Book contents
- The Study of Word Stress and Accent
- The Study of Word Stress and Accent
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Phonetic Correlates and Prominence Distinctions
- Part II Typology
- 5 Mora and Syllable Accentuation
- 6 Word Stress, Pitch Accent, and Word Order Typology with Special Reference to Altaic
- Part III Case Studies
- Language Index
- Subject Index
- References
6 - Word Stress, Pitch Accent, and Word Order Typology with Special Reference to Altaic
from Part II - Typology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 December 2018
Book contents
- The Study of Word Stress and Accent
- The Study of Word Stress and Accent
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Phonetic Correlates and Prominence Distinctions
- Part II Typology
- 5 Mora and Syllable Accentuation
- 6 Word Stress, Pitch Accent, and Word Order Typology with Special Reference to Altaic
- Part III Case Studies
- Language Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
It has been claimed that in some languages the location of word stress correlates with the word order of a syntactic head and its complement; for example, a verb and its object (Donegan and Stamp 1983, Plank 1988), that is, languages with left-hand stress have head-final order while languages with right-hand stress have head-initial order. Based on an analysis of the data in Haspelmath and Dryer (2005), Tokizaki shows that this correlation generally holds in the world’s languages. However, potential counterexamples to this generalization are Altaic languages, a large number of which have been reported to have right-hand stress and head-final order; see Goedemans, Heinz and van der Hulst (2014) and data in Haspelmath and Dryer (2005). It is argued in this chapter that Altaic languages in fact have word-initial stress as well as right-hand pitch accent. Thus, the general correlation between stress and word order also holds for Altaic languages.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Study of Word Stress and AccentTheories, Methods and Data, pp. 187 - 224Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Abney, S. P. (1987). The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Anderson, E. W. (1984). Gemination in Italian. In Baldi, P. (ed.) Papers from the XIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 303–321.Google Scholar
Bally, C. (1944). Linguistique Générale et Linguistique Française, 2nd edn. Berne: Francke.Google Scholar
Beckman, J. (1998). Positional faithfulness: An optimality theoretic treatment of phonological asymmetries. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Berg, T. (2008). Emphatic stress shift in German. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 27, 165–187.Google Scholar
Birtalan, Á. (2003). Oirat. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 210–228.Google Scholar
Bläsing, U. (2003). Kalmuck. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 229–247.Google Scholar
Blevins, J. (2004). Evolutionary Phonology: The Emergence of Sound Patterns. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bomhard, A. R. (2008). Reconstructing Proto-Nostratic: Comparative Phonology, Morphology, and Vocabulary, 2 vols. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., and Goodwin, J. M.. (1996). Teaching Pronunciation: A Reference for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cho, Y. Y. and Inkelas, S.. (1994). Post-obstruent Tensification in Korean and geminate inalterability. In Kim-Renaud, Y.-K. (ed.) Theoretical Issues in Korean Linguistics. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 45–60.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.(2012). The Science of Language: Interviews with James McGilvray. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cinque, G. (1993). A null theory of phrase and compound stress. Linguistic Inquiry 24, 239–298.Google Scholar
Csató, É. Á. and Johanson, L.. (1998). Turkish. In Johanson, L. and Csató, E. A. (eds.) The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge, 203–235.Google Scholar
Dmitrieva, O. (2012). Geminate typology and the perception of consonant duration. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Donegan, P. J. and Stampe, D.. (1983). Rhythm and the holistic organization of language structure. Papers from the Parasession on the Interplay of Phonology, Morphology and Syntax. Chicago Linguistic Society, 337–353.Google Scholar
Downing, L. J. (2010). Accent in African languages. In Goedemans, R., van der Hulst, H., and van Zanten, E. (eds.) A Survey of Word Accentual Patterns in the Languages of the World. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, 381–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.(2005a). Prefixing versus suffixing in inflectional morphology. In Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press, 110–113.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.(2005b). Order of object and verb. In Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press, 338–341.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.(2005c). Order of adposition and noun phrase. In Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press, 346–349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.(2005d). Order of genitive and noun. In Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press, 350–353.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.(2005e). Order of adverbial subordinator and clause. In Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press, 382–385.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S. and Haspelmath, M. (eds.) (2013). The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/.Google Scholar
