non-tonic. the However, as seen in (2c), where the nouns begin non-tonie. However, noun following and the following noun aa High drop occurs between the IV and pitch drop High to Low pitch · class prefix. set be must e morphem must be set alternations, the IV morpheme To account tonal alternations, these tonal account for these it whenever deleted whenever it must be deleted up but its High must underlying High tone, but with underlying up with rule this (1), in parameters given in (1), this rule is within its CG. Following the parameters initial within is initial is stated stated as in (3).

'

l

A edge. A its edge. domain and its relevant domain The identify the relevant parameters identify The first two parameters ~nd PP a of right PW, rule may thus target the left edge of a PW, the right edge of a PP and target rule may thus phonolog1cal so parameters are needed for phonological three parameters remaining three forth. The remaining so forth. spreads inserts, rules in general. First, we must know if the rule inserts, deletes, spreads must First, rules must we or delinks a featme or features. Second, in the case of tone, we must features. feature or delinks L(ow) a or rule-e.g., know which feature(s) trigger the rule—e.g., a H(igh) tone, or a, L(ow) the trigger feature(s) know conditio~(s) target condition(s) phonological target tone. we need to identify any phonological Finally, we tone. Finally, (1.e., tone (i.e., adjacent require that must be met. The rule may require a specific adjacent tone that , However TBU._ target preceding or following it), and/or it may target a specific TBU. However, and/or preceding target 1cal phonolog no there in the case of domain-limit rules, there may be no phonological target mit domain-li in the This indications). This domain and edge indications). conditions there will still be domain (though there conditions (though tone boundary last possibility is manifested, for example, when a so-called boundary tone d, last possibility manifeste any to without is inserted initially or finally within a domain, without reference to any within is inserted initially material. surrounding phonological material. surrounding phonological boundto bound­ phonology to parametric phonology In order application of parametric illustrate the application order to illustrate 2 There Luganda. ns illustratio ary tonology, let us consider two brief illustrations from Luganda. There consider ary tonology, ~o~ to is a quite general rule according to which a High tone is lowered to Low according is a quite m1so-called within initial when it is linked to a vowel that is initial within its CG. The so-called ini­ vowel that when ~rovided have tial vowel (IV) morpheme is affected by this rule. In (2a) I have provided morpheme tial vowel w1thout aa isolation surface without aa set 'non-tonie' nouns, i.e., those which in isolation set of ‘non-tonic’ 3 drop: pitch drop:^ High to Low pitch (2) a.

e-ki-tabo ki-tabo ki-tabo / e-ki-tabo mu-limi / o-mu-limi o-mu-limi ka-kulwe / a-ka-kulwe a-ka-kulwe

b.

na ki-tabo na== ki-tabo na na= -- mu-limi na na== ka-kulwe

c.

é-kl-tabo na = e-ki-tabo na 6-mù-limi na=- 6-mu-limi na = a-ka-kulwe a-kà-kulwe

(3) (3)

a. b. c. d. e.

domain edge function fonction trigger condition target target condition

: CG : left : delete :HH mora 4 : vocalic mora^

~li

all In all Luganda. In intonational High in Luganda. The second illustration illustration concerns intonational High with cited are Luganda reference with High non-tonie moras in Luganda reference works, final non-tonic realized be realized can be intonation, these moras can tone. depending on the intonation, However, depending tone. However, the indicates H where High H// consider the forms in (4), Thus, consider Low. Thus, High oorr Low. 11 indicates the intonational High tone in question: intonational (4) a.

b.

'book' ‘book’ 'farmer' ‘farmer’ 'tadpole' ‘tadpole’

à-gùl-à a-gul-a

/ a-gul-a à-gul-a buys' 'he buys’ ‘he H;; H// ' 'l -1'l-a' a-gul-il-a à-gùl-11-à / a-giil-fl-a a-gu for' ‘he 'he buys for’ H;; H// -1 -1 a-gu'l'l'la ''l'l'l'/'-1 -1 -a / a-gul-fl-il-a a-gul-il-il-a a-gu bribes' ‘he 'he bribes’ H;; H// ba-gul-a ba-gùl-à / ba-giil-a ba-gùl-a buy' ‘they 'they buy’ H L H L H// H;; ba-gùl-11-à / ba-gul-fl-a ba-gul-il-a ba-gùl-il-a for' 'they buy for ‘they H L H L H// H;; ba-gul-il-ilba-gùl-il-il-a bribe' ba-gùl-ll-il-àa / ba-gul-il-fl-a 'they bribe’ ‘they H L H L H H;; U

prefix subject prefix footnote 3), with the subject The non-tonie (see footnote The forms in (4a) are all non-tonic may forms non-tonie these a- arguably non-tonic forms may undergone rule 3. As seen, arguably having undergone Low a with realized be may b^ with a Low either with all Low tone, or they be, realized either the (4b) In moras. remaining on (4b) the and High tone on the remaining mora and the first mora on the to drop pitch a causing subject pitch drop to underlying High tone, ba- has an underlying subjed prefix banon-tonie ng l".emaini root -gul-. The remaining non-tonic Low mora of the verb root following mora on the following Low on as tone, as High tone, either with Low tone or with High moras may again be realized either one with than rather seen. Consider now forms ending with a Low tone, rather than with one with aa ends with that if the form ends we see that or non-tonie moras. In (5a) we or more non-tonic if that if see we 5b) ( in· (5b) we see that cannot surface; in single intonational High cannot Low, the intonational single Low, d Low-tone last the H11 links to there are at least two Low-toned last Low-toned Low-toned moras, H// there 'are mora. '1

book' 'with a book’ ‘with framer' 'with a framer’ ‘with tadpole' 'with a tadpole’ ‘with

on depending on Luganda, depending Nouns without an IV in Luganda, both with and without appear both Nouns appear that see we present aa number of factors irrelevant to the present issue. In (2a) we see that factors irrelevant number are forms are not, _these appear or not, whether these forms [e, o, a] appear phonetic IVs [e, three phonetic whether the three 'with' na= proclitic non-tonie non-tonic. In (2b) we see that when the non-tonic proclitic n a = ‘with’ that non-tonie. by in ppart supported 22Research R esearch on so d ic sstructure tru c tu re of L u g an d a has been su p p o rte d in a rt by Luganda prosodie thee pro on th 7. BNS871919 No. Grant N a tio n a l Science FFoundation o u n d a tio n G ra n t BNS8719197. National tonology. postlexical tonology. thee postlexical ^3•Non-toni ‘N on -to n ic’ e ir surface ppitches itches from th their formss receive th c' form

lll 111

Il .

,

4

,:,

of view of to oone's according to may condition m target T h e ex act sta te m e n t ooff th is ta rg e t condition ay vary according n e ’s view this statement exact The CG-initial only aa C that is th (3e) is in (3e) intended What th c tu re . W h a t is in te n d e d in a t only G -initial structure. syllable stru skeleton and syllable thee skeleton targeted. is targ mora onsetless m o ra is e te d .

,'

112

Hierarchy Prosodie Hierarchy Boundary and the Prosodic Boundary Tonology and

Hyman Larry M. Hyman Larry

y-a-gul-a / y-à-gul-à y-a-giil-a (5) a. y-à-gul-à H HLL

'he ‘he bought' bought’

LH11 H L H//

for' bought for’ 'he bought b. y-a-giil-il-a ‘he y-à-gul-11-a y-à-gul-11-à / y-a-giil-il-a H LL H L L H// HLLH11 HLL bribed' 'he bribed’ y-a-gul-il-il-a ‘he y-à-gul-11-11-a y-à-gul-11-11-à/ y-a-giil-il-il-a H LLL HHLLLH11. LLLH//. HLLL

appear after tone patterns after all lexical tone rules (7) as they appear illustrated in (7) patterns illustrated have applied: (7) (7)

(6). The H11 is given in (6). inserting H// The rule inserting (6)

a. b. c. d. e.

domain domain edge function fonction trigger trigger target condition target condition

: IP : right insert : insert ::HH : none

inserted at the boundary tone tone is inserted the right right edge of an intonaAs seen, a High boundary that the High condition means that target condition tional phrase. The absence of any target tional phrase. comes in unlinked, and that that it must link by the general general properties properties of the the unlinked, and cornes mora Low-toned mora language—which, example, do not allow it to link to a Low-toned language-which, for example, that High-toned mora. mora. The The only additional additional preceded by a High-toned immediately preceded that is immediately it If it optional. If insertion rule is optional. that this insertion statement made is that that need be made statement that default Low tone will instead instead be assigned to all non-tonie non-tonic does not apply, default moras. illustrate boundary The two Luganda and (6) illustrate boundary tonology Luganda rules in (3) and The right that that is sensitive to a CG versus an IP and to the left edge versus right domain. In addition, illustrate the the deletion deletion versus addition, the rules illustrate edge of the domain. boundary examples of boundary provide examples languages provide insertion Other tone languages parameters. Other insertion parameters. tonology involving other other domains domains as well as the spreading spreading and and delinking parameters. parameters. In the remainder remainder of this this paper paper I hope to do two things. things. First, First, I will will In makes hierarchy makes prosodie hierarchy that the prosodic show from Kinande data in section 1 that Kinande data correct predictions concerning boundary boundary tonology. Specifically, Specifically, it will predictions concerning correct tonology be shown that in Kinande, the boundary tonology specific to a smaller boundary Kinande, that of tonology boundary the 'inside' domain (the PP) must take ‘inside’ the boundary of aa place take must PP) domain Luganda I 2, larger domain (the IP). Second, in section 2 ,1 will draw again on Luganda IP). larger domain Kinande and then Gokana to examine examine some of the implications imphcations of the Kinande then on Gokana and analysis analysis in section 2.

Tonology 1 Kinande Boundary Tonology Kinande Boundary boundary tonology properties of boundary In this section I will present present the general properties so, do so, Zaire. 5 In order Eastern Zaire.^ Kinande, a Bantu language spoken in Eastern order to do Bantu language in Kinande, characterizing the six noun I will focus mostly alternations characterizing tonal alternations mostly on the tonal Cohen, M. Cohen, 5 1 wish to th Kinande, study thee stu 5l a n k N. M u ta k a for his help in th d y of K in an d e, aand n d M. Mutaka thank support generous California, D ean H u m an ities a t th e U niversity of S o u th e rn C alifornia, for his generous su p p o rt Southern University the at Humanities of Dean USC. ooff M r. M u ta k a ’s ggraduate ra d u a te study s tu d y in linguistics linguistics aatt USC. Mutaka's Mr.

113

e-ki-ryatu a. e-ki-ryatu

'shoe' ‘shoe’

b. e-ki-rimu HL HL c. e-ki-koba HLL H L L

'spirit' ‘spirit’ 'rope' ‘rope’

d. e-ki-tabu e-ki-tabu HL HL e. e-ki-saka HHL HHL f. e-ki-tsungu e-ki-tsungu L

'book' ‘book’ 'bush' ‘bush’ 'potato' ‘potato’

which As seen, the output Kinande lexical tonology provides TBUs which output of Kinande 6 IV augment e- is the augment or IV have High or Low tone toneless. In (7) etone or are toneless.® surface The morpheme, and ki- is a class 7 noun prefix. Luganda, and morpheme, as in Luganda, the context. We can define the according to context. reahzation nouns varies according these nouns realization of these to apply postlexical tone rules neutral to environment to be one where no postlexical neutral environment toneless default Low to each these nouns other assignment of a default the assignment than the other than phrasemora. Such an environment environment is observed when these nouns occur phrasemora, as in (8). toneless mora, internally followed by a toneless internally followed (8) (8)

ki-r{to ki-r{to è-ki-ryàtù ki-r(to a. e-ki-ryatu d. e-ki-tabu è-ki-tabù ki-r(to HLL H% H% L// H L// H%L// H%L// b. è-ki-rimù ki-rito e-kf-r'imu kl-rità ki-r(to e. e-kf-saka è-ki-sakà ki-r(to HLL H H% L// HHL H H L H% L// H%L// H%L// c. e-kf-koba ki-rito ki-r{to è-ki-kobà ki-r(t6 f. e-ki-tsungu ki-r(to è-ki-tsùngù HLL H L L H% L// L H% L// H%L// H%L//

'heavy,' whose ki-rjto ‘heavy,’ adjective ki-r}to In (8) these ~hese nouns are followed by the adjective seen from the As point. this underlying point. tone should be ignored at underlymg stem tone default a default received have moras toneless the toneless tone markings vowels, the markings above the vowels, . specification Low Lo'\\' specification. non-neutral obtains in non-neutral that obtains We now turn postlexical tonology that turn to the postlexical first shall first we shall apparent, we that will become apparent, environments. reasons that environments. For reasons Kinande demonstrate tone can always override a Low tone in Kinande, that a High tone demonstrate that phonologicai within a phonological spreading within whether leftward High tone spreading whether it is from a leftward boundH11 bound­ floating High tone, or linking of a H// phrase, leftward linking of a floating phrase, leftward ary tone. followed by a realization of the six nouns when followed the realization il~us~rate the . In (9) I illustrate phrase: phonological phrase: High the same phonological w1thm the H1gh TBU within

(9) (9)

è-ki-ryàtu a. e-ki-ryatu

ki-nénè kf-nene d. e-ki-tabii è-ki-tabu kf-nene ki-nénè HLL H H H Ho/J,// Ho/J,// H H,L// jL// è-ki-rimu kf-nene b. e-kf-rimii ki-nénè e. e-kf-saka è-ki-saka kf-nene ki-nénè HL HHL HL HHL H HcrJ, H Ho/J,// HyL// H H?L// 11 C. §-kf-koba c. ki-nénè ~-ki-koba kf-nene f. e-ki-tsungu è-ki-tsùngu kf-nene ki-nénè HLL H L L H HrL// L H Ho/J,11 J:¼J,11

6 this concerns ooff th thee concerns to th irrelevant to which violations, w ®I1 ignore here aapparent p p a re n t O C P violations, hich aare re irrelevant is OCP pa.per. paper.

-

•I

·

Hyman Larry M. Hyman 114 Larry 114

Hierarchy Prosodie Hierarchy Boundary Tonology and the Prosodic Boundary

'big' (whose stem ki-nene adjective ki-n followed by the adjective Here the nouns are followed en e ‘big’ postlexical rule of leftward there is a postlexical disregarded). As seen, there tones can be disregarded). adjective prefix ki- onto spreads the High of the adjective that spreads spreading that High tone spreading Low tone. whether it is toneless or has a lexical Low the last mora of the noun, whether Low. that a High can override a Low. indication that we have the first indication Thus we floating High tone can also override a Low tone: that a floating we see that In (10) we (10)

ki-ryâ ki-ryâ è-ki-ryàtu ki-rya è-ki-tabu ki-rya a. e-ki-ryatii d. e-ki-tabii HL HLL H HrJ,;; HL HrL// HL H L HHrJ,;; 5 .JL // ki-ryâ ki-ryâ è-ki-saka ki-rya è-ki-rimu ki-rya b. e-kf-rimu e. e-kf-saka HLL HrJ,;; HL H^L// HLL HL HrJ,;; HL H^L// H HL HH ki-ryâ ki-ryâ è-ki-tsùngu ki-rya è-ki-koba ki-rya c. e-kf-koba f. e-ki-tsungii HrJ,;; HL H HL HrJ,;; L HL L L H L 5 .L// HL

precedes the verb that precedes daughter of S or S' that tensed clauses, each daughter Within Within tensed within material following the verb within constitutes hand, all material other hand, PP; on the other constitutes a PP; PP. 8 An example of constitute a single PP.® the same S joins with this verb to constitute (13). PPs is given in (13). three such PPs a sentence having three (13) 6-mu-tututu ] [ è-ki-tsùngù e-ki-tsungii ] [ki-ryà-w-â] [kf-rya-w-a] (13) [ o-mù-tùtùtù L L H L H%L// H%L;; L L fell' potato fell’ morning a potato 'in the morning ‘in

fell' does '(it) fell’ that the High of the verb kki-rya-w-a noticed that It should be noticed i-rya -w -a ‘(it) 'potato.' In (14a) e-ki-tsungu ‘potato.’ subject noun e-ki-tsungu leftwards onto the subject not spread leftwards (proper name) subject noun ka-tsuba (proper initial High of the subject that the initial see that we see morning.' 'in the morning.’ adverbial oo-mu-tututu spread onto the adverbial does not spread -m u -tu tu tu ‘in

'that' is preceded by a floating High tone which The demonstrative i-rya ‘that’ demonstrative kki-rya preceding noun. links to the last mora of the preceding boundary tone can H11 boundary interrogative H// Finally, in (11) we see that that an interrogative also override a Low tone: (11)

è-ki-ryatu mw-a-tùm-à e-ki-ryatii a. mw-a-tiim-a L HL L L H H #// H~II b. mw-a-tum-a è-ki-rimu mw-a-tùm-à e-kf-r(mu L HL L L H H HrJI;; è-ki-koba mw-a-tùm-à e-kf-koba c. mw-a-tum-a HL L L L H H H;; HLL H//

è-ki-tabu mw-a-tùm-à e-ki-tabii d. mw-a-tum-a L HLL L H H H// H;; è-ki-saka mw-a-tùm-à e-kf-saka e. mw-a-tiim-a HL L L H H H H// H;; è-ki-tsùngu mw-a-tùm-à e-ki-tsungii f. mw-a-tum-a HLL L H H// H;;

spirit?' 'did he send a spirit?’ shoe?', ‘did These utterances 'did he send a shoe?’, utterances are glossed ‘did and so forth. We are interested interested only in the last TBU of the noun, which boundary intonational boundary invariably phonetic High of the intonational taken on the phonetic invariably has taken tone H//. generalizations seen from these forms are: (a) observational generalizations H11. The observational if the norm o boundary boundary Highs two (lla,b), tw noun ends in a toneless mora, as in (11a,b), noun ends in a and (b) if a noun H;; ); and are added % and H//); H% respectively, H added (marked, respectively, (namely, added (namely. boundary High is added Low-toned mora, as in (llc -f), only one boundary (llc-f), H;; ).1 within a phonological First, within We have thus established two facts. First, thus established (cf. (9), (10)). Second, before pause phrase, phrase, a High can override a Low (cf. Low IP), a High can override a Low (or, more accurately, accurately, at the end of an IP), across happens across what happens is: what (cf. that is now relevant is: question that (cf. (11)). The question Kinande as phonological phrases? phrases? The PP can be informally defined for Kinande in (12).

S' S'

(12)

~

[[XP] XP] 7 For ^For

[[XP] XP]

[[V V . ... . . ]]

Low tone thee final Low representation clarity, I have oomitted m itte d from th re se n tatio n ooff ((llc-f) l l c - f ) th thee rep tthat h a t is overridden igh bboundary o u n d a ry tone. High thee H overridden by th

115 115

a-lyà-w-â ] ka-tsùbà ] [ a-lya-w-a o-mù-tùtùtù ] [ ka-tsuba (14) a. [ 6-mu-tutiitu L H L H L L L L L fell' Katsuba fell’ morning Katsuba 'in the morning ‘in

ka-tsùbà l tùm-a ka-tsuba b. [ tum-a L L H L L' L L L Katsuba!' 'send Katsuba!’ ‘send

H% Ly/ H%L;;

tùmà ]l cr. [[ tuma

cf.

L L 'send' ‘send’

spreading leftward High tone spreading that leftward From (13) and (14a) we conclude that preceding PP. material in a preceding boundary onto material apply across a PP boundary may not apply Thus, this rule can only apply »• within a single PP, as in (14b). apply within that a floating High tone may, ; Finally, it should be noted noted in (15) that preceding PP: leftwards onto a preceding -however, :however, link leftwards

,, ki-ryà-w-â ] ki-rya ] [ kf-rya-w-a o-mù-tùtùtu ] [ ki-rya (15) [ 6-mu-tututu ·;:(15) L HL % H L L H% HL H fell' that one fell’ morning that 'in the morning ‘in

.·

H%L// H%L;;

H% boundary tone H We now tm % in (16). phrasal boundary turnn to the phrasal

.,

!; ”(16)

a. e-ki-ryatii ki-kâ-w-â è-ki-ryàtu ki-ka-w-a H % HL H%L;; HL H%L// H% b. e-kf-rjmu ki-kâ-w-â è-ki-rimu ki-ka-w-a HL % HL H%L;; HL H%L// H% L H c. e-kf-koba ki-ka-w-a c. è-ki-kobà ki-kâ-w-â H L HL H%L;; HL H%L// L L L

ki-kâ-w-â è-ki-tabù ki-ka-w-a d. e-ki-tabu H%L;; L HL HL H%L// ki-kâ-w-â è-ki-sakà ki-ka-w-a e. e-kf-saka H%L;; HL L HHL HL H%L// ki-kâ-w-â è-ki-tsùngù ki-ka-w-a f. e-ki-tsungu H%L;; HL H%L// L L HL

('^hile nouns in (16a,b) show a subject nouns moras of the subject ~he toneless final moras :,While the Lowfalling,' the final Low'(it) is falling,’ ki-ka-w-a % before the verb ki-ka-w -a ‘(it) H% plirasal H ~nal phrasal . final nouns in (16c-f) do not become High. We subject nouns i!|oned moras of the subject ;1,~oned know that cannot be a floating High coming from the verb, or that this High cannot :~ow preceding Low-toned preceding both toneless and Low-toned It would be expected expected to link to both ,tt ^oras, boundary tone phrasal boundary cannot let this phrasal ~oras, as was seen in (15). We also cannot 8

languages, T h is sstate ta te o~ff affairs, hich is found w ith m inor variatio n s in m any B a n tu languages, Bantu many variations minor with which ~ffairs, w This by Rice language Slave by Athabaskan thee A account given for th thee account s1milar 1, remarkably sim ilar to th th a b ask an language .,

JisroT. 1987.

Hyman Larry M. Hyman 116 Larry 116

Hierarchy Prosodie Hierarchy Boundary Tonology and the Prosodic Boundary

inserted at the end of a PP or it would have the same automatically inserted be automatically boundary tone, seen to override a Low properties intonational boundary H;; intonational properties as the H// mora of inserted if the final mora H% Instead, H tone in (11) above. Instead, % must only be inserted (17). 9 formalized in (17).® a PP is toneless, as formalized (17) (17)

V -

((20) 20)

V // //_ -]PP ]p p

117

è-kl-ryatù a. e-ki-ryatu è-kl-tabù d. e-ki-tabu H%L// HLL H H%L;; è-ki-r{mù b. e-ki-r(mu è-ki-sakà e. e-ki-saka H H%L// H%L;; HHLL HH è-ki-kobà c. e-ki-koba f. è-kl-tsùngù f. e-ki-tsungu HLL H L L L

1

H

outlined in section 1, this rule would approach outlined parametric approach Or, within within the parametric stated as in (18). be stated (18)

a. b. C. c. d. e.

domain domain edge fonction function trigger trigger condition target condition target

pp : PP : right insert : insert ::H H : toneless mora

]IP .... ]ip ]PP .... (21) .... ]pp (21) H % L// L;; H%

regardless mora of a PP regardless that this rule applies to the last mora In (19) we see that of its category: (19) a.

b.

c.

è-kl-ryàtù [ e-ki-ryatu

è-ky6] ] e-kyo

shoe

H% that (rel) that

è-kl-ryàtù [ e-ki-ryatu

è-ky6]] e-kyo

shoe

H% that that (rel)

tu-ka-langir-aa tu-ka-langir-aa H see' 'we see’ ‘we

vs.

(kl-kâ-w-â] [tù-ka-lànglr-a] [ki-ka-w-a] [tu-ka-langir-a] HL H%L// H% H%L;; H n% is falling we see tw-a-langlr-à ]l [ tw-a-langir-a H LLL HHH L we saw we

H% Note that % to the nouns in (20a,b), which before that rule (18) assigns a H application of (18) end in a toneless mora. Since the nouns in (20cthe application Now, H%. phrasal H% acquire a phrasal f) end in a Low-toned mora, . Now, mora, these do not acquire L;; H% outputs, where only (20a,b) have a H phrasal outputs, assuming these phrasal assuming % tone, a L// assertions. completed assertions. mark completed prepausally to mark inserted prepausally intopational tone is inserted intopational boundary tones, as seen in (21). creates a sequence of two boundary In (20a,b) this creates

[ky-a-w-à] [ky-a-w-a] H L is falling

tu-a-lang-ir-a tu-a-lang-ir-a HHH H LLL L saw' 'we saw’ ‘we

marker e-kyo. relative marker In (19a,b) we see that that the first H% goes on the relative separated off as a single that' is separated In these sentences, i-ry a tu e-kyo ‘shoe 'shoe that’ e-ki-ryatu sentences, e-k see' and 'we see’ tu-ka-langir-a PP by virtue -k a -la n g ir-a ‘we relative verbs tu preceding the relative virtue of its preceding relative clause forms tw -a-lan gir-a ‘we addition, the verb in the relative saw.' In addition, 'we saw.’ tw-a-langir-a algorithm in general algorithm per the general a separate follows, as per that follows, separate PP from the verb that that is lacking in relative verb that (12). In (19a) we see a second H % on the relative H% directly that this difference is directly (19b). The lexical outputs outputs in (19c) show that attributable present tense ends in a toneless mora, that the present attributable to the fact that insertion H% Thus, the H Low tone. Thus, while the chosen past % insertion past tense ends in a Low phrase. the phrase. whatever word ends the mora of whatever the final mora targets the rule in (18) targets declarConsider prepausally in declar­ appearing prepausally realization of forms appearing Consider now the realization ative utterances. transcriptions in (20) show how our six nouns would utterances. The transcriptions citation forms. and as citation utterance and appear both at the end of such an utterance appear both 9 This ru Odden insertion tone ®This le is nnearly early id en tical to th h ra sal to n e in sertio n rule pproposed roposed by O dden thee pphrasai identical rule thee that condition thee co without 1987 for th a n tu language im atu u m b i, aalthough lth o u g h w ith o u t th ndition th a t th Kimatuumbi, language K Bantu thee B Low of nouns thee final Low this final m o ra bbee toneless. ight bbee no ted aatt th is ppoint o in t tthat h a t th noted might toneless. It m mora mora that failure of th thee failure such as e-ki-tsungu o ta to ’ in (16f) is m o tiv ated by th at m o ra to receive motivated 'potato' e-ki-tsungu ‘p a H% h ra sal tone. phrasai ~ p

phrase layer of the intonational phrase L;; tone with the intonational In (21) I identify the L// either marked either Kinande is marked we shall see, an IP in Kinande hierarchy. As we prosodic prosodie hierarchy. assertion) completed assertion) L;; tone (when the IP occurs at the end of a completed ;, with a L// that prediction that hierarchy makes the prediction prosodie hierarchy H;; tone. The prosodic or else with a H// must occur boundary tone, coming as it does at the end of a PP, must H% the H % boundary (20a, b), H%L/1 sequence in (20a,b), result is a H%L// ithin the L// H;/) of the IP. The result (or H//) L;; (or within " w H%we finsi.lH% identical to the fin§il where H % (realized on the penultimate penultimate mora) is identical H% H91a 'a H showifig n exactly the same forms showing saw in (16a,b). In other % other words, it is exactly corresponding ppenultimate that have a corresponding on the last toneless mora en u ltim a te mora of a PP that 1985). Valinande 1985). Hyman and Valinande (cf. Hyman position (cf. utterance-final position H % in utterance-final H% Some derivations are given in (22). Sorne derivations (22)

a. e-ki-ryatu e-ki-ryatu

e-ki-ryatu b. e-ki-ryatu H% è-kl-ryatù c. e-ki-ryatu

',' i' ', H % L// L;; H%

e-ki-rjmu e-ki-rimu H HLL e-ki-rjmu e-ki-rimu HL % H% HL H e-kf-r(mu è-ki-r{mù i1 =f='#,, H L;; HLL H%L//

e-ki-koba HLL H L L e-ki-koba HLL H L L è-ki-kobà e-ki-koba 1 1 1 H L;; HLL L L//

Starting representations in (22a), in (22b), rule (18) has Starting with the lexical representations emora of the nouns einserted % boundary boundary tone onto the final toneless mora H% ~nserted the H condition target condition they meet the target 'spirit,' since they kki-ryatu i-rya tu ‘shoe’ i-rim u ‘spirit,’ e-ki-rjmu and e-k 'shoe' and sin ce 'rope,' since H% % is found on e-ki-koba ‘rope,’ hand, no H other hand, '·· of the rule. On the other intonational tone is L;; intonational Low-toned mora. In (22c) the L// " this noun ends in a Low-toned L;; this L// tl).e first two columns this formalized). In the inserted insetted (by a rule yet to be formahzed). penultimate causes the E% relink to the penultimate mora and relink H%to delink from the final mora e~ki-koba mora of e-ki-koba L;; has no effect, since the last mora ' mora. In the last column, L// Low. is aheady already Low. earlier We now are in a position interrogative forms seen earlier position to derive the interrogative in (11). Sample derivations derivations are given in (23).

Hierarchy Prosodie Hierarchy Boundary Boundary Tonology and the Prosodic

Hyman Larry M. Hyman 118 118 Larry (23) (23)

a. e-ki-ryatu e-ki-ryatu b. e-ki-ryatu e-ki-ryatu H% c. C. e-ki-ryatii è-ki-ryatu ,_' f ',, H % H// H;; H%

e-ki-r(mu e-ki-rimu H HLL e-ki-rjmu e-ki-rimu H % H% HLL H e-ld-r(mu è-ki-rimu

conditioned, phonologically conditioned, choice boundary tone is not phonologically H;; boundary L;; versus H// of L// choice of no target condition is given in (24e). target condition PP of aa PP right edge of marking the right H% To % marking there is a H thus far, there summarize thus To summarize the expected, the and right edge of an IP. As expected, marking the right H;; marking L;; or a H// either a L// and either relationship 'prior' • H % occurs to the left of the L// or H//. Because of the ‘prior’ relationship H L;; occurs li% 11 tonolboundary tonol­ that the boundary imposed hierarchy, we have seen that prosodie hierarchy, imposed by the prosodic tonology boundary ogy boundary tones of a larger domain may affect the boundary tonology domain larger toues ogy boundary of a smaller one, though though the reverse should not be possible. daim. We now consider justification of this claim. further justiflcation consider further found not found tone is not boundary H% The data in (25) now show that the H % boundary tone that sh~w The data IP': 'imperative IP’: on the last PP within within an ‘imperative

e-ki-koba H L L HLL e-ki-koba H HLL L e-ki-koba è-ki-koba

I1 =f=·..j,._ 11 11 :P•,

H % H// H;; H% HLL H

H L L H;; L %

The (22a). The in (22a). identical to those in The representations in (23a) are identical The lexical representations identical (18) H% forms obtained in (23b) by assigning the H % by rule (18) are also identical forms obtained intothe intocornes in (23c), where the to those seen in (22b). The only difference comes to those links tone al intonation the before, As national intonational tone links L11. than L//. rather than H;; rather national tone is H// columns two columns to preceding tone. In the first two delinking the preceding the final mora, delinking to the te penultima the to links then the , which then penultimate H%, phrasal H% preceding tone is the phrasal the preceding mora te penultima this of Low the mora. Low penultimate mora 'spirit,' e-ki-rjmu ‘spirit,’ mora. In the case of e-ki-rj,mu when Similarly, when phonetic effect. Similarly, is and fails to have any phonetic itself delinked and is itself no has Low delinked the , e-ki-koba the Low has no H;; tone links to the final mora of e-ki-koba, the H// effect. effect. in aa ends in results: if a form ends following results: To summarize, we achieve the following To summarize, its on tones High with be toneless tones on its realization will interrogative realization toneless mora, its interrogative mora, d Low-tone a in final o moras; on the other Low-toned mora, hand, if a form ends other hand, two final tw mora. 10 that final mora.^“ there will be only a single High tone on that there will is insertion is boundary tone insertion A parameterized intonational boundary parameterized version of intonational now given in (24). (24)

a. b. c. d. e. e,

domain domain edge function fonction trigger trigger target condition target condition

(25)

(26) è-ki-ryàtù mù-tum-é e-ki-ryatu (26) mu-tiim-e H HH L// L;;

X X

'•·-J )rp Rro]PP % ] P P ]lP

''■ d

its PPP, of its mora thee final m ta th w hich says a t th h ra sa l Rro,aalready lre ad y linked to o ra of P , _spreads sp read s •phrasai thee -p that says th which lmked, aa doubly linked, thee Rrodoubly With position. W leftw ards oonto n to th receding m o ra in IP -final position. ith th IP-final mora thee ppreceding leftwards doubly Rro· of H thee _two L// o u n d a ry to ne w ould now tw o links of ^ . _With W ith aa doubly thee second of th now delink th would tone L;; bboundary effect. no has 1t mora, H1gh-toned linked H % we could say th a t w hen H// follows a final H igh-toned m ora, it h a s no effect. H;; when that linked Hr, 0 we could thee ppenultimate H;; bbump L;; or H// T h u s we ould have no need to a t h// u m p Rrooonto nto th e n u ltim a te that ta say th would we w Thus analyses. twoo analyses. these between m ora. II know inande-specific een th ese tw ecific way of choosing betw Kinande-sp know of no K mora.

è-lçi-tabù d. tum-a tùm-à e-ki-tabu L L L H HLL è-ki-sakà e. tum-a tùm-à e-ki-saka L L H HL HHL f. f. tum-a è-ki-tsùngù tùm-à e-ki-tsungu L L L

shoe!' (pl.) a shoe!’ 'send (pi.) ‘send

is there is if there person forms, if The The same effect can be seen on first or second person order: an as d interprete is imperative îm~erative force, as in (27a), which interpreted

general the general to the according to The boundary tone will link up according inserted floating boundary The inserted linking specific the indicate properties of Kinande; i.e., there is no need to indicate the speciflc linking there Kinande; properties the since addition, and and delinking operations seen in (22) and (23). In addition, since the (22) s operation and delinking

X X

è-ki-ryàtù a. tum-a tùm-à e-ki-ryatu L L L L;; L// è-ki-rlmù b. tum-a tùm-à e-ki-rimu L L H HLL L// L;; è-ki-kobà c. tum-a tùm-à e-ki-koba L H HL'L L L L

six our six of our each of by each followed by 'send!' is followed In (25) m -a ‘send!’ tum-a imperative verb tu (25) the imperative we where tous g nouns. The forms that are interesting to us are those in (25a,b), where we interestin that nouns. *tùm-à and shoe!' 'send è-ki-ryatù foil to obtain the expected * tu m -a e-k i-ryd tu ‘send a shoe!’ and * tu m -d *tùm-à expected obtain fail L;; simple a with , indicated e-kt-rim u ‘send a spirit!’. As indicated, these forms end with a simple L// è-ki-rfmù 'send spirit!'. • sequence. H%L;; sequence. tone, rather ^ expected H%L// with the expected than with rather than ob.l 6badditiona few Before attempting an analysis, let us consider a few additional Before attempting plur.a.l the s, difference gical morpholo servations. (26) shows that despite morphological differences, the plural that despite servations. corresponding singular: imperative imperative works the same way as the corresponding

IP : IP right : right insert : insert Low, High : Low, none : none

10 ne m ight o b jec t to a process tone High tone High ^°O here one H igh to n e causes aanother n o th e r H igh tone where process w One might abject ta in cases few precious are There mora. to delink and th e n relink to th e preceding m ora. T h ere are precious few cases in preceding the ta ta delink and then tone like to displaces aa like tone nnon-bounda o n -b o u n d aryry tonology, here th read in g of a to n e displaces n e oonto nto aa spreading thee sp where tonology, w possible, logically possible, is logically facts Kinande thee K neighboring BU. A n aalternative lte rn a tiv e analysis in a n d e fa cts is analysis ooff th An TBU. neighboring T First, Raya. analysis ooff H 1984 analysis o's 1984 Byarusheng tak in g its sp iratio n from H y m a n aand nd B yarushengo’s aya. F irst, Hyman inspiration its in taking form,, thee form th e re w ould be a rule ooff th would there

119 119

(27) è-ki-ryàtù à-tum-é e-ki-ryatii ('27) a. a-tiim-e H H L// L;; b. a-tiim-e è-ki-ryatù à-tum-é e-ki-ryatu H H H%L// HroL;; H

shoe!' 'let him send a shoe!’ ‘let shoe!' 'he can send a shoe!’ ‘he

in (e.g., in suggestion (e.g., interpreted as a suggestion On hand, in (27b), which is interpreted other hand, the other On the desinence H%L;; normal do?'), response to the question ‘what might he do?’), the normal H%L// desinence question 'what response H interrogative H// that when the interrogative i-rya tu.. In (28) we see that e-ki-ryatu is observed on e-k '. is 11 is H%) (with pattern rative non-impe tone is superimposed, only the non-imperative tone pattern (with H% ) is / tone superimposed, ·· possible: ,;

è-ki-ryatu nyi-tu.\fi-é e-ki-ryatu (28) nyi-tiim-e >(28) H~;;

.

H' h

H

shoe?' 'me send a shoe?’ ‘me

H # //

boundary (non-imperative) boundary regular (non-imperative) imperative shows regular negative imperative Finally, the negative \iFinally, ,· tonology, as seen in (29).

