DOMAINS IN MICHIF PHONOLOGY by Nicole Rosen A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Linguistics University of Toronto © Copyright by Nicole Rosen 2007 ii Domains in Michif Phonology Nicole Rosen Doctor of Philosophy 2007 Department of Linguistics University of Toronto Michif is an under-described contact language spoken by a few hundred Métis people, mostly in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. It has two principal source languages: Plains Cree and French and has generally been analyzed as having two co-phonologies: French phonology applying to the French-source lexical items and Cree phonology applying to the Cree-source lexical items (Rhodes 1986, Bakker 1997, Bakker & Papen 1997, Papen 2003. This thesis serves a dual role in the study of Michif. First, it offers the first systematic description of phonological distribution and patterning including segmental inventories, stress assignment and syllabification, as well as a sketch of Michif morphology and morphological categories. Second, it argues that Michif need not be analyzed as stratifying its lexical components according to historical source. Lexicon stratification of this type, according to historical language source, has also been posited for languages such as Japanese (Itô & Mester 1997, 2001, 2005) and English (Kiparsky 1982) to account for synchronic differences in patterning of different lexical items. However distributional differences in Michif are argued not to be sufficient for positing a stratified lexicon, and it is argued in this thesis that previously claimed synchronic patterning either relies on diachronic data as input to synchronic rules, or else the patterning itself is no longer productive in Michif, or different phonemicization accounts for patterning differences. Two case studies in Michif patterning, stress assignment and -deletion, are shown to be predictable and systematic with no differences in patterning with regards to historical language source. Given these facts, I argue that lexicon stratification in Michif is unwarranted. Although historical source domains do not play a role in synchronic iii Michif, prosodic domains are shown to have different phonological inventories and to pattern differently with respect to phonological processes such as syllabification and stress assignment. Michif affixes and minor categories are shown pattern differently, but this is based on regular synchronic patterning of linguistic, rather than historical, criteria. iv Acknowledgements Graduate school and this dissertation have been a huge part of my life in the last several years, and it’s hard to know where to start in thanking people who helped along the way for fear of leaving someone out. Here goes. First I’d like to thank the people who led me to this path: Hitay Yükseker, my first instructor at Queen’s University, who opened me up to the world of linguistics and encouraged me to pursue graduate work at the University of Toronto. I’d also like to thank the French linguistics section at the U of T, for welcoming me and exposing me to the field of Romance linguistics that I draw on in my work, but also for encouraging me to transfer departments even though it meant they were losing a student. I found out about this mysterious Michif language while in the French department, through research on North American French with Yves Roberge and a French in Contact course with Anne-Marie Brousseau, and for that I am eternally grateful. I don’t think I can get across how lucky I feel to have been part of the Linguistics department at the University of Toronto. It is a truly special place; one where students and faculty alike are dedicated, active, caring, and fun. I’d like to thank in particular Alana Johns, Jack Chambers, Diane Massam, Arsalan, Wenckje, Susana, Carrie, Abdel, Carolyn, Chiara, Milan, Manami, Christine, Suzanne and Alexei for being sources of inspiration and for making the department a brighter place at some point while I was there simply by being part of it. While I’m thanking people for brightening up my life, I would remiss in not mentioning Katreena & Jenn, my two good friends, grad school sounding boards and inspirations in how thesis-writing should be done: quickly. Also Jodi, for helping out with childcare in my final thesis writing and defending year. You and our G&T Fridays made things so much easier. I spent two beneficial periods while thesis-writing away from Toronto. I would like to thank the Institute for the Humanities of the University of Manitoba for allowing me closer v access to my research, and Shana Poplack at the University of Ottawa for showing me a different approach to language variation contact. My time in Ottawa has influenced this thesis and my approach to linguistics, generally, and for that I am grateful. A number of people have helped with the thesis in particular. I’d like to thank Manami Hirayama particularly for her help with the phonetic and Japanese parts in the thesis, as well as Ron Smyth for help with statistics (or lack thereof). Peter Bakker, despite our differing views of Michif, has always been supportive of my work and inspirational in his. Both Emmanuel Nikiema and Elan Dresher gave me extremely helpful comments on previous versions of my thesis, allowing me to improve the final product. Thank you for your time. Of course I cannot thank my consultants enough: Norman Fleury, the first Michif speaker I ever met, and who consulted with me regularly over the years; Rita Flamand, who met and emailed me so diligently when I needed help; and Grace Zoldy, a wonderful speaker and proponent of the Michif language. I would be nowhere without these three people and I am so glad they agree to share their knowledge with me. Likewise, Heather Souter has pushed me to learn more about the Michif people and language and has been a source of inspiration, as she lives and learns the Michif language. I feel so fortunate to have been welcomed into the Manitoba Métis Federation and greater Métis community, and I hope to be able to return their generosity. I and my thesis have benefited from having the best advisor and external appraiser a PhD candidate could ask for. Though he was involved only after the thesis was submitted, Rich Rhodes played a huge role in the final version found here. He spent an unknown number of hours going over the fine details of my data, teaching me a lot about Michif and attention to detail along the way. Words cannot express my gratitude for the attention he has given my work. Similarly, there are no mere words to describe my advisor and mentor Keren Rice, and I will not do her a disservice by trying to describe her. She is, simply put, the most impressive vi person I know, and my inspiration in all things academic. Everyone should be so lucky to have an advisor like Keren, but since not everyone can, I’m glad I was. Keren, I will never be able to thank you enough. I’d like to thank my family for their support, in particular my mother for her intellectual curiosity, and my father for his sense of humour. Both have proven invaluable throughout the years. And finally, I need to thank my new family for constant inspiration: Dave, the love of my life, whom I met while in grad school, for putting up with hearing ‘I’m almost finished’ more times than either of us can count, not to mention moving all over the country with me, and Oscar, for being my other labour of love. You both make my life better just by being in it. vii Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction to the Michif language .............................................................................. 1 1.1.1 The Métis people and the creation of Michif......................................................... 1 1.1.2 Terminology .......................................................................................................... 2 1.1.3 Status of Michif today ........................................................................................... 3 1.2 Contact languages.......................................................................................................... 4 1.2.1 Types of contact languages.................................................................................... 4 1.2.2 Contact languages as an object of study................................................................ 6 1.2.3 Conflict sites.......................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Previous work on Michif ............................................................................................... 8 1.4 The data......................................................................................................................... 9 1.4.1 Elicited data........................................................................................................... 9 1.4.2 Recordings ........................................................................................................... 10 1.4.3 Limits of the data................................................................................................. 10 1.5 A preview of the thesis ................................................................................................ 11 1.5.1 Potential inventorial evidence.............................................................................. 11 1.5.2 Potential evidence from stress