Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2014-07-03 A Statistical Approach to Syllabic Alliteration in the Odyssean Aeneid Cory S. Robinson Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Linguistics Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Robinson, Cory S., "A Statistical Approach to Syllabic Alliteration in the Odyssean Aeneid" (2014). Theses and Dissertations. 4199. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/4199 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. A Statistical Approach to Syllabic Alliteration in the Odyssean Aeneid Cory S. Robinson A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Don W. Chapman, Chair Dirk A. Elzinga Roger T. Macfarlane Department of Linguistics and English Language Brigham Young University July 2014 Copyright © 2014 Cory S. Robinson All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT A Statistical Approach to Syllabic Alliteration in the Odyssean Aeneid Cory S. Robinson Department of Linguistics and English Language, BYU Master of Arts William Clarke (1976) and Nathan Greenberg (1980) offer an objective framework for the study of alliteration in Latin poetry. However, their definition of alliteration as word initial sound repetition in a verse is inconsistent with the syllabic nature both of the device itself and also of the metrical structure. The present study reconciles this disparity in the first half of the Aeneid by applying a similar method to syllable initial sound repetition. A chi-square test for goodness-of-fit reveals that the distributions of the voiceless obstruents [p], [t], [k], [kʷ], [f], and [s] and the sonorants [m], [n], [l], and [r] differ significantly from a Poisson model. These sounds generally occur twice per verse more often than expected, and three or more times per verse less often than expected. This finding is largely consistent with existing observations about Vergil’s style (e.g. Clarke, 1976; Greenberg, 1980; Wilkinson, 1963). The regular association of phonetic features with differences in distribution suggests phonetic motivation for the practice. Keywords: Aeneid, alliteration, dactylic hexameter, Latin, onset maximization, phonetics, phonology, poetry, syllabification, syllable structure, transcription, Vergil ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS No accomplishment can be attributed to the efforts of a single person, and it would be unfitting for me not to thank those who have assisted in this effort. I am particularly indebted to Dr. Chapman, my committee chair, for his patience, insight, and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Elzinga and Dr. Macfarlane for the time and expertise they have imparted to this endeavor. I am likewise grateful to other members of the Linguistics and English Language Department, the College of Humanities, and the BYU community for the help they have provided. Dr. Melby merits particular mention for his constant concern and encouragement. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their support, particularly my parents and my sister. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................................................... i ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES.............................................................................................. vi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Foregrounding in Roman Poetry .......................................................................................... 1 1.2. The Odyssean Aeneid ........................................................................................................... 3 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................... 5 Research Question ....................................................................................................................... 5 Delimitations ............................................................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................ 6 2.1. Contributions of William Clarke (1976) .............................................................................. 7 2.1.1. Methodology .................................................................................................................. 8 2.1.2. Results ........................................................................................................................... 8 2.2. Contributions of Nathan Greenberg (1980) ....................................................................... 11 2.2.1. Methodology ................................................................................................................ 11 2.2.2. Results ......................................................................................................................... 15 2.3. Limitations of Existing Work ............................................................................................. 19 2.4. Proposed Contribution........................................................................................................ 20 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 22 3.1. Preparation of the Text ....................................................................................................... 22 3.1.1. Sources......................................................................................................................... 23 3.1.2. Preparation ................................................................................................................... 24 3.2. Transcription of the Text .................................................................................................... 25 3.2.1. The Latin Alphabet ...................................................................................................... 26 3.2.2. Consonants................................................................................................................... 26 3.2.2.1. Voiceless Plosives ................................................................................................ 27 3.2.2.2. Voiced Plosives .................................................................................................... 28 3.2.2.3. Fricatives .............................................................................................................. 29 v 3.2.2.4. Nasals ................................................................................................................... 30 3.2.2.5. Lateral Approximant and Apical Trill ................................................................. 31 3.2.3. Vowels ......................................................................................................................... 32 3.2.3.1. Asyllabic Vowels ................................................................................................. 33 3.2.3.2. Semivowels .......................................................................................................... 33 3.3. Syllabification of the Text .................................................................................................. 35 3.3.1. Onset Maximization in Latin ....................................................................................... 36 3.3.2. Poetic Variation ........................................................................................................... 37 3.3.2.1. Syllable Merger .................................................................................................... 38 3.3.2.2. Syllable Division .................................................................................................. 39 3.3.3. Syllabification Process ................................................................................................ 41 3.3.4. Evaluation and Correction ........................................................................................... 41 3.4. Chi-Square Test for Goodness-of-Fit ................................................................................. 42 3.4.1. Assumptions ................................................................................................................ 42 3.4.2. Procedure ..................................................................................................................... 43 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 45 4.1. Chi-Square Test .................................................................................................................