Hierarchy Prosodie Hierarchy Boundary Boundary Tonology and the Prosodic

Hyman Larry M. Hyman 120 Larry 120 è-kl-ryatù w-a-tùm-à e-ki-ryatu (29) 1f si sl w-a-tum-a H L HL

H L HL

L L

( 11), intonation in (11), question intonation from the preceding preceding one. As in the case of question nouns (which end in a toneless mora) mora) are characterized characterized by a the first two nouns nonremaining non­ intonational tone. The remaining H % phrasal phrasal tone followed by a H11 H// intonational H% H11 the H// mora, receive only the Low-toned mora, final nouns, they do in a Low-toned ending as they no_uns,ending 'thing' is toneless, receiving noun e-ki-ndu ‘thing’ intonational added noun intonat1onal tone. (The added assertion.) appropria te at the end of an assertion.) the H % L// tonal sequence appropriate L11tonal H% When we look at the the same list intonation intonation in an imperative imperative utterance, utterance, When a different tonal tonal realization realization is observed:

shoe!' 'don't send a shoe!’ ‘don’t

H% L// H%L//

'imperative.' informally as ‘imperative.’ environments informally I will refer to the appropriate environments the appropriate assigned or being from I¼ the either keep we either Our H% that we requires that account requires Our accoimt imperative proper the H% removing H that % in proper imperative forms. I later rule removing we have a later that we imperative H% the H that will adopt adopt the latter propose that the % of an imperative approach and propose latter approach pause): before (e.g., IP an of end PP is deleted deleted when the the PP PP stands stands at the the pause): (30)

a. b. c. d. e.

domain domain edge function function trigger trigger target condition condition target

: IP right : right : deletion deletion :H :H : final mora mora in imperative imperative

(33) tùm-à tum-a è-kl-ryàtu, e-ki-ryatii, nà na è-kf-r}mu, e-kf-rjmu, nà na è-kf-koba, e-kf-koba, nà na è-kl-tabu e-ki-tabu,1 H11 L L H// H L H// H L H// H H// H11 H11 H11 è-kl-ndù nà è-kl-tsùngu, nà na e-kf-saka, na e-ki-tsungu, na e-ki-ndu è-kf-saka, nà L11 H// H// L// H11 H H H11

... potato bush ... a p ... a bush... book rope ... a b ‘send oe... ook... otato... spirit ... a rope... ... a spirit... shoe 'send a sh thing' and a thing’ and

imperative, present in an imperative, is present H% The reason % is that the H this decision is that reason for this imperative The IP. its within if the imperative The imperative forms in imperative PP is not final within consist of ofone one IP IP containing containing two two PPs: PPs: (31) consist w-as-è l] 1l è-kl-ryàtu] [ w-as-e tùm-à e-ki-ryatii] (31) a. [ [ tum-a HLL H% H L L B%

corne!' ‘send a shoe and and come!’ 'send

w-as-è ]l ]l è-kf-r}mu ]l [[ w-fe-e tùm-à e-kf-r'imu b. [ [ tum-^ H HLL H% L L H % HLL H

corne!' and come! spirit and ‘send 'send a spirit

w-as-è l] ]l tum-a è-kf-kobà e-kf-koba l] [[ w-fe-e c. [ [ tùm-à H HLL HLL L L H L L

corne!' 'send ‘send a rope rope and and come!’

e-ki-ryatu boundary tone on e-k H% boundary In (31a,b) we see the i-rya tu and presence of a B.% the presence mora. toneless e-ki-rim u , the two nouns that mora. In (31c), that end in a lexically e-ki-rjmu, because H%, final a the other other hand, hand, e-ki-koba does not show H%, because it ends on the thus are The H% Low-toned mora. The H% tones thus not affected by rule in a lexical Low-toned imperative within final (30), because within the one imperative respective PP is not their respective because their IP. interaction the interaction system is the Perhaps property of the system interesting property most interesting Perhaps the most intonation list between and list intonation. intonation. As seen in (32), intonation is between rule (30) and the by marked exactly the the same as question question intonation, intonation, namely namely the presence marked 11 tone. H11 tone.^^ of a H// (32) m6-tw-à-tùm-à mo-tw-a-tum-a è-kl-ryatu, e-ki-ryatii, nà na è-ki-rimu, ^kf-r(mu, nà na è-ki-koba, e-kf-koba, nà na è-kl-tabu, e-ki-tabii, H11 H L L L H H # // H H% H// H L H// H H// H11 Ho/JI// H'lif11 è-ki-ndù nà è-kl-tsùngu, na e-kf-saka, na e-ki-tsungu, na e-kf-ndu nà è-ki-saka, nà H// H % L// L11 H% H11 H11 H H H//

bush. . . a . . a bush... rope. . . a bbook. spirit. . . a rope... . . a spirit... ‘we oe... ook... shoe. brought a sh 'we brought thing' and a thing’ . . and p otato... potato. this intonation intonation pattern pattern requires requires that that a pause pause occur As seen in the gloss, this separates each noun 'and' separates The marker between each of the marker na ‘and’ the list NPs. The 11 Thus, it m 'nonmark thee m H11 as being th speak ^^Thus, ight bbee m ore aappropriate p p ro p ria te to sp eak of H// ark of ‘non­ more might 'completion.' mark thee m L;; th com pletion’ aand n d L// ark of ‘c o m p le tio n .’ completion'

121 121

1 '

nouns e-ki-ryatu e-k i-rya tu and and e-ki-rjmu e-k i-rim u appear appear with only In (33) the first two nouns the intonational intonational H11, H//, rather rather than H%H// sequence seen in (32). with the H%H// than with H%L//sequence realized with a H%L// Note also that noun e-ki-ndu is realized the final noun that the What this means intonational tone in (33). What in (32), but L11intonational the % but only with the constituents. The scope' over all of these constituents. is that 'tonal scope’ imperative has ‘tonal that the imperative AH IPs proposal here is that that (32) and (33) are divided into seven IPs. All proposal can.apply must ,be identified as 'imperative' ‘imperative’ in (33) so that that rule (30) can, apply to appear. otherwise appear. that would otherwise H%that each IP, deleting ;’ deleting the B.% phonological strictly phonological accomplished in a strictly Assuming that this is to be accomplished that this there construction, there imperative construction, direct reference to the imperative than by direct way, rather than way, rather implement some approaches. The first is to implement seem to be two possible approaches. the U can transmit head IP of the transmit the Perhaps the head kind of co-indexing. Perhaps that an IP can be the idea that adopting the sister IPs. Or, adopting feature 'imperative' to sister feature ‘imperative’ Nespor and others, Nespor among others, smaller IPs (see, among (optionally) divided up into smaller (optionally) divided 'imperative,' feature ‘imperative,’ starts as one IP with its feature Vogel perhaps (33) starts 1986), perhaps Vogel 1986), feature in smaller IPs, each one keeps the feature and when it is broken broken up into smaller approach assumes question, satisfying target condition condition in (30). This approach satisfying the target question, that the daims that approach claims that disjoint, as in (34a). The second approach IPs are disjoint, that IPs self-embedded, as in (34b). IPs are instead instead self-embedded,

(34) a. . . . [ X )rp ]ip [ Y )rp ]ip [ Z Z )rp ]ip ... . ..

b. . . . [ [ [ X )rp ]ip Y )rp ]ip Z )rp ]ip .. . . .. corequiring co­ separately, requiring While apply to each IP in (34a) separately, ~hile rule (30) would apply apply indexing of the feature ‘imperative,’ it would apply to (34b) in an ever'imperative,' feature mde~ing argued for exactly as McHugh (this volume) has argued enlarging enlarging cyclic fashion, exactly Chaga. (34b) requires requires that that the the pauses pauses in (32) and and (33) mark mark right right IPdisjoint independent an ends, but not that each stretch so marked be independent or disjoint marked stretch ' e~ds, but not_that but appeal, sister IP. This second approach has some appeal, but of course violates approach s1ster 1984). Hypothesis (Selkirk 1984). the Strict Strict Layer Hypothesis

Hierarchy Prosodie Hierarchy Boundary Boundary Tonology and the Prosodic

Hyman 122 Larry M. Hyman 122 Larry

2

Further implications Fur~her implications

strikingly hierarchy is strikingly prosodie hierarchy that the prosodic In the preceding section we saw that preceding section Pierrehumand PierrehumBeckman and confirmed in Kinande boundary tonology. Since Beckman Kinande boundary domain bert ordered by size of domain boundary tones are ordered that boundary bert 1986 have shown that the pitch-accent, the Japanese pitch-accent, in the realization stress-accent and Japanese English stress-accent realization of English work that boundary present study study completes completes the picture picture by showing that boundary tones work present like would like point I would the same way in a non-accentual non-accentua! tone system. At this point Kinande study. to consider three implications of the Kinande three implications in outlined in approach outlined zed approach The first implication parameterized concerns the parameteri implication concerns that shown that There it was shown section 1 and illustrated in section 2. There further illustrated and further boundary tonology tonology can target target a specific landing landing site either either by requiring requiring aa boundary only inserted only H% Kinande H Thus, Kinande particular % is inserted particular TBU. Thus, particular tone or a particular that boundary What this means is that if the final mora boundary PP is toneless. What mora of a PP apan ap­ to an linked to waiting to be linked floating tones waiting tones need not come corne in as floating 1) (section 1) Luganda (section H;; in Luganda intonational H// propriate propriate TBU. Of course, the intonational Kinande do have this and intonational H// and and L;; L// in Kinande this property. property. In In l H;; and the intonationa versus this framework, this is reflected merely by the presence versus framework, however, this target condition. 12 phonological target absence of a phonological boundon bound­ conditions on target conditions Now, phonological target possibility of phonological Now, given the possibility adjabe adja­ not to be landing site not ary tone insertion, it should be possible for a landing tone insertion, Luganda relevant domain example is found in Luganda domain edge. Such an example cent to the relevant Lowfirst Lowinserted onto the first question S(uperhigh) is inserted intonation, where a S(uperhigh) question intonation, toned mora mora following the the last High of an utterance: utterance: toned (35) a. tu-ba-gulilila —►tu-ba-gulilila tu-ba-gùlililà tu-ba-gulilila --+ L LLL H H H S LLLL L H L

bribing them?' 'are we bribing ‘are them?’

H LLL L LLL L L H L

in parallel in besicles the parallel other words, besides piu-poses languages. In other purposes in different languages. boundsimilarities structural function, there may be important stru ctu ra l similarities between bound­ important fonction, there the that the ary tones and particles. particles. In fact, the difference may be simply that should there If latter former lack segmental content, while the latter do not. If so, there should content, segmental 'bounddomain p, before aa ‘bound­ be cases where a phonological phonological rule applies at domain case one l. + domain ary particle’ is inserted by rule at domain p -h 1. I will now cite one case inserted particle' Eastern language from Gokana, a Cross-River language spoken in Eastern Nigeria. r Cross-Rive Gokana, is spreading rule in (36a), which is Low spreading Gokana has the morphologized morphologized Low (36b). in as such responsible for derivations derivations (36) a.

]verb V jverb

---=} H ]PP L----L H ]pp

(it)' 'he took (it)’ ‘he

I1 Ul-'l '%

H ML ML H

rule spreading rule 'invisible' to the Low spreading particles are ‘invisible’ that two particles we see that (38) we ' In (38) ,• in (36a): »• (38) (38) a.

tù eë?? nwee nwéé eÈ:tu

' 4 I1 V Ll--4=

(it)?' ‘who 'who took (it)?’ [who-PST-take-WH] [who-PST-take-WH]

H L HH HLHH b.

them?' bribing them?’ 'is he bribing ‘is

tù aa nwm ë- a-ètu nwfn e-a-e

I1 I1I1 L--t I1

LLL L LL LLLLL L

12 rule phonological ru th e r w ords, I do not view ru le (18) as a phonological le hhaving aving aa ggrammatical ram m atical rule words, In oother be would It w morpheme. introducing con d itio n a n d (24) a s a m orphological rule in tro d u c in g a m orphem e. It ould be l morphologica as and condition fewer have fewer to have tend tones in te re stin g to h e th e r IP-level o u n d a ry to n es te n d to IP-level bboundary whether to know, however, w interesting believe. fact believe. tones, as I in fact ta rg e t conditions an P P -level bboundary o u n d a ry tones, PP-level than conditions th target 13 H followed by '^^The o n d ingg sta te m e n t w ould norm ally have a single Low followed by ail all H normally would statement correspondin The corresp As 1. As section 1. recalled from section may T B U s, i.e., d ‘he rib in g th e m ,’ as m ay be recalled them,' 'he is bbribing à-ba-gul1î1îa i.e., d-bd-gulM TBUs, disregarded. should be before, p p a re n t O O P vio latio n s should b e disregarded. violations OCP before, aapparent

aa eè tu tù

animal' 'he took an animal’ ae ‘he n5m tu nom aètii ]PP [[ML ML H M M ]pp

(37) (37)

them?' after them?’ 'did we look after ‘did

are mora are Superhigh mora target Superhigh after the target Examples that all moras after Examples (35a,b) show that utterance that pronounced phonetically Low. Example (35c) shows that if an utterance Example pronounced phonetically lacks a High to Low pitch drop, Superhigh Superhigh fails to be inserted inserted and, and, instead, instead, pitch drop, lacks 13 While it usually question intonation consists of a sequence of Low tones. question intonation consists domain, Luganda the U domain, does not Luganda adjacent to the right edge of the not occur adjacent boundary Superhigh is still a boundary tone. Superhigh be tones may be boundary tones The second implication intonational boundary that intonational implication is that sothe as way same the much in regarded as IP or U level morphemes the the somorphemes regarded forth used for similar called markers and so forth question markers particles, question called affective particles,

b.

in verb in monomoraic verb A Low spreads and knocks off the High of a monomoraic Low tone spreads by followed is verb the PP-final followed by position. This rule does not apply when PP-final position. an object within the same PP as in (37). objeçt within

LLL L LLL H S L H

c. a-ba-gulilila > a-ba-gulilila à-bà-gùlllllà --+ a-ba-gulilila —

[C

\/

b. tw-aa-ba-làbililà tw-aa-ba-labilila--+—+ tw-aa-ba-labilila b. tw-aa-ba-labilila

123 123

(it)' ‘the that took (it)’ 'the child that [child-REL-he-PST-take-REL] [child-REL-he-PST-take-REL]

H H H H MML H H MML

verb In E / cannot cannot belong to the same PP as the verb particle //E/ (38a) the WH particle In (38a) the tu ‘take’; if it did, rule (36a) would not apply. Similarly, in (38b), the 'take'; , preceding ; relative particle / a / must not appear in the same PP as the preceding appear must a/ particle :;: inserted much in the verb. E / and //a/ a / are inserted that //E/ would like to suggest that verb. II would ··•• the level before the same way as boundary tones. Rule (36a) applies at the PP level boundary ·same boundary l intonationa ; IP-level rules of / E / and / a / insertion which, like intonational boundary insertion /a/ /E/ HP-level functions. 14 pragmatic functions.^^ grammatical or pragmatic ; tones, target target specific grammatical \tones, analmy anal­ study concerns my Kinande study Finally, the third implication of the Kinande third implication ·· find should we then correct, analysis is correct, we should find If this analysis imperative tone. If ~·.ysis of imperative Gokana the again Consider other languages. Consider 'scope' effects in other parallel ‘scope’ , parallel conappearing at the end of a WH-Q or focus Gokana focus con­ particle appearing /E// particle J /E (39), In struction. ! struction. 14

(38). in (38). tone M(id) A n o th er rule (id) to n e on //E/ E / aand n d //a/ a / in thee surface M responsible for th rule is responsible Another h

CL.

"

g - CD a

^ E '2 .g

CD

pS

6

O

E

B

H|

,Cl)

e-ki-ryatu

e-ki'-rimy HL e-ki-koba H L L e-ki-tabu HL e-ki'-saka HHL e-ki-tsungu L

‘shoe’ ‘spirit’

e-ki-ryatu e-ki-rimy HL e-ki-koba H L L e-ki-tabu HL e-ki-saka HHL e-ki-tsungu L

neutral environment w/default Low / __ki-ljto ‘heavy’

Il

,::,

..., è

~1

1

~

.p

0 0

~

fS' I?^ tT iB It) pi pi p P p -B p

p

B 3 95 3 O' *=* S P. U-.

95

gP 0S->

end of assertion, e.g., citation form / —H%L//

e-ki-ryatu H%L// e-ki-n'my HH%L// e-kf-koba H L L e-ki-tabu HL e-ki-saka HHL e-ki-tsiingu L

end of phrase, e.g., as subject / —H%

e-ki-ryatu H% e-kf-rimy H L H% e-ki'-koba H L L e-ki-tabu HL e-ki-saka HHL e-ki-tsungu L

3 o p

H% - phrasal tone; L//, H// = intonational tones (only tones that surface are indicated)

,(Il

‘potato’

W

B

0 0

o p plf- tS

Po o

K

S' g 3P' k 2.

^ o C '^

a5

P' ^ "— ^o

H//

e-ki-ryatii H%H// e-ki-rimy H H%H// e-ki-k5ba H L H// fe-ki-tabii H% e-ki'-sak^l H H H// e-ki-tsungu

question/list intonation / — H.%H//

C^NfO>

B, 3

S --

P' pi

3

OI S' V ^

^ P 2 Ip

É

‘bush’

fD

S

CD

Sum m ary o f Tonal R ealizations in K inande

CD

05

.

3

2 >o »—■ BH O Pi K' % 5- ^

05

S' 8

S ' » p CA P 03

e+ 45 p '.S B P- ^ M a> PH CD B "• P CO P 5 c« P . o S p o S' P w _ ^ ^ P 2. S '^ 0 -3 ' C L \ t?d T O p P P o ■>• g: p era . . p I— I r+- c+

S'

ty

s.S gcr S's

g p I-. C»

p o .

É

‘book’

^

g

CD

É É

2* O

■

o P '

P


T l

CO

O

*-*%

2 .

S' ft •-* O ^ a? P

1

^ p

ty

S'

p p

I

CB 'S ' 95 ^ 95 * 0 CD ' ' ^ * 0 B < rf CD O ' CD S ' B 'B

_ p-

^

t3 X3 CD T 3 P P M __ •-J i-j c tO O a c+" Po ‘

CD

E"

O

t Ip > P5 ^

p i p p

fy CD tr

g

09

CL

. £•^

o

5 '

S IB £L

p o .

P Oc+i p-

S

CP eD

g p I-. C»

S ' » p CA P 03

s.S gcr S's .

CD

B

05

S

W

S' 8 05

3

2 >o »—■ BH O Pi K' % 5- ^

C' o

Ht OT o CD i-n ntr> S W 5* 00* P i.' 10 aq a 0 fD

~ ro_________

u

Q.)

Here the verb moves into INFL while the subject NP remains in situ and thus within the maximal projection of the verb. As a result, the verb and its subject phrase together. The tone rules apply as usual: the initial accent of the subject noun attracts the floating tone of the verb. The floating tone of the subject deletes and all toneless moras receive a default Low. It is this example that provides the motivation for verb movement into INFL in Kiyaka. In general, phonological phrasing joins heads together with material in the same maximal projection, and it is only by moving the verb into INFL that we can obtain shared phonological phrasing in this case. It is important to point out that the two constructions headed by the verb have something in common: they have à•special reading with regard to the postverbal NP. Both constructions carry the meaning 'instead of.' It appears that the occurrence of an NP in situ is marked in Kiyaka. In fact, we will see later that the subject and object NPs usually occur outside the maximal projection of the verb. In other words, the postverbal position of the subject or object NP does not necessarily mean that it must phrase together with its verb. In Kiyaka as well as in many other languages, the subject normally surfaces in the TOPIC position or [Spec, CP]. Consequently, the subject and its verb phrase separately, because the two elements are not in the same maximal projection. The data in (26) confirm this (see also (28)).

1

!

H]]^

ü

P

basuümbidï ha.ana 2-child 2-buy-Past 'The children bought (instead of some other people)'

'~

ro

2

en

[baana] [basuumbidi]

~

b

[H[

[ba[suumbidi ]]

>

- §

g 3 p a

n |:r f

cr"

3

g

2 03. p o O'

o

o' 3^ o 2" *“=* o p ®" "o tr a>

m^ S m-- ^P cl" tr Q g. H I to cn

(25)

207

1

l

~(->-~

1 A K “ S'

g-U O

P

05

•o o’ 3 cr 1 2 g ► P

“ O

The phrasing for this clause is accounted for as shown in (24). Following Koopman 1984 and Kinyalolo 1987, I assume that the verb moves into INFL for morphological purposes: agreement and tense affixation. As will be shown later, this position accounts for Verb-Subject word order, which obtains whenever the subject remains in situ. In the particular case of (24), the object NP is in situ and thus within the projection of the verb. Consequently, the verb and the object NP are included within a single phonological phrase. As we would expect, the tone of the verbal prefix ba- is donated to the verb stem, which in turn gives its own tone to the object noun. The tone of the noun deletes, and Plateauing takes place between the two associated tones. The phrasing illustrated by (24) is in no way limited to the verb and its object when the latter remains in situ. The verb and its subject can, in fact, phrase in the same way, provided the subject remains in situ, which is the case in (25) (see also 27).

g. zn "C 3

to o

Tone and Syntax in Kiyaka

206 Lukowa Kidima

•

.,·

1 t

l'~

. i;

' 1

basuümbidi baana 2-child 2-buy-Past 'the children bought (= as for the children, they bought)'

b

Q.)

~

u

r.f'.l

---

ü

~ en

ro

Tone and Syntax in Kiyaka

g

g. zn "C 3

3

>

J

ro

2

H]]^

~(->-~

~ ro_________

.c

P

>----...J

[ba[suumbidi ]]

206 Lukowa Kidima

The phrasing for this clause is accounted for as shown in (24). Following Koopman 1984 and Kinyalolo 1987, I assume that the verb moves into INFL for morphological purposes: agreement and tense affixation. As will be shown later, this position accounts for Verb-Subject word order, which obtains whenever the subject remains in situ. In the particular case of (24), the object NP is in situ and thus within the projection of the verb. Consequently, the verb and the object NP are included within a single phonological phrase. As we would expect, the tone of the verbal prefix ba- is donated to the verb stem, which in turn gives its own tone to the object noun. The tone of the noun deletes, and Plateauing takes place between the two associated tones. The phrasing illustrated by (24) is in no way limited to the verb and its object when the latter remains in situ. The verb and its subject can, in fact, phrase in the same way, provided the subject remains in situ, which is the case in (25) (see also 27).

(25)

basuümbidï ha.ana 2-child 2-buy-Past 'The children bought (instead of some other people)'

Here the verb moves into INFL while the subject NP remains in situ and thus within the maximal projection of the verb. As a result, the verb and its subject phrase together. The tone rules apply as usual: the initial accent of the subject noun attracts the floating tone of the verb. The floating tone of the subject deletes and all toneless moras receive a default Low. It is this example that provides the motivation for verb movement into INFL in Kiyaka. In general, phonological phrasing joins heads together with material in the same maximal projection, and it is only by moving the verb into INFL that we can obtain shared phonological phrasing in this case. It is important to point out that the two constructions headed by the verb have something in common: they have à•special reading with regard to the postverbal NP. Both constructions carry the meaning 'instead of.' It appears that the occurrence of an NP in situ is marked in Kiyaka. In fact, we will see later that the subject and object NPs usually occur outside the maximal projection of the verb. In other words, the postverbal position of the subject or object NP does not necessarily mean that it must phrase together with its verb. In Kiyaka as well as in many other languages, the subject normally surfaces in the TOPIC position or [Spec, CP]. Consequently, the subject and its verb phrase separately, because the two elements are not in the same maximal projection. The data in (26) confirm this (see also (28)). (26)

0

C+" 0 a

'gp ' X a* r P

HH

ctQ5

* ro .::

~~

~,

.c,

*\

'~

i,-

207

'Ea"'

~

~

~

o

-J

i

fü

* ::, ~·

00

.c

~

cd

.:: •ro ,ro

.c ,... :sl

2

~

,::, ::,

::,' "s

S\,,

1 "O• ....._,,

* ....,, ...o,,,

10

[baana] [basuumbidi]

[basuumbidi baana]

P

[H[

2 03. p o O'

g 3 p a

- §

n |:r f

cr"

§!

Q ntr

cr

[baana] I [ H]^

05

“ O

1 A K “ S'

p a < CD a 3 O' CL aCD ap ap r O- 05 S ' a05 1 c4- a CO cr P 5t cr a* 05

CP (28)

•o o’ 3 cr 1 2 g ► P

to o o

o' 3^ o 2" *“=* o p ®" "o tr a>

g-U O

m^ S m-- ^P cl" tr Q g. H I

to cn

CD

hH r+c+- c+CL ■O o 3] o S 1 tz: O 3 B! ► -h p05 c-fCO* S ' P CD c4H H S’ s ® t-H 05 £ 2 . C+* 0 p -c f y & !=b Bp 2- *2 CO* 0 3 CO* 05 3 ’ P P cr p (t5 0 . P 0 a> Ht OT o CD i-n ntr> S W 5* 00* P i.' 10 aq a 0 fD

P p3 3CD CL 3 05

oto

•

•

1

1

1

1

!

l

1

'

I'

1

',î'

·,-

4

1

1

.'•

r!

L

~

I•

..

.,·

t

1

l'~

' 1

. i;

Syntax in Kiyaka 209 Tone and Syntax

208 Lukowa Kidima Kidima phrase for the reasons phonological phrase constituent is a phonological In this example, each constituent associate to the Baana has a floating tone which will associate mentioned mentioned above. Baana phrase; within last syllable of the phrase, phrase, since no High is linked yet in the phrase; attracted by ba- is attracted the phrase containing the verb, the High of the prefix baphrase containing the leftmost leftmost accent. projection outside the projection preverbally and outside The object, abject, too, can surface preverbally headed the verb: headed by the

correspondwith a correspond­ together involve an NP in situ, with phrase together subject abject phrase subject or object characterization is motivation for this characterization Further motivation ing marked interpretation. Further marked interpretation. phrasing between phrasing interaction between discussion on the interaction provided provided in the following discussion and word order. 2.2

Phrasing Phonological W ord Order and P honological Phrasing Word

restricted generally have a restricted that NPs generally The preceding preceding section has shown that within an NP constituents within explains why all constituents internal internal word order. This explains order in Apart from this case, word order phrase together with the head noun. Apart phrase together however orders however, Kiyaka clauses can be said to be free. The different word orders, ' phrasing. phonological phrasing. possibilities for phonological are associated In' associated with different possibilities between the interaction between results from the interaction that this results this section section I suggest that that constraint that syntactic constraint formulated in (16) above and a syntactic rule of phrasing phrasing formulated headed by the main projection headed within the projection limits the number number of full NPs within , verb on surface. abject usually surface subject and the object that the subject I mentioned mentioned earlier that other words, the verb is projection of the verb. In other outside maximal projection outside the maximal that the verb projection. This means that within its projection. element within the only constant constant element sentence. When elements of a sentence. other elements separately from other generally phrases separately generally phrases limited to a single material is limited that material material, that other material, with other it does phrase phrase with subject phrase with its subject cannot phrase instance, the verb cannot Thus for instance, constituent. constituent. Thus construction is that such a construction indicates that and object abject at the same time. (31) indicates · ' not well-formed.

.1

(29)

ba-n-süumbidi khoko ba-n-siiumbidi 1-chicken they-it-buy-Past they-it-buy-Past it)' bought it)’ they bought (=as for the chicken, they ‘they bought the chicken (=as 'they bought CP

(30)

~

C'

Spec

c/'----~

J

khoko

I' V

Spec

I

~

VP

1~

V~P NP VLJ, * *] [ khoko khoko] '' '

H]^ H], ...c:: E-t ~ ...c:: +' -

s

1

~·1\_ ro ..c

~

:::C::

[basuümbidï (ma) l [madya) [baana)

d. [V),p [S),p [O),p [basuümbidï (ma)) [baana) [madya)

~

(40)

everything else in this structure is identical to (28): the phrasing, and consequently the tonal behavior, match exactly. Unlike object preposing, object postposing does not require agreement with the verb. Again, the subject is kept in situ in example (41). Since the verb and the subject phrase together, tone donation will take place between them as usual. The object madya phrases separately and receives its own High on the phrase-final syllable.

'+',

...c::

cd:Q

..,:;,i,

215

"O O "O

~10

:;::::::1

ro

[basuvimbidi (ma) baana] [madya] they-buy-Past (it) 2child 6food ‘The children bought (it), the food.’

>

H]^

~-J1 ~(-+>

~(~~(_ -( ~ ü

fü

~

* ~ ---fü

[ H f "

s

[madya ]

ro

[ba [suumbi4i ] (ma)J^^^^^^^^Jteana ]

Spec

"O

W.

ü

p

madya

ro >,

u o.

Q,)

p..

3

a

p

H -‘

214 Lukowa Kidima

e. [O),p [V),p [S),p

[madya) [basuümbidï mal [baana)

f. [O),p [S),p [V),p

[madya) [baana) [basuümbidï ma)

·. For illustrative purposes, the derivation for [O),p[V),p[S),p(42e) is in (43) . . The additional orders (42b,c,d,f) obtain when both the subject and object , occur on the same side of the verb. This is made possible by just Chomsky\ adjoining one of the constituents to CP on the same side of the verb. : Finally, let us note that structures such as example (43) suggest that the ; position [Spec, CP) does not have a strict ordering: we find Spec on the : left of CP as [Spec, CP) or the right of CP as [CP, Spec). In summary, argument preposing and postposing accounts for the fact i that only the verb always surfaces in IP. In turn, the rule of phonological . phrasing formulated in (16) guarantees that constituents which do not "jjurface under the maximal projection of the verb will not phrase together ! with it.

216 Lukowa Kidima Kidima

,, CP

(43)

Spec

CP

~

C'

Spec

madya

Spec

I

VP

~

''

' H]4>

NP

1 ti

t

fr,,,.:-' /

H]

McHUGH B r ia n D. M cH u g h BRIAND.

V

* * [ba [suumbidi ] ma ] [ H[

H]4>

,.

1

1

** [baana] '' '

H]4>

[madya] [basuiimbidi' [baana] [basuümbidï ma] 6-food they-buy-Past-6-it 2-child they-buy-Past-6-it 'The ‘The food, the the children children bought bought it' it’

3

1

The Phrasai Phrasal Cycle Cycle in The Tonology Kivunjo Chaga Tonology Kivunjo Chaga

V'

/\

V,

j

baana

I' ~ NP

* * [madya]

J

11

c~

1

Conclusion Conclusion

phonological phrase, formation of the phonological this paper, paper, I have examined examined the formation In this domain of tone tone rules in Kiyaka. Specifically, I have disdis­ which is the domain cussed the role that that syntax syntax plays in defining this this domain. domain. The The phonologphonolog­ cussed projection. notions of head and maximal maximal projection. the notions phrase is defined using the ical phrase what falls that what indicates that subjects indicates Moreover, the phrasing postverbal subjects phrasing of postverbal the head. of complement into a maximal projection does not have to be a complement maximal projection phonological the addition, I have attempted attempted to account account for phonological phrasing phrasing In addition, associated with with free word order order in Kiyaka main main clauses. To this this effect, associated NPs in excess that forces NPs constraint that suggested that that Kiyaka Kiyaka has a constraint I have suggested together phrases together result, the verb phrases of one to move out of the IP. As a result, Other remains in situ. Other that remains with namely the one that constituent, namely with at most one constituent, either as constituents generally generally surface surface outside outside the projection projection of the the verb, either constituents (with preposing) preposing) or Chomsky-adjoined Chomsky-adjoined to CP (with (with postpospostpos[Spec, CP] (with ing).

1968 Chomsky and Halle 1968 (SPE), Chomsky In a ttern of English (SPE), Pattern IN The Sound P that and that maintained phonological rules may apply cyclically, and that all phonological maintained that structure, bracketing structure, nested bracketing phonological rules reflects the nested ·;cyclicity of phonological apstrings to which those rules ap­ syntactic, of the strings morphological and syntactic, both morphological , both assumed in SPE did not grammar assumed organization of the grammar \ ply. However, the organization component structure-building component force cyclicity on phonological phonological rules. The structure-building .force component phonological component with the phonological interacted with (syntax and morphology) morphology) interacted '(syntax input to the output served as the input lonly derivation: its final output Jonly once in the derivation; framework phonothat in such a framework l^phonology. Thus equally conceivable that Thus it is equally •!rphonology. that they should bracketing entirely, or that ;;logical rules should fail to refer to bracketing refer to bracketing information in a noncyclic fashion. information bracketing ! Mohanan 1982) has (Kiparsky 1982b, Mohanan The theory Phonology (Kiparsky theory of Lexical Phonology ; account principled brought a partial remedy to the lack of a principled account for cyclicity by remedy ; brought partial domain type ' proposing that cyclicity correlates with the type of domain in which a rule with correlates proposing that phonological applies. In this theory only word-level, or lexical, phonological rules are theory ; structure ‘Icyclic. cyclic. Their cyclicity follows from the structure of the lexicon, in which Their phonological with morphological rules are interleaved with phonological rules, as shown in interleaved •morphological through that Phonology "'(1). (1). The prediction made by Lexical Phonology is that only through such prediction component and the phonology structure-building component between a structure-building interaction between •;interaction structures nested structures apply to nested and structure to structure phonological rules refer { can phonological manner. · in a cyclic manner. that sentence-level, predicts that Phonology predicts By that then, Lexical Phonology criterion, then. that criterion, cyclistructure nor apply cycli­ syntactic structure or postlexical neither refer to syntactic postlexical rules will neither funstructure rules are fun­ phrase structure because phrase cally to syntactic This is because syntactic trees. This nature. While worddamentally word-formation rules in nature. damentally different from word-formation

r

217

1

'

G

.

•"

The Phrasal Phrasal Cycle in Kivunjo Chaga Tonology 219

218 Brian Brian D. McHugh ((1) 1)

G

Lexicon ~---~ phonology word-formation 1word-formation j~ phonology

1

beprediet the be­ One theory proposed to describe and predict theory which has been proposed 1986; 1980a, (Selkirk havior of p-level rules is the Prosodic 1986; Prosodie Hierarchy Procentral insight of Pro­ 1989). The central Nespor and Vogel 1982, 1986; Hayes 1989). 1982, 1986; synto directly refer not do sodic directly syn­ phrasai rules that phrasal sodie Hierarchy theory is that by derived structure 'prosodie' structure tactic rather to a modified ‘prosodic’ structure, but rather tactic structure, necessary is structure syntactic structure rule from syntactic Modification of syntactic syntactie trees. Modification syntactie phrases since prosodic prosodie domains are often not coextensive with syntactic 1987). 1989; (Selkirk 1980a; 1982, 1986; Hayes 1989; McHugh 1987). 1980a; Nespor and Vogel 1982,1986; Vogel and Nespor In (3) I cite the parameterized Vogel algorithm used in which parameterized algorithm tically. cross-linguis phrase cross-linguistically. 1986 1986 to define the phonological phrase

h

l

word-formation

phonology j --+!

--+

words

--+

phrase phrase markers il utterances utterances il P ostlexical Postlexical C om ponent Component

Formation (3) Phonological Phrase Form ation

I. 4>

r to

C!> CL

CO

^ t» 03 W

t i j 5 ’ ,

.,,

Cil

Cil

n/a

.,,

1""'"l ~

>;:l ,o .!,d

Tone Shift

:::,

:::,_::r:

~:::,

o

ukou 1 H

ukou 1 H

~:::,

“

:::,_::r:

:::,_::r:

0

.!,d

* ukou mburu i/ 1 H S P ... mburii ukou . a goat yesterday’

2

tt>

K-

p X

Because of the difference in phrasing context between the two Raising rules, and the indifference of Superhigh Spread to the tonal specification of the syllable immediately following the Superhigh, it is possible to set up a tonal configuration in which adjacent accented High syllables compete to raise and spread. In such a configuration, shown in (32), a sequence of two toneless syllables must follow the two accented High-toned syllables so that either of the High tones, if raised, has an opportunity to spread. For ease of reference, I will call this the Rival High Configuration.

By varying the phrasing of this configuration, we will be able to identify the role phrasing plays in predicting (a) which accented High will raise, and (b) which resultant Superhigh will spread (in the event both raise). The role of phrasing in determining the result will then shed light on the question of cyclicity. H1 in (32) can raise only by Junctural Raising when attached to the p-final syllable, because only a High which is the last High in the phonological phrase may raise. Consequently all relevant phrasings of the Rival High Configuration must place- a juncture between the two High tones. H2, on the other hand, can raise in three different ways, depending on its position in its phonological phrase. In (33a) below, it is attached to the p-phrase-antepenultimate syllable and raises by Antepenultimate Raising; in (33b) it is linked to the penult and raises by Junctural Raising; finally, in (33c) it is attached to the final and only syllable of a monosyllabic phonological phrase and raises by Junctural Raising.

( 33) •.

T .] [ T ® H1

p

H2

®] p

234 Brian Brian D. McHugh *

b. b.

u;,®U®

Phrasal Cycle in Kivunjo Kivunjo Chaga The Phrasal Chaga Tonology Tonology

*

a

a ;, H1 J

0

©

L H2

,.;.1lJ(®®

c.

