Segmental phonology and the foot: the case of proparoxytones in some Italian dialects Laura Bafile University of Ferrara It is generally acknowledged that the foot is not simply a phonological unit dedicated to the organisation of stress prominence, but is also a relevant domain for some segmental phenomena concerning both phonotactics and phonological processes (cf. Nespor & Vogel 1986; Harris 1994; Hammond 2012). As a domain of segmental phonology, the foot is not simply required by the fact that stress may determine phonetic quality of vowels and consonants contained in stressed syllables; it has been shown that a constituent wider than the syllable but smaller than the word is necessary to account for different phenomena in different languages. For instance, Harris (2013 ) shows that, in some British varieties, t lenition as well as h and r deletion cannot be confined in the syllable, finding their appropriate domain in the foot. In Italian varieties, main stress falls in most cases on the penultimate syllable on the word. However, since in a fair number of words stress comes on the antepenultimate syllable, the definition of metrical constituency in those languages is somewhat controversial. While it is generally assumed that bounded feet are maximally binary (cf. Hayes 1995) and, therefore, that trochee is the foot corresponding to Italian stress pattern, some authors have proposed that metrical structure should be enlarged to admit ternary constituents (cf. Nespor 1993, Thornton 1996). However, the two positions do not make different predictions about stress, since in those varieties stress placement is lexically determined. In fact, stress may fall on one of the last three syllables of the word, and in few, exceptional cases, even on the fourth from last syllable, without provoking metrical restructuring: e.g. péna ‘pain’, péttina ‘he combs’, péttinano ‘they comb’. More interestingly, in some Italian dialects, the actual size of stress domain may have consequences for the segmental structure of the word. In this paper, I will take into account data from different Italian dialects, illustrating three kind of phenomena affecting proparoxytones. i) Syncope and epenthesis In some dialects of Piedmont and Emilia-Romagna, non-final unstressed vowels delete both in the pretonic and in the post-tonic section of the word. As for the post-tonic syncope, the deletion of the non-final vowel is possible only if the final one is preserved; when the final is deleted, a default vowel appears in the penultimate syllable: (1) védva védav (cf. Standard Italian védova ,védovo ‘widow (f., m.)’) I will adopt here an analysis based on the idea that phonological structure may contain empty constituents (cf. among others Kaye 1990); thus, the structure at the base of both forms in (1) contains an empty nucleus in either final or penultimate position: (2) védØva védavØ Since the content of the last nucleus determines the content of the preceding one, the relevant domain of syncope must be a foot that contains the stressed vowel and the unstressed ones including the final, i.e. a trisyllabic foot. ii) Vowel harmony Some dialects of Central and Southern Italy show various kinds of vowel harmony (VH). In a kind of regressive VH, the unstressed penultimate vowel becomes identical to the final vowel, e.g. Servigliano (Marche) ˈprɛdoko, ˈprediki, ˈprɛdaka ‘I/you/he preach/es’ (Maiden 1997). In the dialect of Vallepietra (Lazio) analysed in Schirru (2012), a mid stressed vowel triggers the VH of post-tonic vowels including the final, that becomes -o instead of -u: j ˈarberu ‘the tree’, but ju ˈvedovo. In both cases, VH affects a section of the word that corresponds to the foot and contains three syllables. iii) ‘Trisyllabic shortening’ Many dialects, from Northern to Southern Italy, exhibit qualitative effects of quantity in vowels occurring in open stressed syllables, often producing diphthongization. However, stressed vowels of proparoxytones generally behave like vowels of closed syllables, e.g. ˈkrajtə ‘I believe’, ˈlɛŋgwa ‘tongue’, ˈkrɛdənə ‘they believe’ (Marotta&Savoia 1994). In the last form, shortening is not conditioned by syllable structure, but rather by foot structure. The paper will analyse data of the kind illustrated above and propose a formalisation of the relationships among nuclei inside stress domains, in order to account for the special behaviour of proparoxitones, as well as for locality requirement holding in formal models of phonological theory. Hammond, M. (2012) “The Foot” in M. van Oostendorp, C. J. Ewen, E. Hume and K. Rice (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, vol II, ch. 40, Blackwell. Harris, J. (2013 ) “Wide-domain r-effects in English”, Journal of Linguistics 49.2: 329-365. Harris, J. (1994) English sound structure, Oxford: Blackwell. Hayes, B. (1995) Metrical stress theory: principles and case studies, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kaye, J. (1990) “Government in phonology. the case of Moroccan Arabic”, The Linguistic Review 6: 131-159. Maiden, M. (1986) “Vowel systems” in Maiden, M. & Parry, M. (eds.) The dialects of Italy, London: Routledge. Marotta, G. & L.M. Savoia (1994) “Vowel properties and nuclear constituents: evidence from Italian dialects” Probus 6: 43-79. Nespor, M (1993) Fonologia, Bologna: Il Mulino. Nespor, M. & I. Vogel (1986) Prosodic phonology, Dordrecht: Foris. Schirru, G. (2012) “Osservazioni sull’armonia vocalica nei dialetti della Valle dell’Aniene e in quelli dei Monti Aurunci”, in M. Loporcaro, V. Faraoni & P.A. Di Pretoro (eds.) Vicende storiche della lingua di Roma, Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso. Thornton, A.M. (1996) “On some phenomena of prosodic morphology in Italian: accorciamenti, hypocoristics and prosodic delimitatio”, Probus 8: 81-112.
© Copyright 2022 Paperzz