The Status of Laryngeal in Mohawk"

Jose Bonneau MIT/McGill University Abstract

This paper will show that the "degenerate" nature of laryngeal consonants in Mohawk can be accounted for if we assume that both /7/ and /hl in post-vocalic position are in the Nucleus of the syllable. Some discrepancies between /7/ and /hl are explained away if post-vocalic /hl is syllabified as the right member of a branching nucleus whereas /7/ is part of a light diphthong (cf. Kaye & Lowenstamm 1984). Three basic pieces of evidence are used in favour of this hypothesis: (i) the non-application of epenthesis in laryngeal- clusters, (ii) the exceptional behavior of consonant-? with respect to glide vocalization, and (iii) the behavior of /7/ in the process of " Doubling" discussed in Postal (1969). Finally, a general condition on the licensing of IaryngeaIs will be suggested, based on the "Prosodic Government Constraint" of Kaye & Lowenstamm (1985).

The laryngeal consonants are defective in many ways; that is, they do not behave like "complete" segments, even when they occupy a timing slot of their own. Evidenc~ for this can be found in a number of well-documented processes. The laryngeals, along WIth a number of other consonants, fail to geminate in various Semitic languages when mapped onto a skeleton which demands a geminate. In Zoque (Kingston 1986), too, the presence of /71 before a stem-final consonant does not interfere, contrary to other consonants, with the process of compensatory lengthening (gemination). Zoque, and a number of Amerindian languages - e.g., Cayuga (Foster 1982); Mohawk (Postal 1969) - have a process in which the relative order of a sequence of laryngeals and a following vowel is changed. Finally, laryngeals also behave in a particular way with respect to the assignment of stress in some languages; that is, they do not close the syllable as other consonants do (see Jeanne 1978 for Hopi and Safir 1979 for Capanahua, among others). These authors suggest that /71 forms a "light" diphthong, in the sense of Kaye & Lowenstamm (1981), with the preceding vowel.

In this paper I will discuss similar properties of laryngeal consonants in Mohawk, an Iroquoian language spoken on Montreal's Kahnawake reserve, in Ontario, and in New York State'! In section 1, I will show that the distributional properties of /71 and /hI with respect to epenthesis can be accounted for directly if we assume that /71 forms a light diphthong with the preceding vowel, whereas /hi is syllabified as the right member of a branching nucleus. The analysis will be strengthened in section 2 when I discuss the special behaviour of /71 in glide vocalization. Section 3 deals with the case of so-called metathesis in Mohawk. It will be shown that metathesis can be readily accounted for if we adopt the representation of the feature system first suggested in Clements (1985), to show

* For discussions and comments, I would like to thank Alicja Gorecka, Donca Steriade, Morris Halle, David Lipscomb, Karin Michelson, Sam Rosenthall, Glyne Piggott, Jose Tourville and the reviewers of the McGill Working Papers in Linguistics. I, of course, take responsibility for any errors and/or misinterpretations. 1All of my data are taken from Michelson (1983) and Postal (1968).

60 THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MOHAWK 61

that the metathesis effect is only apparent. Finally, I will try to give a general characterization of the "deficient" nature of laryngeal consonants in terms of the "Prosodic Government Constraint" suggested in Kaye & Lowenstamm (1985).

I will adopt a syllabification theory which argues for the existence of a skeletal tier (see Levin 1985; Kaye & Lowenstamm 1981; and Prince 1984, among others). While most current researchers accept the existence of a level of syllabic terminals mediating between the syllable and the melody, its exact representation is a matter of continuing debate. Levin (1985) argues that the Cs and Vs suggested in McCarthy (1979) are redundant and that the skeleton should in fact be considered timing units represented by Xs. Others, such as Hyman (1985)" propose that the skeleton consists of weight units or morae. I will adopt Levin's (1985) hypothesis, although nothing in this paper hinges upon this particular issue.

The nature of the, skeleton and the form of the subsyllabic categories are not independent of each other. With subsyllabic categories such as the coda, the CN differentiation on the skeleton becomes unnecessary. In a model with no sub syllabic categories and the syllable node directly dominating the skeleton, more information on the skeleton is necessary. In this paper I will crucially refer to the structure of the rime and nucleus. No such constituent exists in a theory with no subconstituents, such as that of Clements & Keyser (1983). The status of the onset and coda constituents remains, however, a topic of debate (see Kaye & Lowenstamm 1981, Steriade 1982 for arguments for such constituents). I will adopt the basic syllable structure represented in (1).

(1) a A (0) R A N (C)

1. Distributional Properties of Laryngeals and Epenthesis

All consonants of Mohawk (i.e, k, t, s, n, r, w, y, ?) may appear word-initially and/or word-finally. Word-initial are automatically preceded by /? /, which is not word-initial underlyingly.s An exception to this distribution is /hI, which occurs neither word-ini.tial~y (except in a few uninflected particles; K. Michelson, personal communication) nor word-finally. In terms of syllable structure I will assume that all consonants may appear in the onset, in the coda, or in both.

