DOCSLIB.ORG

The Phonology of Verbal Reduplication in Ancient Greek

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Phonology of Verbal Reduplication in Ancient Greek THE PHONOLOGY OF VERBAL REDUPLICATION IN ANCIENT GREEK: AN OPTIMALITY THEORY APPROACH by SAM ZUKOFF (Under the Direction of Jared S. Klein) ABSTRACT This thesis sets out to develop a constraint grammar for Ancient Greek within the framework of Optimality Theory that can economically and thoroughly account for the diversity of forms and patterns within the reduplicated categories of the verbal system. Analyzing the reduplicative morphemes to have a morphologically fixed vowel, I propose a constraint ranking that unites the patterns and ascribes the variation to differences in syllabification and alignment considerations. The exceptional patterns of the reduplicated presents and the enigmatic Attic Reduplication are explained as lexicalized archaisms generated by a minimally different constraint grammar of an earlier period of the language. This thesis thus seeks to integrate cutting-edge theoretical techniques with traditional historical methods to create a fully integrated account of reduplication in Ancient Greek, such that the conclusions drawn here may yield new insights not only into the synchronic state of Ancient Greek but also on the nature of reduplication in Proto-Indo-European. INDEX WORDS: Ancient Greek, verbal reduplication, Optimality Theory (OT), Correspondence Theory, syllabification, Attic Reduplication, coalescence, Proto-Indo-European (PIE), lexicalization, Structural Role (STROLE ) THE PHONOLOGY OF VERBAL REDUPLICATION IN ANCIENT GREEK: AN OPTIMALITY THEORY APPROACH by SAM ZUKOFF B.A., Georgetown University, 2010 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS ATHENS, GEORGIA 2012 © 2012 Sam Zukoff All Rights Reserved THE PHONOLOGY OF VERBAL REDUPLICATION IN ANCIENT GREEK: AN OPTIMALITY THEORY APPROACH by SAM ZUKOFF Major Professor: Jared S. Klein Committee: Anya Lunden Keith Langston Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia August 2012 DEDICATION To my brother. Don’t give up, don’t ever give up. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I cannot possibly properly thank the innumerable people who have helped me in the writing of this thesis, and who have helped me reach this point in my academic career, but I will try nonetheless. The most thanks of all must go to my teacher Jared Klein. Two years ago, I walked into UGA not even knowing what it was that I didn’t know. Now I know a lot of that, and, equally important, I now know what remains out there for me to learn. Without your tutelage, there is no way I would have had the skills necessary to write this thesis or been able to achieve everything I have over these past two years. I need especially to thank Anya Lunden for, among other things, introducing me to Optimality Theory, telling me to read the Kager book, and talking through so many issues about so many different topics and so many different papers. I truly would not be on the path on which I now find myself without your guidance. I would also like to thank my other committee member, Keith Langston. Although I never managed to take any of your classes for credit, I gained immensely from sitting in on them nonetheless. I would never have found myself interested in this topic at all without my amazing Linguistics and Classics professors from Georgetown University: Shaligram Shukla, Alex Sens, Patricia Slaton, Jim Gruber, Charles McNelis, Solomon Sara, Elizabeth Zsiga, and many others. v This thesis benefits immensely from the many constructive comments on, critiques of, and conversations about it that so many of the kindest people around have spent their time on over the past several years. Among others, I need to thank Donca Steriade, Jay Jasanoff, Donald Ringe, Kie Zuraw, Edward Flemming, Adam Albright, Velizar Sadovski, my friends and most valued colleagues Andrew Byrd, Tony Yates, Mark Wenthe, Brent Peterson, Caley Smith, Nick Kalivoda, Jessica DeLisi, Mattyas Huggard, Ryan Sandell, Adam Paulukaitis, Martin Macak, Ludi Chow, Kelly Dugan, Filip De Decker, my friend and fellow Neo-Saussurian Andy Paczkowski, all the members of Georgetown’s 2010 thesis seminar class, especially Nick Miller, for helping me through the first incarnation of this project, and my non-linguist friends Dan Rufolo, David Richards and Noah Frederick for humoring me and taking a look at this gibberish, even though it surely makes little sense even to the initiated linguist. And of course, above all, I need especially to thank my family. To my parents, my brother, and my grandparents, you have all been unbelievably supportive through what has surely been the craziest year of my life. There is absolutely no way I could have made it through without you. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1 1.1. The facts: the reduplicative patterns of Ancient Greek ....................................3 1.2. The corpus: what do we mean by Ancient Greek ? ............................................6 1.3. The approach: Optimality Theory and Correspondence Theory ......................8 1.4. Previous research ............................................................................................12 1.5. The outline ......................................................................................................17 1.6. Notes on the symbology and terminology of Optimality Theory ...................19 2 PERFECT-TENSE REDUPLICATION OF CONSONANT-INITIAL ROOTS ........22 2.1. Morpheme alignment ......................................................................................22 2.2. The size and shape of the reduplicant .............................................................25 2.3. The nature of the reduplicative vowel ............................................................26 2.4. The complications of longer roots ..................................................................33 2.5. Reduplication of CRV roots............................................................................35 2.6. CV and CRV reduplication conclusions .........................................................39 3 THE NON-COPYING BEHAVIOR OF obstruent + obstruent ROOTS ...................40 3.1. The problem with COV roots .........................................................................40 3.2. STRUCTURAL ROLE ..........................................................................................42 vii 3.3. Ramifications of a STRUCTURAL ROLE account ..............................................49 3.4. An alternative to STRUCTURAL ROLE : alignment ............................................54 3.5. Other COV root-shapes...................................................................................57 3.6. The problems with TS roots ............................................................................61 3.7. Conclusions about the reduplicative patterns of COV roots ...........................68 4 PRESENT-TENSE REDUPLICATION AND ITS IMPACT ON THE PERFECT ...71 4.1. Accounting for the reduplicated presents in Pre-Greek ..................................75 4.2 Which solution is better? .................................................................................79 4.3. The copying COV roots and their connection to reduplicated presents .........82 4.4. The alternation between ἔκτηµαι and κέκτηµαι ..............................................86 4.5. Conclusions about the reduplicated presents ..................................................87 5 REDUPLICATION AND INITIAL GEMINATES ....................................................89 5.1. σεύω and palatalization ...................................................................................89 5.2. σεύω as an initial double-consonant root ........................................................91 5.3. The present tense of an underlying double-consonant root ............................93 5.4. σεύω as an initial moraic-consonant root........................................................96 5.5. Other initial geminate roots ............................................................................99 5.6. r-initial roots as initial geminates .................................................................102 5.7. Conclusions about initial geminates .............................................................103 6 PERFECT-TENSE STEM-FORMATION OF VOWEL-INITIAL ROOTS ............105 6.1. The origins of vowel-initial roots in Greek...................................................107 6.2. What about the augment? ..............................................................................110 6.3. Perfect-tense stem formation through vowel lengthening ............................113 viii 6.4. Determining the quantity of the coalesced vowel .........................................116 6.5. Ruling out Attic Reduplication .....................................................................118 6.6. Determining the quality of the coalesced vowel ...........................................120 6.7. The vowel system of Ancient Greek .............................................................121 6.8. ā-fronting in Attic-Ionic ................................................................................124 6.9. Vowel-lengthening in Classical Attic ...........................................................125
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Feature Geometry in Disordered Phonologies
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by IUScholarWorks CLINICAL LINGUISTICS & PHONETICS, 1991, VOL. 5, NO. 4, 329-337 Feature geometry in disordered phonologies STEVEN B. CHIN and DANIEL A. DINNSEN Department of Linguistics, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA (Received 29 January 1991; accepted 8 May 1991) Abstract Two types of systems are in general use for the description and classification of consonants in disordered phonological systems: conventional place-voice-man- ner and standard distinctive features. This paper proposes the use of a third model, feature geometry, which is an analysis framework recently developed in the linguistic study of primary languages. Feature geometry allows for relatively independent behaviour of individual distinctive features, but also organizes them into hierarchies in order to capture the fact that features very often act together in rules. Application of the feature geometry to the study of the phonologies of 40 misarticulating children, specifically to the phenomena of apparent cluster coalescence, fricative/affricate alternations, and alveolar stop/glottal stop alter- nations, reveals that feature geometry provides better explanations for represen- tations and rules in disordered systems than either of the other two frameworks. Keywords: Feature geometry, distinctive features, functional misarticulation, phonological disorders. For personal use only. Introduction Two types of systems are in general use for the description and classification of consonants in disordered phonological systems. These are first, systems using place of articulation, voicing, and manner of articulation; and second, systems using distinctive features. The choice of using one or the other type of description is often more a matter of training tradition rather than true theoretical inclination.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 30: Distinctive Features-II
