<div dir="ltr">Hi Adam,<div><br></div><div>Yes you are right, determining syllable boundaries has always been challenging. In this case, syllabification is based on speaker intuition, which is also corroborated with some phonological processes which are sensitive to the syllable structure. Thus, in Teotitlán Zapotec a rising tone is not preferred on an open syllable, so when a C-final stem is followed by a V-initial suffix, the stem-final C is now resyllabified as the onset of the syllable of the suffix, and thus the risign tone is split into a mid tone on the stem and falling tone on the suffix:</div><div><br></div><div>(1) kwǎ:ʧ 'twin' + DIM -i'n >
kwāʧî’n
</div><div><br></div><div>When a C-final stem is followed by a V-initial enclitic, then the rising tone is split into mid and high tone, which shows that the stem final C now is parsed as the onset of the syllable with =u. </div><div><br></div><div>(2) ri-g<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">ǐ:b 'sew' + 2sg =u > </span>ri-g<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">ī:bú</span></div><div><br></div><div>Neither syllabification nor rising tone split is observed between prosodic words. </div><div><br></div><div>(3) <span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">gǎk 'will be' i:z 'year' > </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">gǎk i:z (*g</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">ā.kî:z</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">)</span></div><div><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">I also used these criteria (speaker intuition and phonological processes) as well as the Maximal Onset Principle to determine the syllable boundaries in Oklahoma Cherokee.</span></div><div><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">Best,</span></div><div><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:11pt">Hiroto</span></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">El jue., 27 de ago. de 2020 a la(s) 09:57, Adam James Ross Tallman (<a href="mailto:ajrtallman@utexas.edu" target="_blank">ajrtallman@utexas.edu</a>) escribió:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">Hey Hiroto,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">There's another example from Chacobo. When the first person singular appears after the nonpast declarative marker it reduces from <i>-ɨa </i>to <i>-a.</i></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><i><br></i></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">tsaya=ki=(ɨ)a</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">see=dec:nonpast=1sg</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">'I see him/her/them.'</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">It does not surface as <i>ɨa</i> in slow speech, so it seems to be categorical. It's as Mark was remarking, however. It is not a general rule. <br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">What I wonder here, at least in the case of "syllabification", how you really know that what you are observing is categorical or even real at all. Isn't it the case that you would need some phonetic criterion for identifying syllable boundaries? Do you have one? I've had this problem in trying to measure tone levels in naturalistic speech where it is very difficult to always see syllable boundaries at many vowel-vowel junctures in Praat.<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">best,<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">Adam<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><i></i></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><i></i><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:31 AM Hiroto Uchihara <<a href="mailto:uchihara@buffalo.edu" target="_blank">uchihara@buffalo.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div dir="ltr">Dear all,<div><br></div><div>I'm aware of the asymmetry between the preposed and postposed morphemes in terms of their integration into the prosodic constituent with the stem (Himmelman 2014; Asao 2015), but is anyone aware of the difference in the level of integration between the vowel-initial vs consonant-initial postposed morphemes (suffixes or enclitics)? </div><div><br></div><div>I have been observing that this might be the case in a couple of languages, including Teotitlán Zapotec and Alcozauca Mixtec. For instance in Teotitlán Zapotec, vowel-initial enclitics are clearly within the domain of syllabification, while consonant-initial enclitics are not. In Alcozauca Mixtec, it might be the case that vowel-initial enclitics are incorporated into the prosodic word, while consonant-initial enclitics are not. Is this something commonly reported in the literature?</div><div><br></div><div>I would appreciate any insights.</div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div>Hiroto</div><div><br></div><div><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:rgb(0,112,192)">Asao,
Yoshihiko. 2015. <i>Left-Right Asymmetries
in Words: A Processing-Based Account</i>. Ph.D. dissertation, SUNY Buffalo</span> </div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,112,192);font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:10.5pt">Himmelmann, Nikolaus. 2014.
Asymmetries in the prosodic phrasing of function words: Another look at the
suffixing preference. </span><i style="color:rgb(0,112,192);font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:10.5pt">Language</i><span style="color:rgb(0,112,192);font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;font-size:10.5pt"> 90(4).
927–960.</span> </div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman, serif">Adam J.R. Tallman</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman, serif">PhD, University of Texas at Austin<br></font><div><font face="times new roman, serif">Investigador del Museo de Etnografía y Folklore, la Paz<br></font><div><font face="times new roman, serif"><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><font>ELDP -- </font>Postdoctorante<br></font><font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><font>CNRS -- </font>Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)</font></font><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Dr. Hiroto Uchihara</div><div><a href="https://sites.google.com/view/hiroto-uchihara/home?authuser=0" target="_blank">https://sites.google.com/view/hiroto-uchihara/home?authuser=0</a><br></div><div>Seminario de Lenguas Indígenas</div><div>Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas</div><div>Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México</div><div>Circuito Mario de la Cueva</div><div>Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Ciudad de México.</div><div>Tel. Seminario:(+52)-(55)-5622-7489</div><div>Office: (+52)-(55)-5622-7250, Ext. 49223</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>