<div dir="ltr">The question of what languages lack X has been of interest to me regarding whether the claim often made in the literature that 'all languages have ideophones', since I've seen modern dictionaries of languages that show few or no trace of them- including ones where there were still good number of speakers. Years ago, utilizing the end-tables of typological data from Johanna Nichols' book Languages in Space and Time, I hypothesized that the prevalence of increased levels of synthesis and/or fusion militated against having large ideophone inventories in a language. And having looked at materials from around 150 languages, this does in fact seem to be the case. Korean seems to be the language with the greatest numbers of these forms- and it is claimed by at least one native-speaker lexicographer that it has AT LEAST 29 THOUSAND of them, when you pool together all the bare and derived roots, compounds, and light-verb constructions. That kind of number is larger than the entire reported lexicons of many languages with traditional lifeways.<div><br></div><div>Jess Tauber</div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 2:04 AM Martin Haspelmath <<a href="mailto:martin_haspelmath@eva.mpg.de">martin_haspelmath@eva.mpg.de</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>
<p>Dear all,</p>
<p>It seems to me that the question whether there are "languages
without X" comes up again and again, for all kinds of X, where X
is a category or class of units (e.g. phonological feet, a dual,
adjectives, serial verbs, adpositions, second-position clitics,
nasal vowels...)<br>
</p>
<p>But what do we mean when we say "language L has X" (or "lacks
X")? It seems to me that such statements are inherentlly
comparative, so that X must be a comparative concept. If I don't
compare my language with other languages, I don't (have to) say
that it "has X", but I simply say which categories I set up and
how they behave.</p>
<p>So "X" in such statements is a comparative concept, but this
means that we must define it clearly (if perhaps somewhat
arbitrarily). Getting back to Adam's feet: How is a phonological
foot defined in general terms? It seems that for phonological
words, there is no such general definition, but maybe there is one
for feet?<br>
</p>
<p>As I don't think that description/analysis should be done in
general-comparative terms, I wouldn't think that it's relevant
whether phonological feet are "found useful for
description/analysis" in some language. Clearly, one can assume
the universality of everything, and not be bothered too much if
one doesn't find too much evidence/usefulness for it in all
languages. (Chomsky 2001 formulated this as the Uniformity
Principle:"<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT">In the absence of compelling evidence to
the contrary, assume
languages to be uniform, with variety restricted to easily
detectable properties of utterances." Whether one finds the
evidence compelling seems to be rather subjective.) </span> </p>
<div title="Page 2">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT">Best,</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT">Martin<br>
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p></p>
<div>On 10.05.23 05:25, Adam James Ross
Tallman wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)">Yes,
Mark is right. Sorry for getting carried away and spamming
your inboxes!</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>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, May 10, 2023 at
1:33 AM Mark Post <<a href="mailto:mark.post@sydney.edu.au" target="_blank">mark.post@sydney.edu.au</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>
<div lang="EN-AU">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Adam</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">This
is getting a bit complex and away from your original
query, so perhaps we should take this convo off-list
to avoid overloading inboxes</span><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE">.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE">Mark</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div style="border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentcolor currentcolor;border-style:solid none none;border-width:1pt medium medium;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Adam James Ross
Tallman <<a href="mailto:ajrtallman@utexas.edu" target="_blank">ajrtallman@utexas.edu</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, 9 May 2023 at 17:14<br>
<b>To: </b>Mark Post <<a href="mailto:mark.post@sydney.edu.au" target="_blank">mark.post@sydney.edu.au</a>>,
<a href="mailto:LINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG" target="_blank">LINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG</a>
<<a href="mailto:LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Lingtyp] languages without
feet?</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Hi Mark,</span><span></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(76,17,48)"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">There
are actually philosophers who question Popper et
al.’s view on falsification as a criterion, so I
was wondering whether this might be underlying
what you were saying. These issues were brought
up in the context of the “Linguistics Wars”
(Harris
