[Lingtyp] Lingtyp Digest, Vol 76, Issue 22

[Larry M. HYMAN]

Yes, thanks Ryan. I wrote the same to Laura Arnold earlier today, feeling
terrible that I had forgotten about it! It's a great case, quite compelling!

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 9:50 AM Ryan Sullivant <iamsullivant at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Another case of  /H, M, Ø/ is Eric Campbell's analysis of Zenzontepec
> Chatino (https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/26021). /M/ is
> realized as [M] in many contexts and [L] in others. /Ø/ is realized as a
> mid tone or a falling tone in most contexts, and as [H] when a preceding
> /H/ spreads into it.
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:09 AM <
> lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org> wrote:
>
>> Send Lingtyp mailing list submissions to
>>         lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         lingtyp-owner at listserv.linguistlist.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Lingtyp digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: Tonal inventories: High vs Extra-High (ARNOLD Laura)
>>    2. Re: Tonal inventories: High vs Extra-High (Larry M. HYMAN)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:18:22 +0000
>> From: ARNOLD Laura <Laura.Arnold at ed.ac.uk>
>> To: "lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
>>         <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Tonal inventories: High vs Extra-High
>> Message-ID:
>>         <
>> DB6PR05MB454973F206A7007FE5170F10B8BB0 at DB6PR05MB4549.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com
>> >
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>>
>> 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-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 09:34:20 -0800
>> From: "Larry M. HYMAN" <hyman at berkeley.edu>
>> 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
>> Message-ID:
>>         <
>> CAMQd4M0FVpx7Ssei310KYWwFber+csLWuVMG2_The6MocLr9mg at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi Laura,
>>
>> I don't know how many readers are interested in tones, but to be more
>> concrete, if I now understand what you are asking, the following systems
>> have been proposed:
>>
>> /H, L, Ø/ = common (see below)
>> /H, M, Ø/ = less common (Mary Paster proposed this for Leggbo, the only
>> case I know): Ø is realized L.
>> /M, L, Ø/ = unattested? (I don't know of any language that has been
>> analyzed that way)
>> /S, H, Ø/ = you are proposing? I don't see why this couldn't exist
>> /S, L, Ø/ = ?
>> etc.
>>
>> Now, the question is how Ø is realized in /H, L, Ø/ systems. There are /H,
>> L, Ø/ analyses where Ø has a phonological behavior distinct from /H/ and
>> /L/, but ultimately is assigned [H] or [L] vs. those where Ø is realized
>> on
>> a distinct, third phonetic pitch height, e.g. [M]. I think you are only
>> interested in these latter. For other /S, H, Ø/ systems, I suspect Punu
>> (Bantu; Gabon), but again, a lot depends on interpretation, e.g. whether
>> /L/ is needed instead of /Ø/.
>>
>> One other thing I forgot to say; The interpretation often depends on
>> frequency. We have a tendency to first use /H/ and /L/ and then other
>> tones, such that if the highest pitch were rare in the system (e.g.
>> derived
>> only in a specific environment), it would likely be called "superhigh".
>> But
>> this wasn't the issue you were interested in.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 9:18 AM ARNOLD Laura <Laura.Arnold at ed.ac.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > 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>
>> > 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
>> > 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
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Lingtyp mailing list
>> > 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/ca11b832/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lingtyp mailing list
>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of Lingtyp Digest, Vol 76, Issue 22
>> ***************************************
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> 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/20210128/cb36ea41/attachment.htm>