Papers in General Linguistics [Reprint 2019 ed.] 9783110921311, 9789027931313

Citation preview

JANUA LINGUARUM STUDIA M E M O R I A E N I C O L A I YAN WIJK D E D I C A T A edenda curai C. H. V A N S C H O O N E V E L D Indiana University

Series Minor,

209

PAPERS IN GENERAL LINGUISTICS by J. K R Â M S K Î

1976

MOUTON THE HAGUE • PARIS

© Copyright 1976 Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, The Hague No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers

ISBN 90 279 3131 3

Printed in The Netherlands by Z.N.D., Den Bosch

INTRODUCTION

The scientific work of Jiff Kramsky is marked by two characteristic features: his constant endeavour to penetrate to a right conception of the fundamental problems of structural linguistics, such as those relating to phoneme, syllable, morpheme and word; and his viewing of the latter elements both from qualitative and quantitative points of view in order to attain a solid and coherent basis of tenable assumptions. His effort to extend the examination of a subject to a number of oriental languages leads him on to the field of linguistic typology which opens up a wider field for the problems under discussion. In the first of the papers collected in this volume, J. Kramsky draws the attention of phonologists to the importance of distinguishing between the full relevance of a phoneme, on the one hand, and the imperfect relevance of the phonemes whose omission or substitution in words does not result in any semantic differentiation, on the other hand. In contrast to some phonologists of the Prague School, he holds that the phoneme has a real existence as a unit of the linguistic structure which inheres in the mind of the speaker and helps to form his utterance. This mentalistic and partially psychological view of the phoneme, however, is modified by his statement that the psychological aspect of a phoneme is not of immanent character, since it comes to the phoneme from outside, i.e. from the utterance. In the subsequent article suggested by A. V. Isafienko's division of Slavonic languages into vocalic and consonantal, he tries to ascertain deeper quantitative relationships between vowel and consonants by confronting their relative con-

6

INTRODUCTION

textual frequency in texts of a certain size with their occurrence in the phonemic inventories of Persian and seven European languages including Czech and Slovak. J. Kramsky's third contribution to phonology discusses consonantal correlation of timbre and shows, using material from Old Irish and Kashmiri in which several classes of this opposition occur, that all of them are dependent on those of the following vowel, whereas other consonantal correlations in languages, e.g. that of aspiration, concern the consonants alone and cannot be treated on the same footing as timbre. On this basis he gives an explanation of the origin of vowels in Turkish from the transitory sounds which shared the same timbre with their neighbouring consonants. His study "The Origin and Function of Vowel Harmony in Ural-Altaic Languages", based on the examination of the Old Turkish graphic system, is the first pioneering study of the phonological problems concerning these languages. In the article "On the Functional Conception of the Syllable" J. Kramsky develops his theory of the syllable. He holds that the nucleus of the syllable is always immutable in all languages, while its "cover" and linking to the neighbouring syllable may be different. The most important factor by which a different syllabic division of the same phonemic organization of a word in languages can be explained is, however, a different adhesion of the elements of which the syllable consists. As to its functional values, he makes a marked distinction between the primary and secondary or collateral ones, the phonemes of the latter being less loaded with functions than those of the former. Some other phonological issues are critically dealt with and elaborated in the sixth, seventh, and tenth articles of this book; the other two articles present his investigations in the field of phonological typology. In the former study (pp. 105-120) he classifies twenty-three languages in terms of their quantitative use of particular kinds of consonants as given by the relation of the sounds of the inventory to their relative occurrence in texts, he distinguishes three types of languages according to the manner of articulation and three types of languages according to the place of articulation. In the latter investigation (pp. 130-155) based on the material of

INTRODUCTION

7

twenty nine languages which have the same vowel system (i,u,e,o,a), J. Kramsky shows that the frequency of occurrence of individual vowel phonemes manifests itself in a limited frequency span, and that within the zone of every vowel there are apparent centres of concentration of the language distribution. Between these centres there are "more or less wide empty spaces" within which no languages under discussion occurred. Three remaining studies of J. Kramsky are concerned with morphology and with what I call morphological syntagmatics. In one of them (pp. 100-104) J. Kramsky assumes that the phoneme, morpheme, and sentence have each a fixed place in the system of language, whereas the word belongs both to the morphological, syntactic, and lexical plans. While he regards the morpheme as the basic unit of the morphological plan and the sentence as that of the syntactic plan, he holds that the lexical plan is exclusively based on the word as its basic unit. In another article (pp. 156-180) he observes the occurrence of morphological homonymy in the isolative, agglutinative, flexive, and other types of languages, and finds out in which word categories morphological homonymy occurs. He also shows the influence of context upon the identity of forms. The last of J. Kramsky's studies included in this book (pp. 181 -197) treats the most productive ways of expressing the category of determinedness by other means than by independent words in a number of languages and shows that the latter fall into four classes in this respect: (a) languages in which determinedness or indeterminedness is inherent in the noun itself; (b) languages in which the category of determinedness is manifested in the declension of nouns; (c) languages in which it is manifested in the declension of adjectives; and (d) languages which manifest the category of determinedness in verbal forms. As may be seen from the above review, all the articles selected by the author for the present publication are the result of his painstaking, ingenious, and sympathetic work done on the progressive lines of Prague functional linguistics. I feel confident that a student of linguistics who should take the trouble to read it

8

INTRODUCTION

thoroughly will not find his labour wasted. J. Kramsky's reasoning is clear and his assertions — in spite of some minor debatable points — are fully supported by his numerous observations of linguistic phenomena, especially in terms of their quantitative aspects. Here the words of William Hazlitt which may be taken as a motto of the Prague Linguistic School can be quoted: "When a thing ceases to be a subject of controversy it ceases to be a subject of interest." B. Trnka Caroline University of Prague

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction by Professor B. Trnka 5 Some Remarks on the Problem of the Phoneme 11 Phonological Exploitation of Vowel Phonemes 25 To the Problem of the Consonantal Correlations of Timbre 31 The Origin and Function of Vowel Harmony in Ural-Altaic Languages 37 On the Functional Conception of the Syllable 57 On the Phonological Law of Incompatibility of Free Quantity and Free Stress 71 Is English a Germanic Language? 88 The Place of the Word in the Language System 100 A Quantitative Typology of Languages 105 Some Statistical Observations on the Role of the Place of Articulation in Languages 121 The Frequency of Occurrence of Vowel Phonemes in Languages Possessing Vowel Systems of Identical Structure . 130 A Typological Study of Morphological Homonymy in Languages 156 Some Ways of Expressing the Category of Determinedness . 181 Index of Names 199 Index of Languages 201 General Index 205

SOME REMARKS ON THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

When in 1956 Professor Jakobson gave a lecture in Prague on the problem of synchrony and diachrony, the author of the present paper was especially captivated by that passage in which Jakobson declared ellipticity as one of the active forces of language. According to Jakobson there are situations which are characterized by a certain economy in speech; the speech becomes simplified, some sounds are dropped, not arbitrary sounds indeed, but DEFINITE sounds. It means that the ellipsis is subjected to certain laws. This extremely interesting observation has led us to do a bit of thinking over the function and character of the phoneme resulting in the following few remarks. Much has been written about the phoneme and it is not our intention to increase the extent of the literature concerning the definition of the phoneme and the problems connected with it. We will rather examine the function of the phoneme and its position in language and speech from the point of view of communication. Today we do not quite realize what a revolutionary reversal in linguistics it was when the phoneme was established as a linguistic unit. It was the first time that man was able "to take hold of the speech", to base himself on something that was, although only an abstraction, from the standpoint of the language system something very concrete. To be sure, what could the linguist base himself on until that time? Could he base himself on the sounds which were individual products of the speaker, each different not only with different speakers but even with the same speaker? It was not until the concept of the phoneme was established — in

12

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

addition to the concept of the function and relevance — that it was possible to conceive of language as a system. In spite of the great number of definitions of the phoneme there has been a general agreement that the phoneme is a unit of both 'langue' and 'parole'. However, no difference has been made between the phoneme in 'langue' and the phoneme in 'parole': words have been simply regarded as composed of a certain number of phonemes of equal value. Statistical linguistics has counted the occurrence frequencies of phonemes in vocabulary and compared them with occurrence frequencies of phonemes in uttered speech, in coherent texts, and accordingly all phonemes have been regarded as quite equivalent entities. However, if the phoneme is considered from the standpoint of its communicative value in the process of communication, a clear-cut difference between the phoneme as a member of a language system and the phoneme as realized in uttered speech becomes evident. As a unit of 'langue' the phoneme is really a linguistic unit possessing a certain invariable function, i.e., the word differentiating function. Quite a different situation is, however, in 'parole'. We cannot ignore the difference indicated by B. Pottier at the Vlth International Congress of Linguists in Paris in 1948. It is interesting that it was just phonological statistics that led Pottier to show that relative frequencies of phonemes in a statistical investigation of coherent texts cannot be duly compared. According to Pottier 1 phonemes possess two substantial qualities: they are either CONSTITUTIVE or SIGNIFICATIVE. Thus for instance in the Spanish sentence "Las cosas que tienes en el bolsillo de tu americana son muy pesadas" there are eight phonemes /s/, out of which three indicate the plural (las, cosas, pesadas), one indicates the 2nd person singular (tienes)-, and four are word-constitutive (cosas, bolsillo, son, pesadas). However, Pottier introduces a psychological point of view into the problem when writing: "II faut se mettre à la place du sujet parlant qui sent des phonèmes 1

Cf. Actes du sixième congrès international des linguistes, Paris 19 au 24 Juillet 1948, Rapports sur les questions historiques et pratiques mises à l'ordre du jour (Paris, 1948), 87.

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

13

dominants, par le sens qu'il veut donner à sa phrase. Il est évident que le son ch de blanche est totalement différent psychologiquement de celui de chaise ou arracher." The last quoted sentence in particular leads us back to where we were before functional linguistics, namely to individual sounds again. Nevertheless, Pottier's distinction of constitutive and significative phonemes is important and legitimate and has unjustly failed. We have drawn attention to it in our paper "On the Acoustic Identity of the Word". 2 It was just the problem of the acoustic identity of the word that has forced us to re-value the concept of the phoneme. We start from the concept of the functional relevance of phonemes which, according to our opinion, is not always the same. The basic criterion for the differentiation of the meaning of the word is the existence of one or more pairs of words differentiated only by one phoneme (e.g., pit-bit-tit-kit-fit-wit-sit-chit-knit-lit-writ, or pit-pet-patpot-put, or bit-bid-big-bitch-bill, etc.) In this case all phonemes constituting the above-mentioned words are PHONEMES POSSESSING FULL RELEVANCE, as the differentiation of the meaning by only one phoneme can be made in all sound positions of the word in question. PHONEMES POSSESSING NONFULL RELEVANCE are such phonemes that their substitution in a word does not result in a semantic word differentiation, but only in a nonsemantic corruption of the word. Consequently, in the latter case there does not exist any word pair differentiated solely by a single phoneme. Thus, for instance, when we substitute phoneme ¡9/ for the final /t/ in the word bit, the result is a nonsemantic corruption of the word, as there is no such word as bith /bi0/ in English. Accordingly, /t/ in the word bit represents a phoneme possessing nonfull relevance. Similarly, nonfully relevant phonemes are /i/ and /e/ in clinch, clench, and in flinch, flench, as their interchange does not influence the meaning of the words in question. Nonfully relevant phonemes can not only be interchanged but also dropped without changing the meaning of the word. In some languages this phenomenon is manifested quite regularly in literary 2

Linguistics, 16 (September 1965), 42-49.

14

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

or colloquial language, in vulgar language or in dialects. A typical representative of such languages is English where it appears in colloquial language in the so-called contracted forms, especially with auxiliary verbs (lam > I'm, you are > you're, he is (he has) > he's, he will > he'll, I have > I've, they would > they'd, do not > don't, cannot > can't, etc.), but also in other cases, e.g. history /histri/, necessary /nesisri/, participle /pa:tsipl/, national /nsejnl/, etc. The pronunciation of strong or weak forms depends, as is well known, on the position of the word in the sentence and on the degree of emphasis. The first-mentioned words occur more often in an unstressed position than in a stressed position and this is why weak forms are more often used than the strong ones. A considerable occurrence frequency of these weak forms substantially changes the phonetic characteristics of the language. In vulgar language and in dialects the reduction of sounds has a still stronger tendency. Beside commonly used reductions there can also appear quite individual reductions. From the point of view of the communicative process the fact that certain sounds of the word can be interchanged or dropped without a consequent change in the meaning of the word in question is evidence of the REDUNDANCY of phonemes. Redundant phonemes can only be those possessing nonfull relevance, of course, when single words are concerned. We ignore here the redundancy of whole words which is based upon the possibility of complementing such words from the context. Redundancy is indispensable in language if communication is to be possible, especially communication in worsened conditions, i.e., in the presence of a considerable noise in the communication channel. After all, language communication in a normal environment is almost never exempt from noise and thus redundancy makes the full understanding of the message possible. The intelligibility of the message is, of course, also influenced by psychological aspects of the communication process such as the problem of perception, recognition, or the interpretation of the message, the workings of the environment, etc. To sum up: the language system contains a certain inventory of phonemes, i.e. sounds that can differentiate words. Words are

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

15

composed of phonemes, but not each of the phonemes is relevant for the meaning of the word. The phonemes whose substitution for other phonemes causes a semantic change are fully relevant phonemes. All other phonemes are nonfully relevant phonemes as they are not indispensable for the semantic relevance of the word; they can be replaced by other phonemes or dropped without change in the meaning of the word. We can say that every word represents a subsystem for itself in which its components are in mutual relations of different functional relevance. Our second remark concerns the problem of the nature of the phoneme. This problem belongs to the basic questions of phonology, but its solution seems to be still very remote.3 It is just in connection with what we wrote above about the functional relevance of phonemes in 'langue' and in 'parole' that this question gains renewed interest and urgency. According to Gerhard Dietrich4 the problem of the nature of the phoneme has a certain similarity with the medieval controversy about REALIA and NOMINALIA, that is whether universals are something existing in reality or whether they are only subjective products of abstraction, mere names (nomina rerum). As to the problem of the phoneme, the basic question is whether phoneme has a certain reality in language and in the mind of the speaker or whether it is a mere product of the abstractional activity of the scholar, a highly fictitious and subjective work. G. Dietrich3 distinguishes three different conceptions of the phoneme: the empirical-physical conception of D. Jones, the mentalist-psychological conception of Baudouin de Courtenay, and the structuralist-functional conception of Sapir and Bloomfield. W. Freeman Twaddel6 regards as rep3

Cf. David Abercrombie, Studies in Phonetics and Linguistics (London, 1965), 135: "The usefulness of phonemes may be agreed on, but their nature is not, and the word has become a focal point for what Sapir has called 'phonetic metaphysics'." 4 G. Dietrich, "Das Phonem und die Phonologie", Zeitschrift fur Anglistik und Amerikanistik, V (1957), 410. 5 Cf. G. Dietrich, op. cit., 410-412. 6 W. Freeman Twaddell, On Defining the Phoneme (= Language Monographs, XVI) (Baltimore, 1935).

16

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

resentatives of the mentalist (psychological) conception of the phoneme particularly the members of the Prague Linguistic Circle (N. S. Trubetzkoy, A. Sommerfelt, H. Ulaszyn), and E. Sapir; of the mentalist physical conception, W. L. Graff and J. Marouzeau; of the functional conception, V. Mathesius and J. Vachek; of the physical conception, L. Bloomfield, D. Jones, Harald E. Palmer, and Morris Swadesh. Twaddell himself advocates an abstractional fictitious conception of the phoneme. Last but not least it is necessary to mention the conception of R. Jakobson and M. Halle7 who distinguish a double approach to the phoneme in relation to the sound: the 'inner' and the 'outer' approach. The former approach locates the distinctive features and their bundles within the speech sounds, the latter divorces phonemes in different ways from concrete sounds. The inner approach is represented, according to Jakobson and Halle, by Bloomfield, the outer approach by the mentalist view, the coderestricting view (phonemes are confined to the code and variants to the message), the generic view (phoneme is opposed to sound as class to specimen), the fictionalist view (phonemes are abstractional, fictitious units), and the algebraic view (requiring analysis totally independent of the sound substance — Hjelmslev). Here we are not concerned with a thorough criticism of the particular trends in the conception of the phoneme, but with an approach to this problem from the same point of view we have assumed in the preceding discussion of the function of the phoneme in 'langue' and 'parole'. Let us, first of all, discuss the character of the phoneme as a unit of the language system. The system of every language consists of an inventory of a certain number of phonemes. Phonemes are abstractions obtained by the analysis of an utterance. For themselves they have no meaning, but in their mutual relations they are in certain functional-relevant oppositions, and, accordingly, they are functional units as stated already, for instance, by J. 7

Roman Jakobson and Morris Halle, Fundamentals of Language (The Hague, 1956), 8-17.

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

17

Vachek. 8 We can say that phonemes as members of a phoneme inventory have only a relational existence, i.e., they are characterized only by their quality of being in opposition against other phonemes. But how does the phoneme behave in an utterance? What is it that transforms a sound into a phoneme? As already mentioned the phoneme by itself has no meaning; it acquires meaning only through its relation to other phonemes whose configuration constitutes a certain meaningful unit, either bound (a morpheme) or free (a word). The existence of the phoneme in 'parole' is, according to our opinion, real as it is given in the mind of the speaker. Presuming that the phoneme is determined by the inner structure of the language given in the speaker's mind, L. Novak formulates his definition of the phoneme which is important for our view.9 Dans la conscience linguistique des sujets parlants, il est exclu de confondre normalement deux phonèmes distincts même si les réalisations phonétiques respectives en sont compliquées. Le fait qu'il s'agit des oppositions est le caractère essentiel de toute la structure interne de la langue et non seulement de celle de son corps phonique. There is no doubt that in the language structure which is given in the speaker's mind the basic factor is precisely the phonemic distinctiveness. But what about a meaningless morpheme or word? We know it is possible to invent words that are meaningless both for the hearer and for the speaker. Can we speak about phonemes in this case? Our answer is a negative one as in this case the basic function of the phoneme, i.e., the function of the realization of a meaningful unit (morpheme or word), is missing. A meaningless word represents only acoustic material composed of individual acoustic entities. When in such a meaningless word one sound is replaced by another, the result is only another meaningless word. The difference between two or more meaningless words is only acoustic, phonetic, but not phonological, not functional. Meaningless words 8

Cf. J. Vachek, What is Phonology? (= English Studies, 15) (1933), 82. L'udovit Novâk, "Projet d'une nouvelle définition du phonème", TCLP, 8 (Prague, 1939), 68. 9

18

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

are composed not of phonemes but of individual sounds which can be phonetically described but which cannot be ascribed any phonological value because they lack the capacity for semantic differentiation given by the mutual configuration of phonemes in meaningful units. It must, however, be admitted that the maker of such meaningless words uses a certain language code — as a rule the system of his mother tongue — so that the sounds used as material for making meaningless words are mostly identical with those of the phonemic inventory of the mother tongue. Nevertheless, as the basic function of the sound, namely the capability of the differentiation of semantic units, is missing here, those acoustic formations cannot be regarded as phonemes. On the other hand we can form words to which we ascribe a certain meaning or sense which for the hearer will be meaningless. This is, after all, the case for words of a foreign language which the hearer hears and perceives but which he does not understand. Are such words composed of phonemes? Even here the answer is not difficult. For the maker of such words (in the case of artificially made words) it is phonemes that constitute them, as he ascribes a meaning to the words and this meaning is carried by the capacity of the opposition of distinctive features of the sounds which the meaningful unit is composed of. The hearer who does not know the meaning of those words will perceive not phonemes but only a mass of sounds which cannot be ascribed any capacity of differentiating meaning. A similar situation is with a language unknown to the hearer. Strictly speaking meaning is not so much concerned here as the knowledge of the phonological structure of the language in question. If the phonological structure of the language is embedded in our mind, even the units composing morphemes or words whose meaning we do not know may appear as phonemes. This enables us to distinguish rather safely the acoustic form of such configurations. However, it may happen that we do not perceive such a configuration perfectly; we may replace one phoneme by another, or we may wrongly articulate the stream of the speech. Essentially we can say that a correct perception of phonological oppositions is possible even when we do not know the

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

19

meaning of the units in question, assuming the knowledge or awareness of the phonological system of the language. That pressure of the phonological system of the language in the hearer's mind is primary. The above examples of when a certain acoustic entity can and cannot be regarded as a phoneme prove that phoneme is not an artificial construct 10 of linguists but something that is anchored in the mind of the man who has mastered the respective language, or better, who is given the structure of that language in his mind. Consequently, we can ascribe a real existence to the phoneme—not, of course, to an isolated phoneme but to a phoneme which stands in a functionally relevant opposition to other phonemes. It is, accordingly, a relational existence. The existence of the phoneme appears to be most concrete in the morpheme or word as it is the meaningful unit in which distinctiveness, the basic quality of the phoneme, 11 finds its most direct manifestation. The fact that not all sounds in a word represent fully relevant phonemes proves that phonemic relevance is a quality which is (at least partly) separable from the phoneme in certain, structurally conditioned circumstances, or, in other words, which may in certain cases become redundant. On the other hand, the fact that not arbitrary phonemes but definite phonemes are redundant in a morpheme or word points to fixed, structural dependencies of not an arbitrary but a legitimate character. These facts testify that the language structure is firmly established in the mind of the speaker or hearer and thereby a real existence of the phoneme is given. Consequently, language structure is something very real that is actively given in the speaker's mind as it forms his utterance. Mistakes in a foreign language are pre10 Cf. Jakobson-Halle, op. cit., 73: "When before the World War H,phonemics was the most controversial area in the science of language, doubts were expressed by some linguists as to whether phonemes really play an autonomous part in our verbal behavior. It was even suggested that ... distinctive units, such as phonemes, are an artificial construct to facilitate the scientific description and analysis of a language." 11 Cf. Gerhard Dietrich, op. cit., 409: "... beruht das Phonem ... auf einer phonologischen Opposition, der die Qualitat (Klangfarbe) der Laute mit der Wirkung einer Wortunterscheidung zugrunde liegt".

20

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

dominantly caused by the interference of the structure of the speaker's mother tongue, because the structure of the foreign language is not sufficiently anchored in the speaker's mind. Last but not least the real existence of the phoneme is testified too by the fact that it is the awareness of the phoneme that helps to overcome individual differences in the articulation of sounds. We can hardly maintain that we can ever utter the same sound for the second time in the identical manner as the first.12 There must be something that confines within the limits of a certain entity those acoustic qualities which, though different, have something essential in common. And that essential is the distinctive feature or a bundle of distinctive features existing in mind. Our last discussion, closely connected with the preceding one, concerns the problem of the psychological nature of the phoneme. As is well known, the Prague School linguists regarded the phoneme as an exclusively linguistic and not psychological concept and clearly separated themselves from the psychologizing views of Baudouin de Courtenay, Sderba, and others. 13 At present, as a new branch of linguistics, psycholinguistics, is developing, it is necessary to reconsider this view. Since today we regard language as a means of communication between people we must inquire into the characteristics of individuals who form and interpret messages. Man cannot be detached from speech. From all that has been said here about the nature of the phoneme ensues that the phoneme as an abstraction cleared of individual characteristics, and as a unit of language structure, of language system, cannot be of psychological character by itself, but acquires that character through its realization in utterance. The realization of the phoneme is a psycho-physiological fact, whether it is in an utterance or in 12

Cf. Joseph H. Greenberg in Psycholinguistics (ed. by Charles E. Osgood and Thomas A. Sebeok) (Baltimore, 1954), 11: "The number of potential phones (sounds) in a language approaches infinity. The great virtue of the phonemic principle is that it enables the linguist t o effect a powerful reduction from this complexity to a limited number of signals that constitute the code, and this represents a great economy in description...". 13 Cf. D. CyzevSkyj, "Phonologie und Psychologie", TCLP, 4 (Prague, 1931), 3-22.

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

21

isolation. The psychological aspect is not immanent to the phoneme, but external to it precisely in its realization in utterance. In the mind there is anchored its principal function, the worddifferentiating function carried by distinctive features, and this function is projected into the realization of the phoneme by an individual sound in a meaningful unit, i.e., in a morpheme or word. From our discussion of the reality and nature of the phoneme it is obvious that our conception of the phoneme is essentially a mentalist one and in a limited degree also a psychological one. In conclusion to these problems we consider it necessary to react to the view of W. F. Twaddell in the already mentioned monograph which is an important contribution to our problem. Twaddell rejects both the mentalist (psychological) and the physical conception of the phoneme. As far as physical reality of the phoneme is concerned, especially in the views of L. Bloomfield and D. Jones, 1 4 we are essentially in agreement with Twaddell when he writes (p. 23): That we do not find any such constant, characteristic fraction is o f course a commonplace o f experimental phonetics. I f Bloomfield is right, the only explanation for our failure to find 'phoneme-features' in an acoustic record is the inadequacy o f our recording apparatus.

As to the conception of D. Jones, Twaddell rightly points to the difficulty of establishing the hiatus of similarity between the sounds Bloomfield defines the phoneme (cf. Language, p. 79) as " a minimum unit of distinctive sound-feature". Further he writes: "The phonemes of a language are not sounds, but merely features of sound which the speakers have been trained to produce and recognize in the current of actual speech-sound." The phoneme thus appears, according to Twaddell (p. 22), "to be a constant, characteristic fraction of phonetic events; a phoneme-feature is then a constant, characteristic acoustic fraction which is present in the sound-waves at each occurrence of that phoneme". In the conception of D. Jones the phoneme is a group of sounds that are related, i.e., as a group, organogenetically similar to each other, and organogenetically different from the sounds of all other groups within the language. That means, according to Twaddell, that there is a minimum of organogenetic similarity without which two sounds cannot be considered members of the same phoneme, and, consequently, there must be a hiatus of organogenetic similarity which sets off all members of the group as distinguished from the members of all other groups. 14

22

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

of two groups. On the other hand, we cannot quite accept Twaddell's criticism of the mentalist conception of the phoneme. According to Twaddell (p. 9), the mentalistic definition of the phoneme is invalid because (1) we have no right to guess about the linguistic working of an inaccessible 'mind', and (2) we can secure no advantage from such guesses. The linguistic processes of the 'mind' as such are quite simply unobservable; and introspection about linguistic processes is notoriously a fire in a wooden stove. Our only information about the 'mind' is derived from the behavior of the individual whom it inhabits. To interpret that behavior in terms of 'mind' is to commit the logical fallacy of 'explaining' a fact of unknown cause by giving that unknown cause a name, and then citing the named * as the cause of the fact. We agree with Twaddell that linguistic processes in the mind are inaccessible to a direct observation but we are convinced we can, at least indirectly, infer them from speaking and listening to subjects. The present author has verified this in his own experience. Once in conversation with an Englishman he pronounced the word windmill, but he was not understood because he pronounced the phoneme /wI incorrectly. In the author's mother tongue there exists phoneme /v/ but not phoneme /w/, so that there is no opposition /v/ vs. /w/ and, accordingly, the substitution of /v/ for /w/ in pronunciation is quite understandable. The /v/ might be pronounced with labialization which was not sufficient to constitute a relevant feature and accordingly to differentiate /w/ from /v/. Remarkable in this case is the fact that we are concerned here with an opposition which has a relatively weak representation in English, its functional load being very small, and yet, as experience has shown, the awareness of the phoneme is very strong. According to our opinion this gives a very strong evidence in favour of the real existence of the phoneme in man's mind, and against Twaddell's fictionalist view. Otherwise we could not explain why there are possible far greater distortions in the pronunciation of sounds without the intelligibility of the word being endangered. On the other hand, Jakobson and Halle 1 5 criticize the mentalist 15 Roman Jakobson and Morris Halle, Fundamentals of Language (The Hague, 1956), 11-12.

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

23

conception of the phoneme for reasons other than Twaddell's. According to their opinion it cannot be presumed that the sound correlate in our internal speech or in our speech intention is confined to distinctive features to the exclusion of the configurative, or redundant features. On the other hand, the multiplicity of contextual and optional variants of one and the same phoneme in UTTERED speech is due to the combination of this phoneme with diverse redundant and expressive features; this diversity, however, does not hamper the extraction of the invariable phoneme from among all these variations. Thus the attempt to overcome the antinomy between invariance and variability by assigning the former to the internal and the latter to the external experience distorts the two forms of experience. We do not exclude the possibility that in our internal speech configurative or redundant features may be present, but we do not consider this possibility substantial. In our opinion, the only fact that is substantial is that the sound correlate contains that phoneme component that makes of an individual sound a phoneme, that is, the relevant component represented by the distinctive feature or a bundle of distinctive features. We do not see any antinomy between the invariance of the phoneme and the variability of contextual and optional variants in utterance. The variability is possible just because it is not relevant since no distinctive features are concerned, and, on the other hand, because the distinctive feature is the same in all variants. After all, the sameness of the distinctive feature is adduced by Jakobson and Halle as argument 16 against Twaddell's fictionalist view. Both authors support in relation to the sound an 'inner', immanent approach which locates distinctive features and their bundles within the speech sounds. The outer approach, they argue, divorces phonemes from concrete sounds. Our conception also locates the distinctive features within the speech sounds but, at variance with Jakobson and Halle, we believe that it is not necessary to presume redundant features directly in the conception of the phoneme. It cannot be, of course, denied that as Jakobson and Halle write (p. 9), "beside the distinctive 16

Cf., op. cit., 14: "The sameness of a distinctive feature throughout all its variable implementations is now objectively demonstrable."

24

THE PROBLEM OF THE PHONEME

features, there are, at the command of the speaker, also other types of coded information-bearing features that any member of a speech community has been trained to manipulate ...", but these features are, according to our opinion, somewhere in the background of our mind, at a lower level than distinctive features and come to assertion only in the second rank. 17 Even though we have stressed in this paper the importance of the particular nature of the phoneme, we must finally conclude that the crucial test of the validity of this linguistic unit lies, above all, in its verification in practice. We conceive of practice in a broader sense, usefulness in methodology. Modern linguistics is unthinkable without the concept of the phoneme. The concepts of the function and of the phoneme have incredibly expanded the horizons of language studies and given new relevance to the linguistic science. They enabled us to see language plastically, to know its structure and function. The concept of the phoneme is a very manageable concept and is, accordingly, very useful from a methodological point of view. After all, practically it would not matter so much whether the phoneme has a real existence or whether it is only an abstraction. In science we often meet with concepts that have no real existence. They are often constructs which have no other purpose than to make research easier; they are supports without which the whole structure would collapse. Last but not least good evidence for the usefulness of the concept of the phoneme is the fact that phoneme has become a connecting link between most varied trends of structural linguistics which in the conceptions of other linguistic categories often differ very considerably. The usefulness of the phoneme has, in our opinion, been sufficiently demonstrated. It must be admitted that the phoneme's real existence has not yet been verified, but it is to be hoped that science has not yet finished with this difficult problem. 17 We agree with E. Fischer-j0rgensen's opinion expressed at the Fifth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences: "It is probably useful to distinguish several levels of perception. We do not hear (with our ears) sounds that are not there, but we may nevertheless at a higher level interpret what we hear as a sequence of phonemes" (Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Basel-New York, 1965, 430).

PHONOLOGICAL EXPLOITATION OF VOWEL PHONEMES 1

In my paper "Je angli5tina jazykem germanskym?" [Is English a Germanic Language?] in Casopis pro moderni filologii (1941), 260ff, I mentioned Isacenko's classification of languages according to the relative frequency of occurrence of vowel and consonant phonemes of the inventories of particular languages.2 According to Isacenko, Slavic languages can be classified into three types: (1) radically vocalic, (2) radically consonantal, and (3) mixed type. To the fundamental classification into vocalic and consonantal type IsaCenko is led by the fact that among Slavic languages there are two groups: on the one hand there are languages distinguishing hard and soft consonants, on the other hand there are languages which do not possess the correlation of palatalization but have musical pitch. Languages with a highly developed consonantal system, e.g. Polish, have a poor vocalic system; conversely, languages with a rich vocalic system, e.g. Stokavian, have a poor consonantal system. If this theory is applied to Germanic and Romance languages, Germanic languages appear as predominantly vocalic (having only 28.1 percent - 55.8 percent of consonant phonemes), 3 Romance 1 This paper is a translation from the Czech original "Fonologick6 vyuziti samohlaskovych fonemat", Linguistica Slovaca IV-VI (1946-1948), 39-43. 2 Cf. A. V. Isacenko, "Versuch einer Typologie der slavischen Sprachen", Linguistica Slovaca I (1939-1940), 64f. 3 However, this is valid only for modern Germanic languages; the old Germanic languages are explicitly consonantal (65.9 percent - 75 percent of consonants).

26

PHONOLOGICAL EXPLOITATION OF VOWEL PHONEMES

languages as predominantly consonantal (having 54.5 percent - 82.5 percent of consonants). I have also emphasized that it is necessary to solve the question of priority for the structure of the given language: whether the relative number of vowel and consonant phonemes in phonemic inventory or their relative exploitation in spoken language is more important. The phonological-statistical investigation of a coherent text shows that the occurrence of consonants or vowels in the phonemic inventory is not the same as the occurrence of consonants or vowels in coherent texts. Quite a simple consideration leads us to the conclusion that the percentage of consonants of a coherent text and of a whole dictionary must be lower since it is not possible to range consonants arbitrarily side by side in word units without any support of vowels or at least sonant consonants. It is precisely by means of vowels that the continuous speech flow is dissected into passages which confer intelligibility on word units and on speech in general. The language which possesses too many consonantal clusters is less intelligible than the language in which the distribution of vowels and consonants is more even. 4 It is evident that a language such as Italian, the phonemic inventory of which includes 82.5 percent of consonants, cannot have the same percentage of consonants in a coherent text. If the Italian text which I investigated includes 3,368 phonemes in 779 words, it is necessary that out of this number of phonemes theoretically 779 be vowels, that means at least one vowel per one context word. Those 779 vowels make 23.1 percent of all phonemes, which is the smallest theoretically possible percentage of vowels. However, the phonemic inventory counts a lower percentage of vowels: 17.5 percent. The number of consonants would be, in this case, 2,599 (76.9 percent) which means the average of 3.3 consonants to one context word under the condition that all words are monosyllabic. A phonological-statistical investigation of eight languages has given the following relations between the number of vowels and consonants of phonemic inventory and of coherent text: 4

Cf. the Czech sentence "strc prst skrz k r k " .