<i>The Linguistics Wars </i>2021). Here’s
Lakoff, in an interview with Huck &
Goldsmith (a passage that I always floats
through my mind in these discussions)</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">“There
</span><span>was another major
difference. Chomsky held a view about the
philosophy of science that we did not hold - the
Quine-Duhem thesis.<span>
Quine</span> assumed that a scientific theory
was a finite list of axioms in first<br>
order predicate calculus, and used the
Lowenheim-Skolem theorem to argue that no finite
number of counterexamples could falsify any
finite number of axioms since a finite number of
auxiliary hypotheses could always be added to
handle the counterexamples. As Chomsky has said,
in the Quine-Duhem spirit, only the theory as
whole, once completed with no additional
auxiliary hypotheses, can be falsified.<br>
We of course did not subscribe to the
Quine-Duhem thesis, since the role of
generalization played no role in it. That is, no
auxiliary hypotheses, from our perspective,
could be adequate if they failed to capture
generalizations about content. But, as Chomsky
knew well, the theory of formal<br>
systems could only state generalizations about
form and not content. Since we were concerned
with generalizations about content, the
Quine-Duhem<br>
thesis made no sense to us. But for Chomsky, the
Quine-Duhem thesis was important, since it
shielded his theories from possible
counterexamples.” (Huck & Goldsmith
<i>Ideology and Linguistic Theory,</i> 115)</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">While
I do not want to suggest that we should all
become philosophers of science, I think thinking
about philosophical issues might help us be able
to articulate the differences underlying our
views. It might actually help us understand what
we are talking about, whether we are talking
past each other, and what is actually at stake.
Perhaps we just have 'cognitive' commitments
that make research programs incompatible ... but
maybe despite initial biases, we can still work
together to test competing claims.</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">One
could, I imagine, argue that while the notion of
‘foot’ is not directly testable assuming a foot
makes a number of other statements and perhaps
universals coherent: a sort of Lakatosian view
that the foot forms part of the core of a
scientific paradigm not subject to direct
empirical scrutiny. Or perhaps it is a useful
assumption for discovery – we learn so much by
assuming something like a foot is actually
there. </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">Or
perhaps the problem is not falsifiability
itself, but the way we’re putting it into
practice: falsifiability need not refer to
structural facts from a single language – you
need to have a broad sample of languages and
show that the ‘foot’ is
<i>not </i>a regulative principle in language
structure, even if its evidence is weak or
absent in some cases.</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">These
arguments do not frustrate me. What frustrates
me is the assertion on the part of some
lingusits that a concept is well empirically
supported, but then at the same time the same
linguist can’t give me a single case where the
hypothesis was put under serious empirical
scrutiny and not just assumed.</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">I
think though the criterion of “workability” (is
the foot ever unworkable), or the criterion of
“bad idea” (is it ever a bad idea to adopt the
foot?) is hard for me to square with how I view
science. All purposes are ultimately “workable”.
McCawley’s comments I think are pertinent here
(in his summary of his article ‘Language
Universals in Linguistic Argumentation’:</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">“It
[the article] deals with the role that the
notion ‘language universal’ has played in the
argumentation of transformational grammarians,
especially with arguments in which conclusions
are justified on the basis of the claim that
they allow one to maintain anguage universals
that alternative analyses would conflict with. I
find the bulk of such arguments worthless, since
the putative universals generally are merely
features accidentally shared by analyses that
the investigator or some reason happens to like.
<b>The investigator’s preferred type of analysis
is always available at a price, and in
advancing the putative universal he</b> [sic]
<b>is only expressing his commitment to pay that
price and to bully his fellow linguists into
paying it too</b>….” (McCawley
<i>Thirty Million Theories of Grammar, </i>p.4).</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">I
think similar issues arise with the “bad idea”
argument… “bad” according to what standards? If
a linguist has staked their career on the
assumption that foot are universals, then the
universal foot just becomes self-justifying: the
foot is never a bad idea, because its never a
bad idea.</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">I
understand there are some people that will never
be convinced. But if we can convince others in
the field that they are in the same epistemic
world as defenders of flat earth theory (an
obviously “good idea” which is always “workable”
for its practitioners), then insisting on
testability has merits.
