2-4 14195 Berlin Germany rrenate@zedat.fu-berlin.de Kevin Russell Linguistics Department University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2 Canada krussll@cc.UManitoba.ca Wendy Sandler De
STUDIES ON THE PHONOLOGICAL WORD CURRENT ISSUES IN LINGUISTIC THEORY AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE – Series IV General Editor E.F.K KOERNER Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung, Berlin efk.koerner@rz.hu-berlin.de Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (CILT) is a theory-oriented series which welcomes contributions from scholars who have significant proposals to make towards the advancement of our understanding of language, its structure, functioning and development CILT has been established in order to provide a forum for the presentation and discussion of linguistic opinions of scholars who not necessarily accept the prevailing mode of thought in linguistic science It offers an outlet for meaningful contributions to the current linguistic debate, and furnishes the diversity of opinion which a healthy discipline must have A complete list of titles in this series can be found on http://benjamins.com/catalog/cilt Advisory Editorial Board Raimo Anttila (Los Angeles) Lyle Campbell (Christchurch, N.Z.) John E Joseph (Edinburgh) Manfred Krifka (Austin, Tex.) Hans-Heinrich Lieb (Berlin) Ernst Pulgram (Ann Arbor, Mich.) E.Wyn Roberts (Vancouver, B.C.) Hans-Jürgen Sasse (Köln) Volume 174 T Alan Hall and Ursula Kleinhenz (eds.) Studies on the Phonological Word STUDIES ON THE PHONOLOGICAL WORD Edited by T ALAN HALL URSULA KLEINHENZ Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung, Berlin JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Conference on the Phonological Word (1997 : Berlin, Germany) Studies on the phonological word / edited by T Alan Hall and Ursula Kleinhenz p cm (Amsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science Series IV, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, issn 0304-0763 ; v 174) Includes bibliographical references and index Word (Linguistics) Congresses Prosodic analysis (Linguistics) Congresses I. Hall, T Alan II Kleinhenz, Ursula III Title IV Series P128.W67C66 1999 414’.8 dc21 99-15507 isbn 978 90 272 3680 (EUR) / 978 55619 891 (US) (Hb ; alk paper) isbn 978 90 272 8402 (Eb) © 1999 – John Benjamins B.V No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher John Benjamins Publishing Co · P.O Box 36224 · 1020 me Amsterdam · The Netherlands John Benjamins North America · P.O Box 27519 · Philadelphia pa 19118-0519 · usa TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Contributors vi The Phonological Word: A Review T A Hall Words and Prosodic Phrasing in Lushootseed Narrative David Beck 23 The Role of the Prosodic Word in Phonotactic Generalizations Geert Booij 47 Prosodie Stem = Prosodie Word in Bantu Laura J Downing 73 Phonotactics and the Prosodie Structure of German Function Words T A Hall 99 Diagnostics for Prosodie Words Revisited: The Case of Historically Prefixed Words in English Renate Raffelsiefen 133 The "Word" in two Polysynthetic Languages Kevin Russell 203 Cilticization and Prosodie Words in a Sign Language Wendy Sandler 223 On the Prosodie Status of Stressless Function Words in European Portuguese Marina Vigário 255 Index 295 CONTRIBUTORS David Beck Department of Linguistics University of Toronto 130 St George St Toronto, Ontario M5S 3H1 Canada dbeck@chass.utoronto.ca Renate Raffelsiefen Institut für englische Philologie Freie Universität Berlin Goßlerstr 2-4 14195 Berlin Germany rrenate@zedat.fu-berlin.de Geert Booij Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Fakulteit der Letteren De Boelelaan 1105 1081 HV Amsterdam The Netherlands booij@let.vu.nl Kevin Russell Linguistics Department University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2 Canada krussll@cc.UManitoba.ca Laura J Downing Dept of Linguistics 1203 Dwinelle Hall University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-2650 USA ldowning@socrates.berkeley.edu Wendy Sandler Department of English The University of Haifa and Sign Language, Linguistics, and Cognition Research Laboratory The University of Haifa 31905 Haifa Israel wsandler@research.haifa.ac.il T A Hall & Ursula Kleinhenz Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft Jägerstr 10/11 10117 Berlin Germany hall@zas.gwz-berlin.de ursula@zas gwz-b erlin de Marina Vigário Departamento de Português, ILCH Universidade Minho 4710 Braga Portugal marina.vigario@bigfoot.com THE PHONOLOGICAL WORD: A REVIEW* T.ALAN HALL Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft The present volume consists of eight articles dealing with the role of the prosodic constituent 'phonological word' in various typologically diverse lan guages These languages and their respective families subsume Indo-European (Dutch, German, English, European Portuguese), Bantu (SiSwati, KiNande), Algonquian (Cree), Siouan (Dakota), and Salishan (Lushootseed) One contri bution examines the phonological word in a sign language The goal of this introductory article is to summarize some of the research that has been done to date on the phonological word, to show where the articles in the present volume fit in to this line of research, and to outline several questions for further study This article is organized as follows Section consists of introductory remarks In section I present examples from various languages of the kinds of phenomena that require reference to the phonological word Section concerns itself with the relationship between the phonological word and other prosodic constituents, e.g syllable, foot, phonological phrase, and section outlines the connection between the phonological