    Module 30: Distinctive Features-II . Objectives: • To carry over from the previous module and make the student familiar with some novel concepts relating to distinctive features, such as ambiguity and underspecification • To show the student the rationale of the proposals for distinctive features through exercises Topics: 30.1 Introduction 30.2 Dorsal features 30.3 Contour features 30.4 Prosodic features 30.5 Ambiguous features 30.6 Contrastive and redundant features: Underspecification 30.7 Summary 30.1 Introduction You were introduced to the notion of distinctive features in phonology in the preceding module. The need for the notion and the development of the theory of distinctive features arose, as we saw, on account of the problem of characterizing natural classes of sounds in structural phonology. As phonological processes involve natural classes of sounds, phonological analysis without the characterization of natural classes is unable to explain the naturalness of phonological processes as well as the distinction between a possible and impossible process. In the present module you will be further introduced to a discussion of some of the inadequacies of the best known account of distinctive features. Towards the end of the module, some aspects of uncertain interpretations of a few distinctive features will be taken up for caution. Finally the notion of Underspecification of features will be taken up for brief elaboration, as it relates to the theory in its earlier as well as later versions. 1 The main goal in presenting these topics is to have them put in one place because of their relevance to the topics that will be taken up for critical discussion in the course on Advanced Phonology.
    [Show full text]
  • Sofya Dmitrieva Institute for Linguistic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences Nasal-Infixed Presents and Their Collateral
    Sofya Dmitrieva Institute for Linguistic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences Nasal-infixed presents and their collateral aorists in Homeric Greek1 The process of formation of the Greek verbal paradigm is closely related to secondary affixation: new presents are built on present and non-present stems, modifying the grammatical semantics of primary roots (Kuryłowicz 1964). The paper analyses the uses of the Greek verbs derived from the IE present stems of the type R(C1C2)-né/n-R(C3)- or R(C1)-né/n-R(C2)- (LIV) and their collateral aoristic formations attested in the Homeric poems. Indo-European nasal-infixed presents are known to be connected with transitivisation (Meiser 1993; Sihler 1995; Shatskov 2016). It has also been observed that Greek n-infix verbs, along with higher degree of transitivity, demonstrate higher degree of telicity in comparison with the corresponding verbs of the same roots without the nasal infix. This feature had been mentioned in earlier studies, particularly concerning the nasal presents in -ανω (Vendryes 1923; Chantraine 1961), and was recently addressed with regard to other Greek n-presents (Dmitrieva 2017). It should be considered that lexical aspect played a significant role in the earlier periods of Ancient Greek (Moser 2017). Imperfects from telic verbs can often express perfective meaning; the employment of imperfectives "pro perfective" has been discussed in the studies dealing with Homeric aspect. (Napoli 2006: 191). Some nasal preterits could even formally be interpreted either as imperfects or aorists (e.g. ὄρινε, ἔκλινε). These conditions provide a good opportunity to investigate how nasal imperfects correspond with the aorists built to the same roots, taking into account the distribution of usages, structure and completeness of verbal paradigm.
    [Show full text]
  • C:\#1 Work\Greek\Wwgreek\REVISED
    Review Book for Luschnig, An Introduction to Ancient Greek Part Two: Lessons VII- XIV Revised, August 2007 © C. A. E. Luschnig 2007 Permission is granted to print and copy for personal/classroom use Contents Lesson VII: Participles 1 Lesson VIII: Pronouns, Perfect Active 6 Review of Pronouns 8 Lesson IX: Pronouns 11 Perfect Middle-Passive 13 Lesson X: Comparison, Aorist Passive 16 Review of Tenses and Voices 19 Lesson XI: Contract Verbs 21 Lesson XII: -MI Verbs 24 Work sheet on -:4 verbs 26 Lesson XII: Subjunctive & Optative 28 Review of Conditions 31 Lesson XIV imperatives, etc. 34 Principal Parts 35 Review 41 Protagoras selections 43 Lesson VII Participles Present Active and Middle-Passive, Future and Aorist, Active and Middle A. Summary 1. Definition: A participle shares two parts of speech. It is a verbal adjective. As an adjective it has gender, number, and case. As a verb it has tense and voice, and may take an object (in whatever case the verb takes). 2. Uses: In general there are three uses: attributive, circumstantial, and supplementary. Attributive: with the article, the participle is used as a noun or adjective. Examples: @Ê §P@<JgH, J Ð<J", Ò :X88T< PD`<@H. Circumstantial: without the article, but in agreement with a noun or pronoun (expressed or implied), whether a subject or an object in the sentence. This is an adjectival use. The circumstantial participle expresses: TIME: (when, after, while) [:", "ÛJ\6", :gJ">b] CAUSE: (since) [Jg, ñH] MANNER: (in, by) CONDITION: (if) [if the condition is negative with :Z] CONCESSION: (although) [6"\, 6"\BgD] PURPOSE: (to, in order to) future participle [ñH] GENITIVE ABSOLUTE: a noun / pronoun + a participle in the genitive form a clause which gives the circumstances of the action in the main sentence.