PHONOLOGICAL EXPLOITATION OF VOWEL PHONEMES

27

percent of percent of consonants of consonants of phonemic text inventory German English Slovak Old English Czech Persian Spanish Italian

52.6 54.5 60.0 65.9 66.6 78.2 80.0 82.5

61.7 59.5 57.7 58.8 57.6 57.5 57.7 52.0

For Czech, German, English, and Italian the same text of equal length was used (Chapter 6 of St. Matthew Gospel), for Spanish the same but shorter text, whereas for Old English and Slovak, texts of different contents, style, and length were used. However, the diversity of examined texts has no influence on the relation of vowels and consonants. Of the same opinion was Trubetzkoy who found (Grundzüge der Phonologie, p. 232) nearly an equal relation between vowels and consonants in two stylistically diverse texts in German: 60.8 percent of consonants in the first case, 61.3 percent of consonants in the other case — an insignificant difference. The fact is the more striking because the texts mentioned by Trubetzkoy render very different numbers of consonant clusters: 55 (including 116 consonants, i.e. 27 percent of all consonants) and 127 (including 281 consonants, i.e. 44 percent of all consonants). A greater number of consonant clusters must evidently be balanced by a greater number of vowels. Similar results are given when comparing two stylistically different texts in English. Whereas our table gives 59.5 percent of consonants, another text 5 gives 61.2 percent, the difference being only 1.7 percent. From the table it is evident, above all, that in texts German and 5

Cf. Jiri Krámsky, "Píispévek k fonologické statistice staré a nové angli£tiny" [Contribution to Phonological Statistics of Old and New English], Casopis pro moderni filologii (1942), 376 ff.

28

PHONOLOGICAL EXPLOITATION OF VOWEL PHONEMES

English have a greater percentage of consonants than in phonemic inventory, whereas the other languages — Czech, Old English, Italian, Spanish, Slovak, and Persian — have a greater exploitation of vowels in context. If this exploitation of vowels (V) is expressed numerically, it is given by the relation of the percentage of consonants of the phonemic inventory (P,) to the percentage of consonants in text (P,):

e,

v = Ii

For the above mentioned languages the following values of the exploitation of vowels have been ascertained: German English Slovak Old English Czech Persian Spanish Italian

0.85 0.91 1.04 1.12 1.15 1.36 1.46 1.58

Values over 1.00 mean a positive exploitation of vowels, i.e. the percentage of vowels in text is greater than the percentage of vowels of the phonemic inventory; values below 1.00 mean a negative exploitation of vowels, i.e. the percentage of vowels in text is smaller than in the phonemic inventory (cf. the graph, p. 29). Consequently, we can formulate a general principle according to which the so-called vocalic languages show that the greater the exploitation of consonant phonemes is, the smaller is the percentage of consonant phonemes of the inventory; whereas in languages of consonantal type, the greater the percentage of consonant phonemes in the inventory is, the smaller is the exploitation of consonant phonemes. In other words, the more vocalic (in Isacenkoan sense) a language is, the more the consonantal elements assert themselves in particular context; conversely, the more

PHONOLOGICAL EXPLOITATION OF VOWEL PHONEMES

J 0.2

I 0.4

I 0.6

I 0.8

1.0

» ' ' 1.2 1.4

exploitation of vowels

I 1.6

30

PHONOLOGICAL EXPLOITATION OF VOWEL PHONEMES

consonantal a language, the greater number of vowel occurrences can be found in the context of such a language. The discovery of this almost mathematically exact dependence is of a considerable importance. It shows that even in the field of phoneme exploitation there is a certain, stylistically unconditioned regularity. Languages of consonantal type select or make ample use of such constructions by which their consonantal character is negated. Thus Czech, a language of consonantal type, makes ample use, in context, of words in which the vocalic element is balanced with the consonantal element or even predominates. The same principle is valid for languages of vocalic type. In speech, both elements — the vocalic and the consonantal — are perfectly balanced. As a matter of fact, from this point of view we cannot speak about a vocalic and a consonantal type: the classification of languages into these two types has its main value only when the phonemic inventory of a certain language is considered.

TO THE PROBLEM OF THE CONSONANTAL CORRELATIONS OF TIMBRE

The phonological oppositions of the timbre of consonants belong to the most interesting and important phonological phenomena. They deeply touch not only the phonological but also the morphological structure of languages, especially in the case of languages with bundles of the correlation of timbre of more members. The consonantal opposition of timbre consists in various "colouring" of the consonantal members of the opposition, one member of the opposition having a "neutral" colouring and functioning therefore as a featureless member of the opposition, whereas the phonologically relevant place of articulation constitutes the feature of the other member. But we must be aware of the particular position which the correlation of timbre holds among other correlations. The timbre of consonants is inseparably connected with the timbre of the neighbouring vowels. N. S. Trubetzkoy says in his "Grundzüge" (TCLP 7, 123): Der Gegensatz zwischen mouillierten und unmouillierten Konsonanten übt außerdem auch einen starken Einfluß auf die Realisation der umgebenden Vokale aus und manchmal bemerkt der fremde Beobachter nur die kombinatorischen Varianten der Vokale, ohne die Eigentonunterschiede der Konsonanten wahrzunehmen. Dies ist aber eine akustische Täuschung, die auch bei der Beobachtung anderer konsonantischer Eigentonkorrelationen häufig vorkommt. In einer Sprache mit Mouillierungskorrelation ist die 'Färbung' (der 'Eigenton') des Konsonanten immer das wesentlichste und von allen übrigen artikulatorischen Eigenschaften werden nur diejenigen beachtet, die dem betreffenden Konsonanten und seinem 'Partner' gemeinsam sind.

32

CONSONANTAL CORRELATIONS OF TIMBRE

We see that Trubetzkoy admits the influence of consonants upon neighbouring vowels, but does not take into consideration the possibility of an influence of vowels upon consonants. This possibility has, nevertheless, been mentioned by scholars who have investigated languages with correlation bundles of timbre of more members and it must be admitted that the question of dependence or independence of the "colouring" of consonants on the "colouring" of vowels and vice versa might cause considerable embarassment. But, is this question put in the right way? To throw a little light on this problem we shall notice some languages in which more classes of consonantal oppositions of timbre occur. Trubetzkoy in his article "Die phonologischen Systeme" (TCLP 4, 108 ff.) gives an example of bundles of the correlation of timbre with four members in some Japanese dialects (according to Polivanov): k k°

k' k"

In TCLP 7 (126) Trubetzkoy mentions the dialect of Abkhasian, where the j-sounds form four classes of timbre, i.e. a neutral, simply palatal, simply labial, and palatally labial, «-class. In the Bantu language of Kinyarwanda there is a similar case: in the bilabial and s-series there are four classes of timbre, in the apical and s-series only three, in the labiodental only two, viz. f - f , v-v°. Contrary to this, the Japanese dialect of Nagasaki has four kinds of gutturals: velar, palatal, labiovelar, and labiopalatal. But as the correlation of labialization is unknown in other series of localization, whereas the correlation of palatalization refers to all series, we can take the labialized gutturals as an autonomous series (labiovelar) in the frame of which, like in the other series, the correlation of palatalization finds its place. In the article "Aus meiner phonologischen Kartothek" (TCLP 8, 22 ff.) Trubetzkoy classifies the consonantal system of Dunganian as follows: 1. consonants, which do not take part in any correlation of timbre and are, therefore, neutral: s, z; / , v;

CONSONANTAL CORRELATIONS OF TIMBRE

33

2. consonants which take part in the correlation of palatalization: bilabials b,p,m- V, p\ m'; 3. consonants which take part only in the correlation of rounding: affricates c, dz - c", dz°; gutturals g, k, x - g°, k°, 4. consonants which take part in a bundle of three members of both correlations: apicals d,t,nd\ t\ ri - d°, t°, n"; 5. consonants which take part in a bundle of four members of both correlations: sibilants z, c, s-z', c', s' - z°, c", s" - z", c", s"; liquid/-/'-/0-/". Let us supplement Trubetzkoy's examples by another two languages in which the correlations of timbre assert themselves very strongly. They are Old Irish and Kashmiri. In Old Irish the timbre of consonantal phonemes plays an important part, because, for instance, the nominal flexion consists, for the greater part, only in the alternation of the "colouring" of final consonants. Every consonant can be phonetically realized in three ways: 1. palatally (before i, e); 2. velarly (before u). This is frequent especially with labial and velar consonants; 3. neutrally (before a, ó). This colouring represents the central position and can be considered as normal. The origin of these three kinds of the colouring of consonants must be sought in old times when these consonants were followed by vowels which later fell off. If we accepted the present conception of the correlation of timbre, we should say that these three kinds of consonants were mutually in the relation of combinatory variants, so that in the same position they were mutually excluded; after the final vowels had disappeared so that the consonants became final, the distinction was phonologized. In Kashmiri this problem is connected with the problem of the so-called matra-vowels, which sometimes are inaudible for the European ear. Have these mátrá-vowels a phonemic value? Examples as dsl = "they were" and os" = "she was", dor (written dair) = 1. "firmness", 2. "monastery" and dor" = "beard", nil1 ag. from "blue" and nlli, abl. from "blue", seem to testify to the feature

34

CONSONANTAL CORRELATIONS OF TIMBRE

of an opposition between matra-vowels and full vowels. But we have no safe information about how this difference is felt by natives, whether as a phonemic difference between different vowels or as a vocalic after-sounding of the colouring of the preceding consonant. Supported by the uncertainty in the metrical valuation of matravowels (sometimes they are not counted), we are inclined to agiee with Graham Bailey ("The Four-Fold Consonant System in Kashmiri", Proceedings of the Second International Congress of Phonetic Sciences [London, 1935], 182 ff.), according to whom matra-vowels are not genuine vowels, but are absorbed by the preceding consonant, which is velarized, palatalized, centred, or neutral. Similar is the opinion of R. Jakobson and also G. Morgenstierne ("The Phonology of Kashmiri", Acta Orientalia XIX., 79-99) inclines to this opinion, though he hesitates to hold the distinction of the timbre of consonants for phonological. The question is, according to Morgenstierne, whether the vowels in question are or are not followed by a neutral a, e.g. in kar, kor", kar\ kiiru, which ought to be written phonemically either {kar, kar", kar\ kar"~\, or [kar, kar03, kar'a, karva]. Considering the metrical value of the matra-vowels, Morgenstierne holds the latter interpretation for correct. It would also be supported by the fact that even now a tenuis is aspirated in absolute final position, but not before matra-vowels. It is evident that the matra-vowels have no phonological value at the end of words — we leave aside the problem, whether they have a phonological value in the middle of words — and of the matra-vowels Morgenstierne includes into phonemes only "(d). We may consider (in orthography) the matra-vowels as mere signs for indicating the "colouring" of the preceding consonants. The "colouring" of consonants is inseparably connected with the "colouring" of the following vowel, be this vowel a phoneme or not, eventually also with the "colouring" of the preceding vowel. In the case of Old Irish we must assume that indeed the final vowels lost their phonological value, but nevertheless did not fully disappear and took the function similar to that of the matra-vowels in Kashmiri.

CONSONANTAL CORRELATIONS OF TIMBRE

35

As the opposition of the timbre of consonants is conditioned by the following vowel, i.e. by its timbre, it is evident that we cannot put the consonantal correlations of timbre in the same level with other correlations. They concern the consonantism as well as the vocalism. In TCLP 4, 115, Trubetzkoy says: "Gewisse phonologische Erscheinungen lassen sich nicht in die Grenzen des Vokalismus oder des Konsonantismus einschließen." We could speak about the "vocalic-consonantal" or "consonantal-vocalic" correlation of timbre. Then it would be only consistent not to combine the correlation of timbre with other correlations into correlation bundles. Other correlations concern only the consonant itself. For example, the correlation of aspiration. In Kashmiri, according to Morgenstierne, tenuis is aspirated at the absolute end of words, but not before mäträ-vowels. So we have guph but gup", gup1, gup". Similarly, the correlation of plosion is entirely independent of the vowel. With the correlation of voice, this is disputable. In the above-mentioned article Grahame Bailey compares the correlation of timbre in Kashmiri with the correlation of voice in English. In this language final plosives, inclusive affricates, are usually followed by a soft vocalic sound, voiced or voiceless. Often even fricatives contain this inherent vowel. So the words world, look, whiff, rove end in a short neutral vowel as most English words. The vowel is said not to be always the same. It is, of course, unsyllabic and has no phonological function; it resembles the mäträ-vowels. So, according to this conception, in languages, as for example in Czech, where the correlation of voice is neutralized at the end of word, this vocalic sound, following the final consonant, would be missing. It seems to be really so, as we notice the difference in the pronunciation of words /e/"the flight" and W ' t h e ice" in Czech and of the same words let and led in English. Nevertheless, this dependence on the vocalic element is of a quite different character with the correlation of voice than with the correlation of timbre. With the correlation of voice it is merely the fact of the position before whatever vocalic element without any influence: the vowel does not interfere with the consonant and the consonant does not interfere with the vowel. On the other hand, with the

36

CONSONANTAL CORRELATIONS OF TIMBRE

consonantal correlation of timbre there is a mutual penetrating of the consonantal with the vocalic element. This difference between both correlations is great enough that we may be authorized to put the correlation of voice to the level nearer to the correlations of aspiration and plosion than to the consonantal correlation of timbre.

THE ORIGIN AND FUNCTION OF VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES 1

Vowel harmony, the most remarkable and characteristic feature of Ural-Altaic languages, is represented in many languages of other groups, such as African languages.2 We can say that the former geographical extension of vowel harmony which went hand in hand with the extension of agglutination, covered a far larger territory than is the present territory of the Ural-Altaic languages. Thus, for example, according to B. Hrozny, 3 Sumerian shows certain Altaic, Turco-Tatar features (e.g. agglutination and a tendency to vowel harmony) on the one hand, and certain IndoEuropean features (e.g. in pronouns) on the other hand. Even the Japhetic languages may have originally shown some remnants of vowel harmony, as the former agglutinative type can be traced in them, though they are included in the flexional type. 4 A number of works treat the problem of vowel harmony from different points of view, but not many solve this problem on a broad basis. We must therefore be aware of the fact that such an 1

Translation from the German original "Über den Ursprung und die Funktion der Vokalharmonie in den ural-altaiischen Sprachen", ZDMG 106 (1931), Heft 1, 117-134. 2 Julius Németh, "Die türkisch-mongolische Hypothese", ZDMG 66 (1912), 556. 3 B. Hrozny, Histoire de l'Asie antérieure de l'Inde et de la Créte (Prague, 1947), 85. 4 Friedrich Braun, "Die Urbevölkerung Europas und die Herkunft der Germanen", Japhetitische Studien I (1922), 42. Cf. also N. Marr, "Der japhetitische Kaukasus und das dritte ethnische Element im Bildungsprozess der mittelländischen Kultur", Japhetitische Studien II (1923), 37.

38

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

important linguistic feature as vowel harmony must be concerned more or less with all the aspects of the language. Consequently, it is not entirely a phonetic or phonological or morphological problem, but all these aspects must be taken into consideration as far as possible. We realize, too, that the synchronous point of view is not sufficient for the explanation of this phenomenon: we must also try to solve this problem diachronously. In the synchronous way we can only state the occurrence of vowel harmony and ascertain its function, but not its origin, cause, and basis. Generally a one-sided view of the language is responsible for the fact that existing works have not essentially solved the problem of vowel harmony in all its depth, though they have contributed much. Let us devote our attention, first of all, to the vowel harmony entirely from the synchronous point of view. Phonetically, vowel harmony is a progressive assimilation of either back or front vowels, so that in a word there are vowels of one series only. In different Ural-Altaic languages vowel harmony is accomplished to a different degree. We will classify the Ural-Altaic languages according to their vowel harmony, as stated by Radloff: 5 I. Languages with no vowel attraction in the stem (a) The final vowel assimilates to the vowel of the last stem syllable only irregularly (Samoyed languages,6 Ostyak dialect) (b) A more regular attraction of the final vowel of the last stem syllable — first traces of the morphological use of vowel attraction (Finno-Ugrian languages) II. Languages which show both in word stems and word endings 5

W. Radloff, Phonetik der nördlichen Türksprachen (Leipzig 1882), 55-60. Other valuable information on vowel harmony: A. N. Kononov, Grammatika tureckogo jazyka (Akad. nauk SSSR, Moskva-Leningrad 1941), 20-23; W. A. Bogorodickij, Etjudy po tatarskomu i tjurkskomu jazykoznaniju (Kazan 1933); Ragip Oezdem, "Über die praktische Wortphonologie im Neu-Osmanischen", Festschrift Friedrich Giese, Die Welt des Islams (Sonderband, 1941), 137-138; Martti Räsänen, "Zur Lautgeschichte der türkischen Sprache", Studia Orientalia XV (Helsinki 1949), 96-106. 6 With the exception of the Kamassin dialect which, under the influence of Turkish, shows quite distinct traces of vowel harmony.

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

39

distinct, though irregular, traces of a certain vowel assimilation (Tungusian languages) III. Languages which show an already accomplished vowel harmony (a) Languages in which generally only palatal affinity exists and additionally a complete vowel attraction of the final vowel occurs (Finnish languages) (b) Languages in which the palatal attraction consequently exists side by side with traces of labial attraction (Hungarian) (c) Languages in which the palatal attraction consequently exists side by side with a regular labial attraction conditioned by the stem syllable (Mongolian and Turkish languages) From the phonological point of view, vowel harmony means that the vocalic system of the language has its full phonological value only in the first syllable of the word, whereas in the other syllables the oppositions of vocalic timbre are neutralized, the choice of the archiphonemic representative being conditioned externally. Thus vowels in syllables other than the first always belong to the same class of articulatory position of the tongue as the vowels of the preceding syllable. We will add to this that in Turkish the vowel system of suffixes is impoverished by two vowels, o and o which never occur in suffixes, while in vowel harmony they are replaced by the vowels a, e in one category of suffixes, and by u, u in the other category of suffixes. L'udovit Novak 7 tries to prove that not combinatory variants, but phonemes are concerned in vowel harmony. According to Novak, the position in which vowels alternate according to the law of vowel harmony need not be explained as a position of neutralization, because the oppositions of timbre in languages such as Turkish, Hungarian, and Finnish, are distinct in the first syllable as well as in other syllables. For the linguistic conscience of the speaker these sounds are phonemes, not combinatory variants or archiphonemes. We do not deny that in noninitial syllables oppositions of timbre are distinct, but the 7

L. Novdk, "L'harmonie vocalique et les alternances consonantiques dans les langues ouralo-altaiques, surtout finno-ougriennes", TCLP 6 (1936), 81-95.

40

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

independence of these oppositions cannot be maintained in any way. It is, in fact, the dependence of these oppositions on the timbre of the vowel of the preceding syllable which must needs be in the subconsciousness of the speaker; otherwise, the vowel harmony would lose its raison d'être. It is this consciousness of the dependence of vowels on the vowel of the first syllable that binds together all that belongs to a word unit and makes clear the distinctions between different word units. As to the functional charge, the word unit in Turkish, and predominantly also in other languages with vowel harmony, can be divided into three parts: (a) The first stem syllable, which is phonologically most important, forms the phonological word peak, since only here does the complete vocalic system of the language have phonological validity. Examples: kil 'loam' — kill 'ashes' — kil 'hair' — kol 'arm' — kul 'servant' — kal 'refining (of metals)' — kei 'having a scabby head'; kôr 'blind' — kir 'dirt; filth' — kir 'grey' — kur 'levee' — kor 'glow' — kar 'snow'. (b) Syllables other than the first (with the exception of suffixed syllables) whose vowels can also be functionally charged (less, indeed, than vowels of the initial syllable); on the other hand the choice of these vowels is limited by the law of vowel harmony. In this position, as said above, the opposition between back and front, and partially also the opposition between rounded and unrounded, vowels is neutralized. Examples: ara 'space between' —• ari 'bee'; sefer 'journey' — sefir 'ambassador'; saban 'plough' — sabun 'soap'. (c) Suffixed syllables, the vowels of which have no functional charge at all, as they do not serve to differentiate meaning and are likewise dependent on vowels of preceding syllables. The following observation illustrates the different functions of stem and suffix vowels: some suffixes, as for example -er, -ar, -irici, -dur, -sin, -ya, are identical with independent words, but as independent words act quite differently from suffixes and are also differently felt in the subconsciousness of the speaker. The suffixes -er, -ar, by which distributive numerals are formed, have entirely the same

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

41

grammatical function and their vowels have no phonological function, because the choice of vowels is dependent on the vowel of the last syllable of the word to which the suffix is added, whereas in the independent words er 'man', ar 'shame', vowels have a distinctive power in distinguishing words, and are therefore phonemes. L'. Novak further states that vowels are phonemes also in syllables other than the first, asserting that in some languages both series of vowels are admissible after the so-called neutral vowels, e.g. in Finnish silta-silta, teko-tekd, sinnun-sinnyn. This assertion does not contradict our conception of the function of vowels in syllables other than the first, as here we have circumstances in which no neutralization takes place. As for the function of vowel harmony, we can accept Novak's view that vowel harmony signalizes that the suffixes belong to the root. In Turkish the vowel harmony binds together the independent unit of meaning, as it signalizes the beginning and end of the unit of meaning. Vowel harmony is valid not only for the suffix following the stem, but also for every series no matter how long, e.g. yaz-ildir-ama-mak 'not to be able to cause to be written', with four suffixes grammatically equivalent but modified by the vowel harmony. As F. N. Finck observes,8 the speaker need not be conscious of the vocalic nature of the stem syllable during the utterance of the word until the last suffix. The vocalic nature is determined rather by that of the preceding syllable, as may be seen from the fact that suffixes with four vocalic modifications after a suffix with only two vocalic modifications are also reduced to two. Thus, for example, the possessive suffix of the third person singular is, according to the preceding stem vowel, /, u, i, u. But if the suffix of plural -larj-ler is inserted between the stem and the possessive suffix, the latter has only two modifications. In many cases, however, the operation of the vowel harmony is spread over a whole complex of suffixes. It is therefore evident that vowel harmony is connected with the length of words. The structure of the units of meaning in 8

F. N. Finck, Die Haupttypen des Sprachbaus (Leipzig, 1910), 74.

42

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

Ural-Altaic languages is different from that of other languages, for example Indo-Germanic, as Ural-Altaic languages are of the agglutinative type in which suffixes are more autonomous than in flexional languages. The lack of vowel harmony in flexional languages is further caused by too great a functional charge of vowels, especially in endings. 9 The problem of the function of vowel harmony from the synchronous point of view needs to be supplemented by a diachronous explanation. And thus we are led to the problem of the origin and essence of vowel harmony. It is a difficult problem, but in order to reach a full understanding of vowel harmony we must examine it. As to the essence of vowel harmony many speculations have been made which, however, are the result of too narrow a point of view and solve the problem too partially. Such, for example, is the theory of Bohtlingk (Die Sprache der Jakuten, 11), rejected by Radloff (Phonetik, 51), asserting that the law of vowel harmony has its origin in a special organization of the organs of speech of all Ural-Altaic peoples. Lucien Adam 1 0 maintains that vowel harmony, like assimilation or "umlaut" in Indo-Germanic languages, developed later: originally all suffixes were added to the stem and only by habit came to be joined with them in harmony. Likewise J. Szinnyei and Z. Gombocz (Nyelvtudomány 3: 50) were of the opinion that the Proto-Finno-Ugric language did not possess any vowel harmony, but that it developed independently in different languages. Recently, however, most investigators consider it to be inherited; e.g. B. Collinder 11 uses vowel harmony as support for his theory that even the Yukaghir language is related to the Ural languages. The outstanding Finnish Turkologist Martti Rasanen 1 2 also regards the division of words into front-vocalic 9

Cf. L. Novák, "L'harmonie vocalique ...", 86-87. Lucien Adam, De Vharmonie des voyelles dans les langues ouralo-altaiques (Paris, 1874), 52 ff. 11 B. Collinder, Das Alter der Vokalharmotiie in den uralischen Sprachen (Uppsala, 1941). 12 Martti Rasanen, Zur Lautgeschichte der tiirkischen Sprachen (Helsinki, 1949), 16. 10

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

43

and back-vocalic as original and the tendency towards vowel harmony as uralt, whereas the labial harmony and labial attraction are, in his view, probably of later origin. A remarkable theory as to the essence of vowel harmony comes from Josef Grunzel. 13 The author asserts that in Altaic languages there were originally three basic vowels: a, i, u. The palatal series a, u is of later origin. According to Grunzel, the splitting of guttural and palatal vowels occurred as early as in the common cradle of these peoples, as proved by the same physiological behavior of the palatals a and u in all Altaic languages. In this stage a trace of palatal attraction might have appeared when a and u were connected more often with guttural vowels, u more often with palatal vowels, and i behaved neutrally. Later on, when the Altaic peoples had somewhat withdrawn from their original countries, the vowel u became differentiated from the vowel o by a sharper utterance in the first syllable. Its occurrence was long limited to the initial syllable, but as o is physiologically exactly between a and u, it has also gotten into the other syllables through an advancing process of assimilation, and has reached in some languages a dominating position. Analogical is the origin of the palatal o. According to Kellgren 14 o and u have also not yet parted in Finnish, Mongolian, Uygur, and Kalmuck, but there is a mixed sound. In Tungusian languages, especially Manchurian, the original u has almost completely changed to o. The guttural / has, according to Grunzel, become differentiated from the palatal i, as there is no orthography to give the differentiation of these two vowels. In Mongolian and Uygur no trace of a guttural / can be found; in Buryat and Tungusian there are beginnings of separation; the full value of each appears in the two extremes of the linguistic family in Yakut and Osmanli. Essentially, Grunzel distinguishes four periods of historical development: 13 Josef Grunzel, "Die Vokalharmonie der altaischen Sprachen", Sitzungsberichte der phil.-hist. Classe der k. Akad. d. Wiss., Bd. 117 (Wien, 1889), III. Abh., 1-42. 14 Grundziige derfinnischenSprache, 26.

44

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

a

a I.

II.

a 1

u

a i

III. ii

u

a

a o o i

u

IV. u

a o l

o u

u

Unfortunately, the author does not say what connection the development of the vowel harmony has with the development of vocalism. H e states only briefly that it may be seen from his investigation that palatal attraction was primary and basic, whereas labial attraction has developed in considerably more recent times, after the Ural-Altaic peoples had left their original cradle (Grunzel, 39). In vowel harmony Grunzel sees a steadily increasing attraction of physiologically related sounds, for which the sound system of the Ural-Altaic languages has offered an especially favourable field of action. Properly speaking, all languages have a core of vowel h a r m o n y , 1 5 but this core has come to its full display only in the

15 This view is shared by many scholars. Let us add, for example, that the Indo-European umlaut is regarded as a kind of vowel harmony. Thus Holger Pedersen ("Tiirkische Lautgesetze", ZDMG 57 [1903], 540) is quite right in defining vowel harmony as Fernassimilation der Vokale [assimilation in which the separating consonants do not play any intermediary role]. He sees the differences between vowel harmony and umlaut only in the passive or active role of the consonants separating vowels. If the question of vowel harmony were that of assimilation operating by the mediation of consonants (as it is in umlaut), we should expect to find consonants or consonantal groups that would be useless as mediators, because they would make the change of the vowel impossible. However, this is not the case with vowel harmony. In Sinhalese the umlaut plays such an important part that there may seem to be a kind of vowel harmony. According to W. Geiger (A Grammar of the Sinhalese Language [Colombo, 1938]) it must be assumed that umlaut, vowel assimilation, and vowel equalling (Vokalangleichung) were effective during the Proto-Sinhalese period. It is interesting that umlaut is not limited to one syllable only but that it can influence two syllables. Thus a-a changes to a-a or a-a before i of the third syllable. Umlaut plays an important part in Sinhalese morphology. In contrast to umlaut, vowel assimilation occurs only in light syllables which are influenced by the vowel of the next syllable. There are also cases of a progressive assimilation which is evidently caused by the tendency toward the unification of the vowels occurring in one word. The same tendency governs the so-called vowel equalling (Vokalangleichung). It means the change of a-i/e/ and i/e/-a to e-e and of a-ujoj and u/ol-a to o-o. In our opinion this change cannot be

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

45

Ural-Altaic languages. Of course, the morphological element was also active. Nevertheless, the Indo-European accent has not been replaced by it, as Radloff thought, because in Altaic languages the accent does not play a subordinate role. We have been occupied with Grunzel's theory in detail, because even if it does not contribute much to the problem of the origin of vowel harmony itself, it tries to conceive the development of Ural-Altaic vocalism as a problem of importance for vowel harmony. Other scholars regard the origin of vowel harmony as a morphological problem. Thus Baudouin de Courtenay 16 emphasizes the substantial difference between the structure of words of AryanEuropean languages and the structure of words of Turanian languages. In polysyllabic Aryan-European languages, one syllable is emphasized by the accent, while the other syllables keep their individual qualities and are not assimilated to the dominant syllable. In Turanian languages, on the other hand, all syllables are assimilated to the dominant syllable; they are subordinated to it in the true sense of the word. In Aryan-European languages we cannot, according to Baudouin de Courtenay, speak about real words until particular sound and syllable complexes are bound into a unity by accent. In Turanian languages, on the other hand, all sound complexes connected by vowel harmony must be regarded as a single word of several syllables. An identical view is expressed by Radloff (Phonetik, 52-55), who gives a good illustration of the connection of vowel harmony with agglutination and quotes examples showing that in certain Turkish dialects the intensity of the vowel harmony goes hand in hand with the progress of the process of agglutination. From a recognition of the morphological regarded as an indication of vowel harmony. It is the result of a strong tendency to a balance in the Sinhalese vocalism, such a strong tendency that it influences even two syllables. Likewise the morphological structure of Sinhalese offers no reason for accepting the existence of vowel harmony. Neither with respect to its origin nor with respect to its function can the above mentioned changes be regarded as identical or cognate with the vowel harmony in its proper sense. 16 "Rezja i RezjanS", Slavjanskij sbornik III, 323.

46

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

nature of vowel harmony springs also the view of N. S. Trubetzkoy 17 who speaks of "morphologically strong" and "morphologically weak" syllables which always have different vocalic systems. According to Roman Jakobson, 18 vowel harmony is a survival of the correlation of syllabic palatalization. There is no doubt that the morphological aspect plays a great part in the origin of vowel harmony, but we are sure that also other motives, especially phonetic ones, have contributed to this phenomenon. In its further development the morphological aspect is, of course, predominant. When the language began to lose its agglutinative character or when it was too much influenced by another non-Ural-Altaic language, it began to lose vowel harmony, too (e.g. the Iranized dialects). 19 The origin of vowel harmony must be sought in very ancient times, as the oldest written documents already possess vowel harmony. The only point from which our investigation of this extremely difficult problem can start is orthography. Even if we are aware of the unreliability of information offered to us by orthography and even if we are extremely cautious in drawing conclusions from it, we cannot reject its help. That which appears in orthography can be accepted into the sound system of the language, but we must notice that the functional value of sounds ascertained in this way will often be uncertain, since in the case of old written documents we have to do with a stage of language whose actualization is not accessible to us. On the other hand, the nonoccurrence of a certain fact in orthography need not mean nonoccurrence in spoken language. Our investigation ought to start from Proto-Turkish which, with N. Poppe, 20 we can regard as a continuation of some dialect of 17 N. S. Trubetzkoy, "Zur allgemeinen Theorie der phonologischen Vokalsysteme", TCLP I, 57 ff. 18 Roman Jakobson, "Ober die phonologischen Sprachbunde", TCLP 4, 234 ff. 19 Cf. Karl Menges, "Einige Bemerkungen zur vergleichenden Grammatik des Tiirkmenischen", Archiv Orientalnl, 11 (1939), 24. 20 N. Poppe, "Altaisch und Urturkisch", Ungarische Jahrbucher II, 94-121.

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

47

the Proto-Altaic language and, consequently, as a stage in its development. Poppe holds Proto-Turkish, Proto-Mongolian and Proto-Tungusian to be the only preserved languages which follow the Proto-Altaic language. Of course, if we want to base our investigation objectively, we must start not from a deduced or assumed language, but from existing ancient evidences of the language — the so-called Old Turkish runic alphabet of Orkhon and Yenissey inscriptions. The language of the runic inscriptions cannot indeed be regarded as Proto-Turkish, because ProtoTurkish is a far older language than the language of the Orkhon inscriptions which date from the 8th century, but on the whole we can consider the sound system of Proto-Turkish as identical with the sound system of the language of the Orkhon inscriptions (Poppe, 98). In the Old Turkish runic writing 21 our attention will be drawn to the fact that there are different signs for consonants of velar and palatal timbre. These consonants have, indeed, a syllabic value, but besides this they are used in the value of simple consonants in connection with special signs for vowels. Thus the labial b has the following signs: 1. b1 which has the syllabic value of ba at the beginning of words. It is also used as a simple consonant for syllables with the other velar vowels. 2. b2 which has the syllabic value of eb and be; it is also used independently in connection with signs for palatal vowels. The consonants ç, s, z, p, m have only one sign each; k, on the other hand, has several signs: 1. the sign for k" or "k; it has a syllabic value, but occurs also as a simple consonant in connection with velar and labial vowels. At the end of words it is always written with a vowel, even in connection with a. 2. q° is a sign for ok, uk, ku and has a syllabic value; it also occurs as a simple consonant in connection with vowels o, u. 21

Cf. Ahmet Cevat Emre, Sur l'origine de l'alphabet vieux-turc (dit alphabet runique de Sibérie) (Istanbul, 1938). Cf. also A. von Gabain, Alttiirkische Grammatik (Leipzig, 1941).