</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">But
you did point out a potential falsifying
instance:</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">“Perhaps
the sort of counterevidence that I’m suggesting
looking for might be a language that showed
evidence for multiple units between syl and
phrase, and in which segmental and prosodic
phenomena referenced units both above and below
one another – though I’m not aware of such a
language.“</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">I
have to admit that I read this passage multiple
times and just could not make sense of it. So,
you mean a process that happens at some <i>kappa
</i>between syllable and phrase, but that makes
reference to syllables and phrases? Isn’t this
just how all “word” level stress assignment
generally works? So you mean a process that
makes reference to syllables
<i>and </i>phrase boundaries? That just sounds
like most phonological processes…</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">best,
</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA">Adam</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:8pt;line-height:105%"><span lang="EN-CA"> </span><span></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">On
Tue, May 9, 2023 at 8:08 AM Mark Post <</span><a href="mailto:mark.post@sydney.edu.au" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">mark.post@sydney.edu.au</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt">> wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor rgb(204,204,204);border-style:none none none solid;border-width:medium medium medium 1pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin:5pt 0cm 5pt 4.8pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Hi Adam,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">That’s a lot of
questions, but FWIW – and freely admitting
that I’m no philosopher of science – to
the extent that a given style of argument
basically inoculates itself from
falsification through lack of positive
evidence (you haven’t shown that it’s not
<i>not</i> there…), its proponents are
probably not going to find such efforts
convincing, regardless of whatever you or
I might think. I’m not necessarily
endorsing that way of thinking, but to the
extent that it exists, I’m asking whether
we can find positive evidence that
assuming a “foot” for a particular
language is actually a <i>bad idea</i>.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">I’m interested in
this because, under the assumption that
“foot” is the focus of prosodic phenomena
exclusively (not, e.g., segmental
phenomena that could not be attributed to
syl or wd; if this is wrong I’d be happy
to be corrected), it seems useful to
assume this unit of analysis for
cross-linguistic comparison even if, for a
particular language, “foot” turned out to
be isomorphic with, for example, “word” as
defined through segmental criteria (and
assuming that most analysts would not
adopt the reverse approach – attributing
segmental phenomena to the “foot”, and
doing away with “word” – though in
principle, I suppose one could). Perhaps
the sort of counterevidence that I’m
suggesting looking for might be a language
that showed evidence for multiple units
between syl and phrase, and in which
segmental and prosodic phenomena
referenced units both above and below one
another – though I’m not aware of such a
language. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">I think this is a
little bit different from the other types
of case you mentioned, as at least in
principle, “foot”
<i>could</i> have a universal functional
motivation in prosodic organisation (e.g.
rhythm), as opposed to being just a formal
structure.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Cheers</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Mark</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-width:1pt medium medium;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm;border-color:currentcolor">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Adam
James Ross Tallman <</span><a href="mailto:ajrtallman@utexas.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">ajrtallman@utexas.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, 8 May 2023 at 3:17
pm<br>
<b>To: </b>Mark Post <</span><a href="mailto:mark.post@sydney.edu.au" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">mark.post@sydney.edu.au</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">>,
</span><a href="mailto:LINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">LINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <</span><a href="mailto:LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Lingtyp] languages
without feet?</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Thanks
everyone for the helpful comments</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Mark:
this is an interesting comment, as it
is typically used to argue in favor of
the universality of structures
cross-linguistically.</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>"
</span><span lang="X-NONE">I’m not sure whether or
not there are languages for which that
would not be true – i.e. in which
assuming a foot level not only adds
nothing, but leads to a less
insightful or unworkable analysis. To
me, that’s a more interesting question
than whether or not we
<i>have</i> to identify a foot
distinct from syllable and word for
any given language to sustain a
particular prosodic analysis (lack of
positive evidence not generally being
taken as negative evidence in
theorizing about UG).</span><span>"</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Perhaps
I'm missing some crucial assumption,
but I don't understand this
formulation. Should it not be up to
those <i>pushing </i>theoretical
claims that the conditions for the
falsifiability of their theories be
clear? If someone is making a claim
that some structure is universal,
should it really be an
<i>open question </i>how they could
ever conceivably be wrong? </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Nespor
& Vogel (2007:11) make a similar
argument regarding layers of the
prosodic hierarchy. They argue that if
one does not find evidence for a given
layer of the prosodic hierarchy one is
not necessarily warranted in assuming
that the layer is not present. So one
of the reasons that the prosodic
hierarchy hypothesis seems like it has
wide empirical coverage is because it
is basically let off the hook for
accounting for cases where there seems
to be no evidence for its domains. And
the reverse is true as well it turns
out (too many domains? just posit some
are not related to the theory). I've
heard the same argument used to
justify the vP shell, the argument for
binary branching in all languages,
and, of course, for the universal foot
as well. It's been insisted that if I
don't want to adopt the foot I should
provide evidence
<i>against </i>its presence (...
