Prosodic domains in Kisa

Abstract

In a language, certain phenomena are sensitive to specific prosodic domains. In a model of morphology‑syntax‑phonology interaction in which morphological and syntactic structure projects phonological domains belonging to a set hierarchy, each phonological process refers to a specific level of that hierarchy. Therefore, describing a phonological process generally requires specifying the domain within which it applies. In Kisa, a Bantu language spoken in Western Kenya, a sequence of two vowels with different qualities is unacceptable. The ill-formed sequence is repaired through at least one of the vowel processes: gliding, coalescence, raising, assimilation and deletion. These vowel processes involve vowels occurring at different morphological and syntactic boundaries and apply within different prosodic domains in Kisa. Using a descriptive design and basing on data generated by two native speakers of Kisa and verified by the author as a native speaker of Kisa, this paper identifies and describes the boundaries at which and the prosodic domains in which the vowel processes stated above apply. The findings show that unacceptable vowel sequences occur both at morphological and syntactic boundaries in Kisa. The strategies used to repair the unwanted vowel sequences at each boundary differ depending on the combining vowels. Further, the findings of the paper show that the vowel processes attested in the language apply in different domains.

Keywords

• Kisa language
• vowel hiatus
• vowel height; vowel processes; prosodic domains

References

1. Akinlabi, A. (1993). Underspecification and the Phonology of Yoruba /r/. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 139 160.
2. Buchstaller, I., & Khattab, G. (2003). Population Samples. Data without generalisation is just gossip. Pirsing 1991: 55, in Chambers 2003: xix.
3. Casali, R. F. (1997). Vowel Elision in Hiatus Contexts: Which Vowel Goes? Language, 73(3), 493-534.
4. Chomsky, N. (1962). The Logical Basis of Linguistic Theory. International Congress of Linguists. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
5. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. London: Sage Publication.
6. Harford, C. (1997). When Two Vowels Go Walking: Vowel Coalescence in Shona. Zambezia, 24, 69 85.
7. Hayes, B. (1984). The Phonology of Rhythm in English. Linguistic Inquiry, 15, 33-74.
8. Hyman, L. M. & Katamba, F. (2001). The Word in Luganda. In E. Voeltz (Ed.), Proceedings of Cologne Conference on Typology.

9. McCarthy, J. (2011). Pausal Phonology and Morpheme Realization. In T. Borowsky, S. Kawahara, T. Shinya & M. Sugahara (Eds.), Prosody Matters: Essays in Honor of Lisa Selkirk. London: Equinox. Available at: http://works.bepress.com/john_j_mccarthy/4.
10. McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1995). Prosodic Morphology. In J. Goldsmith (Ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory (pp. 318-366). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
11. Mtenje, A. (2007). On Recent Trends in Phonology: Vowel Sequences in Bantu Languages. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics, 15, 33-48.
12. Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1982). Prosodic Domains of External Sandhi Rules. In H. van der Hulst & N. Smith (Eds.), The Structure of Phonological Representations (pp. 225-265). Dordrecht: Foris.
13. Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
14. Pulleyblank, D. (1988). Vocalic Underspecification in Yoruba. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 233 270.
15. Pulleyblank, D. (1998). Yoruba Vowel Patterns: Deriving Asymmetries by the Tension Between Opposing Constraints. Paper presented at the South Western Optimality Theory Conference, University of Arizona.
16. Pulleyblank, D. (2003). Yoruba Vowel Patterns: Asymmetries Through Phonological Competition. Ms, University of British Columbia.
17. Rosenthall, S. (1994). Vowel/Glide Interaction in a Theory of Constraint Interaction. University of Massachusetts-Amherst Doctoral dissertation.
18. Sample, W. A. (1976). The Application of Rules in the Phonology of Olukisa. Indiana University Doctoral Dissertation.
19. Selkirk, E. (1978). On Prosodic Structure and Its Relation to Syntactic Structure. In T. Fretheim (Ed.), Nordic Prosody (pp. 111-140). Trondheim: TAPIR.
20. Selkirk, E. (1980). Prosodic Domains in Phonology: Sanskrit Revisited. In M. Aronoff & M-L. Kean (Eds.), Juncture (pp. 107-29). Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.
21. Selkirk, E. (1984). Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Selkirk, E. (1986). On Derived Domains in Sentence Phonology. Phonology, 3, 371-405.
23. Sibanda, G. (2009). Vowel Processes in Nguni: Resolving the Problem of Unacceptable VV Sequences. In M. Matondo, F. Mc Laughlin & E. Potsdam (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference on African Linguistics: Linguistic Theory and African Language Documentation (pp. 38-55). Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
24. Spencer, A. (1986). Towards a Theory of Phonological Development. Lingua, 68, 3-38.
25. Spencer, A. (1996). Phonology Theory and Description. Oxford: Blackwell.
26. Tanner, D. S. (2006). Context Insensitive Vowel Hiatus Resolution in Ciyao. University of Washington working papers in Linguistics Online 25.
27. Vaux, B., & Cooper, J. (2005). Introduction to Linguistic Field Methods. Muenchen: LINCOM GmbH Publisher.