2 According to Michelson (1983), Mohawk has four oral vowels, /i/, /e! .la!, and /0/, and two nasal vowels, /A! and /0/. IA! represents a central nasal vowel. The front vowels may appear as lax in stressless environments and the nasal vowels become oral in closed syllables. The are aspirated in some environments: in word fmal position, as transition between in clusters and before /hI. /s/ shows aspiration before but voices between vowels. In addition, /k/ and It! in more environments: namely, between vowels and between a vowel and a resonant. I will use the abbreviations given in Michelson (1983): lA, 2A = 1st and 2nd person singular pronoun agent prefix; IMP = imperfective; HAB = habitual aspect; CIS = cislocative; NSF = noun suffix; MA = 3rd per~on masculine singular agent prefix; MP = 3rd person masculine singular patient prefix; PERF = perfective aspect; CAUS = causative marker; DU = dislocative; PUT = future tense marker; PUNC = punctual aspect; AOR = aorist; IdA = 1st person dual; NO = 3rd person neuter; SRF = semireflexive. 62 BONNEAU

The distribution of consonants becomes more interesting when we consider the distribution of /? / and /h/ in clusters. Possible CC-c1usters in initial and final positions of words are somewhat restricted. In initial position, they are generally restricted to O(bstruent)-O (e.g. sk/ks, ts/st) and Oh clusters.3 CR(esonant)-clusters are broken up by a rule of epenthesis+ this is illustrated in (2). RC-c1usters do not occur in initial position.

(2) a. k + rho + s kErhos (IA + coat + HAB) 'Icoat it'

b. sni + ehyahra? + s sEnehya:ra?s5 (2dA + think + HAB) 'you think'

In final position the restriction on possible CC-clusters is even stricter. CC-clusters generally do not occur except for non-resonant consonants followed by /s/ (e.g. ks, hs, ts). Neither CR nor RC-c1usters occur in this position. A note able exception, however, is ?R. C? may also precede almost any consonant in final position except /h/, /1/ and /r/.6 Examples of ?R 7 clusters in final position are given in (3).

(3) a. hs + nuhwe? + n 'sEnu:we?n (2A + like + IMP) 'Like it!'

3 There are exceptions to this statement. There are cases of kk clusters and Cy clusters in initial position. kw is also a possible CC-cluster in this position. Perhaps Cy can be analysed as a palatalized obstruent (Michelson 1983). As for the kk cluster, 1 will assume that the first k is in the appendix rather than the onset of the first syllable. 4 Again there are exceptions to CR-Epenthesis. Cy clusters seem to escape this rule:

(i) wa? + k + at + ya7k + 7 -> wa7katya7kE7 (AOR + Is + SRF + cut + PUNC) 'I cut myself

5 There are no vowel sequences in Mohawk. In (2b) Iii has been deleted as a result of a morphologically conditioned vowel deletion process (Michelson 1983). The deletion of /hI in (2b) is the result of a rule that deletes laryngeals in stressed syllable. See section 4 for an analysis of this phenomenon. 6 rk and ht are exceptions. 1 will have little to say about these. Perhaps both k and I should be allowed in the appendix of the syllable (cf. (8». 7 The reason why (b) is not integrated in the condition (a) in (7) is related to the absence of epenthetic vowel in Cy clusters. Condition (b) takes care of examples like (i).

(i) t + k + atawya7t + s --7 tkatawEya7ts (CIS + Is + enter + HAB) 'I enter'

Michelson (1983) postulates two other rules of e-epenthesis crucially ordered with respect to stress assignment. (7) is referred to as "Poststress E-Epenthesis" since it is ordered after stress. Since stress is generally penultimate in Mohawk, this rule accounts for the antepenultimate stress in (4b), for instance. The two other rules of epenthesis are referred to as "Prestress E-Epenthesis" I and II. Their effect need not concern us here. Essentially they insert e in the context _C', where ".••means unsyllabified consonant. THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MOHAWK 63

b. Te + t + yo + akavw + 0 ~ tetyo:kara ?w (DU + CIS + ZO + be dark + IMP) 'Be dark'

It seems then that ?R in final position does not behave as CR-clusters do: i.e. it does not trigger epenthesis. This observation is reinforced by the fact that medial position "R does not trigger epenthesis although other CR-clusters are broken up in this position. Compare (4) and (5).

(4) a. wak + nyak + s waklinyaks (1P + get married + HAB) 'I get married'

b. te + k + rik + s ~ tekliriks (DU + lA + put side by side + HAB) 'I put side by side'

c. wak + atayaxru? + s wakatyanliruts (lP + feel spooky + HAB) 'I feel spooky'

(5) a. A + wak + ita?w + ? Awaki.tawli? (FUT + IP + sleep + PUNC) 'I will sleep'

b. k + ?nikhu + s kE?nikhus (1A + sew + HAB) 'I sew'

The same observation holds of hR -clusters in medial position, as in (6):

(6) a. k + ya?t + ahnot + ha? kyastahnotha? (1A + body + describe + HAB)

b. yo + hruw + a? ohru.wa? (yo + ditch + NSF) 'ditch'

Michelson (1981, 1983) notices the peculiar behaviour of?R and hR with respect to epenthesis, but she does not correlate this fact with other distributional properties of f? / and /h/. Michelson (1983) proposes to account for this observation by adding the specification [- low] to the consonant on the left-hand side of the context bar in (7).8

8 According to Gorecka (1985), all rules of syllabification apply cyclically. Hence the last t in (i) should, according to this view, be syllabified in the coda of the preceding syllable. But this analysis predicts incorrectly that lengthening will not apply since t closes the stressed syllable.