against the presence of something
invisible).</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>When
are we justified in saying that
positing a particular formal structure
is "unworkable", especially when such
structures are indeterminately
abstract, especially if we are willing
to admit that the structure need not
have any empirical content? Are we not
constructing a hypothesis that is
fundamentally unfalsifiable? Or is the
claim here that falsifiability is not
a good criterion for scientific
status?</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>And in
linguistic descriptions, in the long
run, doesn't presuming evidence for a
structure when none can be found
present a misleading picture of
typological variation?</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>best,</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Adam</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">On Mon, May 8,
2023 at 6:39 AM Mark Post <</span><a href="mailto:mark.post@sydney.edu.au" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">mark.post@sydney.edu.au</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt">> wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-style:none none none solid;border-width:medium medium medium 1pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin:5pt 0cm 5pt 4.8pt;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Hi folks,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Just
briefly, I think Enfield’s
recent analysis of prosodic
structure in Lao</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/guwzCq71mwf1kKJlGiZlZRX?domain=doi.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198865681.003.0007</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE">…which I think
also holds for Thai, suggests
that while it may be
<i>possible</i> to handle
prosodic phenomena at the word
level – basically by
proliferating word “types” –
it’s more
<i>desirable</i> to handle
prosodic phenomena at the
sub-word level – so it’s not
really a case of shoehorning the
data into a particular model for
at least those lgs.
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE"> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE">I’m not sure
whether or not there are
languages for which that would
not be true – i.e. in which
assuming a foot level not only
adds nothing, but leads to a
less insightful or unworkable
analysis. To me, that’s a more
interesting question than
whether or not we
<i>have</i> to identify a foot
distinct from syllable and word
for any given language to
sustain a particular prosodic
analysis (lack of positive
evidence not generally being
taken as negative evidence in
theorizing about UG).
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE"> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE">Cheers</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt" lang="X-NONE">Mark</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-width:1pt medium medium;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm;border-color:currentcolor">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Lingtyp
<</span><a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">> on behalf of Kirsten <</span><a href="mailto:kirstenculhane@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">kirstenculhane@gmail.com</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">><br>
<b>Date: </b>Sunday, 7 May
2023 at 00:03<br>
<b>To: </b>Adam James Ross
Tallman <</span><a href="mailto:ajrtallman@utexas.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">ajrtallman@utexas.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">><br>
<b>Cc: </b></span><a href="mailto:LINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">LINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <</span><a href="mailto:LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:12pt">LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org</span></a><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Lingtyp]
languages without feet?</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:11pt">Hi
Adam and everyone else,<br>
<br>
The Strict Layer Hypothesis
assumes that foot structure
—as for other prosodic
domains — is present in all
languages. I get the
impression, however, that
the lack of evidence or foot
structure in many languages
hasn't been problematised in
the same way as for the
syllable and word - e.g.
Hyman's analysis of Gokana,
Sheiring et al's re:
Vietnamese (one exception is
Özçelik 2017's paper The
Foot is not an obligatory
constituent of the Prosodic
Hierarchy: “stress” in
Turkish, French and child
English).<br>
<br>
Anyway, underlying much of
the discussion here is
ultimately the question of
what constitutes evidence
for foot structure, and what
is the relationship between
foot structure and stress. I
think there's good reasons
not to treat stress as
evidence for foot structure
(you can account for stress
without foot structure, and
empirical evidence for
stress both complex and
lacking for many languages).