48

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

3. qy is a sign for ki (sometimes it is also written with a vowel). 4. k2 is a sign with the syllabic value of ek, ik; it forms palatal syllables with vowels e, i, but also with ö, ü. A variant of this sign is the sign marked as g2. 5. k0 is a sign with the syllabic value of kö/kü, ök\ük\ sometimes it is used as a simple sound of palatal timbre. How can we explain this dual or multiple indication of consonants? A. von Gabain denies that from the existence of a double series of consonantal signs we might infer the double quality of consonants. In her Alttürkische Grammatik (p. 57) she writes: Das besagt nicht, dass die Konsonanten zweierlei Aussprache hätten, sondern dass wir es mit einer Silbenschrift zu tun haben; korrekter sollten wir sagen: es gibt nur ein Zeichen für ab ein anderes für äb usw. Wir können aus dem Vorhandensein dieser doppelten Reihe nicht auf die Qualität der Konsonanten schliessen. If a completely syllabic alphabet were really concerned, then this scholar would be right. But the Old Turkish runic alphabet has also signs for vowels, so that the alphabet cannot be regarded as consistently syllabic. On the contrary, it is to a great degree vocalized and the mere fact that a sign for a certain consonant is sometimes written with a vowel and at other times without it and, consequently, that we have consonants of a double value, viz. syllabic and nonsyllabic, seems to point to the existence of consonants of various timbres. The fact that we find the same word written sometimes with and sometimes without a vowel belonging to a consonant seems to indicate that the runic alphabet belongs to a transition period between the time in which consonants of various timbres were the only determining elements of words, and the time when vowels had already fully developed from the transitory vowels belonging to consonantal timbre. As we have already seen above, in the runic alphabet there predominates a division of consonants into velar and palatal, with the exception of m, p, p, z which may have been felt as neutral in timbre. Diiferent signs for the consonant k point to a still older period in which we can assume a fourfold timbre of consonants, that is to say velar,

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

49

palatal, labiovelar, and labiopalatal. With signs for the consonant k there distinctly appears a transition from this period to the period with a double timbre, as sign 2 indicates labiovelarized sounds, sign 5 labiopalatalized sounds, whereas sign 1 comprises both velarized and labiovelarized sounds, and sign 4 both palatalized and labiopalatalized sounds. We will now proceed to independent vocalic signs. They are four: 1. The sign for i, I. The old alphabets (Uygur, Sogdian, Manichean, Brahmi) do not distinguish these two vowels (Gabain, 45), so we must assume that / had a tendency to be neutral. 2. The sign for a, a. The pronunciation of this sign is, of course, determined by the character of the consonant. Other alphabets have different signs for each vowel. 3. The sign for o, u. Only the Brahmi alphabet has different signs for these vowels. 4. The sign for o, u. These vowels, too, are differentiated only in the Brahmi alphabet. According to present-day Taranchi (Gabain, 50) it must be assumed that o, o occurred only in initial syllable. We can add to this that in the vocalism of suffixes in modern Turkish and some Turkish dialects these vowels do not occur. This graphical system will especially interest us because it always has one sign for two vowels: in two cases back and front vowels are blended in one sign; in two cases wide and narrow vowels are blended. It can be graphically illustrated in the following way (the enclosed vowels are expressed by the same sign): back

a

i

0

ü

front

e

i

ö

ü

We see that the language felt it necessary to distinguish in writing between a wide vowel and a narrow one in one case but not in the other case, and similarly, between a back vowel and a front one in one case but not in the other case. We can hardly believe that it is accidental: we are sure that there is just as little of the accidental in language as anywhere else in nature. At least we can

50

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

conclude from it that the vowels a-e on the one hand and i-i on the other hand were phonetically nearer to each other than a-i and e-i, and similarly, o-u and o-ii were phonetically nearer to each other than o-d and u-ii. We do not want and we are not entitled to infer from this that in the time of runic alphabet the distinction between sounds expressed by one sign was not phonological, but it is quite possible that the functional charge of the opposition of these sounds was so small that there was no need to express them in writing by different signs. In an older stage we can assume the existence of four vowels to which there corresponded the fourfold timbre of consonants. It is, of course, possible that these four vowels were not phonemes but that their occurrence was conditioned by the consonantal timbre; however, that is a question irrelevant to our problem. Jac. van Ginneken 22 is of the opinion that originally there were glides which functioned as dependent variants. That every consonant had a glide seems to be proved by the fact that even present-day Turkish shows a dislike of consonantal groups; in words in which consonantal groups occur, glides can still be observed in pronunciation, as confirmed by many scholars. The problem of the origin of vowel harmony itself is, of course, still more difficult than the investigation of the sound system of Proto-Turkish; here we have nothing to rely on, we are in the sphere of mere supposition. The results of our investigation agree in essence with those of Jac. van Ginneken, especially in the assumption of the fourfold timbre of consonants. 23 Nevertheless, the question is whether we can also accept the extreme consequences of Ginneken's theory of the existence of a purely consonantal 22 Jac. van Ginneken, "Ein neuer Versuch zur Typologie der alteren Sprachstrukturen", TCLP 8 (1939), 240, 245. 23 Ginneken's study in TCLP is only a short preliminary statement of his conclusions, published in Verh. d. Kon. Nederlandsche Akad. van Wetenschappen under the title La reconstruction typologiques des langues archaiques de Vhumanite (Amsterdam, 1939). We are sorry we had not that treatise at hand so that we do not know whether Ginneken explains in detail how he came to his conclusions as to the fourfold timbre of consonants in West Altaic languages — the article in TCLP does not say anything about it.

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

51

language which originated in a click language. In this group of languages Ginneken includes Old Egyptian, Proto-Semitic, ProtoUral-Altaic, and Proto-Indo-Germanic. Vowels, according to Ginneken, developed from a purely consonantal language, from glides which had a certain sonority but no timbre. We are of the opinion that we can hardly imagine a purely consonantal language, entirely without any vowels, especially in the case of polysyllabic words. Ginneken himself admits the low intelligibility of such a language. Even if we accept a development from an original click language — which, however, cannot be regarded as a normal language in the present sense of the word — then perhaps as a transitory stage to normal speech we can assume the mutual connection of consonants through the mediation of glides which might have developed simultaneously or almost simultaneously with the differentiation of click sounds into neutral or palatal, palatal or labiovelar, or palatalized and labiovelarized at the same time (Ginneken, 236). If, however, Ginneken presents as an argument for his theory of purely consonantal languages the Old Semitic alphabet or alphabets in which Old Egyptian was written, then he makes just the same error which we have already pointed out: from nonoccurrence in orthography he deduces occurrence in spoken language. Yet it cannot be asserted that languages that were written in a syllabic alphabet did not know vowels. Our explanation of the origin of the vowel harmony can be supported by another phenomenon related to vowel harmony to which Ginneken also points (p. 240), namely syllabic synharmonism which is still preserved in Kasak-Kirghiz, Kara-Kirghiz, Turkmen, Tartar, and Bashkir languages. Synharmonism means that every word in these languages may contain either only front vowels and palatalized consonants or only back vowels and velarized consonants. A phonological explanation of this phenomenon is given by N. S. Trubetzkoy 24 who asserts that the oppositions of vocalic timbre are phonemic — the palatalized and velarized varieties of consonants represent only combinatory variants without any 24

N. S. Trubetzkoy, "Grundzuge der Phonologie", TCLP 7, 251-252.

52

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

distinctive power. From the diachronous point of view we must, however, presume quite an inverse relation of vowels and consonants; the syllabic synharmonism is quite a natural consequence of word formation in a period when consonants were the most decisive elements in words, while vowels have developed from glides which naturally had the timbre of the consonants to which they belonged. 25 Syllabic synharmonism is accepted for the common primitive language of the Turkish, Mongolian, and Tungusian languages, and must be assumed for the Uralic languages as well. The development of syllabic synharmonism into vowel harmony is clear enough and needs no further comment. As for the vocalism of suffixes, we must also assume the development of four glides from the fourfold consonantal timbre and not only of two glides as assumed by Ginneken (p. 244). This assumption is the more necessary since we must presume a far greater independence of suffixes than in the present-day language. If the suffix was an independent word with the timbre different from that of the stem word, then with the vanishing independence of suffixes the assimilation of their timbre to that of the stem word took place. There is now the question of the development of vocalism and the origin of vowel harmony in Uralic languages. The answer to this question is connected with the problem of the relation between Uralic and Altaic languages and, consequently, with the problem of the common primitive language of both these linguistic groups. It is well known that doubts were expressed about the relationship 25

In this connection we will mention another phenomenon which is closely related to vowel harmony. It is consonant harmony. Traces of consonant harmony appear in several Turkish languages but its full display can be found in West Karaimian. However, it does not represent here any original phenomenon, having developed as late as after the vowel shift and after the destruction of the vowel harmony caused thereby. The consonant harmony in West Karaimian means that within a sound group there are either only nonpalatal or only palatal consonants. Thus there is k'un'l'ar'd'an' 'von den Tagen' beside kuniardan 'von den Dienern'. We must add that the colouring of consonants passes independently, because there are the same vowels in both words while the consonants in the first case are only palatal, in the other case only nonpalatal (cf. Tadeusz Kowalski, Karaimische Texte im Dialekt von Troki [Krak6w,

1929]).

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

53

between the Uralic and Altaic languages (see N. Anderson, H. Sweet, K. B. Wiklund, H. Paasonen, E. N. Setälä, B. Collinder, G. J. Ramstedt, J. Szinnyei), but in recent times the opinions of scholars incline towards acknowledgement of the relationship of both groups (see J. Nemeth, A. Sauvageot, M. Räsänen). As for the sound system, Martti Räsänen (Zur Lautgeschichte der türkischen Sprache, 15) emphasizes the richness of the vowel system in contrast with the poverty of the consonant system, in which languages from the Pacific to the North Atlantic Ocean and from the Arctic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea differ greatly from neighbouring languages. Further, words do not begin with two or more consonants, neither do they usually end with them, and these languages are altogether poor in consonantal groups. The most remarkable sound feature of the Ural-Altaic languages is, of course, vowel harmony. As for the corresponding points in morphology and syntax, we refer to the above-mentioned book by M. Räsänen (pp. 11-15). The reconstruction of the Proto-Uralic is considerably difficult, as written documents of peoples belonging to this linguistic group are not as old as those of Old Turkish and so there hardly anything can be found on which we could base our investigation. In one of the latest works concerning Finno-Ugric vocalism 26 the system of Finno-Ugric vowels is given as follows: 27 o a ä o e u i i Apart from these full vowels there existed also reduced vowels ö, o, 3 (and perhaps also the unlabialized reduced vowel a). These reduced vowels show oppositions back: front and labialized: unlabialized, but not the opposition of sonority. As a special vocalic group the reduced vowels have been preserved in Ostyak, Cheremis, 28

W. Steinitz, Geschichte des finnisch-ugrischen Vokalismus (Ungarisches Institut, Universität Stockholm, 1942). 27 The question whether there also existed front labialized vowels remains as yet undecided.

54

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

Proto-Lapp, and Vogulian (in the latter two with certain changes). The existence of reduced vowels leads us to the assumption that they are survivals from a time when there were only glides in the language. As in the series of four reduced vowels o, ö, a, ä there are represented the oppositions front : back and labialized : unlabialized, the original fourfold timbre of consonants can be taken for granted, as well as in the Proto-Finno-Ugric language and in the Ural-Altaic languages. Consequently, we can also accept the same explanation of vowel harmony as for Altaic languages. Our explanation, of course, also answers the question whether vowel harmony already existed in the primitive language or whether it has developed only gradually and independently in different languages. If we assume the origin of vowels from the fourfold consonant timbre, it is clear that the development of vowel harmony took place simultaneously or almost simultaneously with the proper development of the vocalic qualities of the original glides. The agglutinative character of the language, which required binding together of the word unit in another way than by accent alone, contributed much to this development, because of a considerable independence of suffixes,28 the accumulation of suffixes, and the consequent length of words. J. Szinnyei29 admits that vowel harmony at one time might have been developed more or less over the whole territory of the Finno-Ugric languages, but he considers it more probable that in the primitive language there was no vowel harmony. 30 As a proof he quotes that many loan 28

A sign of the independence of suffixes is, for example in Turkish, the possibility in some cases of a double addition to words: (a) a free addition of the type var idi, where there are two words not bound together by vowel harmony; and (b) a close addition of the type vardl, where the vowel of the suffix yields to the law of vowel harmony. We will add that in the present-day Turkish there are several suffixes which do not follow the vowel harmony: -das, -ken, -yor, -leyin, -mtlrak, -ki. W. Bang ("Monographien zur türkischen Sprachgeschichte", Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Kl., Bd. 9 [1908], 3) is of the opinion that the suffix -yor was originally a proper word because it preserves the vowel o even in South Turkish dialects which do not tolerate o in the last syllable. 29 J. Szinnyei, Finnisch-ugrische Sprachwissenschaft (Leipzig, 1910) 49-50. 30 E. Noväk (p. 89) is of a similar opinion. According to him in Finno-Ugric

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

55

words which were originally without any vocalic attraction, later became subject to vowel harmony. This, however, cannot be regarded as an argument against the original existence of the vowel harmony, as it is well known that loan words often, even usually, violate the vowel harmony. Such also were the cases mentioned by Szinnyei: words such as malaszt "mercy", szerencse "good luck" (from the original milaszt, szerencsa), etc., have obviously been domesticated, so that their foreign origin was no more felt, and consequently they have accommodated themselves to the constitution of native words, i.e. they have completely succumbed to vowel harmony. We cannot end this paper without pointing out B. Collinder's solution of this problem from the standpoint of phonetic changes. Collinder explains the phonetic changes which originated the decay of the vowel harmony in many Uralic languages. For example, in the Finnic area the destruction of vowel harmony has caused i to accept a front vowel quality as early as in Proto-Finnic (cf. p. 94). In Lapp the vowel harmony is lacking completely, but the phonetic situation can be quite naturally explained when we accept the vowel harmony which had disappeared as early as in ProtoLapp (cf. Collinder, 95-96). Likewise in Permic there is no vowel harmony. However, according to Lakos ("A permi nyelvek szovegi maganhangzoi", NyK 48, 49) vowel harmonic alternation -a —a in Proto-Permic has not been destroyed. The destruction of vowel harmony in Permic languages must be ascribed to an extensive revaluation of the vocalism of the first syllable which led partly to the predominance of back vowels, partly to various changes of front and back vowels (cf. Collinder, 103-104). The western Ostyak dialects are also lacking the vowel harmony. However, Steinitz (Ostjakische Volksdichtung /, 186, footnote 14) concludes from the orthography that in the dialect of Nizyam there can be traced remnants of vowel harmony. Steinitz has also ascertained remnants originally both the syllabic synharmonism and vowel harmony were lacking. Syllabic synharmonism has gradually developed through direct contact with the Eurasian linguistic world.

56

VOWEL HARMONY IN URAL-ALTAIC LANGUAGES

of vowel harmony in the dialect of Synya. There is no doubt that the presence of vowel harmony in Proto-Ostyak (cf. Collinder, 109-110) can be postulated. In Samoyed, vowel harmony or at least its remnants have been preserved. A partial destruction of vowel harmony in Northern Samoyed may be connected with the change of vowel quantity in the first syllable. 31 Also in the case of the Samoyed language the Proto-Samoyed origin of vowel harmony may be accepted. We see that Collinder's theory is in accord with our theory of the origin of vowel harmony which we have put into the period of the Proto-Uralic or Proto-Ural-Altaic language respectively. It is not possible to decide safely whether the vowel harmony phenomenon is more phonetic or more morphological. Assumptions in the phonetic respect were given in the Proto-Ural-Altaic language by the existence of the fourfold timbre of consonants. But there must also have been assumptions of a morphological character and other factors, too, which, for the greater part, are undiscoverable. Thus, in agreement with Radloff (Phonetik, 54) we see the first task of the further research of vowel harmony is a precise and detailed comparison of the degree of assertion of vowel harmony in different Ural-Altaic languages with the degree to which the agglutinative process in language has been accomplished. From the example of literary Esthonian we see how the elimination of vowel harmony is connected with a considerable decrease in the agglutinative character of this language.

31 Especially the adoption in many words of the back vocalic quality of originally front vowels.

O N THE FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE1

The problem of the syllable has, so far, lost nothing of its topical interest. Again and again there appear papers trying to solve this problem from different points of view. 2 The aim of our contribution is to render more precise the role and position of the syllable from the point of view of functional linguistics. Although many discussions have dealt with this problem, no clean-cut conclusions have been arrived at. It is a strange thing that the existence o f the syllable in languages is generally evident but linguists are at a loss as to its role in the language — the determination of the syllable

1 This paper is a slightly modified English version of the paper "Pokus o funkëni pojeti slabiky", Slovo a slovesnost 30: 2 (1969), 112-119. 2 Let us cite some papers from the last twenty years, especially those having some relation to our conception of the syllable: K. Horâlek, "Slabika jako jazykovëdny problem" [The Syllable as a Linguistic Problem], Slovo a slovesnost 11 (1948), 23-29; D. Gerhardt, "Die Fiktion der Phonetik", Zeitschrift f . Phon, u. allgem. Sprachwissenschaft 5 (1951), 181-199; O. von Essen, "Die Silbe — ein phonologischer Begriff", Zeitschrift f . Phon. u. allgem. Sprachwissenschaft 5 (1951), 199-203; Alena Skaliékovà, "Kotâzce podstaty slabiky" [On the Problem of the Syllable], Slovo a slovesnost 15 (1954), 19-24; the same author, "The Problem of the Syllable Boundary and the Identification of Sounds", Zeitschrift f . Phon. u. allgem. Sprachwissenschaft u. Kommunikationsforschung 14: 4 (1961), 321-327; Roman Jakobson and Morris Halle, Fundamentals of Language (The Hague, 1956); A. L. Trachterov, "Osnovnyje voprosy teorii sloga i jego opredelenije", Voprosy jazykoznanija 5: 6 (1956), 15-32; Häla, Slabika, jeji podstata a vyvoj [The Syllable, Its Essence and Development] (Praha, 1956); E. Haugen, "The Syllable in Linguistic Description", in For Roman Jakobson (The Hague, 1956), 214; Miroslav Rensk^, "Funkce slabiky v jazykovém systému" [On the Function of the Syllable in Language System], Slovo a slovesnost 21: 2 (1960), 86; A. Rosetti, Sur la théorie de la syllabe (The Hague, 1963).

58

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

boundary is especially troublesome. Thus, e.g., Svein Bergsveinsson writes:3 "Die Silben als solche sind in allen Zeiten in allen bekannten Sprachen als eine akustische Tatsache festgestellt worden, während die genaue Feststellung der Silbengrenze von Sprachen nach individuellem Sprachgefühl und sprachlichen Vorstellungen... schwankt." If we want to solve the problem of the syllable from the functional point of view, we must begin by clearly separating that which in the phenomenon of the syllable is of phonetic character from that which is phonological, functional. However, this does not mean that we are giving up the help of phonetics. It is necessary to reach agreement on the phonetic explanation of the syllable and to decide which of the phonetic explanations is the most adequate for the functional appreciation of the syllable. In our opinion the expiration theory is unsuitable from the functional point of view not only because the syllable is no unit of expiration but also because this theory considers the syllable only from the standpoint of the speaker. More acceptable is the theory of sonority or acoustic theory which is based on the acoustic impression of the strength crescendo accompanied by the strength descrescendo.4 The value of this theory for the functional conception of the syllable lies just in what Häla criticises as the shortcoming from the phonetic point of view, that is to say the syllable is appreciated solely from the point of view of the hearer without any regard to articulation. Miroslav Rensky (cf. op. cit. in note 2) is right, in our opinion, when he points to the fact that when analyzing the syllable we must start from the sound aspect of the language in its communicative function and not from the physiological mechanism which produces speech. Decisive here is the sensoric perception consisting of an alternating strengthening and weakening of the acoustic impression. The nucleus of the syllable is formed by the most sonorous sound of the group; however, it is not the absolute intensity which is of concern here. Closest to the 8 4

Svein Bergsveinsson, Grundfragen der isländischen Satzphonetik, B. Häla, Slabika, jejl podstata a vyvoj (Praha, 1956), 11 ff.

71.

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

59

theory of sonority is L. Trachterov's theory of tonality. According to this theory, syllables are monolithic sections of speech limited by interrupting the voice or by weakening its activity. These sections of speech are the shortest carriers of accentual and tonal means of language and are composed of particular vowels or heterogeneous sounds linked together by the leading tonal element. The physical predominance of the tonal nucleus of the syllable defines the syllable as a minimum dynamic unit of a successive movement of speech in time, as the shortest adequate articulatoryacoustic element of the living structure of the language connecting its phonemes capable of forming the MATERIAL COVER of the sound speech solely on the basis of the organization in syllables. The syllabic activity of the tonal element depends on three different factors which are interlinked in the system and mutually operating: (1) on the purity of the voice given by the minimum breadth of the passage in the system of articulatory resonators on which depends even the share of the noise in the tonal element of every phoneme having syllable potential; (2) on the intensity of the oscillations of vocal chords caused by the sublaryngeal air pressure which regulates the amplitude of oscillations and cannot produce optimum peaks of voice without the changes of timbre essential for the qualitative characterization of the sound; (3) on the length of the optimum phase (peak) which ensures the possibility and strengthens the distinctness of the RECEPTION of the sound excitation by the mechanism of the nerves of the hearing analyser and regulates the rhythmic prolongation of the syllable in time as well. In our opinion the most important of the three factors is the third one, that is to say the length of the optimum phase (peak) (compare the difference between the English words finely and finally). In special cases of a certain importance may also be the second factor, that is to say the intensity of the oscillations of vocal chords (compare e.g. the difference in the pronunciation of the word krvi in Czech where it is dissyllabic and in Polish where it is monosyllabic). The shortcomings for which a number of the theories of the syllable could be blamed have led to many complicated descriptions

60

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

of the syllable (e.g., Roudet, Abel, Chlumsky, and recently, Hala). We will mention here in detail only Hala's theory. Hala blames the research workers (cf. p. 40, op. cit.) for trying to solve the essence of the syllable usually from a more or less limited point of view and, consequently, quite partially, some of them regard the syllable as a product of the articulatory activity of the speaking subject and do not take into account the hearer, some regard it as a purely acoustic phenomenon without any regard to articulation, etc. Even when a few of them have come to the solely correct conception of a major complexness of the syllable, yet they have failed to give a complete enumeration of all its characters. However, we cannot fully agree with Hala's objection that undue attention is paid to the present situation, that is to say " t o the synchronic standpoint of the static phonetics", whereas the diachronic, evolutive standpoint is fully neglected. It is the latter standpoint which, in Hala's opinion, is the only one that can contribute to the solution of our problem, as the syllable is said to be an essentially historical language fact. Leaving aside the fact that Hala is wrong in identifying synchrony with statics and diachrony with dynamics or evolution, we must emphasize that it is precisely here that it is necessary to make a consistent distinction between the synchronic and the diachronic point of view. The question of how the syllable could be produced in days of old when speech was developing from nonarticulated to articulated sound utterances is a hypothesis which is not based on any facts and can in no way contribute to the elucidation of the problem of the syllable. Neither would it be of any use if the assumption that speech in its early beginnings was monosyllabic proved to be correct. Similarly it is necessary to reject the idea, also held by Calzia, that the production of the syllable is an act of volition. After all, speech is articulated into syllables quite mechanically, without the presence of volitional efforts. Hala sees the basic elements of the syllable in stricture (i.e., the state of closeness of the organs of speech) and aperture (i.e., the state of openness of the organs of speech). Further, the syllable is

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

61

characterized, according to Hala, by the following phonetic components: (1) the expiratory component, i.e., a temporary strengthening of normal expiration necessary for the vocal chords to get oscillated, or shortly, the expiratory impulse; (2) the phonatory component, i.e., the oscillation of vocal chords connected with their tension; the consequence of this activity is the voice; (3) the articulatory component, i.e., the shifting of the organs of speech from stricture to aperture or loosening the way for the voice which could not sound without this loosening; (4) the muscular component, i.e., the activity of muscles during the all above-mentioned acts (expiration, phonation, and articulation) of the speaking individual, in other words the exertion of a certain energy; (5) the acoustic component, i.e., the creation of air undulations perceived by the listener's organ of hearing. In phonetic respect Hala's theory undoubtedly means a progress compared with other syllable theories, as he succeeded in giving a satisfactorily exhaustive description of the syllable by means of which various accompanying phenomena connected with the syllable can be explained. It seems that the complex theory of the syllable best conforms to the functional conception, as we can notice that in different languages DIFFERENT components of the syllable are dominant. Also Trachterov's theory conforms, on the whole, to the functional conception; but we are missing here, as one of the components, Grammont's tension, the concept based on the differentiation of syllables according to the continuous muscular tension (increasing and decreasing tension). This is, in our opinion, one of the most important components as it determines when the syllable peak sets in and also the length of the optimum phase. In this manner it is possible to explain quite well such cases as the Czech Ize-slze, Isti-plsti, rve-krve, etc. Siever's theory of expiration can be best applied to Germanic languages ("stark and schwach geschnittener Akzent"). The above-mentioned examples of a different conception of the

62

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

same complex of identical sounds in different languages seem to confirm the view that there exists no unified theory of syllable valid for all languages. Only the formation of the nucleus of the syllable seems to be the same in all languages but different is the COVER of that nucleus and, especially, the linking of one syllable to another syllable. This all also depends on a different adhesion of the elements of the syllable, i.e., on the looseness or closeness with which particular phonemes of the same syllable or the final phoneme of one syllable and the initial phoneme of the following syllable are mutually linked. This can explain why the same word can have a different syllabic division in two languages such as the above-mentioned word krve. In Polish the tension evidently increases more slowly than in Czech in the same word, so that in Polish the tension does not reach its peak before the boundary between the phonemes v and e, whereas in the Czech word krve the tension increases faster and reaches its peak somewhere between the phonemes k and r, falls and again rises in order to produce a new syllable peak between v and e. This looseness or closeness of the connection is different not only in different languages but also in the same language in different phonemic connections. The concept of looseness and closeness of connection is also used by Alena SkaliCkova in whose opinion the connection VOWEL + CONSONANT is not so close as the connection CONSONANT + VOWEL and the connection of two consonants is not as close as when one of the elements is a vowel. This observation of SkaliCkova can further be complemented by pointing to the fact that the looseness or closeness of the linking of two phonemes is different even if in the connection VOWEL + CONSONANT or CONSONANT + VOWEL or two consonants, respectively, different kinds of the sounds in question are concerned. Thus, e.g., the connection d + r in the Czech word drat makes the impression of a closer connection than r + d in the word rdi, and the connection p + I in the word plot is closer than the connection I + p in the word Ipi. In English the connection n + a in the word finer is different from that in the words finely and finally. This different looseness or closeness of the connection of two phonemes is evidently dependent on the degree

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

63

of sonority of both phonemes: the connection is closer when its first member is less sonorous than the other, and looser when the first member of the connection is more sonorous. Our second remark concerns the functional value of the syllable. E. Polivanov5 was the first to draw attention to the phonemic syllable, which he called SYLLABEME, as the basic structural cell in speech strings. Similarly R. Jakobson 6 defines the syllable as "the elementary pattern underlying any grouping of phonemes". According to Jakobson the basic principle of syllable structure is a contrast of successive features within the syllable. One part of the syllable dominates over the other parts, especially in the syllables containing the contrast vowel : consonant. Jakobson distinguishes CREST PHONEMES and SLOPE PHONEMES. Crest is usually formed by vowels, whereas slopes contain other phonemes. The difference between mono- and dissyllabic articulation of the word krvi, which we have explained as caused by different tension, Jakobson sees in the fact that when a more sonorous phoneme is in a less sonorous environment, its sonority is substantially reduced so that the unity of the syllable may be preserved. In our opinion it is necessary to fuse both explanations into one: the regulation of sonority is sure to cooperate with the regulation of muscular tension. Let us try to find out the function of the syllable in relation to the meaning of the word unit. We can hardly have a good idea of a coherent speech flow without syllabic division or articulation. To articulate the coherent speech flow into meaningful distinctive units solely by means of an expiratory flow would probably be possible only in languages having quite short units of meaning as for an uninterrupted, coherent articulation of a too long succession of phonemes the expiratory flow would not be sufficient. That is, of 5

E. Polivanov and A. Ivanov, Grammatika sovremennogo kitajskogo jazyka (Moskva, 1930). Some other papers dealing with the function of the syllable: A. W. de Groot, "Voyelle, consonne et syllabe", Archives néerlandaises de phonétique expérimentale 17 (1941); J. Kurylowicz, "Contribution à la théorie de la syllabe", Bulletin de la Société Polonaise de Linguistique 8 (1948); J. D. O'Connor and J. L. M. Trim, "Vowel, Consonant and Syllable — A Phonological Definition", Word 9 (1953). 6 R. Jakobson, Fundamentals of Language, 20.

64

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

course, merely a theoretical possibility. We know that we articulate words or speech sections which are so short that the expiratory flow is sufficient for them. Consequently, we cannot but come to the conclusion that syllable division is the very essence of speech utterance. According to Otto von Essen the division of words into syllables is governed by combinatory and signalling laws inherent in every particular language. Whereas a German articulates the Suahili word simba 'lion' as sim-ba, the Suahili speaker articulates the same word as si-mba, as any other division would contradict the structure of the respective language. This observation is, in our opinion, very important as it fully supports our thesis of a different adhesion of particular elements of the syllable in different languages. There is also no doubt as regards the function of the syllable boundary 7 as a boundary signal which is so aptly described by Otto von Essen. Let us add, however, that there are cases when the syllable is not determined by boundary signals and there are even cases when the syllable boundary is uncertain (e.g., the German da-rauf and dar-auf). According to Jakobson there exists an 7 An important attempt at a solution of the problem of syllable boundary in phonological respect is represented by the above-mentioned paper by SkaliCkovd. She starts from the presupposition that there must be some difference, e.g., between the / of the second syllable of the Czech word /pata/ and the t of the word /pat/. If from the sound record of the word /pata/ the final a is obliterated and only a very weak plosion of t at the end of the newly created word is left, the t which in the word /pata/ had belonged to the second syllable, has in the newly formed word become an indisputable part of the first syllable. That is to say, a shifting of the core of identification of the t took place here. The sound t in the word /pata/ has a certain acoustic effect not only in its plosion with respect to the following sound, but even in its transition from the preceding vowel. That means that it has two points where it can be identified. The choice of such a core of identification is not arbitrary, it must be made in agreement with the rule of the closest possible connection of the given elements within the syllable, as the character of the syllable requires. In the word /pata/, where the detension of t must be acoustically more important than its intension, and further, where in Czech the linking to the following vowel is always closer than to the preceding vowel, the linguistic feeling must conceive t as a part of the second syllable. Each point of identification, i.e., a certain experimentally determinable position, is a potential core of identification. However, it is only our linguistic feeling that determines which of the possible points of identification becomes the core of identification of the given sound.

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

65

opposition syllable peak: syllable slope but not a distinct syllable boundary. K. Horalek (op. cit. in note 2) asserts that the syllable as such has no distinctive validity but he also says that it is not possible to regard it simply as a nonphonological fact. However, what happens if we shift the syllable boundaries in words? Let us divide in Czech zak-la-dnt ot-d-zky 'basic questions' instead of the correct division za-klad-nl o-taz-ky, or in English the word phonemic /foun-'i:m-ik/ instead of the correct /fou-'m:-mik/ or syllable /'sil-a-bl/ instead of the correct /'si-la-bl/. If in a careful pronunciation we should sharply limit particular syllables using an incorrect division, a more or less impaired intelligibility of words would result. A simple experiment has confirmed it. On a tape a Czech text was recorded with distinctly differentiated syllables of each word, the boundaries of most of the syllables having been shifted in the above-mentioned way. The text was recorded with the speed of 33^. When it was reproduced with the speed of 45, it was still intelligible enough, but reproduced with the speed of 78 it was nearly unintelligible, though the text with a correct syllable division recorded with the speed of 33^ was still intelligible when reproduced with the speed of 78. Can we, consequently, regard the difference in syllable division as a functional difference? As we have shown above, in a sense we can, since by shifting the syllable boundary the structure of the word is to a certain degree impaired and a theoretically DIFFERENT word results which is composed of the same sequence of the same phonemes but articulated in a different manner. Even if in most cases we recognize the meaning of the incorrectly articulated word, it is obscured to a certain degree. In this case the syllable has not a FULLY distinctive function but it approximates it and can be characterized as POTENTIALLY FUNCTIONAL. The preservation of the identity of the succession of phonemes brings about that, in spite of the impairment of the syllable division, the word preserves its sound shape and the hearer can identify it in most cases. However, with an increase of the speed of the utterance the intelligibility decreases more swiftly than with a correctly articulated word.