(i) v + k + ya?t + ahnot + v? ~ vkya? tahno.tv?

See Bonneau (in progress) for an alternative analysis. 64 BONNEAU

(7) { l-llrwl-- w

But (7) does not say much about the peculiar relation between the distributional properties of /hi and /7/, and their behaviour with respect to epenthesis.

A full analysis of the syllable structure of Mohawk is beyond the scope of this paper (but see Bonneau in progress for a detailed analysis). However, ~n light of the restrictions on consonant clusters discussed above, 1will suggest that (8) IS a reasonable hypothesis for Mohawk.

(8) App. A o R AA x (x) N C AI x (x) x x I I /hi (s, t, k, ?)

Whether or not the onset is branching in Mohawk is a debatable question. One could always argue that most, if not all, consonant clusters are in fact complex segments of some sort. Other clusters might be accounted for by allowing the first consonant of a cluster to appear in an initial appendix position. Evidence against this view has been provided in Gorecka's (1989) analysis of Kw -clusters.

Essentially, Kw -clusters behave like single segments only if followed by a vowel in the same morpheme; i.e. they do not prevent open syllable lengthening, which lengthens a preceding stressed vowel in an open syllable, e.g. (9a-b). Kw s act like clusters of two segments only in the morpheme-final position, e.g. (IOa-b) (see Michelson 1983).

(9) a. ka + YAkwir+? kaya.kwirli? (Zs + arrow + NSF) 'arrow'

b. hra + kwek + s ~ ra:kweks (MA + shut off + HAB) 'he shuts it off'

(10) a. k + rukw + as kErukwas (IA + scrape + HAB) 'Iscrape it'

b. hro + kw + A OkwA (MO + pick + PERF) 'He has picked it' THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MOHAWK 65

Michelson (1988) suggests that those kw s that do not close the preceding syllable are actually complex segments (labiovelars). Clusters that do close the preceding syllable are real stop-glide sequences. On this account, however, the nonexistence of morpheme- finallabiovelars, as well as the absence of bisegmental kws in the morpheme-internal position (followed by a vowel) are accidental gaps. Gorecka (1989) proposes instead to derive all sequences of kw from an underlying velar-stop and round glide sequence. Cyclic syllabification rules will derive the appropriate structures (see Steriade 1982, 1984).9 Gorecka's analysis is the only one I know that suggests the existence of branching onsets in Mohawk. But since both Postal (1968) and Michelson (1988) challenge this view seriously, it is far from clear that (8) is the correct analysis. (I will assume (8) nevertheless, since nothing in the following analysis of laryngeals hinges on this issue.) Branching codas seem to be less likely since, as we have seen earlier, consonant clusters in final position are quite limited. 10 Finally, a branching nucleus is allowed in Mohawk only in the case where /hi is the right member of this nucleus. Long vowels are not allowed in underlying representations in Mohawk. They occur only as a result of open syllable lengthening. In fact it is possible that this constraint extends also to geminates, as I did not find true cases of geminate consonants in Mohawk (but see note 3).

The one-to-many and many-to-one relationship of skeletal points and segments allow for different representations. For example, (1Ia) covers both the case of long vowels and geminate consonants depending on the skeletal points being dominated by the nucleus or the onset/coda. (11b) covers both the cases of complex segments (e.g. ts/ks) and light diphthongs (in the sense of Kaye & Lowenstamm 1981).

(11) a. x x b. x V A (l J3

There are no long vowels in Mohawk; that is, (1Ia) is not allowed in the nucleus underlyingly. There are also no diphthongs of any kind. However, I would like to suggest, following Safir (1979) and others, that (11b) is allowed in Mohawk in the case J3= f?/ and

9 If we allow branching codas to appear in Mohawk, we would expect fewer restrictions on the possible CC-clusters in final position. The presence of /s/ in many of the CC-clusters is not very surprising. It has been widely recognized that Isl often violates the in clusters. Furthermore, Sn and Sw escape the epenthesis rule (7), as shown below.

(i) hs + atsnoret + 0 -> satsno:ret (2A + hurry + IMP) 'Hurry up'

(ii) yo + ?swv?t + a? -> o?swv:ta? (2P + coal + NSF) 'coal'

Although I do not have a clear understanding of the behaviour of /s/, the observations presented so far recall the behaviour of /s/ in other languages such as Spanish; cf. Harris (1983). Harris (1983) proposes to treat s as a special which is adjoined to the syllable by a marked rule of syllabification. I will assume that this is also true in Mohawk. 10 An exception to this is ht . But see note 6. ?? and Ih also do not occur in this position. This gap follows from the analysis presented above, for V?h clusters would violate the constraint (13). See also section 4 on /?I-deletion in ?h clusters. 66 BONNEAU

a = vowel. Hence, cases of postvocalic f? I will be syllabified as in (12a). f? / is not allowed to appear in the coda. For reasons that will become clear below, I also propose the structure (12b) for postvocalic /hi.

