Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T04:40:00.295Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phonetics and phonology of main stress in Italian

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2002

Mariapaola D'Imperio
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Sam Rosenthall
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Abstract

Vowel duration is not contrastive in standard and regional varieties of Italian. However, vowels in stressed open syllables are longer than unstressed vowels or vowels in closed syllables. The increased duration is not equal in all positions. Most notably, the increased duration of a stressed open penultimate syllable is much greater than the duration of a stressed open antepenultimate syllable or a stressed final syllable, which has no noticeable duration increase. Nonetheless, phonological analyses of Italian have characterised length by a single rule (see for example Vogel 1986, Nespor & Vogel 1986) that lengthens non-final main stress vowels regardless of position. Phonetic studies, particularly Farnetani & Kori (1983, 1990) and Marotta (1985), pay closer attention to the duration of stressed vowels in different positions. Although their explanations of stressed vowel duration differ, the common theme is that duration differences are due to shortening vowels as a consequence of word compression or position (antepenultimate or penultimate syllable) in the word.

While the phonetic approaches account for differences in duration due to shortening, the phonological approaches propose lengthening with no regard for actual duration differences. The phonetic and phonological approaches to stressed vowel duration in Italian appear to be diametrically opposed. This paper proposes that lengthening a stressed vowel is the correct characterisation of duration differences in Italian, but there is no single rule that lengthens stressed vowels.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

We would like to thank Mary Beckman for comments and suggestions. We have also benefited from comments from audience members at the Mid-continental Workshop in Phonology at Indiana University and the LSRL at Pennsylvania State University. We also thank Federico Albano Leoni and the members of the CIRASS labs (Federico II University, Naples) for use of their facilities for the duration study.