Word stress in Pontianak Malay
Kazuya INAGAKI Nanzan University The aim of this paper is to describe word stress in Pontianak Malay from an impressionistic viewpoint, with supportive evidence from both acoustic analysis and (morpho-) phonological data. No research has been done on word stress in Pontianak Malay to date. I argue that this language has fixed (non-distinctive) ultimate word stress which only bears delimitative function. The main prosodic features for determining word stress in Pontianak Malay are length and clearness of vowels. This paper looks into the realization of these prosodic features through examining target words and presents supportive evidence for a descriptive generalization of word stress in Pontianak Malay.
1. Overview1 Pontianak Malay (hereafter PoM) is a vernacular variety of Malay spoken in and around the city of Pontianak, West Kalimantan province, Indonesia. Ethnoloɠue estimates the total number of speakers for three Malay varieties, i.e., Pontianak/Sambas/Ketapang Malay spoken in West Kalimantan as 940,000 (Simons & Fennig 2018: 186). Southeast Asia began an age of trading and religious activity around the 15th century. From the 18th century, Arab migrants, including Hadhrami Arabs from Yemen, began to reside increasingly in West Kalimantan. Additionally, Pontianak became a main trade center of West Kalimantan in the 18th century, attracting Buginese and southern Chinese people to come and work there, primarily in plantation and gold mining. In addition to immigrants from Java and South Sulawesi, Madurese also came to the Pontianak region under the transmigration program in the late 20th century. Currently Pontianak is composed of different ethnic groups, including Arabic, Chinese, Javanese, Buginese, Madurese, as well as the native ethnic groups of Malay and Dayak. In such a multilingual situation, PoM is usually used as the common language mainly among Malay people. Apart from the general descriptions on “Malay” such as Howison (1801), Marsden (1812), or Fokker (1895), there are only a limited number of previous studies focusing specifically on PoM. All of the following accounts were published in Indonesian: Kamal et al. (1986) provides a grammatical sketch of PoM, Kalbarpost (2001) a wordlist, Astar (2002) a documentation work of word geography, Martina, Novianti & Damayanti (2005) and Kurniati (2011) sociolinguistic analyses, and Abror (2009) a study on quatrain of PoM. No research has been done to date on the stress or accent of PoM. In fact, there is no phonological study of PoM. Thus, this study aims to provide a description of word stress and a phonological sketch of PoM on the basis of primary data recorded in
1 I am very grateful to Sander Adelaar, Szymon Grzelak, editors of this volume, and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions and comments on a previous draft. All remaining errors and shortcomings are mine. This paper is supported in part by ILCAA joint research project “A Research on Varieties of Malayic Languages”, and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 15K16746.
INAGAKI, Kazuya, 2020. ‘Word stress in Pontianak Malay’. In Thomas J. CONNERS and Atsuko UTSUMI, eds. Aspects of regional varieties of Malay. NUSA 68: 121-137. Permanent URL: http://repository.tufs.ac.jp/handle/10108/94896 https://doi.org/10.15026/94896 122 NUSA 68, 2020
Pontianak by the present author in September 2018. Language consultants who also kindly contributed to the recording were two young male native speakers of PoM. In the following section, some phonological features including word stress and intonation of PoM are described. Section 3 introduces the methodology and data on which this study relies. Section 4 provides the result of acoustic analysis and discusses how length contributes to the perception and production of word stress in PoM. Section 5 describes and discusses the interaction between the morphology and word stress in PoM. Finally, section 6 is a conclusion.