(12) a. N b. N I A x x x A I I V ? V h

Furthermore, I will assume that Mohawk is subject to the constraint on representation given in (13) (Kaye & Lowenstamm's 1985 "Prosodic Government Constraint"):

(13) * R A N C AI x x x

(13) rules out both the case of long vowels and (12b) in closed syllables.

Let us now consider the distributional properties of f? I and /hi presented earlier. The exceptional behaviour of /hi and f? I with respect to epenthesis follows nicely from our analysis. Consider for instance the structure of the last syllable of (3a) and the first syllable of (6b), represented here as (14a-b) respectively. (14) a. .>.0" b. r-.0" r-.0" 0 R 0 R 0 R I A I I I D x N C x N x I I I I A I w x x y x x r A I I I e ? n 0 h

Since both f?/ and /hi are nuclear elements at the stage where epenthesis is expected to apply, no cluster of non-syllabic CR arises. Hence, epenthesis will not apply to break the hR , ?R sequences.

(12a, b) also account for the distribution of?C and hC clusters in final position. Although /hI and f? I behave similarly with respect to epenthesis, they differ when we consider the distribution of CC-clusters in final position of word. ?C clusters are freely THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MORA WK 67

allowed in this position. Almost any consonant can follow f?1 in this position, whereas hC clusters generally do not occur in final position. 11 But that is precisely what the conjunction of (12) and (13) predicts. Since /hi occupies the branching nucleus in (12b), the following consonant(s) will have to be in the coda, thereby violating (13). However, f7/ is part of a non-branching nucleus, hence the following consonant may be properly syllabified without violating (13). This analysis also accounts for the limited possible CCC- clusters in final position. In fact only two types of CCC- clusters are allowed in final position; rts and ?ks. This is not so surprising if we assume that only f?I is allowed to occur in structures like (12a).12

2. Glide Vocalization and the Behaviour of I'll and Ih/.

Another piece of evidence for the peculiar status of laryngeal consonants in Mohawk may be found if we consider the context of application of glide vocalization, cf. Michelson (1983). The glides Iwl and Iyl vocalize to 101 and IiI respectively, between a consonant or /hi and a word final f?I, and word finally after a consonant or /hi. Consider for example (15) and (16):

(15) a. A + k + ahtzty +"1 AkahtA:t? (FUT + lA + leave + PUNC) 'Iwill leave'

b. hs + ahtsty + 0 sahts.ti (2A + leave + IMP) 'leave!'

c. k + rihsy + us kErihsyus (IA + take off + RAB) 'I am taking off'

(16) a. A + k + atshokw +"1 Akatsho:ko? (PUT + lA + smoke + PUNC) 'I will smoke'

b. hs + atshokw + 0 satsho:hokw (2A + smoke + IMP) 'smoke'

c. hs + 0 + hw + 0 ~ soho (2A + be in water + CAUS + IMP) 'get into the water'

11 Michelson (1983) also gives some cases of CCCC(C)-clusters in initial and final positions. In initial position only Khny is found, whereas in final position only ?tsth and ?tskw are found. Again it is interesting to note that these clusters involve laryngeals, glide and /s/. This suggests that these clusters might be reducible to CC(C) clusters.

12 Michelson (1983) also gives some cases of CCCC(C)-clusters in initial and final positions. In initial position only Khny is found, whereas in final position only ?tsth and ?tskw are found. Again it is interesting to note that these clusters involve laryngeals, glide and /s/. This suggests that these clusters might be reducible to CC(C) clusters. 68 BONNEAU

Interestingly enough, when the /w/ is preceded by f?/, vocalization does not apply (but see note 12). Instead, depending on the type of consonant that follows, the glide deletes, e.g. (17c), or epenthesis breaks up the cluster C-glide, e.g. (17b).

(17) a. te + t + yo + akarw + 0 ~ tetyo:kara ?w (DU + CIS + ZO + be dark + IMP) 'Be dark'

b.A + wak+ ekavw +? ~ A wake:ka?we? (FUT + IP + like the taste + PUNC) 'I will like the taste'

c. wak + ita7w + s waki.tars (1P + sleep + HAB) 'I am sleeping'

Again, it seems that this property of f?/ correlates with the others discussed in the preceding section. When f? / is syllabified as a nuclear element, the following glide may appear in the coda position. One might assume then that glide vocalization applies only to unsyllabified glides. For instance, neither /y/ and /w/ in (15)-(16) can be syllabified properly in underlying representation. Therefore, glide vocalization is applicable and yields the surface forms of (15)-(16).13

Consider now the status of /hi in glide vocalization. Contrary to f? /, /hi behaves like other consonants with respect to glide vocalization. But this is precisely what we expect. This is illustrated in (18). (18) gives only the relevant substructure of (16c). (18) r-.o 0 R I N A x x x x I I I I s 0 h w

13 See Gorecka (1989)for some evidencethat glidesare specifiedas [- syllabic]in underlying representation.K. Michelsontells me that /hkw/ as well as J7w/ is exceptionalwith respect to Glide Vocalization. Postal (1968) analyses the /kw/ of /hkw/ as a single segment /p/, analogous to most Iroquoianistsreconstructionas a labiovelar/kw/. Furthermore,some/hw/vocalize- i.e. theybehavelike /ew/, whileother/hw/ do not- i.e. theybehavelikeJ7w/. THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MOHAWK 69

Since the nucleus of (18) is branching, Iwl can not be syllabified (in the coda) without violating (13). Therefore, glide vocalization will apply, yielding the correct surface fOnTI.

Michelson's (1983) rule of glide vocalization is rather cumbersome precisely because she has to account for the peculiar behaviour of laryngeal consonants. The role of the angled brackets in (19) serves essentially to exclude J?I while allowing /hI. Within our analysis, this move is unnecessary.

(19) wly -7 o/i I C C# I I

[:~::;,;, ] (?)

Condition: ae-b

(19) can be simplified to (20), where '"'' means unsyllabified.H

(20) X' N 1 __ (C)# I I {w,y} x {i/o} 3. Vowel Doubling and "Metathesis" in Mohawk

Stressed vowels are lengthened in Mohawk if they appear in open syllables or they are followed by either PI or /hR!. The first case is illustrated in (21), and the second in (22).15

(21) a. yo+hruw + a? ohrzz.wa? (ZO + ditch + NSF) 'ditch'

b. A + k + ya?t + ahrot + A? -7 Akya?tahro:tA? (FUT + 1A + body + describe + PUNC)

c. k + ohkwt + s kohkwats (lA + dig + HAB) 'I am digging'

14 This rule does not account for the cases of glide deletion in (17c). However, independently of this question, I have not found any cases of Resonant-/sl clusters in final position. If we assume that both glide-s and resonant-s are subject to a deletion rule like the one illustrated in (17c), we might have an explanation for the absence of Resonant-s clusters in final position. Rs clusters may be allowed generally but a late rule will delete the resonant

15 The" A " on the stressed vowel of (25a) indicates the presence of a tone. This tone appears only when either PI or /hi deletes under stress. It has been often noticed that laryngeals are associated with tones (generally, low) for reasons that remain obscure; cf. Jeanne (1978); Safir (1979); and Halle & Stevens (1971). 70 BONNEAU

(22) a. wak: + ya?k + u wakya:ku (1P + cut + PERF) 'I have cut'

b. hra + nuhwe? + s rarucwers (MA + like + HAB) 'He likes it'

Several verbs in Mohawk do not seem to obey this rule, i.e. they have short stressed vowels in open syllables. Examples of these are given in (23). The underlying representation will be explained below.

(23) a. k + atit?a + s --7 katitats (lA + mount + HAB) 'I mount'

b. k + oy? ak + s koyatks (1A + throw + HAB) 'I throw it'

c. wak +Pa+z, --7 waketz? (1P + put inside + PERF) 'I have put inside'

This phenomenon is observed only when the stressed vowel is followed by the sequence CV?, Postal (1968) proposed to analyse the sequence CV? in those verbs as underlying C?V, forcing the first consonant to close the preceding syllable. This hypothesis is supported by examples like (23c). In Mohawk, adjacent vowels undergo a rule which deletes one of the vowels depending on certain morphological properties; (see Michelson 1983). (23c) finds a natural account if the vowel Ia! deletes before we get the surface CV? sequence. Ia! and Iv! are adjacent in underlying representation.

Postal's analysis also accounts for the application of epenthesis in forms like (24).

(24) k + r?ok + s --7 KEro?ks (1A + chop with an axe + HAB) 'I chop with an axe'

Notice that the epenthetic vowel is not lengthened, as is normally the case in open syllables. Furthermore, Mohawk has another rule of e-epenthesis which inserts an epenthetic vowel in consonant clusters. This rule is referred to as "Prestress E-Epenthesis" in Michelson (1983), as the epenthetic vowel is counted by the stress rule. If the epenthetic vowel in (24) was inserted by the epenthesis rule (7) rather than by "Prestress E-Epenthesis", we would expect (24) to have undergone a rule of Ii/-insertion which applies to all verbs with only one underlying vowel, e.g. *ikEro ?ks.16 The prothetic vowel Iii is always stressed. The presence of stress on the epenthetic vowel indicates that it was inserted by "Prestress E- Epenthesis" .

16 l-insertion is referred to as Prothesis in Michelson (1983). In terms of stress theory, prothesis creates a binary foot in order to avoid stress being assigned to a degenerate foot structure (see Hayes 1981). The relevant rules are ordered in the following way (cf. Michelson 1981, 1983): (i) Vowel Deletion; (ii) Prestress E-Epenthesis; (Hi) i-insertion/Prothesis; (iv) Glide Vocalization; (v) Stress Assignment; (vi) Poststress E-Epenthesis; and (vii) Lengthening. THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MOHAWK 71

Finally, Postal's analysis accounts for the fact that the punctual aspect morpheme has the form - ? in cases like (25) rather than -n? -? occurs only with vowel-final stems, whereas -n? occurs only with -? fmal stems.

(25) a. A + k + f~a + ? AkEta? (FUT + lA + put inside + PUNC) 'I'll put inside it'

b. A + ka + rihw + Aha? + n? ~ AkarihwAta?n? (PUT + 2A + matter + wear out + PUNC) 'It will wear out'

The obvious question is this: How do we get the surface order CV? from an underlying C?V order? One possibility might be to say that the surface order is the result of a "simple" case of metathesis. This phenomenon is widespread in Amerindian languages (see Foster 1982 for Cayuga, Safir 1979 for Capanahua).

