Detail of contribution
Auteur: Narayan SHARMA
Titre:
Morphology-Phonology interface in Puma
Abstract/Résumé: This paper investigates relationship between morphology and phonology in Puma, an endangered Rai-Kiranti language spoken in Nepal. The interface between phonology and morphology has been studied by many scholars within different theories such as Co-phonology Theory (Orgun 1996, Inkelas 2009, Anttila 2002), Stratal Optimality Theory (Kiparsky 2000), Indexed Constraint Theory (Pater 2009). In this paper I examine how phonology interacts with morphology in a number of ways in Puma. Puma has many stem final alternations that are phonologically conditioned except open syllable. Past tense is generally marked by a suffix –a in all forms. Though before vowels, prevocalic –a is realized by vowel lengthening or tone lowering, as in (1), this distinction is not always observed in fast speech. (1) Lengthening of vowel (a) bet-a-u-ŋ > bet-u-u-ŋ ‘I exchanged it.’ (b) khaŋ-a-i > khaŋii > khaŋ-i ‘She see/saw it.’ This paper explores the various ways in which phonology interacts with morphology. What I argue here is that stem alternation, the active participial kʌ-, locative participial –kha and nominalizers –ku and –ma-pa are key components in the Puma phonology which significantly interface the Puma morphology. (2) Stem final alternations (a) open (b) tensed non alternating (c) tensed alternating (d) augmented (e) alternating non-tensed augmented (f) tensed augmented (3) Noun Formation kʌ + ROOT = NOUN (a) chap ‘write’ kʌ-chap ‘one who writes (writer)’ *kʌ-chapd (b) pi ‘speak’ kʌ-pi ‘one who speaks (speaker)’ *kʌ-pis (4) Place Name formation ROOT-kha yuŋ ‘sit’ yuŋ-kha ‘a place to sit’ (5) Reduplication/triplication wa ‘water’ wacekcekwa ‘tasteless, watery’ (6) Nominalization (I) ROOT + ku (a) chapd ‘write’ chapd-i-ku ‘written’ *chap-ku (II) ROOT + ma-pa (a) chap ‘write’ chap-ma-pa ‘something to write with’ The findings reveal that open syllable, augmented and alternating non-tensed stems are not found in the gemination, while tensed non-altering and tensed altering appear in the gemination. References Anttila, Arto. 2002. Morphologically conditioned phonological alternations. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20:1-42. Inkelas, Sharon. 2009. The Morphology-Phonology Connection. Workshop on the Division of Labour between Morphology and Phonology. Kiparsky, Paul. 2000. Opacity and cyclicity. The Linguistic Review 17:351-367. Orgun, Cemil Orhan. 1996. Sign-based morphology and phonology: with special attention to Optimality Theory. University of California, Berkeley dissertation. Pater, Joe. 2009. Morpheme-specific phonology: constraint indexation and inconsistency resolution. Phonological argumentation: essays on evidence and motivation, ed. by S. Parker, London: Equinox.
Titre:
Morphology-Phonology interface in Puma
Abstract/Résumé: This paper investigates relationship between morphology and phonology in Puma, an endangered Rai-Kiranti language spoken in Nepal. The interface between phonology and morphology has been studied by many scholars within different theories such as Co-phonology Theory (Orgun 1996, Inkelas 2009, Anttila 2002), Stratal Optimality Theory (Kiparsky 2000), Indexed Constraint Theory (Pater 2009). In this paper I examine how phonology interacts with morphology in a number of ways in Puma. Puma has many stem final alternations that are phonologically conditioned except open syllable. Past tense is generally marked by a suffix –a in all forms. Though before vowels, prevocalic –a is realized by vowel lengthening or tone lowering, as in (1), this distinction is not always observed in fast speech. (1) Lengthening of vowel (a) bet-a-u-ŋ > bet-u-u-ŋ ‘I exchanged it.’ (b) khaŋ-a-i > khaŋii > khaŋ-i ‘She see/saw it.’ This paper explores the various ways in which phonology interacts with morphology. What I argue here is that stem alternation, the active participial kʌ-, locative participial –kha and nominalizers –ku and –ma-pa are key components in the Puma phonology which significantly interface the Puma morphology. (2) Stem final alternations (a) open (b) tensed non alternating (c) tensed alternating (d) augmented (e) alternating non-tensed augmented (f) tensed augmented (3) Noun Formation kʌ + ROOT = NOUN (a) chap ‘write’ kʌ-chap ‘one who writes (writer)’ *kʌ-chapd (b) pi ‘speak’ kʌ-pi ‘one who speaks (speaker)’ *kʌ-pis (4) Place Name formation ROOT-kha yuŋ ‘sit’ yuŋ-kha ‘a place to sit’ (5) Reduplication/triplication wa ‘water’ wacekcekwa ‘tasteless, watery’ (6) Nominalization (I) ROOT + ku (a) chapd ‘write’ chapd-i-ku ‘written’ *chap-ku (II) ROOT + ma-pa (a) chap ‘write’ chap-ma-pa ‘something to write with’ The findings reveal that open syllable, augmented and alternating non-tensed stems are not found in the gemination, while tensed non-altering and tensed altering appear in the gemination. References Anttila, Arto. 2002. Morphologically conditioned phonological alternations. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20:1-42. Inkelas, Sharon. 2009. The Morphology-Phonology Connection. Workshop on the Division of Labour between Morphology and Phonology. Kiparsky, Paul. 2000. Opacity and cyclicity. The Linguistic Review 17:351-367. Orgun, Cemil Orhan. 1996. Sign-based morphology and phonology: with special attention to Optimality Theory. University of California, Berkeley dissertation. Pater, Joe. 2009. Morpheme-specific phonology: constraint indexation and inconsistency resolution. Phonological argumentation: essays on evidence and motivation, ed. by S. Parker, London: Equinox.