66

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

Now the question remains whether there are languages in which the change of the syllable division has a fully distinctive function. The example of the German word couple Schiff-art and Schiff-fahrt, quoted by O. von Essen, is doubtful as both words do not possess an identical phonemic structure. In spite of Horalek's assertion that "the syllable as a signalling and rhythmic means does not even produce sentence meaning so that no phonological fact is concerned here even from the point of view of the phonology of sentence" (cf., op. cit., p. 24), it seems, however, that the syllable does possess a fully functional meaning in some cases in the sentence phonology, e.g., in Czech rekla 'she said' — rekl a... 'he said and ...', in German Delikatessen and delikat essen, in English a blacked eye /a'blaekt'ai/ against a black tie /a'blask'tai/, it slips /it'slips/ against its lips /its'lips/, etc. In spite of the above-mentioned instances of meaning differentiation by means of a different syllable division we cannot regard the syllable as explicitly a semantically distinctive element, even if it can be assumed that the semantically distinctive function of the word-unit passes over to it, at least partially, as the syllable division has — as we have seen — a certain influence upon the intelligibility of the word-unit and, consequently, upon its communicative value. Subject to many controversies is the problem of the so-called SECONDARY SYLLABLES. It is not our aim to deal here with the history of these controversies8 but we will try to determine the importance of this phenomenon from the functional point of view. According to B. Hala (op. cit., p. 91) secondary syllables arise in the linking of consonants, that is to say, speech organs need a certain, though quite short time to be able to pass from one position to another. During this transition the voice sounds, although it is partially or completely damped by the consonants. As, however, in the transitional phase the speech organs do not take a position proper to the vowel system of the given language, the voice sounds only in the quality of a mixed vowel. Most conspicuously this phenomenon takes place in linking sonants or j with nonsonant consonants (cf. the Czech mse, Ika, jdu). 8 For information we refer to chapter III of Hala's monograph Slabika ... (cf. note 4).

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

67

According to A. SkaliCkova (op. cit. in note 1) in such cases there appear two peaks of sonority in the same syllable, e.g., the Czech liu (l-u), sto (s-o), rty (r-j). SkaliCkova regards the phenomenon of secondary syllables as a "terminological evasion" but we are of the opinion that the case of linking sonants or j with nonsonant consonants is really a striking and typical phenomenon, the linking of two consonants being so loose that there is a possibility of the rise of a genuine syllable. A. Frinta seems to characterize these syllables most realistically when he called them "latent syllables" as they are consonantal groupings which under certain circumstances (e.g., in a very emphatic pronunciation) can really become genuine syllables. B. Hala is right in pointing out that secondary syllables are not all latent to the same degree, but that what is decisive is the sonority of their consonant. It is proven by the records of speech by means of a kymograph showing that the bud of a vowel or a latent syllable always appears in the linking of two voiced occlusives, under favourable conditions even in the linking of two unvoiced occlusives; it also appears between two voiced fricatives, e.g., the Czech vzdttch [vazdux] 'air', vzdam [vazda:m] 'I shall give up'. Most conspicuous are the secondary syllables arising in the linking of sonants or j with nonsonants at the beginning of words, e.g., the Czech rty, Istivy, msta, jdu. Articulatory difficulties created by this connection are removed in various ways, e.g., by eliding the sonant or j, e.g., the Czech zice, mino, du instead of lzice,jmeno,jdu, by inserting a vowel (sedum—sedm), by metathesis (zlice-lzke), by prothesis (e.g., the Slavic omsa 'mass'), by shifting the syllable boundary (nej-du, nej-sem, pom-sta, nel-zi instead of ne-jdu 'I do not go', ne-jsem 'I am not', po-msta 'revenge', ne-lzi 'do not tell a lie', etc.), or by a consonant change (ptak > ftak 'a bird'). These changes testify that in phonological respect secondary syllables have a smaller functional load than the genuine syllables; they are unstable and their phonemes have not the same functional relevance as the phonemes of genuine syllables. As we have just seen, the problem of secondary syllables is also a problem of syllable boundary. Vacillation or uncertainty in linking the conso-

68

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

nant in the case of syllables containing a consonantal group may be explained by a different degree of adhesion of secondary elements of syllables. In the last part of this paper we will try to cope with the conception of the syllable as a carrier of prosodic qualities. In a paper subtitled as a suggestion for discussion, K. Horalek (op. cit. in note 2 ) deals with the problem of the syllable as carrier of PROSODIC DISTINCTIONS and comes to the conclusion that from the point of view of the phonology of the word the prosodic importance of the syllable is definitely smaller than was assumed by Trubetzkoy. According to Horalek the syllable is a phonological means not only when it is prosodically loaded. And he writes further (op. cit., p. 28): We cannot but admit that the syllable is an autonomous phonological unit which can enter into a close relation with prosodic (word- and sentence-distinctive) means but its phonological existence is not conditioned by them. It would be possible to speak about distinctive qualities of the syllable itself only in special cases such as the correlation of contact, if Trubetzkoy's interpretation is valid in this case. Even if the syllable were the bearer of all prosodic means, it is produced by them as little as by the particular phonemes which it is composed of. On the whole, we can agree with Horalek's criticism of Trubetzkoy's interpretation of prosodic means, especially with the assertion that the carrier of prosodic means is the whole syllable. Horalek is right in disagreeing ...that the carrier of syllabicity (syllable) could be defined as part of the syllable which is a 'holder' of prosodic means. This could hold true only in the case that the syllable carrier itself would be prosodic means, but that would mean a vicious ring. Otherwise languages that in the phonology of the word are short of meaningful prosodic means (e.g. Polish), would not even know syllables; they would lack the carrier of syllabicity, i.e., the very prerequisites for the creation of the syllable. In the light of our conclusions about the function of the syllable it is natural that we are inclined rather to the original view of Trubetzkoy, according to which prosodic means are qualities of phonemes, that is to say the means that differentiate vowels by a

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

69

different degree of intensity (quantity) or by a different tonal course (intonation). However, we are of the opinion that the controversy as to whether the carrier of prosodic qualities is the sound or the syllable, is quite ungrounded. After all, syllables are composed of sounds so that the prosodic quality is bound equally to the syllable as a whole as to the sound or to more sounds. The only difference is, consequently, in the fact that sometimes the prosodic feature concerns only one sound (usually it is a vowel, that is to say the syllable peak), sometimes concerns two or more phonemes (cf. Horalek, op. cit., p. 25). Whether a whole syllable is a carrier of prosodic qualities or only a part of it is not decisive at all, either for the functional conception of the syllable or for the conception of prosodic features. Of course, it is evident that in a way both are bound together; prosodic features assert themselves within the frame of the syllable and on the background of the syllable or syllabic sequence. This conception is in agreement with what the authors of Fundamentals of Language, R. Jakobson and M. Halle, write when they divide distinctive features into prosodic and inherent features. According to them only those phonemes possess prosodic features which form a syllable peak and can be defined only in the relief of the syllable or syllabic sequence, whereas inherent features are proper to phonemes without any regard to the role they play in the relief of the syllable and their definition does not involve the relief of the syllable. Horalek sees an inconsistency in Trubetzkoy's starting from the opposition vowel: syllable as if these were mutually exclusive concepts. According to Horalek even the cases where the carrier of the prosodic means is a whole group of phonemes do not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the proper carrier is here the syllable, particularly when a special combination of phonemes of a diphthongal character is concerned, as is the case usually in the sequence VOWEL + SONANT CONSONANT. Horalek admits that it could be possible to regard the syllable as a prosodic factor (under the condition that we accept Trubetzkoy's conception of prosodic means) in the case when the prosodic feature does not directly mark phonemes or groups of phonemes but a linking of syllables; it is, above all, the so-called

70

FUNCTIONAL CONCEPTION OF THE SYLLABLE

correlation of contact which is of concern here. We are of the opinion that even in this case it is not possible to speak about the syllable as carrier of prosodic means, even when the prosodic means is here more closely bound to the syllable, or better, to the syllable division, than in other cases. Here we have the case where, according to Jakobson, the distinctive prosodic feature is intersyllabic because it overlaps the boundaries of one syllable. In this case we should speak rather of prosodic means as a determinator of syllable contact than of the syllable as a carrier of the prosodic means, as the prosodic means (in this case it is quantity) is entirely primary and the contact of the following syllable is only its consequence.

ON THE PHONOLOGICAL LAW OF INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

There can be no doubt that the phonology of the thirties, elaborated in its classical form especially by the members of the Prague Linguistic Circle, was a great, revolutionary contribution to linguistics. The importance of this feat is in no way diminished by the fact that some concepts, some conceptions have been corrected during the further development of phonology, while some other concepts have been subject to discussions till now. In the time of the publication of the first volumes of Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Prague there were large blanks in phonological descriptions of languages. In the course of time these blanks have been gradually filled up, but even now we are still far from having reliable phonological descriptions especially of some non-European languages. And it is just those Asian, African, American, Australian, Polynesian, and Melanesian languages that frequently possess interesting phonological features not met with in European languages. With every phonological description of any seemingly unimportant language or dialect we get nearer to the understanding of regularities and to the explanation of irregularities in the structure of languages. The more complete comparison is possible, the more convincing can be the conclusions and generalizations. In the present paper we are about to deal with one of such far reaching generalizations of a series of observations, viz. with the relation between quantity and stress. The problems of quantity and stress and their mutual relation have been given considerable attention as early as at the beginning of phonological research, these problems having been especially

72

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

analysed by Jakobson, Trubetzkoy, Polivanov, Durand, de Groot and others. In this paper we want to focus our attention to one problem which has been dealt with especially by Jakobson and Trubetzkoy. It is the so-called phonological law of incompatibility of free dynamic stress and free quantity, the first definition of which comes from R. Jakobson: 1 "Die monotonische Tonstufenkorrelation kann nicht mit der Quantitätskorrelation der Vokale im selben phonologischen Plan eines Sprachsystems koexistieren." What does Jakobson mean by the concept "monotonische Tonstufenkorrelation"? He defines it as a phonological opposition "stress" vs. "lack of stress". A language possessing a tone correlation is polytonic. On the other hand, if stress is phonologically homogeneous, we speak of monotony. The position of the tone correlation and its relation to the other elements of the phonological system is very different according as whether a polytonic or monotonic language is concerned. This is why we use the terms polytonic and monotonie correlation. Jakobson prefers these terms to the terms "musical" and "dynamic" stress. Let us go back to the quoted sentence. Jakobson holds in his article the incompatibility of free dynamic stress and free quantity for a law admitting of no exceptions. If it is pointed out that this law does not seem to be valid in English and German, Jakobson argues that it is the correlation of tension, 2 not the correlation of quantity, which is found in English vowels and that some dialects of German possess the correlation of contact ("Silbenschnittkorrelation"), and that in those dialects which possess the correlation of vocalic quantity, the quantity and tone correlations belong to different language levels: the correlation of quantity is only lexicalized, the correlation of tone only morphologized. Near to the formulation of the law of incompatibility of free stress and free quantity was J. Vendryes.3 According to Jakobson, Vendryes 1

See the paper "Die Betonung und ihre Rolle in der Wort- und Syntagmaphonologie", TCLP 4 (Praha, 1931), 182. 2 Cf., e.g. E. A. Meyer, Englische Lautdauer (Uppsala-Leipzig, 1903); A. Ehrentreich, Zur Quantität der Tonvokale im Modern-Englischen (Berlin, 1920). 3 J. Vendryes, Recherches sur l'histoire et les effets de l'intensité initiale en latin (Paris, 1902), § 2.

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

73

failed to realize that by the stabilization of the stress the word stress was eliminated as an element of meaning, and this fact forced him to admit — apart from the cases when one of the incompatible elements destroys the other — compromises between quantity and dynamic stress (e.g. for Czech and Persian). Later in this paper we shall return to those compromises. Trubetzkoy 4 admits, to a limited degree, the coexistence of free stress and free quantity, as will later be explained in detail. In his "Anleitung" he presents a kind of prosodie typology of languages. First he classifies languages into languages counting syllables and languages counting moras, according as whether the unit of their prosodie system is the syllable or the mora. The term "mora" is used by Trubetzkoy in the case when the syllable onset and close are formed by two different prosodie features, this difference being phonologically relevant. N. Durnovo 5 and R. Jakobson 6 propose here the terms "monotonie and polytonic languages". These terms have also been accepted into the "Projet de terminologie phonologique standardisée". Further classification of syllabic languages as proposed by Trubetzkoy is according to their relation to the formation of the syllable peak and to quantity. Both facts, the formation of the syllable peak as well as the quantity, may be "free" and "bound", so that by their combination the following four types of languages may be distinguished: A. Bound stress and bound quantity. All words with the same number of syllables show the same distribution of stress and quantity on individual syllables. Stress has only a delimitative function and quantity is only an accompanying phenomenon of the stress. Examples: Polish (stress on the penultima), Armenian (stress on the ultima), etc. B. Word differentiating stress while quantity is bound. There exist words that are differentiated only by the place of stress. Stressed syllables are longer than the unstressed ones, or the syllable length 4 6 9

Anleitung zu phonologischen Beschreibungen (Praha, 1935). Vvedenije v istoriju russkogo jazyka, 217 ff. See note 1.

74

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

is automatically directed by some other principle. Examples: Spanish, Italian, Modern Greek, Bulgarian, Rumanian, Ukrainian, Russian. To this type naturally belong also such languages in which the "freedom" of the stress exists only within certain limits. As examples may serve Avar, Archinian, or Lesghian (Kurinian), where only the first or the second syllable of a word is stressed, or Modern Greek where only the last three syllables of a word may bear stress. C. Word differentiating quantity and bound stress. In this case the semantic difference between the members of some pairs of words depends on syllabic quantity only, whereas the position of the stress is automatically directed. There are two subclasses: (a) languages in which all words with the same number of syllables have the same stressed syllable (for instance languages with initial stress such as Finnish, Hungarian, Czech, Slovak, Chechen, Mongolian, or languages with final stress such as Turkmen); (b) languages in which stress depends not only on the word boundary but also on the quantity of the last or first syllable of the word and where, consequently, all words possessing the same number of syllables and having the same distribution of quantity stress the same syllable (e.g. Latin, Baltic, Slavic, Ossetian, etc.). D. Word differentiating formation of the syllable peak and word differentiting quantity. In words that have the same number of syllables stress does not always lie on the same syllable, in stressed (partly also in unstressed) syllables quantity is differentiated, but with an important limitation: open stressed final syllables are always long (e.g. English, German, Dutch), in other words, the opposition of quantity is neutralized. The unmarked member of the neutralized opposition is not shortness but length, which is not without reason. According to Trubetzkoy it is not differences in intensity (as in type C) that matter, but differences in contact, i.e. the opposition of a loose and a close contact between the syllable bearer and the following consonant. It is evident that such differences may occur before consonants only. This is the well-known "Silbenschnitt-

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

75

korrelation" (correlation of contact). 7 Further, Trubetzkoy regards as suspicious (cf. "Anleitung", p. 26) those languages which allegedly possess "free dynamic stress" and "free quantity" without the above mentioned limitation. A more thorough reexamination of those languages is said to show that they are not languages counting syllables but languages counting moras. Suspicious also are those languages counting syllables which seem to distinguish more than two grades of quantity of the syllable bearer. Some of these languages appear to be, according to Trubetzkoy, languages counting moras and their "middle" quantitative grade appears to be a special kind of tone course. In other languages the supposed variety of quantitative grades is only the result of the existence of vowel and consonant quantitative oppositions. Such is the case for instance in Lap where consonants in the middle of words can either be simple or geminated, the latter having, moreover, two subclasses: weak (shorter) and strong (longer). Syllable bearers in Lap (i.e. vowels and diphthongs) show in all positions only two grades of intensity (quantity), the objective duration of which is, however, always in reverse relation to the duration of the following consonants. Thus in phonetic respect there are six, in phonological respect only two quantitative grades of syllable bearers. Trubetzkoy, unlike Jakobson, concedes the coexistence of free quantity and free stress, but with the exception of open final syllables. Compared with Jakobson, the limitation of type D (free quantity and free stress) to the same phonological level is not found in Trubetzkoy. Let us now examine some languages which possess free stress and free quantity without the mentioned limitation in open final 7 Recently A. SkaliSkova (in a lecture at the Philosophical Faculty of the Caroline University in Prague) has urged that the primary differentiating features of English vowels are not quantitative differences, or the so-called "Silbenschnitt", or the differences in muscular tension, but qualitative differences. Differences in duration must be viewed, according to Skalickova, as suprasegmental characteristics which do not concern only the vowel itself but also the neighbouring consonant. This conception could, of course, considerably simplify and make easier the solution of our problem. However, it is necessary to verify this also in other languages in which the presence of the "Silbenschnitt" is still postulated.

76

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

syllables. We have already mentioned Persian where the solution of the problem of quantity and dynamic stress by Vendryes means a compromise. In his phonological description of Modern Persian 8 the author of this paper devotes his attention also to the question of quantity and stress. The case of Persian is very instructive, as it shows us how an incorrect determination of the sound system can influence even a correct determination of the prosodic system of the language. When the present author was to determine the position of Persian in one of Trubetzkoy's four prosodic types, he found out that though Persian complies with type D (i.e. free stress and free quantity), it does not comply with the condition according to which the final stressed vowel must always be long, which means that in this position the opposition of quantity is neutralized. In Persian the opposition of vowel quantity has a considerable functional load and occurs even in the final position of the word, even if with certain limitations. The opposition i-l, that is to say, is limited to the morphological level, whereas the opposition u-u has only a slight functional load at the end of words. As stress in Persian is free only on morphological level, i.e. it differentiates words belonging to the same morphological family and ending in -i (e.g. 1 mardVa. m a n ' — mar ^di 'manhood'; 1 dldan 'to see' — dl1dan

'the seeing', etc.), but the opposition of vowel quantity at the absolute end of words does not seem to be neutralized, it could be concluded that Persian represents a type transitional between C (free quantity and firm, i.e. automatically directed stress) and D. However, even the fact that it was not possible to class Persian with some of the four prosodic types raised suspicion. Moreover, this suspicion was strengthened by difficulties in the explanation of quantitative conditions. In Persian, that is so say, the opposition /a-a:/ is realized by different phonetic factors than the oppositions /u-u:/ and /i-i:/. The timbre of short vowel phonemes differs distinctly from that of corresponding long vowel phonemes. The articulations of /i:/ and /u:/ take place much higher than the articulations of /i/ and /u/ and the articulation of /a:/ resembles 8

"A Study in the Phonology of Modern Persian", ArOr 11 (1939), 66-83.

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

77

the articulation of the English a in words like all /o:l/, whereas before nasal consonants it approximates Jo:/ or even /u:/ (in colloquial Persian). Thus the opposition of short and long vowel phonemes is not constituted by one feature only, and it is necessary to decide whether the relevant feature is length or tension or labialization. It is also questionable whether these oppositions are proportionate. Formerly we used to hold the oppositions i/i: and u/u: as proportionate but it appears that even in this case we cannot speak of strictly proportionate oppositions. If we consider the quantitative differences existing between the so-called short and long vowel phonemes, we are led to the following conclusion: in Modern Persian, quantity cannot be considered phonological, because neither length nor tension are relevant features. The difference between the so-called short and long vowels in Persian is rather a difference in timbre, owing to the different place of articulation with the pair i/i: and u/u: and owing to the differences in articulation with the pair a/a:. Consequently, the differences in duration are secondary. This fact, of course, changes the vocalic triangle, formerly supposed for Persian, i u a into the quadrangle i: u: e o a a: The latter vowel system of Modern Persian is now generally accepted. If quantity is not phonological in Modern Persian, it means that it cannot be classed with any of the above mentioned prosodic types. Similar, perhaps still more obscure, is the situation in Pashto. According to D. A. Shafeev9 Pashto has a free, word differentiating stress (cf. pe$a 'case' — peja 'imitation'; pasta 'soft (fem.)' — pasta 'after'; J6ra 'world, peace' — Jora 'pair') which can fall on 9

A Short Grammatical Outline of Pashto (Indiana University, Bloomington, 1964), 5-6, 3-4.

78

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

either a long or a short vowel (cf. rät hi 'to arrive', kärxänä 'factory', cdra 'affair'). As to quantity, however, the situation is less clear. The system of Pashto vowel phonemes is as follows: i u ¿

3

0

a ä Though there are three long vowels, two of them, ¡e, o/, have no corresponding short counterparts, the third, jä], has a short counterpart /a/ though, but both sounds differ in quality, /a/ being "low, central", ¡äj "low back". So the situation here is similar to that in Modern Persian. Here, too, the question arises what should be regarded as a relevant feature, and here, too, the difference in duration seems to be secondary. It is interesting to state that the opposition a/ä at the end of words does exist (e.g. dä da 'she is'). From the examples of Modern Persian and Pashto it follows how important it is to determine exactly what quantity means in reality, whether it is possible to speak about phonological quantity in a particular language and what is the relation of quantity to stress. Above all, we must realize that there are two kinds of quantity: internally conditioned and externally conditioned. The terms "innerlich" and "äusserlich bestimmte Quantität" were used as early as by Otto Jespersen. 10 As the name shows, externally conditioned quantity means dependence on external phonetic conditions, for example on the situation in the syllable, in the neighbourhood of certain sounds, in stress, etc., whereas internally conditioned quantity depends only on internal conditions of the vowel in question. Trubetzkoy specifies it as a phonologically relevant quantity. It is a factor which is quite independent of the phonetic realization, being conditioned by nothing else than by the difference in meaning. Thus in Finnish: tuli 'the fire' — tuuli 'the wind'; tule 'come' — tulee 'he comes' (this opposition is morphological). O r in Swedish: kail — kal; tall — tal; grann — gran; etc.

Similarly in Danish: fanen 'the flag' — fanden 'the devil'; hyle 'to howl' — hylde 'celebrate'. In German: Aal 'eel' — all 'ill'; fahl 'fair, 10

Lehrbuch der Phonetik (Berlin, 1926), 182.

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

79

pallid' — Fall 'the fall, c a s f ü h l e n 'to feel' —füllen 'to fill'; Sohne 'to the son' — Sonne 'the sun'; Saat 'the sowing' — satt 'satiated'; etc. In English: beat — bit; naught—not; etc. In Dutch: kaas 'cheese' — kas 'the safe'. In Irish: dö 'two' — do 'to'; mala 'sack' — mala 'eyebrow'. In Estonian: saada 'obtain' — sada 'a hundred'. In Arabic: dlb 'wolf' — dib 'he beats'. In Haussa: [fi:to] 'the whistle, whistling' — [fito] 'to come out'. Quantitative differences are connected with differences in quality, especially as far as the tongue position but also the degree of muscular tension are concerned. In Swedish /a:/ is articulated far back, /a/ in front (cf. gran : grann), long je-.j is substantially more open than the short one (tjäna : känna) and it is also possible to ascertain, according to Bertil Malmberg, 11 that in Swedish there is a perceptible difference between loose and tense vowels which coincides with the difference "short : long". Eli Fischer-Jorgensen 12 emphasizes that the difference in quantity and tension is also connected with the difference in the contact of the following consonant with the preceding vowel so that long vowels always require loose contact, short vowels always require close contact. And here we touch the problem of the so-called "Silbenschnittkorrelation" which is of considerable importance for the solution of our problem. According to Trubetzkoy, the correlation of contact is based upon a privative opposition the unmarked member of which is an "uninterrupted" vowel without a close contact with the following consonant. Hence we can, according to Trubetzkoy, 13 explain the consequences of the neutralization of this correlation: at the end of words or before vowels it is neutralized, while in the position of neutralization naturally stand only phonetically long, completely elapsed vowels. Consequently, the vowel length corresponds to a full glide and the vowel shortness corresponds to the interruption of the vowel duration by the following consonant. The fact that the "Silbenschnitt" need not always be functional, 11 "Die Quantität als phonetisch-phonologischer Begriff", Lunds Universitets Ärsskrift, Bd. 41, Nr. 2 (Lund-Leipzig, 1944), 38. 12 Cf. Archiv für vergleichende Phonetik 4 (1940), 2. 13 Cf. "Grundzüge", 196.

80

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

is of a certain importance for our problem. Thus Malmberg in the above mentioned paper (pp. 49-51) proves that in Swedish the "Silbenschnitt" has no phonological value. According to Malmberg's argumentation Swedish and Norwegian intonation belongs to the phonology of the word and does not constitute a prosodic phenomenon. The opposition "long" vs. "short" can be found in Swedish even in monosyllabic words where there is no opposition of intonations. It is disputable whether it is possible to speak about the difference between "stark geschnittener Akzent" and "schwach geschnittener Akzent" in the cases like kana : kanna with a long, geminated consonant. It is more than doubtful, according to Malmberg, whether we can really speak about geminated consonants. In normal Central Swedish pronunciation the consonant should be long, but quite explosive (the pronunciation of the word kanna is [ka/nna], whereas the pronunciation of the word kana is [ka:/na], the quality of a being combinatorily conditioned: the back vowel /a:/ is always long, the front /a/ is always short). In Southern Sweden the long pronunciation of the consonant is quite unknown. These dialects seem to have in the middle and at the end of words only short vowels (the difference between kal and kail being exclusively in the length and in the combinatorily conditioned timbre of the vowel). Consequently, we cannot agree that in this form of Swedish pronunciation the "Silbenschnitt" has any phonological value, as there is no difference of "Silbenschnitt" between kana and kanna. The quantity and quality are quite different here. Neither the "Silbenschnitt" nor the quality of consonants are functional. What situation in this respect is there in Romance languages? In Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Rumanian the correlation of stress is the only prosodic correlation. In quantitative respect one finds a similar situation in these languages as in those languages which possess the correlation of contact. In Italian, for instance, stressed vowels before a vowel or before a simple intervocalic consonant are always long, before geminated consonants, on the other hand, always short. As, however, the opposition between geminated and nongeminated consonants exists not only after stressed

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY A N D FREE STRESS

81

but also after unstressed vowels, and the latter when standing before nongeminated consonants are not longer than those standing before geminated consonants, it is clear that the consonantal correlation of gemination must be regarded as an entirely autonomous phenomenon and not as a concomitant of the correlation of contact. On the other hand, stressed vowels in Italian are short not only before geminated consonants, but also before all consonant clusters (excepting the clusters "consonant + r, w,j") and at the end of words. Thus the quantitative differences between vowels are conditioned internally and the length of stressed vowels before nongeminated consonants (and before the clusters "consonant + r, w, / ' ) and before heterosyllabic vowels must be evaluated as combinatory variant. The correlation of contact is out of the question in this case. Consequently, one can agree with Malmberg's conclusions which read as follows: 14 Sowohl die Vokalquantität als auch die Konsonantenlänge muß in den verschiedenen Sprachen verschieden werden. Es ist wohl sicher, daß es sich in gewissen Sprachen eher um qualitative Verschiedenheiten als um reine Längen handelt. Mit anderen Worten: das was mit einem hergebrachten Ausdruck 'Quantität' genannt zu werden pflegt, ist in gewissen Sprachen auf ganz andere Phänomene zurückzuführen, nämlich Intensitäts- und Melodieverschiedenheiten, Silbengrenzen- und Anschlußphänomene, welche die Funktion erfüllen, die in anderen Sprachen die Quantität allein oder die in den betreffenden Sprachen in einem früheren Entwicklungsstadium erfüllt hat. Let us return to the question of the incompatibility of free quantity and free stress in final open syllables. Our task is to ascertain whether this limitation is really valid for all languages. In his "Anleitung" (p. 26) Trubetzkoy writes that languages which allegedly possess free dynamic stress and free quantity without the above mentioned limitation are always suspicious. A closer examination proves, according to Trubetzkoy, that not languages counting syllables but languages counting moras are concerned. Let us examine this argument. According to our opinion the "

Op. cit., 62-63.

82

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

difference between languages counting syllables and languages counting moras is not a functional difference but only a phonetic difference and there is no reason to take it into account in prosodic typology. Trubetzkoy excludes languages counting moras from this typology because of their tone correlation. In another place 15 he writes, however, that tone correlation need not be necessarily present in all languages counting moras and possessing free stress. There are languages counting moras that possess free stress and yet we find only one kind of stress with long (two-mora) syllable bearers. As examples of such languages Trubetzkoy quotes Danish and Hopi. In these languages free stress exists side by side with the prosodic correlation of contact (in Danish it is the correlation of glottal stop and in Hopi the "Silbenschnittkorrelation"). Let us further quote Japanese which is a language counting moras. Here we have free stress and free quantity without any limitation even in open final syllables. Let us give, for example, words with quantitative differences only: 16 koko 'here' — koko 'arc light' — koko 'grammar school'. These words are without any accent, both melodic and dynamic. An example of words of a different quantity and identical stress: koko 'particular' — koko 'financial company'. Examples showing stress changes: sodzo 'symptom of illness' — sodzo 'orang-utang'; hana 'nose' — hand 'flower'. This opposition "short unstressed" vs. "short stressed" is uncertain at the end of words; sometimes it is realized, sometimes not. Further, there is a difference between native and foreign words. In native words there are few long vowels, in words of foreign origin (Sino-Japanese) long vowels are numerous (especially o, u, e; a, I occur in words borrowed from languages other than Chinese). In the case of the above mentioned couples of words we cannot speak about tone oppositions within the same syllable, but only about the opposition "unstressed" vs. "stressed". It is irrelevant whether dynamic or melodic accent is concerned, as it is not the case of an opposition 16

"Grundzuge", 187. For the elucidation of prosodic conditions in Japanese and their exemplification the author is indebted to J. Neustupny. 16

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

83

of two tones. These conditions are similar to those in syllabic languages with a dynamic stress and there is no reason why we should exclude from the above mentioned typology such languages as Japanese. They belong there, at least partially, by certain subsystems of theirs. 17 In some Iranian languages and dialects free quantity and free stress seem to exist on morphological level, so as it originally was the case in Persian, till short vowels and their correspondent long counterparts were to become differentiated qualitatively to such a degree that they can no more be regarded as corresponding phonemes, which means that qualitative and not quantitative differences have become relevant. In Russian phonetic descriptions of Iranian dialects which were at our disposal there is no mention of stress, so that it was possible to find, from transcribed texts only, that for instance in the Pamir dialect of Bartang the opposition i/i: in open final syllables as well as stress seem to be free. In Baluchi we have found, on the other hand, phonological quantity (e.g. 'ati 'he was' — 'ati 'he came'), but not a phonological, free stress. In this respect all Iranian languages and dialects should be examined. In the colloquial Tajik of Bokhara 18 stress has word differentiating function in several words, e.g. im}sol 'in this year' — Umsol 'in the next year'; im}ruz 'today' — Umruz 'the next d a y ' ; jakUa

' o n e ' — ^jakta 'disorder'; pogi[za

'clean' —

1

pogiza

'accomplished'. Quantity is represented here by /:, u: in a rather small number of relics. Obscure is the situation in Kurdish. This language has to a certain degree free stress on morphological level. The main stress lies on the last syllable of the word, but in dependence on the morphological structure of the word, case forms and verbal suffixes can be stressed. Thus e.g. qiz 'girl': qizd dbb-imm 'I see a girl', but 'qiza nan ' m y d a u g h t e r ' ; zm

17

' w o m a n ' : zbna dbbimm

' I see a

Similar situation seems also to exist in most Shtokavian dialects of SerboCroatian (cf. Pavle Ivic, Die serbokroatischen Dialekte. Ihre Struktur und Entwicklung, Erster Band ['s-Gravenhage: Mouton, 1958], especially 100 ff., 111). 18 Cf. A. A. Kerimova, Govor Tadzikov Buchary (Moskva, 1959), 12.