In order to explain the fact that only vowels followed by f7/ undergo metathesis, one might appeal to Kaye's (1983) analysis of light diphthongs. Kaye (1983) suggests that phonological linear ordering of segments be defined at the skeletal level. Hence the members of a light diphthong are unordered with respect to each other until the phonetic level is reached. Metathesis is viewed in this theory as a phonological reordering of the members of the light diphthong. But only f7/ can be part of a light diphthong in Mohawk. Hence only V? sequences can undergo metathesis. This process is illustrated in (26). (26) .>.o .>.o ~ .>.cr .>.o 0 R 0 R 0 R 0 R A A A A N C N C N C N C I I I I I I I I x x x x x x x x x x x x I I I A I I I I AI t 1 t ? a s t i t a ? s

(26) illustrates the application of metathesis in (23a). As seen in (26), f7/ is assumed to be "ambiguously" linked to the onset and the nucleus in order to force the preceding consonant to be syllabified in the coda of the preceding syllable. This process is similar in relevant aspects to what Kaye (1983) has discussed for Vata.17

17 Kaye (1983) assumes that the onset is universally present in the syllable structure. Hence an empty node "0" will fill the onset in the case where no overt consonant can fill it in underlying representation. However. the ambiguous status of laryngeals allows them to be "ambiguously" specified [- syllabic] or [+ syllabic] at the same time. The exact specification is determined by its final position in the syllable. This allows the laryngeal to fill in the empty onset in underlying representation while being a member of a light diphthong. 72 BONNEAU

This analysis cannot be extended to all cases of metathesis, however. In Cayuga for instance, laryngeal consonants block vowel lengthening; that is a V? sequence is analysed as a closed syllable. Hence it would seem reasonable to assume that the laryngeal consonants are in the coda rather than the nucleus; see Foster (1982), Michelson (1983). Yet, metathesis of V? sequences operates as in Mohawk. Furthermore, this hypothesis would fail to relate the metathesis of f? / to the cases of translaryngeal harmony discussed in Steriade (1987). In Wichita (Rood 1976), a process of vowel merger applies across both /hi and J7 I: Iahi/ and la? if become lehel and /e?e/ respectively.

As Steriade (1987) shows, both metathesis and translaryngeal harmony (as well as many other phenomena related to laryngeal consonants) can be appropriately characterized under some basic analysis if we assume Clements' (1985) basic hierarchy of features. Clements (1985) has shown that, inside a single segment, the relation between individual feature specifications like [voice] and [coronal] is mediated by abstract autosegments, called "class nodes". Thus, within a single t, [coronal] is not directly linked to [- voice]; rather, they are both linked, indirectly, to a common class node, called "root":

(27) [-voice] [+coronal] V Root Node

The picture emerging from Clements' work, and further elaborated in Sagey (1986), is considerably more complex than (27). But for our purposes it is sufficient to consider only the basic structure (see Sagey 1986; Piggott 1989; and others). A segment like t in this hypothesis will then look like this:

(28) [+ant] [- dist] V Coronal I Place [- nasal] [- voice] [+ asp] V V Supralaryngeal Laryngeal V Root Node I C

Under this approach the segmental representation of laryngeal consonants is somewhat "deficient" in that it lacks a supralaryngeal node. It is this property, Steriade claims, which is responsible for the peculiar behaviour of laryngeal consonants in cases like metathesis and translaryngeal harmony. I would like to suggest that this property is also responsible THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MORA WK 73 for the apparent cases of metathesis in (23). Postal (1968) introduces two rules into the phonology of Mohawk in order to explain metathesis.

The first rule, referred to as "Vowel Twin", inserts a vowel identical to the vowel following the f? /. This rule is given in (29).

(29) 0 ~ Vi / C C Vi [-Stress] ~

a

"Vowel Twin" yields the intermediate form k + atita? a + s from k + atii? a + s. "Twin Reduction", ordered after "Vowel Twin", deletes the original vowel.

(30) Vi ~ 0 / Vi C Co # I I [-stress] ?

"Twin Reduction" produces katitars from k + atita? a + s. The [- stress] specification is necessary in order to prevent the deletion of the vowel in such words as rahsat? a 'boy'. Again, rules (29) and (30) must crucially refer to laryngeal consonants in their formulation. But no account is provided of why only f? / allows such rules to apply. Despite this problem I believe that Postal's basic intuition is right.

But rather than adding special rules such as (29)-(30) into Mohawk phonology, one might take advantage of the fact that C? clusters are subject to the epenthesis rule (7). (Total) translaryngeal harmony will then apply, spreading the supralaryngeal features of the vowel following f?/ to the empty root node inserted by epenthesis. This process is illustrated in (31) below, using example (23a) (see Michelson 1988 for a similar proposal). 74 , BONNEAU (31) a.r-.0' r-.0' ~ b..>.0' r.0' 0 R 0 R 0 R NO R A A A A N C N C N C N C I I I I I I I I x x x x x x x x x x x x x I I I I I I I I I I I I I t 1 t ? a s t 1 t root? a s ~ c.r.o r-.o ~ d.r-.o r-.o 0 R NO R 0 R 0 R A A I A N C N C N N C I I I I I I I x x x x x x x x x x x x I I I I I I I I I I A- I t i t root? root S t i t a ? s V -, sl lar

As (31d) shows, the supralaryngeal features of the vowel following J? I have delinked, and J? I has been resyllabified to form a light diphthong with the epenthetic vowel. This process is particular to some languages but not all (see Steriade 1987). However, translaryngeal harmony frequently applies to the output of epenthesis: in Kekchi (Campbell 1974), for instance, epenthesis rules insert a vowel in contexts like V? Ih_C, after which translaryngeal harmony specifies the inserted vowel as a copy of the preceding one. Still other versions of this rule apply to glides: A sequence /glide-? /hI becomes /glide-? /h-glide/ in Tojolabal (see Furbee-Losee 1976).