Duanmu, S. (1990). A formal study of syllable, tone, stress and domain in Chinese languages. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Duanmu, S(2008). A two-accent model of Japanese word prosody. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 28, 29–48.Google Scholar
Fukumori, T. (2010). Torukogo-no akusento-ni tsuite [On the accent in Turkish]. Gengo Kenkyu 137, 41–63.Google Scholar
Georg, S. (2003a). Ordos. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages, London: Routledge 193–209.Google Scholar
Georg, S(2003b). Mongghul. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 286–306.Google Scholar
Goedemans, R. and van der Hulst, H. (2005a). Fixed stress locations. In Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press, 62–65.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Goedemans, R. and van der Hulst, H.(2005b). Weight-sensitive stress. In Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press, 66–69.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Goedemans, R., Heinz, J., and van der Hulst, Harry (2014). StressTyp2. http://st2.ullet.net.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. (2002). A factorial typology of quantity-insensitive stress. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20(3), 491–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowlett, D. (2003). Zone S. In Nurse, D. and Philippson, G. (eds.) The Bantu Languages. London: Routledge, 609–638.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (1997). Does Altaic exist? In Hegedus, I., Michalove, P. A., and Manaster, A. Ramer, (eds.) Indo-European, Nostratic and Beyond: A Festschrift for Vitaly V. Shevoroshkin. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man, 88–93. (Reprinted in J. H. Greenberg. (2005). Genetic Linguistics. Oxford University Press, 325–330.)Google Scholar
Harn, R. F. (1998). Uyghur. In Johanson, L., and Csató, É. Á. (eds.) The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge, 379–396.Google Scholar
Hashimoto, M. (1990). Mongorugo-no kotoba-asobi [Wordplay in Mongolic]. In Eguchi, K., (ed.) Kotoba-asobi-no Minzokushi [Ethnography of Wordplay]. Tokyo: Taishukan, 283–293.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., and Comrie, B.. (eds.) (2005). The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hayata, T. (2005). Shogengo-no on-in-to nihongo-no on-in [Phonology in languages and phonology in Japanese]. In Hayata, T. (ed.) Sekai-no-naka-no Nihongo [Japanese Language in the World]. Tokyo: Asakura Shoten, 1–22.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1995). Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hugjiltu, W. (2003). Bonan. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 325–345.Google Scholar
Hulst, H. van der. (2011). Pitch accent systems. In van Oostendorp, M., Ewen, C., and Rice, K.. (eds.) The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, Volume II: Suprasegmental and Prosodic Phonology. Chichester: Blackwell, 1003–1027.Google Scholar
Hulst, H. van der, Goedemans, R., and van Zanten, E.. (2010). A Survey of Word Accentual Systems in the Language of the World. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. M. (1977). On the nature of linguistic stress. In Hyman, L. M. (ed.) Studies in Stress and Accent. Los Angeles: Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California, 37–82.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. M.(1981). Tonal accent in Somali. Studies in African Linguistics 12(2), 169–203.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. M.(2002). Is there a right-to-left bias in vowel harmony? Paper presented at the 9th International Phonology Meeting, Vienna, November 1. http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/%7Ehyman/Hyman_Vienna_VH_paper_forma.pdf.Google Scholar
Ikegami, J. (1989). Tsunguusu-shogo. In Kamei, T., Kohno, R., and Chino, E. (eds.) Gengogaku Daijiten [The Sanseido Encyclopedia of Linguistics], vol. 2. Tokyo: Sanseido, 1068–1083.Google Scholar
Ikegami, J(1997). Uilta-go Jiten [A Dictionary of the Uilta Language Spoken on Sakhalin]. Sapporo: Hokkaido University Press.Google Scholar
Janhunen, J. (2003). Proto-Mongolic. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 1–29.Google Scholar
Janhunen, J(2009). Proto-Uralic – what, where, and when? The Quasquicentennial of the Finno-Ugrian Society. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia = Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 258, 61–62.Google Scholar
Johanson, L. (1998a). The structure of Turkic. In Johanson, L. and Csató, É. Á. (eds.) The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge, 30–66.Google Scholar