    [Show full text]
  • Phonetic and Phonological Systems Analysis (PPSA) User Notes For
    Phonetic and Phonological Systems Analysis (PPSA) User Notes for English Systems Sally Bates* and Jocelynne Watson** *University of St Mark and St John **Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh “A fully comprehensive analysis is not required for every child. A systematic, principled analysis is, however, necessary in all cases since it forms an integral part of the clinical decision-making process.” Bates & Watson (2012, p 105) Sally Bates & Jocelynne Watson (Authors) QMU & UCP Marjon © Phonetic and Phonological Systems Analysis (PPSA) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. Table of Contents Phonetic and Phonological Systems Analysis (PPSA) Introduction 3 PPSA Child 1 Completed PPSA 5 Using the PPSA (Page 1) Singleton Consonants and Word Structure 8 PI (Phonetic Inventory) 8 Target 8 Correct Realisation 10 Errored Realisation and Deletion 12 Other Errors 15 Using the PPSA (Page 2) Consonant Clusters 16 WI Clusters 17 WM Clusters 18 WF Clusters 19 Using the PPSA (Page 3) Vowels 20 Using the PPSA (Page 2) Error Pattern Summary 24 Child 1 Interpretation 25 Child 5 Data Sample 27 Child 5 Completed PPSA 29 Child 5 Interpretation 32 Advantages of the PPSA – why we like this approach 34 What the PPSA doesn’t do 35 References 37 Key points of the Creative Commons License operating with this PPSA Resource 37 N.B. We recommend that the reader has a blank copy of the 3 page PPSA to follow as they go through this guide. This is also available as a free download (PPSA Charting and Summary Form) under the same creative commons license conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Phonological Processes
    Phonological Processes Phonological processes are patterns of articulation that are developmentally appropriate in children learning to speak up until the ages listed below. PHONOLOGICAL PROCESS DESCRIPTION AGE ACQUIRED Initial Consonant Deletion Omitting first consonant (hat → at) Consonant Cluster Deletion Omitting both consonants of a consonant cluster (stop → op) 2 yrs. Reduplication Repeating syllables (water → wawa) Final Consonant Deletion Omitting a singleton consonant at the end of a word (nose → no) Unstressed Syllable Deletion Omitting a weak syllable (banana → nana) 3 yrs. Affrication Substituting an affricate for a nonaffricate (sheep → cheep) Stopping /f/ Substituting a stop for /f/ (fish → tish) Assimilation Changing a phoneme so it takes on a characteristic of another sound (bed → beb, yellow → lellow) 3 - 4 yrs. Velar Fronting Substituting a front sound for a back sound (cat → tat, gum → dum) Backing Substituting a back sound for a front sound (tap → cap) 4 - 5 yrs. Deaffrication Substituting an affricate with a continuant or stop (chip → sip) 4 yrs. Consonant Cluster Reduction (without /s/) Omitting one or more consonants in a sequence of consonants (grape → gape) Depalatalization of Final Singles Substituting a nonpalatal for a palatal sound at the end of a word (dish → dit) 4 - 6 yrs. Stopping of /s/ Substituting a stop sound for /s/ (sap → tap) 3 ½ - 5 yrs. Depalatalization of Initial Singles Substituting a nonpalatal for a palatal sound at the beginning of a word (shy → ty) Consonant Cluster Reduction (with /s/) Omitting one or more consonants in a sequence of consonants (step → tep) Alveolarization Substituting an alveolar for a nonalveolar sound (chew → too) 5 yrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Theoretical Aspects of Gitksan Phonology by Jason Camy Brown B.A., California State University, Fresno, 2000 M.A., California St
    Theoretical Aspects of Gitksan Phonology by Jason Camy Brown B.A., California State University, Fresno, 2000 M.A., California State University, Fresno, 2002 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in The Faculty of Graduate Studies (Linguistics) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) December 2008 © Jason Camy Brown, 2008 Abstract This thesis deals with the phonology of Gitksan, a Tsimshianic language spoken in northern British Columbia, Canada. The claim of this thesis is that Gitksan exhibits several gradient phonological restrictions on consonantal cooccurrence that hold over the lexicon. There is a gradient restriction on homorganic consonants, and within homorganic pairs, there is a gradient restriction on major class and manner features. It is claimed that these restrictions are due to a generalized OCP effect in the grammar, and that this effect can be relativized to subsidiary features, such as place, manner, etc. It is argued that these types of effects are best analyzed with the system of weighted constraints employed in Harmonic Grammar (Legendre et al. 1990, Smolensky & Legendre 2006). It is also claimed that Gitksan exhibits a gradient assimilatory effect among specific consonants. This type of effect is rare, and is unexpected given the general conditions of dissimilation. One such effect is the frequency of both pulmonic pairs of consonants and ejective pairs of consonants, which occur at rates higher than expected by chance. Another is the occurrence of uvular-uvular and velar-velar pairs of consonants, which also occur at rates higher than chance. This pattern is somewhat surprising, as there is a gradient prohibition on cooccurring pairs of dorsal consonants.