2. Description 2.1 Phonological features of PoM Pontianak Malay has six vowels /i e ə a o u/ and nineteen primary consonants /p t ʨ k ʔ b d ʥ g m n ȵ ŋ s h ɣ l w y/ with 6 loan consonants /f ɕ x v z r/ which can appear in loanwords from Arabic and Indonesian. Similarly to Riau-Johor Malay, PoM is considered to be a “schwa-variety” language (Asmah 1977: 2‒3, 22, 30) which shows phonetic schwa [ə] as an allophone of /a/ in a word-final open syllable. Examples in (1) illustrate some words containing a base-final schwa. Based on Blust & Trussel (2010‒) and Jones (2007), proto-forms or original forms are provided in parentheses hereafter if there are any. (1) a. adə ‘exist’ (PMP. *wada) b. samə ‘equal’ (PWMP. *sama) c. ŋ-adə-kan ‘bring about’ d. ȵamə-kan ‘make equal’ e. kə-ada-ʔan ‘situation’ The words in (1a) and (1b) indicate that a schwa replaced the word-final *a which occurred in proto-forms. However, suffixed2 forms in (1c) and (1d) have the same bases which apparently resulted from the application of the rule ‘/a/ → ə / ___#’. These data suggest that the synchronic allophonic rule in PoM may have gained a new status as a diachronic rule ‘*a > ə / ___#’ which causes a phonemic change. However, we need to consider examples like (1e) and clarify why the base-final /ə/ does not occur in the case of the kə-ʔan circumfixation (and -ʔan suffixation such as ʨoba-ʔan ‘test’ from ʨobə ‘try’). This paper leaves this problem open. Furthermore, as in Riau-Johor Malay, mid-vowels [e o] usually appear as allophones of /i u/ in word-final closed syllables.3
2 PoM has at least four verbal prefixes N-, (d)i-, b(ə)-, t(ə)-, two valency-increasing suffixes -kan, -i, and five nominal affixes pəN-, -an, kə-an, pəN-an, pəɣ-an. Some verbs which are derived by attaching the nasal prefix N- to the bases are: maʥoh ‘eat’ (N-paʥoh, cf. (d)ipaʥoh ‘be eaten’); ȵuɣahkan ‘pour’ (N- ʨuɣah-kan); ȵantay ‘relax’ (N-santay); ŋəsat ‘wipe dry’ (N-kəsat) [nasal substitution occurs when the first consonant of the base is a voiceless obstruent]; mbuka ‘open’ (N-buka); ȵʥait ‘sew’ (N-ʥait, cf. (d)iʥait ‘get stitches’); ŋgaɣoʔ (Kamal et al. 1986) ‘scratch’ (N-gaɣoʔ) [homo-organic nasal added when the first consonant of the base is a voiced obstruent]; ŋlabə (Kamal et al. 1986) ‘show off’ (N-labə, Kalbarpost 2001); ŋaʥaʔ ‘invite’ (N-aʥaʔ) [velar nasal added when the first segment of the base is a sonorant]. 3 See also Adelaar (1992: 10) for a summary on the distribution of mid-vowels in Standard Malay.
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 123
(2) a. pileh ‘choose’ (PAN. *piliq) b. tumet ‘heel’ (PWMP. *tumid) c. tutop ‘cover’ (PMP. *tutup) d. laot ‘sea’ (PAN. *lahud) Regarding the consonants, PoM does not have a trill /r/ as a primary consonant, but shows a voiced velar fricative /ɣ/ at every position (or a glottal stop /ʔ/ at the word-final position) where /r/ is expected to occur. (3) a. ɣumah ‘house’ (PAN. *Rumaq) b. timoɣ ‘east’ (PAN. *timuR) c. nuɣot ‘follow’ (PWMP. *tuRut) d. təɣbaŋ ‘fly’ Glottal stop /ʔ/ occurs as the coda of base-final syllables instead of expected /r/, /k/, or ∅ (zero). (4) a. aeʔ ‘water’ (PMP. *wahiR) b. butiʔ ‘grain’ (PWMP. *butir) c. ekoʔ ‘tail’ (PAN. *ikuR) d. masoʔ ‘enter’ (PMP. *p
2.2 Word stress of PoM This subsection focuses in the first place on four disyllabified phonological words,4 given in (5). This is the smallest set in number among three sets under consideration here, and describing this smallest set is a good starting point for looking into word stress in PoM. (5) a. məntɣi ‘minister’ b. palaʔ ‘head’ c. pɣeksə ‘inspection’ d. slatan ‘south’ The disyllabification process can be demonstrated as follows. (6) Disyllabification a. /mən.tə.ɣi/ → mən.tɣi (-təɣi → -tɣi ) b. /kə.pa.laʔ/ → pa.laʔ (kəpa- (→ kpa-) → pa-) c. /pə.ɣek.sə/ → pɣek.sə (pəɣek- → pɣek- ) d. /sə.la.tan/ → sla.tan (səla- → sla- )
4 In PoM, affixes are integrated into a phonological word, while clitics are not. For example, the 3rd person pronominal enclitics =ə and =ȵə that correspond in person and number are not integrated into a phonological word. The pronominal uses in the function of possessor, undergoer and actor are: iwak=ə ‘his/her/its fish’, namə=ȵə ‘his/her/its name’, ŋəsat=ə ‘wipe it/them off’, makan=ȵə ‘eat it/them’, dipaʥoh=ə ‘eaten by him/her/it’, dikoʨoʔ=ȵə ‘stirred up by him/her/it’. They are also used as an adverbializing marker (nampak=ə ‘apparently’ (nampak ‘visible’), axiɣ=ȵə ‘finally’ (axiɣ ‘end’)) or a nominalizing marker (ʨantek=ə ‘loveliness’ (Kamal et al. 1986: 73, ʨantek ‘lovely’)).