Johanson, L(1998b). History of Turkic. In Johanson, L. and Csató, É. Á. (eds.) The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge, 81–125.Google Scholar
Kabak, B. and Vogel, I.. (2001). The phonological word and stress assignment in Turkish. Phonology 18, 315–360.Google Scholar
Kara, G. (2011). Alliteration in Mongol Poetry. In Roper, J. (ed.) Alliteration in Culture. London: Palgrave, 156–179.Google Scholar
Kazama, S. (2011). Tungusu-shominzoku-no kosho-bungei-ni tsuite [The oral literatures of Tungusic languages]. Hokkaido-ritsu Hoppo-minzoku Hakubutsukan Kenkyu-kiyoo [The Hokaido Museum of Northern Peoples] 20, 25–54.Google Scholar
Kazama, S(2012). Nanai-no Minwa-to Densetsu [Nanay Folk Tales and Legends] 13. Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.Google Scholar
Kim, S. S. (2003). Santa. In Janhunen, Juha (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 346–363.Google Scholar
Kircher, M. (1998). Kazakh and Karakalpak. In Johanson, L. and Csató, É. Á. (eds.) The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge, 318–332.Google Scholar
Kubozono, H., Takeyasu, H., and Giriko, M.. (2013). On the positional asymmetry of consonant gemination in Japanese loanwords. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 22(4), 339–371.Google Scholar
Kuribayashi, H. (1988). Mongorugo-ni okeru jakkaboin-no hattatsu-to heionsetsuka-gensho [The development of reduced vowels and the change of syllabic structure in Mongolian]. Onsei-no Kenkyuu 22, 209–223.Google Scholar
Lahiri, A., Riad, T., and Jacobs, H.. 1999. Diachronic prosody. In van der Hulst, H. (ed.) Word Prosodic Systems in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 335–422.Google Scholar
Li, F. and Whaley, L. J.. (2000). Emphatic reduplication in Oroqen and its Altaic context. Linguistics 38, 355–372.Google Scholar
Meid, W. (1971). Das germanische Praeteritum: Indogermanische Grundlagen und Ausbreitung im Germanischen. Institut fur Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft der Universitat Innsbruck.Google Scholar
Miller, R. A. (1971). Japanese and the Other Altaic Languages. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Miyashita, H. and Tokizaki, H.. (2017). Ancrene Wisse ni okeru hondooshi-to mokutekigo-no sootaitekigojun-to shakunyuugo [Relative word order of the main verb and the object and loanwords in the Ancrene Wisse]. JELS 34, 98–104. The English Linguistic Society of Japan.Google Scholar
Mutaka, N. and Hyman, L. M.. (1990). Syllables and morpheme integrity in Kinande reduplication. Phonology 7, 73–119.Google Scholar
Myers, S. and Carleton, T.. (1996). Tonal transfer in Chichewa. Phonology 13, 39–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nasu, A. (1999). Chouhukukei-onomatope-no kyouchou-keitai-to yuuhyousei [Emphatic forms of reduplicative mimetics and markedness]. Nihongo Nihon Bunka Kenkyuu [Studies on Japan and Japanese Culture] 9, 13–25.Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, I. and Tolskaya, M.. (2001). A Grammar of Udihe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Nugteren, H. (2003). Shira Yughur. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 265–285.Google Scholar
Odden, D. (1999). Typological issues in tone and stress in Bantu. In Kaji, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the Symposium Cross-Linguistic Studies of Tonal Phenomena: Tonogenesis, Typology, and Related Topics. Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa (ILCAA), Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, 187–215.Google Scholar
Orwin, M. (2011). Alliteration in Somali poetry. In Jonathan, R. (ed.) Alliteration in Culture. London: Palgrave, 219–230.Google Scholar
Pagel, M., Atkinson, Q. D., Calude, A. S., and Meadea, A.. (2013). Ultraconserved words point to deep language ancestry across Eurasia. PNAS 110, 8471–8476.Google Scholar
Plank, F. (1998). The co-variation of phonology with morphology and syntax: A hopeful history. Linguistic Typology 2, 195–230.Google Scholar
Polivanov, Y. D. [Полива́нов, Евге́ний Дми́триевич]. (1927). К вопросу о родственных отношениях корейского и “алтайских” языков [On the issue of family relations between Korean and “Altaic” languages]. Известия Академии наук СССР [Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR] 21 (7), 1195–1204.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, G. J. (1952–1966). Einführung in die Altaische Sprachwissenschaft [Introduction to Altaic Linguistics], 3 vols. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar
Robbeets, M. (2017). The Transeurasian languages. In Hickey, R. (ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of Areal Linguistics. Cambridge University Press, 586–626.Google Scholar
Rogers, D. and d’Arcangeli, L.. (2004). Italian. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 34, 117–121.Google Scholar
Schiering, R. and van der Hulst, H. (2010). Word accent systems in the languages of Asia. In van der Hulst, H., Goedemans, R., and van Zanten, E. (eds.) A Survey of Word Accentual Patterns in the Languages of the World. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, 509–613.Google Scholar
Schönig, C. (1998). Azerbaijanian. In Johanson, L., and Csató, É. Á. (eds.) The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge, 248–260.Google Scholar
Shoolbraid, G. M. H. (1975). The Oral Epic of Siberia and Central Asia. Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Sinor, D. (1968). Some remarks on Manchu poetry. In Sinor, Denis (ed.) Studies in South, East, and Central Asia: Presented as a Memorial Volume to the Late Professor Raghu Vira. New Delhi: International academy of Indian culture, 105–114.Google Scholar
Skribnik, E. (2003). Buryat. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 102–128.Google Scholar
Slater, K. W. (2003). Mangghuer. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 307–324.Google Scholar
Stampe, D.(1985). Rhyme and the holistic evolution of English. Handout of paper read at the 4th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Sunik, O. P. (1997). Тунгусо-маньчжурские языки [Tungusic-Manchurian languages]. In Алпатов, В. М., Кормушин, И. В., Пюрбеев, Г. Ц., and Романова, О. И. (eds.) Языки Мира: Монгольские Языки, Тунгусо-Маньчжурские Языки, Японскиий Язык, Корейский Язык [Languages of the World: Mongolian Languages, Tungus Languages, The Japanese Language, The Korean Language]. Москва: Издательство Индрик.Google Scholar
Svantesson, J.-O. (2003). Khalkha. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 154–176.Google Scholar
Svantesson, J.-O., Tsendina, A., Karlsson, A., and Franzén, V. (2005). The Phonology of Mongolian. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thurgood, G. (1993). Geminates: A cross-linguistic examination. In Ashmore Nevis, J., McMenamin, G., and Thurgood, G. (eds.) Papers in Honor of Frederick H. Brengelman on the Occasion of the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Department of Linguistics, CSU Fresno. Department of Linguistics, California State University, Fresno, 129–139.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H. (2011a). Japanese as an accent and stress language. Paper presented at International Conference on Phonetics and Phonology (ICPP 2011), Kyoto University, December 14.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H(2011b). The nature of linear information in the mophosyntax-PF interface. English Linguistics 28, 227–257.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H(2013). Deriving the compounding parameter from phonology. Linguistic Analysis 38, 275–303.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H(2015). Stress and restrictiveness in phrase and compound. JELS 32, 346–352.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H(2017). Historical changes of word order and word stress in English. In Tokizaki, H. (ed.) Phonological Externalization, vol. 2. Sapporo University, 83–100.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H. and Fukuda, K.. (2013). A statistical association between head-complement orders and word-stress location. Paper presented at Association for Linguistic Typology 10th Biennial Conference. University of Leipzig, August 17.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H. and Kuwana, Y.. (2013). A stress-based theory of disharmonic word orders. In Biberauer, T. and Sheehan, M. (eds.) Theoretical Approaches to Disharmonic Word Orders. Oxford University Press, 190–215.Google Scholar
Tokizaki, H. and Nasukawa, K.. (2014). Tone in Chinese: Preserving tonal melody in strong positions. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 35, 31–46.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. S. (1969). Principles of Phonology, trans. Baltaxe, C. A.M.. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Tsumagari, T. (1987). A Manchu wordplay in the Nišan Saman-i Bithe. Festschrift for Professor Park Eun-yong on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Hayang, Korea: Hyosung Women’s University Press, 567–576.Google Scholar
Tsumagari, T(1995). Tungusu-no kotoba-to bunka [Language and culture in Tungusic]. Toyogakuhoo [Studies in the East] 77, 167–169.Google Scholar
Tsumagari, T(1997). Linguistic diversity and national borders of Tungusic. In Shoji, H. (ed.) Senri Ethnological Studies 44: Northern Minority Languages: Problems on Survival. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 175–186.Google Scholar
Tsumagari, T(2003). Dagur. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 129–153.Google Scholar
Tsumagari, T(2009). A sketch of Solon grammar. Hoppo Jinbun Kenkyu [Journal of the Center for Northern Humanities, Hokkaido University] 2, 1–21. http://hdl.handle.net/2115/38236.Google Scholar
Walker, R. (2005). Weak triggers in vowel harmony. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23, 917–989.Google Scholar
Weiers, M. (2003). Moghol. In Janhunen, J. (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. London: Routledge, 248–264.Google Scholar
Welmers, W. E. (1973). African Language Structures. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, X. (1996). Vowel systems of the Manchu-Tungus languages of China. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar