[Lingtyp] Tonal inventories: High vs Extra-High

[ARNOLD Laura]

Thank you all for the helpful discussion!

I realise I phrased the original question poorly. I’m not so much interested in the labels – we can call the two tones whatever we want – I’m more interested in the relation of the two tones with reference to non-tonal units.

So, in languages that contrast two level tones (let’s call them X and Y) and toneless units, I’m interested in cases where X and Y are phonologically specified to be realised with a higher F0 than toneless units (i.e., toneless < X < Y). For that matter, I’d also be interested to hear about cases where the two tones are lower than toneless units (i.e., X < Y < toneless). I may be wrong, but it’s my impression that these two distributions are less common than the more frequent X < toneless < Y.

Many thanks again,
Laura
________________________________
From: Larry M. HYMAN <hyman at berkeley.edu>
Sent: 27 January 2021 16:47
To: ARNOLD Laura <Laura.Arnold at ed.ac.uk>
Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Tonal inventories: High vs Extra-High

This email was sent to you by someone outside the University.
You should only click on links or attachments if you are certain that the email is genuine and the content is safe.
There are at least three problems in this discussion.

First, there is the problem of whether we are talking phonetics or phonology.

Second, there is the problem of whether the labeling of tones can be uniquely derived from the phonetics, continuous F0 alone (as we can identify vowels from the acoustic vowel space).
As Mark Donohue once put it to me, "We don't hear tones. We hear pitch." (and anything co-varying with the pitch: duration, other laryngeal activity etc.)

Third, there's the sometimes arbitrary labeling of tones.

I agree that in some languages the pitch of the highest tone sounds higher than in others (and sometimes also individuals speaking the same language). It also is the case that in some languages the lowest tone is at rock bottom (trailing off especially before pause), while in others, the lowest tone has a level "middish" F0.

In many cases, the languages where terms like "superhigh" or "extrahigh" are invoked not only have some very high pitch realizations, but often ones that are derived. For example, in Elaine Thomas' analysis of Engenni (Edoid, Nigeria), a H tone is raised to what she calls "top" tone (=superhigh) when followed by a L tone (and in certain morphological contexts). Since the L sometimes is not realized, this creates a system of with a "superhigh", "high", and "low" pitch contrast which then has to be interpreted. (I have proposed that the "high" tone is really phonologically Ø, such that the system starts out as a /L/ vs. Ø one, but develops into a three-height system, S, H and L.) There are other languages where the highest tone is derived from the simplification of a H + downstepped H sequence (or contour on the same vowel/syllable), and others reported where H tone is realized as "superhigh" on high vowels.

In my dissertation on Fe'fe' dialect of Bamileke (Grassfields Bantu, Cameroon), the general non-low tone was called M, even though there are rules raising it (and even L) to H, e.g. in most noun classes, where a M + M noun + noun in a genitive relation (N1 of N2) is realized H + M. I certainly could have called the M a high tone, and called the H tone as superhigh tone. The reason I didn't do this is that I didn't feel that the H was any higher than I would expect in a H, M, L system like Yoruba, Nupe etc.

Mid tone languages are also different from each other. In some the /M/ is there underlyingly, in others it is interpreted as the realization of Ø, and in still other languages it is derived. (I'm now remembering that I once gave a minicourse just on the mid tone--in Leipzig in 2006 :-)!

I don't think labeling is as crucial as the characterization of the tonal system itself, the relation between the tones, the phonetic implementation etc. Maybe someone will come up with an objective way to go from pitch to tone category, but so far it isn't automatic (or agreed upon by different researchers).

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:06 AM ARNOLD Laura <Laura.Arnold at ed.ac.uk<mailto:Laura.Arnold at ed.ac.uk>> wrote:
Dear colleagues,

Does anyone know how frequent two-tone inventories contrasting only High and Extra-High are? I’m working with data from a language which has an inventory that can possibly be analysed this way (the two tones also contrast with toneless syllables). I suspect this is quite an unusual inventory, cross-linguistically – it would be helpful to confirm this. I would also be interested to hear about similar examples elsewhere in the world.

Many thanks,
Laura

~~~
Laura Arnold – British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow
laura-arnold.org<https://www.laura-arnold.org/>

Room 1.13, Dugald Stewart Building
School of Philosophy, Psychology & Language Sciences
University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp


--
Larry M. Hyman, Professor of Linguistics & Executive Director, France-Berkeley Fund
Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley
https://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~hyman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20210127/dd476691/attachment.htm>