The Oslo Dialect of Somali Tonal adaptations of Norwegian loanwords Nina Hagen Kaldhol LING4190 MA thesis in linguistics Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Spring 2017 The Oslo Dialect of Somali Tonal adaptations of Norwegian loanwords Nina Hagen Kaldhol LING4190 MA thesis in linguistics Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Spring 2017 © Nina Hagen Kaldhol, 2017 The Oslo Dialect of Somali Tonal adaptations of Norwegian loanwords Nina Hagen Kaldhol http://www.duo.uio.no Printed: Reprosentralen, Universitetet i Oslo iv Abstract This thesis presents the first linguistic investigation of the Somali language as it is spo- ken in Norway. The goal is to describe what happens to Norwegian words when they are borrowed by Somali speakers. Both languages have simple tone systems, and this study explores what happens when these two systems meet: Do Norwegian loanwords show the same tone patterns as native Somali words, or is Norwegian tone preserved when words are borrowed by Somali speakers? Previous research on loanword prosody suggests that the former is likely when the recipi- ent language has strong restrictions on tone. In Somali, the distribution of tone is governed by and predictable from grammatical features, so the same principle may apply here. How- ever, previous research also suggests that such restrictions may be violated in loanwords in situations of intimate language contact. The speakers in the present study are bilinguals liv- ing in Norway, and use both Norwegian and Somali every day. Therefore, their borrowing provides a test case for these two competing possibilities. The material presented here was collected during fieldwork in Oslo, and consists of spon- taneous speech from nine native Somali speakers, in addition to some elicited forms. The results suggest that in most cases, the tone patterns of Norwegian loanwords are in accor- dance with native Somali morphological tone assignment. In some cases, though, Norwe- gian tone is preserved in violation of these restrictions. There are even cases where both strategies are found in different locations within the same word. This results in words with two high tones, which is surprising because native Somali words have maximum one. Hyman’s property-driven approach to prosodic typology is adopted when describing and comparing Norwegian and Somali. The results are explored in light of the typological pro- files of the prosodic systems of the two languages, as well as the language contact situation and type of bilingualism involved. The study is intended to contribute to already existing bodies of research on both loanword adaptations and bilingual competence. Because loan- word adaptations illustrate the rules and processes that are active in a language, this study also sheds new light on the Somali language system. v Acknowledgments The greatest thing about working on this thesis is that I got to meet so many wonderful people. First of all, I had no less than three supervisors: Sverre Stausland Johnsen has been challenging me constantly for a year now. By disagree- ing with me all the time (sometimes even pretending to, I suspect), he has made me look at things from different angles and trained me in spotting weaknesses in my own reason- ing. We have had a lot of good laughs, and I am very glad that he is not afraid of a good discussion. I am also endlessly grateful for how seriously he takes his job as a supervisor. Hanne Gram Simonsen is possibly the most enthusiastic and motivating person I know. Her support has been invaluable in this process. So has her eye for details, academic input, and good ideas. She even spent valuable emerita time on supervising me, for which I am very grateful. Guri Bordal Steien believed in my project from day 1, and joined the team of supervisors pro bono (!). I am very glad that I met someone who shared my passion for prosody and was up for nerdy conversations about murky concepts like accent and prominence. She also suggested conferences, shared Praat-scripts and showed immense support all along. Huge thanks go out to all three of you, for all the inspiring discussions we have had this year, for a lot of useful literature suggestions, for answering e-mails at all hours, and for being such thorough readers. I am especially glad that you have had such different views and opinions. This has forced me to make my own decisions, and I have learned a lot from this process. This thesis would not have been possible without my private Somali teacher Ali Osman Egeh. Ali, thank you for inviting me into your home and your life, for introducing me to your friends, for teaching me your language, for sharing my passion for grammar, for help- ing me find participants, for extreme amounts of shaah, for introducing