84

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

woman', but zina bddaw 'a beautiful woman'. According to K. K. Kurdoyev 19 length and shortness of vowels is not a differentiating feature of phonemes, though proper to some vowel phonemes is shortness, to others both shortness and length. According to Kurdoyev, the lengthening of vowel phonemes in Kurdish is connected with the stress of the syllable and not with its quality. The vowel phoneme in Kurdish is said to be always a little longer in stressed syllables. I. I. Cukerman, 20 on the other hand, distinguishes length in Kurdish even in open final syllables. Least problematic is the situation in Urdu, where the existence of free quantity and free stress can be safely proved. The vowel system in Urdu comprises short vowel phonemes a, i, u and long a:, i:, «:, e\, o:, and diphthongs ai, au. Long vowels e: and o: have no short counterparts. Some examples of words of different vowel quantity: kam 'little, few' — kam 'the work'; mod 'shoemaker'; din 'day'; ki 'what' — kl (a feminine form of the postposition ka which expresses genitive); bahut 'much, very'; dur 'far'. The opposition of vowel quantity in open final syllables seems to be scantily represented: in our examples it is found only with the pair i/i:. Z. M. Dym§ic states explicitly21 that a does not usually occur at the end of words and final a of borrowed Iranian and Arabic words in Urdu is lengthened, e.g. dasta 'section'. Further he states that final i and w of Sanskrit words are either lengthened o r fall off, e.g. pati

> pati ' m a n , g e n t l e m a n ' , vastu > bastu

'thing',

dhatu > dhat 'metal'. In spite of this weak representation of the opposition of vowel quantity we can speak about free, i.e. phonological quantity in Urdu. As stated by Dymsic (p. 20), Urdu has dynamic and free stress, e.g. halan 'ingredient, condiment', cabana 'move', ya^han 'here', etc. However, Dymsic does not quote among his examples words that would differ only by stress. From the observations given in this paper the following conclusions can therefore be drawn: 19

Grammatika kurdskogo jazyka (Moskva-Leningrad, 1957), 15. "Oierki gramma tiki kurdskogo jazyka", Trudy instituta jazykoznanija VI (1956), 5-56. 21 Jazyk urdu (Moskva, 1962), 11. 20

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

85

1. We do not oppose so strictly the so-called monotonic and polytonic languages as was done by Jakobson and Trubetzkoy. It indeed appears, that is to say, that with tonic languages also intensity is of importance and that in certain cases not even the opposition of tones is present in them, as we have shown in several examples from Japanese. It is, for example, the opposition "unstressed syllable" vs. "stressed tone syllable" which represents not an opposition between two tones, between two melodies, but an opposition between unstressed and stressed syllables. Consequently, we cannot exclude these languages from the above mentioned typology of Trubetzkoy. 2. The opposition between languages counting syllables and languages counting moras is not a functional one and, consequently, does not play any important role in the mentioned typology. 3. It is important to ascertain on what level the differentiation of meaning by means of stress takes place. This should be distinguished by typology. 4. Our investigation shows that Trubetzkoy's type D, i.e. free quantity and free stress, should not be limited by the condition that open stressed final syllables are always long. Languages that are limited by this condition, as for instance English, German, Dutch, should form a special type or subtype of type D, or should be entirely excluded, if it appears that they have no correlation of contact (cf. note 7). To conclude we should like to emphasize that our investigation of languages has been considerably hampered by the still insufficient phonological descriptions of languages, especially of the less known ones. In those descriptions more attention is devoted to the problems of quantity than to the problems of stress. The question of the character of the stress is, so far, in a great number of languages treated insufficiently or wholly neglected. Data on stress are often quite vague. Nevertheless, in spite of these deficiencies in the present investigation we are of the opinion that our examples, though not exhaustive, have at least contributed to the doubts about the unexceptionality of the so-called phonological law of the incompat-

86

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

ibility of free quantity and free stress. 22 On the other hand, though we are sure that further languages possessing free quantity and free stress will be found, we must admit that the diffusion of this type of language is quite a limited one and the functional load of quantitative oppositions, especially at the absolute end of words, is mostly very weak. From that it follows that Jakobson's law, even with its probability character, keeps its value as one of the most important and clean-cut phonological laws. 23 The very scanty occurrence of the coexistence of free quantity and free stress may, however, be attributed even to factors resulting from the communicative function of language phenomena: free quantity and free stress are two very effective means of word differentiation and the functioning of both these means of phonological differentiation in one and the same language may be regarded as redundant. 22

It is necessary to change the content of the notion "law" in linguistics. Certain language phenomena have an unexceptional validity, but there are also phenomena that have a certain probability validity. And that seems to be the case of Jakobson's law. This law does not lose anything of its importance — it is exemplified in numerous languages, indeed — when we declare it probable. It is not necessary to save it by means of such complicated argumentation as was done by N. S. Trubetzkoy. 23 It should be emphasized that Jakobson himself now regards his law as a "near-universal". In his paper "Typological Studies and Their Contribution to Historical Comparative Linguistics" (Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Linguists [Oslo, 1958], 17-25) he writes (p. 20): "No doubt a more exact and exhaustive description of languages of the world will complete, correct, and perfect the code of general laws ... The question of linguistic, particularly phonemic, universals must be broached. Even if in some remote, newly recorded language we find a peculiarity challenging one of these laws, it doesn't devaluate the generalization drawn from the imposing number of languages previously studied. The uniformity observed becomes a 'nearuniformity', a rule of high statistical probability." Further (p. 21) Jakobson mentions his law and writes: "... this general law requires a more cautious formulation. If in a language phonemic stress co-exists with phonemic quantity, one of the two statements is subordinate to the other, and three, almost never four, distinct entities are admitted: either long and short vowels are distinguished only in the stressed syllable or only one of the two quantitative categories, length or brevity, may carry a free, distinctive stress. And apparently in such languages the marked category is not the long vowel opposed to the short, but the reduced vowel opposed to the non-reduced. I believe with Grammont that a law requiring amendment is more useful than the absence of any law."

INCOMPATIBILITY OF FREE QUANTITY AND FREE STRESS

87

However, this supposition cannot be raised to a principle, as, on the other hand, there are languages which make almost excessive use of various means of word differentiation. As a matter of fact we can say that language structures are so diverse and heterogeneous that no two languages of quite identical structures can be found. In the investigation of language structures, above all in comparing mutual relations between different structures, we are still at the beginning. One is certain: all languages serve for communication, but all do not transmit the same measure of information. Particular language typologies cannot, of course, evaluate languages in an absolute way, because they give only partial characteristics. Only a complex evaluation of languages could give us rather an undistorted picture of languages as means of communication.

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE? 1

The influence of Latin and French upon the development of English has always been considerable. Even in Old English which has the character of a Germanic language there is a cultural stratum of words of Latin origin. The French influence which begins in the eleventh century and culminates in 1250-1400, later gives way only to the intensive influence of humanistic Latin from which the English lexicon was substantially drawing, especially in the sixteenth century and in the first half of the seventeenth century. The French influence asserts itself again in the other half of the seventeenth century and in the eighteenth century. Thus the Romance share in the English word stock has continuously been increasing so that at the present time about two thirds of English words are of French or Latin origin. Considering that this influence was not limited to lexicon only and that of all Germanic languages English has in many respects most radically departed from the original state attested by its written documents, the question whether English may be classified with Germanic languages seems quite legitimate. It is our task to answer that question. 2 For this purpose we will state, following N. S. Trubetzkoy in his paper "Gedanken iiber das Indogermanenproblem" (Acta linguistica I, 81 ff.), the features which can be regarded as Germanic or Romance. For the solution of the question, Trubetzkoy does not attribute in his paper any 1

This paper is translated from the Czech original "Je angliitina jazykem germanskym?", Casopis pro modernI filologii (1941), 260-268. 2 This paper is a summary of an extensive work.

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

89

importance to lexical and morphological elements common to several Indo-European languages on which comparative historical linguistics is based. He writes that on the one hand one could hardly find a word which occurs in all Indo-European languages, and on the other hand he asserts that some of the most spread IndoEuropean lexical and morphological elements are not limited to Indo-European languages only. This is why he starts from six structural features whose total, in his opinion, characterizes IndoEuropean languages only. The aim of this paper is not to judge to what extent Trubetzkoy succeeded in solving this problem. However, it is conspicuous that out of those six features 3 only two concern phonology: (1) There is no vowel harmony in Indo-European. (2) Initial consonantism is not poorer than intervocalic and final consonantism. However, if Trubetzkoy admits that each of these features can by itself occur in languages other than IndoEuropean, we would suppose that he is looking for a mutual structural dependence between these features, though he does not mention it in his paper. However, such dependence does not seem to exist — those features do not seem to form a system. After all, the basis for their statement is genetic respect; if Trubetzkoy wants to use them as a criterion of the Indo-European character of languages, he gets involved in a vicious circle. In spite of that danger this procedure can be fruitful as testified by the formulation of Verner law. A different starting point is suggested by A. V. IsaCenko in his paper "Versuch einer Typologie der slavischen Sprachen" (Linguistica Slovaca I [1939/40], 64 ff.). IsaCenko classifies Slavic languages according to the relative frequency of 3 The other four are: (1) The word need not unconditionally begin with a root. There is no Indo-European language without prefixes. (2) Vowel alternances within the stem morpheme. (3) Consonant alternances. (4) The subject of the transitive verb is expressed similarly as the subject of the intransitive verb, i.e. in every Indo-European language in which the opposition nominative: accusative is expressed by means of the ending, the subject of the verb is in nominative be the verb transitive or intransitive. One could ask whether these features are not shared not only by IndoEuropean languages but also by any languages of other groups as for example by Arabic.

90

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

the vowel and consonant repertory into (a) radically vocalic type (e.g. Serbocroatian: 50 percent of consonants), (b) radically consonantal type (Polish 87.5 percent, Ukrainian 72 percent of consonants), and (c) mixed type (Czech 66.6 percent, Slovak 60 percent of consonants). As IsaCenko did not state a fixed numerical limit for the mixed type, it is more correct to distinguish two types only— the vocalic and the consonantal. The mixed type would be classed either with the vocalic or the consonantal type according to the relative predominance of vocalic or consonantal oppositions. To IsaSenko's expositions can also be remarked that numerical representation of both kinds of sounds in the phonemic repertory of individual languages does not exclude the fact that "consonantal" languages make a more frequent use of vowels than "vocalic" languages, and vice versa. It is also not quite clear whether the relative number of vowels and consonants in the phonemic repertory, or the more substantial use of vowels or consonants in word forms is more important for the structure of a given language. IsaCenko does not discuss this question, though stating the mutual relation of the phonemes of the repertory and their use would be important for the solution of the whole problem. We will try it on another occasion. Here we should only like to point out that Romance languages belong predominantly to the "consonantal" type, whereas Germanic languages belong to the "vocalic" type, though in word forms consonants are more frequent in Germanic than in Romance languages. Consequently, if English has the same percentage of consonants (54.5 percent) as French while both languages have an unequal number of consonants and vowels of the inventory (20 vowel and 24 consonant phonemes in English, 15 vowel and 18 consonant phonemes in French), then we can regard this fact as a convergence of the two genetically distant languages. Comparing the repertory of phonological oppositions of Germanic and Romance languages we come to the result that, contrary to Romance languages, all Germanic languages are characterized by several exclusive features: (1) by dynamic stress of morphological nature; (2) by close contact (vowel length); (3) by secondary,

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

91

morphologically conditioned stress; and (4) by the phoneme g. To these features two other features of morphological nature may be added: (5) synthetic genitive in addition to analytical genitive, and (6) the double function of the preterite (by means of the dental ending or only by the alternation of the stem syllable). And again, all Romance languages are unambiguously destined (1) by a triangular vowel system; (2) by phonological accent with phonetic vowel quantity (e.g. in Italian), or by phonetic accent with weakly developed phonological vowel length (in French); and (3) by the opposition of the grammatical masculine and feminine gender. On the other hand, both groups jointly share only two negative phonological features: (1) the lack of plosive palatals, and (2) the lack of the voice correlation of velar fricatives; and one positive morphological feature: the periphrasis of the perfect by means of the verb "to have" and "to be". Thus the Germanic and Romance languages, in contrast to the other Indo-European languages, form a common group which has developed owing to a long common cultural life. To this also point the phonological features which, though occurring in both language groups, are nevertheless limited to some of these languages only. In order to be able to appreciate better the position of English within the groups of Germanic and Romance languages, especially its relation to Modern French, we will state the most important phonological features which occur in both language groups or by which both groups differ, and their occurrence in Modern English and Modern French. (1) In Romance languages the most sonorous vowel phoneme does not take part in the opposition of timbre so that their vowel system — apart from the problem of double a in French — is only triangular. In Germanic languages both systems — the triangular (in Dutch, Danish, and Norwegian) as well as the tetragonal (in English, German, and Swedish) — are represented equally. (2) No nasalized vowels which are members of the phonemic repertory of Portuguese and French occur in Germanic languages. In Proto-Germanic there occurred nasalized a and on the AngloFrisian territory also nasalized i and u, but from the phonological

92

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

point of view all these nasal vowels were combinations of the respective oral vowel with a nasal consonant. Nasalization was combinatory variant of a nasal consonant. (3) In present-day Germanic languages there is no proportionate opposition of palatalization. In Romance languages the opposition of palatalization is represented in Italian (cf. n-n, l-l) and in Spanish (n-n, l-t). In literary French there must be admitted the existence of soft / until the end of the seventeenth century, but a new opposition n-n arose as late as toward the end of the same century when I had already disappeared from literary language. (4) In present-day Germanic languages consonantal gemination is not phonological. German, English, Swedish, and Norwegian possess geminated consonants, but the gemination occurs only on the suture of two morphemes (in German, English, Dutch, and Danish) or is a concomitant phonetic phenomenon which arises during the realization of a close contact of a consonant with a preceding (short) vowel. On the other hand in Italian, where the gemination of consonants is phonologically relevant, vowel quantity is conditioned by the opposition of gemination of the following consonant (cf. pala 'shovel' : palla 'ball'; eco 'echo' : ecco 'here'; topo 'mouse' : toppo 'root'; etc.). In Spanish only r is phonologically geminated, e.g. pero 'but' : perro 'dog'. For Modern French Martinet admits a start to the phonologization of consonantal gemination (cf. je désirais : je désir/e/rais; il éclaira : il éclair/e/ra; je courais : je courrais; on the morphological suture of learned words: diffusion, illégal, etc.), but it is not clear whether the vacillating pronunciation is not influenced by spelling and conditioned also by other considerations of stylistic nature as for example by speech tempo, etc. It is hardly possible to speak about phonological gemination in French. (5) The opposition occlusive : spirant is more frequent in Germanic than in Romance languages. In Gothic, Old Norse, and Anglo-Saxon this opposition is correlative as it concerns three phonemic pairs ( p / f , tH>, k/h), whose members are distinguished solely by presence or absence of closure. In new English the opposition of plosion is undoubtful with two pairs, c/s and dzjz

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

93

which were missing in Anglo-Saxon, whereas in order to ascertain the phonological character of the oppositions p¡f, t/p, and k/h to which two other pairs, b/v and d¡S, have been added since the end of the fourteenth century, we must take into consideration that the articulatory difference between p and / is not the same as that between t and p, k and h. That is to say, the English labio-dental /(v) differs from the labial p(b) also by the place of articulation as well as p(§) which is dental in contradistinction to the alveolar t which is articulated with a higher position of the tip of the tongue and is strongly aspirated before a stressed vowel or before an emphatic pause so that a kind of s may be heard. As h also differs from k by articulatory localization, it is rather doubtful whether these oppositions really form a series of proportionate oppositions, though it is necessary to emphasize that those features by which the articulation of individual members of oppositional pairs differ, with the exception of the presence and absence of closure, are not relevant in the whole phonological system of English. We meet similar difficulties in Danish where, according to Martinet, the consonants v/b, 5[d, and q/g do not form a correlative series (cf. his book Laphonologie du mot en danois [Paris-Copenhague, 1937], 41-45). However, we should admit here the proportionate correlation, as articulatory differences between a fricative and the corresponding plosive sound are not, even in Danish, so far as we know, phonologically relevant. Trubetzkoy regards the Danish v, d, q as "sonorous" sounds, as they are realized almost without any friction and their connection with the preceding vowel is prosodically equal to a long syllable bearer. However, the different attitude toward them taken by the language system gives decided evidence against that view: whereas 5 and q disappear between vowels, r, I, n are preserved without any change. In Norwegian and Swedish the opposition of plosion concerns only the pairs p¡f, b/v, and k/h. In new French as well as in classical Latin correlation of plosion cannot be spoken of as the phonemes / and v which would come into consideration for new French belong to a different localization series than p and b. Moreover, between s and t, s and k, the articulatory differences are still greater so that it is not possible

94

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

to accept Gougenheim's correlation series p / f , t/s, k/S. In Spanish the oppositions p / f , t/p, and k/x form a correlation series, though the articulatory localization of the corresponding plosive and fricative sounds rather differs (p is labial, / labiodental, / dental, p interdental, k middle-palatal, x uvular). The correlation affricate: spirant is represented in Italian (c/s, c/s), in Rumanian (c/s, dz/z, c/s), and in Old French (ts/s, dz/z). Such oppositions are known even in Germanic languages, but only in German (c/s and perhaps even £/S) and especially in English (£/s, dz/i) which in this respect comes near to Romance languages. (6) The occurrence of characteristic phonemes. Characteristic of all Germanic languages is the phoneme y which in Romance languages occurs only as a combinatory variant. Out of the other phonemes which are lacking in Romance languages, w is characteristic of English, c of Norwegian and Swedish,/»/ of High German. On the other hand, Romance languages are positively characterized by the phoneme n which occurs in all Romance languages but Rumanian, whereas Italian and Old French are characterized by dz and Rumanian by d. Out of vowels long a is characteristic of English, ut of both Scandinavian languages. All Romance languages with the exception of Rumanian are characterized by a lack of diphthongs which occur in phonemic function in German, Dutch, and English. (7) Stress in Germanic languages is morphological. In all these languages except New Icelandic stress distinguishes morphological, not lexical, language oppositions. It can distinguish words belonging to the same morphological family such as verbs from corresponding nouns, e.g. im'port (verb): 'import (noun), or compound verbs with a prefix of different meaning (German 'durchtreiben: durch' treiben). Only in Old Icelandic the stress was phonetic due to the extinction of unstressed prefixes. If in Danish and Swedish stress has again a morphological function, it may be due to the influence of Low German with which the Northmen were in constant contact during the whole middle ages and from which they have again taken over unstressed prefixes. With the exception of French, the stress of Romance languages is phonological which

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

95

means that it is not dependent on the number and position of syllables in the word or on morphological respects. Only in French does the stress have no phonological function; its only task is to separate groups of words into which spoken language is resolved. In contradistinction to the other languages the French stress resting on the final syllable of the word cannot emphasize even individual words in a sentence.4 In addition to the dynamic stress Norwegian and Swedish has also melodic accent by which words of different morphological origin can be distinguished (cf. bmer 'farmers' : bemer 'beans'). The opposition of melodic accent with a low and high peak is limited only to words in which a stressed syllable is followed by at least one unstressed syllable. (8) The position of a secondary stress in Germanic languages is not regulated mechanically by the primary stress but again by morphological respects. Thus, in addition to the primary stress on the prefix, compounds in German have secondary stress on each stem syllable (cf. Blufkreis, ' vor sprechen, 'unternehmen, 'BotKschaft). This explains the "full" vowel in English words 'outnumber, 'out*cry, 'fore"cast, 'blackbird which is given morphologically. In Romance languages, as far as they have phonological stress at all, the secondary stress is regulated mainly by the distance from the primary stress. (9) The correlation of close contact in Germanic languages. According to Trubetzkoy's phonological interpretation of Sievers's theory, vowel length in Germanic languages depends on the opposition of close contact: if a consonant is joined to the preceding vowel in such a way that the syllable nucleus is unchecked, the vowel is long; when the syllable nucleus is checked in the very peak of articulation, the vowel is short. In Trubetzkoy's opinion this explanation is correct as it is confirmed by the fact that final 4

Germanic stress also causes a difference in phonological oppositions of stressed as well as quite unstressed vowels. For example in English, vocalic oppositions are limited only to (semi) stressed syllables, whereas in unstressed syllables only one opposition (ija) operates. There is no such limitation in Romance languages. Only the occurrence of French a is conditioned by the syllable being unstressed.

96

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

stressed vowels in German are always long, i.e. the opposition of quantity is neutralized in this position. Trubetzkoy regarded long vowels as unmarked, short vowels as marked members of the correlation of close contact. According to Martinet's convincing comments, Danish is an exception to this rule as the short vowel in Danish can have both loose and close contact and can occur even at the end of a stressed syllable (cf. vi 'we'). In Romance languages vowel quantity depends entirely upon the syllable (either stressed or unstressed) being open or closed. Only in literary French, according to Martinet's and Gougenheim's views, the quantity of the vowels e and œ seems to be phonological in front of certain consonants. If this is true, French can be regarded as a link between Mediterranean Romance and Germanic languages and is close to English which has limited the correlation of close contact to the couples //i':, u¡u:, o / o : (perhaps also A / a : ) . (10) Romance languages do not possess the so-called glottal stop which is frequent in Germanic languages with the important exception of English, which by dropping it in the second half of fourteenth century came nearer to French. Glottal stop existed in Old English as can be inferred from the rules of Anglo-Saxon alliterative prosody and from the direct information of Abbo, the French author of a Latin grammar who spent several years in the English monastery at Ramsay. Its loss is proved by an incorrect division of words (cf. apron from naperon, atter from natter, etc.), which appears more frequently since the half of fourteenth century. It may even be traced in Old French in the occurrence of the socalled h aspiré which, however, is now the spelling mark of the context-conditioned opposition hiatus-liaison (cf. le hêtre : l'être; la hache : Vache; la hauteur : l'auteur; la haine : Vaine', haute : hote; hune : une; le hère : Vair : Vére; la hanche : l'anche). These pairs are not identical homonyms as Martinet suggests in his "Remarques sur le système phonologique du français" (pp. 201 ff.; cf. also G. Gougenheim, "Éléments de phonologie française", 29 if.). Even in the other Romance languages glottal stop does not occur, whereas in German it is frequent before initial vowels of a word or a stem (the so-called fester Vokaleinsatz) and in Danish it has an important

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

97

phonological role. Martinet argues that stod is no genuine consonant phoneme as when it is brought to the speakers' attention they realize it as a part of the sound which usually disappears in singing. According to Martinet, stod is a purely prosodic factor. Its place is determined by length or shortness of the vowel: it follows a long vowel directly; following a short vowel it occurs only after a consonant if it is voiced (i.e. after v, 8,j, q, r, I, m, n, rj). It is true that glottal stop occurs in Dutch but only in emphatic speech. In both Scandinavian literary languages, where, equally as in English, there is no neutralization of final voiced consonants, glottal stop became extinct, perhaps again under the influence of French pronunciation. (11) Important differences between Germanic and Romance languages appear in the composition and relative frequency of phonemes in words. However, a detailed analysis of these phonological features calls for a special paper — only a mention can be made of them here. The most important feature distinguishing English from French is the fact that English tolerates consonant clusters of many members, whereas French inserts the vowel a behind the second member of a cluster of two members when its first or last member is not r or /. On the other hand, of all south European Romance languages, literary French has the most consonant clusters and tolerates best the consonantal end of words so that even from this respect it forms a transition to Germanic languages.5 CONCLUSION

Taking into consideration all arguments presented here, we come to the conclusion that English has some features common with French, some common with Germanic languages. It comes nearer to French in points 3, 4, 10, and partly 9, but differs from it in points 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8. As points 3 and 4 are of a purely negative 6 Cf. V. Mathesius, "Zum Problem der Belastungs- und KombinationsfShigkeit der Phoneme", TCLP 4, 148-152.

98

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

nature and, moreover, French agrees in them with all Germanic languages, it is necessary to conclude that English is a purely Germanic language though it has borrowed many Latin and French lexical elements. French, on the other hand, has departed from the other Romance languages by the phonological vowel quantity (though weakly developed), by the phonetic accent, by different vowel phonemes u, d, oe, and by a frequent consonantal ending of words so that of all Romance languages it is nearest to Germanic languages. Both languages, French and English, have, consequently, a special position in their respective language families. There can also be observed a tendency to a certain approximation which is, however, of a special character. Whereas in English the respective features (loss of glottal stop, limitation of the correlation of quantity, the creation of the correlation pairs f/v, s\z, s/z,6 which were absent in Old and Middle English before the end of the fourteenth century) bring the language nearer to French, the latter is nearer to the former by some features only as far as English shares the features of continental Germanic languages. Consequently — so far as any conclusions can be made from this phonological analysis which should, of course, be complemented by a morphological analysis — the phonological approximation of both languages is much smaller than could be expected from their lexical, phraseological, semasiological, and stylistic correspondences. Moreover, English itself shares with the other languages of its genetic group all its essential features, especially the morphological accent by means of which it has assimilated words of Romance origin and which, in contradistinction to Romance languages, makes a sharp difference between vocalic oppositions of stressed and unstressed syllables. FURTHER REFERENCES Borgstram, C., "Zur Phonologie der norwegischen Schriftsprache", Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap 9 (1937), 250 ff. 6

The third pair of phonemes p/d which arose at the same time, is proper, out of all Germanic languages, to English only.

IS ENGLISH A GERMANIC LANGUAGE?

99

Gougenheim, G., Éléments de phonologie française (Strasbourg), 193. - , "Reflexions sur la phonologie historique du français", TCLP 8, 262-269. Martinet, A., La gémination consonantique d'origine expressive dans les langues germaniques (Copenhague - Paris, 1937). - , "Remarques sur le système phonologique du français", BSL 34 (1933), 191-202. Mathesius, V., "K fonologickému systému moderni anglictiny" [On the Phonological System of Modem English], ÖMF15, 129 ff. Novâk, L., "De la phonologie historique romane. La quantité et l'accent", Charisteria G. Mathesio ... oblata (Prague, 1932), 45 ff. Trnka, B., "K norskym alveolârâm" [On Norwegian Alveolars], ÖMF21,170 ff. -, A Phonological Analysis of Present-Day Standard English (Praha, 1935). - , "Poznâmky ke germânské expressivni geminaci" [Remarks on Germanic Expressive Gemination], ¿MF 26, 85 ff. - , "Slovné a mezislovné signâly v anglictiné, francouzStinë a ëeâtinë" [Word and Interword Signals in English, French, and Czech], Listy filologické 67, 223 ff. - , "The Phonemic Development of Spirants in English", English Studies 20, 69-71. - , "O nynëjsim stavu fonologie" [On the Present-Day State of Phonology], Slovo a slovesnost 6, 164 ff., 203 ff.; cf. also ÖMF2X, 22, etc. Trubetzkoy, N. S., "Grundzüge der Phonologie", TCLP 7.

THE PLACE OF THE WORD IN THE LANGUAGE SYSTEM

An important task which we assume must precede the proper analysis of word criteria is to discover the place occupied by the word in the system of language. The solution to this problem will provide us with a solid starting point for our analysis of the criteria of the word. The place of the word in the system of language is a problem of the relation of the word to the units of different language plans. This relation has been very pregnantly expressed by B. Trnka in his paper "Peut-on poser une définition universellement valable des domaines respectifs de la syntaxe?" 1 Trnka discusses the relation between the plan of the word and the plan of the sentence. The sentence and the word are, according to Trnka, on different levels, as the sentence is neither the result of a mechanical arrangement of words nor equivalent merely to the sum of the words of which it consists. The plan of the sentence and the plan of the word are not in a reciprocal relation but in the relation of the function to its realization, that is, in a relation similar to that of the word and phonemes realizing it. Elsewhere2 Trnka formulates this problem as follows: Though both plans, the phonological and the morphological one, cooperate with the syntactic plan toward a common aim of language 1

Actes du sixième congrès international des linguistes, Paris, 19 au 24 Juillet 1948 (Paris, 1948), 19-30. 2 B. Trnka, Rozbor nynëjSl spisovné angliétiny, II: Morfologie slovntch druhù (ëâstl reii) a tvoreni slov [Analysis of Present-Day Literary English, II] (Prague, 1954, mimeographed), 5.

THE PLACE OF THE WORD IN THE LANGUAGE SYSTEM

101

utterance that is toward the intersubjective understanding, each of them works with quite different means. The basic elements of the morphological plan are, that is to say, not phonemes but words, units endowed with meaning, whose relation to phonemes or to sequences of phonemes (for instance [teibl, taim, buk]) respectively is that of the sign to its realization. The word cannot be realized as a mere grouping of phonemes but as a unit realized by phonemes capable of being displaced and capable of semantic opposition. In relation to the sentence as an independent sign of extralinguistic reality to which the speaker takes a stand the word is only the realization of a higher unit — the sentence. Consequently, the word has in the entire language system a double aspect: it is partly (partial) sign, partly realizer. Thus morphology has a central position in language: on one hand it deals with words as partial signs realized by phonemes, on the other hand with words as realizers of the sentence. However, we have a few critical remarks on this formulation. Trnka regards words as basic elements of the morphological plan, but he does not mention morphemes, the relation between morphemes and words, and the place of both in the morphological plan. We are of the opinion that it is the morpheme as the smallest semantic unit (bound to the word) which must be regarded as the basic element of the morphological plan. A morpheme can at the same time be a word, and a word can be uni- or polymorphemic. The difference between the position of the morpheme and that of the word in the system of language is that the morpheme belongs solely and exclusively to the morphological plan whereas the word belongs equally both to the morphological and to the syntactical and lexical plan. 3 Of course, when we regard as a morphological unit the word as a realizer of the sentence, the boundaries between morphology and syntax must needs be very vague and disputable, if boundaries and, thus, the difference between morphology and syntax can in this case be spoken of at all. The criterion of the displaceability of the word in the sentence will be discussed later. Having adopted the morpheme as a unit of the morphological 3

Cf. Ivan Poldauf, "Tvofeni slov" [On the Formation of Words], O vldeckem pozndni soudobych jazykii (Prague, 1958), 146: "Words formed by morphemes are units of both the lexical and the morphological plan, even if they represent units of a higher order than are morphemes."

102

THE PLACE OF THE WORD IN THE LANGUAGE SYSTEM

plan, we must determine the function the word has in the morphological plan. It is necessary to make a sharp distinction between the function of the word in the morphological plan and the function of the word in the syntactical plan. It is the morphological relations within the word, that is to say, the relations between particular morphemes (as far as multi-morphemic words are concerned), which are of concern, whereas in the syntactical plan the relations are those between words as realizers of the sentence.4 Words as syntactical units are in mutual syntactical relation, whereas words in the morphological plan can be taken into consideration solely in terms of their relation to the paradigmatic axis.5 Only this double aspect of the word can throw light on the question of whether forms of one and the same word represent different words or only variants of one word. This problem is pointed to by B. Trnka, 6 when he contrasts the word as an element of the syntagmatic axis and the word as an element of the paradigmatic axis. From the standpoint of the syntagmatic axis each of the word forms is a special word which is differentiated through its opposition to other words of the sentence, whereas from the standpoint of the paradigmatic axis all word forms are variants of the same word. 7 This differentiation by the two axes is not without 4

Likewise, the position of the word in the system of language and, at the same time, the difference between morphology and syntax is characterized by P. L. Garvin, who writes (op. tit., 65) that morphology is a study of the inner structure of words and syntax a study of the outer functioning of words. The division into morphology and syntax presupposes, according to Garvin, that words are thoroughly defined as linguistic units. 5 This, of course, does not mean that we put an impenetrable wall between morphology and syntax. In fact, syntax presupposes morphology and morphological relations are realized in syntax. If we, however, wish to delimit morphology somehow, we must, in the first stage of our investigation, center our attention on the relations within morphology, within the framework of the morphological plan, only in the second stage investigating the relations between morphology and syntax. 8 Cf. the paper cited in fn. 1, pp. 28-29. 7 Edward Sapir (Language [New York, 1921], 26) speaks of radical and grammatical elements. In the same work (p. 25) he writes: "The single word may or may not be the simplest significant element we have to deal with. The English words sing, sings, singing, singer each conveys a perfectly definite

THE PLACE OF THE WORD IN THE LANGUAGE SYSTEM

103

importance, as, for instance, in Chinese and in Bantu languages the word form can be given outwardly by tone characteristics of another word of the sentence. The dependence of the word form upon another word of the sentence can be met with even in Celtic and other languages. Thus, for instance, in Manx 8 the words beginning with c have variants with initial c, ch, g, according to the influence of preceding words, such as, e.g., carrey 'friend' — e charrey 'his friend' — nyn garrey 'our friend', the words beginning with b have variants with initial b, v, m, for instance, bea veayn 'long life' — e vea 'his life' — nyn mea 'our, your, their, life', etc. The well-known 'sandhi' phenomena also belong in this category. It is beyond dispute that the word is, above all, a unit of the lexical plan. Whereas in the lexical plan the word is the basic and the sole unit, in the morphological plan the basic unit is the morpheme and in the syntactical plan it is the sentence. The problem is whether the word as a part of the word stock, as the bearer of lexical meaning, possesses grammatical form. According to A. IsaSenko9 the word does not become 'form' until it is used in a syntactical whole. 10 However, this problem is of minor imporand intelligible idea, though the idea is disconnected and is therefore functionally of no practical value. We recognize immediately that these words are of two sorts. The first word, sing, is an indivisible phonetic entity conveying the notion of a certain specific activity. The other words all involve the same fundamental notion but, owing to the addition of other phonetic elements, this notion is given a particular twist that modifies or more closely defines it. They represent, in a sense, compounded concepts that have flowered from the fundamental one. We may, therefore, analyze the words sings, singing, and singer as binary expressions involving a fundamental concept, a concept of subject matter (sing), and a further concept of more abstract order — one of person, number, time, condition, function, or of several of these combined." If Sapir regards the expressions sings, singing, singer as binary expressions which have a common basic concept, it is the same as regarding them as variants of the word sing. 8 Cf. John Kelly, A Practical Grammar of the Ancient Gaelic, or Language of the Isle of Man, Usually Called Manx (Douglas, Isle of Man, 1870). 9 A. IsaCenko, "Slovo a véta" [The Word and the Sentence], O védeckém poznáni soudobych jazykü (Prague, 1958), 89. 10 On the other hand, K. Hausenblas, E. Pauliny, and B. Havránek expressed disagreement with this assertion (cf. op. cit. in fn. 9, 117).

