The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent

René Schiering, Balthasar Bickel, Kristine A. Hildebrandt

Journal of Linguistics · 2010 · 322 citations · 37 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Prosodic Phonology models domains through a Prosodic Hierarchy, predicting clustering of domains and strict succession without skipping levels. The study shows that restricting evidence to lexically general phonological processes causes some languages to violate strict succession (no prosodic word domain) and clustering (extra domains between phrase and foot), and proposes treating prosodic domains as language‑specific properties to empirically explore variation. The authors conduct in‑depth analyses of Vietnamese and Limbu phonological rule domains and advocate a heuristic that defines prosodic domains as intrinsic, language‑particular properties of individual rules or constraints. The results indicate that the prosodic word is not a universal construct; it emerges only when sound patterns repeatedly reference a particular construction type within a language.

Abstract

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.

References

37