    [Show full text]
  • University of California Santa Cruz Minimal Reduplication
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ MINIMAL REDUPLICATION A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in LINGUISTICS by Jesse Saba Kirchner June 2010 The Dissertation of Jesse Saba Kirchner is approved: Professor Armin Mester, Chair Professor Jaye Padgett Professor Junko Ito Tyrus Miller Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies Copyright © by Jesse Saba Kirchner 2010 Some rights reserved: see Appendix E. Contents Abstract vi Dedication viii Acknowledgments ix 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Structureofthethesis ...... ....... ....... ....... ........ 2 1.2 Overviewofthetheory...... ....... ....... ....... .. ....... 2 1.2.1 GoalsofMR ..................................... 3 1.2.2 Assumptionsandpredictions. ....... 7 1.3 MorphologicalReduplication . .......... 10 1.3.1 Fixedsize..................................... ... 11 1.3.2 Phonologicalopacity. ...... 17 1.3.3 Prominentmaterialpreferentiallycopied . ............ 22 1.3.4 Localityofreduplication. ........ 24 1.3.5 Iconicity ..................................... ... 24 1.4 Syntacticreduplication. .......... 26 2 Morphological reduplication 30 2.1 Casestudy:Kwak’wala ...... ....... ....... ....... .. ....... 31 2.2 Data............................................ ... 33 2.2.1 Phonology ..................................... .. 33 2.2.2 Morphophonology ............................... ... 40 2.2.3 -mut’ .......................................... 40 2.3 Analysis........................................ ..... 48 2.3.1 Lengtheningandreduplication.
    [Show full text]
  • Vocalic Phonology in New Testament Manuscripts
    VOCALIC PHONOLOGY IN NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS by DOUGLAS LLOYD ANDERSON (Under the direction of Jared Klein) ABSTRACT This thesis investigates the development of iotacism and the merger of ! and " in Roman and Byzantine manuscripts of the New Testament. Chapter two uses onomastic variation in the manuscripts of Luke to demonstrate that the confusion of # and $ did not become prevalent until the seventh or eighth century. Furthermore, the variations % ~ # and % ~ $ did not manifest themselves until the ninth century, and then only adjacent to resonants. Chapter three treats the unexpected rarity of the confusion of o and " in certain second through fifth century New Testament manuscripts, postulating a merger of o and " in the second century CE in the communities producing the New Testament. Finally, chapter four discusses the chronology of these vocalic mergers to show that the Greek of the New Testament more closely parallels Attic inscriptions than Egyptian papyri. INDEX WORDS: Phonology, New Testament, Luke, Greek language, Bilingual interference, Iotacism, Vowel quantity, Koine, Dialect VOCALIC PHONOLOGY IN NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS by DOUGLAS LLOYD ANDERSON B.A., Emory University, 2003 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS ATHENS, GEORGIA 2007 © 2007 Douglas Anderson All Rights Reserved VOCALIC PHONOLOGY IN NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS by DOUGLAS LLOYD ANDERSON Major Professor: Jared Klein Committee: Erika Hermanowicz Richard
    [Show full text]
  • Sambahsa Mundialect Complete Grammar
    Sambahsa Mundialect Complete Grammar Henrique Matheus da Silva Lima Revision: Dr. Olivier Simon Version: !.!9.! IMPORTANT NOTES ABOUT LEGAL ISSUES This grammar is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 license. You are free to: Share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. You must give appropriate credit, provide a lin to the license, and indicate if changes !ere made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any !ay that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. "ere is the lin for more information# https#$$creativecommons.org$licenses$by$4.0$deed.en %or the elaboration of this grammar, The Grammar Of Sambahsa-Mundialect In English by &r. 'livier (imon !as used. (ome subchapters of this grammar are practically a transcription of 'livier)s book. &r. (imon has given me permission to do so, even considering the license of this book. *)ve also utilized many examples from The Grammar Of Sambahsa-Mundialect In English and others that Dr. Simon made for me. *t)s very important to inform the reader that the language it!elf ! not under a "reat #e "o$$on! l %en!e or anyth ng l ke that, the language is under the traditional Copyright license in !hich &r. 'livier (imon has all property rights. But the language ! free, you can translate your !orks or produce original !orks !ithout the need of &r.
