View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Pintupi, Language of Australia
Words2σ pána
3σ tjútaya
4σ málawana
5σ púliŋkalatju
6σ tjámulimpatjuŋku
7σ tíliriŋulampatju
8σ kúranjululimpatjura
9σ yúmariŋkamaratjuraka
Gloss• ‘earth’• ‘many• ‘through’• ‘we (sat) on a hill’ • ‘our relation’• ‘the fire for our benefit flared up• ‘the first one (who is) our relation’• ‘because of mother-in-law’
Timestamp:July 25, 2005
2
The Raw Pattern
• Main stress: always initial
• Secondaries follow on every other syllable
• Except the last, which is never stressed
3
Structural Interpretation
• Feet are– Binary (σ σ)– Trochaic: (X x)
• Footing is– Left Aligned– As dense as possible, up to binarity
• The first foot is the head of the Prosodic Word
4
Pintupi: structural analysis
Words
2σ pána
3σ tjútaya
4σ málawana
5σ púliŋkalatju
6σ tjámulimpatjuŋku
7σ tíliriŋulampatju
8σ kúranjululimpatjura
9σ yúmariŋkamaratjuraka
Pattern• (X x)• (X x) x• (X x) (X x)• (X x) (X x) x• (X x) (X x) (X x) • (X x) (X x) (X x) x• (X x) (X x) (X x) (X x)• (X x) (X x) (X x) (X x) x
5
Relevant Constraints
• FtBin: feet consist of two syllables. *(σ)• Parse-σ: every syllable belongs to a foot: *σ not in F• All Feet Left: every foot is at the left edge.
– For each foot, * each σ intervening between it and left edge
• All Feet Right: every foot is at the right edge– For each foot, * each σ intervening between it and right edge
• Trochaic: feet are head-initial: *(x X)• Iambic: feet are head-final: *(X x)
• Constraints demanding that first or last foot be head in Prosodic Word (omitted from discussion).
6
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic remarks
W1 (X x) 0 0 0 0 0 1
L1.1 (x X) 0 0 0 0 1 0 *fact
W2 (X x) x 0 1 0 1 0 1
L2.1 x (X x) 0 1 1 0 0 1 *fact
L2.2 (X x)(X) 0 0 2 1 0 1 *fact
L2.3 (X) x x 1 2 0 2 0 0 *interp
W3 (X x)(X x) 0 0 2 2 0 2
L3.1 (X x) x x 0 2 0 2 0 1 *fact
L3.2 (X) x x x 1 3 0 3 0 0 *fact, *interp
L3.3 (X) x (X) x 2 2 2 4 0 0 *interp
7
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
W1 (X x) 0 0 0 0 0 1
L1.1 (x X) 0 0 0 0 W 1 L 0
W2 (X x) x 0 1 0 1 0 1
L2.1 x (X x) 0 1 W 1 L 0 0 1
L2.2 (X x)(X) W 1 L 0 W 2 1 0 1
L2.3 (X) x x W 1 W 2 0 W 2 0 L 0
W3 (X x)(X x) 0 0 2 2 0 2
L3.1 (X x) x x 0 W 2 L 0 2 0 L 1
L3.2 (X) x x x W 1 W 3 L 0 W 3 0 L 0
L3.3 (X) x (X) x W 2 W 2 2 W 4 0 L 0
8
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
W3 (X x)(X x) 0 0 2 2 0 2
L3.1 (X x) x x 0 W 2 L 0 2 0 L 1
L3.2 (X) x x x W 1 W
3 L 0 W 3 0 L 0
L3.3 (X) x (X) x W 2 W 2 2 W 4 0 L 0
13
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
W3 (X x)(X x) 0 0 2 2 0 2
L3.2 (X) x x x W 1 W 3 L 0 W 3 0 0
14
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
W3 (X x)(X x) 0 0 2 2 0 2
L3.2 (X) x x x W 1 W 3 L 0 W 3 e 0 0
15
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
W3 (X x)(X x) 0 0 2 2 0 2
L3.2 (X) x x x W 1 W 3 L 0 W 3 e 0 L 0
16
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
W3 (X x)(X x) 0 0 2 2 0 2
L3.2 (X) x x x W 1 W 3 L 0 W 3 0 L 0
17
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p3 W L W
p4 W W W L
p5 W L L
p6 W W L W L
p7 W W W L
18
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p3 W L W
p4 W W W L
p5 W L L
p6 W W L W L
p7 W W W L
19
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p3 W L W
p4 W W W L
p5 W L L
p6 W W L W L
p7 W W W L
20
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p3 W L W
p4 W W W L
p5 W L L
p6 W W L W L
p7 W W W L
21
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p3 W L W
p4 W W W L
p5 W L L
p6 W W L W L
p7 W W W L
22
Entailments of p5
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p5 W L L
p4 W W W L
p6 W W L W L
p7 W W W L
Check the L’s : L L, e, W ?
23
Entailments of p5
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p5 W L L
p4 W W e W L
p6 W W L W L
p7 W W e W L
Check the L’s : L L, e, W ?
24
Entailments of p5
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p5 e W L e e L
p4 W W W e L
p6 W W L W e L
p7 W W W e L
Check the e’s : e e, W ?
25
Entailments of p5
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p5 e W L e e L
p4 W W W e L
p6 W W L W e L
p7 W W W e L
Check the e’s : e e, W ?
26
Entailments of p5
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p5 e W L e e L
p4 W W W e L
p6 W W L W e L
p7 W W W e L
Check the W’s : W W ?
27
Entailments of p5
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p5 e W L e e L
p4 W W W e L
p6 W W L W e L
p7 W W W e L
Check the W’s : W W ?
28
Reduced ERC set for Pintupi
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p5 W L L
p3 W L W
29
Reduced ERC set for Pintupi
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p5 W L L
p3 W L W
But p3 is disjunctive !
30
Fusion to the Rescue
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p5 W L L
p3 W L W
p3◦p5 W L L L
Disjunctivity eliminated !
31
Reduced ERC set for Pintupi
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p5 W L L
p3◦p5 W L L L
32
Eliminating L’s following from transitivity
FtBin Parse-σ AFL AFR Trochaic Iambic
p1 W L
p2 W L
p5 W L L
[α] W L
● Cleaner picture of local domination relations.NB: entirely legit by L-retraction!
33
FtBin
p3◦p5
Parse-σ Trochaic
p5 p5 p1
AFL Iambic
p2
AFR
Pintupi rankings and their justifications
34
[Optional] Challenge !
• We have assumed that Pintupi is trochaic.• We have seen no direct evidence for foot boundaries• They are inferred from the theory of prosodic structure.
• How solid is the inference?• Does Pintupi have a (lurking, bizarre) iambic analysis
under the constraints we’ve accepted??• Challenge: show that Pintupi cannot be iambic under
the constraints used here.
35
What would Iambic Pintupi look like?
2σ pána (pá)na (X) x
3σ tjútaya (tjú)taya (X) x x
4σ málawana (má)(lawa)na (X) (x X) x
…and so on: same stress, different structures
The goal: show that such forms can’t all be optimal.
Find ERCs involving them that lead to inconsistency.
● No more than 2 ERCs are needed!
36
For Example
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6
α:a~x L W L L
β:b~y W L L L
α○β L L L L
If you achieve success, and want me to look at it,Email your concise submission to [email protected]
No ranking can make both a and b optimal