BL accent patterns.

[Rankin, Robert L.]

> Now you've got me confused, Bob. This started with miyoglas'in being either four or five syllables, you opting for 5, Willem, me and Pam opting for four. Now you seem to be saying the gl and bl are syllables phonologically but not phonetically, because there is no phonological schwah between b or g and l, but because there used to be a vowel there, we still have to count as if the schwah were a real vowel?

Uh, no, we're not counting schwas as anything at all.  They should never have gotten into the discussion at all.  They're a red herring from day two of any introductory Dakota class.

> I understand the argument that word-initial bl and gl with accent on the vowel after them derive from words that used to have two syllables, stressed on the second.

Then you’re not confused, David. You understand the whole argument.

> That is certainly one source for words with first-syllable stress. But as soon as the unaccented vowel disappears, doesn't it stay disappeared both phonetically and phonologically?

No, B alternates with wa- ‘absolutive’ and wa- ‘1st sg.agent’ (and in some languages, wi-‘animate absolutive’) and the G alternates with ki- ‘possessive’ and 'vertitive'.

> Aren't you confusing diachrony with synchronic phonology?

No, I think that argument was settled in the 1960s in papers like Larry Hyman’s “How Abstract is Phonology?” and similar such. James Harris virtually reconstructed proto-Indo-European in order to explain synchronic Spanish phonology. These trends come and go, but I’m sure you’ve taught and understand them just as I have.

> I don't see how you can claim that miyoglas'in has five syllables synchronically.

Oh, I could justify the 4 syllable solution by simply asking any undergraduate student how many syllables the word has. But if Jan is right, and óglas'iŋ is derived from ókas'iŋ, then the G of glas'iŋ is underlying ki-, and the extra underlying syllable. Thus, the five underlying synchronic phonological syllables.

One way or another our phonology (morphophonolgy) has to account for the b/w and the g/k allomorphy, and either the verb stems or the prefixes, or both, show alternations in all these cases.

From earlier: “The term is pretty clearly based on the verb ókas(‘)iŋ, ‘to look into’. In its vertitive form óglasiŋ, it should mean ‘to look into at oneself” (probably into water)

Forgive my lack of knowledge of Dakota, but do we mean ‘vertitive’, ‘reflexive’ or ‘possessive’ here? I guess it doesn’t matter to our discussion, since the G- will alternate with a full syllable in any of those cases.

Perhaps this clarifies my point of view.

Bob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20130912/f3e9251c/attachment.htm>