APPENDIX: Apparent Counterexamples to Consonant Gradation Analysis One of the main claims of this thesis is that foot structure and prominence are distinct notions. In Nganasan, we claim, consonant gradation depends on, and therefore marks, the rhythmic organization of the language, i.e. foot structure, while stress is assigned independently. There are, however, examples in the language, which seem to contradict the claim that consonant gradation is intervocalic lenition that is constrained by the foot structure of the language. These ostensible counterexamples can be grouped into three types: strong grade where we expect to find a weak grade (1a); weak grade where we expect to find a strong one (1b); and, finally, an unexpected reflex of consonant gradation (1c): (1) a. (le)(hua) *(le)(bua) ‘board’ Nom sg non-poss (turku)-(tu) *(turku)-(Du) ‘his/her/its lakes (pl)’ (¯il)(hie)-(tï) *(¯il)(hie)-(Dï) ‘his/her/its slopes (pl)’ (nilu)-(tu) *(nilu)-(Du) ‘his/her/its life’ (¯erbï)-(tï) *(¯erbï)-(Dï) ‘his/her/its wool’ (Namsu)-(tu) *(Namsu)-(Du) ‘his/her/its meat’ b. (kaDar) *(katar) ‘light’ (häÔir) *(häsir) ‘fish hook’ (NuDa-/) *(Nuta-/) ‘berries’ (Nom pl) (¯inï)-(nt´nï) *(¯inï)-(t´nu) ‘older brother’ (Loc) (cimi)-(nt´nu) *(cimi)-(t´nu) ‘tooth’ (Loc) (s´mu)-(nt´nu) *(s´mu)-(t´nu) ‘hat’ (Loc) (Ôem¯i)-(nt´nï) *(Ôem¯i)-(t´nï) ‘salary’ (Loc) c. (cinde-/) *(cinte-/) ‘hill’ (Nom pl) (le)(mbua-/) *(le)(bua-/) ‘board’ (Nom pl) (hoNge-/) *(hoNke-/) ‘handle’ (Nom pl) (kaÔu) ~ (kaÔu-N) *(kasu) ~ (kasu-N) ‘bark’ (Gen sg) (iÔi) ~ (iÔi-N) *(iCi) ~ (iCi-N) ‘father’ (Gen sg) (ÔäDe) ~ (ÔäDeN) *(Ôäte) ~ (ÔäteN) ‘stone’ (Gen sg) (Nubu)-(ndi) *(Nuhu)-(ti) ‘mitten’ (Lat sg) (cebï)-(ndi) *(cehï)-(ti) ‘nail’ (Lat sg) (kiDa)-(ndi) *(kita)-(ti) ‘cup’ (Lat sg) 269 Some of the examples we see above we have already explained: for example, we know that a voiceless obstruent can be a weak grade of the gradation alternation, hence a word like ‘board’ (le)(hua) has alternation between [Nh] and [h], and we observe the correct (weak) grade when the consonant is foot-initial. Other apparent counterexamples in (1a- c), however, are due to a number of factors that we have to discuss in order to prove the validity of the foot structure, we claim is marked by consonant gradation. Below are examples of the alternations between strong and weak grades the reflexes of which are, in most cases, identical to the grade alternations we have previously discussed: (2) a. Nom.sg. Nom.pl. Gloss kuhu kubu/ ‘skin, hide’ basa baÔa/ ‘iron’ kente kende/ ‘sledge’ Nuta NuDa/ ‘berry’ m´ku m´ga/ ‘back’ Ôak´ Ôagü/ ‘twin’ b. kaDar katar´/ ‘light’ he¯Ôir hensïr´/ ‘shaman’s drum’ bï/ bïDï/ ‘water’ tuj tuu/ ‘fire’ Noj Nu´/ ‘foot’ hu´/ hi´Ôi/ ‘fur overcoat’ ciÔar cisare/ ‘benefit’ häÔir häsire/ ‘fish-hook’ ho¯Ôir ho¯Cire/ ‘edge, side’ In (2a) Nominative singular forms and (2b) Nominative plural forms above, the word- internal consonants are in their strong grade, as expected, when they are foot-internal. A problem, however, arises when we look at the Nominative plural forms in (2a). From 270 these data we can see that the only difference between the forms in the Nominative plural and in the Nominative singular is that the Nominative plural ending is a glottal stop, while the Nominative singular ending is zero. It seems clear that the ‘extra’ consonant of the plural effects the consonant gradation: the plural forms in (2a) all have their foot- internal consonants in their ‘weak’ grades, contrary to what we predict with the condition on the distribution of weak grades we previously. The same difficulty is apparent in (2b): Nominative singular forms of the words for ‘light’ and ‘benefit’ have the weak grades of, respectively, t/D and s/Ô alternations. When the plural ending (glottal stop) is added to the basic consonant-final forms in (2b), it causes vowel epenthesis between the last consonant of the stem and glottal stop, since the language does not tolerate complex codas. The final syllable of the plural forms, therefore, is always closed, regardless of whether a stem ends in a vowel (as in (2a)) or in a consonant (as in (2b)). The fact that a syllable is closed seems to affect gradation: the onset of a closed syllable is always ‘weak’ (except word-initial and postconsonantal onsets), and an open syllable’s onset is either weak or strong, depending on the position in a foot. The above generalization, however, is not true for onsets that appear after another consonant (a coda of the previous syllable), and word-initially: (3) a. Nominative, possessive, 3rd person pl. possessor, sg. possessed suffix -tuN/-DuN t´r-tuN ‘their hair’ (cf. kuhuDuN ‘their skin’, stem /kuHu-/) Noj-tuN ‘their foot’ kaDar-tuN ‘their light’ honÔir-tuN ‘their edge, side’ tuj-tuN ‘their fire’ b. tujCa ‘come’, Verbal Adverb honÔir ‘edge, side’ t´r ‘hair’ baN ‘dog’ baarp´ ‘master, chief’ 271 The data in (3a) shows that, while the first consonant of the suffix is a gradating consonant and is an onset of a closed syllable, it surfaces in its strong grade after another consonant. Another position in which the grade of consonants is not regulated by the condition on closed syllables (or their position within a foot) is the word-initial position. All of the word-initial consonants in (3b) are onsets of closed syllables, but the grade of the consonants can be either strong, as in words for ‘come’, ‘edge, side’ and ‘hair’, or weak, as in the words for ‘dog’ and ‘master, chief’. The word-initial position, therefore, is the only position where we need to prespecify the grade of the consonants in the inputs, the same conclusion we reached in the discussion of foot-marking consonant gradation, henceforth Rhythmic Gradation (RG). The type of gradation we have been discussing here, therefore, is very similar to RG: all the gradation alternations happen intervocalically (due to the set of LENITION constraints under the present analysis), voicing of a consonant can be prespecified in the input for word-initial consonants and only there; postconsonantal consonants receive the default strong grade. The only difference, it seems, RG and Closed Syllable Condition (CSC) is only in the constituent the weak grades can be aligned with; in case of RG that depends on foot structure, the foot is the relevant constituent, and in case of CSC, this constituent in a closed syllable. Given the degree of similarities, one might suspect that RG and CSC are, in fact, the same phenomenon and CVC can constitute a foot by itself. However, there are two facts that argue against such an analysis: first, closed syllables are always footed together with another syllable (except if CVC is the ultimate syllable within a word, footed into a degenerate foot): (4) a. (t´r-r´)(gï-tï) *(t´r)-(r´kï)-(Dï) ‘similar to his/her/its hair’ (Noj-r´)(gï-tï) *(Noj)-(r´kï)-(Dï) ‘similar to his/her/its foot’ (tuj-r´)(gï-tï) *(tuj)-(r´kï)-(Dï) ‘similar to his/her/its fire’ (baN-r´)(gï-tï) *(baN)-(r´kï)-(Dï) ‘similar to his/her/its dog’ 272 b. (kaDar)-(r´kï)-(Dï) *(ka)(Dar-r´)(gï-tï) ‘similar to his/her/its light’ (häÔir)-(r´kï)-(Dï) *(hä)(Ôir-r´)(gï-tï) ‘similar to his/her/its fish hook’ The examples in (4a) show that initial CVC syllables are always footed with a syllable following it, creating a binary foot. If CVCs were footed by themselves like CVV syllables are, we would observe different reflexes of RG in the similative and the 3rd person singular possessive suffix. (4b) further shows that the footing of CVCs as light is not due to any sort of Foot Form constraints that might allow a (CVC.CV) as a good, or nearly ideal, trochee, but ban a (CV.CVC) trochee as maximally disharmonic. The data in (4b) indicate that it is not the case here, since the closed syllable is not footed with the following syllable, but rather with the preceding one. All the data in (4) shows that closed syllables are footed exactly as CV syllables are, i.e. CVCs are light syllables, and their onsets may or may not be foot-initial, in contrast with CVV syllables, the onsets of which are always foot-initial. Another argument against analyzing CSC and RG as the same phenomenon is that some of the reflexes of the two differ. In particular, the ‘weak’ reflexes of prenasalized obstruents, which are lenited with the loss of prenasalization for RG, are lenited with voicing without the loss of prenasalization for the CSC: (5) n n strong grade Nh t Nk s ¯C RG h t k s C weak grade m n CSC b d Ng ¯Ô ¯Ô weak grade Onsets of closed syllables weak-grade reflexes of voiceless prenasalized consonants are voiced prenasalized consonants. In other words, lenition still takes place, but the result of it is simply voicing distribution. Given the two significant differences between RG and CSC we are concluding here that the two are synchronically different. While RG marks the foot structure of the language just as we have been maintaining, CSC stands on its own, accounting for a lot of apparent 273 counterexamples to RG we mentioned in (1). The similarities between the two phenomena should probably be attributed to the historical development of the language that used to regard closed syllables as heavy, and thus allowing them to pattern with CVV syllables, and not CV syllables as the case is in the contemporary language. Some of the apparent counterexamples to our generalization about consonant gradation in Nganasan are, therefore, explained: the language has two similar but distinct types of consonant alternations, that differ in terms of a) whether they depend on foot structure (RG) or syllable structure (CSC); and b) the weak reflexes of prenasalized obstruents.