124 NUSA 68, 2020
As is clear from example (6), the vowel /ə/ in an originally non-final open syllable is the target vowel for the deletion process. In other words, any vowels other than /ə/ are not deleted, and /ə/ in a closed syllable and final /ə/ are never deleted, as exemplified in (6a) and (6c) respectively. Vowels including /ə/ in final syllable are not deleted but retained, possibly because the final syllables are stressed. Conversely, the vowel /ə/ in non-final open syllables is deleted possibly because non-final /ə/ is not stressed. Word stress of these disyllabified words is impressionistically described as in (7) below. The onset cluster /Cɣ-/ is realized as [Cɰ-] ([ɰ] as an allophone of /ɣ/), as illustrated in (7a, c). The word-final rhyme consisting of a vowel and a glottal stop /-Vʔ/ is realized as a creaky vowel [-V̰], as in (7b). (7) Impressionistic description of word stress (disyllabified words) a. mən.tɣi [mən.tɰí] b. pa.laʔ [pa.lá̰ ] c. pɣek.sə [pɰek.sə́] d. sla.tan [slá.tán] Only slatan is heard to the present author as if every vowel in it is salient. This point will be discussed below. In order to understand the regularity (and irregularity) of word stress in PoM more comprehensively, it is useful to look into other disyllabic words. (8) Impressionistic description of word stress (disyllabic words) a. bini [biní] ‘wife’, gigi [ɡiɡí] ‘tooth’, guɣu [ɡuɣú] ‘teacher’, kue [kué] ‘cake’, lihay [liháɪ] ‘skilled’, matə [matə́] ‘eye’ b. aȵʥiŋ [aȵʥíŋ] ‘dog’, buɣoŋ [buɣóŋ] ‘bird’, ʥaguh [ʥaɡúh] ‘clever’, kotaʔ [kotá̰ ] ‘town’, laot [laót˺] ‘sea’, leheɣ [lehéɰ] ‘neck’, sayoʔ [sajó̰ ] ‘vegetables’, təɣbaŋ [təɰbáŋ] ‘fly’, timoɣ [timóɰ] ‘east’, tumet [tumét˺] ‘heel’ c. kawan [káwán] ‘friend’, taman [támán] ‘park’ The description in (8a) and (8b) clearly shows that there is no difference in stress assignment between words with ultimate open syllable and ones with closed syllable. All words in (8a) and (8b) receive word stress on the final vowel mainly because the final vowel is produced and heard as relatively longer and clearer than the non-final vowel. On the other hand, kawan and taman in (8c) behave in a different way from words in (8a, b). They seem to receive word stress on the non-final syllable as well. Therefore, both final and non-final syllables are salient, and it cannot be determined that one is more salient than the other. Based on the phonetic observation of these words in (7) and (8), the four prosodic features which could constitute the word stress in PoM can be impressionistically summarized as in (9) below. This paper uses the term ‘clearness of vowels’ which reflects greater articulatory effort and precision of vowels (cf. van Heuven 2019; see §3.2 below). It differs from other prosodic features, namely pitch, loudness, and length. Clearness of vowels in this paper is described in such a way that vowels are relatively different in clearness or vividness. For example, the final [a] is clearer or more vivid than the non-final [a] in taman, or in more complicated cases, the degree of the clearness of the final [ə] in matə relative to other [ə]s in the language is heard relatively
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 125 higher than that of the non-final [a] relative to other [a]s in the same language. There is a similar term to clearness of vowels, namely “vowel quality”, but they should not be confounded with each other. “Vowel quality” is usually defined as, for example, “[t]he totality of those distinguishing characteristics of a particular vowel which result from the positions of the tongue and the lips during its articulation, but excluding such features as pitch, loudness, duration and usually also phonation type.” (Trask 1996: 384). Thus, “vowel quality” is a phonological concept, and usually described by using 5 binary distinctive features of tongue HEIGHT, BACKNESS, and ROUNDING. (9) Four features of word stress in PoM a. Pitch does not seem to be a relevant feature for determining the place of word stress. No salient pitch can be heard except for intonational curve. Only flat pitch can be heard over every target word. b. Loudness does also not seem to be more relevant either. Salient difference in loudness cannot always be heard between non-final and final syllables. c. Length seems to be more relevant to word stress than pitch/loudness. Final vowels can be heard as longer than non-final vowels in all target words except for slatan, kawan, and taman. d. Clearness of vowels also seems to be more relevant than pitch/loudness. The final vowels can be heard as slightly clearer than non-final vowels in all words. Based on these impressionistic characterizations, it can be said that word stress in PoM can be heard and produced according to a hierarchy ‘Clearness/Length > Loudness/Pitch’ which indicates that clearness and length are more reliable phonetic cues than loudness or pitch in PoM. Moreover, the following statements about word stress in PoM can be asserted. (10) Word stress in PoM a. Length and clearness contribute to the perception/production of word stress. b. The ultimate syllable receives fixed salience in length and clearness. c. There are three exceptional words, namely slatan, kawan, and taman. They receive salience on both penultimate and ultimate syllables (or show no word- level stress). There are two (morpho-)phonological phenomena which support the description in (10b) above. One such phenomenon is clipping which involves deletion of the first syllable of disyllabic function words. Some examples are listed in (11) below. (11) Deletion of the first syllable of disyllabic function words (clipping) a. (s)aʥáʔ → ʥaʔ ‘only’ b. bəlóm → lom ‘not yet’ c. dalám → lam ‘in(side)’ d. dulóʔ → loʔ ‘previously’ e. ʥugáʔ → gaʔ ‘also’ f. sudáh → dah ‘already’ g. tidáʔ → taʔ ‘not’