This issue is the focus of
my current paper in
Linguistic typology, and is
discussed in more detail in
my forthcoming PhD thesis. <br>
<br>
All the best,<br>
Kirsten </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">On
Sat, 6 May 2023 at 11:21,
Adam James Ross Tallman <</span><a href="mailto:ajrtallman@utexas.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">ajrtallman@utexas.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt">>
wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-style:none none none solid;border-width:medium medium medium 1pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin:5pt 0cm 5pt 4.8pt;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Thanks everyone for your responses (Ian
and David + private
responders),</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Great leads to look at!</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Here's another question ... have there
been any phonologists
who have proposed or
assume that
<i>all languages have
feet</i>. I ask
because I've had
reviewer questions and
conference questions
that seem to presuppose
this to be the case. I'd
like to see the original
arguments, if there are
any.</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>best,</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Adam</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">On
Sat, May 6, 2023 at
7:20 AM Ian Maddieson
<</span><a href="mailto:ianm@berkeley.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">ianm@berkeley.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt">>
wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-style:none none none solid;border-width:medium medium medium 1pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin:5pt 0cm 5pt 4.8pt;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Hi
all,</span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">There must be many languages in which the concept
of a foot is not
found to be relevant</span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">(see Sun-Ah Jun’s chapter "</span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:rgb(88,89,91);background:white">Prosodic
Typology: By
Prominence Type,
Word prosody, and
Macro-rhythm"</span><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:rgb(88,89,91);background:white"> </span><span style="font-size:11pt">in </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size:11pt">Prosodic Typology II</span></u><span style="font-size:11pt">
(edited by Sun-Ah)
for some
discussion. The
notion of a foot
does not seem to</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">useful for (standard) French, Korean, Yorùbá,
among many others,
though it can be
pressed into
service</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">in languages such as Thai and Mandarin. Since
it’s an abstract
notion, I’m not
sure what phonetic</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">data would be capable of providing direct
evidence either
for or against the
notion of a foot,
though</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">if for example, vowel length was considered
important in foot
construction, data
could confirm the</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">presence of greater length where it’s presence
had been invoked
to justify foot
structure.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Ian</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">On May 5, 2023, at 09:16, Adam James Ross Tallman
<</span><a href="mailto:ajrtallman@utexas.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">ajrtallman@utexas.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt">>
wrote:</span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Hello
all,</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>In
Caroline
Féry's
excellent
<i>Prosodic
Structure and
Intonation</i>,
she describes
a class of
"phrase
languages",
identified as
languages
whereby there
isn't much
going on at
the level of
the prosodic
word.
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>I
was wondering
if anyone had
*described*
explicitly a
language where
the same thing
could be said
of feet
(neither
iambic or
trochaic)? Or
perhaps even
more
radically, not
just that the
feet don't do
much, but that
they aren't
there at all?</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Perhaps
there's lots
of cases where
feet haven't
been proposed,
are there any
cases where
they had been
proposed, but
then further
research
(perhaps some
phonetic
study) found
that there was
no evidence
for them?</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>best,</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Adam<br clear="all">
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><br>
-- </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Adam
J.R. Tallman</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Post-doctoral
Researcher
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Friedrich
Schiller
Universität</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Department
of English
Studies</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp
mailing list<br>
</span><a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt"><br>
</span><a href="https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/kMvZCr81nytrnP4oXizqpVj?domain=listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Ian Maddieson</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Department of Linguistics</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">University of New Mexico</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">MSC03-2130</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Albuquerque NM 87131-0001</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><br clear="all">
<br>
-- </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Adam
J.R. Tallman</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Post-doctoral
Researcher
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Friedrich
Schiller
Universität</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Department
of English
Studies</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
</span><a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt"><br>
</span><a href="https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/kMvZCr81nytrnP4oXizqpVj?domain=listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</span></a><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><br clear="all">
<br>
<span>--
</span></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Adam
J.R. Tallman</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Post-doctoral
Researcher
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Friedrich
Schiller Universität</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Department
of English Studies</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><br clear="all">
<br>
<span>--
</span></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Adam J.R.
Tallman</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Post-doctoral
Researcher
</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Friedrich
Schiller Universität</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Department of
English Studies</span><span style="font-size:11pt"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br clear="all">
<br>
<span>-- </span><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">Post-doctoral
Researcher <br>
</font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman, serif">Friedrich
Schiller Universität<br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="times new roman, serif">Department
of English Studies<br>
</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a href="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div>