*

*

a

a

I

Hi

p

H2 J p

A three-ph rase utteranc e is needed A three-phrase utterance needed to create structures in (32). (32). create the structure s in This can can be done by adding adding an indirect indirect object This object to the “verb "verb ++ direct direct ob­ object -t+ adverb” adverb" sentence sentence frame used to build ject build two-phrase two-phrase utterances utterance~ in in (26). (26). The indirect indirect object, object which intervenes intervenes between The between the the verb and the direct direct obob­ and the ject, not vary. It should ject, will will supply supply H/, Hi, and and need not should have an accented accented HighHightoned final syllable, which is available available in the toned the HH final-accented keyword final-accented keyword Ndelya-n go. To achieve the the different different phrasing Nddya-ngo. 2 phrasing possibilities possibilities for H H2,, the ~he di­ direct object object following following Ndelya-n go must must vary between rect Ndelya-ngo between a HLL penultimatepenult1mateaccented word such as leeri, accented leeri, a HL penultimate-accented word such such as as penultimate-accented word mburu, and monosyllable such as ngu mburu, and a High accented accented monosyllable ngu 'firewoo ‘firewood.’ For d.' For the third third phrase phrase in the the construction construction we may continue the adverb continue to use the the adverb ukou which has enough enough toneless toneless syllables syllables to allow for the ukou, environment the envir

]] ][][ ]] rules < ---------------- rules------------------>

When we examine examine the outcome outcome of each phrasing When the rightmost phrasing option, option, the rightmost extent h compare d with extent of Superhig Superhigh compared with a fixed reference point will tell tell us us reference point will

235

which tone tone has raised raised and and spread. spread. If Hi H 1 raises and spreads which spreads first, it it will will delink H2, preventi ng H H22 from itself itself raising delink H2, preventing raising or, if already already raised, raised, from from spreading. As As a result result the the underlying underlying HHLL will surface spreading. surface as SSLL SSLL (shifted (shifted one syllable rightwar d Shift). If, on the other one syllable rightward by Tone Shift). other hand, hand, H H22 raises raises and and spreads spreads first, it will prevent prevent H Hi1 from spreadin spreading (assuming Hi1 raises) g (assumin g H raises) by placing placing a tone on the second second syllable syllable following by following Hi, H1, thereby thereby violat­ violating the structural structural description description of Superhigh Superhigh Spread. ing the Spread. Thus Thus if H22 spreads, spreads, underlying HHLL HHLL will derive SSSL underlying SSSL on the surface. Since in each case H1 Since Hi is the the final High of Ndelya-ngo, Ndelya-ngo, that that tone tone may may serve reference point. point. After After Tone Shift it will serve as as our fixed reference wiU surface on the surface on the first syllable syllable following following Ndelya-ngo Ndelya-ngo so that first that in effect we can tell which High High has spread spread by by observing observing the number number of Superhigh-toned has Superhigh-toned syllables syllables that that follow Ndelya-n go. Superhigh-toned syllables follow, we know that follow Ndelya-ngo. If two Superhigh-toned that H1 Hi has has spread spread at the the expense expense of H H22. If, however however,, three three Superhig Superhigh-toned h-toned syllables go, H H22 must must have spread, syllables follow Ndelya-n Ndelya-ngo, application spread, bleeding bleeding applicati on of Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread to Hi. H1. In Table Table 2 I provide of provide affixation-style affixation-style cyclic cyclic derivations of the three three possible possible phrasings phrasings of the configuration. derivations configuration. For For sim­ simplicity three derivations, plicity II omit omit the the verb. In all three derivations, no relevant relevant rules apply apply on the the first on first cycle, which has as its domain domain only the the first phonological phonological phrase: the verb verb and and its indirect indirect object object Ndelya-ngo. phrase: the The accented Ndelya-ngo. The accented final final Hig~ of of Ndelya-ngo Ndelya-ngo cannot cannot raise on the the first cycle because High because the the only raising raising rule whose whose structural structural description description it meets meets is Junctural rule Junctural Raising, Raising, yet yet JuncJunctural Raising just a phonological tural Raising needs to see more more than than just phonological phrase phrase boundary boundary followin the High. On Cycle 1 the followingg the the second second phonolo phonological phrase has has not not gical phrase yet been parsed, and so Junctural Junctural Raising Raising cannot yet been parsed, and pcannot tell yet whether whether the the pboundary following following Ndelya-ngo Ndelya-ngo is junctural junctural or u-final. Junctural boundary Junctural Raising Raising must therefore until the second cycle to apply must therefore wait until apply to Hi. H1 . On On Cycle Cycle 2, the the action action begins. begins. In Case A, Accent Accent Retractio Retraction, n, which which does not crucially crucially refer to phrasing does not phrasing of any kind, kind, shifts shifts the penultimate penultimate accent of of leeri leeri to its antepenult, antepenult, feeding Antepenultimate accent Antepênultimate Raising. Raising. Ante­ Antepenultim ate Raising Raising may apply apply to H22 on this cycle because penultimate because its structural structural description refers right-hand phonological description refers only to a single right-hand phonological phrase phrase bound­ boundary, ary, which which is present present at this this stage. stage. Junctura Junctural Raising, now eligible to l Raising, eligible to raise Hi, H1, also applies. applies. The The two Raising Raising rules are not crucially raise crucially ordered ordered with respect respect to each other, other, but but both both must must precede with precede Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread to to feed it. Thus Thus Superhigh Superhigh Spread, Spread, when it finally applies, finds two po­ feed it. potential S2, tential targets: targets: S 2, followed by two toneless toneless syllables, syllables, clearly clearly meets meets the the rule's l descripti on. S rule’s structura structural description. Si, and then then by by aa tonetone­ 1, followed first by S22 and less syllable, syllable, also meets meets the structural structural description less description of Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread as as formulat ed in (30). As Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread cannot formulated cannot apply apply to both, both, it it must must choose between the the surface form of Case A there choose between the two tones. In the there are are three Superhig h syllables g Ndelya-n three Superhigh syllables followin following Ndelya-ngo, go, which indicates indicates that that Su­ Superhigh Spread Spread has chosen S S2. possible reason perhigh 2. One possible reason for this might might be that that Superhigh Spread Spread iterates iterates from right right to left, and so selects the Superhigh the rightmost rightmost target meeting meeting its structural structural description. description. Alternatively, target Alternatively, Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread might immediately following might be be blocked by an immediately following Superhigh, Superhigh, even though though it it C

.. ~

'1

Table Table 2 A

B

[t] [

“1

r

*

*' Ndelya-ngo

C

* mburu

*' Ndelya-ngo

*'

ukou Ndelya-ngtlukok Ndcl~ngtl [mbrl[uko~Ndelya-ntl [il [uko~ I Ndelya-ngo

Cycle C ycle 1: Cycle C ycle 2: 2;

Accent Retraction Retraction Antepen. Antepen. Raising Raising

Junctural Junctural Raising Raising

leeri ukou 1 1 H p .H H ^p pp No relevant relevant rules apply apply ■* leeri 1 1 H p .H p ■* Ndelya-ngo leeri 1 1 I H p .S p ■* Ndelya-ngo leeri 11 S. p .S

Cycle C ycle 3:

~i~•] p

['r·]

n

.s

.s

n/a ii/^

1 1

R. pp

H

nn/a /a

nn/a /a

ngu Ndelya-ngf] [ngtl

p P

t]

Ndelya-ngo

1 1

S,

p

Ndclya•n:~f

p

H

^ Vp

p.

p V

n/a ii/a

H

Ndelya-ngo

S.

V p P

p

Blocked by boundary boundary

p

* mburu

%

ukou

H

p P

. H n/a n/a

ukou

p

H

Ndely~i] [i][uko~ I *■ ngu

Ndelya-ngo 1 1

S.

ukou

1 1

p P

n/a n/a

. H n/a

p ^ P

nn/a /a

spread on Cycle 2 bled by S spread

["i] ■

ukou Ndclya-ngf][uko~

Ndelya-ngo

n/a n/a

nn/a /a

1

1

p P

1

Ndelya-ngo lëërï leeri' ùkotl ukou Ndelya-ngo ... N. yesterday' . money yesterday’ '

Ndelya-ngo mbürü ukou ùkoù Ndelya-ngo mburii ' ... . N. a goat yesterday’ yesterday'

S.

pD

1 1

. H lokou

Ndelya-ngo ngu Ndcly•-ngf] hHuko~ L S.

U-Level: U-Level: Tone Shift

ngu

11

S Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread

H

n /a n/a *■

Junctural Junctural Raising Raising

H

pP

"

Ndelya•ngf] [mt"l

p

leeri

p P

1

nn/a /a

Ndely••i] Ndclya-ng~=u [uko~ ]I 1 ['Pd] 1/ [uko~ 1 L Ndelya-ngo

1

n/a n/a

* mburu 1 1 H + mburu

Ndelya-ngo

Ndelya-ngo leeri Ndel~ngf] 1 [tl y p P

H

pP

ngu

p

Ndelya•ngf l S.

H

pP

Ndelya-ngtl

S.

Accent Accent Retraction Retraction Antepen. Antepen. Raising Raising

H.

Ndclya•ngtl l

P

Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread

1 1

[t

“1

Ndelya-ngo

ukou

p P

s. Pp

^

1

.

H

Ndelya-ngo Ndelya-ngo ngii ngü likou ükoii ' ... . N. firewood yesterday’ yesterday'

Brian D. McHugh 238 Brian Regardless of the reason, this position. Regardless that position. is not blocked by a High in that eliminating one tone other factors eliminating example that in the absence of other example shows that adjacent between two adjacent or the other, Spread must choose between Superhigh Spread other, when Superhigh Superhigh Superhigh tones it selects the second. complete, and By the end of Cycle 2, the derivation derivation of Case A is complete, information phrase adds no information the concatenation phonological phrase third phonological concatenation of the third S2, S1 and S between Si competition between crucial 2. outcome of the competition crucial to deciding the outcome example does not Since both apply in the same cycle, this example both raising rules apply control for the Rather, it serves as a control present orderings. Rather, present any cyclic rule orderings. outcome of the Rival unmarked outcome that the unmarked other derivations by showing that other two derivations producing a sequence of three spread, producing High Configuration 2 to spread, S2 Configuration is for S surface. Ndelya-ngo on the smrface. Superhigh after Ndelya-ngo Superhigh syllables after inapRaising are inap­ Antepenultimate Raising In Case B, Accent Retraction Retraction and Antepenultimate H1 that of Hi plicable, plicable, so the only raising which takes place on Cycle 2 is that until Cycle Junctural Raising until undergo Junctural by Junctural Junctural Raising. H22 may not undergo undergo the rule: 3 for the same reason must wait until Cycle 2 to undergo H1 must reason Hi until the the juncture needed for H22 to raise will not be visible until phrasa! juncture the phrasal spreading barrier to the spreading third meantime, however, H22 is no barrier third cycle. In the meantime, condition S1 causes H22 to delink by a condition of the now-raised Si. spreading, Si S1 . In spreading. time the allowing only one tone per non-final non-final syllable in Kivunjo. By the time third appears on the third Raising finally appears phrasing Junctural Raising environment for Junctural phrasing environment accented syllable and cycle, it is too late: H22 is no longer linked to an accented Superhigh syllables result only two Superhigh so can neither raise nor spread. spread. As a result neither'raise follow Ndelya-ngo Ndelya-ngo in the surface form of Case B. allowThis cyclic analysis analysis of Case B accomplishes the desired effect of allow­ Superhigh ing Junctural Raising to apply once in Cycle 2, feeding Superhigh Spread apply Junctural RaisJunctural Rais­ reapplication of Junctural on the same cycle, which in turn turn bleeds a reapplication paradox, ordering paradox, ing on Cycle 3. This ordering constitutes an A-B-A ordering ordering constitutes extrinsically that rules are extrinsically incompatible assumption that standard assumption incompatible with the standard ordering derivation. stage ordered and may apply at only one stage in the derivation. Such ordering ordered Gan be paradoxes are typically adduced as evidence for cyclicity when it can adduced typically paradoxes structure shown that (a) there is a correlation with a change in structure and (b) correlation that replaced neither of the crucial orderings between the two rules can be replaced by between orderings neither certainly some noncychc effect. The cyclic derivations in Table 1 certainly show a derivations noncyclic apcorrelation with structural change; we must now consider noncyclic ap­ structural correlation proaches deriving the same forms. proaches to deriving eliÎ:ninate the feeding In the case at hand, hand, it would not help to try to eliminate Spread, since this Superhigh relationship between Junctnral Raising and Superhigh Spread, Junctural relationship could only be done by collapsing the two rules into one. Even were we to surmount problems this would create, we would still be notational problems surmount the notational Junctural Raising left with the question of hoyr that in Case B, Junctmal ensure that ho'f to ensure question application applies to Hi first, in effect bleeding its own application to H22 .• This will H1 be addressed addressed below. relationship The other paradox is the bleeding relationship ordering in the paradox other crucial ordering Raising Junctural between Superhigh Spread on Cycle 2 and Junctural Raising on Cycle 3. between Superhigh Spread transform to necessary In order to eliminate transform it into eliminate this link, it would be necessary

The Phrasal Phrasa! Cycle in Kivunjo Chaga Tonology

239 239

Superhigh either Superhigh iterations of either a blocking between successive iterations relationship between blocking relationship derivation. Spread or Junctural Raising at the same point in the derivation. Two such Raising Junctural Spread time-honored iterativity, scenarios come to both involving iterativity, a time-honored device both mind, corne scenarios extrinsic violating extrinsic without violating for allowing repetitive application of a rule without repetitive application ordering. ordering. Junctural Raising, First, H1 and H2 both Hi First, we could allow both 2 to raise by Junctural iterations of Supersubsequent iterations between subsequent and have the blocking take place between thereby bleed spread and thereby S1 to spread order to allow Si high Spread. Spread. However, in order Superhigh that spreading of S 2 , we must assume that Superhigh Spread is not blocked by assume S2, spreading irnmediately the presence of another Superhigh on the immediately following syllable. Superhigh another presence prospreads Yet recall that in the discussion of why S 2 spreads in Case A, one pro­ discussion that 2 Spread Superhigh that posed reason was precisely the opposite, namely that Superhigh Spread is opposite, reason Superhigh. in fact blocked by an immediately following Superhigh. To reconcile our immediately abannoncyclic analyses of both both Case A and Case B, we would have to aban­ alternative don the Superhigh blocking analysis of Case A in favor of its alternative, analysis , Superhigh iterates because it iterates namely Spread chooses S22 in Case A because Superhigh Spread that Superhigh namely that direction in S2 from right 2 first. However, in Case B the direction right to left and finds S s1 to order in right to left be must which Superhigh right order for Sj iterates must Spread iterates Superhigh Spread have would we compatible analyses raise first. Thus to render compatible these two render these certain a whether on contingent iteration contingent to make directionality whether certain rule directionality of iteration apRaising has ap­ Antepenultimate just in case Antepenultimate Raising had applied: applied: right to left just Making right. to left otherwise structure; plied to the same or overlapping overlapping structnre; applied in another rule has applied whether another direction function of whether iteration a function direction of iteration and power, grammar's the the derivation grammar’s undesirable increase in derivation seems an undesirable case. present the beyond support beyond one which has no empirical present empirical support non-iterative, Junctural Raising a non-iterative, The other other scenario would be to make Junctural environment an for or self-blocking rule which scans firom environment from left to right target, potential leftmost potential target, meeting its structural description, picking the leftmost structural description, meeting effectively noniterativity would which in this case would be Hi. rule's noniterativity H1, The rule’s This analysis is easily falsifiable with prevent 2. This H2, applying to H then applying prevent it from then overlapping data Raising in fact does apply twice to overlapping Junctural Raising data in which Junctural C. Case structures. data can be found in structures. Such data c;cle Raising on Cycle Junctural Raising In Case C, just H1 raises by Junctural just as in Case B, Hi Superhigh 2, while H 2 must wait until u~til Cycle 3. This time, however, Superhigh H2 there is only one syllable Spread because there S1 because apply on Cycle 2 to Si cannot apply Spread cannot Spread needs to refer following it in the domain Superhigh Spread domain of Cycle 2. Superhigh although toneless, to the second syllable following the Superhigh, Superhigh, which, although Spread Superhigh Spread Thus on Cycle 2 Superhigh will not be available until until Cycle 3. Thus p-juncture. On Cycle 3, before is in effect bled by the placement placement of the p-junctme. Junctural Raising, Superhigh reapply, H22 raises by Jnnctural Spread has a chance to reapply, Superhigh Spread Spread finally Superhigh Spread When Superhigh whose phrasing requirement is now met. When phrasing requirement applies, it faces the same situation situation as it does in Cycle 2 of Case A: it just as in Case A, targets. Here, just must choose'between potential targets. choose, between two potential discussed above for Case A, this could Superhigh 2. As discussed S2. Spread selects S Superhigh Spread that iterates from right to left, or that mean either Spread iterates Superhigh Spread that Superhigh either that another S syllable. spreading onto another Superhigh Spread is blocked from spreading Superhigh Spread

,!

•

240

The The Phrasal Phrasal Cycle Cycle in Kivunjo Kivunjo Chaga Chaga Tonology Tonology

Brian D. McHugh McHugh Brian

The The derivation derivation of Case Case C constitutes constitutes a counterexample counterexample to the the noncyclic noncyclic analysis analysis of Case Case B in which which one application application of Junctural Junctural Raising Raising blocks blocks its its own subsequent subsequent reapplications reapplications to overlapping overlapping environments. environments. Here, both H 1 and both Hi and H22 have have raised raised by Junctural Junctural Raising. Raising. To reconcile reconcile Case Case B with Case necessary to invent with Case C, it would would be be necessary invent an ad hoc hoc condition condition stating stating that, perhaps, the presence of a monosyllabic that, perhaps, the presence monosyllabic phonological phonological phrase phrase disables disables Junctural Junctural Raising’s Raising's self-blocking self-blocking feature. feature. The othf;)r The oth^r noncyclic noncyclic analysis analysis proposed Case B would would require require Suproposed for Case perhigh perhigh Spread Spread to choose choose the the rightmost rightmost structure structure satisfying satisfying its structural structrual description description if Antepenultimate Antepenultimate Raising Raising had had applied, applied, and and otherwise otherwise the the leftmost. leftmost. To accommodate accommodate the the data data from from Case C, this this condition condition would have to be further have further modified, modified, since since here here it would would need need to require require SuperSuperhigh high Spread Spread to apply apply to the the rightmost rightmost target target even even though though AntepenultiAntepenulti­ mate Raising had mate Raising had not not applied. applied. Thus Thus our our final proposa! proposal would would be that that Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread iterates iterates from from left to right right unless unless (a) Antepenultimate Antepenultimate Raising Raising had had applied, applied, or (b) one one of the the targets targets was a monosyllabic monosyllabic phonophono­ logical phrase. phrase. To render logical render such such an approach more plausible, plausible, we approach a bit bit more could could recast recast it in terms terms of a hierarchy hierarchy of configurations configurations to which which SuperSuperhigh would preferentially high Spread Spread would preferentially attempt attempt to apply. Yet this this would would be tantamount tantamount to building building such such information information into the structural structural description description into the of the the rule, rule, a regression regression to the the era era of disjunctive disjunctive ordering ordering in stress stress rule rule statements. statements.

(36) Superhigh Superhigh Spread Spread with with disjunctively disjunctively ordered ordered phrasing phrasing conditions conditions (36) (where (where the the absence absence of phrase phrase boundaries boundaries marked between syllables syllables marked between is construed construed to positively positively indicate indicate their their absence absence in cases cases (a) (a) and and (b)) (b)) a.

l

[;s ®® a @ 0

L,,,

s

tion tion must must explain, explain, without without being being able able to temporarily temporarily eliminate eliminate the the third third phonological phonological phrase phrase from from the the domain domain of rule rule application, application, why why Superhigh Superhigh Spread's Spread’s choice of target target depends depends on the the number nmnber of syllables syllables in the the second second cyclic domain. domain. A cyclic analysis, analysis, on the the other other hand, hand, allows us to examine examine progressively progressively larger larger domains domains according according to a straightforward, straightforward, syntactically syntactically motivated motivated parsing parsing procedure, procedure, and and to correlate correlate those those nested nested domains domains with with the orderings of uncomplicated raising and and spreading spreading rules. the orderings uncomplicated raising rules.

4

(37) parsing: parsing 1 Cycle 1: parsing parsing: Cycle Cycle 2: 2 parsing parsing: Cycle Cycle 3: 3

p

©© [t-1--t~® a

L-

p

c.

a(J* © ©

I1 sS

®®

Unlike Unlike the the stress stress rules rules of SPE, SPE, however, however, the the disjunctive disjunctive parts parts of (36) would would be impossible impossible to collapse collapse into into a single single formula formula using using parentheses. parentheses. The The contortions contortions we must resort to in order order to account account for the the data data must resort in Table Table 1 without without reference reference to cyclicity cyclicity render render untenable untenable any any attempts attempts to eliminate eliminate the the crucial crucial orderings orderings in the the A-B-A A-B-A ordering ordering paradox paradox found found in Case Case B. In effect, any any noncyclic noncyclic analysis analysis of the the Rival Rival High High ConfiguraConfigura-

Types Types of Cyclicity Cyclicity

Thus Thus far I have have argued argued that that an an affixation-style affixation-style cyclic analysis analysis of the the facts facts is preferable preferable to a noncyclic noncyclic analysis. analysis. It still still remains shown, however, however, remains to be shown, why a compounding-style compounding-style cycle would would not not work. The The crucial crucial order order in which must be allowed which rules rules must allowed access access to phrases phrases in Table Table 2 is between the between the second second and and the the third: third: in Cases Cases Band B and C, Junctural Junctural Raising Raising and and Superhigh Superhigh Spread must be limited Spread must limited at first first by the the end end of the the second second cyclic domain, domain, and only after and only after applying applying there there be allowed allowed to reapply the third reapply through through to the third cyclic domain. data in Table domain. However, the the data Table 2 do not not crucially crucially require require the first first and and second second phonological phonological phrases phrases to be so ordered-only ordered—only that that they they be combined combined with with each each other, other, so that that Junctural Junctmal Raising Raising can can apply apply to H1 first Hi first in Case Case B, before before the the third third phonological phonological phrase phrase is added added to the the derivation. derivation. Thus Thus a hybrid hybrid cycle, such such as (36), which which combines combines aspeéts aspects of the the compounding-style compoimding-style and and affixation-style affixation-style cycles, could could also also derive derive the the right right tone tone patterns, patterns, provided provided the the second second phonological phonological phrase phrase is added added to the the first first before before the the third third is added added to the the second. second.

*

b.

241

verb + indirect indirect object+ object+ direct direct object+ object-f adverb adverb [[ ]] ][][ ]] i--------- rules---------►< ---- rules---- > rules +--rules][][ [[ ]][ [[ ]][ ] ♦+-rules-+ —rules—+ rules [[[ ]][ ]]] ][][ [[[ ]][ ]]] rules ♦---------------------------rules--------------------------♦

Other cycles, such such as the the strict strict compounding-style compounding-style cycle (38), or a hybrid Other hybrid the second second two phonological phonological phrases phrases are combined cycle (39) in which which the combined first, fail. first, verb verb + -b indirect indirect object+ object-f direct direct object object+-t-adverb adverb

(38) parsing: parsing: Cycle Cycle 1: parsing: parsing: Cycle Cycle 2:

[[ ][ ][ ][ +----rules----+ +-rules-+[lpt] ♦----------rules---------- * < —rules—+[lpt] ♦ —rules—* +-rules-+ ][ [[ ][ ]] [[ ][ ][ ]] +----------rules-------• rules

242 Brian Brian D. McHugh McHugh

(39) parsing: parsing; Cycle 1: parsing: parsing: Cycle 2: parsing: parsing: Cycle 3:

adverb object+ adverb direct object+ object+ direct verb + indirect indirect objects[[ ][][ ] -rules--+ +-rules♦—rules—+ ][][ [ ]]]] ][[ rules rules

][][ ]]] ][[ ]]] [[[[ rules •2411211214 'call if you will write it to him before... before ... ’' ‘call

Marina Nespor 248 Marina eliminating the thus eliminating prominence on se, thus In (10), Beat Addition Addition adds a prominence grid. 4 lapse of 5 syllables at level 1 in the grid.^ prewith pre­ respect with with respect One of the innovations rhythm with theory of rhythm this theory innovations of this Prince Liberman and Prince 1975, Liberman Liberman 1975, others, Liberman vious theories theories (see, among others, there is no rule of that there 1984) is that 1984, Selkirk 1984) 1977, 1983, Hayes 1984, Prince 1983, 1977, Prince detheories de­ other theories obtained by movement in other movement: results that are obtained results that needed rules of rive in the present present theory theory from the two independently independently needed presence of a clash does Addition. That Beat That is, the the presence Beat Addition. Deletion and Beat Beat Deletion Deletion of an not that an x in the grid is moved somewhere else. Deletion require that not require creates a lapse is deletion creates X eliminate a clash. Only if this deletion x is sufficient to eliminate added somewhere else. prominence added a prominence present discussion, is important for the present A second point, particularly important point, particularly Reapplication. Re­ domain restricted that Beat Deletion is not restricted to any one domain of application. that Beat Deletion lambic Retraction, call that for the Rhythm Rule (also known as Stress Retraction, or lambic Rhythm that bound to the ·phonologthat it is bound Reversal), phonolog­ necessary to specify that Reversal), it was necessary 1989). Hayes 1986, 1982, 1986, Vogel 1982, Nespor and Vogel 1978, Nespor ical phrase 1989). phrase (Selkirk 1978, level clash minimal the Deletion may apply apply only at minimal Beat Deletion However, since Beat clashing two of leftmost (for Italian, clashing Italian, level 3), it will never remove the leftmost leftmost that case the leftmost phrases, since in that phonological phrases, prominences prominences across phonological thus no need There is thus least four xx's’s in the grid. There prominence prominence would have at least Deletion Beat Deletion application of Beat Deletion. Beat to stipulate domain of application stipulate the domain prosodie hierarchy; it sees only the grid. makes no direct direct reference to the prosodic correlates of the that the physical correlates necessarily imply that languages does not necessarily languages physically Insertion may be physically example, Beat Insertion rules are the same. Thus, for example. Italian, pause in Italian, lengthening or as pause realized either as word-final syllable lengthening realized either jump in pitch is available in Greek. while the additional possibility of a jump additional possibility

2

Isochrony Isochrony

minprominences which constitute Determination constitute the min­ Determination of the height of the prominences system. N&V's system. parameter in N&V’s imal clash in a given language language is not the only parameter landistinguishes lan­ delimits two types of isochrony; it distinguishes A second parameter parameter delimits consists of the guages that that are not, and consists syllable-timed from ones that that are syllable-timed that syllablepositions in the grid. N&V propose that adjacent positions definition of adjacent definition languages, in syllable-timed languages, that in syllable-timed others in that timed languages differ from others timed languages adjacent syllables correspond to adjacent must correspond positions must order adjacent, two positions order to be adjacent, syllable-timed, two languages that that are not syllable-timed, linguistic level, while in languages at the linguistic syllables to which positions adjacent even when the syllables considered adjacent positions can be considered syllable. 5 another syllable.® separated by another correspond are separated they correspond they 4 There is a certain applies. Addition applies. Beat Addition precisely Beat where precisely variation as to where ■^There amount of variation certain amount variation (as well as, to a lesser this variation govern this that govern For a discussion mechanisms that the mechanisms discussion of the extent, Deletion) see N&V. Beat Deletion) that of Beat extent, that 5 It is well known that offendthe offend­ English even if the take place in English adjustments take ®It rhythmic adjustments that rhythmic phenomenon the phenomenon analyses of the different analyses adjacent. For different ing prominences strictly adjacent. prominences are not strictly Selkirk 1984. and Selkirk see, among others, Hayes 1984 and among others,

Phonology 249 Rhythmic Phonology On the Separation Prosodie and Rhythmic Separation of Prosodic

The latter configuration is shown in (11) and exemplified in (12). latter configuration American English: definition in American (11) Minimal Minimal clash definition

xX X X X X

pp

t

~":.

î·

(x) (x)

X X X X X X

pp

legislature (12) a. Tennessee legislature created, 212 4121) 213 4121 — -.♦ 312 4121 (or, if no lapse is created, legislature b. b. Mississippi legislature 2121 4121) created, 2121 -. 3121 4121 (or, if no lapse is created, 2131 4121 -+

(

beintervening be­ 1984:70, however, the syllable intervening As observed in Hayes 1984:70, readrhythmic read­ short in order for rhythmic tween the clashing prominences must be short prominences must justment justment to take place. Thus, while words with a short final syllable (e.g., phonetically readjustment, words with phonetically undergo readjustment, M ississippi) are likely to undergo Mississippi) Massapequod) are not, as may be Adirondack or Massapequod) long final syllables (e.g., Adirondack seen in (13).

(13) - Adirondacklegislature legislature (13)· Adirondack -.> no change 2131 4121 —

\'

theory such as the one 'assumed These facts present assumed problem for a theory present a problem positions in the grid and thus do not rhythm rules see only positions here, in which rhythm structural string. A rule whose structural content of a string. linguistic content have access to the linguistic cannot terms of xx's’s in the grid cannot description described in terms configuration described description is a configuration short and long syllables. distinguish between short distinguish between contra N&V, propose, contra As a solution problem, I would like to propose, solution to this problem, English even when avoidance rule applies in English that a clash avoidance that that the fact that prominences is not due to a between the clashing prominences a syllable intervenes intervenes between accounted for by Rather, it is accounted stress clash. Rather, minimal stress different definition definition of minimal hierarchy onto prosodie hierarchy mapping from the prosodic a special readjustment readjustment in the mapping mapping do, in fact, have access the grid. The rules which accomplish accomplish this mapping structure and the grid. prosodie structure to both both the prosodic accordprinciple accord­ contains a principle English thus contains component for English The mapping mapping component optionally not short' syllable at the end of a word is optionally 'very short’ ing to which a ‘very arhyth'extrarhythmic.' The arhythassigned position in the grid, i.e., it is ‘extrarhythmic.’ assigned a position optional Position Deletion, an optional micity established by Position 'short' syllables is established micity of ‘short’ positions if they are word-initial positions word-final or word-initial either word-final rule that that applies to either syllable: 6 short syllable:® occupied by a short 6 Something like Position Kiparsky 1977 word-internally. Kiparsky ®Something turns up word-internally. Deletion also turns Position Deletion preservword-internally, preserv­ position word-internally, syllable position mentions delete a syllable optionally delete mentions two rules which optionally according to which Victory Rule, according ing the associated These are the Victory material. These phonetic material. associated phonetic unsonorant followed by an un­ an unstressed word-internally before a sonorant deleted word-internally unstressed vowel is deleted count as a sequence to count permits a VCV sequence stressed Rule, which permits Resolution Rule, stressed vowel, and the Resolution Shakespeare. Chaucer and Shakespeare. poetry of Chaucer single metrical position in the poetry metrical position

Marina Nespor 250 Marina

(14) Position Position Deletion Deletion^7 corresponds to a 'short' Delete an x at the first level of the the grid if it corresponds ‘short’ syllable at the edge of a word. syllable component: rhythmic component: fourth rule of the rhythmic thus the fourth Position Position Deletion is thus Deletion and (Beat Deletion column (Beat existing grid column two rules either either lower or raise an existing Beat Addition, Addition, respectively), respectively), and and two rules either either delete delete or insert insert a grid Beat Beat Insertion, Deletion and position (Position and Beat Insertion, respectively). respectively). Although Although (Position Deletion position Insertion, it Beat Insertion, counterpart of Beat Position Deletion is in some sense the counterpart Position Deletion readjustment rule three rules: it is a readjustment other three the other has a different status status from the Deletion is Position Deletion rules, Position four rules. mapping. Of the fom of the prosody-to-grid prosody-to-grid mapping. the only one with with access to information information about about the phonetic phonetic content content of a position. position. poetic that is well-known in poetic situation that reminiscent of a situation This proposa! is reminiscent This proposal adjacent syllables in a verse may condition~, two adjacent certain conditions, metrics; under certain metrics; under what is commonly account for what position in the grid, to account count count as one single position known as the phenomenon phenomenon of sinaloepha: sinaloepha! minimal under the the present present proposa!, proposal, the m in im al that under observed that should be observed It should idensyllable-timed, is iden­ that is not syllable-timed, language that English, a language clash definition definition in English, If the morsesyllable-timed language. If Italian, a syllable-timed tical proposed for Italian, that proposed tical to that but of syllable rhythm but distinction is not one of rhythm code versus machine-gun machine-gun distinction other nonrhythmic types, nonrhythmic phonological phonological characteristics, characteristics, as propro­ types, as well as other then the fact that posed by Dauer Dauer 1983 on phonetic phonetic grounds, grounds, then that the the rhythmic rhythmic posed desirable languages looks the same is a desirable subcomponent groups of languages subcomponent of the two groups result.® result. 8 types are the same, language types If components of the two language rhythmic components If the rhythmic syllable-timed Position Deletion while syllable-timed we must then English has Position then ask why English languages do not. A close examination examination of data data from standard standard Italian Italian as languages Position readjustment rule like Position spoken that, in fact, a readjustment spoken in Milan shows that, adjacency is noted, adjacency Deletion Italian as well. As we have noted, Deletion is necessary for Italian HowItalian. How­ constituting a clash in Italian. generally syllables constituting required of those syllables generally required triggered usually triggered ever, the clash avoidance rule of Beat Deletion, which is usually minimal clashes, also applies applies in precisely those cases where a syllable by minimal promibetween the clashing intervenes in between consisting clashing promi­ consisting of only one vowel intervenes positions underlined positions nences. Examples Examples of this are given in (15), where the underlined Delet ion. 9 Position Deletion.® are the ones that undergone Position that have undergone Position Deletion Deletion may may thus thus be more more general genersil than than is proposecl proposed above, above, in the the sense sense of Position English not needing needing a condition which portion portion of the the word word may may undergo undergo the the rule. rule. In English condition on which not restricted more restricted may also be more word-internally may the set of syllables short word-internally count as short which count syllables which the set research. this for future than future research. word-finally. I leave this short word-finally. counts as short what counts than what 7 describes since it describes Deletion, since Beat Deletion, rule is Beat this rule ^Actually, name for this appropriate name most appropriate the most Actually, the however, used, however, a!ready used, name is already This name Insertion. This an operation Beat Insertion. opposite of Beat the opposite that is the operation that would be rule would latter rule The latter column. The top of a grid column. for a rule the top from the deletes an x from that deletes rule that being, Béat Addition. more aptly aptly termed termed Beat Beat Subtraction, Subtraction, to parallel parallel Beat Addition. For the the time time being, more confusion. however, maintain the terminology, in order order to avoid avoid confusion. existing terminology, the existing however, I will maintain 8 stress between stress distinction between the distinction which the ®This Selkirk 1984, in which from Selkirk diverges from conclusion diverges This conclusion the grid. represented in the timing is represented timing syllable timing and syllable timing and 9 Deletion Position Deletion that Position possible that ®As Italian it is also possible English, in Italian mentioned for English, As was mentioned

Phonology 251 Rhythmic Phonology On the Separation Prosodic and Rhythmic Separation of Prosodie bears' 'twenty-two bears’ ventidue orsi ‘twenty-two (15) a. ventidue 2131 41 ...... -+ 312141 3121 41 (or, if no lapse is created, created, 212141) 2121 41) 213141 airplanes' 'twenty-three airplanes’ ventitre aerei ‘twenty-three b. ventitre 2121411) created, 212 213 1411 — ►312 1411 (or, if no lapse is created, 1411) 3121411 ...... 2131411 Deletion Position Deletion Italian, as in English, Position that in Italian, It should be observed that the The syllable syllable corresponding corresponding to the deleted deleted rhythmic rule. The is exclusively a rhythmic hierarchy, as seen from the fact prosodie hierarchy, position the prosodic present in the position is still present syllable will stressed syllable crucially refer to a final, stressed that crucially that prosodie rules that that prosodic stressed and whose penultimate syllable is stressed not apply apply to a word whose penultimate subject to unstressed (hence subject consists of a vowel, is unstressed final syllable, which consists Position Deletion rhythmic phonology). phonology). One such case occurs occurs with with Deletion in the rhythmic Position Italian varieties of Italian raddoppiam ento sintattico certain varieties sintattico (RS). RS is a rule of certain mddoppiamento initial lengthen the initial w2) (w11W which applies across a sequence of two words {W 2 ) to lengthen stressed vowel and w1\ ends in a stressed applies only if w consonant w 22 -• The rule applies consonant of W consonant initial s of a consonant than the initial other than consonant other with a consonant starts with if W w 22 starts cluster (see, among among others, others, Pratelli Pratelli 1970, 1970, Vogel 1977, Chierchia Chierchia 1986). cluster The that RS fails application of RS is exemplified in (16a). (16b) shows that The application stressed rightmost stressed between the rightmost intervenes between syllable intervenes to apply short syllable apply when a short w2, consonant of W initial consonant wi1 and the initial vowel of w 2[b:]arche ventitré [b:]arche ...... barche — ventitré barche (16) a. ventitre ►ventitre [b:]arche) (*ventidue [b:]arclie) [b]arche (=Kventidue b. ventidue > ventidue ventidue [bjarche ...... barche — ventidue barche certain The contrasts with (17), a form found in certain The example in (16b) contrasts deleted. ventidue (i.e., e) is deleted. dialects Italian, where the final syllable of ventidue dialects of Italian, this case, RS does apply. In this ventidu [b:]arche ...... (17) ventidu » ventidu ventidu barche — sylshort syl­ notion of short We turn problem of how to define the notion turn now to the problem moment, I would like to lable. Though solution at the moment, Though I do not have a solution depends on the variety suggest that that what what counts counts as short variety of syllasylla­ short and long depends suggest with language with Italian, a language Thus in Itahan, ble types available in a given language.^® language. 10 Thus exactly containing exactly a restricted types, only a syllable containing number of syllable types, restricted number language English, a language band, in English, other hand, one vowel is considered short. On the other considered short. counts as short. with a large variety types, a CV syllable also counts variety of syllable types, syllable containing unstressed syllable may apply apply word-internally. with an internai internal unstressed containing words with word-internally. In words may count not count may not may or may syllable may short syllable the short only 'feud,' the feudo ‘feud,’ Mauro, feudo such as Mauro, one vowel, such only one syllables. three syllables. either two or three for syllabification. have either can have feudo can and feudo Mauro and both Mauro Thus both syllabification. Thus research. future research. phenomenon for future word-internal phenomenon this word-internal I leave the investigation of this the investigation 1°Kaye, Lowenstamm, sylwhich syl­ theory in which ^°Kaye, propose a theory (forthcoming) propose Vergnaud (forthcoming) and Vergnaud Lowenstamm, and languages. across languages. varying across than varying rather than grammar rather universal grammar lable defined in universal structure is defined lable structure what is relevant The present present proposai proposal is not not incompatible with such such a theory, theory, since since what relevant in incompatible with The that in languages is that stress-timed languages and stress-timed the distinction distinction between syllable-timed and so-called syllable-timed between so-called the while in consonants, while number of consonants, restricted number the separated by a restricted are separated former, two vowels are the former, surface between two vowels in surface intervene between may intervene the consonants may number of consonants large number latter, a large the latter, structure. structure.