Before closing this section I would like to speculate about some problems related to the analysis presented here. First it is not clear why only CV? sequences in cases like (23) can be analysed as C? V underlyingly. These cases can be contrasted with verb forms like (17b). In (17b), the !k/ following the stressed vowel does not seem to close the stressed syllable. This comes from the fact that the stressed vowel has undergone lengthening. According to Michelson (1983), this process seems to be morphologically conditioned. The exact conditioning environment, however, is not clear.

Cayuga also has metathesis of V-laryngeals. However, both J?I and /hi undergo this process. I did not fmd evidence for Vh metathesis in Mohawk. If such metathesis has to be ruled out in Mohawk, one could suggest that non-syllabic /his are in fact derived from an THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MORA WK 75

underlying geminate obstruent. Perhaps this might explain why /hI deletes in stressed syllables only when followed by a resonant (see Bonneau in progress). 18

4. /?/-Delinking

In this section I would like to suggest an extension of Kaye & Lowenstamm's (1985) "Prosodic Government Constraint" to account for f?1-delinking in Mohawk. As can be seen in the example (22), f?I and !hR/ do not prevent the application of lengthening under stress. The phonological order of the vowel and the laryngeal consonant being free in a light diphthong, lengthening is not blocked by the presence of the f?I. The relevant substructure resulting from lengthening is given in (32).

(32) ? v I I root root V -, x x V N

Similarly, vowel lengthening in a stressed syllable followed by hR will yield the (sub)structure (33).

(33) V h I I root root I -. I x x V N

18 Another possibility might be to suggest that /hI is always l+ syllabic]. This hypothesis also explains why /hI is not found in initial and final position in Mohawk. One problem with this approach is that Ch sequences seem to behave like clusters rather than aspirated Cs. As (i) shows, the Ch cluster blocks Lengthening.

(i) k + ?nikhu + s ~ kE?nikhus (lA + sew + HAB) 'I sew'

Perhaps /hI is in fact an aspiration of the /k/ in (i). But it is not clear to me why kh could not be resyllabified in the onset of the following syllable in a way similar to the t in the example given in note 8. Ileave this question for further research. 76 BONNEAU

In both (32) and (33) the laryngeal consonant deletes. This, again, seems to me to be another manifestation of the "degenerate" nature of laryngeal consonants. I will express this in terms of the principle (34).19 .

(34) Laryngeal consonants must be properly licensed.

I suggest that this licensing is accomplished when it is prosodically governed, in the sense of Kaye & Lowenstamm (1985). Kaye & Lowenstamm (1985) define prosodic government in terms of the c-command of skeletal points. Assuming that the nucleus is the head of the rime, only a non-branching nucleus can c-command the consonant in the coda. I propose to extend this notion to the licensing of laryngeals. As laryngeals lack a supralaryngeal node, I suggest that laryngeals must be prosodically governed by supralaryngeal nodes of the head (vowels) of the rime. In both (32) and (33) the root node of the vowel is branching, therefore the supralaryngeal node can no longer c-command the laryngeal consonant. In Mohawk, this situation is resolved by the delinking of the laryngeal consonant.

The rule of f? I-delinking is also operative in another context. At the beginning of section 1, I described the possible CC-clusters in initial and final positions. There is however one CC-cIuster that I have not discussed, namely ?h. Interestingly, I?I systematically drops when followed by a cluster of the type he. This is illustrated in (35):

(35) a. wa? + hra + ehyahra? + n? ~ waOhrehya.ra? ne? (AOR + MA + think of + PUNC) 'He thought of it'

b. k + rhe? ny? + ht + ha? kErhe?nyvOhtha? (IA + fall + CAUS + HAB) 'I knocked it down'

The relevant (sub)structure ofthe V? h sequence is given in (36).

(36) V ? h I I root root root V I x x V N

19 Thanks to David Lipscomb for suggesting this idea to me. THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MORA WK 77

Again, the laryngeal /hi in (36) cannot be C-Commanded by the supralaryngeal node of the vowel, in violation of (34). Hence f? I-delinking will apply to resolve the conflict.20

5. Conclusion

In this paper I have shown that many of the peculiar properties of laryngeal consonants find an interesting account in a framework which assumes a rich theory of syllable structure. The "degenerate" nature of laryngeals manifests itself in several languages of the Amerindian family. Mohawk is just one of those. However, Mohawk shows some interesting discrepancies between f? I and !hI. /hi does seem to have a more narrow distribution than PI. Furthermore, /hi behaves like other Cs with respect to glide vocalization, whereas PI doesn't. Finally, !hI doesn't seem to trigger translaryngeal harmony. The first two properties can be directly accounted for if we assume the structure in (12b) for postvocalic !hI. More research is required before a full account of the non- occurrence of translaryngeal harmony with /hi can be provided. I have suggested two possible hypotheses with respect to this. One is to assume that /hi is always l+ syllabic] in Mohawk (but see note 12). The second, and I believe more promising one, is that !hI derives from an underlying obstruent. Finally, the degenerate nature of laryngeals can be captured in a promising way if one assumes the "Prosodic Government Constraint" of Kaye & Lowenstamm (1985). Condition (34) seems to be the relevant principle to account for the peculiar behaviour of PI and /hi in a wide variety of contexts.

