Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

THEORY: Tepa prosody [was: Estonian Quantity]

From:Dirk Elzinga <dirk_elzinga@...>
Date:Friday, November 9, 2001, 18:05

What follows is best viewed in a monowidth font. It's also rather long.

At 3:50 AM +0000 11/09/01, And Rosta wrote:
>Doergkh: >> F F >> / \ / \ >> F m F m >> | | | | >> s | s | >> /|\ | /|\ | ... >> / m m | / m m | >> | \|/ | | \|/ | >> s a [saa:] l a k e [lak:ke] >> >> That is, a foot consisting of a monosyllabic bimoraic trochee with an >> adjoined mora. This conception of the foot and its role in stem >> gradation has (indirectly) inspired some changes in Tepa prosody, > > though I don't have overlong segments. > >What are the changes to Tepa prosody it has inspired?
I'm glad you asked. The changes in Tepa prosody are the result of the introduction of exhaustive foot parsing and the restriction of some phonological processes to foot-medial position. The exhaustivity requirement of Tepa foot parsing means that all syllables within a Tepa stem must belong to a prosodic foot; that is, syllables may not adjoin directly to the prosodic word (this restriction doesn't apply to clitics). There are three kinds of legal foot shapes in Tepa: 1) the canonical moraic trochee foot F F | / \ syllable s s s /|\ /| /| mora / m m / m / m | | | | | | | segment c v x c v c v (x = vowel or consonant) 2) the trochee with resolution F / \ s s /| /|\ / m / m m | | | | | c v c v x 3) the augmented foot F / \ F \ / \ \ s s s /| /| /| / m / m / m | | | | | | c v c v c v Insuring that a CV string is exhaustively parsed into licit feet requires several kinds of adjustment: 1) suffixation of _-ka_ (this is morphologically restricted), 2) final-vowel lengthening, 3) light-syllable adjunction. In Early Tepa, bound phase was marked by a final long vowel. In Modern Tepa, unbound phase is marked by an initial heavy syllable (moraic trochee). This heavy syllable is usually the result of geminating the medial consonant, but may also be from a lengthened vowel (voiceless fricatives and glides don't geminate). This prosodic marker is accompanied by suffixation of _-ka_ in case parsing the initial heavy syllable would leave behind a light syllable; _-ka_ suffixation thus fills out a prosodic foot: tukana 'thrush:BOUND' tukkana 'thrush:UNBOUND' pite 'see:BOUND' pitteka 'see:UNBOUND' Secondly, the renewed emphasis on the prosodic foot has restricted application of gradation, now properly seen as lenition. In Early Tepa, voiceless stops alternated with voiced fricatives intervocalically; in the modern language, lenition only applies within the foot; it may not occur across foot boundaries (somewhat like American English flapping): tapatapa [taBataBa] 'black widow:DIST' pitepite [piD1piD1] 'see:DIST' tipukankan [tiBukaNgan] 'sage hen:DIST' In these forms, distributive number is marked by suffixal reduplication of the final moraic trochee. The resulting form only shows lenition between vowels when those vowels belong to the same foot: F F / \ / \ s s s s /| /| /| /| / m / m / m / m | | | | | | | | t a p a t a p a = [taBataBa] F F F / \ | | s s s s /| /| /|\ /|\ / m / m / m m / m m | | | | | | | | | | t i p u k a n k a n = [tiBukaNgan] (In the form [tiBukaNgan] 'sage hen', the voicing of /k/ to [g] is not the result of lenition, but is due instead to a separate process of post-nasal voicing; post-nasal voicing is not restricted to foot-medial position.) When a form has an odd number of light syllables, one of two things may happen: 1) the final vowel may lengthen, coercing a final moraic trochee; or 2) the final light syllable may be adjoined to the preceding foot to create a foot consisting of three light syllables. Both options are illustrated with the form _hipite_ 'moon': F / \ F F F \ / \ | / \ \ s s s s s s /| /| /|\ /| /| /| / m / m / m m / m / m / m | | | | | |/ | | | | | | h i p i t e = [hiBit1:] h i p i t e = [hiBiD1] In the first form, the final long vowel creates a monosyllabic moraic trochee. There are two feet, thus lenition will not apply to /t/, since it is not between vowels belonging to the same foot. In the second form, the final light syllable is simply adjoined to an existing foot to form a single augmented foot; since the /t/ is between vowels belonging to the same foot, it is lenited. As far as I can tell, both realizations are in free variation. So while Estonian didn't provide a direct model, Prince's analysis of overlength as a metrical phenomenon got me thinking about foot-based morphophonology in Tepa.
>Where is up-to-date info on Tepa? It must be six or seven years since >I last read the full description of Tepa.
Right now it's on my hard drive; Jeffrey Hennings has some stuff on his pages, but for some reason the inflectional morphology of nouns and verbs never made it there. I'm still working out some changes to the derivational morphology. Once they are done, I'm planning on writing up the phonology and morphology and posting it here. I'm still thinking about where to get web space; I don't get any from BYU for personal pages. I'll probably have to go with a free service.
Dirk -- Dirk Elzinga "Speech is human, silence is divine, yet also brutish and dead; therefore we must learn both arts." - Thomas Carlyle


And Rosta <a.rosta@...>
Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>