104

THE PLACE OF THE WORD IN THE LANGUAGE SYSTEM

tance for this chapter. More relevant is another assertion of IsaSenko, that is to say, that in the lexical system there exist only roots and not words. According to B. Havránek the units of the lexical plan are words, not roots of words; words form an infinite succession which can be prolonged. If we evaluate the place of the word in particular language plans, we come to an important difference in the place of the word and of other language units in the language system. This difference lies in the fact that the phoneme, morpheme, and sentence have their fixed place in the language system, whereas the word belongs both to the morphological and to the syntactical and lexical plans. The word is a bridge between morphology and syntax, making the transition from morphology to syntax gradual and imperceptible. Extreme cases are those of the identification of the word with the morpheme on one hand and with the sentence on the other hand. The place of these basic units in the language system can be represented in the following way:

PLAN

PHONEME

MORPHEME

t

\

/

SENTENCE

phoneme WORD

t

word morpheme

t

phoneme

WORD

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

The question of establishing the classification of languages on the basis of a quantitative treatment of linguistic phenomena can best be introduced by a quotation from Roman Jakobson (1958): "A linguistic typology based on arbitrarily selected traits cannot yield satisfactory results, any more than the classification of the animal kingdom which instead of the productive division into vertebrates and non-vertebrates, mammals and birds, etc., would use, for instance, the criterion of skin colour and on this basis group together, e.g., white people and light pigs." This consideration has a bearing on the question whether and which quantitative aspects can function as substantial typological features. Do there exist quantitative traits essential for the classification of languages? As an example of an unproductive and arbitrary criterion Jakobson quotes colour, which is a qualitative trait. He could just as well have quoted a quantitative trait, for instance the weight of animals. But nobody would regard the classification of animals according to their weight as using an essential trait. Similarly inappropriate would it be to classify animals according to the number of individuals. We must take into consideration that in zoology the quantitative aspect is not so closely connected with the qualitative aspect as it is in other sciences. Of course, we use quantitative classifiers even in zoology (e.g. the classification of animals into artiodactyls and perissodactyls), not because this classification contributes an essential trait to the differentiation, but because it is a classifier which has been verified in practice. It has nothing to do with the qualitative properties of each respective

106

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

species of animals. In some other sciences, e.g. in chemistry and physics, it is, however, quite different. It is well known that in those sciences the relation between quantity and quality is very close, one can even pass into the other. A similar, very close relation between quantity and quality exists also in linguistics,1 though the conditions of the transition of quantity into quality are not so thoroughly ascertained as they are in natural sciences. However, we are sure that in linguistics all qualitative changes assert themselves with the help of quantitative factors (i.e. they depend upon the frequency of occurrence of the innovations in question). Thus the necessity of a quantitative investigation into qualitative facts or changes without which qualitative facts do not possess their full value and relevance, answers the first question in the affirmative. If we regard the quantitative aspect as essential for the evaluation of any linguistic fact, we must admit the importance of a quantitative evaluation even for typology. Of course, we must be careful to choose quantitative traits which are really essential for the classification of languages, in other words, we must choose really characteristic traits. Vladimir SkaliSka (1958) distinguishes five conceptions of typology: (1) the classificatory (taxonomic) conception, (2) the conception of characterization, (3) the conception of the classification of particular traits, (4) the conception of gradual typology, and (5) the investigation of the relations between particular language facts. Quantitative methods are most often used when languages are classified according to the third and fourth conceptions. From the typologies of the third conception (the conception of the classification of particular language traits) we shall mention the typology of A. Isacenko (1939) who classified Slav languages according to the relative frequency of vowel and consonant phonemes of the inventory of particular languages. On this basis, 1 Cf. J. Vachek, "On the interplay of quantitative and qualitative aspects in phonemic development", Zeitschrift fiir Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 5. (Jahrg. 1957), Heft 1, 28: "... as a rule, the quantitative facts of language appear to be closely co-ordinated with qualitative language facts ...".

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

107

Slav languages can be classified into three types: (1) radically vocalic, (2) radically consonantal, (3) mixed type. To the fundamental classification into vocalic and consonantal types IsaSenko was led by the fact that there are two groups of Slav languages: those distinguishing hard and soft consonants and those which possess no correlation of palatalization, but have musical pitch. Languages possessing a highly developed system of consonant phonemes, as for instance Polish, have a poor vocalic inventory, and vice versa, languages possessing a rich vocalic inventory, as for instance Serbo-Croatian, have a poor consonant inventory. This theory being applied to Germanic and Romance languages, the Germanic languages appear to be prevalently vocalic and the Romance languages appear to be prevalently consonantal. The present writer has expanded this theory by comparing the occurrence of vowels and consonants in the phonemic inventory with the occurrence of vowels and consonants in coherent texts.2 The statistical investigation of eight languages showed that in texts German and English have a greater relative frequency of consonants than in the phonemic inventory, whereas the other languages examined, i.e. Czech, Old English, Italian, Spanish, Slovak, and Persian, make more use of vowels in texts. If we want to express the exploitation of vowels (V) numerically, we relate the percentage of consonants of the phonemic inventory (Pi) to the percentage of consonants in the text (Pt), the equation being Pi V = — Pt Values larger than 100 mean an overexploitation of vowels (i.e. the percentage of occurrence of vowels in texts is larger than the percentage of vowels in the inventory), values smaller than 100 mean an underexploitation of vowels (i.e. the percentage of occur2

Cf. J. Kramsky, "Fonologicke vyuziti samohlaskovych fonemat" [Phonological exploitation of vocalic phonemes], Linguistica Slovaca IV-YI (19461948), 39. Cf. also VI. Skalicka, "Typologie slovanskych jazyku, zvlaste rustiny" [Typology of Slav languages, especially of Russian], Ceskoslovenska rusistika (1958), N. 2-3, 73.

108

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

rence of vowels in texts is smaller than the percentage of vowels in the inventory). Consequently, the more vocalic a language is, the more the consonantal elements assert themselves in particular texts, and vice versa, the more consonantal a language is, the more frequent are the vowels in particular texts of such a language. Languages of the consonantal type choose and frequently make use of words of such structure that their consonantal character is denied. Thus, for example in Czech, which is a language of the consonantal type, in texts words are frequently inserted in which the vocalic elements are balanced with the consonantal elements or the vocalic elements are even prevalent. The same is true, mutatis mutandis in languages of the vocalic type. When classifying languages into vocalic and consonantal, we characterize them by that classification — only very roughly, of course — in the phonic aspect. There is no doubt that the phonic image of the language is one of the most important characteristics of any language; it is a complex summation of all factors and facts by which the language manifests itself in its acoustic form. However, we are not able so far to grasp it in all its complexity nor in such a way that a comparison of different languages, and, consequently, the classification of languages into different types, is possible. Thus a certain simplification is necessary. It is equally clear that only a quantitative treatment of particular phenomena which characterize the language as far as the sound is concerned, can lead to a characterization of the language in that respect. Of course, we must look for the most characteristic trait which is common to several phenomena. Thus, for example, it would not be practical to compare individual sounds, as each of them has a different articulation and a different acoustic effect. And if we compared different sounds only as to the frequency of occurrence we should be hardly able to find a classifier by which to classify languages. But we know that certain groups of sounds share some common articulatory features. Therefore it will be best to attempt a quantitative typology on the basis of the usual classification of sounds. In this paper we are concerned with the classification of consonants. They can be classified according to the manner of

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

109

articulation and according to the place of articulation. According to the manner of articulation, consonants are classified into three groups: (1) plosives and affricates, (2) fricatives, (3) nasals, liquids, and semivowels. According to the place of articulation, consonants are classified into four groups: (1) labials, (2) alveolars (or dentals), (3) palatals, (4) velars. If we are to compare several languages as to the frequency of occurrence of consonants of a certain kind, a mere statement of the frequency of occurrence of consonants in each language would be insufficient, as the conditions of their occurrence are not the same in all languages. The absolute frequency of particular kinds of consonants could not be compared, as the compared languages have not the same number of consonantal phonemes of a certain kind in their phonemic inventories so that the data would be inadequate and misleading. It is not our aim to search for a mere frequency of occurrence of consonants, but for their exploitation in the text in comparison with their inventory. We start from the consideration that if the exploitation of consonants of a certain kind in a text were equal, it would relatively equal the percentage of occurrence of the same kind of consonant in the phonemic inventory. For instance, if there are 8 different plosives, 6 different fricatives, and 6 different nasals (i.e. 40 percent: 30 percent: 30 percent) in the phonemic inventory, and 50 percent of plosives, 20 percent of fricatives, and 30 percent of nasals in the text, the differences in the relative frequency between the inventory and the text, making 10 percent with plosives and — 10 percent with fricatives, give the deviations from the equal exploitation of the kinds of consonants examined. The positive deviation means an overexploitation, the negative deviation means an underexploitation of the consonants in question. Thus our method is based on the assumption of an equal functional burdening of particular kinds of sounds 3 in the case of neutral behaviour on the part of the language toward all kinds of sounds and, consequently, 3

The same method has been used in the statistical evaluation of the mutual relation of particular consonantal positions in the word (cf. the author's paper "On the quantitative phonemic analysis of English mono- and disyllables", Casopis pro modernl filologii, 38 [1956], Supplement Philologica 45).

110

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

to all manners and places of articulation. But languages mostly exploit certain kinds of sounds more than others and it is this fact that makes languages characteristic in one way or another, as far as the sound or acoustic aspect of language is concerned. It is just the exploitation of sounds, i.e. the relation of the sounds of the language inventory to the relative occurrence in texts, which characterizes individual languages. Our task was to find out the frequency of occurrence of phonemes in coherent texts in 23 languages. We tried to make a comparatively representative choice of languages. Our choice was, however, limited by the possibility of procuring a reliable phonetic or phonemic transcription of literary texts of various languages. Another limitation was the fact that the work was done by a single researcher only. Such an extensive investigation of a considerable number of languages ought to be done by a collective body of research workers. Nevertheless, the number of 23 languages seems to be representative enough to make possible certain conclusions from the investigation. Indo-European languages are represented in our study by ten languages: the Iranian group is represented by two minor dialects, namely by the Kalai-Khumbian dialect of Tajiki and the Pamir dialect of Ishkashimi. The Slav group is represented by Russian, Czech, and Bulgarian, the Germanic group by German and English, the Romance group by French. Albanian and Armenian are also examined. Semitic languages are represented by Arabic, Hamitic languages by Hausa, Caucasian languages by Lakh, Turkish languages by Turkish and Chuvash, Sino-Tibetan languages by Chinese. From the group of Indonesian languages we have examined Indonesian and Sakalava, a language spoken on the northwestern coast of Madagascar. Languages of New Guinea are represented by Siane, a language belonging to the group of Bena-Bena. African languages are represented by Gola and Inamwanga, American languages by Arapaho (spoken in the state of Wyoming), and the languages of the Far East by Japanese. Although not all language groups are represented, yet the choice of languages examined seems representative enough for the purpose of our investigation.

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

111

The texts from these languages contained from 1,372 to 3,867 phonemes. The total number of phonemes in all texts examined was 61,307 phonemes, out of which vowels number 27,554 and consonants, 33,753 (cf. Table 1). TABLE 1 Number of vowels absol. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

Ishkashimi Kalai-Khumb Turkish Chuvash Inamwanga Gola Siane Sakalava Arapaho Albanian Indonesian French Russian German English Lakh Armenian Japanese Czech Bulgarian Chinese Arabic Hausa

consonants

%

absol.

°/o

Total

Pho- Number nemes of words per word

859

41.6

1205

58.4

2064

4.21

490

903

42.2

1234

57.8

2137

4.44

481

1260

42.1

1733

57.9

2993

6.12

489

1087

42.1

1492

57.9

2579

5.16

500

1729

51.0

1663

49.0

3392

5.86

579

772

48.7

814

51.3

1586

3.61

439

1709

50.9

1643

49.1

3252

5.52

608

1144

50.2

1137

49.8

2281

5.66

403

1431

46.4

1656

53.6

3087

10.25

301

1793

47.4

1989

52.6

3782

4.60

822

1228

44.0

1562

56.0

2790

5.59

499

1063

44.2

1339

55.8

2402

3.00

800

1299

42.0

1791

58.0

3090

4.95

624

835

37.1

1417

62.9

2252

4.33

520

899

37.6

1493

62.4

2392

3.07

779

1204

41.6

1692

58.4

2896

5.18

559

1531

39.6

2336

60.4

3867

6.29

614

1256

51.5

1184

48.5

2440

3.84

636

1199

41.8

1666

58.2

2865

4.85

590

773

56.3

599

43.7

1372

3.43

400 414

964

47.1

1081

52.9

2045

4.94

1450

44.7

1791

55.3

3241

6.07

534

1166

48.5

1236

51.5

2402

3.37

712

The survey of the frequency of occurrence of consonants classified according to the manner or place of articulation can be seen from Tables 2 and 3 respectively. This statistical survey does not provide a basis for comparing the distributions of particular kinds of sounds, because it gives only the absolute frequency of occurrence. The relative frequency of occurrence stated as a percentage for particular kinds of consonants is given in Table 4. It is interesting

112

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

that there are not too great deviations in the percentage of occurrence of particular kinds of consonants according to the manner of articulation. Thus the relative frequency of occurrence of plosives varies between 23.6 percent (Sakalava) and 42.8 percent (Albanian, Japanese), of fricatives between 12.3 percent (Inamwanga) and 33.4 percent (Czech), and of nasals and liquids between 27.1 percent (Arapaho) and 59.7 percent (Inamwanga). As to the consonants according to the place of articulation, the differences are considerable: they vary between 4.8 percent (Arapaho) and 28.1 percent (Siane) for labials, between 33.8 percent (Gola) and 71.6 percent (German) for alveolars, between 0.1 percent (Sakalava) and 26.3 percent (Chinese) for palatals, and between 7.7 percent (French) and 48.5 percent (Arapaho) for velars. Table 5 contains relative frequencies of particular kinds of consonants in the phonemic inventory. The comparison of this relative frequency of occurrence with the relative frequency of particular kinds of consonants in texts gives the deviation (positive or negative) from the equal distribution as assumed in the ideal case. The deviations are recorded in Table 6. As mentioned above, a positive deviation means an overexploitation, a negative deviation means an underexploitation of a certain kind of consonant. Besides, we must bear in mind that positive and negative deviations are compensated so that for instance an overexploitation of plosives is compensated by an underexploitation of fricatives and nasals, or an underexploitation of fricatives is compensated by an overexploitation of plosives and nasals. According to this principle it is possible to classify languages into several types. Comparing consonants according to the manner of articulation, we can distinguish three types of languages: 4 Type I. Languages positively exploiting plosives and nasals: 1. Kalai-Khumb 2. Indonesian 3. Ishkashimi 4

Languages in particular types are arranged in order from the largest to the smallest positive deviation (or the sum of positive deviations).

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

113 i o o ^ I O

cs

^-HooinoNior-o^cs^mw-itNON fS ^ -J d O r-' ri o t~-' O cs' vo* ov r— r-' vo' oi i-5

, I - 1 1 1 -S .1 > « a S113 i ae .S3 o S S g ' 8a

"o i l i E a ^ i s E e < A

isslsliiillills 3

i cn ^f

vo ^ oo o\ o

«s co ^t

S? 2 rt "§ g g» s 1 1a Ji u m o < 33

vd t^' oo on q H N m cs cs cs

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

117

TABLE 5 Relative frequency (%) of consonants in the phonemic inventory

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

Ishkashimi Kalai-Khumb Turkish Chuvash Inamwanga Gola Siane Sakalava Arapaho Albanian Indonesian French Russian German English Lakh Armenian Japanese Czech Bulgarian Chinese Arabic Hausa

4. 5. 6. 7. Type least 1. 2. Type most 1. 2.

Plos.

Fric.

Nas.

Lab.

Alv.

Pal.

Vel.

36.7 33.4 40.0 37.9 35.0 36.3 35.7 45.0 41.7 41.4 36.4 33.3 40.0 28.6 33.3 53.7 50.0 47.4 40.0 41.7 47.8 31.5 54.0

43.3 45.8 35.0 34.5 25.0 27.3 21.4 25.0 33.3 31.0 31.8 33.3 34.3 42.8 37.5 36.6 30.0 26.3 36.0 33.3 26.1 46.3 19.0

20.0 20.8 25.0 27.6 40.0 36.4 42.9 30.0 25.0 27.6 31.8 33.4 25.7 28.6 29.2 9.7 20.0 26.3 24.0 25.0 26.1 22.2 27.0

20.0 25.0 25.0 20.7 30.0 30.3 42.9 25.0 16.7 17.2 22.7 27.8 28.6 28.6 25.0 12.2 20.0 26.3 20.0 27.8 21.7 14.8 19.0

36.7 29.2 35.0 44.8 35.0 21.2 35.7 45.0 33.3 48.3 45.5 55.6 42.9 42.8 54.2 48.8 56.7 36.9 48.0 41.7 43.5 51.8 32.4

23.3 20.8 20.0 20.7 15.0 33.3

20.0 25.0 20.0 13.8 20.0 15.2 21.4 25.0 33.3 17.3 22.7 11.1 17.1 23.8 16.6 7.3 20.0 15.8 16.0 16.6 13.1 24.0 21.6

—

5.0 16.7 17.2 9.1 5.5 11.4 4.8 4.2 31.7 3.3 21.0 16.0 13.9 21.7 7.4 27.0

German Albanian French English II. Languages positively exploiting fricatives and nasals productive type)'. Sakalava Arapaho III. Languages positively exploiting nasals and liquids productive type): Lakh Armenian

(the

(the

118

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

3. 4.

Arabic Turkish

5. 6.

Inamwanga Chinese

7. Hausa 8. Chuvash 9. Siane 10. Japanese 11. Russian 12. G o l a 13. 14.

Bulgarian Czech

TABLE 6 Deviations (%) from equal distribution of consonants

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

Ishkashimi Kalai-Khumb Turkish Chuvash Inamwanga Gola Siane Sakalava Arapaho Albanian Indonesian French Russian German English Lakh Armenian Japanese Czech Bulgarian Chinese Arabic Hausa

Plos.

Fric.

Nas.

Lab.

Alv.

Pal.

1.7 2.7 -7.0 -7.1 -7.0 -1.6 -6.1 -21.4 -7.5 1.4 5.4 1.7 -3.0 0.3 0.4 -16.2 -19.8 -5.4 -5.1 -1.1 -9.9 -0.2 -13.3

-16.7 -22.5 -14.1 -10.0 -12.7 -10.3 -8.6 1.4 5.4 -11.8 -19.4 -8.9 -9.4 -14.2 -8.0 -15.0 -8.7 -8.1 -2.6 -10.4 -9.3 -24.7 -5.0

15.0 19.8 21.1 17.1 19.7 11.9 14.7 20.0 2.1 10.4 14.0 7.2 12.4 13.9 7.6 31.2 28.5 13.5 7.7 11.5 19.2 24.9 18.3

0.3 -0.4 -6.5 -1.2 1.0 -1.7 -14.8 -1.6 -11.9 2.9 -3.2 -6.2 -6.9 -13.8 -6.4 -1.0 -2.6 -10.5 1.9 -6.1 -11.9 6.3 0.2

15.1 15.8 19.6 14.5 11.8 12.6 15.3 14.6 8.4 12.5 11.2 11.8 11.1 28.8 13.5 18.8 2.1 18.0 6.4 12.0 10.4 0.5 16.7

-12.8 -7.6 -8.3 -11.2 -6.3 -10.2 4.9 -11.7 -10.0 -6.4 -2.2 1.7 -4.5 -3.7 -13.3 4.4 -7.7 -4.9 -2.0 4.6 -0.1 -12.2

Vel. -2.6 -7.8 -4.8 -2.1 -6.5 -0.7 -0.5 -8.1 15.2 -5.4 -1.6 -3.4 -5.9 -10.5 -3.4 4.5 -3.9 0.2 -3.4 -3.9 -3.1 -4.7 -4.7

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

119

Type III is the most clear-cut, as it positively exploits nasals as against the underexploitation of all other kinds of consonants. Common to all three types is the overexploitation of nasals, but they differ in the exploitation of plosives and fricatives. The overexploitation of plosives is, however, not so marked as the overexploitation of nasals, and, consequently, languages of Type I come near some languages of Type III. It is a remarkable observation that among the languages examined not a single one was found showing an underexploitation of nasals. Comparing consonants according to the place of articulation, we can distinguish four types of languages:4 Type I. Languages overexploiting labials and alveolars: 1. Albanian 2. Hausa 3. Ishkashimi 4. Inamwanga 5. Czech 6. Arabic Type II. Languages overexploiting alveolars: 1. German 2. Turkish 3. Lakh 4. Kalai-Khumb 5. Siane 6. Sakalava 7. Chuvash 8. English 9. Gola 10. Bulgarian 11. French 12. Indonesian Type III. Languages overexploiting alveolars and palatals: 1. Chinese 2. Russian 3. Armenian Type IV. Languages overexploiting alveolars and velars:

120

A QUANTITATIVE TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES

1. Arapaho 2. Japanese The most clear-cut of these types and the most productive, too, is Type II which exploits alveolars and underexploits all other kinds of consonants. The present investigation forms only the beginning and it is necessary to supplement it by the examination in this respect of other languages, especially of such as have either a very rich oi a very poor inventory of consonantal phonemes. Besides, it will be necessary to link up the question of the exploitation of different kinds of consonantal phonemes with the question of the exploitation of different kinds of vocalic phonemes. Our investigation in that respect has so far not reached clear-cut and reliable results. The comparison is here rendered more difficult by the fact that the limits between particular kinds of vowels (for example between front, middle, and back vowels) are not so well defined as for instance the limits between plosives and nasals, or between labials and velars. Perhaps we shall reach some results (even if negative ones), if we begin by comparing languages of identical vocalic systems but with different types of exploitation of consonants.

REFERENCES Isa£enko, A. V., "Versuch einer Typologie der slavischen Sprachen", Linguistica Slovaca, 1 (1939), 64. Jakobson, R., "Typological Studies and their Contribution to Historical Comparative Linguistics", Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Linguists (Oslo, 1958), 17. Skaliöka, V., "O soucasnem stavu typologie" [On the Present-Day State of Typological Studies], Slovo a slovesnost, 19 (1958), 224.

SOME STATISTICAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE ROLE OF THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

When choosing the theme for a paper in honour of B. Trnka, the present author had in mind that line of linguistic research in which B. Trnka was one of the pioneers: quantitative linguistics. The basic principle of quantitative linguistics is that qualitative language phenomena can obtain their genuine value only when complemented and supported by quantitative data giving the relative frequency of occurrence of the language phenomena in question. This principle is, of course, valid also for the current classification of consonant phonemes according to the manner and place of articulation. In this paper we want to discuss the role of the place of articulation of consonant phonemes in a number of languages of various types in terms of the positive or negative exploitation of labials, alveolars, palatals, and velars in a number of languages. The material is taken from the present author's paper on "A Quantitative Typology of Languages" 1 which presents a typology of 23 languages based on the criterion of the over- and underexploitation of consonants classified according to the manner and place of articulation. In that paper, however, no deeper analysis is made of the ascertained data. It has only been stated that the examined languages may be classified, when consonants according to the place of articulation are concerned, into four types: (1) languages overexploiting labials and alveolars, (2) languages over-

1

Language and Speech, vol. 2, Part 2 (April-June 1959), 72-85.

122

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

exploiting alveolars, (3) languages overexploiting alveolars and palatals, (4) languages overexploiting alveolars and velars. Before setting in further analysis it is necessary to explain what is to be understood by "over-" and "underexploitation". It is evident that absolute figures giving the frequency of occurrence of particular kinds of consonants in particular languages are not of much use for our investigation. In order to be able to compare particular languages we must find out the relative frequency of occurrence of particular kinds of consonants in examined contexts and, besides, we must know the relative frequency of occurrence of consonant phonemes in the phonemic inventory of examined languages. We are namely starting from the assumption that if the language exploited all sounds equally, the relative exploitation of each kind of sound and even of individual sounds in contexts should equal the percentage of occurrence of the same kind of sound or of individual sounds in the phoneme inventory. If the inventory of a language includes, for example, 5 labials, 7 alveolars, 4 palatals, and 4 velars (i.e. 25 percent : 35 percent : 20 percent : 20 percent), we should presume that in the case of equal distribution the context would also include 25 percent of labials, 35 percent of alveolars, 20 percent of palatals, and 20 percent of velars. If we find in the context, let us say 20 percent of labials, 40 percent of alveolars, 10 percent of palatals, and 30 percent of velars, then it means that the frequency of occurrence of labials shows a deviation of — 5 percent from the equal distribution of labials (which is, as stated above, 25 percent in the phoneme inventory). Palatals show in this case the deviation of —10 percent, whereas alveolars + 5 percent, and velars +10 percent. Negative deviation means underexploitation, positive deviation means overexploitation. It is very typical of languages which sounds they exploit and to what extent. In the above mentioned paper there is only the enumeration of languages of particular types. Let us examine them from the standpoint of our theme, i.e. the role of the place of articulation in languages. The examined languages possess different numbers of phonemes in their inventories. Thus, among the examined languages, the

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

123

least number of consonant phonemes is met with in the phoneme inventory of the American language Arapaho, namely 12, whereas the greatest number of consonant phonemes has the Caucasian language Lakh (41). In contexts we shall be concerned with the quantitative exploitation of particular kinds of consonant phonemes classified into four groups, namely (1) labials, (2) alveolars and dentals, (3) palatals, (4) velars. These groups have different numbers of different members in various languages. Thus the question arises whether a different number of members of particular kinds of consonants in the inventories of particular languages influences in some way their quantitative charge in contexts. Three cases are theoretically possible: 1. In the context there is a relatively equal exploitation of consonants of a certain kind without any relation to the number of those consonants in the inventory. This means that the number of consonants in the inventory is not decisive. Languages with a small number of consonants of a certain kind in the inventory have, on the whole, approximately the same charge of a certain place of articulation in contexts as languages with a large number of consonants of the same kind in the inventory. 2. In the context there is, on the whole, a greater exploitation of a larger number of consonants of the inventory than of a smaller number of consonants of the same kind in the inventory. 3. In the context there is, on the whole, a greater exploitation of a smaller number of consonants of the inventory than of a greater number of consonants of the same kind in the inventory. Let us consider the examined languages in view of the above stated possibilities. First of all, we will survey the situation in labials: The labial series has only 2 members (b, w) in Arapaho. In the consonant inventory labials include 16.7 percent of consonants, but only 4.8 percent in contexts, the deviation being —11.9 percent. The labial series of three members is not represented among the examined languages. The labial series of four members occurs in Arabic (b, / , vv, m). In the consonant inventory labials include 14.8 percent, in contexts 21.1 percent, the deviation being +6.3 percent.

124

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

Most frequent is the labial series of five members. In Turkish, Albanian, Sakalava, Czech, and French it is p, b, f , v, m, in Indonesian and Japanese it is p, b, f , w, m, in Lakh p, v, pp, pi, m, in Chinese p, px, f , w, m. An overexploitation of labials in contexts occurs only in Albanian (+2.9 percent), in the other examined languages there is an underexploitation: Turkish —6.5 percent, French —6.2 percent, Sakalava —1.6 percent, Indonesian —3.2 percent, Japanese —10.5 percent, Lakh —1.0 percent, Chinese — 11.9 percent. Frequent are also labial series of six members. Among the examined languages most frequent is the series p, b,f, v, w, m which occurs in Chuvash, Inamwanga, Ishkashimi, Kalai-Khumb, and Siane. In these languages the underexploitation of labials is the predominant, the deviations being: —1.2 percent in Chuvash, —0.4 percent in Kalai-Khumb, —14.8 percent in Siane. A very slight overexploitation can be found in Inamwanga (+1.0 percent) and in Ishkashimi (+0.3 percent). In English the exploitation of labials (p, b,f, v, m, w) is —6.4 percent, in German (p, b,f, pf, m, v) — 13.8 percent, in Armenian (p, p, b,f, v, m) —2.6 percent. Labial series of seven members occurs in our material only in Hausa (p, b, 6, f , w, m, mm) and their exploitation is slightly positive (+0.2 percent). Labial series of eight and nine members are not represented in our material. Series of ten members are represented by Russian and Bulgarian (p,p\ b, b \ f , f \ v, v', m, m'); they are underexploited in both languages (Russian —6.9 percent, Bulgarian —6.1 percent). Another ten members series is in Gola (p, b, kp, gb,f, v, y, m, m, w) with a negative deviation of —1.7 percent. To sum up: We can conclude that in examined languages labials are underexploited in contexts. Only in 6 out of 23 languages we have met with an above-average exploitation of labials, namely in Arabic, Albanian, Czech, Inamwanga, Ishkashimi, and Hausa. Rather higher percentage of exploitation has Arabic (+6.3 percent), in other above mentioned languages the positive exploitation varies between +0.2 percent and + 2.9 percent. The negative exploitation in 17 languages is within the limits of —0.4 percent and —14.8 percent.

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

125

Similar tendencies in exploitation can be observed in velars. Here the situation is more explicit: velars are overexploited only in 3 out of the 23 examined languages. The smallest overexploitation of velars is observed in Japanese (+0.2 percent), followed by Lakh (+4.5 percent). Both these languages have velar series of three members (Japanese: k, g, h, Lakh: xl, 2>, gb). A strong overexploitation of velars is found in Arapaho (+15.2 percent) with its velar series of four members: k, h, x, ?. It is worth noting that Arapaho has a considerable functional charge of velars in the inventory: 33.3 percent. The other languages subject to our investigation have proved to underexploit velars. Velar series of two members (k, g) occurs in French (—3.4 percent), series of three members are represented, apart from the already mentioned Japanese and Lakh, also in Siane (k, g, y, the deviation —0.5 percent) and Chinese (k, kx, x, the deviation —3.1 percent). Velar series of four members possess, beside Arapaho, also Turkish (k, g, g, h, the deviation —4.8 percent), Czech (k, g, h, x, the deviation —4.8 percent), Inamwanga (k, g, n, ng, the deviation — 6.5 percent), Chuvash (k, kk, g, h, the deviation —2.1 percent), and English (k, g, tj, h, the deviation —3.4 percent). Velar series of five members are represented in five languages: in German and Indonesian (k, g, h, x, r\, the deviations —10.5 percent, —0.6 percent), Albanian (k, g, h, rr, 11, the deviation — 5.4 percent), Sakalava (k, g, n,', h, the deviation —8.1 percent), and Gola (k, g, x, x, n, the deviation —0.7 percent). Velar series of six members occur in 5 languages: in Russian and Bulgarian (k, k, g, g, x, x, the deviation —5.9 percent and — 3.9 percent respectively), Ishkashimi and Khalai-Khumb (k, g, x, q, h, y, the deviations —2.6 percent and —7.8 percent respectively), and Armenian (k, k, g, h, x, I, the deviation —3.9 percent). Velar series of seven members is represented in Hausa (k, k, g, kw, gw, ', h, the deviation —4.7 percent), that one of eight members in Arabic (q, x, g , ' , h, h, k, the deviation —4.7 percent). Palatals too, show a strong underexploitation which in 7 languages reaches 10 percent or even more. They are Ishkashimi

126

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

(—12.8 percent), Chuvash (—11.2 percent), Gola (—10.2 percent), Arapaho (— 11.7 percent), Albanian (—10.0 percent), Lakh (—13.3 percent), and Hausa (—12.2 percent). Overexploitation of palatals can be found only in three languages, namely in Russian ( + 1 . 7 percent), Armenian ( + 4 . 4 percent), and Chinese ( + 4 . 6 percent). Compared with the relative number of palatals in the inventory, Chinese has a comparatively high percentage of palatals (21.7 percent), whereas Russian and Armenian have a poor inventory of palatals (11.4 percent and 3.3 percent respectively). It is worth noting that languages possessing a rich inventory of palatals often have a considerably under-average exploitation of palatals in contexts, e.g. Ishkashimi with 7 (i.e. 23.3 percent) different palatals in the inventory, the deviation from the equal distribution in contexts being —12.8 percent, Kalai-Khumb with 5 (20.8 percent) palatals in the inventory and —7.6 percent deviation in contexts, Turkish with 4 (20.0 percent) palatals in the inventory and —8.3 percent deviation in contexts, Chuvash with 6 (20.7 percent) palatals in the inventory and — 11.2 percent deviation in contexts, Gola with 11 (33.3 percent) palatals in the inventory and —10.2 percent deviation in contexts, Lakh with 13 (31.7 percent) palatals in the inventory and —13.3 percent deviation in contexts, Hausa with 10 (27.0 percent) palatals in the inventory and —12.2 percent deviation in contexts, etc. Quite different — in comparison with the above mentioned consonants — is the exploitation of alveolars. There is one outstanding feature concerning alveolars: in all examined languages they show an over-average exploitation. There is a certain prerequisite to this phenomenon: in the inventory of most of the examined languages alveolars are predominant over all other kinds of consonants. Only three languages have a smaller inventory of alveolars than of the other kinds of conspnant phonemes. The poorest inventory of alveolars has Arapaho with 4 alveolars (t, 9, s, n), 2 labials and 2 palatals. However, even in this case the frequency of occurrence of alveolars in context is over-average ( + 8 . 4 percent). Another example: Siane has 5 alveolars (t, s, n, r, 1) as against 6 labials and 3 velars in the inventory, in context the

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

127

frequency of occurrence of alveolars shows a high overexploitation (+15.3 percent). Gola has 7 alveolars (t, d, s, z, r, 1, n), 10labials, 11 palatals and 5 velars in the inventory, in context alveolars are also highly overexploited (+12.6 percent). We may conclude that the frequency of occurrence of alveolars in context does not depend on the number of sounds in the inventory. The highest exploitation of alveolars in context has been stated in German (+28.8 percent), following are Turkish (+19.6 percent), Lakh (+18.8 percent), Japanese (+18.0 percent), Albanian (+17.0 percent), Hausa(+16.7 percent), Kalai-Khumb (+15.8 percent), Siane (+15.3 percent), Ishkashimi (+15.1 percent), Sakalava (+14.6 percent), Chuvash (+14.5 percent), English (+13.5 percent), Gola (+12.6 percent), Bulgarian (+12.0 percent), French and Inamwanga (both +11.8 percent), Indonesian (+11.2 percent), Russian (+11.1 percent), Chinese (+10.4 percent). The above-average exploitation of less than +10.0 percent is displayed in the other examined languages, i.e. in Arapaho, Armenian, Arabic, and Czech. There can be hardly found any regularity in the frequency of occurrence when we compare languages with the same number of alveolars in the inventory. Most frequent is the alveolar series of 7 members; it occurs in 5 languages and the exploitation of alveolars in these languages varies between +11.8 percent and +19.6 percent. Three languages possess an alveolar series of 10 members and are exploited in the range of +10.4 percent to +11.8 percent. More probable is a certain relation between the relative number of alveolars in the inventory and their relative frequency of occurrence in contexts: a higher relative number of alveolars in the inventory is in relation with their higher frequency in contexts. This relation is, however, valid only for languages of alveolar series of 7 and 10 members. In the other series there seems to hold an indirect relation between the relative number of alveolars in the inventory and their frequency of occurrence in contexts. Nevertheless, a still greater number of languages should be examined in order that we may adopt a more definite view. Plotting the frequency of occurrence of particular kinds of consonant phonemes in the inventory of particular languages we

128

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

can ascertain a few interesting facts. First of all, it is the width of the zone of the relative number of particular kinds of sounds. It is smallest for velars (26.0 percent), following are palatals (30.0 percent), labials (30.7 percent), and alveolars (35.5 percent). Within these zones there are certain centres of a denser occurrence of languages. Thus for labials there are three centres of density: the first is in the range of 20.0 percent - 20.7 percent (Ishkashimi, Armenian, Czech, Chuvash), the second is in the 25.0 percent zone (Kalai-Khumb, Turkish, Sakalava, English), the third is in the zone of 27.8 percent to 28.6 percent (French, Bulgarian, Russian and German). In the zone of alveolars there are three centres of density: (a) between 32.4 percent and 36.9 percent with the following languages: Hausa, Arapaho, Turkish, Inamwanga, Siane, Ishkashimi, Japanese; (b) between 41.7 percent and 45.5 percent there are 7 languages: Bulgarian, Gola, Russian, Chinese, Chuvash, Sakalava, and Indonesian; (c) between 48.0 percent and 48.8 percent are Czech, Albanian, and Lakh. In the zone of palatals there are also three centres of density: (a) between 3.3 percent and 5.5 percent (Armenian, English, German, Sakalava, French); (b) between 16.0 percent and 17.2 percent (Czech, Arapaho, and Albanian); (c) between 20.0 percent and 21.7 percent (Turkish, Chuvash, Kalai-Khumb, Japanese, Chinese). In the zone of velars the most conspicuous is the centre of density between 15.2 percent and 17.3 percent; in the zone only 2.1 percent wide there are concentrated 7 languages: Gola, Japanese, Czech, Bulgarian, English, Russian, and Albanian. Another centre of density is at 20.0 percent with 4 languages: Ishkashimi, Turkish, Inamwanga, and Armenian. In the zone between 21.4 percent and 25.0 percent there are 7 languages: Siane, Hausa, Indonesian, German, Arabic, KalaiKhumb, and Sakalava. The graphic representation of the frequency of occurrence of particular kinds of consonant phonemes in context has rather a different structure. The span of the frequency zone is smaller in the case of labials (26.2 percent) and palatals (26.2 percent), larger with alveolars (37.8 percent) and velars (45.7 percent). All kinds of sounds with the exception of alveolars show mostly only one

THE PLACE OF ARTICULATION IN LANGUAGES

129

centre of density of languages, but there are several languages isolated on the scale, more or less distant from each other. Labials show the centre of density between 18.5 percent and 21.9 percent, in the zone only 3.4 percent wide in which 12 languages are concentrated: Turkish, English, Hausa, Chuvash, Indonesian, Albanian, Ishkashimi, Arabic, French, Russian, Bulgarian, and Czech. Alveolars have four smaller centres of density: (a) between 51.0 percent and 52.3 percent (Siane, Ishkashimi, Arabic), (b) between 53.7 percent and 54.9 percent (Bulgarian, Chinese, Russian, Czech, Turkish, Japanese), (c) between 58.8 percent and 60.8 percent (Armenian, Chuvash, Sakalava, Albanian), and (d) between 67.3 percent and 67.7 percent (French, Lakh, and English). Palatals have three centres with three languages each: (a) between 0.1 percent and 0.5 percent (Sakalava, German, English), (b) between 7.2 percent and 7.7 percent (Albanian, Arabic, Armenian), (c) between 13.1 percent and 13.3 percent (Russian, Kalai-Khumb, Japanese). Velars, on the other hand, show a very conspicuous concentration of almost all examined languages in the zone between 11.2 percent and 17.4 percent. In this zone, 6.2 percent wide, 16 languages are concentrated: Russian, Chuvash, Albanian, Czech, Bulgarian, English, German, Inamwanga, Gola, Turkish, Japanese, Armenian, Sakalava, Hausa, Kalai-Khumb, and Ishkashimi. Most isolated is Arapaho which is in the distance of 27.4 percent from the nearest language (Indonesian). We dare not make definite conclusions from the observations given in this paper, because even when the number of investigated languages is considerable, it is, according to our opinion, not sufficient for fully reliable conclusions of this kind. However, the facts referred to in this paper are worth taking note of and it may be they are not due to chance. Language is, of course, influenced by so many factors of statistical nature that it is very difficult to discover and follow their operation, especially when they are influenced by many other factors of nonstatistical nature. This is also why the regularities which we ascertain by a statistical method have so often exceptions which weaken the conclusions offered by the results of the investigation of this kind.