word and morphosyntactic structure Section deals with the kinds of conflicts among diagnostics for phonological words one encounters in individual languages A short conclusion is provided in section Introduction Numerous studies (to be cited in the following sections) have demonstrated the need for a prosodic constituent that is larger than the syllable or foot but The present article has benefitted from comments by Antony Dubach Green, Ursula Kleinhenz, and Renate Raffelsiefen The usual disclaimers apply Most of the following papers were presented at the 'Conference on the Phonological Word', which took place on 24-26 October, 1997 in Berlin T A HALL smaller than the phonological phrase Since this constituent can be shown to be roughly the size of a grammatical word, it is often referred to in the literature as the 'phonological word', or alternatively as the 'prosodic word' The authors in this volume use both terms; in the present article I refer to the phonological/ prosodic word simply as the 'pword.'2 An important point that has been made repeatedly in the literature is that the pword is an entity that is distinct from the grammatical word Thus, many languages are attested in which a single grammatical word consists of two or more pwords (e.g each part of a compound word, or both the prefix and following stem) In other languages a pword has been argued by some authors to consist of two grammatical words (e.g in a sequence of lexical word+clitic) There is also near unanimity in the literature that pword boundaries — unlike those of syllables and feet — must align with morpho(syntactic) boundaries Thus, if a single grammatical word consists of two or more pwords, then the pwords correspond directly to morphemes This view of the pword implies that a monomorphemic word cannot be parsed as two or more pwords In the present volume all of the authors show that the pword is nonisomorphic with the grammatical word In addition, all of the authors in the present volume agree that there is a direct connection between pword boun daries and morpho(syntactic) boundaries, as described in the preceding para graph All of the authors of the present volume argue that the pword is an indispensible prosodie constituent because it forms the domain for various phonological generalizations (see section 2) Almost all of the contributors operate under the assumption that the phonological generalizations that refer to the pword are 'concrete' in the sense that they refer to the surface level of representation and not to an abstract stage in a derivation Historically the term 'phonological word' was employed by Dixon (1977a, b) and later adopted by other writers (e.g Booij 1983, van der Hulst 1984, Nespor 1986, Nespor & Vogel 1986, Hannahs 1995a, b) One of the first linguists to employ the locution 'prosodie word' was Selkirk (1978, 1980a, b); this term has subsequently gained currency in the literature on Prosodie Morphology and Optimality Theory (e.g McCarthy & Prince 1986, 1993, 1994, Prince & Smolensky 1993, McCarthy 1993, Peperkamp 1997) Some authors (e.g Liberman & Prince 1977, Booij & Rubach 1984) refer to the pword as the 'mot' A survey of the literature on pwords, including numerous historical notes, is contained in Smith (1996) Pregenerative studies sometimes recognized a unit larger than a syllable but smaller than a grammatical word that bears a strong affinity to the 'phonological' or 'prosodie' word referred to by all of the authors cited in the previous paragraph For example, Aoki (1966) writes that vowel harmony in Nez Perce occurs within a 'harmonic sequence', which is a group of seg ments not always identical to a grammatical word THE PHONOLOGICAL WORD: A REVIEW Evidence for the pword The pword derives motivation as the constituent that defines the domain for various phonological generalizations These generalizations can be reduced to three types: (1) a The domain of phonological rules b The domain of phonotactic generalizations The domain for minimality constraints The term 'rule' in (la) is to be understood in the broadest sense of the word, subsuming segmental processes like assimilations, processes manipulating tones, as well as prosodic rules that assign syllables, and stress While not recognized by some authors (e.g Nespor & Vogel 1986), phonotactic constraints (i.e (lb)) have been proposed for various languages that refer crucially to the pword That the domain of minimality constraints is the pword has been recognized by Dixon (1977a, b) and more recently by McCarthy & Prince (1986) In the following subsections examples of (la)-(lc) will be provided 2.1 The pword as the domain for phonological rules Many of the examples discussed in the literature that argue for the pword involve segmental phonological rules that make crucial reference to this constituent This point can be illustrated with Hungarian vowel harmony, which has been argued to apply only when its trigger and target belong to the same pword (Booij 1984, Nespor & Vogel 1986) The examples in (2a) show that all vowels within a sequence of stem+suffix agree in backness (In (2) and below the symbol ' ω ' represents the pword) By contrast, the individual parts of a compound, as in (4b), and prefixes as well as the stems to which they attach, as in (4c), constitute separate vowel harmony domains Booij (1984) and Nespor & Vogel (1986) capture these facts by positing that the sequence stem+suffix constitutes a single pword (cf the prosodic structure indicated in (2a)) Each part of a compound is analyzed as a separate pword, as in (2b), and prefixes and the stems to which they attach are separate pwords, as in (2c) The rule of vowel harmony can now be stated as in (2d)