252 Marina Marina Nespor

On the Separation Separation of Prosodic Prosodie and Rhythmic Rhythmic Phonology Phonology 253

We may now draw the rhythmie component the conclusion conclusion that that the the rhythmic component of phopho­ nology is the same for syllable-timed syllable-timed and and for stress-timed stress-timed languages; languages; it rhythmic alternation is characterized characterized by an aspiration aspiration towards towards maximal maximal rhythmic alternation (see, among among others, others, Sweet 1913, Dell 1984, Selkirk 1984). This This is in keepkeep­ ing with with the results results of phonetie phonetic experiments experiments carried carried out out by, among among others, others, Dauer Dau'er 1983, Borzone de Manrique Manrique and and Signorini 1983, and and den Os 1988. 1988. All of these these studies studies show that that the the distinction distinction between between syllable-timed syllable-timed and stress-timed languages is not stress-timed languages not one of rhythm, rhythm, since no distinction distinction in timtim­ ing exists exists between between the the two groups groups of languages. languages. The present present proposa! proposal is thus thus the the phonological phonological counterpart counterpart of these these phonetic phonetic discoveries. The The only parametric parametric value remaining remaining in the the rhythmic rhythmic component component is the the definition definition of how high in the minimal clash is defined in a given language; the grid the the minimal that that is, at whieh which level of the the grid grid the need for alternation alternation is the the strongest. strongest. This This parameter parameter is independent independent of the the property property of syllable-timing. syllable-timing. The The one example we have seen of variation variation along this parameter parameter involves Italian Italian example and Greek, languages. and Greek, both both syllable-timed syllable-timed languages. One reason reason why the inclination inclination towards towards alternating alternating stress stress has often been languages may be that most machinebeen overlooked in syllable-timed syllable-timed languages that most gun gun languages languages have fixed st~ess. stress. In these these cases, therefore, therefore, the the occurrence occurrence of stress limited to languages languages with stress clashes is limited with word-initial word-initial or word-final stress, monosyllabie word stress, and, and, in particular, particular, to instances instances where a stressed stressed monosyllabic is adjacent adjacent to the the stressed stressed end end of another another word. A close look at languages languages of the the machine-gun machine-gun type type which lack fixed stress stress reveals the existence existence of clash avoidance avoidance rules similar similar to those those of English. English. As we said above, both both Italian Italian and Greek need rules such as Beat Deletion Beat Deletion and Beat Beat Insertion Insertion in Qrder order to avoid clashes. In addition, addition, even in languages languages with with fixed stress, stress, in those those cases in which clashes arise they they are eliminated. eliminated. Although Although I presently presently lack a detailed detailed analysis analysis of Turkish Turkish rhythm, rhythm, the examples examples in (18) show that that even in this this fixed-stress fixed-stress language, language, rhythmic rhythmic adjustments adjustments do apply apply to eliminate eliminate clashes: (18) Turkish. Turkish. a. hfc hic bir habér haber -+ —> hic hie bir bir habér haber

'no ‘no news' news’

b. bir mektup mektup X var mektup var_-+ var —> bir mektup

'there ‘there is a letter' letter’

The The example example in (18a), showing showing destressing destressing of bir Mr indieates indicates that that Beat Deletion Deletion has applied. applied. (18b), where a small pause pause is inserted inserted in between between mektup and and var, suggests suggests the the application application of Beat Beat Insertion. Insertion. 11

3

Toscan Tuscan Italian Italian

In the second part part of the paper, paper, I will show that that by locating locating prosodie prosodic phonology at the interface between phonology and syntax, and phonology interface between phonology syntax, and by rep11 Since the the Turkish Turkish data data at at my disposai disposal are incomplete, incomplete, I do not not daim claim that that these these are the the only only rhythmic rhythmic adjustments adjustments that that are are available available to eliminate eliminate arhythmic arhythmic configurations. configurations. Further research is needed Further research needed to decide decide whether whether this this is the the case.

resenting rhythmic rhythmic phonology phonology in a distinct distinct structure structure which results results from resenting mapping prosodic prosodie structme structure onto rhythmic rhythmic structme, structure, we gain insight into mapping interaction between between RS and the rhythm rhythm rules of Tuscan Toscan Italian. Italian. the interaction that in the case of a stress stress clash, Nespor and Vogel 1979 observe that th~ rule of Stress Retraction Retraction applies in Northern Northern Italian Italian to eliminate eliminate the the clashing configuration. configuration. Examples Examples of the application application of this rule are given clashing 'a' indicates indicates primary primary stress and 'à' indicates indieates secondary secondary in (19), where ‘a’ and ‘a’ stress. meta torta t6rta -+ meta mèta torta t6rta ‘half 'half cake’ cake' (19) a. meta sara cotto c6tto — -+» sara sàra cotto c6tto ‘it 'it will be cooked’ cooked' b. Sara Within the rhythmic rhythmic subcomponent subcomponent of phonology phonology outlined outlined above, this Within phenomenon is analyzed analyzed as Beat Deletion Deletion followed (possibly) (possibly) by Beat phenomenon Addition. The presence of the minimal minimal clash triggers triggers Beat Beat Deletion, Deletion, re­ reAddition. physically as destressing. destressing. In the case that that a lapse is created. created, Beat alized physically Addition applies to add a prominence prominence elsewhere, eliminating eliminating the lapse. Addition addition, that that in the cases in (19), Nespor and Vogel 1979 observe, in addition, Toscan varieties varieties of Italian Italian exhibit exhibit RS instead instead of Stress Retraction Retraction the Tuscan (although the presence of a stress clash is not a necessary necessary condition condition for (although the p.pplication This is shown in (20): the application of RS). This meta torta t6rta ^-+ meta metà [t:]6rta [t:]6rta (20) a. meta sara cotto c6tto -+ sara sarà [k:]6tto b. sara They propose propose that that the reason reason for the absence of the rhythm rhythm rule in They that RS, by lengthening lengthening the initial initial consonant consonant of w^, w 2 , in­ inthese varieties is that troduces sufficient phonological phonological distance distance between between the two stresses stresses so that that troduces they are no longer perceived perceived as clashing. Within Within a theory theory of phonology phonology they proposed here, however, prosodic prosodie rules apply apply on trees, trees, and such as the one proposed rhythmic rules apply on the grid. It is therefore therefore impossible impossible for the rules of rhythmic rhythm to have access to any segmental segmental information information of a string, string, including including rhythm consonant length. length. As it stands, stands, the proposal proposa! of Nespor Nespor and Vogel 1979 is consonant inexpressible in the framework framework presented presented here. In order for the effect of inexpressible rhythm, RS must apply apply to the grid. For RS to be visible to the rules of rhythm, instance, it might introduce introduce an extra extra position position to eliminate eliminate the clash. The instance, extra x would introduce introduce enough distance distance to render render the originally originally clashing clashing extra prominences no longer adjacent, adjacent, so that that they they do not constitute constitute a clash prominences representation of rhythm. rhythm. This solution solution is in fact proposed proposed in Yip in the representation 1988. 1988. Several arguments, arguments, can be brought brought against against this solution, solution, however. Several First, RS, a prosodie rule, would have to have power normally unavailable First, prosodic normally unavailable to prosodic prosodie rules, namely namely the ability ability to alter alter grid configurations. configurations. Though Though prosodie rules may change the grid configuration indirectly, they prosodic configuration indirectly, they never example, a prosodic prosodie rule that that deletes a syllable has do so directly. For example, indirect effect of eliminating eliminating one position position from the grid, since a grid the indirect

espor 254 Marina Marina N Nespor

On the Prosodie and Rhythmic the Separation Separation of Prosodic Rhythmic Phonology Phonology

position corresponding to a single syllable. position represents represents the time span span corresponding syllable. 12 An example deletion rule of Italian, Italian, shown applying applying example of such a rule is the the vowel deletion in (21).

faranno bene (21) faran faran bene béne < -—faranno

‘(they)’ll do well’ '(they)'ll well'

faranno can That an x has been deleted That deleted from the final syllable of faranno be seen from the fact that that the the primary primary stress stress of faran fardn clashes with with the primary béne. primary stress of bene. Prosodie rules that alter the number number of syllables Prosodic that do not not alter syllables of a sstring t r ing 1988: that that never have the power attributed attributed to RS in the proposa! proposal of Yip 1988: of directly directly changing changing the grid. Giving RS this power would in addition addition that it would operate operate on two different make it a nonlocal nonlocal rule, in the sense that structures (the prosodic prosodie tree and rhythmic grid), another another undesirable structures and the rhythmic undesirable consequence. The against having having RS insert The second argument argument against insert a position position in the the grid is that that since each grid position proposa! position stands stands for a time unit, unit, such a proposal predicts predicts that that a long consonant consonant stretching stretching across two words will be longer than within a single word. However, tthis than a long consonant consonant contained contained within his Italian. On the contrary, contrary, measurements measurements difference is not significant significant in Italian. reported in Korzen Korzen 1980 of word-internal word-internal long consonants consonants and reported and of long consonants generated generated by RS reveal that that they equally long. In support consonants they are equally support this finding, Korzen Korzen 1986 shows that that native native speakers speakers find ambiguous ambiguous of this minimal pairs pairs of the reported in (22), where the first member member of each minimal the type type reported pair contains a word-internal word-internal long consonant consonant and the second member member a pair contains consonant lengthened by RS. consonant lengthened

(22) a. abbraccia abbraccia b. abbisogno abbisogno c. accasa accasa

// ha ha braccia braccia // ha ha bisogno bisogno // aa casa casa

‘(he) '(he) hugs / (he) has arms’ arms' ‘need (noun) / (he) needs’ needs' 'need (noun) ‘(he) '(he) goes home home/ / at home’ home'

A third undesirable consequence construing RS as the addition third undesirable consequence of construing addition of a position is the incorrect lengthening of the grid position incorrect prediction prediction that that the the lengthening the concon­ sonant will be the same whether whether there sonant there is a clash or not. However, an experimental study Marotta 1986 reveals that that the RS consoexperimental study reported reported in Marotta conso­ nant context of a clash. That w 22 bears bears nant is actually actually much longer in the context That is, if W its primary primary stress on the initial initial syllable, the consonant consonant is longer than than it otherwise Marotta considers these these three types of otherwise would be. To show this, Marotta three types sentences: sentences: a. sentences sentences in which the context context of application application of RS is met and where w 22 give rise to a clash stresses of w i1 and W the main main stresses context of application b. sentences sentences in which the context application of RS is met but but no arhythmic configuration arhythmic configuration is created created 12

Exceptions to this physical realization might be a ^Exceptions this are silent silent demibeats, demibeats, whose physical realization might pause (Selkirk 1984, Nespor Nespor and pause (Selkirk and Vogel 1989).

255

c. sentences sentences where where the the phonological phonological conditions conditions for for RS RS are are met met (i.e., (i.e., w w 1i ends with stressed vowel and w 22 begins with with a stressed and W with a consonant consonant other other than cluster) but than the initial initial s of a consonant consonant cluster) but where w1 w i and and w2 W2 do not meet the configurational configurational requirements requirements necessary apply necessary for RS to apply (see Nespor Nespor and Vogel 1982, 1986). Examples of these sentences respectively. Examples sentences are given in (23a,b,c), (23a,b,c), respectively. (23) a. Ho visto citta citta piccole piccole in Olanda. Olanda. '(I) have seen small Rolland.' ‘(I) small cities in Holland.’ pulite in Olanda. citta puUte b. Ho visto citta Olanda. '(I) have seen clean cities in Holland.’ Rolland.' ‘(I) davvero pulite c. Ho visto citta citta davvero pulite in Olanda. Olanda. '(I) have seen really really clean cities in Holland.’ Rolland.' ‘(I)

Measurements of the initial consonant of W w 22 , italicized the above Measurements initial consonant italicized in the examples, examples, reveal that that while no lengthening lengthening takes place at all in cases such as (c), the initial w 22 is lengthened lengthened both both in cases of the (a) initial consonant consonant of W and type. It is lengthened and of the (b) type. lengthened significantly significantly more in (a), where there there stress clash. is a stress The treating RS as a grid position The fourth fourth argument argument against against treating position insertion insertion rule is that that the the insertion insertion of an X by RS should should be able to create create a lapse in environments environments such as that that in (24), where the the bold 1 represents·the represents'the grid position putatively putatively inserted inserted by RS. position (24) a. Perché Perche te lo chiedi? 231116 231116 'Why do you wonder about ‘Why about it?' it?’ b. Perché Perche glielo dici sotto sotto voce? 223111413161 3111413161 'Why do you say it to him with ‘Why with such a soft voice?' voice?’ The readjustment expected The stress stress readjustment expected in such a case would be the addition addition of an xX in the grid to te in (24a) and and to glie in (24b), resulting resulting in secondary secondary stress stress readjustment stress on these clitics. However, the fact is that that no stress readjustment takes these cases. This taken as an indication indication that that there takes place in these This must must be taken there is no lapse in the first place, i.e., that inserted by that no position position was ever inserted RS. These four arguments arguments essentially essentially preclude preclude the the possibility possibility that These that RS changes the the grid configuration. configuration. We must must thus account account for the the data data of Toscan Tuscan Italian Italian in a different different way, and and I propose propose to do so within within the phonological system system presented presented in this this paper, paper, which separates separates prosodie prosodic phonological and and rhythmie rhytfimic phonology. My proposa! proposal is that that RS is a strictly strictly prosodie prosodic rule, whose application blind to the (non)existence application is blind (non)existence of a stress stress clash. What makes cases of stress What stress clash clash special special is that that in exactly exactly these these cases, we find the further application of a rhythm reported in further application rhythm rule. The The data data reported

.... Marina Nespor 256 Marina these cases is particular rule which applies in these that the particular indicate that Marotta indicate Marotta consonant of initial consonant lengthening of the initial extra lengthening Beat that is, the extra Insertion; that Beat Insertion; particular, Insertion. In particular, Beat Insertion. correlate of Beat physical correlate W just one more physical w22 is just ambisyllabic w 22 ambisyUabic consonant of W initial consonant made the initial when RS has applied applied and made Insertion is to realization of Beat Insertion physical realization possible physical (Vogel 1977), the only possible consonant even longer. make the consonant Beat Insertion is, however, not the only remedy remedy for minimal minimal clashes Beat Insertion remedy is alternative remedy data. 13 An alternative according to my data.^^ in the context context of RS, according Beat Deletion, as shown in the following example, where the final syllable Beat destressed. 14 sarà may be destressed.^'^ of sara

Phonology 257 Rhythmic Phonology Prosodie and Rhythmic Separation of Prosodic On the Separation instead, is realized as Beat Deletion, instead, ening of the last syllable of w i1}. 15 ^ Beat destressing. destressing. minimal one, we can than the minimal stronger than If If we now consider clashes stronger predicted, is the Insertion, as predicted, Beat Insertion, contexts, Beat segmental contexts. see that that in all segmental s-initial vowel, with an s-initial starts with a vowel, w 22 starts only remedy. It applies when W illustrated consonant cluster, or with a single consonant, as illustrated in (27a,b,c), consonant, consonant respectively. 6rride poesie. scrivera X orride (27) a. Come sempre, scrivera poems/ horrible poems.’ (he)'ll write horrible ‘As 'As always, (he)’ll monumento cosi grande. st6na un monumento citta X stona b. In questa questa citta place.' monument is out of place.’ ‘In 'In this town, such a big monument

3 4 funziona bene. vécchia, ma funziona sara vecchia, bici sara (25) La mia bid lengthening of C) X=extra lengthening (with X=extra — either 2 4 or 3 X 4 (with -++ either well.' but it works well.’ 'My bike may be old, but ‘My Italian Tuscan Italian rhythm rules apply in Tuscan Up till now, we have seen how the rhythm undergoes RS. If the case of minimal minimal clashes whose second word undergoes If this in the that apply adjustments that rhythmic adjustments track, the same rhythmic right track, proposa! is on the right proposal stress clashes minimal present in cases of m in the case of RS must in im al stress must also be present expect to find such context. For example, we expect that that are not in an RS context. cluster in consonant cluster vowel, or with a consonant with a vowel, starts with adjustments w22 starts adjustments when W that this is indeed data show that Pisa data which the first consonant consonant is s. My Pisa beginning with s, as in the cases cluster beginning with a cluster the case; where W starts with w 22 starts Insertion Beat Insertion Deletion or Beat either Beat Deletion in which W starts with a vowel, either w22 starts applies, as exemplified in (26).

3344 (26) a. Quel monte sara arso circa un anno fa. monte sara either 2 4 or 3 X 4 -+> either — ago.' about a year ago.’ burned about must have burned mountain must 'That mountain ‘That 3 4 anch'io. stanca anch’io. sar6 stanca b. Ora di sera sard either 2 4 or 3 X 4 -+» either — well.' tired as well.’ 'By evening I will be tired ‘By either of a pause or of lengthcorrelate either physical correlate Insertion has the physical Beat Insertion Beat 13

recordings of tape recordings consisting of tape data consisting corpus of data based on a corpus ^®The analysis is based present analysis The present recordings have The recordings Pisa. The spoken in Pisa. ltalian spoken standard Italian six speakers variety of standard the variety speakers of the machines. the aid of machines. without the working without linguists, working been transcribed trained linguists, transcribed by two trained 14 context of RS in observed in the context adjustment was observed rhythmic adjustment ^^One One may ask why no rhythmic there to avoid rule_posited there that the rule.posited reason, I believe, is that The reason, Nespor and Vogel 1979. The Nespor and stress in appearance of a stress Retraction. Since the appearance Stress Retraction. but Stress a clash destressing but clash was not destressing destressing, it was than is destressing, ltalian than perceived in Italian easily perceived an unstressed position is more easily unstressed position Most of the formulated. Most analysis was formulated. that the analysis feature that on the phonetic feature that phonetic the basis of that created lapse is created ail, since no lapse stress at all, examples there, however, do not have a new stress examples given there, ( deletion rules (deletion separate rules then two separate rather then movement rather by Beat Posting a rule of movement Deletion. Posting Beat Deletion. certain cases. destressing in certain presence of destressing and obscured the presence addition) may have obscured and addition)

nessuna ragione. sénza nessuna lamentera. X senza c. Come sempre, si lamenterd reason.' complain for no reason.’ ‘As 'As always, (he) will complain than the The fact that Insertion applies to remedy clashes higher than that Beat Insertion minimal minimal clashes, however, only predicted in N&V. For minimal minimal clash is predicted languages. This follows from a syllable-timed languages. predicted in syllable-timed Deletion is predicted Beat Deletion dominated by a material dominated that material establishes that principle which establishes clash elimination elimination principle strengthened, that at which the clash is defined is strengthened, than that grid column column higher than dominated by a grid column of the level at which the whereas material dominated whereas material . minimal minimal clash is defined is weakened. predict the syllable-timed, N&V predict that are not syllable-timed, contrast, in languages that By contrast, Deletion or Beat Deletion either by Beat possibility eliminated either minimal clashes are eliminated that minimal possibility that Italian, Toscan Italian, just seen of Tuscan data we have just by Beat Insertion. Insertion. From the data availability of that the availability thus conclude that a syllable-timed syllable-timed language, we may thus characteristic just one more characteristic minimal clashes is just two rhythm rhythm rules to solve minimal syllable-timed and blurring the line between syllable-timed component, blurring of the rhythm rhythm component, adjacency of two definition of adjacency languages. Since the definition non-syllable-timed non-syllable-timed languages. either one or two availability of either prominences prominences involved in a clash, and the availability according parameters according mechanisms minimal clashes, are the only parameters mechanisms to solve minimal that are syllable-timed differ from languages that that are syllable-timed to which languages that assumed), proposa!, whose general lines I have assumed), N&V's proposal, not (according (according to N&V’s either, I and since Italian Italian and English have been shown not to differ for either, component is the same for the two types rhythmic component that the rhythmic mhst must conclude that distinction must machine-gun versus morse-code distinction of languages. Again, the machine-gun than the other than subcomponent of the phonology other be accounted accounted for in a subcomponent rhythmic rhythmic one.

4

Conclusions Conclusions

paper, assumed in this paper, framework of phonology assumed According the general framework to·the According to interface with rules of rhythm rhythm apply on the grid. They are not at the interface 15 cluster has starting with an s cluster ^^Lengthening w1 before a word starting syllable of wi Lengthening of the last syllable 1979. Nespor and Vogel 1979. also been noted' noted· in Nespor

î !: ' ; 1

l •

'

.

258 Marina Marina Nespor Nespor bemediates be­ which mediates rhythmic-structure syntax, which prosodic-not rhythmic—structure syntax, since it is prosodic—not on represented Prominences rhythm. of tween syntax and the phonology rhythm. Prominences represented tween syntax and the phonology constructure, prosodie of DTEs the (indirectly) the grid reflect (indirectly) the DTEs prosodic structure, whose con­ the stituents are not isomorphic to the syntactic syntactic ones. Rhythm Rhythm thus thus functions functions not isomorphic stituents language. given of structure syntactic the independently of syntactic structure a language. independently permits phonology permits prosodie phonology rhythm from prosodic phonology of rhythm Separating Separating the phonology no languages: across uniform as viewed be the rhythmic component to uniform across languages: the rhythmic component stress-timed and syllable-timed between distinction needs to be drawn drawn between syllable-timed and stress-timed distinction Toscan Italian, languages. On the the basis basis of an analysis analysis of Tuscan Italian, I have shown shown that that languages. different on apply rules rhythm by having and rhythm apply different structures, structures, prosodie rules and having prosodic account. straightforward account. obtain a straightforward phenomena obtain a number complex phenomena number of complex phenomena the mention that Finally, I would like to mention that when when the phenomena usually usually dede­ Finally, instead dealt scribed by the the prosodie prosodic rule rule of Stress Stress Retraction Retraction are instead dealt with scribed results for the the rhythmic component, we achieve welcome results the typology typology rhythmic component, in the this proposal, According to this speech rules proposed proposed in Nespor Nespor 1987. According proposal, of fast speech enlarges in fast speech application enlarges domain of application the prosodie rules whose domain the prosodic intonational correspond to the the highest highest prosodie prosodic levels, namely namely either either the the intonational correspond phrase or the the phonological phonological utterance. utterance. Hayes 1984 has pointed pointed out out that that phrase English, a rule confined to the Stress Retraction Retraction in English, the phonological phonological phrase, phrase, Stress broadens in fast speech. If Stress application that has a domain that broadens Stress RetracRetrac­ domain of application problem for the thus poses a problem observation thus this observation prosodie rule, this tion indeed a prosodic tion is indeed frametypology of fast speech speech rules rules just just mentioned. mentioned. Within Within the the present present frame­ typology this observation observation is not not problematic, problematic, as the the facts facts mentioned mentioned work, however, this rhythmic component-for accounted for in the the rhythmic component—for example, example, by Hayes can be accounted by some mechanism speech phonology, of the the type type proposed proposed for mechanism of fast speech columns in certain grid columns Polish flattens certain that flattens and Booij 1985, that Rubach and Polish in Rubach fast speech. speech. What What is a clash clash at at levels higher higher than than the the minimal minimal one at rates. normal rates rates of speech speech might might become become a minimal minimal clash clash at higher higher rates. normal Beat Deletion thus apply apply in fast speech speech to prominences prominences that that would Deletion would thus Beat not be in the context of application application of the rates. I leave the rule at slower rates. the context not Deletion Beat Deletion rate of speech on Beat the rate the influence of the investigation of the influence the investigation future research. research. English for future in English

13 13 and Rules and Lexical Rules Syntax, Lexical Syntax, Rules in Postlexical Post lexical Rules Kimatuumbi Kimatuumbi ÜDDEN DAVID D avid O ddbn

insyntax-phonology in­ PROBLEMS K im a t u u m b i p resents t wo p r o b l e m s in syntax-phonology TWO PRESENTS KIMATUUMBI that syntax in a way that conditioned by syntax teraction. First, some rules are conditioned teraction. First, number of prosodic sâtisfactorily explain. Second, a number cannot satisfactorily structures cannot prosodie structures lexmust be lex­ actually must postlexical, actually expect to be postlexical, inter-word inter-word rules, which we expect theory daims made in the theory ical. This conclusion modifications of claims requires modifications conclusion requires concerning the Mohanan 1982) concerning (Kiparsky 1982b, Mohanan of Lexical Phonology Phonology (Kiparsky postlexical rules. distinction between lexical and postlexical distinction between

1

Rules Conditioned Rules Syntactically Syntactically Conditioned

(These bracketing. (These syntactic bracketing. First consider rules which refer to syntactic First we will consider referred reader are discussed at length in Odden 1987, to which the reader is referred Odden length discussed InPhrasal Tone In­ Shortening, Phrasal for further relevant rules are Shortening, details.) The relevant further details.) applies Shortening Lengthening. Insertion, and Lengthening. Shortening applies to sertion, Initial Tone Insertion, sertion, Initial Insertion takes as its Phrasal Tone Insertion the head phrase, i.e., X in X'. Phrasal head of a phrase, daughters between two X" daughters syntactic seam between conditioning environment the syntactic conditionirfg environment applying from Insertion is blocked of an X" phrase. applying across ]s Initial Tone Insertion phrase. Initial members applies only to members Lengthening applies but Finally, Lengthening apply across [s. Finally, but does apply of the same S.

259

Kimatuumbi Postlexical Rules in Kimatuumbi and Postlexical Syntax, Syntax, Lexical Rules and

Odden David Odden 260 David

1.1

Shortening Shortening

The data application of Shortening Shortening to a head head when when followed data in (1) show application The NP. within modifier within by a modifier shell' 'cleaning shell’ (1) ‘cleaning kik6loombe ( 1) kikoloombe shell' cleaning shell’ 'my cleaning kjkolombe chaangu chaangu ‘my kikolombe 'string~ lykaamba ‘string’ ltJ.kaamba broke' 'string which broke’ lykamba lwah1,puwaaniiké ‘string ltJ.kamba Iwalypuwaanjike shortened. If it modifier in the NP to be shortened. The must be followed by a modifier noun must The noun Shortening NP, different noun in a different adjacent verb, or a noun is followed by some adjacent Shortening will not not apply.

]vP chaapuwaaniike ]vp (2) a. [ kjkoloombe np [ chaapiiwaanyke kikoloombé ]]NP broken shell broken broken' 'The shell is broken’ ‘The Mamboondo ]]NP kikoloombe ]]NP b. [ naampej np [ Mamboondo np ]]vP vp naampéi [ kikoloombe Mamboondo I-him-gave Mamboondo I-him-gave shell shell' the shell’ Mamboondo the 'I gave Mamboondo ‘I

might conclude conclude that that long vowels shorten shorten if followed by another another One might word in the the same phrase. within NP, only a vowel in the fact, however, within phrase. In fact, adjectives such including adjectives head Non-nouns, including shortens. Non-nouns, phrase shortens. the phrase noun of the head noun 'all,' are chootf ‘all,’ 'the' or chootj cheéne ‘the’ as kikeele determiners such as cheene and determiners 'red' and kjkeéle ‘red’ Shortening. not subject subject to Shortening. chaangu ]]NP np kikeéle chaangu kik6lombe kjkeele (3) a. [ kjkolombe shell red mine shell' ‘my 'my red shell’ ^kjkolombe chaangu kikelé chaangu *kik6lombe kjkele

b. [ ikolombe jkolombe cheene np yanaanchima ]]NP cheéne yanaanchjma shells the many man y the shells' ‘the many shells’ 'the many *jkolombe yanaanchima chené yanaanchjma *ikolombe chene c. [ makalala np gaangu ]]NP gooti gaangu makalala gootj nets all my bird bird nets nets' bird nets’ ‘all 'all of my bird *makalala gaangu goti gaangu *makalala gotj

Mere presence presence in an Turning other Turning to other followed by a range range clause, purpose clause, or a purpose

Shortening. condition Shortening. not sufficient to condition NP is not applies to a verb Shortening applies that Shortening phrases, phrases, (4) shows that relative headless relative of complements, complements, such as an NP, a headless clause.

261 26~

naa- kalaangi te (4) naa-kalaangjte ‘I'I fried’ fried' choolya naa-kalangite choolya food' naa-kalangjte ‘I'I fried fried food’ eéla yoopata eela naan-kalangile yoopata money' naan-kalangjle ‘I fried for him to get money’ 'I kalaanga ywaapala kalaanga naan-kalangile ywaapala naan-kalangjle ‘I 'I fried for the one who fry' wants to fry’ wants clause (italicized verb is in a subordinate predicted, when when the the verb subordinate clause (italicized bebe­ As predicted, Shortening sentence, Shortening does not higher sentence. word is in a higher low) and the following word and the dominating the immediately dominating the VP immediately i.n the not in next word is not the next apply, apply, since the verb.

]vP ]NP]vp eéla ]np ]NP[ eela ]vP ]s ]np ywaa-kaatjte naampéi [ [ [ yw (5) a. [ naampej aa-kadtite ]yp money Rel-eut Rel-cut money I gave eut' the one who cut’ money to the 'I gave money ‘I ]vP liiso ]vp ]vP ]s Ijjso aakalaanga ]vp naay11wine [ [ aakdlaanga b. [ naayywjne yesterday he'll fry I-heard I-heard he’ll yesterday 'Yesterday ‘Yesterday I heard heard that that he will fry' fry’ pronoun, which may also be a possessive pronoun, Shortening apply to a possessive can apply Shortening can complenoun comple­ pronoun possessive phrasal head. When a possessive pronoun is followed by a noun When head. phrasal shortened. pronoun is shortened. the pronoun the vowel of the ment, the ment,

^6) a. [ [ kikolombe kjkolombe ]]N n [ chaake chaake ]]PP pp ]NP ]np ~6) shell' ‘his cleaning shell’ 'his cleaning

]PP ]]NP b. [ [ kjkolombe n [ chake np Mamboondo ]pp chaké Mamboondo kikolombe ]]N shell' cleaning shell’ 'Mamboondo's cleaning ‘Mamboondo’s head of a the head constitute the generally constitute Adjectives not generally Kimatuumbi do not Adjectives in Kimatuumbi shell,' one selects cleaning shell,’ phrase 'the very red cleaning render ‘the modifier . To render with a modifier phrase with saana, adverb sddna, the adverb modified by the the may be modified which may red,' which 'to be red,’ kéelya ‘to verb keelya the verb red.' which is very red.’ cleaning shell which 'the cleaning saana ‘the giving kjkdlombe chakfkeéljjle sddna kjk6lombe chakflceelUle certain adjectives adjectives are are requplicated reduplicated in their their plural plmal form: However, certain

(7) ngalawa ngeéle ngalawa ngeele ngalawa ngeéle ngelé ngeele ngalawa ngele

dhow' 'red dhow’ ‘red dhows' 'red dhows’ ‘red

adjecexample of an adjec­ constitutes an example The adjective in (7) constitutes the adjective repetition of the Th~ repetition tive serving serving as the the head head of a phrase phrase and and followed by a word word in its phrase. phrase. predicted. shortened, as predicted. The head is shortened, the head The vowel of the context which can phrase, a context the phrase, Shortening thus applies to the head of the head Shortening thus applies syntax, theory be concisely represented, assuming an X' theory of syntax, as follows: concisely represented, assuming (8) Shortening Shortening (J' (T

~ V V ]x _ ]x Y ]x' V/ / [ [ —

1

material) phqnetic material) contains phqnetic (Y contains

i

262 David Odden

1.2

Syntax, Lexical Rules and Postlexical Postlexical Rules in Kimatuumbi Syntax, Kimatuumbi

Phrasai Tone Tone Insertion Insertion Phrasal

bracketing is Phrasal Phrasai Tone Insertion Insertion A second rule referring referring to syntactic syntactic bracketing (PTI). PTI places High tone on the final word in an X" phrase, that (PTI). PTI phrase, when that phrase is followed by an X" phrase phrase and both both are dominated dominated by another phrase another phrase-in short, short, between daughters of a maximal maximal projection. projection. X" phrase—in between phrasai phrasal daughters preceding the left VP bracket. In (9), PTI PTI locates locates a High on the word preceding bracket. We that PTI PTI inserts inserts a floating floating High tone, tone, which is mapped mapped by may assume assume that docking rule to the phrase-final phrase-final vowel.1^ an independent independent tone docking

kjyogoyo kiJ6goyo [ kjyogoyo kiJ6goy6 ]NP chaatituumbuka ]vp ]vP ]np [ chaatjtuumbuka

'bird (type)’ (type)' ‘bird 'the bird has fallen’ fallen' ‘the bird

tone shows up on the last word of the phrase preceding preceding the VP High tone the phrase subordinate clause, as illustrated illustrated by mpyy.ngd mpy,·1_,mga even if it is in a subordinate in (10): (10) [ myndy my.ndl} [ [ ywaanaampey ywaanaampeii person REL-I-him-gave person REL-I-him-gave 'The person ‘The person I gave rice left' left’

mpl}l}nga ]vp ]vP ]s ]]NP waabuui ]yp ]vP mpyynga np [ waabiiui rice he-left

PTI both be sensitive to syntactic determine if ifHigh PTI must both syntactic structure, structure, to determine High will inserted, and at the time fairly blind to syntactic structure-as be inserted, the same time syntactic structure—as it is not sensitive to the nature right brackets intervening between between the nature of right brackets intervening vowel which actually the High tone, and the following phrase. actually receives the phrase. Thus, PTI phrasal node immediately precedes VP. Thus, PTI applies whenever a phrasai immediately precedes The The presence of a verb is irrelevant irrelevant for the rule; as shown in (11), PTI PTI applies subject NP before a predicative predicative adjective: applies to the subject

(11) a. [ Mamboondoo np [ [ nnaaso nnaaso ]AP ]ap ]]vP vp Mamboond6o ]]NP tall M tall ‘Mamboondo is tall' tall’ 'Mamboondo mpl}l}nga ]NP b. [ mpyynga ]np [ [ waangu waangii ]]PP p p ]vp ]vp mine rice 'The ‘The rice is mine' mine’ PTI subject NP which is separated PTI also applies to a subject separated from fi:om the the verb by a complementizer, such as kjla kila 'whenever' ‘whenever’ or keénda, keenda, mana mand 'if.' ‘if.’ complementizer,

(12) Mamboond6 Mamboondo k^la kila paajsa paaisa Mamboondo keenda akateleka Mamboond6 keénda akateléka Mamboondo mana mana ateliiké atelyke Mamboond6

Not just preposed objects just the subject subject NP, but but also preposed objects or preverbal preverbal adverbs adverbs will acquire manner. Example acquire High tone tone in this this manner. Example (13) shows PTI PTI applying applying to each member member of a series of preverbal preverbal phrases. phrases. (13) [ Mamboond6 Mamboondo ]NP ]np [ naammwéeni naammweenj ]vP ]vp 'I ‘I saw Mamboondo' Mamboondo’ [ H.i1Jma iuyma ]AdvP ]AdvP [ Mamboond6 Mamboondo ]NP ]np [ aayiii ]vp ]yp 'On ‘On Friday Friday Mamboondo Mamboondo went' went’ np [ Mamboondo np [ naampej f[ H.iyma]AdvP ]Ad~P[ kjyogoyo kiJ6goy6 ]]NP Mamboond6 ]]NP naampéi Ij li ]yp ]vp

'Mamboondo' ‘Mamboondo’ 'Mamboondo died’ H/(stem(H)x_ contains no ]s brackets) brackets) 1.4 1.4

Lengthening Lengthening

This last last rule lengthens lengthens a vowel before a noun noun stem stem containing containing exactly exactly two This moras, moras, and and applies only to members members of the same minimal minimal S. Lengthening Lengthening is illustrated illustrated in (28), where various various object object nouns nouns follow the the verb, as well as another another object object noun. (28) aatwétjj aatwetjj iiama nama naammwén jj pili naammwenjj plli naamml}ligee naammyljgee mbaka mbaka naampéi naampei Mamboondoo Mamboondoo chl}pa chypa

‘he 'he took meat’ meat' ‘I 'I saw a puff adder’ adder' ‘I 'I killed a cat’ cat' 'I ‘I gave Mamboondo Mamboondo a bottle' bottle’

Trisyllabic stems stems and and disyllabic disyllabic stems stems with with long vowels do not not cause 'Irisyllabic lengthening, lengthening, nor do bimoraic bimoraic verbs and and adjectives. adjectives. (29) naammwénj naammwenj no6me hoome naatwet j ngalawa ngalawa naatwétj ngalawci ngalawa ngulu ngulu mbala mbala téma tema

'I ‘I saw a cat' cat’ 'I ‘I took took a canoe' canoe’ 'large ‘large canoe' canoe’ 'I ‘I want want to chop' chop’

=f=naammweny no6me noome *naammwénii *naatwetii ngalawa ngalawa *naatwétii *ngalawaa ngulu ngulii *ngalawaa *mbalaa tema *mbalaa téma

267

k,; Lengthening also applies to the Level 3 locative prefixes pa-, my,-, ky Lengthening and the copular copular prefix nganga- ‘it 'it is,’ is,' but but not to noun class prefixes (e.g., and kj-), which, as we will shortly shortly see, are added added at Level 2. k}-),

paa-chl}pa 'at the the bottle’ bottle' (30) pafl-chypa ‘at ngaa-mbaka ‘it 'it isis aa cat’ cat' ngaa-mbaka kj-libe 'thing (Cl. (Cl. 7)’ 7)' kflibe ‘thing

*kii-hbe

Example (31) shows that that Lengthening Lengthening is blocked when the determinant determinant Example minimal S’s. S's. and focus belong to different minimal niJ1Jwine [ mbaka mbaka aawyle aawüle ]s ]vp (31) [ njyywjne 1-heard

(oblig) oblig) ( -t l l ki-ati *[ ffil}

njl} palwaanjy palwaa ati mykyaatj ml}kya

d' 'at ‘at the the firewoo firewood’ farm' 'on the family farm’ ‘on

palwaanj'lj between palwdanjy contrast between The explains the contrast Formation explains cyclicity of Glide Formation The cyclicity is prefix is a When djjke. aalwaan with aalwdandijke. and When a prefix alternates with aalv,aandjjke, which alternates and aalydandjike, applica ndjjke, aalv,aa preceded applica­another syllable at its own level, as in aalyaandjike, by another preceded by is gliding where j'lj, palwaan tion gliding is optional. In palwdanjy, lv,- is optional. Formation to lyGlide Formation of Glide tion of any by d precede not obhgatory, preceded by any added at Level 2. It is lv,- is added obligatory, the prefix lycondition the condition syllable at that level. Glide Formation must apply, since ion Format that at syllable is p;efix is locative a missing. At Level 3 locative prefix licensing optionality in the rule is missing. licensing optionality rily obligato applied obligatorily already applied added Formation has already but Glide Formation to the noun, but added to level. on the earlier level.

2.2

R ule Interaction Interaction Rule

ShortShortening and lexical rules. Short­ Now between Shortening interaction between consider the interaction Now consider to apply not apply to Shortening does not ening Formation, since Shortening must precede Glide Formation, ening must e accurat long Formation, as in (45). A more accurate created by Glide Formation, vowels created long vowels Glide of output of Ghde generalization Shortening does not apply to the output that Shortening generalization is that Formation at Levels 2 or 3. ion Format li (45) m1J-aké Ij (45) my-ake hunt' ‘you 'you should not hunt’ chaangu kj-andaangyo ki-andaangyo chaangu farm' ‘my 'my forest farm’

-t

-t

li mwaake mwaaké Ij *mwake li *mwaké Ij chaangu kyaandangyo kyaandangyo chaangu *kyandangyo chdangii *kyandangyochaangu

Glide of Ghde rule of problem; the lexical rule This manifestation of the problem; the first manifestation is the This is facts these theory, LS Formation facts Shortening. In sandhi rule of Shortening. follows the sandhi Formation follows is It is ent. compon can issigning Shortening to the lexical component. It g Shortening explained by 2assignin be explained can be tion applica the s involve argument involves important apphcation ordering argument that this ordering to note that important to at applies, at also ion Format Glide of Ghde Formation at Levels 2 and 3. Ghde Formation applies, ion Format Glide of cal recipro the and -isuflix -jLevel reciprocal combination of the applied suffix 1, to the combination Level 1, (46). suffix -an- an- in (46).

.,

...'