    [Show full text]
  • The Aorist in Modern Armenian: Core Value and Contextual Meanings Anaid Donabedian-Demopoulos
    The aorist in Modern Armenian: core value and contextual meanings Anaid Donabedian-Demopoulos To cite this version: Anaid Donabedian-Demopoulos. The aorist in Modern Armenian: core value and contextual mean- ings. Zlatka Guentcheva. Aspectuality and Temporality. Descriptive and theoretical issues, John Benjamins, pp.375 - 412, 2016, 9789027267610. 10.1075/slcs.172.12don. halshs-01424956 HAL Id: halshs-01424956 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01424956 Submitted on 6 Jan 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The Aorist in Modern Armenian: core value and contextual meanings, in Guentchéva, Zlatka (ed.), Aspectuality and Temporality. Descriptive and theoretical issues, John Benjamins, 2016, p. 375-411 (the published paper miss examples written in Armenian) The aorist in Modern Armenian: core values and contextual meanings Anaïd Donabédian (SeDyL, INALCO/USPC, CNRS UMR8202, IRD UMR135) Introduction Comparison between particular markers in different languages is always controversial, nevertheless linguists can identify in numerous languages a verb tense that can be described as aorist. Cross-linguistic differences exist, due to the diachrony of the markers in question and their position within the verbal system of a given language, but there are clearly a certain number of shared morphological, syntactic, semantic and/or pragmatic features.
    [Show full text]
  • Gemination As Fortition?
    Gemination as fortition? Articulatory data from Hungarian Maida Percival, Tamás Gábor Csapó, Márton Bartók, Andrea Deme, Tekla Etelka Gráczi, Alexandra Markó Introduction: This study uses ultrasound imaging to investigate how tongue position differs across singleton and geminate consonants in Hungarian. In previous research, coronal geminates were found to be produced with greater lingual-palatal contact and a higher and flatter tongue (Kochetov & Kang, 2017; Payne, 2006). In Eastern Oromo, ultrasound imaging found similarly results that the tongue was more advanced in the mouth for coronal geminates, suggesting that it was more fully reaching its targeted place of articulation than singletons (Percival et al., 2019). These findings liken gemination with fortition. We follow up on these studies by examining whether there is evidence of differences in lingual articulation in geminates compared to singletons in Hungarian. As previous studies concentrated on coronal stops, we additionally ask if similar patterns of tongue raising or fronting can be found for geminates at other places of articulation as this could indicate how closely the pattern is tied to gemination in general versus a tongue pull mechanism limited to coronals. Methodology: Five native speakers of Hungarian (3 female, 2 male) were recorded with ultrasound and audio in Articulate Assistant Advanced (AAA). They read six repetitions of a word list containing geminate and singleton voiced and voiceless bilabial stops, alveolar stops, alveolar fricatives, and velar stops in intervocalic (post-tonic) position. Ultrasound frames at the point of maximum constriction were selected, and tongue contours were traced in AAA. The tongue contours were rotated to the speaker’s bite plane and divided into three regions (coronal, velar, and pharyngeal) (c.f.
    [Show full text]