Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:19:19.094Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Foot and Syllable Structure in Modern Icelandic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Gregory K. Iverson  and
Courtenay A. Kesterson
Gregory K. Iverson
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA.
Courtenay A. Kesterson
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA.
Get access

Abstract

As is well known, vowel length in Modern Icelandic is in general predictable on the basis of syllable structure such that, in polysyllabic words, stressed vowels in open syllables are long, other vowels are short; in stressed monosyllables, however, vowels are long whether the syllable is open or closed by a single consonant, and short only when the syllable is closed by a consonant cluster. In contrast to the ‘final maximalistic’ strategy of Árnason (1980) and other unlikely syllabification schemes designed to unify these two patterns, we invoke Giegerich's (1985) characterization of foot structure as applied to German and English, according to which stressed monosyllables categorize metrically as disyllabic feet whose rightmost member is null. Thus, CVC structures are metrically /CV.CØ/, with the result that the generalization regarding vowel length in words of all types is simply that stressed vowels in open syllables are long, others short.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , June 1989 , pp. 13 - 45
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

REFERENCES

Anderson, S. R. 1984. A Metrical Interpretation of Some Traditional Claims about Quantity and Stress. In Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. T. (eds.), Language Sound Structure: Studies in Phonology Presented to Morris Halle by his Teacher and Students. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Árnason, K. 1980. Quantity in Historical Phonology: Icelandic and Related Cases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Árnason, K. 1984. Toward a Model of Modern Icelandic Syllable Types. Islenskt Mal 6, 136–153.Google Scholar
Árnason, K. 1985. Icelandic Word Stress and Metrical Phonology. Studia Linguistica, 93–129.Google Scholar
Benediktsson, H. 1963. The Non-Uniqueness of Phonemic Solutions: Quantity and Stress in Icelandic. Phonetica 10, 133–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Keyser, S. J. 1983. CV Phonology: A Generative Theory of the Syllable. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Einarsson, S. 1945. Icelandic Grammar, Texts, Glossary. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Garnes, S. 1974. Quantity in Icelandic: Production and Perception. Hamburger phonetische Beiträge 18.Google Scholar
Geigerich, H. 1985. Metrical Phonology and Phonological Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John, (to appear). Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology: A New Synthesis. London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gussmann, E. 1982. Review of Kristjan Árnason (1980): Quantity in Historical Phonology: Icelandjc and Related Cases. Islenskt Mal 4, 303–316.Google Scholar
Gussmann, E. 1985. The morphology of a phonological rule: Icelandic vowel length. In Gussmann, E. (ed.), Phonomorphology: Studies in the interaction of phonology and morphology. Lublin: Catholic University of Lublin.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. 1981. A Metrical Theory of Stress Rules. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Hogg, R. & McCully, C. 1987. Metrical Phonology: a Coursebook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. 1985. A Theory of Phonological Weight. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, D. 1976. Syllable-based Generalizations in English Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Published 1980. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Lass, R. 1985. Minkova Noch Einmal: MEOSL and the Resolved Foot. Folia Linguistica Historica 6, 245–265.Google Scholar
Malsch, D. 1976. Syllable, Mora, and Length in the Development of English. In Christie, W. (ed.), Current Progress in Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Minkova, D. 1982. The Environment for Open Syllable Lengthening in Middle English. Folia Linguistica Historica 3, 29–58.Google Scholar
Minkova, D. 1985. Of Rhyme and Reason: Some Foot-governed Quantity Changes in English. In Eaton, R., Fischer, O., Koopman, W. & Vand der Leek, F. (eds.), Papers from the Fourth International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 163–178.Google Scholar
Murray, R. & Venneman, T. 1983. Sound Change and Syllable Structure in Germanic Phonology. Language 59, 514–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakatani, L. & Shaffer, J. 1978. Hearing ‘Words’ Without Words: Prosodic Cues for Word Perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 63, 234–245.Google Scholar
Plotkin, V. 1974. Is Length Phonologically Relevant in Icelandic? Phonetica 30, 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rischel, J. 1982. Review Article: Quantity in Historical Phonology. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 5, 163–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. 1980. The Role of Prosodic Categories in English Word Stress. Linguistic Inquiry 11, 563–605.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. 1982. The Syllable. In van der Huist, H. & Smith, N. (eds.), The Structure of Phonological Representations, Part II. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, pp. 337–383.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. 1984. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Valfells, S. & Cathey, J. 1981. Old Icelandic; An Introductory Course. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Venneman, T. 1972. On the Theory of Syllabic Phonology. Linguistische Berichte 18, 1–18.Google Scholar
Zöega, G. 1910. Dictionary of Old Icelandic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar