Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:00:02.726Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A mismatch between morphological and prosodic domains: evidence from two Igbo rules*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Elizabeth C. Zsiga
Elizabeth C. Zsiga
Affiliation:
Yale University and Haskins Laboratories
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In order to adequately describe the application of phonological rules across word boundaries, phonologists have appealed to the notion of prosodic domains (Selkirk 1980, 1986; Nespor & Vogel 1982, 1986; Kaisse 1985; Inkelas & Zee 1990). This research has suggested that the domains within and across which rules apply cannot be defined in purely syntactic terms, but rather that a domain structure consisting of prosodic entities such as the phonological word, phonological phrase and intonational phrase must be built up from the syntactic structure. It is to these prosodic categories that phonological rules refer. Prosodic domains are derived from but not necessarily coextensive with syntactic or morphological domains. In fact, some of the best evidence for the necessity of a prosodic structure in addition to a syntactic structure comes from cases where the two do not match, and where the correct phonological generalisations can only be captured in terms of the prosodic structure. Igbo presents just such a mismatch. This paper will examine two rules - ATR vowel harmony and vowel assimilation - that make the mismatch clear. These two rules apply in complementary situations: harmony applies only within the word, assimilation only between words. Both rules delineate the same domain, although one operates within the domain boundaries, one across them.

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , May 1992 , pp. 101 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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

Booij, G. (1985). Coordination reduction in complex words: a case for prosodic phonology. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.) Advances in nonlinear phonology. Dordrecht: Foris. 143–160.Google Scholar
Clark, M. M. (1990). The tonal system of Igbo. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, A. C. (1989). Stress in Indonesian and bracketing paradoxes. NLLT 7. 167–216.Google Scholar
Emenanjo, E. N. (1978). Elements of modern Igbo grammar. Ibadan, Nigeria: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. (1979). Autosegmental phonology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Inkelas, S. (1989). Prosodic constituency in the lexicon. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Inkelas, S. & Zec, D. (eds.) (1990). The phonology-syntax connection. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Itô, J. (1990). Minimality and directionality. Paper presented at the 25th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. (1985). Connected speech: the interaction of syntax and phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). Lexical morphology and phonology. In Yang, I.-S. (ed.) Linguistics in the morning calm. Seoul: Hanshin. 3–91.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1989). Cyclic default rules. Paper presented at the Conference on Feature and Underspecification Theories, MIT.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P. (1968). A phonetic study of West African languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (1980). On the organization of the lexicon. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1982). Prosodic domains of external sandhi rules. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.) The structure of phonological representations. Part 1. Dordrecht: Foris. 225–265.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1980). Prosodic domains in phonology: Sanskrit revisited. In Aronoff, M. & Kean, M.-L. (eds.) Juncture. Saratoga: Anma Libri. 107–129.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1982). The syntax of words. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3. 371–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. & Shen, T. (1990). Prosodic domains in Shanghai Chinese. In Inkelas & Zec (1990). 313–337.Google Scholar
Sproat, R. (1986). Malayalam compounding: a non-stratum ordered account. WCCFL 5. 268–288.Google Scholar
Williamson, K. (1972). Igbo—English dictionary. Benin City, Nigeria: Ethiope Publishing.Google Scholar
Zec, D. & Inkelas, S. (1990). Prosodically constrained syntax. In Inkelas & Zec (1990). 365–378.Google Scholar
Zsiga, E. (1988). Underspecification and vowel harmony in Igbo. NELS 19. 453–466.Google Scholar
Zsiga, E. (in preparation). Prosodic domains in Igbo.Google Scholar