THE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES IN LANGUAGES POSSESSING VOWEL SYSTEMS OF IDENTICAL STRUCTURE

The investigation of the frequency of occurrence of sounds or letters has been pursued since the beginning of the use of statistical methods in linguistics as manifested by the works of E. Forstemann, F. Mariotti, G. Dewey, G. U. Yule, M. Boldrini, etc. However, the value of these works, which are more of a statistical than linguistic character and are not based upon the comprehension of the structure of investigated languages, is not always quite reliable having merely the value of the material. It is the use of statistical methods in structural linguistics that means an important contribution to the discovery and correct evaluation of different relations within the system of the language. The study of the frequency of occurrence of phonemes in several languages and especially the comparison of languages as to the frequency of occurrence of particular phonemes presents an interesting insight into the workshop in which languages are moulded. Every language has at its disposal a certain number of building stones of a certain type — phonemes. But how does it economize those building stones — phonemes? That is a question of cardinal importance for structural linguistics. The gist of the matter is for us to ascertain how language makes use of all possibilities it has for the formation of coherent phonic forms endowed with meaning. We can ascertain that the functional exploitation of particular language phenomena and elements is diiferent in different languages. This statement is of great importance for the typology of languages as it shows the possibility of classifying languages not only according to the presence of certain phenomena in

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

131

certain languages but also according to their frequency of occurrence. This classification of languages according to the presence in the language of certain phenomena is insufficient because one phenomenon being of cardinal importance in some languages, the same phenomenon can be of a minor, insignificant importance in other languages, due to its relatively small frequency of occurrence. It is just the regard to the frequency of occurrence of linguistic phenomena that enables us to make an undistorted classification of languages. In one of his papers 1 the present author has stated the types of languages according to their exploitation of particular kinds of consonant phonemes classified according to the manner and place of articulation. In the present work the functional exploitation of vowel phonemes in contexts of a number of languages will be dealt with. As languages possess vowel systems of various types with various numbers of phonemes, 2 direct comparison is possible only of languages of identical structure of vowel systems. For the present work we have chosen a number of languages possessing a triangular five vowel system i u e o a which belongs to the most current vowel systems. It occurs e.g. in Czech, Serbo-Croatian, Russian (in stressed syllables only), Polish, Latin, Spanish, Gothic, Old Irish, New Greek, Erza-Mordwin, Georgian, Avar, Andian, Archinian, Japanese, Tamil, Siane, Inamwanga, Lamba, Shona, Zulu, Ganda, May, Chichewa, Chitimacha, Miwok, Nootka, Tonkawa (in stressed syllables), Coeur d'Alene, Fidji, Hausa, Polynesian, Hindi, etc. 3 Our investigation includes the following 29 languages: Czech, 1

Cf. the present author's paper "A Quantitative Typology of Languages", Language and Speech, vol. 2, part 2 (April-June 1959), 75-85. 2 Cf. e.g. N. S. Trubetzkoy, "Grundziige der Phonologie", TCLP 7 (Prag, 1939), 86-114, and C. F. Hockett, A Manual of Phonology (Baltimore, 1955), 76-91. 3 Cf. C. F. Hockett, op. cit., 85-86.

132

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

Polish, Slovenian, Latin, Spanish, Gothic, Old Irish, New Greek, Japanese, Tamil (colloquial), Hindi, Inamwanga,4 Ndali,5 Ronga, 6 Thonga,7 Djagga,8 Swahili (dialect of Mombasa), Hausa,Zaramo,9 Siane, 10 Ono, 11 Florida,12 Pala, 13 the language of the Ghazel Peninsula,14 Tahitian, Garo, 15 Avar, Afghan, and Andkhai.16 In languages possessing a phonological vowel quantity long vowels have been counted together with short ones as we are more concerned with the place of articulation than with the prosodic phenomena such as quantity, accent, etc. Diphthongs have been counted as two sounds even in the case when a monophthongal valuation would be unquestionable, because this would impair our principle of comparison of identical vowel systems. The consequence would be that a number of languages ought to be excluded. Even in the case of diphthongs the matter is to record statistically both elements of the diphthong, because here, too, we are concerned with the frequency of occurrence of a certain place of articulation. 4 The language of a tribe inhabiting the region between the north end of Nyasa Lake and the south end of Tanganyika Lake. 6 The language of a tribe settled in East Africa, about 50 km west of the north end of Nyasa Lake in the mountain range between the rivers Kibila and Songwe. 8 One of the dialects of the language Thonga (or Anathonga) which belongs to Zulu languages. 7 A Zulu language, cf. footnote 6. 8 A language spoken in East Africa, at the southeast border of Kilimanjaro. 9 The language of Zaramo (or Dzalamo) is spoken in the hinterland of Dar es Salam in East Africa. 10 The westernmost language of the group Bena-Bena spoken in the eastern highlands of New Guinea. 11 Ono is, like Siane, a New Guinea language belonging to the group BenaBena. 12 A language spoken on the island of Florida in the Salomon Group, south of the isle of Ysabel. 13 A language belonging to Papuan languages. 14 One of the Papuan languages spoken on the Ghazel Peninsula in New Pommern. 15 The examined text is written in Achik dialect; Garo belongs to the Bodo (or Bara) group of Tibetan-Burmese languages. 16 Andkhai is an Iranized Uzbek dialect of Afghan Turkestan. It is a language in which, according to G. Jarring (cf. his Uzbek Texts from Afghan Turkestan [Lund-Leipzig, 1938], III.), the vowel harmony is completely destroyed.

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

133

An important problem is to determine the scope of the examined texts so that the results be reliable, in other words, to find out to what extent the length of the text influences the frequency of occurrence of particular phonemes. We have tried to solve this problem empirically by finding out the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes in passages of the same text but of different lengths. First of all, we ascertained the frequency of occurrence (absolute and relative) of vowel phonemes in the first 40 words of the text, then in the first 80, 120, 200, 240, 320, 500, and 713 words of the same text (counting always from the beginning of the text) in Spanish, and in 40, 80, 120, 250, 320, and 420 words (counted again from the beginning of the text) in Ndali. A similar investigation has been done in Tamil, Pala, and Afghan. Particular frequencies of occurrence of vowel phonemes are given in tables 1-4. Let us have a look at Table 1 giving the frequency of occurrence of Spanish vowel phonemes. In general we can say that in texts of a minimum number of about 200 words the relative frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes is stabilized, the differences not exceeding 3.64 percent (with the vowel e, the other vowels showing smaller differences). The greatest differences are between the passages of 40 and 80 words (3.85 percent with the vowel o, 7.69 percent with a). Between the text of 80 words and a text of 120 words the greatest difference in the frequency of occurrence is with the vowel o (3.96 percent), between the text of 120 words and a text of 200 words the greatest difference is again with o (only 2.8 percent); these differences cannot be considered substantial. The text in Ndali (cf. Table 2) also shows the greatest differences between the passages of 40 and 80 words (u 3.81 percent, e 7.84 percent, o 3.66 percent, a 5.68 percent). Further, there is a somewhat greater difference in the frequency of occurrence of vowel a between the passages of 120 and 200 words (4.25 percent). In this language, too, the relative frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes is rather stabilized, the differences not exceeding 2.67 percent (in the case of e). Similar situations are also met with in languages given in Tables 3-5. A more extensive material (up to 1000 words) is given in Table 6 (Czech). Even in this case no

134

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

substantial differences in the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes are met with in texts of different lengths. Consequently, we are of the opinion that the tables presented here give a sufficiently convincing material to be generalized for other languages, too. Accordingly, we can say that with the exception of small passages up to 80-100 words the length of texts does not affect the relative frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes. Thus the length of the text between 326 and 836 words seems to be sufficient and to warrant a relative stability of statistical results. It was already N. S. Trubetzkoy 17 who pointed out the influence of style in the investigation of the frequency of occurrence of certain phonological elements and emphasized the importance of the choice of investigated texts. He distinguished phonological phenomena which are "stilbedingt", whereas others may be independent of the style, or, as he says, only "sprachbedingt". Such a phenomenon dependent on style is for instance the length of the units of meaning (words or morphemes). On the other hand, the frequency of occurrence of phonemes is not dependent on style. Trubetzkoy gives as example the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes in two passages of quite different styles, each counting 200 words: one is a passage from Bühler's "Sprachtheorie", a highly specialized style, the other is a passage from "Kaukasische Märchen", edited by A. Dirr. There are only very small, quite insignificant differences in the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes in those stylistically so different passages. 18 Further instances of the stability of relative

"

Cf. his "Grundzuge", 231 ff. We have checked this statement by investigating different Czech texts: for table 6 we used material from K. Capek's Povldky z jedne kapsy, for table 7 material from E. Valenta's novel Jdi za zelenym svgtlem. The differences for the text-length of 500 words in table 6 and 590 words in table 7 do not exceed 1 percent with vowels i.e. u, 2.06 percent with o, and 1.35 percent with a. Consequently, being convinced that we can assume relative independence of the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes on style we have disregarded the unity of style in our choice of the material for investigation. Neither would it have been possible in view of the limited possibilities of gaining adequate written material. 18

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

135

frequencies of occurrence of phonemes can be found in G. Herdan's book. 1 9 Table 7 gives the number of investigated words in examined languages. Table 8 shows the frequency of occurrence of individual vowel phonemes both absolute and relative (in percentages). It goes without saying that for the comparison of particular languages only the relative frequency of occurrence comes into consideration. Analyzing the items of Table 8 we can find interesting characteristics. If we graphically represent the frequency of occurrence of individual vowel phonemes (cf. Table 9), we can observe a different span of the zone of the frequency of occurrence of individual vowels. Thus the frequency of occurrence of the phoneme i varies between 9.76 percent (Afghan) and 35.11 percent (Andkhai), i.e. there is a span of 28.76 percent. The frequency of occurrence of u varies between 5.25 percent (Slovenian) and 24.30 percent (Thonga), i.e. the span of 19.05 percent. The phoneme e shows the frequency of occurrence between 6.67 percent (Ghazel) and 31.00 percent (Ono), i.e. the span of 24.33 percent. The frequency of occurrence of o varies between 2.49 percent (Hausa) and 28.02 percent (Japanese), i.e. the span of 25.53 percent. The greatest span of the frequency of occurrence — between 20.23 percent (Latin) and 63.04 percent (Hausa) — has the phoneme a. The order of the vowel phonemes as to the span of their frequency of occurrence is as follows: u (the narrowest span), e, o, i, a. Some languages are very near to each other as to the frequency of occurrence of some vowels so that within the frequency spans we can observe certain groupings, concentrations, i.e. several languages are concentrated in a very narrow zone; these zones are separated by more or less wide zones of nonoccurrence. Thus considering the vowel i we can trace the following groups of languages (arranged from the lowest to the highest frequency of occurrence of /): I.

19

1. Afghan 2. Spanish Language as Choice and Chance (Groningen, 1956), Chapter 5.

136 II.

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

1. Zaramo

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. III.

1.

2. 3. 4.

Hausa Ghazel Pala Ono Florida Thonga Siane Ndali Garo Tamil Avar Swahili Tahitian Inamwanga Hindi Polish Japanese Ronga Czech Slovenian Latin Modern Greek Old Irish Gothic Djagga

Isolated, in a greater distance, stands Andkhai. However, this language must be taken with reserve: Andkhai belongs to Iranized Turkish dialects and the phonological system of its vowel phonemes has not yet been quite reliably established. Quite predominant is group II, i.e. the span between 15.18 percent and 25.27 percent in which there are concentrated 22 languages. Group III includes 4 languages in a span only 1.37 percent wide. Empty zones are in the span of 5.08 percent between groups I and II and 3.39 percent between groups II and III.

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

137

Vowel u occupies, as stated above, the narrowest frequency zone. Two groups can be traced here: I.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Modern Greek Slovenian Ono Spanish Garo Polish Czech Hindi

In this group an especially clean-cut concentration of the frequency zone can be observed: 8 languages occur in a zone between 5.25 percent and 7.52 percent, i.e. only 2.3 percent wide. II.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

Hausa Afghan Djagga Old Irish Gothic Florida Swahili Japanese Tahitian Andkhai Siane Latin Avar Ghazel

This grouping is of a character different from that of group I. The width of the frequency span amounts to 5.96 percent (from 9.43 percent to 15.39 percent). There are 14 languages in this group compared to 8 languages of group I. However, even the first 8 languages of group II lie in a wider zone (3.40 percent) than 8

138

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

languages of group I. Within group II there are again subgroups separated by empty zones: they include languages 1-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-10, 11-14. Between these subgroups there are empty spaces about 1 percent wide. The remaining 7 languages (Ronga, Inamwanga, Zaramo, Pala, Tamil, Ndali, Thonga) are dispersed in a zone reaching from 16.85 percent to 24.30 percent, i.e. 7.45 percent wide. It is not feasible to set these 7 languages into a group in view of the fact that the distance between some of them is greater than between group II and the nearest of these 7 languages (i.e. between Ghazel and Ronga). Vowel e shows a greater span between the smallest and greatest frequency of occurrence than vowel u. Here we can distinguish 6 groups: I.

1. 2. 3. 4.

Ghazel Gothic Pala Garo

This group has a span between 6.67 percent and 7.27 percent which means a considerable concentration: 4 languages are in a zone only 0.60 percent wide. II.

1. Hausa 2. Japanese

Between group I and group II there is an empty space of 2.25 percent. III.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Inamwanga Djagga Florida Tamil Afghan Ronga

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

139

Swahili Avar Zaramo Siane Ndali Hindi

This group has a span between 10.82 percent and 14.76 percent so that in a zone 3.94 percent wide there are concentrated 12 languages. Languages 1-2, 3-8, 9, 10-12 may be regarded as subgroups. IV.

1. Tahitian 2. Andkhai 3. Old Irish

This group has a span between 16.12 percent and 17.73 percent. Between groups III and IV there is an empty space of 1.36 percent. V.

1. Modern Greek 2. Polish

The span between the two languages of this group makes 0.78 percent. VI.

1. 2. 3. 4.

Slovenian Latin Czech Spanish

This group has a span of 1.84 percent (between 26.37 percent and 28.21 percent). From group V it is separated by an empty zone 2.18 percent wide. Isolated stand Thonga (19.59 percent), separated from group IV by an empty zone 1.86 percent wide and from group V by an empty zone 3.82 percent wide, and Ono separated from group VI by an empty zone of 2.79 percent. As to the vowel o, three clean-cut groupings of languages and

140

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

two isolated languages can be observed: Hausa stands at the bottom of the frequency zone with the occurrence of 2.49 percent, Japanese at its top (with the frequency of occurrence 28.02 percent). The other languages are grouped as follows: I.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Swahili Tamil Ghazel Andkhai Pala Hindi Inamwanga Ronga Afghan Thonga Gothic

This group can be divided into 2 subgroups: languages 1-8 are jammed in a very narrow zone (1.04 percent), but between the last language of this subgroup and the first language of the other subgroup there is an empty zone of 1.05 percent. The last three languages (9-11) could also form a group, but with regard to a much greater span (2.47) between the last language of this group (Gothic) and the first language of group II (Avar) we are inclined to consider all 11 languages as a single group. The distance of Hausa, standing isolated, from the first language of this group is 2.39 percent. II.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Avar Djagga Zaramo Ndali Latin Old Irish Tahitian Florida

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

141

9. Modern Greek 10. Garo Group II is characterized by a smaller concentration of languages in its zone of the frequency of occurrence which reaches from 10.02 percent (Avar) to 16.84 percent (Garo), i.e. in the span of 6.82 percent. Within this group three subgroups may be differentiated: languages 1, 2-5, 6-8, 9-10. Differences between them make 1.00 percent, 1.49 percent, and 1.36 percent respectively. Between group II and group III there is an empty space of 2.49 percent. III.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Ono Czech Polish Slovenian Spanish Siane

Japanese, standing isolated, is 5.70 percent distant from the last language of this group. The widest zone of the distribution of languages is met with the vowel phoneme a. In this zone the following centres of density in the grouping of languages may be observed: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Modern Greek Polish Japanese Ono Old Irish Andkhai Siane Thonga

Two subgroups can be distinguished in this group: languages 1-4, 5-8. The empty space between these subgroups is 1.28 percent wide. II.

1. Zaramo

142

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Ronga Tamil Avar Gothic Florida Inamwanga

Again, there are two subgroups: languages 1-4, and 5-7. The empty space between them is 1.30 percent wide. III.

1. 2. 3. 4.

Swahili Garo Pala Hindi

The span of this group is 1.36 percent. Apart from these groups there are the following more or less isolated languages: Latin 20.23 percent, Czech 20.85 percent (eventually, they can form a group); Slovenian 23.28 percent, Spanish 33.84 percent, and Ndali 34.10 percent (can form a group); Tahitian 35.96 percent, Djagga 38.63 percent; Ghazel 56.50 percent; Afghan 61.95 percent; Hausa 63.04. Consequently, typical for the vowel a is the distribution in a considerably wide zone with a small number of centres of concentration. Two conclusions follow from our observations of the frequency of individual vowel phonemes and of the distribution of languages in frequency zones of vowel phonemes: 1. The frequency of occurrence of individual vowel phonemes manifests itself in a limited frequency (of occurrence) span which is for some vowels narrower, for other vowels wider. 2. The distribution of languages according to the frequency of occurrence of individual vowel phonemes is not equal, i.e. languages are not equally distributed along the whole zone of the

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

143

frequency of occurrence of individual vowels, but within the zone of every vowel there are more or less apparent centres of concentration of the language distribution, as shown above. Between these centres of concentration there are more or less wide "empty spaces" within which no languages occur. It is interesting that whereas the centres of concentration often overlap (i.e. they occur in the same frequency zone with two or more vowels), "empty spaces" are often common to more or all vowels. Even if we must admit that by including further languages into our investigation the picture resulting from the investigation of 29 languages would be slightly modified, there are no doubts that the modification would not be substantial. Now let us turn our attention to the relation between the frequencies of occurrence of individual vowels. If the frequencies of occurrence of vowel phonemes were distributed equally, every vowel in a five vowel system would have the frequency of occurrence of 20 percent. However, there is no language that meets this ideal condition: the functional load of individual vowels is always either below or above the relative average. The most equal distribution of vowels is met with in Slav languages of Slovenian, Polish, and Czech in which only the frequency of occurrence of u is deeply below the average (about 5-7 percent). Also Latin, Modern Greek, Old Irish, and Japanese have a considerably balanced frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes; here the frequency of occurrence of any vowel phoneme does not exceed 30 percent. The frequency of occurrence of individual vowel phonemes is given in Table 8. Phoneme i has the frequency of occurrence higher than 30 percent in Andkhai (35.11 percent) and in Gothic (30.03 percent). Lower than 15 percent it is in Spanish (10.10 percent) and in Afghan (9.76 percent). Phoneme u reaches an above-average frequency of occurrence in Tamil (21.69 percent), Ndali (23.54 percent), and in Thonga (24.30 percent), in all other examined languages it has a below-average frequency of occurrence: between 15-20 percent in Inamwanga (18.16 percent), Ronga (16.85 percent), Zaramo (18.57 percent),

144

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

Pala (19.91 percent), Ghazel (15.39 percent), and in Avar (15.37 percent), less than 10 percent in Czech (7.26 percent), Polish (7.02 percent), Slovenian (5.34 percent), Spanish (5.99 percent), Hindi (7.52 percent), Hausa (9.43 percent), Garo (6.57 percent), Ono (5.55 percent), Afghan (9.56 percent), and in Modern Greek (5.25 percent). Phoneme e has an above-average frequency of occurrence in 8 languages, viz. in Czech (28.19 percent), Polish (24.19 percent), Slovenian (26.37 percent), Latin (27.19 percent), Spanish (28.21 percent), Ono (31.00 percent), and Modern Greek (23.41 percent). The frequency of occurrence between 15-20 percent is met with in Andkhai (16.61 percent), Tahitian (16.12 percent), Thonga (19.59 percent), and Old Irish (17.73 percent). 12 languages have a belowaverage frequency of occurrence: Tamil (5.05 percent), Hindi (5.40 percent), Inamwanga (5.67 percent), Hausa (2.49 percent), Ronga (5.92 percent), Andkhai (5.12 percent), Pala (5.36 percent), Thonga (7.51 percent), Afghan (6.97 percent), Swahili (4.88 percent), Gothic (7.59 percent), and Ghazel (5.07 percent). Phoneme o has an above-average frequency of occurrence in 5 languages: Polish (20.57 percent), Slovenian (21.41 percent), Spanish (21.86 percent), Japanese (28.02 percent), and Siane (22.32 percent). The frequency of occurrence between 15-20 percent is met with in Czech (19.93 percent), Garo (16.84 percent), Ono (19.33 percent), and Modern Greek (16.14 percent). The frequency of occurrence lower than 10 percent can be observed in 12 languages: Tamil (5.05 percent), Hindi (5.40 percent), Inamwanga (5.67 percent), Hausa (2.49 percent), Ronga (5.92 percent,) Andkhai (5.12 percent), Pala (5.36 percent), Thonga (7.51 percent), Afghan (6.97 percent), Swahili (4.88 percent), Gothic (7.59 percent), and Ghazel (5.07 percent). From the above-given data we can conclude that phonemes o and u show the smallest, phoneme a the greatest exploitation. Phoneme a has an above-average frequency of occurrence in all examined languages. Very instructive is the measure of exploitation of that vowel. The following table is arranged according to the exploitation of vowel a in five frequency zones:

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES 20-30 percent

30.0140 percent

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Czech Polish Slovenian Latin Japanese Andkhai Ono Modern Greek Old Irish

40.0150 percent

Spanish 1. Tamil 2. Inamwanga Siane Tahitian 3. Ronga Thonga 4. Florida 5. Zaramo Djagga 6. Gothic Ndali 7. Avar

145

50.0160 percent

60.0170 percent

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

1. Hausa 2. Afghan

Hindi Garo Pala Swahili Ghazel

We can also observe that genetically related languages often have a similar exploitation of vowel phonemes. Most striking it is in the case of Czech, Polish, and Slovenian: the differences in the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes are very small, only 2 percent with /', less than 2 percent with u and o, not more than 4 percent with e, and only a little over 5 percent with a. A considerable correspondence is between both Papuan languages (more or less with all vowels). In other languages we meet with greater differences (e.g. in Zulu languages of Ronga and Thonga). The New Guinea languages Siane and Ono show a partial correspondence in the frequency of occurrence of /', o, a, but on the other hand, there are considerable differences with u and e. The same situation is in Inamwanga and Ndali: partial correspondence in the frequency of occurrence of /, u, e, but greater differences with a and o. On the other hand, differences are predominant in Spanish as compared with Latin: 15.27 percent with /, 9 percent with u, and 9.54 percent with o. Only a small difference is in the frequency of occurrence of e and a. On the whole, it is quite natural that in genetically related languages we observe both correspondences and differences in the exploitation of individual vowel phonemes, as related languages have differentiated through phonological changes unequally and the degree of these changes is reflected in the functional load of individual phonemes. To sum up: Our investigation of the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes in languages with an identical vowel system has shown certain facts in the distribution of vowel phonemes which

146

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

seem to testify to the fact that phenomena that are concerned are not due to chance. However, it would be premature to make any conclusions from this. Apparently, too complicated relations and interdependencies are at play and in the present state of research they can be hardly tackled with. It is necessary to make a similar investigation of the frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes even in languages possessing vowel systems other than that dealt with in this paper. Further, it is important to find out the relation of the distribution of vowel phonemes to the distribution of consonantal phonemes, in other words to state the consonantal environments in which individual vowels occur. The distribution and frequency of occurrence of vowel phonemes will then be the resultant of anything that influences this occurrence both in the lexical system and in the choice of words in written or oral utterances.

147

OCCURRENCE OF VOWEL PHONEMES

8 m

8

S ri m

CO •s

« .9

es »-I es Ov « n rn O ^t$

oonONV OMO oo -> ^ N N n

8

oô

M 3

» « t o n IO Cl M 'T N N

VI H-l

z

g S

CO

a 3

8es

M cd

Oi m N N N KlNVIO«

^

to Tf 00 vo M * i « m OS t rs in n M to

tn £>

•r, «s VO r- es M es — i < 00

eu

OS o 00 00 r-; Cl u-l rs

es M

8 ««-I o

o

l5 O % s

R

t

en NN Oen 00 Si O «s

5

00 en

ONNO v> t - en ON O NO r-. V) NO' 1 00* «o* en V)

S

§

Tf

r- NO NO NO

8 8

en O Tjm »-H v> 00 On en v-H m en O O 00* rH R

-n), and in Lapp. Beside Volga-Finnic languages it has also been preserved in a number of Vogul dialects. It also occurs in nearly all Samoyed languages and this is why it is regarded to be Uralic. The question of the determinative declension has been the object of a study by N. Sebestyen.8 The determinative declension has in morphological respect one feature common to these languages: as basic word figures in all cases the simple form of nouns provided with the possessive suffix 3rd person singular and used in a determinative sense. As a concrete example we can name the Samoyed language of Nenets, where noun forms provided with personal possessive suffixes (especially 3rd person singular) can, according to the context, express either the possessor or the definite article. Thus, for example, the word haVeda means not only 'his fish' but also 'the fish' (the possessive suffix being -da here). 9 Consequently, we can distinguish three determinative declensions: 7

Cf. A. V. JakuSkin, Osobennosti morfologii drakinskogo dialekta erzjamordovskogo jazyka (Saransk, 1959). 8 N. Sebesty6n, "Zur Frage der determinierenden Deklination in Yuraksamojedischen", Acta linguistica academiae scientiarum hungaricae 10 (1960), fasc. 1-2, 55-93. 9 Cf. Peter Hajdu, "The Samoyed Peoples and Languages", Indiana University Publications, Uralic and Altaic Series 14 (Bloomington-The Hague, 1963).

188

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

1. nominative forms and identical unmarked accusative forms, 2. accusative forms with the suffix -m, and 3. dative forms. It is remarkable to state that the determinative word forms of this kind occur only in particular sentence types: 1. in imperative sentences whose predicate is the imperative form of the verb; 2. in exhortative and optative sentences whose predicate is the form of predicative or optative of the verb respectively; 3. in sentences expressing a wish or intention and whose predicate is the conditional of the verb; 4. in sentences expressing a wish, intention, fulfilled request, sometimes even need and whose predicate is the indicative form of the verb. The authoress further tries to solve the question of the essence of the determinative declension, which is the quality that forms the basis of the development of those three categories and which distinguishes those three categories from the corresponding forms of the possessive declension. According to her opinion the essence of the determinative declension is understandable on the basis of the syntactic relation of the determinated nominal forms to the predicative verb: in all three categories the forms documented in text express by their relation to the predicative verb some desideratum. Such relations can often express, as the authoress shows, the fact that the desired object has just come over into the possession of the person designated by the morphological element, or that a certain desired state has just come. Similarly Edit Vertes 10 points to the syntactic relation of determination to predicate. She emphasizes, that is to say, that in those Finno-Ugric languages that do not possess in all their dialects the accusative suffix there is another possibility of turning the hearer's attention to the definiteness of the accusative object: the predicate can point to the definiteness of the accusative complement by being expressed in the objective (not subjective) conjugation. Even in Hungarian it is just the objective conjugation that primarily points to the definiteness of the accusative object, as the accusative suffix of both the 10

Edit Vertes, "Beiträge zur Frage des finnisch-ugrischen bezeichneten Akkusativ-objekts", Acta linguistica academiae scientiarum hungaricae 10 (1960), fasc. 1-2, 180-194.

