Re: Justifying a stress pattern
|From:||Eugene Oh <un.doing@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, December 29, 2007, 16:20|
I didn't understand this particular sentence of yours:
"The oddity, of course, is that a long final syllable doesn't attract the
if it ends in a short vowel followed by a single consonant."
??? Perhaps you could explain it. :-p
2007/12/29, Andreas Johansson <andjo@...>:
> One project of mine that has never progressed much beyond the naming
> stage is Keshean (Kesheâras). One particularity it has is a system of
> placement that seemed to make sense at the time but now strikes me as odd.
> certain real-world languages feature stress patterns that alo strike me as
> but can be explained, or at least compactly described, by moraic theory or
> like - eg. Latin, where stress falls on the second-to-last mora, ignoring
> final syllable. Perhaps someone can think of a similar compact description
> Kesheah stress. The noncompact description might be stated like this:
> i) The stress goes on the last syllable if that contains a long vowel (or
> diphthong) or ends in a consonant cluster.
> ii) Failing that, the next long syllable to the left.
> iii) If all nonfinal syllables are short, stress goes on the first
> Some examples (colon marks long vowel, accent stress):
> ('sh'=/S/, the rest more or less = IPA)
> The oddity, of course, is that a long final syllable doesn't attract the
> if it ends in a short vowel followed by a single consonant. The
> would be simplified if the final consonant, if any, of each word were
> ignored -
> the stress rule would then be stress on the rightmost long syllable, or on
> leftmost in the absence of long syllables - but that seems very arbitrary.
> Suggestions? Comments?