5 Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996: 296) provide five parameters for HEIGHT, three for BACKNESS, and four for ROUNDING (under two subcategories) as “[t]he major features of vowel quality”.
126 NUSA 68, 2020
Another phenomenon is the disyllabification illustrated in (6). As shown by the examples in (6), the final syllables which receive word stress are not deleted but always retained. The description in (10c) will be discussed in §4.2.
2.3 Intonation of PoM This subsection provides a short description on delimitative intonations of PoM. A sentence consisting of some phrases may be pronounced with the phrase-final rising pitch at the end of the first phrase. (12) Phrase-final rising pitch [↑]
[Katə matə↑]NP [katə bəndə]NP. word eye noun (=word+thing) ‘The word matə is a noun’. The phrase-final syllable with the rising pitch is usually lengthened in order to bear the pitch movement, resulting in a half-long vowel like [əˑ] in [… matəˑ]. A declarative sentence is pronounced with the sentence-final falling pitch at the end of the sentence. (13) Sentence-final falling pitch [↓]
[[Katə matə]NP [katə bəndə]NP ↓]S ‘The word matə is a noun’. The sentence-final syllable with the falling pitch is also usually lengthened, resulting in a half-long vowel like [əˑ] in [… bəndəˑ]. These intonational pitch movements can be indicated by using the symbol ‘H’ for high pitch, ‘L’ for low pitch, ‘φ’ for phrase boundary, and ‘ι’ for sentence boundary. For instance, the final syllable of the phrase [katə matə] in the example above is associated with ‘Hφ’, and the final syllable of the sentence, namely [də] is associated with ‘Lι’.
3. Methodology This section introduces the method and data used for the description of word stress in PoM. Target words and carrier sentences are illustrated in §3.1. Then, §3.2 provides the procedures used to measure the duration and intensity of each formant. Standard introductory textbooks usually provide loudness, pitch, and length as the most important and consistent indicators of word stress (for example, see Cruttenden 1997: 2‒5, 13‒15). However, considering the growing attention to other physiological and acoustic properties, this paper adopts clearness of vowels as an articulatory/perceptual cue of word stress. 3.1 Target words and carrier sentences There are 23 target words which were audio-recorded for this study.
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 127
(14) Target words: a. monosyllabic; tas ‘bag’ b. disyllabic 1; bini ‘wife’, gigi ‘tooth’, guɣu ‘teacher’, kue ‘cake’, lihay ‘skilled’, matə ‘eye’ c. disyllabic 2; aȵʥiŋ ‘dog’, buɣoŋ ‘bird’, ʥaguh ‘clever’, kawan ‘friend’, kotaʔ ‘box’, laot ‘sea’, leheɣ ‘neck’, sayoʔ ‘vegetables’, taman ‘park’, təɣbaŋ ‘fly’, timoɣ ‘east’, tumet ‘heel’ d. disyllabified; məntɣi ‘minister’, palaʔ ‘head’, pɣeksə ‘inspection’, slatan ‘south’ The monosyllabic tas is of little practical importance here. Disyllabic type 1 in (14b) contains target words with a final open syllable, whereas type 2 in (14c) contains words with a final closed syllable. Disyllabified words in (14d) have the same origin as their trisyllabic counterparts in Sambas Malay and Standard Malay/Indonesian. Thus, this paper deals with 22 formally disyllabic target words listed in (14b, c, d), except for the monosyllabic one in (14a)6. During the data-collection for the word stress in PoM, the target words were embedded in the three carrier sentences shown in (15). (15) Carrier sentences: a. initial position; tu katə {bəndə/sipat/kəɣʥa}. ‘ is a {noun/adjective/verb}.’ b. middle position; Katə katə {bəndə/sipat/kəɣʥa}. ‘The word is a {noun/adjective/verb}.’ c. final position; Tu ah . ‘It is .’ Among these three carrier sentences, (15a) is the best for observing word stress in that a target word can be pronounced without being affected by intonation. This is most probably the case because target words occur in the non-final position within a phrase. The carrier sentence in (15a) has a blank at phrase-initial position followed by a modifier, or demonstrative tu ‘it’. On the other hand, in the two carrier sentences (15b) and (15c), a target word occurs in phrase-final position (and sentence-final position in (15c)) where no modifier follows in the same phrase. In the phrase-final position, some rising pitch can be observed. This kind of pitch movement can be characterized as a raised pitch up to H(igh) at the rightmost boundary within a phrase.
