J. Linguistics 29 (1993), 37-63. Copyright © 1993 Cambridge University Press
The Dutch foot and the chanted call
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
University of Nijmegen
(Received i April 1992; revised 13 April 1993)
1. INTRODUCTION
Algorithms for the assignment of main word stress in Dutch have never been
systematically tested against foot-based segmental processes.1 The assumption has apparently been that such processes do not exist. In this article,
it is suggested that Dutch has at least four segmental rules that make
reference to the foot, and that Dutch has a chanted intonation contour whose
realization is governed by foot structure. The evidence provided by all these
processes largely confirms the more recent proposals for Dutch foot
structure, including Kager (1989) and Trommelen & Zonneveld (1989),
except where they fail to conform to (1).
(1) Monosyllabic feet can only occur word-finally
The generalization in (1) rules out the structures in (2), which have been
widely assumed in the literature on Dutch; both have a non-final
monosyllabic foot, with main stress in (2a), and without main stress in (2b).
The structures argued for in this article are given in (3a, b), respectively. In
recent treatments, the structure in (2a) is commonly assumed when the final
syllable is closed, while the structure of (3a) is assumed when the final
syllable is open (for example pinda 'peanut'). It will be shown that, in final
position, this is not a relevant distinction in the phonology of Dutch. Second,
it will be shown that the structure in (2b) is confined to the lexicon, and that
a postlexical foot-deletion rule creates the structure of (3b), which is the
relevant structure for postlexical phonology. I will use the bracketed grid
notation of Hayes (1991) throughout.
(2)
(x )
(x) (x)
(a) har nas
( x)
(x) (x)
(b) ta bak
(Pword level)
(Foot level)
This material was presented at the meeting of the Word Prosody Theme Group of the
European Science Foundation held in Salzburg on 10-12 October 1991. I should like to
thank the audience for treading softly on my intuitions. I gratefully acknowledge the useful
comments I have received, on my presentation as well as on an earlier draft of this article,
from Geert Booij, Judith Haan, Bruce Hayes, Harry van der Hulst, Rene Kager, Paul
Kiparsky, Aditi Lahiri, Erwin Marsi and Mieke Trommelen. I have liberally made use of
their judgements and the information they have given me. Any errors are my responsibility
only. I should like to thank Richard Piejjenbrock for his assistance with a search in the
CELEX data base.
37
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
(3)
(X
(X
)
. )
(a) har nas
.
( X )
(x)
(b) ta bak
This article takes the realization of the Dutch vocative chant as its starting
point. It is described in section 2, in terms of the analysis of the English chant
by Hayes & Lahiri (1992). The plausible assumption is made that the
distribution of one of its tones is foot-based and, in section 3, the foot
structure of a number of word types is established on the basis of the way
they are pronounced when chanted. Then, four segmental rules will be
presented, and it will be shown that they confirm the structures arrived at. In
section 4, these results are compared with a number of proposals in the
literature. There, I also consider and reject the claim by Trommelen &
Zonneveld (1989) that rightward stress shift in Dutch is foot-based. Section
5 summarizes the results.
2. THE 'CHANTED CALL'
One of the best-known intonation contours of English is the tune which has
been described as the 'calling contour' (see Gibbon, 1976), the 'vocative
chant' (Liberman, 1975), the 'stylized fall' (Ladd, 1978) and, most recently,
as the 'chanted call' (Hayes & Lahiri, 1992), which term I will adopt here.
The tune is most easily evoked by imagining a speaker calling someone's
name, although the meaning of this tune is best characterized as' routineness'
(Ladd, 1978). In this section, the Dutch vocative chant is described in terms
of the analysis given by Hayes & Lahiri (1992) for the Engish vocative chant.
That analysis is given in section 2.1, and our analysis of the Dutch tune is
given in section 2.2.
2.1 Hayes & Lahiri 1992
2.1.1 The facts
2.1.1.1 Tones. The tonal facts of the English chanted call, as set out by
Liberman (1975: 20), are summarized by Hayes & Lahiri as in (4). Illustrative
data are given in (5). (As Hayes & Lahiri observe, these utterances become
more plausible if one imagines them as names for pets.)
(4) (a) H(igh) begins on the main stress.
(b) M(id) begins on the strongest stress after H.
(c) If all syllables after the main stress are stressless, then M begins
on the final syllable.
(d) If the main stress is final, it receives the HM sequence.
(e) Pitches extend in time to the next pitch or the phrase end.
38
THE DUTCH FOOT
(5)
(a) Abernathy
(d) Hesitancy
(b) Ri'gamarole
(e) John
(c) Pamela
(f) Abernathy dear
Examples (5a) and (5b) illustrate that the association of M is sensitive to the
postnuclear stress, which is on the penult in (5a), but on the last in (5b)
(which is quadrisyllabic in American English). Examples (5c, d) illustrate how
a stressless final syllable attracts the M if no secondary stress intervenes
between it and the main stress. In (se), the two levels are realized on the same
syllable, because main stress is on the final syllable, while (51) (from
Liberman, 1975) illustrates that the M looks for the strongest stress after the
main stress. Here, the word-internal secondary stress on -nath- has less stress
than unaccented dear.
2.1.1.2 Duration. The lengthening of the first syllable of a pitch level is
illustrated by Hayes & Lahiri with the help of examples like those in (6),
which show that the degree of lengthening depends on the number of
syllables that are associated with a pitch level. The most extreme lengthening
occurs when both pitch levels are on the same syllable, as in (6a). If a pitch
level extends over exactly one syllable, it is less extreme, but obligatory, as
illustrated in (6b-d). If it extends over two syllables, the lengthening is
optional, as in (6c-e). With three syllables, it is dispreferred, as in (6f, g),
while the addition of a fourth syllable makes lengthening impossible (cf. (50).
(6)
(a) John
(b) Johnnie
[djaini:]
(c) Abigail
[se(:)bige:l]
(d) Pamela
39
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
(e) Abernathy
[2e(:)brnae(:)9i]
(f) Rigamarole
[rigamaro:!]
(g) Hesitancy
[hezitansi:]
Lastly, Hayes & Lahiri observe that the lengthening neutralizes the vowelquantity distinction between tense and lax vowels, as shown in (7).
(7)
Polly!
Paulie! ['poili:]
2.1.2 Hayes & Lahiri's analysis
To account for the tonal facts, Hayes & Lahiri propose that the tune consists
of the tone sequence H M. The emphasis in their analysis is on the durational
properties of the tune. They point out that the data in (7) rule out an account
in terms of the addition of moras or Xs. Instead, they assume that the tone
comes with a grid. The grid is intended to capture both the rhythmic facts
(encoded as column height) and the durational facts (encoded as the number
of columns associated with a tone). Underlyingly, the representation of the
English chanted call is as in (8).
(8) English Chanted Call H M
x
X
X
X
X
Hayes & Lahiri propose (9) as a constraint on grids, which they offer as their
interpretation of the rhythmic nature of speech (cf. ' Clash Avoidance' and
'Lapse Avoidance' in other work). As a result of (9), representation (8) will
be expanded if there are no free syllables after the beats. In such a case, (9)
minimally requires one beat to be added, with an option for a second beat.
The added beats associate with the preceding strong syllable. This accounts
for the durational facts: the more beats a syllable associates with, the longer
it will be.
(9) Obligatory Offbeat Condition
Any strong beat must be directly followed by a weak beat.
40
THE DUTCH FOOT
Implementation of (9) will be referred to as BEAT SPLITTING. The pitch levels
are accounted for by (10), TONE SHARING.
(10) Tone Sharing
When a beat is split, all parts of the beat retain the tone of the
original.
Association of the grid follows the description in (4): the strong beat with H
associates with the main stress, and the strong beat with M associates with
the strongest stress after H, or with the last syllable if there are only stressless
syllables. The precise way the beats of the chanted call are mapped onto the
stresses in the text is not made explicit by Hayes & Lahiri, but some gridmatching procedure is envisaged. In (11), a derivation is given, with (i)
illustrating the result of the grid-matching procedure, and with (ii) and (iii)
illustrating Beat Splitting and Tone Sharing, respectively. In (12a, b), two
illustrative surface representations are reproduced.
(11) H M
H M
H
x
X
X
X
X
(0
(iii)
[cfeani]
(12) (a) H
[e
2.2
b ve tr
a pa re tr]
The Dutch chanteci call
Tunes of the type exemplified by the English chanted call occur in many
languages. Hayes & Lahiri describe the Bengali counterpart, showing how
it differs from the English tune in the way the pitch levels are distributed over
the syllables in the word. The Dutch chanted call differs from both of these,
most strikingly in the fact that, in one very common variant, it may have
more than two level pitches.2 First consider the examples in (13), which
[2] I am indebted to Bob Ladd for pointing this fact out to me.
41
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
would appear to suggest that the Dutch chanted call follows the same pattern
as the English one. Also the neutralization of vowel quantity observed by
Hayes & Lahiri for English appears to occur in Dutch, as shown in (14). In
these examples, [a] is a lax, short vowel, while [a] is a tense, long vowel,
usually given as [a:]. (The vowel system of Dutch consists of a set offivelax
vowels, [1, Y, e, a, 0], which are short, and a set of ten tense vowels, [i, y, u;
e:, 0:, o:; ei, oey, au; a:], which are long, except for the close series [i, y, u];
and diphthongal, except for [i, y, u] and [a:]. It also has a reduced vowel [a].
In this article, I will from now on use the length mark only to indicate
lengthening as created by some rule, not to indicate membership of the tense
class.)
[ue(:)dya:]
[d(:)lmana:k]
'John'
' John + DIM'
'widow'
'almanac'
(a) Jan
(b) Jantje
(c) weduwe
(d) almanak
'gigglish'
(e)
(14) Katje! ['kcutja:]
Kaatje! ['ka:tja:] 'proper name'
The data in (15) show that unlike English, Dutch allows more than two level
pitches. The difference between (15a) and (15b) is that the penult has [a] in
(15a), but a full [a] in (15b), the main stress being on the first syllable in either
case. The difference is easily accounted for by the different foot structures:
while 'widow' is a single foot, 'almanac' consists of two feet, [alma] and
[nak] (for example Van der Hulst, 1984). Every (unaccented) foot after the
accented syllable can trigger a new pitch level in this way, as shown by
(15c), a compound with the accent on the first constituent ('fake'). As can be
seen, both unaccented feet of'almanac' trigger the formation of a pitch level,
as does the final (weak syllable.
(15)
_
_____
[uedyatja:]
[dlmanaikja:]
[nE:pa:lmana:kja:]
' widow + DIM'
'almanac + DIM'
' fake-almanac + DIM'
(a) weduwe-tje
(b) almanak-je
(c) nep-almanak-je
42
THE DUTCH FOOT
Let us first give an analysis of the contour in the terms of Hayes & Lahiri's
proposal. The important implication of the difference between the data in
(15) and the comparable English data in (5a, 0 is that in Dutch the last
syllable ALWAYS has a separate pitch level. That is, it has a boundary tone,
not some other tone landing there by default, as is the case in English. The
intermediate pitch levels evidently cannot be accounted for by postulating
underlying tones, as their number varies as a function of the text (see
Pierrehumbert, 1980: 76). These levels can be obtained by spreading the
initial H to every following foot, and by subsequently applying a tonesplitting operation, to ensure that every foot has its own H. The Obligatory
Offbeat Condition (9) and Tone Sharing (10) then apply as in English. In
order to create the terraced realization of the consecutive H tones, we
stipulate that these tones undergo the same Downstep implementation rule
as do downstepped accented H*'s (Van den Berg, Gussenhoven & Rietveld,
1992). Since downstepped contours need to appeal to the presence of a
morpheme [DOWNSTEP] in order to implement the pitch lowering, there seems
to be no reason for not stipulating that Hs in the chanted call trigger
downstep. This option is given in (16).3
(16) Dutch Chanted Call
H
L
x
X
X
X
X
\1P
The representation in (16) matches up with the text such that H goes to the
accented syllable, and L to the last syllable. If this syllable is not a foot, (16)
will provide the appropriate stress level. If it is a foot, (16) applies in the
'matching' sense, as envisaged for (4). In order to create the intermediate
levels, we need H-SPREADING, as given in (17).
[3] Alternatively, under an assumption that Downstep is triggered by particular tonal
configurations (Beckman & Pierrehumbert, 1986; Hayes & Lahiri, 1991), the first H would
have to be replaced with a HL unit (cf. Yip, 1989), which would spread as such to following
feet, as suggested to me by Paul Kiparsky. The context for Downstep could then be 'After
HL'.
43
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
(17) H-Spreading
H
K
x
S
N
X
X
X
X
X
...
..
X
The description is summarized in (18). The examples in (i9a-c) are selfexplanatory.
(18) (a) Associate H and L
(b) H-Spreading (17)
(c) H-Splitting
(d) Beat Splitting (9)
(e) Tone Sharing (10)
(f) (Phonetic implementation) Downstep H after H (in the chanted
call)
J
( 9)
H
L
H
L
(a)
x
x
(d,e) x
x
x
x
X X X
x x x
x \ \ x
x (x) x x x
I I I
H
(a)
x
X
XX
X
X
X
(b) [almanak]
[ue(:) dy a:]
L
(d,e) x
x
X
X \ \
X
X
[a(:)lmana:k]
X
X
X
X
X
(c) [almanakja]
H
L
(b)
x
X
xx
1/ 11/
[almanak]
H
X
x (x) x
X
(a)
x
I V
V
[ue dy a]
(a) [ue dy a]
x
X
X X
X
X
X X X
X
[almanakja]
44
XX
X
X
X
[almanakja]
THE DUTCH FOOT
H
(c) |
x
X
H L
H
L
X \
X
x
X
XX
x x x x
•
H
(d,e)
\
\
x ( x ) x x x x x
I M I
1/ I V V
[almanakja]
-» [a(:)l man.a:k ja:]
3. THE D U T C H FOOT
In this section, the realization of the Dutch chanted call is investigated as a
function of the prosodic structure of the word. First, words with the main
stress on the penult (' trochees') and words with the stress on the antepenult
('dactyls') are discussed, so as to ascertain what foot structures occur after
the main stress. (I will continue to use scare quotes when using these terms in
these senses.) The conclusion will be that a 'trochee' is a single foot,
regardless of the segmental composition of the final syllable, and that a
'dactyl' contains two feet, a binary foot followed by a monosyllabic foot,
unless the last syllable contains schwa, in which case the 'dactyl' is a ternary
foot. In addition to the chanted call, evidence will be presented based on four
segmental processes and on the distribution of [h]. Next, the foot structure
before the main stress is investigated by considering the behaviour of the
chanted call in words with one syllable before the main stress ('iambs'), and
words with two syllables before the main stress ('anapaests'). In support of
the findings here, the durational characteristics of the prestress syllable in
'iambs' are discussed. Here, the conclusions will be that this syllable loses its
foot postlexically, and that the first two syllables of an 'anapaest' form a
binary foot.
3.1 ''Trochees''
Words with the main stress on the penult have only a single pitch level, if a
syllable is added to attract the boundary L of (10). That is, regardless of its
segmental composition, the final syllable of such words fails to undergo HSpreading. Examples, with W , VC and VCC stem-final syllables, are given
in (20). The final syllable represents the diminutive suffix.
(20)
Two levels
meute-tje
paling-kje
pinda-tje
kayak-je
harnas-je
eiland-je
[m0(:)t3tja:]
[pa(:)lirjkJ3]
[pf(:)ndatJ3:]
[kafljakja:]
[hd(:)rnasja:]
[ei(:)lantj3:]
'crowd'
'eel'
'peanut'
'kayak'
'suit of armour'
'island'
45
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
As pointed out to me by Rene Kager, such words contrast with compounds.
A compound like wdndaad 'misdeed' will have three levels when diminutivized, which is explained by the fact that the syllable daad represents a
Pword, and hence a foot.
3.2 'Dactyls'
We have seen in section 2.2 that words with the main stress on the antepenult
appear to behave differently depending on whether their last syllable is
reduced or full. The difference becomes apparent if at least one more syllable
follows to take the boundary L. 'Dactyl'-final full-vowelled syllables trigger
the formation of a new pitch level, as shown in (21b), but 'dactyl'-final weakvowelled ones do not, as shown in (21a). The added syllable is the diminutive
suffix.
(21) (a) Two levels
weduwe-tje [ue(:)dywatJ3:]
Azie-tje
[a(:)ziJatja:]
medium-pje [me(:)diJ3mpjg:]
'widow'
'Asia'
'medium'
(b) Three levels
Panama-tje [pd(:)nama:tJ3:] 'Panama'
alibi-tje
[a(:)libi:tJ3:]
' alibi'
' elephant'
61ifant-je
[6(:)lifa:ntJ3:]
3.2.1 Derived ' dactyls'
As is to be expected, the attachment of suffixes with schwa (as opposed to a
full vowel) does not lead to the creation of new pitch level, since such
syllables are adjoined to the last foot of the base. Equally unexpectedly, the
attachment of a full-vowelled (stress-neutral) suffix to a 'trochee' will begin
a new foot. For instance, the diminutivized agentive noun [[['uand9l]v a:r]N
tja]N ' walk+ er +DIM' has three pitch levels. There is, however, one
interesting exception. When the deverbal nominalizing suffix -itj is attached
to a 'trochee', it triggers a new level, as is to be expected of a syllable with
a vowel other than schwa; but when that' trochee' ends in a vowel, it does
not. There is therefore a contrast between (22a) and (22b).