References

Bonneau, J. (in progress). Syllable structure, epenthesis, stress and related phenomena in Mohawk. Ms., McGill University, Montreal, QC.

Campbell, L. (1974). Theoretical implications of Kekchi phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 40: 269-278.

Clements, O. N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. In Phonology Yearbook 2: 225-252.

Clements, G.N. & J. Keyser (1983). CV-Phonology: A Generative Theory of The Syllable. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Foster, M.K. (1982). Alternating weak and strong syllables in Cayuga words. International Journal of American Linguistics 48: 59-72.

Furbee-Losee, L. (1976). The Correct Language: Tojolaba!. New York: Garland.

Gorecka, A. (1989). Kw Clusters in Mohawk. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Halle, M. & K. Stevens (1971). A note on laryngeal features. In Quarterly Progress Report of the Research Laboratory of Electronics 101, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

20 I assume here that the laryngeal node of the vowel does not count as branching for the purpose of proper government. 78 BONNEAU

Harris, J. (1982). Syllable Structure and Stress in Spanish. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Hayes, B. (1981). A Metrical Theory of Stress Rules. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Hyman, L. M. (1986), A Theory of Phonological Weight. Foris: Dordrecht.

Jeanne, L. M. (1978). Aspects of Hopi Grammar. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Kaye, J. D. (1983). On the syllable structure of certain West African languages. In D. L. Goyvaerts, ed., African Linguistics: Essays in Harmony. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 285-308.

Kaye, J. D. & J. Lowenstamm (1981). De la syllabicite, In F. Dell, D. Hirst & J. R. Vergnaud, eds., Forme sonore du langage: structure des representations en phonologie. Paris: Hermann, 123-159.

Kaye, J. D. & J. Lowenstamm (1985). Compensatory lengthening in Tiberian Hebrew. In L. Wetzeis & E. Sezer, eds., Studies in Compensatory Lengthening. Dordrecht: Foris, 97-132.

Kingston, J. (1986). The Content and geometry of laryngeal features. Talk given at MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Levin, J. (1985). A Metrical Theory of Syllabicity. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

McCarthy, J. J. (1979). Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Michelson, K. (1981). Stress, epenthesis and syllable structure in Mohawk. In G. N. Clements, ed., Harvard Studies in Phonology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 311-351.

Michelson, K. (1983). A Comparative Study of Accent in The Five Nations Iroquoian Languages. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Michelson, K. (1988). A Comparative Study of Lake-Iroquoian Accent. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Piggott, G. L. (1989). The parameters of . McGill Working Papers in Linguistics. This issue.

Postal, P. (1968). Aspects of Phonological Theory. New York: Harper & Row.

Postal, P. (1969). Mohawk vowel doubling. International Journal of American Linguistics 35: 291-98.

Prince, A. (1984). Phonology with tiers. In M. Aronoff & R. Oehrle, eds., Language, Sound, Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 234-244.

Rood, D. S. (1976). Wichita Grammar. New York: Garland. THE STATUS OF LARYNGEAL CONSONANTS IN MOHAWK 79

Safir, K. (1979). Metrical structure in Capanahua. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 1: 95-114.

Sagey, E. (1986). The Representation of Features and Relations in Autosegmental Phonology. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Steriade, D. (1982). Greek Prosodies and the Nature of Syllabification. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Steriade, D. (1984). Glides and vowels in Romanian. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Steriade, D. (1987). Locality conditions and feature geometry. In J. McDonough & B. Plunkett, eds., Proceedings of NELS 17. Graduate Linguistic Students Association, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 595-618. Resume

Dans cet article, je presenterai certains arguments qui suggerent que les consonnes laryngales du mohawk sont syllabifies dans le noyau de la syllable. Quelques proprietes qui differencient /7/ et Ih/ peuvent etre expliquees si 1'0n admet que Ih/ constitue le second membre d'un noyau branchant alors que j? / fait partie d'une diphtongue legere (cf. Kaye & Lowenstamm 1984). J'utiliserai trois types d'evidences en faveur de cette hypothese: (i) 1a non-application de l'epenthese pour briser les sequences laryngale- consonne, (ii) le comportement exceptionnel de /7/ relativement 11la vocalisation des semi-voyelles et (iii) le comportement de /7/ dans le processus de copie vocalique ("Vowel Doubling") discute dans Postal (1969). Enfin, je suggererai une condition generate de I'interpretation des consonnes laryngales basee sur la Contrainte du Gouvemement Prosodique proposee dans Kaye & Lowenstamm (1985).