The following figures show waveforms and F0 contour of all three carrier sentences in (15), containing a target word matə ‘eye’. The rightmost high pitch in a phrase is indicated by ‘Hφ’ consisting of the symbol of ‘H(igh)’ plus phrase boundary symbol ‘φ’. Similarly, a falling pitch in the sentence-final position is indicated by ‘Lι’ consisting of ‘L(ow)’ and a sentence boundary symbol ‘ι’.
6 In order to conduct a strict acoustic analysis, as an anonymous reviewer rightly pointed out, it would be best to choose target words in which the two vowels are phonologically the same in vowel quality, all the syllables or consonants do not affect the adjacent vowels, and so on. Future exploration will implement this suggestion.
128 NUSA 68, 2020
Figure 1. Waveform and superimposed F0 contour (matə in initial position)
Hφ
Figure 2. Waveform and superimposed F0 contour (matə in middle position)
Lι
Figure 3. Waveform and superimposed F0 contour (matə in final position)
Figure 1 contains a target word matə at its initial position and does not show any salient pitch movement on the target word. In contrast, Figure 2 shows a phrasal boundary pitch of Hφ on the same target word at the end of the noun phrase (kata matə), and the final vowel of the target word possibly undergoes phrase-final lengthening. Similarly,
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 129
Figure 3 shows a sentence-boundary pitch Lι and a slightly lengthened final vowel of the target word at the end of the sentence. Thus, the carrier sentence in (15a), which undergoes no lengthening nor pitch movement, is mainly used for investigating word stress in this study. 3.2 Measurement As is generally known, the acoustic correlate of impressionistic length is duration, and usually seconds (s) and milliseconds (ms) are used as the measurement unit of duration. The procedure to measure duration in this paper is as follows: (i) determine the starting and ending points which respectively show the first and last characteristic cycles of the periodic waveform for a relevant vowel (in the case of a creaky vowel [V̰], the starting point exists in its normal part while the ending point exists in its creaky part); (ii) measure the duration of the time interval between the starting and ending points on the waveform. Meanwhile, the acoustic correlate of clearness of vowels has not yet explicitly been stated in standard textbooks. However, van Heuven (2019: 29) states that ‘clear’ vowels reflect “greater articulatory effort and precision” and they are “spectrally expanded”. The degree of the spectral expansion, according to van Heuven, “is best expressed in terms of the Euclidean distance of a vowel away from the centre of the (acoustical) vowel space, which is defined by the mean value of F1 and F2 found for the individual speaker, when the speaker has produced an equal number of all the vowels in his language (under identical circumstances)” (ibid.). However, “greater articulatory effort and precision” which yield the clearness of a vowel would correlate with other acoustic properties in addition to the spectral expansion. One of the candidates of such acoustic correlate is the intensity of formants. Delattre et al. (1952: 203‒205) report some cases in which a reduction in the intensity of formant causes a shift in vowel color. Thus, this paper simply assumes that another available acoustic correlate of clearness is intensity of formant and uses ‘average intensity of each formant of a vowel’ for the sake of descriptive simplicity. ‘Intensity of each formant’ is not the same concept as “intensity”. The former refers to partial intensity while the latter refers to the overall intensity which is what scholars define as the acoustic correlate of loudness. Intensity of each formant and overall intensity are both quantified by using the same logarithmic scale ‘decibel (dB)’. The procedure to measure intensity of each formant in this paper is as follows: (i) select a time interval which seems to show the stable and representative spectrogram for a relevant vowel; (ii) obtain the intensity values of the F1/F2/F3 for the spectrum of the selected time interval.