,,,, Kimatuumbi Postlexical Rules in Kimatuumbi Syntax, Syntax, Lexical Rules and Postlexical

Odden 272 David Odden

273

i

(46) (46) ak-a ak-an-a âk-an-a ak-y-aan-a âk-y-aan-a

'to ‘to 'to ‘to 'to ‘to

net- hunt' net-hunt’ net-hunt net-hunt each other' other’ (/ak-i-an-a/) net-hunt for each other' net-hunt other’ (/ak-i-an-a/)

shorten in (47), Long vowels created Formation at Level 1 shorten created by Glide Formation Formation lide Formation G in contrast to long vowels created at Levels 2 and 3. Glide created contrast at jtuumbili; ty,-ak-j-an-a applies on two underlying ty-ak-i-an-a ituumbili; Level 1, underlying in levels applies prefix-plus-stem to the stem-internal stem-internal sequence sequence ja, and and at Level 2 to the prefix-plus-stem v?wel jtuumbili, the long vowel twaakyana ituumbili, sequence surface twaakyana y,a. As shown by surface sequence ya. denved but shortens, derived by Glide Formation at Level 1 shortens, but the long vowel derived Formation derived by Glide Formation Formation at Level 2 does not. ituumbili twaakyana jtuumbili -+^ twaakyana (47) /tl}-ak-i-an-a /ty-ak-j-an-a jtuumbili/ — ituumbili/ (47) other' monkeys for each other’ ‘we net- hunt monkeys 'we net-hunt

/ty-a-mamaandyile IllJlJmba twaamâmandwile nyymba -+> twaamamandwpe I11J1Jmba/ — /tl}-a-mâmaandlJile nyymba/ house' ‘we plastered a house’ 'we plastered Thus, Shortening, but but Level 2 Glide ForFor­ Formation feeds Shortening, Thus Level 1 Glide Formation Shortening is evaporates if Shortening paradox evaporates The paradox mation Shortening. The counterfeeds Shortening. mati~n counterfeeds Formation, and after Glide Formation, ordered after assigned assigned to the lexical phonology, is ordered 1. applies applies only at Level 1. (48) ak-j-an-a jtuumbili ituumbili (48) ak-i-an-a akyaana ituumbili akyaana itiiumbili akyana ituumbili akyana (tuumbili ty-akyana ituumbili tl}-akyana jtuumbili twaakyana ituumbili twaakyana jtuumbili

Output of Level 1 morphology morphology Output Glide Formation Formation Shortening Shortening morphology Output Output of Level 2 morphology Formation Glide Formation

morphemes if the Initial Tone Insertion, certain morphemes which assigns High to certain Insertion, which Initial st~m the stem preceding must be lexical as well. A High in the preceding word has no High, must precedmg the but a High in the prefix of of the preceding preceding ITI, but blacks ITI, preceding word blocks word does not.

pamwooto li Ij ninâ+kalaanga pâmwo6to (49) njna-fkalaanga kj-l-n’ombe bâlyu ki+n'ombe balyu

‘I fire’ haven't yet fried at the fire' 'I haven’t cows' 'those cows’ ‘those

underelements under­ namely the class of elements ITI information, namely sensitive to lexical information, ITI is sensitive condi~ioning. part of its conditioning. syntax as part takes syntax going the rule. Finally, the rule takes the rule must therefore be lexical. Facts_ Facts of ordermg ordering finfin­ must therefore theory, the In LS theory, ish the proof. Recall that cannot ghde glide before before a long High-toned vowel cannot that a High-toned morphemes ky,-, one of the morphemes vowel. Now consider consider (50), where the prefix ky-, vowel. undergoing precedes a long vowel. undergoing ITI, precedes

(50) lJtili ytjlj kyaanjy kl}aanN-+-+ (50) ytjlj kl}aanN -+ l}tili kyaanjy

ytjlj kwaanjy kwaanN l}tfü ytjlj kyaanjy lJtili kl}aanN

firewood' run to the firewood’ should run 'you should ‘you 'you ran ‘you ran to the the firewood' firewood’

Form~tion can The whet~er Glide Formation determines whether ITI determines ky,- by ITI assigned to kyThe High assigned cannot 1t cannot then it tone, then apply vowel-if the prefix takes a High tone, apply before a long vowel—if

must also Formation, so ITI must glide. ITI precedes the lexical rule of Glide Formation, ITI precedes be lexical. other the lexicon from other available in the The information available constraint on information The constraint surrounding words. This words allows rules access to the lexical form of surrounding applying to word sequence of words XY, no lexical rule applying predicts that in a sequence predicts that applying Shortening, applying sandhi rules, such as Shortening, X has access to the result result of sandhi this daim to Y. A striking demonstration of this claim cornes comes from the interaction interaction striking demonstration Lengthening. and Lengthening. between Shortening and between Shortening contains two stem which contains before a noun stem Lengthening lengthens a vowel before Lengthening lengthens suggests Lengthening, which suggests trigger Lengthening, moras. adjectives do not trigger moras. Verbs and adjectives sensitive to the level of prefixes, failing that that the rule is lexical. It is also sensitive syntax, and to apply apply to Level 2 prefixes. The The rule rule is partially partially triggered triggered by syntax, and has lexical exceptions. lexical exceptions. nga-ndlJsi (51) nga-ndysj yani twaammyljge twaamm1Jlige yanj silâ aatwetj aatwéti sjla

1

1

1

yarn' batches of yarn’ ‘they 'they are batches monkey' ‘we 'we killed a monkey’ weapon' ‘he 'he took the weapon’

proof the proof completes the Formation completes and Glide Formation Lengthening and The interaction of Lengthening The interaction noun bimoraic noun structures involve bimoraic relevant structures that The relevant Lengthening is lexical. The that Lengthening with a high preceded by a prefix with stems vowel-initial, and are preceded stems which are vowel-initial, vowel. /ml}-até/ (52) /m y-ate/ /ky-jgo/ /k1J-{go/ /ky-iibi/ /k1J-ubi/

-+> — — -+» -+ -+

IDl}l}até myyate kyyjgo kwigo kyyubi kwubi

‘in the the banana banana hand' hand’ 'in kidney' the the 'to ‘to kidney’ leopard' thethe 'to ‘to leopard’

(=t=mwaate) (*mwaat~) (*kwjjgo) (*kwiigo) (*kwuubi) (*kwuubi)

uncould un­ The prefix, which could Formation. The Lengthening precede Glide Formation. must precede Lengthening must dergo either either rule, in fact lengthens, lengthens, thereby thereby blocking blocking Glide Ghde Formation. Formation. lexFormation is lex­ Formation and Glide Formation Since Lengthening precedes Glide Formation Lengthening precedes Lengthening is lexical. ical, Lengthening precorrectly pre­ theory correctly sandhi rules. LS theory and sandhi Now consider Lengthening and consider Lengthening lengthening one vowel and dicts Lengthening does not bleed itself by lengthening that Lengthening dicts that destroying the the environment environment for reapplication reapplication of the the rule, since LS rules destroying neighboring words. have access only to the lexical lexical form of neighboring

1

mbakâa pili naampéii mbakaa (53) naampejj adder' ‘I 'I gave the cat a puff adder’

Mamboondoo chlJpaa chypaa mbl}ya mbyya baapéya baapeya li Ij Mamboond6o Mamboondo the bottle' ‘Grandma never give Mamboondo bottle’ 'Grandma will never sequence of words followed by a applies to each word in a sequence Lengthening Lengthening applies trimoraic mbaka gives a trimoraic Lengthening to mbakd bimoraic Applying Lengthening stem. Applying noun stem. bimoraic noun naampéj. in Lengthening trigger Lengthening could not trigger noun, naampei- As structure which could noun, a structure moraic changed the to access lexical sandhi sandhi rule, rule. Lengthening Lengthening has no the changed moraic a lexical word. following structure of the structure Lengthening is in Shor-tening? Since Lengthening and Shortening? Lengthening and What about Lengthening What about apply to long cannot apply Shortenjng cannot Level 3 and Shortening Shortening is in Level 1, Shortening

.,

Kimatuumbi Syntax, Postlexical Rules in Kimatuumbi Syntax, Lexical Rules and Postlexical

Odden 274 David Odden

inforidentical in the kind of infor­ thus identical theories are thus LS and precompilation precompilation theories mation made available to lexical rules; the difference is that that in precompiprecompi­ mation made lation information is only indirectly indirectly accessible. lation theory, this information adder' cat a puff adder’ 'I gave the cat pûi ‘I mbakaa ptli The pejj mbakda naampéjj derivation of naam The derivation algo(Details of the algo­ theories. (Details between the theories. points similarity between another similarity points out another interpretations are my rithm insertion are not given, so these interpretations rithm for lexical insertion input to phonological phonological instantiation instantiation would be: own.) The input

create the Shortening could create vowels Lengthening. However, Shortening vowels derived by Lengthening. structures which condition condition Lengthening. Lengthening. Yet as the data data in (54) show, bistructures preceding lengthening the Shortening do not lengthening moraic the preceding created by Shortening structures created moraic structures vowel. vowel.

(54) apala mbop6 yaangu apala mbopo *apalaa yaangu mbop6 yaangu *apalaa mbopo pambopo yaangu pambop6 yaangu *paambop6 yaangu *paambop6 yaangu

machete' 'he wants my machete’ ‘he

/mbo6po/ /mboopo/

machete' 'at my machete’ ‘at ]ss ]vP ]NP 11 ]]N [ [[ H ]v [ [ 42 ]]N]NP (59) [ [ [ 666 n]np [ n] np ] vp ] 666 ]v

Lengthening and triggers Lengthening Since Shortening structure which triggers the structure creates the Shortening creates Lengthening. But since triggers for Lengthening. create new triggers applies early, it should create the lexical form of a word does not not include the effect of Shortening, Shortening, the the lexical form of both both mbopo and mboopo mboopo, which does not trigger trigger mbo6po is mbo6po, mbop6 and Lengthening. Lengthening. strengthPhonology, it strength­ While LS theory rejects one axiom of Lexical Phonology, theory rejects between lexical and dichotomy between the dichotomy ens the theory other ways, since the theory in other postlexical rules can be sharpened. sharpened. This suggests reevaluation reevaluation of cases postlexical exceptions, apply apply cyclically, or postlexical rules have exceptions, supposedly postlexical where supposedly lexitheory be lexi­ should in LS theory obey the Strict Condition. Such rules should Strict Cycle Condition. conditions. nonphonological conditions. sensitive to nonphonological cal rules, since they they are sensitive 2.3

275

pûi mbakaa, and 11 is pili ~ mbakda, mbaka ~ where 666 is naam pej ~ naampéjj, 42 is mbakd ~ naampeH, naampéj allomorph of 666. To know which frame ~ pzîii. pilii. We begin by inserting inserting an allomorph ~ phonological structure consult the phonological structure of the the following word. to select, we consult not been available, since lexical item 42 has not But this information information is not available, inserted. inserted. inserting lexical item 11. It is not followed by Now let us begin by inserting noun disyllabic noun anything, so pûi ptli is inserted. inserted. Word 42 is followed by a disyllabic anything, Frame 2, so the the variant variant mbakaa mbakda of 42 is inserted. inserted. stem, which defines Frame inconsistent with noun stem, which is inconsistent Now 666 is followed by a trimoraic trimoraic noun with *naampéj yielding *naam inserted, yielding naampéj Frame pei is inserted, pei allomorph naam Therefore the allomorph Frame 2. Therefore pz1i. mbakaa ptli. mbakda

Precom pilation Precompilation

modification problems, proposes a modification Hayes (this volume), discussing discussing similar problems, accounts for of phonological theory, namely precompilation theory, which accounts precompilation namely phonological empirsimilar theories the problems which LS theory handles. The theories are similar in empir­ handles. theory problems ical predictions, predictions, but but certain certain considerations considerations favor LS over precompilation precompilation theory. In precompilation precompilation theory, languages languages define sets of instantiation instantiation phonological rules. Kicontext for lexical phonological fframes r a m e s which may serve as the context follows. matuumbi formulated as follows. Shortening is formulated matuumbi Shortening

(55) VV — ^ V / [ .. [F ra m e 1 1]] • • •· ]][Frame - .. . • .• — ---> Frame 1 is then then defined as: Frame (56) Frame 1: [ ... ]x Y ^-=/:0 lx Y ]x' - ]x ... [ — 1

Frame 1 rules apply derivation where Frame Two derivations generated. The derivation derivations are generated. these rules do other where these generate the Frame Frame 1 allomorph, allomorph, and the other will generate allomorph te allomorph ter, the appropria not apply, generates generates the elsewhere Later, appropriate elsewhere form. La not is selected. neighinformation from neigh­ Frame definitions include phonological information definitions may include •Frame Frame 2: boring Lengthening would apply in Frame Kimatuumbi Lengthening boring words. Kimatuumbi )[Frame2] VV / --- ][P ra m e 2 ] ---> VV (57) V -+

follows. Frame Frame 2 is defined as follows. stem (X does not cross S) [µµ]noun (58) Frame 2: _ X [/xM ]noun stem

t

.

phonoinstantiation scan the phono­ that rules of instantiation A correct requires that derivation requires correct derivation instantiation logical structure structure of neighboring prior to phonological phonological instantiation neighboring words prior limit,phonotheory if we limit precompilation theory constrain precompilation of those phono­ those words. We can constrain 'elsewhere' properties of the ‘elsewhere’ phonological properties logical instantiation instantiation to seeing phonological conthe con­ equivalent to the constraint is equivalent This constraint allomorph neighboring words. This allomorph of neighboring sandhi straint that only the lexical form is available to lexical sandhi theory that straint in LS theory rules. theories theory so well, the theories emulates LS theory Since precompilation theory emulates precompilation theory ,Since armay be notational variants. Hayes cites two possible differences which ar­ notational variants. phonoprecompilation theory, no phono­ First, in precompilation gue for precompilation precompilation theory. First, theory structures. Second, LS theory syntactic structures. logical direct access to syntactic logical, rules have direct part of that information not morphologically morphologically part that allows a cyclic rule to see information cycle. presyntax has force only if the pre­ The direct access to syntax against direct argument against The argument direct reference translation of direct notational translation compilation reanalysis is not a notational compilation reanalysis prethus pre­ theory works if the rule is lexical, and thus to syntax. Precompilation theory syntax. Precompilation postlexical rules referring referring to syntax. syntax. However, the the same constraint constraint cludes postlexical argucriticism provides is inlposed provides an aesthetic aesthetic argu­ irrtposed in LS theory. The second criticism theory argument. While LS theory empirical argument. not an empirical ment but not against LS theory, but ment against struc(syntactic struc­ cycle' (syntactic 'outer cycle’ added on an ‘outer allows direct material added direct access to material mediated information, mediated tures), precompilation allows access to the same information, tures), precompilation through frame definitions. definitions. Until Until a hypothetical hypothetical example example is constructed constructed through showing that that one theory derivations which are impossible impossible in the theory allows derivations based on comparisons are based point, the only possible comparisons other theory on this point, other theory theoretical elegance. theoretical

Kimatuumbi Syntax, Lexical Rules and Postlexical Postlexical Rules in Kimatuumbi

Odden 276 David Odden ascriteria for as­ A theories is the set of criteria between the theories small difference between A small theory, y. In LS postlexical phonolog signing phonology. signing a rule to the lexical versus postlexical conditions must be lexical, rules morphological conditions exceptions or morphological with lexical exceptions rules with (However, Hayes but precompilation theory. (However, made in precompilation daim is made but no such claim certain rules.) lexicality of certain does marking as evidence for the lexicality does use lexical marking follows. proceed as follows. theory might proceed An precompilation theory attempt at falsifying precompilation An attempt canbut s, condition gical Suppose a sandhi rule has lexical and morphological conditions, but can­ morpholo sandhi Suppose to assignment to necessitate assignment not criterion held to necessitate (a criterion be proven to be cyclic (a not be either lexicality, the rule might be either the criteria for lexicality, With weak criteria lexicon). With the lexicon). feature spreads that lexical or postlexical. Suppose, further, that the rule spreads a feature further, Suppose, l. postlexica or lexical be thus could not be precompiled, thus between between words. Such a rule could not be precompiled, criterial led lexical: the supposed properties of precompiled rules thus become criterial precompi properties supposed lexical: the actually does problem actually in phonology. (This problem postlexical phonology. assigning a rule to postlexical in assigning postlexical nt arise; see below.) If the criteria for assignment to lexical versus postlexical assignme criteria If arise; readily theory phonology are very strong, precompilation theory is more readily falsified, lation precompi strong, phonology is theory lation precompi and more interesting. If the criteria are weak, precompilation theory is criteria If g. interestin and g. interestin less falsifiable, and less interesting. falsifiable, theprecompilation the­ There arguments for LS versus precompilation knock-down arguments There are no knock-down of favor in scales the tip problems ory. of technical problems number of technical However, a number ory. However, deriving ty complexi LS computational complexity deriving problem is the computational theory. The first problem LS theory. exoverlap-for ex­ Frames may overlap—for from frame-triggered rules. Frames interactions of frame-triggered from interactions by meat' eut 'to na.ma ample, Kimatuumbi a becomes kataa ndma to cut meat by na.ma kaata ndm Kimatuumbi kdata ample, Lengthening (F2). Shortening (Fl) and Lengthening Shortening (FI)

(60) -bFl,-F2 4-F1,-HF2 +Fl,+F2 (60) +Fl,-F2 kata kata kata kata N/A kataa kataa N/A

-Fl,+F2 -F 1,+ F 2

-Fl,-F2 -F 1 ,-F 2

N/A N/A kaataa kaataa

N/A N/A N/A N/A

(61)

-t-up +up

-upp -u

277 277

+up -bup

1

-t-hi +hi

(·

'

dzragé iity{ké dzrdge mëgbé/ to give dtyike /ëkpé megbe/ The dzragé/ and /ekpe /atyikë dzrage/ rule applies to /atyike The rule other mëgbé, èkpé dzragé and ekpe megbe (which surface as atyike dzrage and ekpe megbe, by other atyi'ké and ëkpé mëgbé (which cannot ng neighbori rules). Since a feature spreads from a neighboring word, the rule cannot spreads feature rules). has rule has However, the rule be precompiled, and thus ought not to be lexical. However, be precompiled, 1985, ed condition lexical exceptions and is syntactically conditioned (Kaisse 1985, Clements lly syntactica lexical exceptions 1978), suggesting that it is indeed lexical. suggesting that probably consider to be Another spreading Another spreading rule which Hayes would probably and 1985, 1986a and precompiled comes fi’om Kipare, discussed in Odden 1985, Kipare, from precompiled cornes HL by preceded Schlindwein 1985. The rule spreads High leftward when preceded by HL, sprèads Schlindwein 1985. ' downstep. yielding downstep.

(62) kfla —»kila I' kahandi kahandi -+ kahandi kila kahandi 1na ve’kiraslunjiya 1 vé 1kfrashinjiya vana ve’kfrashmjiya — > va'na va -+ vé kfrashinjiya tetufinikire shuve tetufinikfre shiive

-+

shuve tetufiniki 1ré shiive tetufmfid’re

knife' 'each knife’ ‘each children were 'the children ‘the sleeping’ sleeping' ‘we didn 't cover 'we didn’t baboon' the baboon’

alternations: Rule (63) accounts accounts for the following alternations:

(63)

H

L

H

i----

v V Shortening Shortening Lengthening Lengthening

derivation of allomorph. The derivation The [+Fl,+F2] allomorph. allomorph is the [-l-Fl,-t-F2] correct allomorph The correct parallel entails ion each word in a language with one instantiation frame entails two parallel instantiat language with each word derivaparallel entails derivations. Having two instantiation frames entails four parallel deriva­ instantiation derivations. one only requires theory LS s. tions, theory requires one derivation 2n derivations. entail 2" tions, and n frames entail derivation derivation for each word. surexceptions in sur­ contextual exceptions Precompiled should not recognize contextual Precompiled rules should phothe present rounding words. The triggering word is not present in the lexical pho­ triggering rounding However, nology, properties of the word are not visible. However, exceptionality properties so exceptionality nology, so ing Lengthen such exceptions do exist for Lengthening (see (51)). s exception formalizing a rule hard time formalizing Finally, theory has a hard precompilation theory Finally, precompilation of M-to-R rule of The another. spreading M-to-R feature from one word to another. spreading a feature beRaised becomes tone Mid Clements Raised be­ Clements 1978 may be a case. In Ewe, [+hi,-up], tone is [-l-hi,-up]. tween conditions. Mid tone syntactic conditions. subject to syntactic High tones, subject tween High of nature of ry assimilato The Raised assimilatory nature [-hi,+up]. [+hi,+up], and High is [-hi,-l-up]. Raised is [-|-hi,-t-up], imis (it register upper ng surroundi the rule clear—Mid absorbs upper register im­ absorbs the surrounding rule is clear-Mid the register rightmost register leftmost or the rightmost material the leftmost whether the argument whether material to the argument feature spreads). feature spreads).

Various that the rule is lexical. It will not apply complications suggest that Various complications subject preceding High tone is in the subject to the Low tone of a verb root if the preceding to the cannot hé n prefix (64a). The High tone of the preposition he cannot serve as the leftprepositio prefix hand context for the rule (64b). The rule does not apply to the Low tone hand context of followed by High tones (64c). Finally, preceded and followed subject prefix preceded of aa subject preceding subject prefix to a preceding from a subject the rule will not spread High tone firom spread the rule the speakers ore, Furtherm noun across a sentence bracket (64d). Furthermore, speakers apply the bracket noun of they that g suggestin rule in slow, syllable-by-syllable speech, suggesting that they are aware of rule in slow, syllable-by-syllable of support its effect (a similar argument has been used to support the lexicality of argument its effect Low Tone Raising in Hausa). (64) a. ale nkhu'kii nkhu.1ku b. he kisima hé c. mghosi esi'koma esi1k6ma nyumba d. nemvoniye ékijenga nyumba Gurisha ekijenga nemv6niye Gurisha

chicken' ‘he 'he should eat chicken’ well' 'in the well’ ‘in killing' isn't killing’ ‘the 'the man isn’t ‘I'I saw Gurisha Gurisha building a house’ house'

precompilation theory, Whether taken to be lexical in precompilation these_ rules are taken Whether these criteria for assigning ultimate hence precompiled, depends largely on the ultimate criteria hence precomp1led, depends is information is logical nonphono rules to lexical phonology. In LS theory, nonphonological information phonology. rules lexical. be must required, required, so they

14 14 Phrase Word-Internal Word-Internal Phrase Japanese Boundary Boundary in Japanese POSER WILLIAM W i l l i a m JJ.. P oser

phonological rules refer phrasal phonological OF IIN n t he d i v e r s it y o f views of how phrasal DIVERSITY THE cmp.mon to that is common information, one of the few ideas that to morphosyntactic morphosyntactic information, necessarily no smaller virtually phrasal rules are necessarily domains of phrasal that the domains virtually all is that counterexample appears to be a solid counterexample what appears than present here what than the word. I present followed by a minor phrase that are followed to this belief, namely a set of prefixes that implications of this fact. boundary, together with a brief discussion of the implications boundary, together

1

Phrases Minor Phrases Properties J apanese Minor Properties of Japanese

necessary In order appreciate the evidence of the following section, it is necessary order to appreciate apanese. J Standard system tonal to have some understanding of the tonal system of Standard Japanese. understanding phrase.' 'minor pattern tonal The smallest unit in Japanese to have a tonal pattern is the ‘minor phrase.’ unit Japanese 'Fh~ schematize pattern Each minor phrase has a basic tonal pattern which we may schematize as tonal phrase Each there, continues ‘LH(L)’; that is to say, it begins Low, rises to High, and continues there, 'LH(L)'; that until point it may fall again to a Low pitch. until at some point location of the fall from The only lexically distinctive property is the location distinctive property or it may never occur syllable, any High to Low. Low. This fall may occur on occurs is said to be fall the mora at all. The syllable after after whose first unaccented. be to accented. If there unaccented. A minor there is no fall, the word is said than one word, more than of phrase phrase has at most one accent; if it is composed a process realized, is accent leftmost lexical as is often the case, then then the leftmost Resolution. which Ii will willrefer to as Accent Resolution. these issues. discussion of these Matsumoto for discussion I am grateful and Yo Matsumoto Tateishi and Koichi Tateishi grateful to Koichi FounDevelopment Foun­ System Development the System from the grant from This part by a grant supported in part research was supported This research University. Stanford University. Information, Stanford and Information, dation Language and Study of Language the Study Center for the the Center dation to the

279

Japanese Word-Internal Boundary in Japanese Phrase Boundary Word-Internal Phrase

William J. Poser 280 William

remains High. Moreover, the again and remains staying expected, it rises again staying Low as expected, until the second examples until fact that the pitch does not rise again on these examples again pitch that Low. initial presence mora of the stem indicates the presence of the initial Low. indicates mora exhaust the list of Aoyagi PreThe prefixes illustrated illustrated by no means exhaust (2). in extensive list is given fixes. A more extensive

but its present, but The non-distinctive initial rise is in principle always present, non-distinctive initial syllable, first the on phonetic realization is variable. If the accent falls phonetic realization beginning of the minor short rise at the beginning there but only a short plateau but there is no Low plateau phrase, in minor phrase, another preceded by another minor phrase, phrase is preceded phrase, unless the minor phrase the end at plateau Low which case the initial plateau initial Low may be realized as a 1 phrase. of the preceding preceding minor phrase.^

2

Prefixes Aoyagi Aoyagi Prefixes

Prefixes (2) Partial List of Aoyagi Prefi: (2) A Partial

Prefix boo doo gen han han hi hon ki ko moto tai tyoo zen zen

''

phonological peculiar phonological their peculiar The prefixes that interest to us, and their that are of interest 1969, whence I will refer to properties, described by Aoyagi 1969, properties, were first described them Representative examples of words formed with them as Aoyagi prefixes. Representative examples is contour of the examples pitch contour these prefixes are given in (1).^ (1). 2 The pitch over-lines.3 under- and over-lines.^ shown schematically schematically by the under-

(1) Words Formed with Aoyagi Prefixes Example Example Prefix Gloss

.,

-·,

Gloss

moto m6to

‘former’ 'former'

ffw to d a iziN motodaiziN

‘former minister' 'former minister

zeN zéN

‘former’ 'former'

zzeNsyusyoo e N syusyoo

‘former Prime 'former Prime Minister’ Minister'

hf hi

‘un-’ 'un-'

higooriteki higooriteki

‘illogical’ 'illogical'

ki kf

‘your’ (honorific/ 'your' (honorific/ formal)

kkisyokaN is y o k a N

‘your letter' 'your letter’

h6N hoN

present' ‘this, 'this, the present’

hoNkaigi h oN kaiai

‘this 'this conference here' here’

HLH exhibit HLH that they exhibit The peculiarity of these words lies in the fact that The peculiarity or HLHL patterns, which are not possible for single minor phrases. HLHL tone patterns, indicates the presence of an In the first example, the fall from mo to to indicates with a single dealing with accent on the first syllable. Consequently, Consequently, if we were dealing But in thereafter to be Low. But m in o r phrase, everything thereafter expect everything phrase, we would expect minor presence of a second indicating the presence fact the pitch then falls, indicating pitch rises again and then remaining accent Resolution had failed to apply. The remaining dai, as if Accent Resolution accent on dai, pitch falls on examples there is no second accent. The pitch examples are similar, only there than rather than but rather example, but the N in the second example, zeN accented syllables, e.g., ze the accented 1 Most of this cornthough it is com­ well-known, though '^Most accent is well-known, pitch accent Japanese pitch description of Japanese this description possessed of unit possessed the unit described as the phrase described mon to see the minor phrase the minor than the rather than the word rather accent the accent tone if the initial Low tone there is no initial a tone that there daim that accounts claim pattern. Most accounts tone pattern. sonorant mora. than one sonorant contains more than falls on the syllable contains first syllable the first syllable or if the the first syllable initial Low is always principle the initial However, I have given evidence that in principle (Poser 1984) that evidence (Poser status the status discussion of the additional discussion present. Beckman 1986 for additional Pierrehumbert and Beckman present. See Pierrehumbert realization. variable realization. of the initial Low and its variable the initial 2 The representation indicates the accent indicates acute accent phonemic. An acute ^The approximately phonemic. representation is approximately accent. pitch accent. location underlying pitch location of the underlying 3 The rise that initial-accented word is not shown. ®The beginning of an initial-accented the beginning occur at the that may occur

281

'\

Gloss ‘a certain' 'a certain’ ‘above-mentioned’ 'above-mentioned' 'original' ‘original’ 'anti-' ‘anti-’ 'pan-' ‘pan-’ 'un-' ‘un-’ present' ‘the 'the present’ ‘your’ 'your' (formal) ‘deceased’ 'deceased' ‘former’ 'former' 'anti-' ‘anti-’ ‘ultra-’ 'ultra-' ‘former’ 'former' 'all' ‘air

explained on the best explained The peculiar these prefixes are best patterns of these peculiar tone patterns boundary. This phrase boundary. minor phrase assumption that they are followed by a minor assumption that Acaccents-the Ac­ im m e d ia te ly explains the possibility possibility of there being two accents—the immediately also cent Resolution phrase-level and so will not apply. It minor phrase-level Resolution rule is minor between the Highs in all of the explains explains the presence of the Low region between Low.4 phrase-initial Low.'* minor phrase-initial examples—this examples-this is the minor directly patterns directly peculiar tone patterns An alternative attribute the peculiar alternative would be to attribute unusual they are unusual that they assuming that to the tonal properties of these prefixes, assuming tonal properties boundary. But the boundary. realized at the in contributing tone which is realized contributing a final Low tone otherwise this would require assignment of Low tone, which is otherwise require lexical assignment explain the unnecessary Japanese, and in any case would not explain Standard Japanese, unnecessary in Standard exceptionless rule, to apply. failure of Accent Reduction, otherwise exceptionless Reduction, an otherwise that they In sum, the tone patterns induced by Aoyagi prefixes suggest that patterns induced attach. belong to a different minor phrase from the stem to which they attach. minor phrase

3

Prefixes are Prefixes Aoyagi Prefixes are Aoyagi Prefixes

morphemes as prefixes, as do those Although referred to these morphemes Although I have referred Kageyama 1982) and who have previously them (Aoyagi 1969, Kageyama discussed them previously discussed 4 indepenthese prefixes in which he indepen­ ^Kageyama discussion of these brief discussion contains a brief Kageyama 1982 contains Thanks boundary. Thanks phrase boundary. minor phrase dently prefixes are followed by a minor these prefixes that these suggests that dently suggests discussion. Kageyama's discussion. to Yo Matsumoto attention to Kageyama’s drawing my attention Matsumoto for drawing

William J. Poser 282 William charthat this char­ possibility that Japanese entertain the possibility must entertain dictionaries, we must Japanese dictionaries, independent words, in they are really independent that they incorrect and acterization and that acterization is incorrect boundary phrase boundary minor phrase they are followed by a minor that they which case the fact that that evidence that Although to my knowledge no evidence surprising. Although will hardly hardly be surprising. reason to there is good reason been given, there these actually are prefixes has ever been these actually correct. characterization is correct. that this characterization believe that part of something is part that something try to argue that Much Much of the time when we try undergo a trigger or undergo criteria-does it trigger phonological criteria—does appeal to phonological a word we appeal status in tests for lexical status double-edged tests word-level rule? I know of no double-edged induction tests, such as induction single-edged tests, number of single-edged there are a number but there Japanese, Japanese, but assimilation, or triggering of voicing assimilation, morpheme, triggering of accent accent on a following morpheme, obstruent of the second initial obstruent triggering triggering of rendaku, the voicing of the initial tests, these tests, compound. The Aoyagi prefixes pass none of these member member of a compound. against evidence against constitute evidence single-edged this does not constitute they are single-edged but but since they being prefixes. their being their exactly what phonological rules is exactly undergo word-level phonological Indeed, Indeed, failure to undergo If it boundary. If phrase boundary. minor phrase we should presence of a minor the presence expect given the should expect then phonological words, then composed of phonological phrases are composed minor phrases that minor is correct correct that apply across should not apply phonological words should restricted to phonological that are restricted processes processes that boundary. 5 phrase boundary.® a minor minor phrase that Aoyagi believing that grounds for believing However, there other grounds variety of other there are a variety inseparathey are insepara­ that they attached. The first is that indeed lexically attached. prefixes are indeed pre-nominal modifiers. other pre-nominal stem, unlike other ble from the following stem, Consider, university' and mo'your university’ example, the words kidaigaku ‘your Consider, for example, contains an Aoyagi prefix. As todaiziN minister,' each of which contains 'former minister,’ todaiziN ‘former beintervene be­ cannot intervene 'famous' cannot example ei ‘famous’ yuumei adjective yuum example (3) shows, the adjective and (5) show, examples (4) and tween the prefix ki and daigaku. Similarly, as examples beintervene be­ 'distinguished' can intervene neither ei nor the adjective adjective erai ‘distinguished’ yuumei neither yuum tween the prefix m oto and the daiziN. moto

(3) *ki yuumei daigaku daigaku yuumei na (3)*ki your famous copula university copula university university' ‘your 'your famous university’ (4) *moto yuumei yuumeinana daizin daizin (4)*moto former famous copula minister copula minister ‘a minister' 'a formerly famous minister’ (5) *moto erai daizin daizin (5)*moto former minister distinguished minister former distinguished minister' distinguished minister’ ‘a formerly distinguished 'a formerly indepenthat no indepen­ generalization that larger generalization These examples illustrate the larger examples illustrate dent stem to which between an Aoyagi prefix and the stem intervene between dent word can intervene 5 Qf course, Phonology Lexical Phonology the sense of Lexical ®0f that are lexical in the phonological rules that course, phonological they are not that extent th apply to the extent (Kiparsky at they Mohanan 1982, 1986 may still apply (Kiparsky 1982a; Mohanan phonological words. restricted restricted to phonological

Japanese Boundary in Japanese Phrase Boundary Word-Internal Word-Internal Phrase

283

modinominal modi­ other nominal with other contrast with prefixes contrast this the Aoyagi prefixes it attaches. attaches. In this deterbetween the deter­ yuumei the adjective insert the example, we can insert fiers. For example, adjective yuum ei between phrase sono daigaku 'that' and the following noun in the noun phrase miner sono ‘that’ miner (6). yielding university,' 'that ‘that university,’ yielding daigaku yuumei na (6) sono yuumei daigaku university copula university that famous copula that university' famous university’ 'that famous ‘that mamodifier over the following ma­ consider the scope of the modifier Similarly, consider they narrow scope, in which they either narrow nave either terial. Independent words can have terial. Independent modify immediately following word, or wide scope, in which they modify only the immediately 'that' example, sono ‘th modify the whole following NP. In (7), for example, modify at’ can have 'horse,' or over the noun uma ‘horse,’ immediately following noun either over the immediately scope either similar (8) structurally similar whole NP of which uma is a modifier. But in the structurally modify the cannot modify scope-it cannot narrow scope—it the Aoyagi prefix m oto can have only narrow moto entire following NP. entire kubiwa uma no (7) sono uma kubiwa collar that horse GEN collar that scope)' (narrow scope)’ that horse (narrow 'the collar of that ‘the scope)' wide ( collar 'that horse ‘that (wide scope)’

(8) moto daiziN no komoN adviser minister GEN adviser former minister former ‘adviser scope)' (narrow scope)’ minister (narrow former minister 'adviser to the former scope)' minister (wide scope)’ *‘former adviser to the minister *'former adviser conjunction. In (9) the The the following NP is a conjunction. true when the The same is true years') may be passed years’) 'has passed (literally, ‘has 'aged' (literally, relative tta ‘aged’ totta relative clause tosi-o to construed immediately following noun or with the whole the immediately with the either with construed either substitution of the but for the substitution identical but conjunct. which is identical But in (10), which conjunct. But posreading is pos­ narrow scope reading Aoyagi prefix m oto for tosi-o totta, only the narrow moto sible. daitooryoo (9) tosi-o-totta to daitooryoo syuusyoo tosi-o-totta syuusyoo President aged Prime-Minister Prime- Minis ter and President scope)' (narrow scope)’ President (narrow ‘the Minister and the President Prime Minister 'the aged Prime scope)' President (wide scope)’ ‘the Minister and President Prime Minister 'the aged Prime to (10) moto moto syuusyoo syuusyoo to daitooryoo daitooryoo President former Prime-Minister and President former Prime-Minister scope)' ‘the (narrow scope)’ President (narrow and the President Minister and Prime Minister former Prime 'the former scope)' President (wide scope)’ and President Minister and *‘the Prime Minister former Prime *'the former respect with respect independent words with behave like independent Thus, Thus, Aoyagi prefixes do not behave to either semantic scope. separability or semantic either separability must be They must they? They what are they? If If Aoyagi prefixes are not prefixes, what they do not behave nominal but as we have seen, they sort, but nominal modifiers of some sort,

284 William William J. J. Poser like other other nominal with respect respect to such properties nominal modifiers with properties as separability separability and and semantic semantic scope. Moreover, they they are morphologically morphologically peculiar peculiar in that that they nearly all other other nominal they lack the inflection that that nearly nominal modifers modifers have. The relative clauses are inflected inflected for tense, as in (11). The The same is verbs of relative true adjectives, as in (12). Nominal Nominal adjectives adjectives must true of conjugated conjugated adjectives, must be followed by the copula, which itself itself is inflected for tense, as in (13). True nouns marker no, as in (14). nouns must must be followed by the genetive genetive marker

Word-Internal Phrase Boundary Boundary in Japanese Japanese Word-Internal Phrase

285

nagoya no (14) nagoya daizin Nagoya GEN cabinet-minister cabinet-minister 'the cabinet-minister from Nagoya' ‘the cabinet-minister Nagoya’

strata, yamato-kotoba strata, native native morphemes, morphemes, known known as yam ato-kotoba and and morphemes morphemes borbor­ rowed from Chinese, known as kango.^ kango. 6 To a large extent extent Sino-Japanese Sino-Japanese morphemes with other morphemes and native morphemes combine only with other Sino-Japanese Sino-Japanese morphemes native morphemes combine only with with native morphemes native morphemes. morphemes. As we might might expect, expect, since lexical stratum stratum is a lexical property, property, such combinatorial combinatorial restrictions restrictions hold only inside of words; there there are no such constraints constraints on syntactic syntactic comcom­ binations binations of words. Almost all Aoyagi prefixes belong Almost belong to the Sino-Japanese Sino-Japanese stratum stratum (moto {m oto is the only exception exception known to me) and and to a very large extent extent they they attach attach other Sino-Japanese Sino-Japanese morphemes. There are some exceptions exceptions to only to other morphemes. There this, e.g., the prefix haN 'anti-,' ‘anti-,’ which can be attached attached to names names of any this, origin, as in haN-tyomusuki haN-tyomusuki 'anti-Chomsky,' ‘anti-Chomsky,’ but but most of them them obey these these restrictions. within lexrestrictions. Since such combinatorial combinatorial restrictions restrictions apply apply only within lex­ ica~ that Aoyagi prefixes ical- words and involve lexical information, information, the the fact that are subject them argues subject to them argues that that they they are lexically attached. attached. It is difficult to find conclusive evidence of lexicality, but but the Aoyagi prefixes behave like prefixes with respect to separability with respect separability and and semantic semantic scope, fit into no syntactic syntactic category, category, and exhibit exhibit lexical combinatorial combinatorial restrictions. This, combined combined with the fact that except for their their phonology phonology restrictions. with the that except there {here is not a shred shred of evidence evidence against against treating treating them them as prefixes, suggests suggests that that the the traditional traditional characterization characterization as prefixes is correct, correct, and and that that we are faced with word-internal phrase with a legitimate legitimate example example of a word-internal phrase boundary. boundary.

The apanese nominal that The only J Japanese nominal modifiers that that are invariant invariant are those that we may refer to as determiners, determiners, listed listed in (15).

4

(11) daizin ( 11) mi-ta mi-ta daizin see-past cabinet-minister cabinet-minister see-past 'the cabinet minister minister (I) saw.' ‘the cabinet saw.’ (12) erai erai daizin distinguished distinguished cabinet-minister cabinet-minister 'a cabinet-minister' ‘a distinguished distinguished cabinet-minister’ (13) hen na daizin strange strange copula copula cabinet-minister cabinet-minister 'a ‘a strange strange cabinet-minister' cabinet-minister’

(15) Japanese Japanese Determiners Determiners Determiner Determiner kono sono ano dono

Gloss 'this' ‘this’ 'that ‘that (near (near you)' you)’ 'that ‘that (away from us both)' both)’ 'what' ‘what’

konna sonna sonna anna anna donna donna

'this ‘this sort sort of' of’ ‘that (near (near you) sort sort of' of’ 'that 'that sort of' ‘that (away from us both) both) sort of’ 'what ‘what sort sort of' of’

am aru

'certain' ‘certain’

But But this this seems an unlikely category category for morphemes morphemes with with the semanseman­ tics of the Aoyagi prefixes, and they behave and in any case we have seen that that they differently determiners with differently from the the determiners with respect respect to separability separability and and semanseman­ tic scope. In sum, if the Aoyagi prefixes are not prefixes they they must must be independent morphological or independent words, but but they they do not fit neatly neatly into any morphological syntactic syntactic category. In addition addition to these syntactic syntactic properties, properties, Aoyagi prefixes exhibit exhibit one other typically lexical property. property. The apanese lexicon contains other typically The J Japanese contains two major major

Implications Implications

The existence existence of the the Aoyagi prefixes is surprising surprising because because we generally generally assume that the domains assume that domains of phrasal phrasal rules are necessarily larger larger than than words, because because phrases phrases are made made up of words. But this this is true true only in a theory theory in which there there is a single hierarchy hierarchy of constituents. constituents. One of the innovations metrical theory theory is the notion that there innovations of the the metrical notion that there is a phonological phonological constituent constituent structure structure parallel parallel to and distinct distinct from the morphosyntactic constituent morphosyntactic constituent structure. structure. Most of the work on the the prosoproso­ die dic hierarchy hierarchy has dealt dealt with with supra-word-level supra-word-level constituency, constituency, but but there there has been some work extending extending phonological phonological constituency constituency down inside words. Booij and 1984, 1987 have appealed and Rubach Rubach 1984, appealed to phonological phonological words that that may be morphosyntactic morphosyntactic word-internal, word-internal, and and Inkelas 1989a has recently recently proposed proposed a further further extension, extension, in which there there are two completely completely parallel parallel hierarchies. this perspective hierarchies. Viewed from this perspective we should should not not be surprised surprised at questhe existence existence of word-internal word-internal phrase phrase boundaries, boundaries, for the words in ques­ tion are morphosyntactic, morphosyntactic, whereas whereas the the phrases phrases are prosodie, prosodic, and and there there is no good reason reason to assume assume that that the the two hierarchies hierarchies should should be aligned. The properties properties of the Aoyagi prefixes may be readily readily described described in terms terms of 6 ln addition, languages other than Chinese, ®In addition, there there are now many many loans loans from languages other than Chinese, and so-called so-called mimetic mimetic words, words, which which though though of native native origin origin exhibit exhibit certain certain phonological phonological peculiari ties. peculiarities.

Japanese Boundary in Japanese Phrase Boundary Word-Internal Word-Internal Phrase

William J. Poser 286 William subcategorization. morphosyntactic subcategorization. Inkelas’s prosodic and morphosyntactic notion of dual prosodie Inkelas's notion subcategorize a stem. morphologically subcategorize Like other affixes, Aoyagi prefixes morphologically other affixes, Unlike other other affixes, prosodically subcategorize subcategorize a minor minor phrase. phrase. they prosodically affixes, they bears on phrase boundaries minor phrase The existence existence of word-internal word-internal minor boundaries also bears The directly phonological rules refer directly to whether phonological the question of whether controversial question the controversial whether others, or whether among others, syntactic proposed by Kaisse 1985 among structure, as proposed syntactic structure, post-lexical rules refer only to a hierarchy hierarchy of phonological phonological phrases, phrases, as post-lexical others, among others, Nespor and Vogel 1986, among and Nespor advocated advocated by Selkirk 1978 and result of the influence indirectly as a result possible only indirectly with syntax possible with reference to syntax syntax on _phonological phonological phrasing. phrasing. of syntax general apthese two general between these real differences between It is difficult to find real ap­ between particular proaches, particular there are of course many differences between though there proaches, though beprinciple be­ There seems to be no difference in principle them. There instantiations instantiations of them. the direct direct and and indirect indirect theories theories as far as how individual individual rules may tween the referdirect refer­ might impose on direct that we might constraint that parse utterance. Any constraint parse the utterance. constraint formulated as a constraint equally well be formulated ence to syntactic structure could equally syntactic structure the mapping mapping between between syntactic syntactic structure structure and prosodie prosodic structure, structure, and on the conversely. hypothesis reference hypothesis indirect reference under the indirect that under A clearer clearer difference is that must all parse the various various phrasal phrasal rules must parse the utterance utterance in the same way, way,^7 the whereas the the direct direct reference hypothesis hypothesis imposes no such constraint. constraint. ConCon­ whereas conthere are no con­ theory in which there reference theory direct reference sider, for example, example, a direct theory in indirect reference theory straints corresponding indirect parse and the corresponding straints on the parse there are no constraints constraints on the the phrasing phrasing algorithm. algorithm. Now add add the which there there be only one level of theory that constraint that there reference theory indirect reference constraint to the indirect all-any phrasal rules at all—any phrasing. constrain the class of phrasal phrasing. This does not constrain formulated just just as it might might be without without this this constraint. constraint. single rule could be formulated But it requires requires that phrasal rules use the same parse. We could, for that all phrasal But but we could not [S][OV], but [SO][V] or [S][OV], example, sentence [SO][V] example, parse an SOV sentence another rule have a language language in which one rule used the former parse and another the latter latter parse. parse. In this this way the the indirect indirect reference hypothesis hypothesis constrains constrains the constrain the class of rules. the class of languages though it does not constrain languages even though fair-we have imposed playing fair—we that we are not playing The skeptic may reply that constraint on the indirect indirect reference reference theory theory that that we have not not imposed imposed a constraint but the crucial true, but the direct reference theory. theory. This crucial point point is that that This is true, direct reference on the imposing a straightforward way of imposing the direct provides no straightforward theory provides direct reference theory comparable constraint. constraint.®8 In our simple example example it is not not too difficult to find comparable an equivalent require that that all phrasal phrasal rules parse constraint: we need only require equivalent constraint: permit a richer way. the syntactic structure in the same way. But once we permit the structure the syntactic must not only harder-we phonological phrasing the problem becomes harder—we must problem phrasing phonological but they limit the number number of distinct distinct parses parses to some fixed number, number, but they must hypothesis reference indirect also be hierarchically related. In sum, the indirect reference hypothesis related. hierarchically 7 must unify into rules must phrasa! rules required by the phrasal ^More put, the constituents constituents required formally put, More formally hierarchical structure. structure. a hierarchical 8 theory reference theory direct reference the direct ®The same constraint, imposed on the cannot be imposed course, cannot constraint, of course, The same phrase. phonological phrase. notion of phonological since ex hypothesi hypothesi it has no notion

287

straightextremely straight­ constraint in an extremely right constraint imposes what appears to be the right what appears under the constraint under state this constraint forward way, way, whereas it is more difficult to state hypothesis. direct direct reference hypothesis. approaches differ. There There is, however, a second way in which the two approaches utterance equally individual rules parse the utterance Even if we can constrain constrain how individual hypothesis allows us to indirect reference hypothesis hypothesis, the indirect well under under either hypothesis, information information is used, since information impose tighter constraints on how information tighter constraints permitted access need not be available to which the phrasing phrasing rules are permitted phonological rules, and if it is not made available directly phrasal phonological directly to the phrasal way. propagated to the phrasal directly phrasal rules only in a limited way. directly will be propagated arguconsequently provides The existence provides an argu­ existence of the Aoyagi prefixes consequently application that the appUcation approach. Suppose that ment in favor of the indirect indirect approach. that, structure and that, syntactic structure directly by syntactic of post-lexical post-lexical rules is governed directly post-lexical Instead, post-lexical phrase. Instead, entity as a minor phrase. therefore, therefore, there is no such entity referformulated as refer­ theory would be formulated rules that indirect reference theory that in the indirect information would be whatever information directly to whatever ring to minor phrases will refer directly phrases. But utterance into minor phrases. parse the utterance used in the indirect theory to parse indirect theory word-internally, it boundaries word-internally, phrase boundaries since Aoyagi prefixes induce minor phrase phonological rules to have access to post-lexical phonological would be necessary for post-lexical morparticular mor­ identity· of particular including the identity the internal structure of words, including internal structure distinguish the Aoyagi prefixes from phemes, since they they must be able to distinguish generally sound violation of the generally blatant violation other other prefixes. This is of course a blatant 1986) 1982, 1986) Mohanan 1982, 1982a; Mohanan (Kiparsky 1982a; hypothesis Phonology (Kiparsky hypothesis of Lexical Phonology structure of interna! structme that post-lexical rules do not have access to the internal that post-lexical words. post-lexical rules is a application of post-lexical If the structure that governs the application structure that behavior of structure, the behavior syntactic structure, phonological distinct from syntactic structure, distinct phonological structure, mechanism for That is, given a mechanism the Aoyagi prefixes is not so problematic. problematic. That post-lexical rules within the lexicon, post-lexical phrases within constructing phonological phrases constructing phonological unconstrained access to without being given unconstrained can refer to this information information without information. word-internal word-internal information.

5

Conclusion Conclusion

separate minor phrase Certain phrase from typically belong to a separate Japanese prefixes typically Certain Japanese than contain more than typically contain phrases typically the stem attach. Minor phrases s'tem to which they attach. evpost-lexical rules, yet the ev­ application of post-lexical one word and are domains of application that these prefixes really are prefixes. daim that idence favors the traditional traditional claim apboundary to ap­ phrase boundary prosodie phrase It therefore appears to be possible for a prosodic therefore appears argument in favor of the pear pear inside a lexical word. This fact provides an argument phonological rules refer phrasal phonological under which phrasal indirect hypothesis, under indirect reference hypothesis, structure. prosodie structure. to morphosyntactic structure only indirectly, via the prosodic morphosyntactic structure prosodie that prosodic proposal that Inkelas's proposal support for Inkelas’s It also provides additional support pr'ovides additional -subcategorize morphemes can subcategorize that morphemes constituency constituency exists in the lexicon and that constituents. morphosyntactic constituents. for prosodic constituents as well as morphosyntactic prosodie constituents

15 Domains Predicting Rule Domains Predicting Rule ~honology in the Phrasai Phonology the Phrasal

1

j

,.•

RICE K eren D. R ice KEREN

'i

..

/:'

the on the focused on phonology has focused phonology ~eare ns domai these how phrasal domains are de­ apply and domains in which rules apply phrasal domains Vogel and r Nespo 1986; 1984, , 1981a 1984, 1986; Nespor and Vogel termined. Selkirk 1981a, instance, see Selkirk (For instance, termined. (For differexamine aa differ­ paper, I examine 1982, 1989; Kaisse 1985.) In this paper, Hayes 1989; 1986; Hayes 1982, 1986; ting predic and ation applic ent namely rule application and predicting phonology, namely phrasal phonology, of phrasal aspect of ent aspect applirule of ples princi the that domains principles of rule appli­ propose that application. I propose rule application. of rule domains of postlexical the postlexical to the extended to cation phonology be extended lexical phonology apply in the lexical that apply cation that phonology. phonology. rule determine rule that determine principles that II begin discussion of and the principles with a discussion begin with compo xical postle turn to the postlexical compo­then turn domains component. I then lexical component. the lexical in the domains in of levels of the levels of the composed of assume, is composed nent. component, I assume, postlexical component, The postlexical nent. The intona , phrase l phonologica phrase, intona-the phonological word, phonological hierarchy: phonological prosodie hierarchy: the prosodic 1986; 1984, 1986; 1981a, 1984, Selkirk 1981a, tional discussed in Selkirk utterance, as discussed phrase, and utterance, tional phrase, 1 rules that argue I others. I argue that rules Nespor 1986; Hayes 1984, and others.^ Vogel 1982, 1986; and Vogel Nespor and ties proper have phrase levels have properties of phonological phrase phonological word and phonological the phonological of the tional intona the intonational that rules of the traditionally lexical rules, and that assigned to lexical traditionally assigned the to the assigned to onally traditi ties phrase and utterance levels have properties traditionally assigned proper ce phrase and utteran phothe for that for the pho­ suggest that 1985). I suggest postlexical phonology (see also Kaisse 1985). postlexical phonology its off; its turns off; rule turns ary nology as a whole, it is only necessary to learn where a rule necess , nology as a whole have that ples princi determined by the principles actual that have application are determined domains of application actual domains T he l it e r a ture o n p h r a sAL al PHRAS ON TURE LITERA THE

comand com­ discussion and helpful discussion Peter Avery for helpful II would thanks to Peter rny thanks express my to express like to would like worktion Connec ntax ogy-Sy Phonol the ments on earlier drafts. Many participants at the Phonology-Syntax Connection work­ rnents on earlier drafts. Many participants paper. this paper. of this developrnent of the development shop thinking in the rny thinking influenced my also influenced shop also (b) and (b) hierarchy and 1 e hierarchy prosodi (a) nts '^See the references in the text for arguments for (a) a prosodic argume the text See the references hierarchy. prosodie hierarchy. this structure for the prosodic particular structure this particular

289

'.

• j

'!

' '

.

;

'

Keren D. Rice llice 290 Keren

Predicting Predicting Rule Domains Domains in the the Phrasal Phrasal Phonology Phonology

been argued argued to hold for the lexical component component of the phonology. next examine examine and reanalyze reanalyze some examples that that appear appear to be prob­ probI next lematic The first concerns the interaction interaction between between the lematic for this model. The syllabification consonants and and rules such as word-final word-final desyllabification of word-final consonants voicing. The domain domain of a rule like word-final devoicing appears appears to be phrasal in cases where a voiced consonant phrasal consonant remains remains before a vowel-initial generally stated stated as applying applying on a postlexical postlexical level, word. Such rules are generally instance, the level of the phonological indefor instance, phonological word. I argue that that if the the inde­ pendently motivated prihciple of extraprosodicity pendently motivated principle extraprosodicity is allowed to turn turn off stipulated level for a particular particular language, phrasal at a stipulated language, then then a putative putative phrasal rule can be seen to obey the principles principles of the lexical phonology. The problem concerns concerns some of the domain span, limit, and second problem the domain span, domain domain limit, domain juncture juncture rules identified identified by Vogel 1984. that the mode of domain 1984. I show that application of these predicted by the proposed application these rules is predicted proposed model.

1

Lexical Phonology Lexical Phonology

Within the model of Lexical Phonology, phonology is divided divided into two Within Phonology, the phonology components, the lexical phonology and the postlexical components, phonology and postlexical phonology. (See Kiparsky 1986; Pulleyblank 1986; Kaisse 1985 Kiparsky 1982a, 1985b; Mohanan Mohanan 1986; Pulleyblank 1986; and others.) This division is motivated by the different ways in which and others.) This division motivated phonological rules apply in each component. These differences in rule phonological apply component. application are summarized application summarized in (1), from Pulleyblank Pulleyblank 1986:7. 1986:7.

e.

lexical lexical rules rules may refer to word-internal word-internal structure structure may not apply apply across words may be cyclic if cyclic, subject subject to strict strict cycy­ cle structurepreserving structure-preserving

f.

may have lexical exceptions exceptions

g. g-

must must precede precede all postlexical postlexical rule applications applications

( 1) a.

b. c. d.

pbstlexical rules rules postlexical cannot word-internal cannot refer to word-internal structure structure may apply apply across words may not be cyclic noncyclic, hence across-theacross-theboard board need not be structurestructure­ preserving preserving cannot have lexical excepexcep­ cannot tions must follow all lexical rule applications applications

hypothesized that In early early Lexical Phonology, it was hypothesized that phonological phonological rules were assigned assigned to levels, either either to a lexical level or to the postlexical postlexical level ((e.g., e.g., Kiparsky Kiparsky 1982a). In more recent recent work on the lexical component, component, it has been been argued argued that that the phonology phonology is better better viewed as a unified black. block. Phonological available from the Phonological rules are available the outset outset of the phonology, with their actual application their actual application being being governed governed by three three interacting interacting principles, principles, the Strong Domain Domain Hypothesis, the Strong Hypothesis, the the Strict Strict Cycle Condition, Condition, and and Structure Structme Preservation. Preservation. These principles principles are summarized summarized in (2).

291

(2) Strong Strong Domain Domain Hypothesis Hypothesis (SDH): The grammar grammar may stipulate stipulate merely where a rule ceases to apply. All rules are potentially potentially appliappli­ cable at the first level of the lexicon, and apply apply there there provided provided only that principles of the that the the principles the grammar grammar permit permit it; at lower levels of the lexicon and and in the postlexical postlexical phonology rules may be 'turned ‘turned off' off’ but 1984). but no new ones may be added added (Kiparsky (Kiparsky 1984). Strict Strict Cycle Condition Condition (SCC): If W is derived from a lexical enen­ try nondistinct from XPAQY and try W', W', where W' W' is nondistinct and distinct distinct from XPBQY, B// XP _QYY cannot XPBQY, then then a rule A-+ A -> B X P_Q cannot apply apply to W until until the word level (Kiparsky (Kiparsky 1985b:89). Structure features and structures Structure Preservation Preservation (SP): Nondistinctive Nondistinctive features structmes cannot introduced in the cannot be introduced the lexical phonology phonology (after (after Kiparsky Kiparsky 1985b).

While the SDH states states that that rules are available until until they they turn turn off, prepre­ venting venting a rule from beginning beginning application apphcation at any arbitrary arbitrary point point of the derivation, availderivation, all rules do not not in reality reality begin begin application application at at the first avail­ able domain. domain. This, Kiparsky Kiparsky argues, argues, is due to the interaction interaction of the SCC and and SP with with the SDH.

2

Postlexical Phonology Phonology Postlexical

Although 'postlexical phonology' encompasses Although ‘postlexical phonology’ encompasses word- and and phrasephrase- level phonology, the primary primary discussion discussion in Lexical Phonology Phonology has centered centered on the the word level.2^ Rule application application has received sophisticated sophisticated treatment treatment in word-level phonology, as outlined there has outlined above. In phrasal phrasal phonology, there also been considerable postlexical rules considerable focus on the domains domains in which postlexical apply apply and and how those domains domains are determined determined (see Selkirk, Kaisse, Nespor and Vogel, and others). Vogel, Hayes, and others). The question question of rule application application is largely neglected, however, even in a model such as that that of Kaisse 1985, which draws explicit parallels parallels between between the lexical and 1985, and phrasal phrasal phopho­ typical rule of the postlexical phonology is generally simply nology. A typical postlexical phonology generally simply assigned instance, Kaisse 1986 assigned to the the domain domain on which it applies. For instance, identifies Turkish Turkish liquid devoicing as a rule of the utterance utterance domain domain and Nespor and Vogel 1986 assign Italian Nespor Italian syntactic syntactic doubling doubling to the the phonophono­ logical phrase phrase level. The conception conception of rule application application at the the level of connected thus quite connected speech is thus quite different different from that that at the the level of word. 2

See Kaisse Kaisse 1985 for an exception exception to this this statement. Kaisse treats ^See statement. Kaisse treats rules rules of the the phrasai Lexical Phonology mode!, suggesting just as the the lexip h r^ a l phonology phonology within within a Lexical Phonology model, suggesting that that just lexi­ con is divided the phrasal phrasai phonology. rules, consista divided into levels, so is the phonology. Her first !evel, level, Pl P I rules, consists of rules th that structure, specifically specifically to the at are sensitive sensitive to sentence sentence structure, the structural structural relationrelation­ ship between between words in sentences; sentences; these these rules rules have many many of the the characteristics characteristics of lexical rules second level, P2 rules, contains contains the apply rules that that are shown shown in (1). Her second the rules rules that th at apply across-the-board, having characteristics of the the postlexical across-the-board, having characteristics postlexical rules in (1).

/

I

292 Keren D. llice Rice

The predicting where and The principles principles available for predicting and how rules apply apply at the the word level have not been been extended extended to the phrasal phrasal phonology, and rules of connected connected speech are simply simply marked marked for the domain domain they they apply apply on. that the principles I propose propose that principles in (2) which determine determine domains domains of rule application relevant for the application in the lexical phonology phonology are also relevant the phrase-level phrase-level particular, the phonology. In particular, the SDH predicts predicts that that rules will apply apply until until they are turned turned off; point can corne phrasal. 3 they off; this point come at any level, lexical or phrasal.^ SP delays the application allophonic rules, or rules introducing introducing nondisapplication of allophonic tinctive features, features, until nonderived level, the highest prosodie tinctive until a nonderived highest level of the the prosodic hierarchy. hierarchy. By considering considering rule application govapplication in the phrasal phrasal phonology phonology to be gov­ erned by the same principles erned principles that that govern word-level phonology, the phopho­ consists of a number number of levels: lexical nology is unified. The phonology phonology consists levels (determined (determined by the language) and phrasal language) and phrasal levels of phonological phonological word, phonological phrase, intonational phrase, phonological phrase, intonational phrase, and utterance. utterance.^4 Levels below the utterance or intonational intonational phrase) tradiutterance ((or phrase) have characteristics characteristics tradi­ tionally assigned to lexical rules, as outlined in (1). It is only rules of tionally rules, outlined the highest domain, the utterance, that have characteristics generally the highest domain, utterance, that characteristics generally thought postlexical: they they are gradient; gradient; they they can create segthought of as postlexical: create novel seg­ ments, sequences, and syllable exceptions. ments, syllable types; types; they they do not have lexical exceptions. In addition, that are sensitive to length constituent addition, these these are the rules that length of constituent and sensitive to location and rate rate of speech; they they are sensitive location of focused elements elements and to pause pause (see Kaisse and Zwicky 1987). The characteristics characteristics of lexical rules thus thus extend determining extend far outside outside the lexicon, as do the principles principles determining application application of the rules. This model has advantages This advantages over the the standard standard view of rule application application postlexical phonology. It predicts predicts that, that, subject subject to other in the postlexical other constraints, constraints, any rule that that applies postlexically postlexically can also apply lexically. It predicts that predicts that there discontinuities in rule domains Mohanan’s 1982 there will not be discontinuities domains (see Mohanan's continuity requires learning continuity of strata strata hypothesis). hypothesis). It requires learning about about a rule only where it turns turns off, since its other other properties properties are predictable predictable from general general principles of the grammar. grammar. principles 3

My conception ®My conception of the the phrasai phrasal phonology phonology may may be somewhat somewhat different different from from that th at in the discussions of the e.g., the the literature. literature. ln In discussions the prosodie prosodic hierarchy hierarchy ((e.g., the work of Selkirk, Selkirk, Hayes, Hayes, Nespor phrasai prosodie considered to be similar the levels Jevels Nespor and and Vogel), phrasal prosodic domains domains are are considered similar to the foot and and syllable. sy Hable. The The levels such Hable and here ((once once of foot such as sy syllable and foot are available available everyw everywhere the structure prosodic levels are, are, I daim, claim, like lexical the stnicture is assigned) assigned) while while the the other other prosodie lexical levels, ceasing to be available avaiiable once they are are left. ceasing once they 4 ■*There disagreement in the the Jiterature literature about about how many many phrasal There is disagreement phrasai levels there there are. Kaisse 1985 identifies identifies two levels while Nespor and and Vogel 1986 identify identify four, phonologKaisse while Nespor four, phonolog­ phrase, intonational intonational phrase, and utterance. utterance. As ical word word (clitic (clitic group), group), phonological phonological phrase, phrase, and pointed out Kaisse and and Zwicky Zwicky 1987, Kaisse's PlI rules rules are largely largely equivalent pointed out by Kaisse Kaisse’s P equivalent to Nespor and and Vogel’s Vogel's phonological and phonological Kaisse's Nespor phonological word word ajid phonological phrase phrase rules, rules, while while Kcdsse’s P2 rules rules are are largely and Vogel’s phrase and and utter­ Jargely equivalent equivalent to Nespor Nespor and Vogel's intonational intonational phrase utterance level rules. grouping together rules of the the intonational intonational phrase phrase and ance rules. I follow Kaisse, Kaisse, grouping together rules utterance particular, allophonic are available available utterance levels as they they share share properties; properties; in particular, allophonic rules rules are for application application on these these levels, but but not not before. before.

Predicting Rule Domains Domains in the Phrasal Phonology Phonology 293 Predicting the Phrasal

3

Extraprosodicity and and Res y llabification Extraprosodicity Resyllabification

One potential proposed model cornes languages with potential problem problem for the proposed comes from languages with rules affecting word-final consonants. consonants. For instance, many languages instance, in many languages word-final word-final consonants consonants devoice when the the following word is consonant-iniconsonant-ini­ tial, but but fail to devoice when when the following word is vowel-initial. Such cases have been treated treated by marking marking word-final devoicing as applying applying on a phfasal level, and phrasal and ordering ordering it after after a rule of resyllabification resyllabification which moves word-final available onset position, position, bleeding word-final consonants consonants into an available bleeding wordfinal devoicing. In this section, I offer an alternative this section, alternative solution, solution, one based based the proposal proposa! that word-final consonants consonants that that are possible onsets are on the that word-final possible onsets extra prosodie. · extraprosodic. Extraprosodicity renders consonants invisible for pur­ purExtraprosodicity renders a consonant consonant or consonants poses of the phonology. A consonant consonant that that is extraprosodic extraprosodic does not par­ participate syllabification (or other other phonological phonological rules); it becomes ticipate in syllabification becomes visible for syllabification syllabification and and other other rules only after after extraprosodicity extraprosodicity is turned turned off. off. According Itô 1986 and and Borowsky 1986, extraprosodicity turns off at According to Ito extraprosodicity turns postlexical level, where the postlexical the postlexical postlexical level is essentially essentially the word level. I propose propose that and that that it must that extraprosodicity extraprosodicity is found universally universally and languages be allowed to turn turn off at levels other other than than the word level. level.®5 In languages where extraprosodicity turns off at the word level, final consonants that extraprosodicity turns consonants that are possible onsets are invisible until until the word level. When extraprosodWhen extraprosod­ icity turns they become visible and turns off, they and must get syllabified. English English is apparently language (see Nespor Nespor and Vogel 1986:64-65 apparently such a language 1986:64-65 for disdis­ cu~sion). cussion). In languages languages where final consonants consonants lose their their extraprosodicity extraprosodicity at the phonological phrase, phrase, they until this the level of the phonological they are not visible until available for syllabification syllabification at earlier earlier stages. stages. If level, and and thus thus are not available consonants can remain stipulated level of the postlexical postlexical consonants remain invisible until until a stipulated contrast, extraprosodicity extraprosodicity phonology, we can maintain maintain the SDH. If, by contrast, must turn turn off at the the word level postlexically, postlexically, then does not exist or must then the SbH, although must be abandoned SDH, although tenable tenable in the the word-level phonology, must abandoned for the t,he phrasal phrasal phonology. The extraprosodicity leads to a simplification simplification of withinwithinThe assumption assumption of extraprosodicity word syllabification. syllabification. It is generally generally agreed agreed that that the CV syllable syllable is unun­ marked, univermarked, a within-morpheme within-morpheme sequence sequence of VCV being being syllabified syllabified univer­ sally as V.CV. In a theory morpheme of the theory without without extraprosodicity, extraprosodicity, a morpheme shape with the final consonant shape CVC will be initially initially syllabified syllabified with consonant in the rhyme. If a vowel-initial suffix is added, added, the final consonant consonant of the the first morpheme delinked from rhyme position of the first syllable morpheme must must be delinked rhyme position syllable and resyllabified into onset position position of the second syllable. Thus, proresyllabified Thus, two pro­ cesses, syllabification syllabification and resyllabification, are required and resyllabification, required for filling onsets. Resyllabifiçation structure-changing operation, Resyllabififiation is a structure-changing operation, one which destroys destroys 5

ltô 1986 argues universally operative operative lexically_and univer®Ito argues that that extraprosodicity extraprosodicity is universally lexically, and univer­ sally postlexically. Its at the (lexical) word level Jevel is, she suggests, suggests, sally absent absent postlexically. Its availability availability at the (lexical) subject parametric variation. subject to parametric variation.

:j •

1

l

,/ 294 Keren Keren D. llice Rice

Predicting Rule Domains Domains in the Phrasal Phrasal Phonology Phonology 295 Predicting

syllable structure that has already syllable structure that already been been built. built. As discussed discussed by Steriade Steriade 1988, syllabification syllabification rules generally generally operate operate in a structure-building structure-building way, not not in a structure-changing structure-changing way. Given this, this, it would be desirable desirable to elimelim­ inate inventory of putative inate resyllabification resyllabification from the the inventory putative cases of structurestructure­ changing changing rules. Extraprosodicity Extraprosodicity allows between-morpheme between-morpheme cases of VC+ VC-I-V ini­ V to be initially syllabified as V.CV, never as VC.V. If tially final consonants that If consonants that are possible onsets are considered considered to be extraprosodic, possible then extraprosodic, then when syllabifica­ syllabification tion of VC occurs, the the final consonant consonant is not visible and is not not syllabified. When When the suffix is added, added, extraprosodicity extraprosodicity is lost since a segment segment can be extraprosodic extraprosodic only when on an edge. The consonant consonant now syllabifies directly unmarked syllable structure. directly as an onset, onset, giving the the unmarked structure. This This is illus­ illustrated in (3), a Lardil example taken trated Lardil example taken from Itô Ito 1986. Extraprosodicity Extraprosodicity is marked marked by parentheses. parentheses.

(3) JJaluk-in galuk-in 'story' ‘story’ a(l

/\ A

r) lJ

a(l

a

//\\

1

(l o

u

3.1

a(l

!\ A

l\ A

(l

(l

g aa i 1 n u lJ

A /\

r) lJ a

(k)

k

a

A /\

1

that have the final consonant consonant of the preceding preceding word filling onset words that position must must have this consonant consonant placed placed there there by resyllabification. resyllabification. position suggest that that just just as a distinction distinction between between syllabification syllabification and I suggest and resyl­ resyllabification is incorrect incorrect in the lexical phonology, it is also incorrect incorrect in the labification phrasal phonology; in other other words, it is not the case that that onsets phrasal onsets are filled syllabification at the word level but but by resyllabification resyllabification at higher higher levels by syllabification prosodie structure. structure. This dichotomy dichotomy arises only from the assumption of prosodic assumption that syllabification syllabification is complete complete at the word level. If If this is not correct, that correct, remain extraprosodic extraprosodic beyond beyond the word level, then and if segments can remain then between-word syllabification syllabification is just just like within-word within-word syllabification. syllabification. Ex­ Exbetween-word traprosodicity will still be blocked from tmning turning off nntil until at least the word traprosodicity because of structure structure preservation, preservation, as argued argued by Ito. level because Itô. However, just just exactly where it turns turns off is determined determined by the language. exactly Turkish, analyzed analyzed within within a Lexical Phonology I first look at a case from Turkish, Phonology framework by Kaisse 1986. Her analysis analysis is problematic problematic for a theory framework theory which assumes the SDH, prosodic prosodie licensing, and extraprosodicity. extraprosodicity. However, if assumes extraprosodicity is allowed to turn turn off at a level later later than extraprosodicity than the word, then then uniform analysis without without resyllabification resyllabification becomes available. I then then look a uniform similar cases in Slave (northern (northern Athapaskan) Athapaskan) and Cairene Arabic.® at similar Arabic. 6

i n Il (l

u

A /\.

k

i (n)

By using extraprosodicity extraprosodicity at the the word level, onsets onsets can always be filled directly directly by syllabification. syllabification. Onset Onset consonants consonants in cases such as (3) need not first be syllabified as rhymes rhymes and and then then resyllabified resyllabified as onsets. Many languages languages exhibit exhibit syllabification syllabification of a final consonant consonant of one mormor­ pheme pheme into the same syllable syllable as an initial initial vowel vowel of the following mormor­ pheme, pheme, both and between between words. For between-word both within within words and between-word cases, the the assumption assumption has generally generally been been made that that word-final consonants consonants are initially initially syllabified as rhymes rhymes and then resyllabified as onsets. onsets. This This is and then made Nespor and made explicit explicit in Nespor and Vogel 1986:68-69. 1986:68-69. The The need for both both syllabisyllabi­ fication and resyllabification fication resyllabification is also implicit implicit in the model of syllabification syllabification proposed proposed by Itô Ito 1986. While Itô Ito accounts accounts nicely for syllabification syllabification of the final consonant consonant of a morpheme morpheme as an onset when the the following morpheme morpheme within within the the word is vowel-initial, she proposes, proposes, as mentioned mentioned above, that that extraprosodicity extraprosodicity turris turns off at the the word level. Prosodie Prosodic licensing, the the rere­ quirement quirement that that all units units be linked linked to higher higher levels of structure, structure, necessitates necessitates that that once a consonant consonant loses its extraprosodicity, extraprosodicity, it either either be syllabified syllabified or lost by stray stray erasure. erasure. Thus, Thus, word-final consonants must must be syllabified syllabified at word-final consonants the the word level. By extension, extension, in between-word vowel-initial second between-word cases, vowel-initial

.

Turkish Turkish

Turkish process process of syllable-final syllable-final stop Kaisse 1986 discusses a Turkish stop devoicing postlexical characteristics, characteristics, but which, she suggests, has lexical and postlexical but is best treated treated as a postlexical postlexical rule with with lexical exceptions. Turkish, stops devoice syllable-finally, where syllable-final In Turkish, syllable-final pattern­ patternboth at word edge and word internally. Examples ing is found both Examples are given in (4). sarap, saraplar saraplar (cf. sarap) sarap) (4) sarap, güc, giicler gücler (cf. giijii) güjü) giic, (cf. gider) git, gitmek (cf.

‘wine’ 'wine' (nom. sg., nom. pi., pl., acc. ace. sg.) ‘power’ 'power' (nom. (nom. sg., sg., nom. nom. pi., pl., acc. ace. sg.) sg.) ‘go’ 'go' (imp, (imp, inf, inf, aor) aor)

assume that that syllable-final syllable-final devoicing is a delinking delinking rule, as in (5), I assume although the exact formulation formulation is not relevant although relevant to this paper. paper.

(5)

R

I1 X X

I1

o0

laryngeal laryngeal

+ 'f

[-H voice] [+voice] 6

Nespor and Vogel 1986 suggest suggest that Nespor that French French provides provides an argument argument for resyllabifi­ resyllabification, since a consonant consonant must must function cation, fonction as a rhyme rhyme to trigger trigger a syllable-based syllable-based rule rule but but IS is actually actually syllabified syllabified as an onset. onset. Space Space prohibits prohibits an analysis analysis of the French French facts facts here; suggest that that in French French there briefly, I suggest there is not not resyllabification, resyllabification, but but spreading spreading to fill an empty empty onset. onset.

'

'!'

1

1 ••

296 Keren Rice Keren D. llice value unmarked value supply the unmarked A defau default rule appli applies, following delinking, to supply ing delinking, es, follow lt rule A obstruents. f-voicel [-voice) to obstruents. may it may However, it word. However, within a word. Syllable-final applies within always applies devoicing always nal devoicing ble-fi Sylla ed follow is word final nantconso fail to apply apply in in conn connected word is followed speech when a consonant-final ected speech fail to ples, exam ing 7 follow the in by vowel-initial word.^ This can be seen following examples, . This l-initial word by aa vowe e. Kaiss taken from Kaisse. taken

(6)

saraft ald-i aldi sarab wine take wine' ‘he 'he took wine’

ak-iyor bu Sara sarab6 akiyor pour this wine pour ng' ‘this pouring’ 'this wine is pouri leng anlamak anlamak reng understand rstand color unde ‘to color’' understand color 'to understand or okuy Arnavud okuyor vud Arna Albanian Albanian read reading' ‘the Albanian is reading’ 'the Albanian vowelion is ing the stop in quest In following question is vowelthe word follow (6), the in (6), phrases in the phrases In the amand is icing devo l, initia nantinitial. devoicing is manda­ conso following word is consonant-initial, the following When the l. When initia tory. satt-i sarap satti (7) sarap wine sold ‘he sold wine wine’' 'he sarap verdi sarap wine gave wine' ‘he 'he gave wine’ (6) as (6) such as forms such As the existe existence voicedd stops in forms nce of voice out, the points out, Kaisse points As Kaisse in those as such as those in words such voicing since words cannot intervocalic voicing regarded as intervocalic be regarded cannot be ces. mstan r all nant unde (8) main maintain voiceless finalconso consonant under allcircu circumstances. less final tain aavoice (8) sg.) ace. sg.) pl., acc. (nom. sg., nom. pi., (8) top, 'ball' (nom. topu ‘ball’ toplar, topu top, toplar, (8) ald-i aldi top ball took ball' ‘he took a ball’ 'he took

*tob

aldi ald-i

before aa ing before inhibit devoic rs are able TKaisse speakers able to inhibit devoicing al! speake 7 Kaisse 1986 "not all that “not notes that 1986 notes identif she that t dialec corne vowel-initial word." The data discussed here come from the dialect th at she i t o t i ies^ here sed discus vowel-initial word." The data Kaisse'ss on ent agreem total there as the ‘liaison dialect.’ It might be noted that there is not total agreement on Kaisse noted that as the 'liaison dialect.' It might the stops in ts that ted sugges consul I whom data A native Turkish speaker with whom consulted suggests that with r speake h Turkis data. A native the ing in yllabic, occurr but ambis question resyllabified, ambisyllabic, occurring m both both the bified, but voiced nor resylla neither voiced are neither question are ntly appare ing follow the of onset the rhyme and onset of the following apparently first word and the first syllable of the last syllable the last of the rhyme of ted the one similar to analysis similar vowel-initial to the one sugges suggested dialect, an analysU speaker's dialect, this speaker’s For this syllable. For vowel-initial syllabll proposed. might be proposed. for note 6 might French in note for French

Phoriology Phrasa! Phonology Predicting Domains in the Phrasal Predicting Rule Domains

297 297

syllabification that syllabification assumes that Kaisse analysis. She assumes following analysis. the following offers the Kaisse offers proceeds outlined in (9). proceeds as outlined slot V slot (9) syllable head over each V construct a syllable a. construct (9) a. right its right to its syllable to b. most one C as the onset of the syllable at most attach at b. attach left the left on the syllable on c. C's as codas to the syllable remaining C’s any remaining attach any c. attach second the second A syllabified as in (10). Only the /sarab/ will be syllabified as /sarab/ such as word such A word 8 n. show is ), hand at issue syllable hand), is shown.® relevant to the (the one relevant S);llable (the (10)

a

/l"-.

r a b optional an optional assumes an Kaisse assumes cases, Kaisse In order between-word cases, account for between-word to account In order to rule of resyllabification, resyllabification, given in (11). (11) Resyllabification Resyllabification a cr a

A,,,1

V C V devoicing. stop devoicing. syllable-final stop This before syllable-final extrinsically before orders extrinsically she orders rule she This rule be caimot be devoicing cannot revoiced, devoicing Kaisse cannot be revoiced, that since stops cannot remarks that Kaisse remarks apply to apply continue to allowed neutralization rule and continue lexically as a neutralization apply lexically to apply allowed to marked be must icing devo that s postlexically as well. Instead, she argues that devoicing must be marked argue postlexically as well. Instead, resyllabification. following resyllabification. as postlexical level only, following the postlexical at the place at taking place as taking abandonment an abandonment icing devo ish Implicit in Kaisse’s analysis of Turkish devoicing is an Turk Implicit in Kaisse's analysis stop solution, stop incorporated into her solution, of hypothesis were incorporated this hypothesis If this SDH. If the SDH. of the the n Give the level. Given word level. devoicing syllable-final stops at the word would apply to syllable-final devoicing would predicted. is predicted. [sarap) is SDH, representation for a word like [sarap] following representation the following SDH, the ((12) 12)

a

/\ A

oa

//1" K-

ss aa rr aa b b

apshould ap­ devoicing should The syllabified, and final devoicing consonant must be syllabified, final consonant The final force thus forcess aa analysis thus ply description is met. This analysis structural description its structural since its ply since Phonology. Lexical Phonology. weakening theory of Lexical weakening in the theory problemis problem­ analysis is Kaisse's analysis As well as weakening Lexical Phonology, ology, Kaisse’s Phon As well as weakening Lexical devoicing. stop devoicing. and stop resyllabification and atic ordering of resyllabification extrinsic ordering requiring extrinsic in requiring atic in that is that Phonology is Lexical Phonology An phonology and Lexical nonlinear phonology of nonhnear achievement of An achievement repre from repre­directly from ordering follow directly many, handled by rule ordering formerly handled cases formerly many. cases ordering rule ordering of rule effect of While the effect sentations principles. While independent principles. and independent sentations and stipulation than aa stipulation rather than principles, rather higher level principles, result of higher it'isis aa result persists, it ·' persists, grammar. in an individual individual grammar. will it will here, it discussed here, 8 ®Since relevant to the issues discussed structure is not relevant syllable structure internai syllable Since internal les. examp not be shown in the examples. shown

298 Keren Keren D. Rice

Predicting Rule Domains Domains in the Phrasal Phrasal Phonology Phonology 299 Predicting

An analysis analysis is possible consistent consistent with with the model proposed proposed in section section 2. By adopting adopting extraprosodicity, extraprosodicity, the the SDH can can be maintained maintained and and extrinsic extrinsic ordering ordering eliminated. eliminated. First First consider consider a within-word within-word case. Upon Upon syllabifisyllabifi­ cation, cation, a representative representative word has the the representation representation in (13). The The final consonant consonant is extraprosodic, extraprosodic, and and thus thus not not visible for syllabification. syllabification.

3.2

a

(13)

/\ A

ü ii

g

(j)

syllabification, syllabification, extraprosodicity extraprosodicity

Affixation and syllabification Affixation syllabification yield the the structure structure in (14). The The consonant consonant loses its extraprosodicity extraprosodicity since it is no longer on an edge. (14)

necessary since there there is no resyllabification. resyllabification. Thus, Thus, by allowing is not necessary extraprosodicity to shut off at a particular particular prosodic prosodie level, we achieve a extraprosodicity general analysis analysis of Turkish.® Turkish. 9 Turkish Turkish no longer poses a problem problem for more general model in which the lexical and postlexical postlexical phonology are unified. a model

similar case to Turkish Turkish is found in Slave ([slevi]), ([slevi]), an Athapaskan Athapaskan lanA similar guage of Canada. Canada. In Slave, syllable-final syllable-final obstruents obstruents are neutralized neutralized to ^a^ge

[h].10 (16) (16)

(7 a

/\ A

g

ii ü

j

iiu

Slave Slave

affixation, affixation, loss loss of of extraprosodicity extraprosodicity

ts'ah ts a,h mih mj/i dzéeh dzeeh téh teh

-ts'adé -ts’ade ‘hat’ 'hat' (nonpossessed, (nonpossessed, possessed) possessed) -mjie ‘net’ -milé 'net' -dzéegé ‘gum’ -dzeege 'gum' -tédhé -tedhe ‘cane’ 'cane'

9

a

A /\

g

Several interesting interesting questions questions about about Turkish Turkish arose arase in the the course course of discussion discussion at the the ^Several Phonology-Syntax Connection Connection workshop. workshop. Phonology-Syntax

a ü ii

j

/\ A

iiü

syllabification syllabification

When the the stop stop becomes available for syllabification, syllabification, it is syllabified di­ When becomes available syllabified directly rectly into into the onset onset of the the second second syllable. At no point point in the the derivation derivation is the structural structural description description for stop stop devoicing met. Between-word cases can be handled handled identically extraprosodicity is Between-word identically if extraprosodicity remain beyond beyond the the word level. A derivation derivation is shown in (15). allowed to remain syllabThe /b/ /b / is extraprosodic extraprosodic at the the word level, and thus thus not not visible for syllab­ ification. It becomes visible only when when a word is placed placed after after it, rendering rendering it no longer on an edge. At this point, it must be syllabified. this point, (15)

a(T

/\ A sS

a£

a(T

/\ A s a

a

aa

a

A /\

/\ A

/\ A

r

a

a (b) (b) a

syllabification of of indi­ india 11 dd ii syllabification vidual vidual words a

/f"A /N A /\ /\ r a bb aa 11 dd i i

words inin concatenation, concatenation, words removal of extraprosodicity, extraprosodicity, syllabification syllabification

When the syllabification, it is assigned When the stop stop becomes available available for syllabification, assigned directly directly to an onset. onset. Again, the structural structmal description description for devoicing is never never met during dming the the derivation. derivation. Stop Stop devoicing devoicing applies applies lexically whenever whenever it can; with with word-edge consonants consonants it cannot cannot apply apply until until the consonant consonant is syllabsyllab­ ified, at a phrasal phrasal level. Kaisse's Kaisse’s analysis analysis involves stipulating stipulating the domain domain of stop stop devoicing and · a statement statement of rule ordering. ordering. The The extraprosodicity extraprosodicity analysis analysis allows the maintenance maintenance of the SDH. What What must must be stipulated stipulated is where the the rule stops stop devoicing and resyllabification stops applying. applying. Extrinsic Extrinsic ordering ordering of stop resyllabification

alternations. As discussed discussed by Sezer 1981, Clements Clements and Keyser Keyser 1983 and (a) k-0 alternations. others, underlying underlying word-final word-final //k/ deletes under under certain certain circumstances. circumstances. While While others, k / deletes deletes before before a vowel-initial vowel-initial suffix, it remains remains before before a vowel-initial vowel-initial word. //k/ k / deletes The formulation formulation of k-deletion k-deletion is complex, complex, and worthy worthy of attention. attention. I assume assume The that it can be formalized formalized and and suggest suggest that that it turns turns off at the lexical lexical word level level. th at It Ward-final consonants consonants do not not meet meet the the structural structural description description of the the rule since Word-final they are extraprosodic, extraprosodic, and and thus thus remain remain before before a vowel-initial vowel-initial word. they There are word-final word-final geminates geminates in Turkish. Turkish. W. Poser Poser pointed pointed out out th that neither of (b) There at neither the consonants consonants of the the geminate syllabified; if the the first one were, one might the geminate can be syllabified; expect final devoicing devoicing to always always apply. apply. This This is not what what happens. happens. A notion notion of expect extraprosodicity in which both bath consonant consonant positions positions of a geminate geminate are invisible invisible extraprosodicity is needed. needed. The The structural structural description description of syllable-final syllable-final devoicing devoicing would then then not IS met until after after affixation. affixation. At this this point, point, the first half half of the the geminate geminate would be met the rhyme rhyme and the second second half half in the the onset onset if the the affix is vowel-initial. vowel-initial. be in the The Linking Linking Constraint Constraint (Hayes (Hayes 1986) predicts predicts that that devoicing devoicing should should not apply apply The since the the consonant consonant is doubly doubly linked, linked, yielding yielding a voiced geminate. geminate. Degemination Degemination since occurs when when the the geminate geminate is followed by a consonant; consonant; this this can be followed by occurs devoicing. devoicing. The third third issue is more complex. complex. The The maximal maximal Turkish Turkish rhyme rhyme is binary binary branch­ branch(c) The discussed by Clements Clements and and Keyser Keyser 1983, there there are several several processes processes in ing. As discussed Turkish which ensure ensure that that binarity binarity is not not violated. violated. One is vowel shortening. shortening. It Turkish apparently applies applies within within a word, word, suggesting suggesting that that the final consonant consonant is part part of apparently the this is the the case, the extraprosodicity extraprosodicity the rhyme rhyme as well as part part of the the onset. onset. If this analysis might might not be the the best best one. Rather, Rather, the the analysis analysis suggested suggested for French, French, analysis outlined m in note note 6. 6, might might be more more appropriate. appropriate. Under Under this this analysis, analysis, there there is outlined not a phrasal phrasai distinction distinction between between voiced and voiceless consonants, consonants, with a voice­ voicenot consonant in a rhyme rhyme and and a voiced consonant consonant in an onset, onset, but but rather rather a less consonant difference between between single consonants consonants and and geminates, geminates, with with the the single consonant consonant difference occurring when the the following word is consonant-initial consonant-initial and the the geminate geminate when when occurring '.isvowel-initial. vowel-initial. These These data data require require further further investigation. investigation. it is 10

the practical practical orthography. orthography. A hook under under a vowel represents represents nasalization; nasalization; an I1 use the acute accent accent,isis High tone. tone. The The following symbols symbols require require comment: comment: dh=S, dh=o, l=voiceless l=voiceless acute lateral fricative, fricative, l=voiced l=voiced lateral lateral fricative, fricative, e=[e], e=[E], ee=[e]. Note that that laterals laterals function fonction as lateral nonsonorants in Slave. nonsonorants

300 Keren Keren D. Rice

Predicting Rule Domains Domains in the Phrasal Predicting Phrasal Phonology Phonology 301

In the the suffixed forms, the structural structmal description description for neutralization neutralization is not met since the consonant consonant in question question is in an onset. onset. In the nonsuffixed forms, neutralization neutralization applies applies since the the consonant consonant is in the the rhyme. rhyme. In addition addition to vowel-initial vowel-initial suffixes, suffixes. Slave possesses vowel-initial clitics. 11 Some are shown in (17). Sorne

Phonology. Neutralization Neutralization cannot cannot apply to a form such as /t Lexical Phonology. s ’ad/ /ts'ad/ consonant is extraprosodic extraprosodic and therefore since the final consonant therefore invisible. When /-é/ is added, the consonant consonant is no longer extraprosodic. the suffix /-e/ extraprosodic. How­ Howstructural description description for neutralization neutralization is still not met because ever, the structural because originally extraprosodic extraprosodic segment segment now forms an onset. A derivation the originally derivation of [-ts'adé] is shown in (20).^^ [-ts’ade] (20). 12

(17)

(20)

egyh égl)h lie He e oli

'past' ‘past’ 'negative' ‘negative’ 'future' ‘future’ 'future' ‘future’

ts'ad ts’ad O'

/\ A

ts' a ts’

When a consonant-final precedes a vowel-initial clitic, neutralization When consonant-final word precedes neutralization fails to apply, as seen in (18). (18)

ts'e7ah ts’eTah ts'e7al ts’e?aZ He fie ts'e7al ts’eTai oli

/\ A

'one ‘one eats' eats’ 'one ‘one does not not eat' eat’ 'one is going to eat’ ‘one eat'

ohTa/i enidh§ oh7ah enidh~ lsg.opt.eat Isg.opt.eat 3 want ‘s/he wants wants to eat' eat’ 's/he cf. (18)

b.

nénéh neneh adani adani 3 is long 3 becomes ‘it 'it is getting getting long’ long' nénédhi ‘that cf. nened/ii 'that is long (relative (relative clause)’ clause)'

c.

dzee/i eli efi dzéeh gum 3 is 'pink' ‘pink’ cf. -dzéegé -dzee^e 'gum ‘gum (possessed (possessed form)' form)’

In a theory theory lacking extraprosodicity, extraprosodicity, where syllabification syllabification of all segseg­ ments ments is required required at the the word level, neutralization neutralization will have to apply apply at the the phonological phrase phrase level. The The stem-suffix stem-suffix and word-clitic word-clitic combinations phonological combinations escape the rule because because the consonant escape consonant is in an onset when the phono­ phonological phrase phrase is reached. reached. In word-word consonant is in a word-word sequences, the consonant rhyme; thus thus meeting meeting the structural structural description description of the rule. The The rule must be blocked from applying applying until until the phonological phonological phrase phrase is reached; reached; this can be done only by stipulating stipulating the phonological phonological phrase phrase as its domain. domain. Again, Again, if we allow extraprosodicity extraprosodicity to turn turn off at a stipulated stipulated level, we obtain obtain an alternative alternative treatment treatment which conforms to the the principles principles of ll See ^^See

Rice ((forthcoming forthcoming a, b) for further a,b) further discussion. discussion.

syllabification syllabification

aO'

ts' a ts’

d

aO'

ts' a ts’

eé

morphology, loss of extraprosodicity morphology, extraprosodicity

é

syllabification syllabification

O'

/\ A

When a consonant-final consonant-final word precedes When other vowel-initial vowel-initial word, the precedes any other consonant neutralized to [h], consonant is neutralized [h], as in (19). (19) a.

(d)

Î\ d

Assuming that that words leave the word level with extraprosodic Assuming extraprosodic final consonants, then then the clitic facts can also be accounted accounted for in the same consonants, straightforward way. At the the level of the phonological phonological word, where stem straightforward extraprosodic consonant consonant becomes visible since and clitic are combined, the extraprosodic then syllabified into the onset of the it is no longer on an edge. It is then Extraprosodicity shuts shuts off in general following syllable. Extraprosodicity general at this point point to that at higher levels, final consonants consonants are syllabified as rhymes ensure that Prosodie licensing places all now-visible and not as onsets (see (19)). Prosodic consonants in the rhyme, creating creating a structure structure that that meets the word-final consonants structural description description of neutralization. neutralization. structural 3.3

Cairene Arabic Cairene Arabie

discussion of Cairene Cairene Arabic Arabie syllable structure, structure, shows Broselow 1979, in a discussion that syllabification syllabification takes place across words. Following Broselow, syllab­ syllabthat ification is indicated indicated with ‘.’ '.' and emphatic emphatic sounds ification sounds with capitals. capitals. (21a) that a word-final consonant consonant syllabifies as the onset of a and (21c) show that comparison with (21a). following vowel-initial word. (21b) is given for comparison (21) a.

FADDAl#ilwalad FADDAl^ilwalad FAD.DA.lil.wa.lad FAD.DA.lil.wa.lad ',he preferred preferred the boy’ boy' ‘he

12

There are some consonant-initial consonant-initial suffixes in Slave as well. With ^^There With these, these, the the conso­ consonant must must syllabify syllabify into into the the rhyme rhyme of the the first first syllable, syllable, and the nant the structural structural description description neutralization is met. for neutralization

•i

302 Keren Keren D. Rice

Predicting Domains in the Phrasal Phrasal Phonology Phonology Predicting Rule Domains

b.

(iddal)#FADDA#lilwalad (iddal)#FADDA#lilwalad FAD.DA.lil.wa.lad FAD.DA.lil.wa.lad '(he gave) silver to the the boy’ boy' ‘(he

c.

mis#ana mis#ana mi.sa.na mi.sa.na 'not rI' ‘not

(21c), if the final consonant not syllabified In (21a) and (21c), consonant of the first word is not until the word level, it can be syllabified syllabified directly directly as an onset postlexically. until postlexically. This This analysis analysis allows a simple simple account account of emphasis. emphasis. As discussed discussed in emphasis has the syllable as its domain. Broselow and elsewhere, emphasis domain. If If the rhyme, it final consonant consonant of /FADDAl/ /FADDAl/ in (21a) first syllabifies in the the rhyme, should be emphatic. emphatic. It would have to lose its emphasis emphasis when resyllabified should resyllabified If it is syllabified directly as onset of the following syllable. If directly as an onset, domain of emphasis. undone, it is never within within the the domain emphasis. Emphasis Emphasis need not be undone, thus eliminating thus eliminating a structure-changing structure-changing process. Evidence from epenthesis epenthesis in Cairene suggests that that extraprosodEvidence Cairene also suggests extraprosodicity turns turns off at a phrasal phrasal level. As Broselow points points out, out, the the maximum maximum number of consonants consonants that that can syllable is one, exnumber can open or close a Cairene Cairene syllable ex­ cept syllable-final consonants phrase. When When cept in the case of syllable-final consonants at the edge of a phrase. more than than one consonant consonant occurs beginning of a word, only the occurs at the beginning the concon­ sonant the vowel is directly Epenthesis occurs sonant closest to the directly syllabified. Epenthesis occurs so that prosodically licensed.^^ licensed. 13 This This is shown in that other other consonants consonants may be prosodically (22). ( 22).

At the the word edge, final consonant consonant clusters clusters are allowed, as illustrated illustrated in (23). While the core rhyme Cairene is binary adjunction rhyme in Cairene binary branching, branching, adjunction at the word edge creates creates superheavy superheavy syllables. hint bint katabt katabt

discussed in recent phonological phonological literature literature (e.g., Ito Itô 1986), epenthe­ epentheAs discussed thought of as a syllable, syllable. repair repair strategy strategy motivated motivated by'the by'the need sis can be thought prosodie licensing. If for prosodic If the the final consonants consonants of the first words in the examples phrasal level, there there is no reason reason for examples in (24) are licensed at the the phrasal epenthesis to occur. However, if these these consonants consonants are extraprosodic extraprosodic until until epenthesis epenthesis will follow directly directly fi:om from the theory: this level, then then epenthesis theory: once the consonants become visible through through the loss of extraprosodicity, extraprosodicity, the consonants the unun­ consonant cannot the rhyme without creating an illicit licensed consonant cannot go into the without creating epenthesis must place. 14 syllable. In order to license the the consonant, consonant, epenthesis must take place.^^ derivation of the A derivation the first form in (24) is shown in (25).

(25) syllabification syllabification at at word word level level f

(7

/~ K

b i

'girl' ‘girl’ 'letter' ‘letter’

doser examination Cairene cross-word data that it is in A closer examination of Cairene data shows that fact not the word edge at which superheavy superheavy syllables are allowed, but but in fact not phrase edge. As the examples with a fact at the phrase examples in (24) show, when a word with superheavy syllable is non-phrase-final superheavy non-phrase-final and followed by a consonant-initial consonant-initial epenthesis must take place. The epenthetic epenthetic vowel is italicized. italicized. word, epenthesis (24) bint hint nabiiha nabiiha -+ —» binti binti nabiiha nabiiha

'an intelligent girl' ‘an intelligent girl’

katabt gawaab gawaab -+ gawaab katabt —* katabti katabtz gawaab

A /\

(t)

n

a(7

a

//Î'--. K

bb i

(7 a

i

A /\

h ha a

extraprosodicity word concatenation, concatenation, loss of extraprosodicity (7 (7 vacya vac + speak speak - ger

pranca:h --+prancah pranc + ah -+ praiic -Ipl Easterner nom pi er Eastern it that it suggests that that suggests suffixation that It apply in suffixation failure of final voicing to apply the failure is the It is upon er, Howev within but is a juncture rule, applying between but not within words. However, upon n betwee g applyin is ajuncture structure, that include syllable structure, the repreèentations that introduction of richer representations the introduction s. emerge s analysi then an alternative analysis emerges. alternative then exof ex­ discussion of with the discussion We Consistent with suffixation. Consistent first at suffixation. look first We look osodic extrapr root of ant conson traprosodicity in section 3, the final consonant a root is extraprosodic traprosodicity belonging as belonging 24 properties as these properties identifies these ^■*This explicit by Kaisse 1985, who identifies made explicit is maxle This is ernal word-int to rules of P I. Rules that apply on P2 are not allowed access to any word-internal to rules of Pl. Rules that apply . structure Structure. see to see 25 analysis to careful analysis require careful rules require juncture rules domain juncture ~roposed as domain rules proposed ~he rules of the Some of • ^®Some Ewe. in found rule raising tone the just what their properties are. One example of this is the tone raising rule found in Ewe. ofthis example JUS~ what the1r_properties phrase. within aa phrase. This between words within compounds and between words in compounds between words apphes between rule applies This rule ed· formulat best is the unclear (See Clements 1978 for discussion.) It is unclear how the rule is best formulated; lt n.) discussio (See Clements sin~ feature since nondistinctive feature introduces a nondistinctive current at it introduces that appear th formulations make it appear current formulations tone. extrahigh tone. it creates creates an extrahigh

1

Phonology Phrasal Phonology Domains in the Phrasal Predicting Predicting Rule Domains

Keren D. Rice 310 Keren

b. cak ++ dhi -+ cagdhi

directly consonant is directly suffixation, this consonant until suffixation. On suffixation, point of sufiixation. until the point syllabified syllabified into the onset, as in (36).

(36)

/\ A

m

/\ A

a r

/\ A /\ A

u

/\ A u

a r

(t) (t)

t

extraprosodicity affixation, loss of extraprosodicity

a

a

m

concatenation - see (33) d. phrasal phrasal concatenation

a

a

m

a r

/\ A

a (7

u

/\ A

t

syllabification i syllabification

consonant of contrast, the final consonant In compounds between words, by contrast, compounds and between extraprosodicity assuming leftward, the first morpheme assuming extraprosodicity morpheme will be syllabified is turned turned off at the word level. compounds (33) (37) compounds a

s

compounding - see (33) c. compounding

a

a

a

/1 ~Ia \ t aI

...

phrasal (33) phrasal cr a

311

cr a

aa

A a A x a /\ ~ A aamyakukt m y a f c u k

s

a

/~ K

t a ra nrn

distinctions is laryngeal distinctions neutralization of laryngeal In syllable-final position, neutralization syllable-final position, This can be 122, 141). This sections 122, Whitney 1889, sections found in Sanskrit Sanskrit (see Whitney between (39) words. within (38) and between seen both both within within word (38) within bhotsyati bhodh-sya-ti bhodh-sya-ti-+-+ bhotsyati

know' (3rd sg. fut.) 'to know’ ‘to

(39) word-finally (Whittri~tubh (Whit­ tri~tup for tristiibh agnimat suhtd, tristup suhtt for suhfd, agnimath, suhft agnimat for agnimath, 140) ney, section 140) segassimilates in voice to the following seg­ then assimilates A syllable-final consonant then syllable-final consonant (40b,c,d), voiceless; in (40b,c,d), ment. ment. In (38) and (40a), the following segment is voiceless; it is voiced.

(40) (40) affixation a. ad ad+-I-sisi-+ -+atsi atsi

First, breaks down into two processes. First, What What is called final voicing thus breaks assimilaryngeal sy llable-finally. Second, a rule of voicing assimi­ features are lost syllable-finally. laryngeal features apply consonant. It fails to apply lation [voice) onto a rhyme consonant. feature [voice] spreads the featmre lation spreads description is not structural description because its structural in some cases of affixation affixation (34) because description structural description rule's structural When the rule’s consonant. When met; there is no rhyme consonant. met: there comp(?unding (40c) affixation (40b), as well as in compounding is met, it does apply apply in affixation (40d). 26 concatenation (40d).^® phrasal concatenation and phrasal Conreanalysis. Con­ juncture rules also yield to reanalysis. Other domain juncture Other cases of domain (Cheng 1987), a rule Mandarin (Cheng sandhi in Mandarin sider, for instance, tone sandhi third tone instance, third another which changes a third third tone to a second tone when it falls before another enstipulation to derived en­ restricted by stipulation third third tone. This rule need not be restricted environments nonderived environments application in nonderived prevents its application vironments; e e prevents vironments; the sSCC (Odden 1987), shortening (Odden Kimatuumbi vowel shortening true of Kimatuumbi anyway. The same is true between words. phrasally between compounds and phrasally a rule that within compounds both within that applies both between words; applying only between state this rule as applying Cowper and Rice 1987 state span becomes a span and the rule simply becomes this can be guaranteed guaranteed by the SCC, and phrase. 27 phonological phrase.^'^ rule which turns turns off at the level of the phonological pr~diction Whether juncture rules exist, at least one prediction domain juncture Whether or not domain compounds and expected in compounds processes are expected of the model model is clear. Similar processes combetween words in a com­ apply between might apply between phrase. A rule might between words in a phrase. between phrase, but no rule will apply between pound between words in a phrase, pound and not between compound. (See also note words in a phrase between words in a compound. phrase and not between 23.)

5

Summary Summary

restrictive model of the phonology, one in which I have argued argued for a very restrictive prinidentical prin­ phonology are governed by identical both phrasal phonology both the lexical and the phrasal counterexamples potential class of counterexamples eliminates a potential ciples. Extraprosodicity Extraprosodicity eliminates higher levels of the until higher segments until certain segments by guaranteeing invisibility of certain guaranteeing invisibility phrasal belonging to the phrasal recognized as belonging phonology. Rules traditionally traditionally recognized phonolthroughout the lexical phonol­ phonology phonology can now be seen as available throughout turn off at some level. Any level, lexical or ogy, possibly marked to turn possibly marked astraditionally as­ properties traditionally nature will show properties phrasal, 'derived' in nature phrasal, which is ‘derived’ intonational highest levels, intonational signed to the lexical phonology, phonology, while only the highest

!

26 (voice] is feature such as [voice] that a feature note that ^®A spreading works; note ta how spreading remains as to problem remains A problem reason, apparent reason, There is no apparent the vowels. There including the Sanskrit, including redundant sonorants in Sanskrit, redundant for sonorants Sanskrit is spread. Sanskrit should be able to spread. feature should this feature given underspecification theory, why this underspecification theory, regressive, generally regressive, assimilation is generally instance, while assimilation more indicated; for instance, than indicated; complex than more complex section 160). (Whitney, section there assimilation as well (Whitney, progressive assimilation there is some progressive 27 analysis. alternative analysis. volume) for an alternative (this volume) ^^See volume), Hayes (this (this volume), Odden (this See Odden

!

Keren D. Rice 312 Keren attributed to the normally attributed phrase characteristics normally exhibit characteristics utterance, exhibit phrase and utterance, 28 postlexical phonology. phonology.^* postlexical nonproblematic; domain limit are nonproblematic; and domain span and domain span The rule types types of domain Domain systematic. 29 Domain identified by Vogel are systematic.^® the types of rules identified the gaps in types turned off at any span span rules are found at all levels, since a rule can be turned they do, they level. Domain probably do not exist. But if they juncture rules probably Domain juncture apply between between words on any level but but not exclusively between between higher apply word-edge and domain limit rules are found at word-edge constituents. Last, domain level constituents. predicted. domains are predicted. and domains types and utterance-edge. Just these rule types utterance-edge. Just testable are clear and testable phonology model axe The predictions predictions of this unified phonology application in the understanding of rule application clearer understanding and will lead, I hope, to a clearer phonology.

16 16 • Domains Illin Prosodie Domains Prosodic Chinese Shanghai Chinese Shanghai SHEN TONG AND SELKIRK E l is a b e t h S e l k ir k a nd T ong S hen ELISABETH

I n SHANGHAI S h a n g h a i CHINESE, C h i n e s e , As a s in the the other other Chinese languages, languages, tone IN that shown that has research Previous morp,he~. of property is a lexical property morphemes. Previous research tone, lexical their lose morpheme leftmost morpheme in compounds their lexical, tone, and but the leftmost compounds all but one-to-one associated are morpheme leftmost morpheme 'the lexical tones of that associated in one-to-one that leftmost (Sherard compound entTre the fashion from left to right across entire compound (Sherard 1972, Zee research has also Reëêllt research Wright and Maddieson Maddieson 1979, Yip 1980, Wright 1983). 1983]bT!ecent and in compounds seen association rightward association shown that and rightward compounds deletion and that the deletion (N, A, or items lexical of generated sequences also apply syntactically generated apply to syntactically research further In V) plus function further research we (Jin 1986, Shen 1986). fonction word(s) (Jin conphrasal con­ applying deletion applying in phrasal have found yet another type of tone deletion another type may word focused a follows texts Shanghai. \ A A lexical item item which texts in Shanghai.\ appropriate structural bears the appropriate structural lose its own lexical tone, as long as it bears examine paper we examine this In element. preceding focused element. relation paper relation to the preceding shown be will It operates. deletion operates. tone deletion the contexts in which tone syntactic contexts the syntactic relain defined domains structure domains prosodie structure that rela­ terms of prosodic that an analysis in terms Vogel and Nespor 1986; 1984, 1986; Nespor and tion to syntactic structure (e.g., Selkirk 1984, syntactic structure characterization of revealing characterization 1986) provides an exceedingly exceedingly simple and revealing sentence. deletion in a sentence. tone deletion phrasal tone the distribution distribution of the two sorts of phrasal detail considering in detail prevent us from considering Unfortunately, limitations of space prevent Unfortunately, limitations accounting in central place to stress alternative accounting alternative analyses which give a central for the distribution tone deletion deletion in the the sentence. We leave this this for a distribution of tone work (in preparation). preparation). Our aim here is to present present enough enough data data to longer wo'rk account theory will have to account that any theory give a sense of the range of facts that

-

28 In addition, postlexical added at postlexical that are added morphemes that ^®In expect to find morphemes might expect addition, one might added at lexical levels, since much of that are added morphemes that phrasal phrasai levels as well as morphemes the postlexical postlexical phonology phonology is an extension extension of the the lexical phonology. phonology. This This appears appears to the Zee and emd Inkelas volume) for examples. examples. Boundary Boundary tones tones can also (this volume) Inkelas (this case; see Zec the caise; be the (this Hyman (this phrasai level. See Hyman added at a phrasal that are added be considered morphemes that considered to be morphemes volume). volume). 29 Something more needs allophonic rules Sorne allophonic allophonic rules. Some about allophonic said about ^®Something needs to be said phrase or intonational phrase the intonational that of the than that might smaller than apply at levels smaller thought to apply might be thought problem for the mode! utterance. this is indeed indeed the the case, it presents presents a problem model proposed proposed here, utterance. If this preserving rules until nonstructure preserving since this this mode! model delays all nonstructure until the the highest highest levels. Sorne Some delays ail since velarization of /1/ example is velgrization within a word; an example apply only within allophonic /I / appear to apply allophonic rules appear syllabification is English syllabification rule, and since English in English. syllable-based rule, this is a syllable-based English. However, this description structural description complete Nespor and Vogel 1986:65), its structural the word (see Nespor within the complete within those particularly those allophonic rules, particularly Sorne allophonic between words. Some will thus thus never be met in between pointed phrase. B. Hayes has pointed within a phrase. position within sensitive to position which timing, are sensitive which involve timing, London is typically out to me that that the the vowel in take take Grey to London typically longer longer than than the the vowel out These may also syllabification may be a factor. in take greater London. again, syllabification factor. These London. Here again, take greater various the various properties of the structural properties the structural structure. Once the be rules grid structure. that refer to grid rules that smaller domains smaller must refer to domains apparently must that apparently those that allophonic understood, those rules are understood, allophonic rules problems. utterance may no longer be problems. phrase or utterance than intonational phrase the intonational than the

BNS-86-17827. Grant BNS-86-17827. part by NSF Grant supported in part Research reported on here was supported Research reported

313

1

Shanghai Chinese 315 Prosodie Domains in Shanghai Prosodic

314 Elisabeth Elisabeth Selkirk and Tong Shen theory. The structure theory. prosodie structure within prosodic account within for, for and to provide an account publication valuable work, the only publication Jin's 1986 valuable reader referred to Jin’s re;der is also referred sentence deletion as it applies in sentence treats tone deletion available English which treats available in English contexts. contexts.

1

Realization in Compounds Tone its Realization Compounds Tone and its

tones in Shanghai: surface tones It is usual distinguish five surface usual to distinguish (1)

Tone A HL HL sa sift

Tone B MM' MM' sa what what

Tone C LM' LM' 'za ‘za firewood

Tone D H saq kill

Tone E LM LM 'zaq ‘zaq stone

tones in three tones distinguish only three Following Shen 1985 1985 and Jin 1986 we will distinguish -----... representation: underlying lexical representation: underlying

(2)

Tone A HL HL

Tone B MH MH

Tone C LH LH

Tone D MH MH

Tone E LH LH

~ of the text below. Details appear in the text that appear These representations that These are the representations relevant is Wnat is relevant concern us here. WHat rules deriving deriving (1) from (2) will not concern identical th~ribution that their tones, and that contour tones, that distribution is identical that all the tones are contour contexts. ^I' phrasal contexts. restricted phrasal in compounds compounds and in restricted leftbut the left­ to!!_esfrom all but Obligatory Deletion removes lexical tones Obligatory Tone Deletion distributed most morpheme contour tone is distributed leftmost contour That leftmost compound. That morpheme of a compound. CÔiiîpound, giving a level tone elements of the the coin^ound, over the first and second elements comdisyllabic com­ morphemëf -Thus syllable is a morphemej! Thus the disyllabic each syllable to each syllable ((each thepairs of lexical cterlvèaïrom the^pairs column of (3) are ^Sive3~from pounds third column pounds in the third items items in the first two columns:

\.

three syllables or more, the first two syllables bear the In compounds compounds of three morinitial mor­ contour tone of the initial two level tones which make up the lexical contour phonetically with Low implemented phonetically remaining syllables are implemented pheme. The remaining pitch (following a High tone). We will transition to Low pitch pitch, or as transition rule, supplied by a late rule. later syllables with Low tone, supplied represent represent all these later Insertion. Default Tone Insertion. decrucially de­ Obligatory Tone Deletion is crucially that Obligatory suggested that It has been suggested Shanghai that in Shanghai propose that pendent pendent on stress. Yip 1980 and Wright 1983 propose that morpheme, and that leftmost morpheme, assigned to the leftmost stress is assigned primary stress compounds compounds primary relatively their relatively morphemes is due to their subsequent morphemes the deletion deletion of tone on subsequent contention support the contention intuition does not support speaker intuition native speaker lesser stress. Yet native promirhythmically more promi­ compounds are rhythmically that leftmost syllables in compounds that the leftmost supshortening to sup­ reduction nor shortening vowel reduction neither vowel nent. There There is, moreover, neither that among the syllables. So we will not assume that diff'erence among port a stress difference port environment. Obligatory Obligatory Tone Deletion takes degree of stress as its crucial environment. designated domain, deletion rule to apply on a designated An alternative alternative is for the deletion in that domain. We will offer a lefüïi.ost lexicalïone imthaFdomain. deleting all but the leftmosTImdcaFtone deleting Section 3.1. )· '· formulation of such a ·rule formulation rule in Section 1 component of The'lissocia^Iofnff’TEFseco^ with the second component The associafaoïI of the second sy~ familaccomplished by the famil­ tonal melody can be accomplished morpheme's tonal the first morpheme’s tonology (e.g., autosegmental tonology association of autosegmental one-to-one association left-to-right one-to-one iar left-to-right sincontour tones on a sin­ that contour assume that We will assrnne 1979). We Clements Clements and Ford 1979). Thus, only the . phonology. Thus, permitted in the lexical phonology. gle syllable are not permitted elefirst tonal the first cycle; association of the second ele­ eycle; association on~he linkon t7ill link eleme~ will tonal elemeiff ment takes^ace compounding, when a second syllable becomes after comp~ou5gmgrwhen tak:3s ace only after manifested association manifested left-to-right association one-to-one left-to-right automatic one-to-one available^^he available. he automatic in compounds Asso.si11:tion.Following tQas LR Association. re~rred to bl:)referred henceforth be comp unds will henceforth unlinked syllables. A remaining unhnked Insertion tonifies any remaining LR, Default Default Tone Insertion compounds is operations on compounds sequential operations three sequential illustrating these three derivation derivation illustrating (4): shown in (4):

HL (4) MHHL (4) MH HL (3) a. HL thi 'sky' ‘sky’

MH MH tshi gas' 'air, gas’ ‘air,

H HLL thitshi thitshi 'weather' ‘weather’

MH b. MH hu 'fire' ‘fire’

MH MH tshi gas' ‘air, 'air, gas’

MH hutshi hutshi 'anger' ‘anger’

LH c. LH 'bi ‘bi 'spleen' ‘spleen’

MH MH tshi tshi gas' 'air, gas’ ‘air,

L H 'bitshi ‘bitshi 'temper' ‘temper’

MH d. MH seq 'wet' ‘wet’

MH MH tshi gas' ‘air, 'air, gas’

MHH M seqtshi seqtshi foot' 'athlete's foot ‘athlete’s

1

1

LH LH 1

sou-foN-dziN hand-wind-organ hand-wind-organ MH MH 11 soufoNdziN

Obligatory Tone Deletion Obligatory

MHH M I t 11 : soufoNdziN

Association LR Association

MHH M L 11 t1 11 soufoNdziN 'accordion' ‘accordion’

Insertion Default Tone Insertion

Shanghai Chinese 317 Prosodic Domains in Shanghai Prosodie Domains

316 Elisabeth Elisabeth Selkirk and Tong Shen

2

Structure Phrase Structure A Few Shanghai Phrase Basics of Shanghai Few Basics

sentential deletion in sentential Before we proceed with our examination examination of tone deletion Shanghai of structure plJ,rase structure contexts, Shanghai superficial review of the basic plnase contexts, a superficial subsentence, the of Chiiiese sentence, a sub­ Chiriese is called for. In the basic word order strictly in is phrase ject predicate. T h eThead iea dof ^ the noun phrase strictly Th-e it~redi~e. ject precedes its folfinal phrases preceding the head noun are fol­ he,ad noun P:~cedi~_the Çomple,mw .12hr~ 1Complement position. 1 final position. lowed subordinating particle ‘qeq. These include relative clauses, !nclqde relative ~R.art~cl(::2,~L by the ..§.J.!.bordill-1!lowed by ~AQ, and AP modifiers. genitive NPs, NP and PP complements to the head, P,P complemeiifisT;o appear at the left edge of DetermineF^nyquantS l^ e n ts usually appear elem~Ûally DetermiÎÎerandquantŒer e F 'e picture. The verb precedes ff^R^Verb present a more mixed picture. 6."\v~ phrase.s present PP. dative PP. tiielnoun phrase anO the îna:irectooject NP or dative direc~tobject andTBeTnHir&cToBject phrase direct \~un prepomost verb. However, most Moreover,~^ntential fhePerBTTIowiwr, ÇQIDiÙfünenWfollow-the Moreover, 'sent ntfal complementslfollow obdirect ob­ position. A direct greverbal position. sitional h r a s ^ are normally normally found in preverbal phras sitional p a!!,§'"ipp~r ject may also appear preverbally, preposi~ goverÏÎi~g preposition supplied with a governing ject supplied appear as may adverbs Thus, _t4e the verb can appear otnei ~ {TiTj (TiT; .. .)pw 1 aa ..... . aa

1 : (7 aa(T ..... .

Association Contour Tone Association (9) Contour .TïT; )pw ( .. .TjTj)pw (..

I

1

a 3.1

Ti Ti )pw * ((.... • .TiTj

yaaV

//

Prosodie Word thee Prosodic D efining th Defining

paconcerns of this pa­ central to the concerns that is central question that Now we come corne to the question derived in, prosodie words derived per: How is the analysis e -'se ^ ^ ce -~nto into prosodic th~~ a~alysis of th relathe rela­ istô-characterize problem iF the problem general, the Shanghai Ln general, to “characterize the Chinese?""fn Shanghai Chinese? autonomously defined: f)iJ structure, autonomously tion between two sorts hierarchical structme, sorts of hierarchical tionbetween the ~(t/' ~ relation, the (surface) This relation, structure. This prosodie structure. and prosodic structure and syntactic structure (surface) syntactic 1 t,.il' parameterizable, such syntax-phonology argued to be parameterizable, mapping, has been argued syntax-phonology mapping, A ~,4>.rj.; range of limited range exploit a limited that languages may exploit individual languages grammars of individual the grammars that the ':_o_O" 'endrelation. We believe the following ‘endoptions syntax-phonology relation. options in the syntax-phonology ~"(v mapping parameterized mapping articulation of the parameterized based’ promising articulation theory to be a promising based' theory Selkirk 1987, and Selkirk within theory (see Selkirk 1986, Hale and structure theory prosodie structme within prosodic Tateishi 1988a, 1988b): Chen Chen 1987c, Selkirk and Tateishi

l

(10) The The Syntax-Phonology Syntax-Phonology Mapping Mapping there language there structure of a language prosodie structure the prosodic For each category en of the category (7" the form parameter of the two-part parameter is a two-part

xm} {Right/Left; X en: {Right/Left; C": ^} hierarchy. X-bar hierarchy. the X-bar type in the where ”' is a category category type xm where X satisfies the set of structure pair satisfies A syntactic structure-prosodie structure syntactic structure-prosodic Right (or Left) language iff the Right syntax-phonology parameters for a language syntax-phonology parameters coïncides structure coincides syntactic structure xm in syntactic type X™ end of each constituent constituent of type structure. prosodie structure. en in prosodic type C" constituent(s)(s) of type with with the edge of constituent

G

321 Chinese 321 Prosodic Shanghai Chinese Domains in Shanghai Prosodie Domains

320 Selkirk and Tong Shen Elisabeth Selkirk 320 Elisabeth synwhich syn­ at which points' at 'anchor points A specifies the ‘anchor parameters specifies mapping parameters of mapping set of A set does mapping does The mapping coïncide. The tactic structure must coincide. prosodie structure structure and prosodic tactic structure it however; it ce, senten ure struct not fully characterize the prosodic structure of a sentence, however; die proso not fully characterize autonomous to autonomous submitted to only structure is submitted prosodie structure constrains it, for prosodic only constrains hybeen hy­ has been It has syntax. It wellformedness independent of the syntax. principles, independent wellformedness principles, general the general defines the constraint defines pothesized wellformedness constraint universal wellformedness that a universal pothesized that Nespor 1989; Nespor Hayes 1989; 1984; Hayes 1981b, 1984; nature (Selkirk 1981b, structure (Selkirk prosodie structure of prosodic nature of 1987): Walusimbi 1987): Katamba, and Walusimbi and Hyman, Katamba, 1986; but see Hyman, Vogel 1986; and Vogel Constraint (11) Wellformedness Constraint Structure Wellformedness Prosodie Structure (11) Prosodic rule the rule to the conform to The sentence must conform structure of a sentence prosodie structure The prosodic 1 )•. e(nen^schema C" schema of hierarchy of parsed into aa hierarchy According exhaustively parsed utterance is exhaustively (11), an utterance to (11), According to cona that in 1 d, layere y strictl constituent types C", etc. These are strictly layered, in that a con­ constituent types en,en- , en-m. i.e., C" types, i.e., constituents of lower types, stitu domina tes only constituents endominates type C" of type ntt of stitueen bracketing. or bracketing. wellformed tree or And organized into a wellformed constituents are organized these constituents And these nology x-pho synta ed eteriz param (11) and a language-particular choice of parameterized syntax-phonology e (11) and a language-particular choic to aa ng pondi corres ure struct die mapping rules together define the prosodic structure corresponding to proso mapping rules together strucdie proso the that e assum will given surface assume that the prosodic struc­ structure. We syntactic structure. surface syntactic given the with the consistent with structure consistent ture minimal structure sentence is the minimal to a sentence assigned to ture assigned rules. ing mapp wellformedness constraint and the mapping rules. wellformedness constraint catthe cat­ to the belonging to In belonging sxntacti~ord the left edge of a~ syntactlc^ord Shanghai, the In Shanghai, with ides coïnc s alway item') al 'lexic item’) always coincides with egories ( = a ‘lexical Adjective (= Verb, Adjective Noun, Verb, egories Noun, has aa grammar has Shanghai grammar that Shanghai s that mean the edge of a prosodic word. This means die proso a of edge the (12): in g settin eter param syntax-phonology mapping rule with the parameter setting in (12). syntax-phonolozy mapping Prosodie Word Rule: (12) Chinese Prosodic Shanghai Chinese (12) Shanghai Lex0 } {Left, Lex°} Prosodic Word: {Left, Prosodie Word: N, categories N, lexical categories where belonging to the lexical stands for word belonging Lex0 stands where Lex*’ V,A. V, A. lexical one lexical of one edge of extend from the left edge will extend with (12), a PW wiU accordance with In accordance /I [! In that words on functi the g item to function words that incorporatin left edge of the next, incorporating the left to the \\item A 18). (13)-( in below and Ajie between. below in (13)-(18). A examples (6d-f) between. We see this in examples \\jie of on locati the e cteriz chara mapping exhaustively characterize the location of like (12) does not exhaustively rule like ~apping rule example, For example, however. For sentence, however. PW edges in the prosodic structure of a sentence, ure struct die proso the in PW edges regardPW, a of edge each of a PW, regard­ coïncides with the always coincides sentence always of aa sentence edge of each edge in nated desig ory categ syntactic category designated m less whether or not the left edge of the syntactic of whether less of in ple princi ess rmedn wellfo general wellformedness the principle m there. The general rule is found there. mapping rule the mapping (6). in PWs al ce-fin senten (11) PWs in (6). illustrated by the sentence-final result, as illustrated guarantees this result, (11) guarantees the of the edge of right the to l lexica These extend from the left edge of a lexical item the right edge d These exten hai Shang in words on functi utterance. in Shanghai utterance-initial function behavior of utterance-initial The behavior utterance. The Note raint. Note const ess rmedn wellfo die is also explained by the general prosodic wellformedness constraint. proso al gener is also explained sition prepo the both (6h), both the preposition that pronunciation of the PP in (6h), isolation pronunciation the isolation in the that in

J ✓

(12) tones. (12) contour tones. and constitute PWs on their own and bear contour noun constitute the noun and the but noun, the of only placement of a PW at the left edge of the noun, but the placement guar_anteesthe only guarantees prothe hence PWs; parsed into (11) hence the pro­ sentence be parsed that the whole sentence reqmres that (11) requires (12) eter (12) param that ~, . motion of the preposition t )(MH pu sa pu 'ma sa pu ‘ma cloth' any cloth’ 'buy any cloth ‘buy

MH (LH MH b. (LH MH)(HL ) MH)(HL 'ma tsi ‘ma po taw many/some buy how many/some knife

)

• (L

)(HL H L )(HL ) ‘ma taw po taw tsi po 'ma tsi knives' ‘buy some knives’ 'buy some

complemen- ) These examples show that pronoun, complemen­ persona! pronoun, preposition, personal that preposition, fonction words in Î ~ tizer, indefinite determiner determiner and classifier qualify as function acquir- / Obligatory Tone Deletion, acquir­ undergo Obligatory Shanghai, insofar as they all undergo Shanghai, preceding lexical item or by Default Association from a preceding ing tone by LR Association syntacmapping from surface syntac­ that the mapping Tone Insertion. Insertion. They also show that foncthat these func­ structure is blind to the fact that prosodie structure structure to prosodic tic structure they form a c-command the lexical items with which they tion words do not c-command PW. fonction word cliticizes to languag~s where a fimction Similar cases from other other languages c-commancîed 'natuB:l,' its not is which a word ‘natural,’ c-commanded host are cited in Klawor0s may that particular function words vans 1982, argues thafyparticuiarTunction Klavans'argues 1985. Klavans 1982, 1985^ sicle and one on l!Q§t syn,tactjc a be simultaneously side subcategorized for syntactic hgst simultaneously subcategorized that the for a phonological host on the other. other. However, we believe that phonolo_g_i~~LJ!9st orfonction grouping The data groupmg~oT~function words motivate such a theory. data do not motivate Shanghai is, on our in Shanghai items lexical with preceding non-c-commanded preceding non-c-commanded syntaxtheory end-based the account, end-based theory of the syntaxaccount, a simple consequence of (a) PW in for parameter left-edge a of phonology parameter mapping, (b) the choice phonology mapping, other In structure. phrase structure. Shanghai phrase Shanghai, other particulars of Shanghai Shanghai, and (c) the particulars a not is words, the radical fonction words seen here 'rebracketing' of function radical ‘rebracketing’ that see 'clitics.' Below we will special fact about that fonction word, or ‘clitics.’ about function consyntactic con­ between phonological and syntactic this radical isomorphy between radicàl lack of isomorphy Our well. Shanghai as phrasing in Shanghai stituency obtains at higher levels of phrasing stituency obtains from nati'irally (13)s(l8) follow naturally contention examples cited in (13)t(18) that the examples contention is that support for theory, and hence provide support the simple end-based mapping theory, end-based mapping it. it. j~

r

H)(H H)(H

obtains in (15), where a A similar formation obtains respect to PW formation situation with respect similar situation comThe com­ complement. The sentential complement. com___plementizer-initial verb precedes sentential precedes a complementizer-initial plementizer plementizer joins with the verb in a single PW.

(15) V

WHindef V [ WHindef V (LH MH a. (LH 'ma sa ‘ma what/any buy what/any

)(HL) H L )(HL) ljaN peN sz 'ma IjaN ‘ma ‘buy books' 'buy some books’

3.3

Theory thee Theory 'Puzzles' Tw atic ‘P u zzles’ for th Problematic Twoo Problem

end-based supporting the end-based Before the preceding examples can be viewed as supporting preceding examples data. theory, hoyvever, forther sets of data. provided for two further solution must be provided ho}Vever,a solution w~n an object NP, as in (19). embedded within First, PPs embedded postverbal PPs First, consider postverbal 1 'Do sentences such as ‘Do negative sentences questions or negative yes-no questions ^Phrases {18a) are used in yes-no Phrases like (18a) cloth.' bought any cloth.’ haven't bought 'I haven’t you want cloth?' or ‘I want to buy any cloth?’

V

(19)

p [[ P [[

[

N

rt Prt ]]NP]PP np ]pp P

N ]]NP np

(21)

LH )(LHMH) a. (LH )(LH )(LH MH L L H ) L )( L H )(LH )( L =>( •( LH )(LH)(L ‘geq 'njitsz 'geq ‘njitsz 'zawNhe 'laq ‘zawNhe ‘laq 'z ‘z son Shanghai at Shanghai be Shanghai' ‘be 'be the son (who is) in Shanghai’ HL b. (MH )(MH )(LH HL =>{ )(MH )( L H •( MH )(MH)( tsou taw ‘noetsiN 'noetsiN tsou Nanjing walk to Nanjing leads) to ‘take (whieh leads) the way (which 'take the

)(LH) LH )(LH) LH )(LH) LL )(LH) 'lu 'geq ‘In ‘geq way Nanjing' Nanjing’

behavior their behavior contrast to their tone, in contrast The their tone, retain their ( 19) retain prepositions in (19) The prepositions in the not prepositions are that the prepositions in (13) and (14). In (19) must say that ,Ll.9)we must thos~(l3) same unlike those in (13) and (14). We will p;ec-eding~:-Ûnlike same PW as the preceding^^rE, those in (13) and those 'str~ded' embedded’ and refer to the ‘strongly prepositions1nl (19) the prepositionsTn*(19)^ syntax-phonology and analysis of the syntax-phonology embed e .' Our analysis 'weakly embedded? and (14) as ‘weakly sorts of mapping for the difference in the two sorts failiasïïoexplanation mapping so fafTiasTio^Sjlanation cases.^ cases/ JlOun..phi.:ase specifiers: The data involves involve~ .noun-pthrase pro~ta second sort of problematic The second and (18). those behave not all determiners and quantifiers behave like those in (17) and quantifiers and determiners not 'some' The quantiser mqrphemeT’ffniSIaJed as ‘a’ and ‘some’ in (17), can also 'a' slated morpheme'str'an The qu'â"nilîfer when But 'two.' 'one' obtain the numeral interpretations ‘one’ and ‘two.’ But when used as faterpretations nume;al obtain realized them preceding toD,e, numerals they do not lose their tone. A verb preceding them is realized their numerals they interpretation nu:rp.~_r with Compare a,b), where the numeral èompare (20 a,b), contomt;:-· with a contouTtone. 2 1interpretation of the quantifier's selected, with (17a,b), where they quantifiers are used the~antifiers of the quantifieryis selected, wi!?.J~, indefinitely: indefinitely: ((20) 20 )

+ Cl N ]NP [Q NP [Q + HL )(LH ):) ^• (MH)(M H )(LH) a. (MH )(MH 'zo 7iq pe taw ?iq ‘zo 'zo ‘zo pe taw 7iq tea' ‘pour 'pour one cup of tea’ cup tea poui: one/a pour one/a V

•4^ (LH )(L H )(HL) MH )(HL ): = b. (LH )(LH ‘ma ljaN peN sz 'ma IjaN peN sz 'ma IjaN ljaN ‘ma books' ‘buy two books’ 'buy book book buy two/some two/some amIn similar determiners like those in (18) which also are am­ similar fashion, determiners interpretation, do wh-interrogative interpretation, biguous indefinite and a wh-interrogative between an indefinite biguous between (21a,b), Compare (21a,b), not wh-interrogatives. Compare their tone when used as wh-interrogatives. not lose their their with their determiners, with which wh-interrogative use of the determiners, illustrates the wh-interrogative whieh illustrates (18a,b): behavior indefinites in (18a,b): behavior as indefinites ~

l

Chinese 325 Shanghai Chinese Prosodic Domains in Shanghai Prosodie Domains

Tong Shen and Tong 324 Elisabeth Selkirk and Elisabeth Selkirk

WHinter V [ WHinter a. (LH )(MH ‘ma 'ma sa buy what/any buy what/any

(Cl ) N )

l

]]NP np

(MH )=>(LH ) • (LH )(MH)( MH ) pu sa 'ma sa pu ‘ma pu buy?' ... buy?’ cloth ... 'What cloth cloth ‘What cloth

b. (LH )(MH )(MH)(HL )=4>(LH ) • (LH )(M H )(HL ) )(JMH 'ma tsi po taw ‘ma tsi po taw ‘ma 'ma buy' knives ... buy’ many knives... 'How many buy how many/some knife ‘How many/some determiners demonstrative determiners that demonstrative fact that Undoubtedly the fact this is the related to this Undoubtedly related circumstances. comparable circumstances. tone in comparable their tone never lose their · never quandeterminers and quan­ ^~ The that while some NP determiners dataisis that these data point, of these The point, precedes, what with what precedes, forming a PW with tifiers words, forming fonction words, treated as function tifiers are treated specifiers 'strong' specifiers former ‘strong’ others independently. We call the former behave more independently. others behave 'weak.' and latter ‘weak.’ and the latter 'weakly' between ‘weakly’ We are now faced with puzzles: (a) a difference between with two puzzles: 'weak' between ‘weak’ and (b) a difference between and ‘strongly’ prepositions, and embedded prepositions, 'strongly' embedded sections of the following sections and within NP. In the elements within 'strong' specifier elements and ‘strong’ intact our that leaves intact this these puzzles that solution to these argue for a solution paper, we argue this paper, preserving in mapping, preserving simple syntax-phonology mapping, the syntax-phonology theory of the end-based theory simple end-based PWsin-Shattg~i. proposed in (12) for PWs particular dn-Shanghai. We mapping rule proposed particular the mapping mo- ~ phrase,fs mo­ th~iQr_ show that structure, th^^ajqr,phraseyis prosodie structure, higher level of prosodic that a higher that the propose that and we propose Shanghai, and tivated phenomena of Shanghai, tonal phenomena other tonal tivated by other automatically phrases automatically major phrases analysis sequence of major sentence into a sequence analysis of the sentence our two PWs seen in our distribution of PWs forces, the unexplained distribution up-to-now unexplained the up-to-now prosodie wellthat the prosodic notion that puzzles. crucially on the notion solution relies crucially This solution puzzles. This syntax-phonology active role in the syntax-phonology foripedness plays an active constraint in (11) plays fonpedness constraint mapping. mapping. / .

4

Focus After Focus Items After Phrasal Lexical Items Deletion II: Lexical Phrasai Tone Deletion ..

-·---

1

emphasizing a contrasting or emphasizing English, contrasting Just language like English, nontonal language Just as in a nontonal that f~pd~quency word in Shanghai render the fundamental frequency of that Chinese may render Shanghai Chinese property this to refer to 'focus' term ‘focus’ word more prominent. this property prominent. We use the term -----emphasis. contrast or emphasis. of contrast

4.1

i

i

(,

1

Phonology T he P honetics and P hon ology ooff Focus Phonetics The

realization phonetie realization the phonetic When ChineseJ the^ Sha~ghai Chinese, focused in Shanghai When a word is focused exam_pj~. of its lexical tone employs aCwider-than-normal p itc h jaifee. For exam­ ~-~orll_!~l tone normal, than realized ple, the Low of the contour tone LH will be realized lower than normal, contour tone affected by neighboring words is also affected and the High higher. pitch of neighboring higher. The pitch pitch entire the focus, a the presenc'e of focus. In particular, the entire pitch partieular, following Within êompressed. considerably compressed. Within register range is considerably and its range register is lowered, and betonal be­ contrast in tonal observes a contrast range, one observes this lowered post-focus pitch range, post-focus pitch structure. syntactic havior with local differences in syntactic structure. In correlates with that correlates havior that

~

.

-'

326 Elisabeth Elisabeth Selkirk and Tong Shen

Prosodic Shanghai Chinese 327 Domains in Shanghai Prosodie Domains

reduced in extremely reduced certain post-focus word will be extremely configurations, a post-focus certain configurations, configother config­ pitch, entirely lose its lexical tone, while in other pitch, and may even entirely maintained. It is urations reduced, and lexical tone is maintained. pitch is less reduced, urations the pitch present that concerns us in the present this contrast behavior that tonal behavior post-focus tonal contrast in post-focus section. utterances in (22) and (23): Consider pair of utterances contrasting pair Consider the contrasting

(22) a. [[[ a p Prt Prt [[[ A ])AP

N

]NpPrt )NpPrt

b. (

e. (L ‘oN 'oN

f. (L H )(H 'oN ‘oN ‘geq 'geq ho red flower’s flower's flowers' ‘red seeds of flowers’ 'red

N ]]NP np )

(LH C. (LH c. ‘oN 'oN

LM )(HL LM )(HL ‘geq 'geq ho

LM )(MH)) LM )(MH 'geq tsz ‘geq

Underlying Underlying

d. (L 'oN ‘oN

H )(H 'geq ho ‘geq

L )(MH) )(MH) ‘geq 'geq tsz

Normal

e. (L

H )(L ‘geq 'geq ho

)(L ) 'geq tsz ‘geq

Focused 1

L )(L ) 'geq tsz ‘geq seed

Focused 2

'oN ‘oN

H )(H f. (L 'geq ho ‘oN ‘geq 'oN flower’s flower's red flowers' ‘seeds 'seeds of red fiowers’

\ L

(23) a. [[ A ])AP Prt [[ N ap Prt b. ( c. (LH (LH ‘oN 'oN d. (L 'oN ‘oN

)( )( )(HL LM )(HL 'geq ho ‘geq H )(H 'geq ho ‘geq

)NpPrt ]NpPrt

)NP )NP ]np N ]np

) LM )(MH) LM )(MH) 'geq tsz ‘geq L )(MH) )(MH) 'geq tsz ‘geq

Underlying Underlying Normal

Focused 1

L )(L ) 'geq tsz ‘geq seed

Focused 2

behavior . tonal behavior. is·aa difference in tonal Corresponding syntactic syntactic difference is Corresponding to this .,..._...___ neither facu,sed, As (23e) shows, when the adjective on the deft is focused, neither of the js q_djective on the Ieft (23~) focused, is noun medial the When following lexical items loses its tone. When noun followmglexical bracketing The bracketing thejigEfinbst tone, as shown in (23f). The its torie, !ose ifs noun may lose the riglitmost lioun Post-Focus of domains in line Post-Focus breakdo:wn..into domains indicated breakdown, (6) shows the indicated ffiie (b) ---Deletion. |1 T9ne Deletion. Tone examples behavior of examples tonal behavior pOur' u f hypothesis that the difference in the tonal hypothesis is that structure. prosodie in (22)'and consequence of a difference prosodic structure. The (22)•and (23) is a consequence phrasing phonological phrasing analysis into phonological (b) lines of (22) and (23) show the analysis ma.,jor whicji utterances) We will call these phrases phrases major attribute to these ~s. we attribute whicp we clear..helo.w. The that will become cleax-belaw. phrases reasons that (MaPs), for mnemonic reasons phrases (MaPs), .llitch pEonetic'impIementation of i^jnvolved ip determining pitch detfü.]JJÏPÏD&, involved jJJ that -is tone that o( tone ~mentation within the material within are;- a focus, material register phrasine;: after maj~ phrasing: thus réifes on majm rêgISter thuST^i^ bePitch register. At the be­ sameliJaFTs within a radically radically lowered pitch same 1vraP'ïs realized within preceding a though preceding somewhat, though raised somewhat, ginning register is raised ginning of a new MaP, the register tonal impledependence of tonal focus will still trigger depression. This dependence trigger a slight depression. analysis of the analysis precedent in the mentation phr~ng~finds a precedent phonological phrasing^finds mentation on phonological Beckman and Pier1984, Beckman the implementation toneJa-JaBaaese (Poser 1984, ofj_gne..ia~e implementation of Tateishi 1989, Selkirk and Tateishi Beckman 1989, rehumBert Pi;;ehumbert and Beckman 1986, Pierrehumbert rehûmbert 1986, whether it is moo~ whether 1988b). As for Post-Focus it remains moot Deletion, ~ai:q§_ Post-Focus Tone Deletion, sentence. th~ ~Ïiology of the sentence. a matter 1mplemeniation or of the^onology phonetlc implementation of phonetic matter oi register manîpulat10n, we assign Since it seems to be distinct pitch registermanipulation, distinct from pitch domain is MaP: it the’status separate rule,,whose ~ul~whose domain the'status of a~epa~~te

i.

.

l.

i:

1

(Optional) Deletion (Optional) (24) Post-Focus Post-Focus Tone Deletion TiTjTiTi =>0

n

Il

L )(MH) )(MH) ‘geq 'geq tsz

*

•

'geq is a particle ‘geq The particle Example left-branching NP. The cohtains a left-branching Example (22) contains whether complements, phrase noun subordinating particle required of all noun phrase complements, whether subordinating particle required bracketPW the is argument bracketing he tonal bracket­ tonal tier bracketin in tthe modifi~he argument or modifieiu.The its losesits 'geqloses all instances, ‘geq ing, which groups ^geq e o ^ ith h ainns^ Irat prece r.i In ith, ^haTprec^^ Association LR by tone acquiring own tone by Obligatory Association Deletion, acquiring Obliga ory Tone Deletion, items loses from the preceding normal speech, none of the lexical items preceding item. Ilnn normal NP is same this in item leftmost its tone, as (2M) But when the leftmost ~ws. shows. But Lo';V, default Low, as focused, all following ~ tones! are deleted-and repiaced by default -structure, while others, conditions on IP-structure, syntactic' conditions 'more syntactic’ more with more nce accorda in stage, this at make accordance with information semantic information use of semantic make use e. languag the of ies propert general language. parameters or properties general parameters

i

• j

''

1

....

18 18 Prosodically Prosodically Constrained Constrained Syntax Syntax SHARON AND S ZEC DRAGA D raga Z ec and haron IlNKELAS nkelas

phonologymode! of the propose a model T he a im o h is paper the phonologypaper is to propose THIS OFf t AIM THE components these two components between these syntax interaction between interface, in which the interaction syntax interface, exert syntax can exert that syntax predict that is bidirectional. mode! will not only predict bidirectional. Such a model commonly assumed-but assumed—but also predicts predicts the influence on phonology, as is commonly reverse effect. This latter claim, that that phonology phonology can constrain constrain syntax, syntax, is latter daim, reverse three from data with data support it with much less widely recognized, and we will support three languages. unrelated unrelated interacUnder phonology-syntax interac­ bidirectionality of phonology-syntax approach, the bidirectionality our approach, Under om tions derives from the nature nature of the grammatical grammatical mode! model itself. We assume assume model within within which all components components of the the grammar grammar are nonderivational mode! a nonderivational beinteraction be­ amount of interaction certain amount co-present, co-present, and which also allows for a certain that mode! that this model architecture of this the architecture tween the components. components. It follows from the exert influence on each other. different components can exert different components interactions at all are Models that phonology-syntax interactions that do not allow any phonology-syntax clearly too impoverished impoverished to describe describe the the known data. data. On the other other hand, hand, clearly components are overly between the two components direct access between models that that allow direct extremes by offering a these two extremes between these balance between powerful. We strike a balance bidirectional is whi~ion..b.et.w~~nJge_~omponents mode! in whichJthejnke]3ction,Jb!fil®gen_the_components bidirectional model phonology ar , syntax and phonologjTafST^ between syntax 11:lt·ihleractions between const:r;ç1.ined;highly high!Y constrained^-u.tt'lHteractions prosodie structure, 'vree propôs"é:· propose' mediated mediated by prosodic structure, a hierarchically hierarchically organized organized ) phonologic~nent-{Selkirk-t978-;-î986;Nesporand subpart subpart of the phonolo^alconipoiient-(Selkfrk'19787lfl86n^pdrljid^ within constituents within prosodie constituents Vogel 1989) consisting consisting of prosodic 6;""1iayësî989) o therefore, not Phonological rules will, therefore, which phonological phonological rules apply. Phonological 365

..

1

:

1

•

!< 1~

.1 . M

::

~

~

·œ

..

li

!

366 Draga Zec and Sharon Draga Zee Sharon Inkelas have direct direct access to syntactie syntactic domains. domains. Likewise, the influence of phopho­ extend further than prosodic and will nology on syntax syntax will not extend forther than prosodie structure, structure, and at most hierarchieal organization. most affect its hierarchical organization. Thus, although the model model to be proposed Thus, although bidirectional, bidirectional, the proposed here is sufsuf­ ficiently constrained constrained to exclude all the undesirable undesirable types types of interaction interaction allowed by a direct mind what direct access model. In partieular, particular, we have in mind Zwicky and pernicious consequences aland Pullum Pullum 1986a describe describe as the the pernicious consequences of al­ lowing syntax direct access to phonological phonologieal information; syntax to have direct information; an exex­ ample would be a syntactic syntactic rule that that "obligatorily “obligatorily moves to the beginbegin­ ning of the sentence constituent that that begins phonetically sentence the the highest highest constituent phonetically with with a bilabial bilabial consonant” consonant" (Zwicky and and Pullum Pullum 1986a:75). Our model will never allow any interactions interactions of this this kind kind because syntactie syntactic rules have access not to the full-fledged foll-fledged phonological representation, but but only to phonological representation, its prosodie subpart. This automatically automatically excludes segmental segmental informa­ informaprosodic subpart. tion tion from the the range range of information information available to the syntactic syntactic compocompo­ nent. Furthermore, as already already mentioned, asnent. Furthermore, mentioned, the model of syntax syntax we as­ sume is nonderivational. prosodie structure syntax nonderivational. The The influence of prosodic structure on syntax can thus expressed as an additional additional source of constraints constraints on syntac­ syntacthus be expressed tie representations, just just as the prosodie struc­ structic representations, the influence of syntax syntax on prosodic ture ture is an additional additional source of constraints constraints on phonologieal phonological representarepresenta­ tions. Precisely because because it is bidirectional, descriptive Precisely bidirectional, this this model has the descriptive adequacy, most powerful, adequacy, which is by definition definition lacking in any, even the most unidirectional syntax whieh unidirectional model, to handle handle the the prosodie prosodic effects on syntax which we whieh allows no effects of phonology syntax will will examine. A model which phonology on syntax existent cases together rule out the the existent together with with the nonexistent nonexistent ones. By positing positing the prosodic prosodie hierarchy hierarchy as a mediator the mediator of phonology-syntax phonology-syntax interactions, interactions, we capture folly syntax. capture fully the the range range within within which phonology phonology can influence syntax.

1

Sources of Influence Influence Sources of

The most most widely recognized prosodie structure structure The recognized source source of influence on prosodic structure, typieally captured is a mapping mapping from syntactic syntactic to prosodie prosodic structure, typically captured this case the constraints by phrasing phrasing algorithms. algorithms. In this constraints go only in one direction, explicitly assumed the various phrasing phrasing algorithms algorithms direction, as is explicitly assumed in the proposed in the literature 1978; Nespor proposed literature (e.g., Selkirk 1978; Nespor and Vogel 1982, 1986; 1989; and others). 1986; Hayes 1989; others). Less commonly commonly recognized in the the literature other direction; direction; atme is the the fact that that constraints constraints may also hold in the other that requirethat is, some syntactic syntactic phenomena phenomena may be affected by prosodie prosodic require­ ments. phrasing ments. Clearly, however, these these effects do not result result from the the phrasing algorithm. algorithm. algorithm as only the most general, In fact, we view the the phrasing phrasing algorithm general, or elsewhere, mechanism mechanism for relating relating syntactie syntactic and prosodie prosodic structures. structures. It is bypassed prosodie constraints, bypassed by more specific prosodic constraints, among whieh which are some that syntactie structure. that may also influence syntactic structure.

Prosodieally Prosodically Constrained Constrained Syntax Syntax

2

367

Lexically Based Prosodic Prosodie Constraints Constraints Lexically Based

In this section we argue that this section that prosodie prosodic structure structure can constrain constrain syntactie syntactic constituent evidencE: two cases in which whieh prosodie constituent structure, structure, using as evidence prosodic retpiiremenfs'on'cCTTaiiTIexicara the linear order·· ordeFof syn^'E e’ ~fremerits-ôîtcëifàïn-re~-~a:ritemslnflûênce ofsyif~tië' omits. —----- —--------- ------------------------------

Y

~-2.1

Serbo-Croatian C Clitics Serbo-Croatian litics

Serbo-Croatian, like a number other languages, languages, is known for its second Serbo-Croatian, number of other position position clities. clitics. Second position position can actually actually be defined in two ways: either after a first fi~st word or after generally either after after a first constituent, constituent, and and speakers speakers generally have a choiee options, as shown in (1) and (2): choice between between these options,

(1) Taj èovek=joj=ga=je c o v e k = jo j= g a —j e poklonio. that man=her=it=aux that man=her=it=aux presented presented 'That ‘That man man presented presented her with with it.' it.’ Taj=joj=ga=je (2) T & i= jo j= g a —j e èovek covek poklonio. that=her=it=aux presented that=her=it=aux man man presented 'That man man presented presented her with with it.' ‘That it.’

locating clities after We will concern ourselves here with with the option option of locating clitics after a first word. Of particular interest to us is the fact that that not every syntactic syntactie particular interest terminal terminal counts counts as first for the sake of clitics. While every major major category category host second position position clitics clities (see (3), ((4), 4), and (6) ), function fonction words word can host (6)), prepositions and systematically fail to do this this (as in such as prepositions and conjunctions conjunctions systematically (5) and (7)). Furthermore, content word counts counts Furthermore, as shown in (4) and and (6), a content as first even when preceded preceded by a function fonction word.

u kuéi. kuci. (3) Petar=je Petar=je Petar=aux Petar=aux in house 'Petar is in the house.’ house.' ‘Petar kuéi=je Petar. (4) U kuci=je Petar. in house=aux house=aux Petar Petar 'Petar ‘Petar is in the house.' house.’ (5)*U=je (5) *U=je in=aux in=aux *'Petar *‘Petar

kuéi kuci Petar. Petar. house Petar Petar is in the house.’ house.'

Petar=je u kuci. kuéi. (6) A Petar=je Petar=aux in house So Petar=aux 'So, Petar Petar is in the house.' ‘So, house.’

Petar Petar u kuci. kuéi. So=aux Petar Petar in house So=aux *'So, Petar house.' *‘So, Petar is in the house.’

{7)* A —j e (7)*A=je

1

l

'l

• • •

Sharon Inkelas Zec and Sharon Draga Zee 368 Draga

Syntax 369 Constrained Syntax Prosodically Constrained Prosodically

content function and content behavior of function syntactic behavior asymmetry in the syntactic This asymmetry between phonological difference between systematic phonological exactly with a systematic coïncides exactly words coincides content 1988, all lexical words, i.e., content Zec 1988, the two. As shown in Inkelas and Zee words, correspond phonological words, and as such receive High tone correspond to phonological function words, which do not and stress. stress. But this is not the case with fimction phonological words. ^1 their own as phonological stand stand on their characterize the what we have said so far, we could characterize On the basis of what syntactically or phonologieither syntactically position clitics either distribution distribution of second position equivalent to following the appears equivalent cally: following the first content content word appears between words which dichotomy between phonological word. However, the dichotomy first phonological quite this cannot is not quite second-position clitics and those which cannot can host second-position account alone is syntactic account that a syntactic simple; there there is in fact some evidence that entire range of facts. capture the entire not sufficient suffi.dent to capture opconjunctions, ali and pa, can op­ As mentioned mentioned in Browne 1974, two conjunctions, 'accent', clitics-and when they do, they also surface with ‘accent’, tionally tionally host clitics—and that Zec 1988 take this as evidence that i.e.. i.e., High tone and stress. Inkelas and Zee phonological words. The examples optionally form phonological conjunctions optionally these conjunctions behavior of ali: illustrate the behavior below illustrate niko=nam (8) Mi smo zvonili, ali niko=nam nije otvorio. neg.aux opened we aux rang but nobody=us(Dat) neg.aux but nobody=us(Dat) rang us.' opened the door for us.’ nobody opened but nobody ‘We 'We rang but ** (9) Mi smo zvonili, ali=nam ali=nam

niko

nije

otvorio.

I1

H neg.aux opened nobody neg.aux we aux rang but=us(Dat) but=us(Dat) nobody us.' for. us.’ ‘We opened the door for nobody opened but nobody 'We rang but characterizing the Under account we would have no way of characterizing syntactic account Under a syntactic disjunction and resorting to a disjunction without resorting that can host clitics without ·set of forms that to diacritic marking of ali and pa: diacritic marking exception category word, with the (10) a. Clitics can follow any major the exception major category of prepositions. prepositions. exception b. Clitics cannot category words, with the exception cannot follow minor category of the conjunctions conjunctions ali and pa, which precede clitics only when combined combined with a High tone.

But under capture all of the clitic facts account, we can capture prosodie accoimt, under a prosodic with one simple statement: statement: clitics follow a phonological word. Following prosodie Inkelas 1987,1989a, characterize clitics as lexical forms with a prosodic 1987, 1989a, we characterize 1 In feict, proclitics. In Serboprepositions to be proclitics. and prepositions ^In conjunctions £ind al! conjunctions fa.et, we take all Croatian, pronouns, every subclass of pronouns, exception of a subclass possible exception the possible that, with the Croatian, it seems that, syntactic English, Serbophonological word or a clitic; unlike English, either a phonological terminal is either syntactic terminal fonction words. non-clitic function Croatian Croatian does not have a large class of non-clitic

clitics Serbo-Croatian clitics, frame. 2 In the case of these Serbo-Croatian subcategorization frame.^ subcategorization subcategorize for is the' they subcategorize unit they that the unit the frame encodes the fact that separated from cannot be separated that these clitics cannot word. 3 The fact that phonological word.^ phonological that a indicates that captured by the frame, which indicates their host by pause is also captured their together form a single phonological word. clitic and its host together

(11) je:

[[

1

]w-]w

subcategoprosodie subcatego­ requirements of this prosodic It is in order to satisfy the requirements that is, word restricted; that distribution of clitics is restricted; that the distribution rization frame that rization constraints. prosodie constraints. subject to prosodic Serbo-Croatian is subject order in Serbo-Croatian order 2.2

Hausa H ausa ffaa

deorder are observed by Inkelas 1988 in a de­ constraints on word order Similar constraints particle fa in Hausa. location of the discourse particle scription of the possible location scription material, from which it preceding material, immediately preceding emphasize the immediately tends to emphasize Fa tends Fa separated by pause: cannot be separated cannot Audu fa ya tafi (12) Audu Audu Audu 3sg leave left' 'Audu (emph.) left’ ‘Audu appear only in a that it is allowed to appear about fa is that interests us about What interests What structure phrase structure environments which would be licensed by phrase subset of the environments subset environments is constraint holding over these environments Furthermore, the constraint rules. Furthermore, syntactic terms. than in syntactic rather than prosodie rather stated in prosodic properly properly stated object between a verb and the following object For example, appear between example, fa may appear word}, than one word), contains more than branching (i.e., contains NP if and only if that that NP is branching rejected, as in (13b). If this condition construction is rejected, obtain the construction condition does not obtain illustrates interest as it illustrates special interest as in (13a) and (13c). Example Example (13c) is of special just by more constituent, not just branching constituent, that followed by a branching that fa needs to be followed than than one word.

(13) a.*Ya sayi fa teburin. teburin. table-def bought he bought table-def table' bought the table’ 'He bought ‘He tebur. babban tebur. b. Ya sayi fa babban he bought big table. bought table' bought a big table’ 'He bought ‘He 2

clitics from distinguishing clitics mechanism for distinguishing further mechanism ^Given require no further frame, we require this frame, Given this subcategorization see Inkelas 1989a. non-clitic prosodie subcategorization discussion of prosodic non-clitic words. For discussion 3 phonological The the clitic is sister sister to a phonological things-that encodes two things—that a.