Prosodic Stem ≠ Prosodic Word in Bantu

Downing, Laura J.

doi:10.1075/cilt.174.05dow

Cited by 97 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2, and the references therein). This is also the case for other languages, like Sanskrit, Turkish and Hungarian (see relevant data in Nespor and Vogel 1986: 4.2), as well as for the Bantu languages whose data are reviewed in Downing (1999), leading the author to propose a distinction between prosodic stems and prosodic words, corresponding, in our terms, to PWs and the PWGs (see also McCarthy and Prince 1994: section 5). 27.…”

Section: On the Construction Of The Pwgmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prosodic structure between the prosodic word and the phonological phrase: Recursive nodes or an independent domain?

Vigário

2010

The Linguistic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, a prosodic domain located between the prosodic word and the phonological phrase is argued for (the prosodic word group -PWG). This constituent groups the members of several types of compound-like expressions, but does not play a special part in the prosodic organization of clitics, and thus is argued to be (partially) distinct from the old clitic group (Hayes 1989;Nespor and Vogel 1986 (Ladd 1996(Ladd /2008Frota 2000).

show abstract

Section: On the Construction Of The Pwgmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…21. We believe that what Downing (1999) calls the prosodic stem and the prosodic word may readily be reinterpreted as our PW and PWG, respectively. The advantage of this reinterpretation is that the same prosodic hierarchy may be posited for Bantu and other languages.…”

Section: Evidence Against Recursive Prosodic Wordsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosodic structure between the prosodic word and the phonological phrase: Recursive nodes or an independent domain?

Vigário

2010

The Linguistic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A fifth solution is to assume a much more fine-grained theory of prosodic structure (Downing 1999(Downing , 2001. Even under this approach, however, there remain crucial problems for the analysis of Limbu.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent In Prosodic Phonology, domains for the application of phonological patterns are commonly modeled as a Prosodic Hierarchy. The theory predicts, among other things, that (i) prosodic domains cluster on a single universal set of domains ('Clustering '), and (ii) no level of prosodic structure is skipped in the building of prosodic structure unless this is required by independently motivated higher ranking principles or constraints ('Strict Succession '). In this paper, we demonstrate that if, as is standardly done, evidence is limited to lexically general phonological processes, some languages systematically violate the Strict Succession Prediction, evidencing no prosodic word domain, and some languages systematically violate the Clustering Prediction, evidencing more than one domain between the phonological phrase and the foot. We substantiate these claims by in-depth studies of phonological rule domains in Vietnamese (Austroasiatic) and Limbu (Sino-Tibetan). As an alternative to the Prosodic Hierarchy framework, we advocate a heuristic for cross-linguistic comparison in which prosodic domains are conceived of as language-particular, intrinsic and highly specific properties of individual phonological rules or constraints. This allows us to explore empirically the actual degree of variation to be encountered across prosodic systems. It turns out that the ' word ' has no privileged or universal status in phonology, but only emerges through frequent reference of sound patterns to a given construction type in a given language.[1] This research was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Grant No. BI 799/ 2-3). We are indebted to Juliette Blevins, Tracy A. Hall, Larry Hyman, Sharon Inkelas, Jochen Trommer and three anonymous JL referees for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. For ancillary material, including summary reports of individual languages and a downloadable database, see www.uni-leipzig.de/yautotyp.

show abstract

“…Downing (1999Downing ( , 2000 shows that the size of RED is more consistent with that of stems than affixes. For instance, Bantu verb stems are typically minimally bisyllabic.…”

Section: The Reduplicative Verb Complex As a Compound Stemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both the prosodic stem and prosodic word have been argued to be phonological domains in a variety of Bantu languages (e.g. Downing 1999;Downing and Kadenge 2015). Thus, prosodic word and prosodic stem "are coextensive with the corresponding morphological constituents: MWord and MStem".…”

Section: The Minimal Size Of Red: Bimoraic Vs Bisyllabicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving Verbal Reduplication Paradoxes in Malawian Tonga

Mkochi

2017

SPILPLUS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper describes three verbal reduplication paradoxes in Malawian Tonga, a southern Bantu language spoken in the northern part of Malawi. The reduplicant (RED) is either total or partial and is either prefixed or suffixed to the base. The problem of whether the relevant level of prosodic (reduplicative) stem analysis is the syllable or the mora and thus whether the minimal size of RED should be two syllables or two moras is considered. The paper argues that this language offers three possibilities for reduplication, namely partial prefixal reduplication, total suffixal reduplication, and partial suffixal reduplication. Thus, reduplication in the language is optionally prefixal or suffixal, although the latter appears to be the default. The paper also argues that the relevant unit of prosodic stem analysis is typically the syllable and that reduplicative prosodic stems, like the base stem, are therefore required to be minimally bisyllabic, as in many other Bantu languages.

show abstract

Prosodic Stem ≠ Prosodic Word in Bantu

Cited by 97 publications

References 0 publications

Prosodic structure between the prosodic word and the phonological phrase: Recursive nodes or an independent domain?

Prosodic structure between the prosodic word and the phonological phrase: Recursive nodes or an independent domain?

The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent

Resolving Verbal Reduplication Paradoxes in Malawian Tonga

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About