4. Analysis and Results 4.1 Acoustic analysis Acoustic analyses of the word stress described in (7) are shown in Figure 4 below.
130 NUSA 68, 2020
m ə n t ɰ í p a l á
p ɰ e k s ə s l á t á n
Figure 4. Waveforms and spectrograms of the target disyllabified words
The results of the acoustic analysis support the impressionistic description shown in (7). In the case of paláʔ, length and clearness are crucial features for determining its word stress. The duration of the final [á̰ ] is 10% longer than the non-final [a] ([á̰ /a]=99/90ms). This property underlies the relative salience in length for the longer [á̰ ]. And the average intensity of F1/F2/F3 of the final [á̰ ] is 10% clearer than the non-final [a] ([á̰ /a]=64/58dB). This result constitutes the salience in clearness for the final [á̰ ]. Similarly, in the case of məntɣí, its final [í] is 174% longer and 15% clearer than the non-final [ə] ([í/ə]=104/38ms, 55/48dB), and as for pɣeksə́ , its final [ə́] is 47% longer and 11% clearer than the non-final [e] ([ə́/e]= 88/60ms, 61/55dB). If we can ignore the differences in intrinsic duration and formant intensity of each vowel, and in segmental make-up of the syllables (open vs. closed), it can be said that these results underlie the relative salience in length and clearness for [í] and [ə́] respectively.
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 131
Table 1 Duration and intensity of F1/F2/F3 for four disyllabified words
məntɣí paláʔ pɣeksə́ slátán
ə í a á e ə́ á1 á2 Duration [ms] 38 104 90 99 60 88 73 53
Ave. intensity of F1‒3 [dB] 48 55 58 64 55 61 60 66
F1 intensity [dB] 51 65 66 72 63 71 69 75
F2 intensity [dB] 51 50 60 68 52 60 60 65
F3 intensity [dB] 41 50 48 52 50 51 52 58
On the other hand, in the case of slátán, the duration of the final [á2] is only three quarter as long as the non-final [á1]. ([á2/á1]=53/73ms), but its final [á2] is 10% clearer than the non-final [á1] ([á2/á1]=66/60dB). The waveforms of the words káwán and támán in (8c) are extracted in Figure 5 and Figure 6 respectively. They show that each non-final vowel is longer than each final vowel: non-final 70ms (panel a) versus final 56ms (panel b) for káwán (Figure 5); non- final 72ms (panel a) versus final 54ms (panel b) for támán (Figure 6). The difference in duration is probably the factor by which each non-final vowel is heard as salient. (a)
k á w
(b)
w á n
Figure 5. Extracted waveforms of [á1] and [á2] in káwán
132 NUSA 68, 2020
(a)
t á m
(b)
m á n
Figure 6. Extracted waveforms of [á1] and [á2] in támán
Both spectrograms in Figure 7 show that each part of the final vowel is ‘thicker’, i.e. higher in each formant intensity than that of non-final vowel. This subjective observation can be confirmed by looking into the respective intensities of formants. Actually, the respective final vowels are 13% (54/48dB) and 11% (61/55dB) clearer than the respective non-final vowels. This difference in formant intensity is probably the factor by which the final vowels are heard as salient.
