Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:58:30.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cayuga Accent: A Synchronic Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Carrie Dyck
Carrie Dyck*
Affiliation:
Memorial University of Newfoundland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cayuga (Northern Iroquoian) is a pitch accent language displaying different conditions for the accenting and lengthening of even-numbered and odd-numbered penults (counting from left to right). It is shown that Cayuga accent placement is predictable from metrical structure, and that metrical structure is in turn influenced by constraints on syllable structure. Syllable structure constraints are that: 1) all things being equal, coda consonants are parsed as light; and 2) vowel length is dispreferred. In odd-numbered penults, dispreferred syllable structure can be avoided, and this results in accented odd-numbered open penults and unaccented odd-numbered closed penults. In even-numbered penults, dispreferred syllable structure (especially that resulting from lengthening) is required in order to avoid metrically adjacent strong elements, and this results in the accenting of all even-numbered penults. The accenting patterns of Cayuga ultimately derive from the fact that Cayuga is a quantity-sensitive language that disprefers quantity.

Résumé

Résumé

Le cayuga (iroquois du nord) est une langue à accent marqué par la hauteur qui obéit à différentes conditions sur l’accentuation et l’allongement des syllables pénultièmes de nombre pair et impair (calculé de gauche à droite). Il est démontré que le placement de l’ accent est fonction de la structure métrique, qui est influencée à son tour par des contraintes sur la structure syllabique. Ces dernières requièrent: 1) que les consonnes en position coda soient considérées comme légères autant que possible; et 2) que la longueur vocalique soit évitée. Dans les syllables pénultièmes de nombre impair, il est possible d’éviter une structure syllabique marquée; ceci entraîne l’accentuation des syllables pénultièmes de nombre impair ouvertes, mais pas celle des syllables pénultièmes de nombre impair fermées. Par contre, dans les syllables pénultièmes de nombre pair, une structure syllabique marquée (surtout celle produite par l’allongement) est requise afin d’éviter des éléments forts adjacents dans la structure métrique; ceci entraîne l’accentuation de toutes les syllables pénultièmes de nombre pair. Ainsi, les patrons d’accentuation du cayuga sont prévisibles si on postule que le cayuga est une langue sensible à la quantité qui, néanmoins, évite la quantité.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , September 1997 , pp. 285 - 322
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Benger, Janet. 1984. The metrical phonology of Cayuga. Master’s thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Benger, Janet. 1985. Accent and vowel length in Cayuga. Paper read at the Symposium on Canadian Native Languages in Theoretical Perspective, Buffalo.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 1990. Alternatives to exhaustivity and conflation in metrical theory. Ms., University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Buckley, Eugene. 1996. Iambic lengthening and final vowels. Ms., University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1977. Accent and related phenomena in the Five Nations Iroquois languages. In Studies in stress and accent: Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 4, ed. Hyman, Larry M., 169–181. Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace, and Foster, Michael K.. 1981. Prehistoric divergences and recontacts between Cayuga, Seneca, and the other Northern Iroquoian languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 47:121–142.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. 1990. The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the grammar and the physics of speech, ed. Kingston, John and Beckman, Mary E., 283–333. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N., and Hume, Elizabeth. 1995. The internal organization of speech sounds. In The Handbook of Phonological Theory, ed. Goldsmith, John, 245–306. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dell, François, and Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1985. Syllabic consonants and syllabification in Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 7:105–130.Google Scholar
Doherty, Brian. 1993. The acoustic-phonetic correlates of Cayuga word-accent. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Donegan, Patricia. 1978. On the natural phonology of vowels. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan, and van der Hulst, Harry. 1995. Head-dependent asymmetries in phonology. In Leiden in last. HIL Phonology Papers I. HIL Publications volume I, ed. van der Hulst, Harry and van de Weijer, Jeroen, 401–431. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
Dyck, Carrie. 1990. Cayuga syllable structure and epenthesis. Master’s thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Dyck, Carrie. 1995. The licensing of r-features in Cayuga (Iroquoian). Ms., University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Foster, Michael. 1974. From the earth to beyond the sky: An ethnographic approach to four Longhouse Iroquois speech events. Mercury Series 20. Ottawa: Ethnology Division, National Museum of Man.Google Scholar
Foster, Michael. 1982. Alternating weak and strong syllables in Cayuga words. International Journal of American Linguistics 48:59–72.Google Scholar
Haraguchi, Shosuke. 1991. A theory of stress and accent. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1987. A revised parametric metrical theory. NELS 17:274-89.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical accent theory. Principles and case studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hung, Henrietta. 1994. The rhythmic and prosodie organization of edge constituents. Doctoral dissertation, Brandeis University.Google Scholar
Idsardi, William. 1992. The computation of prosody. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon, and Zec, Draga. 1988. Serbo-Croatian pitch accent: The interaction of tone, accent, and intonation. Language 64:227-48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kager, René. 1993. Alternatives to the iambic-trochaic law. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11:381–432.Google Scholar
Lounsbury, Floyd. 1963. Linguistics and psychology. In Psychology: A study of a science, ed. Koch, S., 552–582. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John, and Prince, Alan. 1986. Prosodie Morphology. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and Brandeis University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John, and Prince, Alan. 1993a. Prosodie Morphology I. Constraint interaction and satisfaction. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and Rutgers University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John, and Prince, Alan. 1993b. Generalized Alignment. Yearbook of Morphology 79-153.Google Scholar
Michelson, Karin. 1983. A comparative study of accent in the Five Nations Iroquoian languages. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Michelson, Karin. 1988. A comparative study of Lake-Iroquoian accent. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne, and Henry, Reginald. 1984. Watęwayęstanih. A Cayuga teaching grammar. Brantford, Ontario: Woodland Indian Cultural Educational Centre.Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina, and Vogel, Irene. 1986. Prosodie Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan. 1983. Relating to the grid. Linguistic Inquiry 14:19–100.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan, and Smolensky, Paul. 1993. Optimality Theory. Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Technical Report #2 of the Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science. Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Rosenthall, Sam, and van der Hulst, Harry. 1996. Weight-by-position by position. Ms., Ohio State University and University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Rudes, Blair. 1995. Iroquoian vowels. International Journal of American Linguistics 37:16–69.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elizabeth. 1980. Prosodie domains in phonology: Sanskrit revisited. In Juncture, ed. Aronoff, Mark and Kean, Mary-Louise, 107–129. Saratoga, Calif.: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
Smolensky, Paul. 1995. On the internal structure of the constraint component CON of UG. Paper read at University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Stampe, David. 1979. A dissertation on Natural Phonology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1996. Complex onsets as single segments. In Perspectives in Phonology, ed. Cole, Jennifer and Kisseberth, Charles, 207–291. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Zec, Draga. 1988. Sonority constraints on prosodie structure. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Zec, Draga. 1995. Sonority constraints on syllable structure. Phonology 12:85–129.Google Scholar