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

189

definite and indefinite object is -t. In Vogul, Ostyak, and Mordvin the objective conjugation is used, too, when the accusative object is definite. That the possessive suffix does not always designate only possession, but very strongly interferes with the area of pure determination is testified by the fact — also pointed to by Edit Vertes in the above-mentioned paper — that possessive suffixes in names often so little designate the possessive relation that there may occur even a number of possessive suffixes which do not belong to the same person. Kellgren 11 writes that in Finnish the possessive suffix points to genuine possessiveness only with the help of genitive, otherwise it has only a determinative function. Thus hän otti miekkansa has nearly the meaning 'he took the sword'. If the possessiveness should be stressed, there must be used, beside the suffixal pronoun, still the possessive pronoun (genitive personal pronoun): 'it is his sword, it belongs to him': se on hänen miekkansa, not only se on miekkansa. 'He took a sword' means hän otti miekkan. We can find still more languages in which the possessive suffix is also article. Let us mention at least one such language: Armenian. In Tungus there are two accusatives: one with the ending in -a, -ja which is in many cases used partitively (e.g. mö 'wood' — partitive accusative möja) and the other determinative with the suffix -wa the labial of which is dependent upon the preceding sound, so there are the forms -wa, -ma, -ba, or -pa, e.g. hunät 'the girl', accusative hunätpa, plural hunilba, hunilwa.12 With this group also may be classed the expression of definiteness and indefiniteness by means of various nominal verbal forms in Turkish, though it could as well be classed with group four which includes the expression of the category of determinedness by means of a verbal form. As is well known, Turkish is a strongly nominal language. Definite and indefinite forms occur in Turkish with present, past, and future participles. Examples: 11

Grundzüge der finnischen Sprache, 74. Cf. G. J. Ramstedt, Einführung in die altaische (Helsinki, 1952), 30. 12

Sprachwissenschaft

I

190

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

a) indefinite present participle: söylemek 'to tell, speak': gok söyler bir adam (the aorist stem) 'ein Mann, der viel spricht'; b) definite present participle: gelen adam 'der Mann, der kommt; der kommende Mann'; c) indefinite past participle: gok görmüf bir adam (the aorist stem) 'ein Mann, der viel gesehen hat'; d) definite past participle: gelmi§ olart vapur 'das Schiff, das gekommen ist (das gekommene Schiff)'; e) indefinite future participle: Italya'ya ugacak bir tayyare 'ein Flugzeug, das nach Italien fliegen wird'. — Almanya'dan gelecek posta (future stem) 'die Post, die aus Deutschland kommen wird'; f) definite future participle: gelecek olan vapurdan bir haberiniz var mi? 'Haben Sie eine Nachricht über den Dampfer, der kommen wird?' In colloquial speech generally only two participles are used: the definite present participle for present and past tense and the indefinite future participle for the future tense (both definite and indefinite). Let us return to the way of expressing definiteness and indefiniteness of the object in accusative. This phenomenon is not limited to Uralic and Altaic languages only. We can find it in Iranian languages, too. Such is the case of Modern Persian where the definite object is expressed by the postposition rä, whereas the indefinite object is expressed without that postposition. For instance, in bäghrä mibinam 'I see this garden', but bädaz Mm cäi va qahve jä äbe gau mijävarand 'After supper they serve tea, coffee, or beer'. The Iranian language Vaygali, belonging to the group of Kafir (i.e. West-Dardic) languages, spoken in the area of Nuristan in Afghanistan, expresses determination by placing the noun (the direct object) in the indirect case which has the endings -a, -a (after consonant), -o (after -ä), and -e (after -i) and plural -5, -fi, -&. The noun in nominative expresses the function of the direct in-

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

191

definite object: nari aw yam 'I am eating bread'. Besides, indefiniteness is expressed by the proclitic article e and by the numeral ew, Sk 'one'. The noun in an indirect case has the function of a direct object when it expresses a definite, determinate object, for instance gurd gratilom 'I bind the horse'. Similarly in Prasun which belongs to the same group of languages, the category of determinedness is expressed by means of a direct or indirect case of the noun in the function of a direct object in dependence on its concrete or abstract meaning; even here the indefinite article ( a t e ( k / g ) , indirect case ategis) is used. Similar conditions are in Central Dardic languages Gavar, Tiraxi, and Khovar. 13 In some Slavic languages the vocative suffix seems to express definiteness, e.g. in Czech clovek

' m a n ' — voc. clovice!,

zena

'woman' — voc. zeno/; in Serbo-Croatian momak 'young man' — momcel,

iena ' w o m a n ' — zeno!; in Polish wuj 'uncle' — wuju!,

panna 'virgin, young lady' — panno! However, we have strong doubts about this. Vocative, that is to say, is beyond the sentence construction, it stands on a level different from that of the other cases. Besides, it has also a different emotive flavour. Rather different is the case of Bulgarian which has a postpositive article in all cases besides vocative. Does it mean that in Bulgarian vocative itself implies definiteness? However, this phenomenon is not limited to Bulgarian only. Let us mention for instance German or English nouns which have no article when used in addressing.

3. THE CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS IS MANIFEST IN THE DECLENSION OF ADJECTIVES

One of the most clear-cut representatives of this group is SerboCroatian. In this language adjectives have double forms: definite and indefinite. Definite adjectives have in nominative singular masculine the ending -/, in feminine gender -a and in neuter after a hard consonant the ending -o, after a soft consonant the ending -e. For instance dobri, dobra, dobro (masc., fem., neut.) 'good'; lijepi, 13

Cf. D. I. Edelman, Dardskie jazyky (Moskva, 1965).

192

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

lijepa, lijepo 'beautiful'. Indefinite adjectives end in a consonant in masculine, in -a in feminine, and in -o (after a hard consonant) and in -e (after a soft consonant) in neuter gender, e.g. dobar, dobra, dobro; lijep, lijepa, lijepo. As can be seen, not all forms are different. Apart from nominative singular masculine there are different forms of genitive, dative, accusative, and locative masculine, of genitive, dative, and locative singular neuter, whereas the feminine gender and plural of all genders have identical forms of definite and indefinite adjectives in all cases. As indefinite adjectives are also declined possessive adjectives in -ov, -ev, -Ijev and -in, e.g. bratov, bratova, bratovo 'of the brother, brother's, brotherly' (masc., fem., neuter), ocev, oceva, ocevo 'of the father, father's', sestrin, sestrina, sestrino 'of the sister, sister's' (masc., fem., neuter), etc. Not all adjectives have both forms; some have only the definite, some only the indefinite form. The above-mentioned adjectives in -ov, -ev, -Ijev, and -in have only an indefinite form, whereas adjectives in -ji, -cki, -ski, and -ski have only a definite form, e.g. djecji 'child's, children's', junacki 'heroic', hrvatski 'Croatian', as well as adjectives denoting place and time, for instance desni 'right-hand', prednji 'front', danasnji 'today's', etc. In Slovenian the difference between indefinitive and definite adjectives is limited to the nominative and accusative singular of masculine nouns, e.g. dragi sin 'the dear son', novi klobuk 'the new hat' — drag sin 'a dear son', nov klobuk 'a new hat'. In the other genders and numbers the opposition definite vs. indefinite adjectives is neutralized, e.g. draga sestra means, according to the context, either 'the dear sister' or 'a dear sister'. When used predicatively, the adjective in Slovenian as well as in Serbo-Croatian has indefinite forms. In Old English there was a formal difference between the definite and indefinite form of the adjective, cf. wisa cyning 'the wise king' — wis cyning 'a wise king'. Here also belongs the expression of definiteness in the possessive adjective in Czech, for instance vevoduv 'the duke's' in opposition to vivody (genitive, indefinite) 'of a duke'. Today, however, the difference seems to be losing ground.

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

193

The problem of the so-called nominal determination is, according to our opinion, very interesting just through its relation to the determination expressed by an independent definite article. This problem is given a detailed examination by Heinz Wissemann, 14 according to whom the so-called "Bestimmtheitsform" in Lithuanian (i.e. definite forms of adjectives) is in some way determining 15 but in quite another way than in languages possessing the article. The syntagm as a whole is not determined. In those cases when languages possessing the article determine by means of the article a complex consisting of an attribute and noun to which it belongs, Lithuanian has mostly the indefinite form. An important complement of the concept of a kind of article was conceived by Gamillscheg who coined the term "Gelenkspartikel". Gamillscheg starts from Greek where the article serving as connection of noun and attributive complement mostly has the function of "Gelenkspartikel". This "Gelenkspartikel" can easily acquire the genuine function of article, for instance the function of an anaphoric article. Gamillscheg demonstrates, for example, that the Latin pronoun ille has the function of "Gelenkspartikel". Wissemann deducts from certain evidence that the Lithuanian definite form has the function of a genuine "Gelenkspartikel". Similar to the function of the Latin ille, the pronominal element of the definite form in Lithuanian makes the adjective psychically independent, diverts attention from the whole complex to both parts. The author shows that even in Old Bulgarian there is a certain tendency in expression that leads toward the "Gelenkspartikel"; he further comes to the conclusion that the definite form of an independently standing adjective in Lithuanian and in Old Bulgarian has mostly the function of anaphoric articles. It is true that the "Gelenks14

Heinz Wissemann, "Zur nominalen Determination", Indogermanische Forschungen 63 (1957), No. 1, 51-78. 16 Another view considers the complex adjective in Lithuanian to be the expression of emphasis. A. Valeckiene (Kalba ir literatura 2 [1957], 161 ff.) accepts both views: complex adjective in Lithuanian expresses both determination and emphasis. More about this see Pavel Trost, "O slozendm adjektivu baltoslovansk6m", Bulletin Cslavu ruskeho jazyka a literatury 10, 35-38.

194

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

partikel" in Old Bulgarian has functionally changed into anaphoric article, but it has gone out of use. The continuation of the Slavic development shows full loss of the function of the pronominal element of definite forms as means of expression of nominal determination — it becomes a genuine flexive ending. A different situation from that in Lithuanian is in Latvian, where the identification of the complex adjective with the definite article is being accepted as correct. In Latvian the possessive pronoun is bound to the complex adjective. This situation in Latvian rebuts, according to P. Trost, 16 any doubts of the Old Church Slavonic complex adjective expressing definiteness in the sense of the definite article.

4. THE CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS IS MANIFEST IN VERBAL FORMS

To this group belongs, above all, Hungarian. In this language the transitive verb has double forms, an indefinite and a definite one, in all tenses and moods. The indefinite form is also called subjective, the definite form objective. For instance, latok means 'I see' (generally, that is I am not blind), or latok embereket 'I see people' (an indefinite, indeterminate object), but ¡atom baratomat 'I see my friend' (definite object). So the formal expression of the category of determinedness covers here a whole syntactic complex and as formal means are used the determinant with the noun and the determinant with the verb. Essentially, however, the category of determinedness is inherent in the noun, not in the objective conjugation which does not determine by itself. This may be concluded from the fact that a proper name is connected with the verb in objective conjugation. There seems to be a case of congruence. As we have already mentioned, definite declension is used with a definite accusative object also in Yogul, Ostyak, and Mordvin. 16

Cf. op. dt., 38.

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

195

Similarly in Dogrib, an American language of the Athapaskan group, as well as in Apache and Chipewyan the category of determinedness is expressed by verbal forms, that is to say by prefixes.17 We have chosen for our examination four ways of expressing the category of determinedness and indeterminedness with the exclusion of the formally independent article. These ways of expressing this category are no sporadic phenomena, they occur in a considerable number of languages so that we can say that they represent certain characteristic tendencies in grammatical thinking of some nations. If we want to give a general evaluation of the examined cases of different expression of the category of determinedness, we must first of all state that this phenomenon is rather complicated and diversified. The question naturally arises how to explain that diversity. Considering the category of determinedness in its entirety, it is evident that we may distinguish two groups of languages: on one hand the languages in which determination is expressed by articles, either an independent or enclitic or proclitic one, but this article influences only the noun or the attributive adjective respectively. On the other hand there are languages in which determination is not only the matter of nouns but interferes, more or less, with the syntactic level. This is most pregnant, as we have seen, in Samoyed languages where the use of the determinate form is directly bound to certain sentence types. As we have tried to show, not mere determination is concerned here but determination plus some desideratum. A considerably convincing evidence of this syntactic function is given, according to our opinion, by FinnoUgric languages which do not have in all dialects the accusative suffix and where predicate can point to the definiteness of the accusative object through its being expressed by objective con17

Cf. W. Davidson, "A Preliminary Analysis of Active Verbs in Dogrib", Studies in the Athapaskan Languages, University of California Publications in Linguistics 29 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1963), 48-55.

196

CATEGORY OF DETERMTNEDNESS

jugation. Thus the centre of gravity of the formal expression of determination is fully shifted from noun to verb. Another question which arises when considering this type of determination is why the opposition of determination vs. indétermination is realized in accusative only, why it is not present in the other or in all cases respectively. It is evident that this demonstrates the importance of the function of accusative as a case of direct object. There was evidently felt the need of a more clear-cut differentiation of the direct definite object from the indefinite one than it is with the object in other cases. Last but not least there is the question of the role of possessive suffixes. Edit Vertes credits them, quite legitimately, with a great role in the development of the marked accusative. Finnish and other Finno-Ugric languages, with the exception of Hungarian, give evidence of the fact that the possessive suffix has acquired the determinative function. In the above-mentioned languages only the definite accusative object must unconditionally be marked. When the accusative object is definite, the accusative suffix may be omitted but only in the case when the object is determined by a possessive suffix. This shows how great a role can the possessive suffix play in the determination. After all, we need not go even so far: in English, for instance, possessive pronouns have more determinative than possessive function in cases like He fell on his knees. He was black in his face. He keeps his word, etc. Finally we should like to point to the fact that languages possessing the above-mentioned forms of expressing the category of determinedness disprove the current opinion that this category is relatively independent of the other morphological categories of nouns, that the case or number do not earmark whether or which article should be adjoined. This opinion can be valid to a limited extent, for some languages only. It appears that similar to other linguistic categories, the category of determinedness, too, has a very different morphological and syntactic realization in particular languages in which it occurs. This difference of content and realization is, of course, not peculiar to this category only. Let us notice, for instance, the category of number, gender, case,

CATEGORY OF DETERMINEDNESS

197

aspect, etc. In all those categories we sometimes find rather great differences in particular languages. This only confirms the difficulty of conceiving a universal definition of these linguistic categories. It appears that a definition which would be common to and valid for all languages in which the category in question occurs, must be very general, whereas an exhausting definition is possible only for each individual language in particular.

INDEX OF NAMES

Abele, A. 60 Abercrombie, D. 15 Adam, L. 42 Anderson, N. 53

Finck, F. N. 41 Fischer-J0rgensen, E. 24, 79 Förstemann, E. 130 Frinta, A. 67

Bailey, G. 34,35 Bang, W. 54 Baudouin de Courtenay 15, 20, 45 Bergsveinsson, S. 58 Bloomfield, L. 15, 16, 21 Bogorodickij, W. A. 38 Boldrini, M. 130 Borgstrem, C. 98 Böhtlingk, O. 42 Braun, F. 37 Bühler, K. 134

Gabain, A., von 47-49 Gamillscheg, E. 193 Garvin, P. L. 102 Geiger, W. 44 Gerhardt, D. 57 Ginneken, J., van 50-52 Gombocz, Z. 42 Gougenheim, G. 94, 96, 99 Graff, W. L. 16 Grammont, M. 61, 86 Grasserie, R., de la 183 Greenberg, J. H. 20 Groot, A. W., de 63,72 Grunzel, J. 43-45

Calzia, G. 60 Chlumsky, J. 60 Collinder, B. 42, 53-56 Cukerman, I. J. 84 CyzevSkyj, D. 20 Davidson, W. 195 Dewey, G. 130 Dietrich, G. 15, 19 Dirr, A. 164 Durand, M. 72 Durnovo, N. 73 DymSic, Z. M. 84 Edel'man, D. I. 191 Emre, A. C. 191 Essen, O., von 57, 64, 66

Hajdü, P. 187 Häla, B. 58,60,61,66,67 Halle, M. 16, 19, 22f., 57, 69 Haugen, E. 57 Hausenblas, K. 103 Havränek, B. 103, 104 Herdan, G. 135 Hjelmslev, L. 16 Hockett, C. F. 131 Horälek, K. 57, 65, 66, 68, 69 Hofejäi, VI. 157, 158 Hrozn?, B. 37 IsaCenko, A. V. 106, 107, 120

25, 89, 90,103,104,

200

INDEX OE NAMES

Ivanov, A. 63 Ivió, P. 83 Jakobson, R. 11,16,19, 22f., 34,46, 57, 63, 64, 69, 70, 72, 73, 75, 85, 86, 105, 120 JakuSkin, A. V. 187 Jarring, G. 132 Jespersen, O. 78 Jones, D. 15, 16, 21 Kellgrén, A. H. A. 43, 189 Kelly, J. 103 Kerimova, A. A. 83 Kononov, A. N. 38 Kowalski, T. 52 Kràmsk?, J. 27, 107, 162, 182 Kurdoyev, K. K. 83 Kurylowicz, J. 63 Lazard, G.

184

Malmberg, B. 79-81 Mariotti, F. 130 Marouzeau, J. 16 Marr, N. 37 Martinet, A. 92, 93, 96, 97, 99 Mathesius, V. 16, 97, 98, 181 Menges, K. 46 Meyer, E. A. 72 Morgenstierne, G. 34, 35 Németh, J. Novàk, L \

37, 53 17, 39, 41, 54, 98

O'Connor, J. D. 63 Oezdem, R. 38 Palmer, H. E. 16 Pauliny, E. 103 Pedersen, H. 44 Poldauf, I. 101 Polivanov, E. 32, 63, 72 Poppe, N. 46, 47 Pottier, B. 12, 13

Radioff, W. 38, 42, 45, 56 Ramstedt, G. J. 53, 189 Räsänen, M. 38, 42, 53 Rensk?, M. 57, 58 Rosetti, A. 57 Roudet, L. 60 Sapir, E. 15, 16, 102, 103 Sauvageot, A. 53 Sebestyén, N. 187 Setälä, E. N. 53 Shafeev, D. A. 77 Skalicka, VI. 107, 120, 159 Skalièkovà, A. 57, 62, 64, 67, 75 Sommerfelt, A. 16 Steinitz, W. 53, 55 Swadesh, M. 16 Sweet, H. 53 Szinnyei, J. 42, 53-55 ¡Scerba, L. V. 20 TeniSev, E. R. 164 Todayeva, B. Ch. 165 Trachterov, A. L. 57, 61 Trim, J. L. M. 63 Trnka, B. 99, 100, 102, 121, 152, 157, 159, 160, 166, 179 Trost, P. 193, 194 Trubetzkoy, N. S. 16, 27, 31-33, 35, 46, 51, 68, 69, 72-76, 78, 79, 81, 82, 85, 86, 88, 89, 93, 95, 96, 99, 131, 134 Twaddell, W. F. 15, 22, 23 Ulaszyn, H.

16

Vachek, J. 16, 17, 106, 181 Valeckiene, A. 193 Vendryes, J. 72, 76 Vértes, E. 188, 189, 196 Wiklund, K. B. 53 Wisseman, H. 193 Yule, G. U.

130

INDEX OF LANGUAGES

Abkhasian 32 Afghan 132, 133, 135, 137, 138, 143-145, 149-151 African languages 37, 110 Albanian 110,112-119,124-129,185 Altaic languages 43, 45, 52-54, 161, 185, 190 American languages 110 Amerindian languages 161 Andian 131 Andkhai 132,135-137,139-141,143145, 150, 151 Anglo-Saxon 92, 93, 96, 166 Apache 195 Arabic 79, 89, 110, 111, 113-119, 123-125, 127-129, 176 Arapaho 110-118, 120, 123, 125-129 Archinian 74, 131 Armenian 73, 110, 111, 113-119, 124-129, 161, 189 Aryan-European languages 45 Athapaskan 195 Avar 74, 131, 132, 136, 137, 139142, 144, 145, 150, 151 Azerbaijani 185 Baltic (languages) 74, 166, 174 Baluchi 83, 175 Bantu 103 Bantu languages 166 Baoang 165 Bartang 83 Bashkir 51 Bena-Bena 110 Berber languages 176

Bulgarian 74,110,111,113-119,124, 125,127-129,171,172,191; Old 193, 194 Buryat 43 Caucasian languages 110, 161, 164, 165 Celtic (languages) 103, 176 Chechen 74, 164, 165, 178 Cheremis 53, 187 Chichewa 131 Chinese 82, 103, 110-119, 125-129, 177 Chipewyan 195 Chitimacha 131 Chuvash 110,111,113-119,125-129, 186

Coeur d'Alene 131 Czech 27, 28, 30, 35, 59, 61, 62, 65-67, 74, 90, 107, 108, 110-119, 124-129, 131, 133, 136, 137, 139, 141-145,149-151,170,171,179-181, 183, 191, 192 Danish 78,82,91-94,96 Djugga 132, 136-138, 140, 142,145, 150, 151 Dogrib 195 Drakin 187 Dunganian 32 Dutch 74, 79, 85, 91, 92, 94, 97 East-Asian languages 176 Egyptian, Old 51 English 14, 27,28, 35, 59, 62, 65,72.

202

INDEX OF LANGUAGES

74, 77, 79, 85, 88, 90-98, 102, 107, 110, 113-119, 124, 125, 127-129, 159, 160, 177,191, 196; Middle 98; Old 27, 28, 88, 96, 98, 107, 192 Erza-Mordvin 131, 187 Estonian 56, 79 Fiji 131 Finnish 39, 41, 43, 74, 78, 187, 196 Finnish languages 39 Finno-Ugric 187, 196 Finno-Ugric languages 38, 161, 195 Florida 132, 136-138, 140, 142, 150, 151 French 88, 90-98,110-119, 124, 127; Old 94, 96

189,

188, 145, 125,

Ganda 131 Garo 132, 136-138, 142, 144, 145, 150, 151 Gavar 191 Georgian 131 German 27, 28, 64, 66, 72, 74, 78, 85, 91, 92, 94-96, 107, 110-119, 124, 125, 127-129, 157-159, 179, 191; High 94; Low 94; Old High 166 German languages 25, 61, 88, 90-92, 94-98, 107, 158, 176 Ghazel 132, 135-138, 140, 142, 144, 145, 150, 151 Gola 110-119, 125-129 Gothic 92, 131, 132, 136-138, 140, 142-145, 150, 151, 166 Greek 193; Modern 74, 131, 132, 136, 137, 139, 141, 143-145, 150, 151, 166 Hamitic languages 110,176 Hausa 79, 110, 111, 113-119, 124129, 131, 132, 135-138, 140, 142, 144, 145, 150, 151 Hindi 131, 132, 136, 137, 139, 140, 142, 144, 145, 150, 151 Hindustani 174, 175, 178 Hittite 166, 175 Hopi 82

Hungarian Hiirkanian

39, 74, 162, 188, 194 164

Icelandic, New 94; Old 94 Inamwanga 110, 111-119, 124, 125, 127-129, 131, 132, 136, 138, 140, 142-145, 150, 151 Indian, Old 166 Indo-European languages 89, 91, 110, 161 Indo-Germanic languages 42 Indonesian 110-119, 124, 125, 127129, 161 Iranian languages 83, 175, 190 Irish 79; Old 33, 34, 131, 132, 136, 137, 139-141, 143-145, 150, 151 Ishkashimi 110-119, 124-129 Italian 26-28, 74, 80, 91, 92, 94,107, 169 Japanese 32, 82, 83, 85, 110-118, 120, 124, 125, 127-129, 131, 132, 135-138,141, 143-145,150, 151,177 Japhetic languages 37 Kafir languages 190 Kalai-Khumb 110-119, 124-129 Kalmuck 43 Kamassin 38 Karaimian, West 52 Kara-Kirghiz 51 Kasak-Kirghiz 51 Kashmiri 33-35 Khovar 191 Kingarwanda 32 Kirghiz 186 Korean 177 Kurdish 83,84 Kiirinian 74, 165 Lak(h) 110, 113-119, 123-129, 164 Lamba 131 Lap(p) 55, 75, 187 Latin 74, 88, 93, 96, 98, 131, 132, 135-137, 139, 140, 142, 143, 145, 150, 151, 166-169, 174, 178, 193 Latvian 172-174, 178, 194 Lesghian 74

INDEX OF LANGUAGES Lithuanian

157, 174, 178, 193, 194

Manchurian 43 Manx 103 May 131 Miwok 131 MokSa 187 Mongolian (languages) 39, 43, 52, 74, 161, 165 Mordvin 187, 189, 194 Ndali 132, 133, 136, 138-140, 142, 143, 145, 147, 150, 151 Nenets 187 Nizyam 55 Nootka 131 Norse, Old 92 Norwegian 80, 91-95 Old Church Slavonic 194 Ono 132, 135-137, 139, 141, 144, 145, 150, 151 Ossetian 74 Osmanli 43 Ostyak 38, 53, 189, 194 Pala 132, 133, 136, 138, 140, 142, 144, 145, 148, 150, 151 Papuan languages 145 Pashto 77, 78 Permic 55 Persian 27, 28, 76-78, 83, 107, 161, 175, 184; Modern 183, 184, 190 Polish 59, 62, 73, 90, 107, 131, 132, 136, 137, 139, 141, 143-145, 150, 151 Polynesian 131 Portuguese 80, 91, 170 Prasun 191 Proto-Altaic languages 47 Proto-Finnic 55 Proto-Finno-Ugric language 42, 54 Proto-Germanic 91 Proto-Lapp 54 Proto-Mongolian 47 Proto-Ostyak 55 Proto-Permic 55 Proto-Samoyed 56

203

Proto-Semitic 51 Proto-Sinhalese 44 Proto-Turkish 46, 47, 50 Proto-Ural-Altaic 51, 56 Proto-Uralic 53, 56 Romance languages 25, 80, 90, 91, 94-98, 107, 169, 181 Ronga 132, 136, 138, 140, 142-145, 150, 151 Rumanian 74, 80, 94, 170, 178 Russian 74, 83, 110, 111, 113-119, 124-129, 131, 170, 171, 178 Rutulian 165 Sakalava 110-119,124,125,127-129 Salarian 164, 165, 178 Samoyed 38, 56, 187, 195 Sanskrit 84 Scandinavian languages 94, 97 Semitic languages 176 Serbo-Croatian 90, 107, 131, 171, 172, 178, 191, 192 Shona 131 Siane 110-119, 124-129, 131, 132, 136, 137, 139, 141, 144, 145, 150, 151 Sinhalese 44 Sino-Tibetan languages 110 Slav(ic) languages 25,74,89,106,107, 143, 182, 191 Slavonic languages 166, 170, 178 Slovenian 132, 135-137, 139, 141145, 150, 151, 192 Slovak 27, 28, 74, 90, 107 Spanish 12, 27, 28, 74, 80, 92, 94, 107, 131-133, 135, 137, 139, 141145, 147, 150, 151, 169 Sumerian 37, 161 Svan 164, 165 Swahili 64, 132, 136, 137, 139, 140, 142, 144, 145, 150, 151 Swedish 78-80,91-95 Synya 56 Tahitian 132, 136, 137, 139, 140, 142, 144, 145, 150, 151 Tajik 83

204

INDEX OF LANGUAGES

Tamil 131-133, 136, 138, 140, 142145, 148, 150, 151 Taranchi 49 Tartar 51 Thonga 132, 135, 136, 138-141, 143145, 150, 151 Tibetan 176 Tiraxi 191 Tocharian 161 Tonkawa 131 Tsakhurian 165 Tungus(ian languages) 39, 43, 52, 161, 189 Turanian languages 45 Turkic languages 161-164, 186 Turkish 38-41, 49, 54,110, 111, 113119, 124-129, 162, 163, 186, 189 Turkish languages 39, 52, 110 Turkish, Old 47,53 Turkmen 51, 74

Ukrainian 74, 90 Ural-Altaic languages 37, 38, 42, 44-46, 53, 54, 56 Uralic languages 52, 53, 55, 190 Urdu 84 Uzbek 163, 186 Vaygali 190 Volga-Finnic languages 187 Vogul(ian) 54, 187, 189, 194 Yakut 43 Yukagir 42 Uygur

43

Zaramo 132, 136, 138-141, 143, 145, 150, 151 Zulu 131, 145

GENERAL INDEX

adjective 160, 166, 167, 170-175, 178, 191-193 adverbiative 165 affinity, palatal 39 agglutination 37,45 alphabet, Brahmi 49; Manichean 49; Sogdian 49; syllabic 51; Uygur 49 alternation 33 aorist 164, 171 aperture 60 archiphoneme 39 article 182, 183, 185, 189, 193, 195; anaphoric 193, 194; deictic 185; definite 170,184,185,187,193,194; indefinite 169, 170, 184-186, 191; postpositive 191 articulation 61 articulatory component 61 assimilation 42-44, 52; progressive 37 attraction, labial 39, 43, 44; palatal 39, 43, 44; vowel 38, 39 axis, paradigmatic 102 boundary, syllable 64, 65, 67 category, morphological 157, 158 charge, functional 40 chords, vocal 59 click language 51 code, language 18 communication 11, 14, 20, 87; channel 14; process of 12 comparative 160

component, acoustic 61; expiratory 61; muscular 61; phonatory 61 conditional past 170, 172; present 170, 172 conjugation, periphrastic 174 conj unctive imperfect 169;pastl70; present 169, 170 contact, close 79, 92, 95, 96 correlation 31-33, 35; bundles 31, 32, 35; monotonic 72; of aspiration 36; of contact 68, 72, 75, 79, 81, 82, 85; of palatalization 32, 33, 107; of plosion 35, 36; of quantity 72; of rounding 33; of tension 72; of timbre 31, 32, 35, 36; of voice 35, 36; polytonic 72; tone 72, 82 declension, determinative 187 definiteness 181, 183, 188, 190, 191 determination 182, 185, 193-196; category of 162 determinedness 181-185, 189, 191, 194-196 diachrony 11 dual 176 economy of speech 11 ergative 165 expiration 61; theory 58 exploitation of consonants 109,131; of consonant phonemes 28; of vowels 28, 107 exponent, morphological 160, 179 ezaphat 184

206

GENERAL INDEX

features), distinctive 18, 20-24, 69; inherent 69; phonological 91, 97; prosodic 69, 70, 73; redundant 23; relevant 22, 27 form, verbal 168-170, 172 frequency of occurrence 109-112, 122,127,128,130-135,138,141-146 function 12, 21, 24, 41 Gelenkspartikel 193 glide(s) 50-52,54 glottal stop 96-98 harmony, consonant 52; labial 43; vowel 37-46, 50-56, 89 homonymy 152, 157-162, 165-171, 174, 176-180 identity 152,157,158,162-166,169172, 174, 177, 178, 180 imperative 169 imperfect 171, 172 indefiniteness 181,190 indetermination 184,185 indeterminedness 184, 185, 195 intonation 69, 80 intransitiveness 181 illvariance 23 inventory, of phonemes 14; phonemic 18, 107, 108 jussive 176 labialization 32 language, colloquial 14; monotonic 72, 85; polytonic 72, 85; vulgar 14 languages, flexional 42 langue 12,15 linguistics, functional 12, 57; structural 24 locative 165 matrá-vowels 33-35 mora 73, 75, 82, 85 morpheme 17, 19, 21, 89, 101-104, 134 morphology 44, 53, 102, 177

nasalization 92 neutralization 39, 41, 79, 97, 152, 157, 158, 161-163, 165, 166, 169172, 177 noun 165, 169-172, 174, 175, 178, 182-185, 190, 191, 195; indefinite 175; verbal 160 numerals 168 nunation 176 occurrence frequency 14 opposition 31,53,54,158; distinctive 158; phonological 18, 31, 72; morphological 157, 158 overexploitation of consonants 109; of vowels 107 palatalization 32, 33, 46, 92 parole 12, 15, 17 participle, future 189 ; definite future 190; indefinite future 190; definite past 190; indefinite past 190; perfect 164; present 160, 189; indefinite present 190; definite present 190 perception 14, 18, 24 phonation 61 plan, lexical 101, 103, 104; morphological 100-104; phonological 100, 104; syntactical) 100-104 possessiveness 189 position, stressed 14; unstressed 14 preterite 174 pronoun, demonstrative 167, 168, 170, 173, 187; interrogative 167, 169; personal 165, 167, 169-173, 175, 179, 189; possessive 189, 194; reflexive 167, 170; relative 169 phoneme(s) 11-25, 33-39, 41, 50, 59, 62, 63, 67, 77, 83, 90, 91, 93, 94, 97, 98, 100, 101,104,107,109, 111, 120-123, 126, 128, 130, 133-135, 142, 145, 146; constitutive 12, 13; crest 63; function of 11, 17; fully relevant 15, 19; nonfully relevant 15; redundant 14; significative 12, 13; slope 63 phonetics 21, 58, 60

GENERAL INDEX phonologization 92 phonology 15, 71 pluperfect 172 preterite 160, 170, 173, 174; imperfect 169 process, communicative 14 prothesis 67 psycholinguistics 20 quality, prosodic 68, 69 quantity, bound 73; free 71-75, 81, 84-86 redundancy 14 reduplication 161 relevance 12, 19, 24, 67; full 13; functional 13, 15; non-full 13 repertory, phonemic 90 sandhi 103 sentenced) 14, 95, 100-104, 160; exhortative 188; imperative 188; optative 188 statistics, phonological 12 stress, bound 73, 74; dynamic 72, 90; free (dynamic) 71-73, 75-77, 81-86; musical 72; primary 95; secondary 15 sonority, theory of 58 sound(s) 11, 14, 17, 18, 23, 69, 78, 97, 108, 110, 122, 128, 130; substance 16 sound-wave 21 speech 11, 12, 18, 20, 22, 23, 60, 64, 67 stod 97 stricture 60 subjunctive 169, 176

207

superlative 160 syllabeme 63 syllable(s) 39-41, 57-70, 73, 74, 78, 82, 85, 95, 96; secondary 66, 67 synchrony 11 synharmonism (syllabic) 51, 52, 55 syntax 53, 102 system, language 11, 12, 20; lexical 146; phonological 19, 93; vowel 131 timbre 31-35, 39, 40, 47-52, 54, 56, 59, 76, 77, 91 tonality, theory of 59 transitiveness 181 type, agglutinative 37, 42, 159, 161, 177;flexive159,165,174, 175,178; introflexive 159, 175, 177; isolative 159; polysynthetic 159, 176, 177; prosodic 76, 77 typology 105, 106, 108; prosodic 73 umlaut 42,44 unit(s), linguistic 12; semantic 18 universals 15, 86 underexploitation of consonants 109; of vowels 107 value, communicative 12 variants) 16, 23, 48, 51, 81, 92, 94, 102; combinatory 33, 39; contextual 23; optional 23 Verner law 89 word(s) 13-15, 17-19, 21, 22, 39, 40, 45, 48, 52, 54-56, 62, 65, 73-76, 80, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 95, 96, 98, 100104, 134, 150, 159, 183, 187