k á w á n t á m á n
Figure 7. Waveforms and spectrograms of káwán and támán
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 133
4.2 Discussion Three exceptional words, namely slatan, kawan, and taman which receive salience in length on the penultimate syllable needs to be discussed here. Firstly, all these exceptional words share final CVC syllable structure. Furthermore, the coda consonants of these three words are an alveolar nasal /n/. In the list of target words, there are some words ending with similar consonants, for example, a velar nasal /ŋ/ such as anʥiŋ, buɣoŋ, and təɣbaŋ. However, these words consistently receive ultimate salience in length. On the other hand, there are other words ending with alveolar stop /t/ which is also similar to /n/. In the case of laot and tumet, the final vowels are impressionistically more salient than the non-final ones. However, on the basis of acoustic analysis of these two words, it can be said that laot and tumet show slightly longer non-final vowels when we ignore the differences in intrinsic duration of each vowel and in segmental make-up of the syllables (5% longer ([a/o]= 102/97ms) for the former and 14% longer ([u/e]=64/56ms) for the latter). Nevertheless, these two words actually show clearer final vowels than non-final ones. Secondly, the ratio of longer vowel to shorter vowel is worthy of attention. A salient vowel usually has duration in the range from 10 to 50% longer than a non-salient vowel. However, as can be seen in Table 2, the word məntɣí shows 174% longer duration for its salient vowel [í] ([í/ə]=104/38ms). This difference in duration between salient and non-salient vowels is too large even if the difference in intrinsic duration and in segmental make-up of the syllables are taken into account. This is probably because the word is affected by a certain phonological rule. The problems of ratio gap and exceptional salience mentioned above can be resolved if we stipulate a phonological rule such as in (16) below. (16) Vowel shortening rule (reduction in length) V → V̆ / (C) C $ [−continuant, +coronal] This rule states that any vowel will be shortened before alveolar nasal or stop which occurs in coda position. Thus, the application of this rule produces the following outcomes in (17). (17) Application of the vowel shortening rule (and stress assignment on the final vowel) a. /mən.tɣi/ → mə̆ n.tɣi (mə̆ n.tɣí) b. /sla.tan/ → sla.tăn (sla.tắn) c. /ka.wan/ → ka.wăn (ka.wắn) d. /ta.man/ → ta.măn (ta.mắn) e. /la.ot/ → la.ŏt (la.ŏ́t) f. /tu.met/ → tu.mĕt (tu.mĕ́t) Being coupled with stress assignment, the final vowel í in (17a) mə̆ n.tɣí is realized as an extraordinarily longer vowel than shortened non-final vowel ə̆ , resulting in [mə̆ ntɣiː]. On the other hand, the final vowel (ắ / ŏ́ / ĕ́) in (17b)‒(17f) is realized as in similar length as, or even shorter than the non-final vowel (a / u).
134 NUSA 68, 2020
5. Morphological processes and word stress Word stress in PoM is assigned after morphological processes such as affixation and reduplication. In particular, suffixation is crucial for the stress placement as a suffix can change the stress assignment position of its base as shown in (18). (18) Difference in stress assignment position between base and suffixed derivative a. ȵuɣáh ‘pour down on’ ȵuɣah-kán ‘pour something on’ b. sənáŋ ‘happy’ ȵə naŋ-én ‘pleasant’ For example, in (18a), a causative/applicative suffix -kan changes the stress assignment position from base-final ɣáh to derivative-final kán. Similarly, in (18b), another causative (or in this case, adjective-forming) suffix -(ʔ)en, changes the stress assignment position from base-final náŋ to derivative-final ŋén. The impressionistic description given in (18) is supported by the acoustic analysis shown in Figure 8 below. The target word ȵuɣahkán is the one that occurs in a sentence Adə budaʔ kəʨiʔ ȵuɣahkan susu lam gəlas ‘A small child was pouring milk into a glass’. The duration of the final vowel of ȵuɣahkan is 12‒27% longer and the formant intensity of the final vowel is 4‒33% greater than the other vowels within a same derivative.
ȵ u ɣ a h k á n
46dB 50dB 25dB
53dB 54dB 44dB 59dB 60dB 54dB
Figure 8. Acoustic analysis of a suffixed derivative ȵuɣahkan ‘pour something on’
Notice that the final vowel before an alveolar nasal realizes as a still slightly longer vowel than other vowels, even though it is shortened through the application of the vowel shortening rule stipulated in (16). Similarly, in the case of word reduplication, the final vowel of a derivative is consistently longer and clearer than other vowels. In addition, it is obvious that the reduplicated output is a full-fledged phonological word because the stress assignment properly works within the range of the whole output. (19) Difference in stress assignment position between base and reduplicated derivative a. ʨobə́ ‘try’ ʨobə-ʨobə́ ‘experimental’ b. kawán ‘friend’ kon-kawán ‘friends’ (← kwan-kawan ← kawan-kawan) c. blarí ‘run’ blari-blarí ‘jog’
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 135
The reduplicated word kon-kawán in (19b) is a reduced form which is created by phonological processes of (i) deletion of the first vowel /a/ in the base (altering kawan into kwan), and (ii) fusion of the approximant /w/ and vowel /a/ (resulting in kon). The acoustic analysis for kon-kawán is shown in Figure 9 below. This word is the one that occurs in the sentence jadi tu kon-kawan tu bisə… ‘So, those friends could …’. The final vowel of kon-kawan has almost the same duration as the middle vowel although it must have undergone vowel shortening. And the formant intensity of the final vowel is slightly (5‒9%) greater than the other vowels within the word.
k o n k a w á n 47dB 49dB 52dB
52dB 61dB 57dB 74dB 73dB 69dB
Figure 9. Acoustic analysis of a reduplicated word kon-kawan ‘friends’
6. Conclusion From an impressionistic viewpoint, together with supportive evidence obtained through both acoustic analysis and (morpho-)phonological descriptions, this paper mainly elucidated that Pontianak Malay has ultimate fixed word stress in both length and clearness of vowels. These properties crucially contribute to the perception and production of word stress in this language. Additionally, in order to explain why some target words apparently also receive stress on the penultimate syllable, this paper stipulates a vowel shortening rule in specific environments which properly predicts the ultimate-syllable reduction in length. However, this paper does not fully deal with intonation, nor does it discuss interactions between word stress and intonation. Moreover, it also does not provide a full phonemic analysis. For example, the relatively important issue of the phonemic status of schwa /ə/ remains to be addressed. At any rate, there are many pending research problems in the phonology and grammar of the language. At this stage, much more descriptive study on Pontianak Malay is needed.
Abbreviations ↑ rising pitch NP noun phrase ↓ falling pitch O object 1 first person PAN Proto Austronesian 2 second person PMP Proto Malayo-Polynesian 3 third person PWMP Proto Western Malayo-Polynesian Hφ high pitch at the phrase boundary S sentence Lι low pitch at the sentence boundary
136 NUSA 68, 2020
References Abror, Abd. Rachman. 2009. Pantun Melayu: Titik temu Islam dan budaya lokal Nusantara. Yogyakarta: LKiS. Adelaar, K. Alexander. 1992. Proto-Malayic: The reconstruction of its phonology and parts of its lexicon and morphology, volume 119 of Pacific Linguistics Series C. Canberra: RSPAS, The Australian National University. Asmah Haji Omar. 1977. The phonological diversity of the Malay dialects. Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Astar, Hidayatul (ed.). 2002. Kosakata dasar Swadesh di Kotamadya Pontianak dan Kabupaten Pontianak. Jakarta: Pusat Bahasa, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Blust, Robert A. & Stephen Trussel. 2010‒. The Austronesian comparative dictionary, web edition. (Online: Retrieved 2 February 2019) [http://www.trussel2.com/ACD/] Cruttenden, Alan. 1997 [1986]. Intonation. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Delattre, Pierre, Alvin M. Liberman, Franklin S. Cooper and Louis J. Gerstman. 1952. An experimental study of the acoustic determinants of vowel color: Observations on one- and two-formant vowels synthesized from spectrographic patterns. Words 8(3): 195‒210. Fokker, Abraham Anthony. 1895. Malay phonetics. Leiden: Brill. Howison, James. 1801. A dictionary of the Malay tongue: As spoken in the peninsula of Malacca, the islands of Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Pulo Pinang, &c. &c. London: Arabic and Persian Press. Jones, Russell. (ed.) 2007. Loan-words in Indonesian and Malay. Leiden: KITLV Press. Kamal, Mustafa, Tri Manomo G. H., Asmadi M. T. Raz & Maria Ulfah. 1986. Morfologi dan sintaksis bahasa Melayu Pontianak. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengem- bangan Bahasa, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Kalbarpost. 2001. Kamus besar bahasa Pontianak. (Online: Retrieved 23 September 2018) [http://kalbarpost. blogspot.com/2001/01/bahasapontianak.html] Kurniati, Ai. 2011. Interferensi bahasa pada bahasa siaran radio di Kota Pontianak. In Budhiono, R. Hery, Basori, & Ai Kurniati (eds.), Bunga rampai: Hasil penelitian kebahasaan dan kesastraan, edisi II tahun 2011, pp. 37–55. Palangkaraya: Balai Bahasa Provinsi Kalimantan Tengah, Badan Pengembangan dan Pembinaan Bahasa, Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional. Ladefoged, Peter & Ian Maddieson. 1996. The sounds of the world’s languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Marsden, William. 1812. A grammar of the Malayan language. London: Cox and Baylis. Martina, Evi Novianti & Wahyu Damayanti. 2005. Interferensi dialek Melayu Pontianak terhadap bahasa Indonesia (Studi kasus acara dialog interaktif di TVRI Kalimantan Barat). Jakarta: Balai Bahasa Provinsi Kalimantan Barat, Pontianak, Pusat Bahasa, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
INAGAKI: Word stress in Pontianak Malay 137
Simons, Gary F. & Charles D. Fennig. 2018. Ethnoloɠue: Languages of Asia, 21st edition. Dalas, Texas: SIL International. Trask, Robert Lawrence. 1996. A dictionary of phonetics and phonology. London and New York: Routledge. van Heuven, Vincent J. 2019. Acoustic correlates and perceptual cues of word and sentence stress: Towards a cross-linguistic perspective. In Goedemans, Rob, Jeffrey Heinz and Harry van der Hulst (eds.), The study of word stress and accent: Theories, methods and data, pp. 15‒59. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.