me to Somali po- etry and music, and for showing me the Somali hospitality in action. I am grateful to Fir- dawsa Ahmed at Atlas Kompetanse for putting me in contact with this incredible man. I would also like to thank Morgan Nilsson and Laura Downing for inviting me to Gothen- burg, for introducing me to their Somali-speaking students, and for long nice chats and fika. Morgan also answered an awful lot of e-mails with questions about Somali, and helped out with comments on some of the weirder examples I encountered in my data. vi I am grateful to Nicola Lampitelli for very useful comments on selected chapters, and for literature suggestions and general interest in my project. Huge thanks go out to Sara Marie Niday for proofreading the final draft. All errors left are, needless to say, my own. This year, I have learned that linguists are very nice and helpful people. I was welcomed into the small, but happy family of Somali linguists at CALL 2016 in Leiden. At FiNo 2017 I was welcomed into the equally small and happy family of phonologists in the Nordic countries. I am very grateful for all the nice discussions and useful comments and ideas that I got at these conferences, and to all the people who willingly have answered ques- tions and e-mailed papers on request: Morgan Nilsson, Laura Downing, Nicola Lampitelli, Martin Orwin, Giorgio Banti, Wim van Dommelen, Gjert Kristoffersen, Thorstein Fretheim, Maarten Mous and Yoonjung Kang (and anyone I forgot to mention). I would also like to thank Jardar Abrahamsen for answering stupid questions about his superb IPA keyboard (which is highly recommended, by the way!). The long days at the university were not spent in solitude. I would like to thank all my fel- low students for nice lunches and coffee breaks with a lot of good laughs. Linn Iren: The highlight of the day was always our nerdy linguistics discussions and conversations about life, the universe and everything. I would not have benefited as much from this year if it weren’t for all the discussions we had about our MA projects. My friends and family have been very patient with me as usual. Thank you for sponta- neously dragging me outside from time to time to take a break. I would also like to thank Suburban Savages for giving me the chance to take occasional time-outs. And Anders, thank you for being there for me every day. I am grateful to MultiLing and Osloforskning for generous stipends. Last, but not least, I would like to thank all my participants for spending their time on my project, and for demonstrating the wonders of the Somali language and the bilingual mind. Af-Soomaaligu waa af qani ah. Nina Hagen Kaldhol Oslo, May 2017 vii Contents List of Figures xi List of Tables xii Abbreviations xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Aim of thesis ................................... 1 1.2 The Somali language ............................... 1 1.3 Somali speakers in Norway ............................ 2 1.4 A note on transcription and glossing ....................... 3 1.5 Outline of thesis .................................. 5 2 Theoretical framework 6 2.1 Prosody ...................................... 6 2.2 Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology ..................... 8 2.3 Hyman’s Word-Prosodic Typology ........................ 11 2.4 Prominence .................................... 15 2.5 Chapter summary ................................. 16 3 Loanword adaptations 17 3.1 Bilingualism .................................... 17 3.2 Loanword phonology ............................... 19 3.3 Loanword prosody ................................ 20 3.4 Chapter summary ................................. 24 4 The phonology of Somali 25 4.1 Transcription conventions ............................. 25 4.2 Segmental phonology ............................... 25 4.3 Syllable structure and syllable weight ...................... 29 4.4 Orthography .................................... 30 4.5 Tone ........................................ 31 4.6 Summary of important properties of Somali prosody . 43 4.7 Loanword phonology ............................... 43 4.8 Chapter summary ................................. 44 5 The phonology of Norwegian 45 5.1 Transcription conventions ............................. 45 5.2 Segment inventory ................................ 45 5.3 Syllable structure and syllable weight ...................... 46 viii 5.4 Orthography .................................... 47 5.5 Stress ....................................... 48 5.6 Tone ........................................ 49 5.7 Summary of important properties of Norwegian prosody . 53 5.8 Chapter summary ................................. 53 6 Research questions and hypotheses 55 6.1 Comparison of prosodic properties in Somali and Norwegian