(22)
(a) [[[var-taksi] in]g:]
'taxi-fications'
(b) [[[v3r-ka(:)jak] i:n]
*kayak-ifications'
46
THE DUTCH FOOT
The explanation of this difference in behaviour is somehow to be found in the
relation between the weight of the final syllable and the presence of an onset:
Kager & Zonneveld (1986) observe that underived trisyllabic feet, like those
in (21a), are characterized by an onsetless final syllable with schwa. (The
glide that appears between these two syllables results from a postlexical rule.)
Apparently, also [1] counts as a reduced vowel after an unstressed syllable,
but only if its syllable has no onset. I will return to this observation in section
3-2.3-
To summarize, the data for 'trochees' and 'dactyls' suggests that Dutch
words with the main stress on the penult end in disyllabic feet, regardless of
the segmental composition of the syllables. (I reserve judgement on some
words with super-heavy final syllables, that is, those ending in VVC or
(V)VCC, like likdoorn 'corn in foot', which may be compounds. See
Trommelen & Zonneveld, 1989.) Words with the main stress located on the
third syllable from the end have a final monosyllabic foot, provided it is not
a reduced, onsetless syllable. These foot structures are given in (23).
(23) (x
(x .
)
)
<T <r
pin da
har nas
ei land
(x
(x
)
.)
(x
(x
(x)
<ra (T
Pa na ma
al ma nak
0 li
fant
)
. )
a
a
we du we
A zi e
(ver) ta xi ing
In support of the analysis of 'trochees' and 'dactyls', we now turn to the
lexical rule that lengthens [i, y, u] before [r] (Pre-r-Lengthening), a lexical rule
inserting [a] between noun stems and the diminutive suffix (a-Insertion), a
postlexical rule that devoices [j] after [p, t, k] (y-Devoicing), a postlexical rule
breaking up certain consonant clusters (Svarabhakti), and the distributional
pattern of [h].
3.2.2 Pre-r-Lengthening
Pre-r-Lengthening lengthens tense [i, y, u] before [r]. While [bit] 'beetroot'
has the same duration as [bit] 'bit', which has a lax vowel, [bi:r] 'beer' is
durationally the same as [be:r] 'bear'; similarly, [brysk] 'brusque' contrasts
with [by:rt] 'neighbourhood'. The data in (24) make it clear that the rule is
not syllable-based: (24a, b) have the [r] in the same syllable, but (24c, d) show
that [r] may also follow in the next syllable. The possibility of a word-based
rule is excluded by (25). In (25a, b), the tense vowel appears in an initial
monosyllable before a foot beginning with [r], while in (25c, d) the tense
vowel ends a binary foot before [r]. No lengthening takes place in these
contexts. It is concluded that the rule is foot-based, and that lengthening
47
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
takes place when [r] follows in the same foot. (The length mark is used to
indicate the result of Pre-r Lengthening.)
(24) (a) [ui:r]
(b) [61ivi:r]
(c) [slu:ri]
(d) [phrament]
(25) (a) *[pi:rat]
(b) *[hu:ra]
(c) *[k5rdy:roj]
(d) *[atmi:ral]
' algae'
'Oliver'
'slut'
'barrel organ
pirate'
[pirat]
[hura]
hurray'
[kordyroj] ' corduroy'
[atmiral]
admiral'
The prediction of our analysis is that [i, y, u] are long when occurring before
[r] in the second syllable of a 'trochee', regardless of the segmental
composition of this syllable. This prediction is borne out in (26). The rule is
formalized in (27), which assumes that short [i, y, u] are linked to the first of
two consecutive V-slots. (The empty second V-slot accounts for the
distributional behaviour of [i, y, u] as long vowels; the representation of [i]
contrasts on the one hand with [1], which is linked to the only V-slot of its
syllable, and on the other with [i:], which is linked to two V-slots
underlyingly, and which vowel appears in loans like analyse, Hermans, 1992.)
(26) (a) [ui:rok] 'incense'
(b) [dii:rak] ' scoundrel'
(c) [zy:nrj] ' sorrel'
(27) Pre-r-Lengthening
(...i, y, u
r...) F
The rule must be lexical. Ablauted past tense verb stems fail to undergo Prer-Lengthening. For example, bedierf [ba'dirf] 'spoiled' and wierp [uirp]
'threw' have short [i]. We will return to this point in section 3.3.
3.2.3 ^-Insertion
In Kooij (1982), it has already been proposed that the rule inserting schwa
between the stem and the diminutive suffix in Dutch is foot-based: this schwa
is inserted only if the stem ends in a monosyllabic foot (see also Van der
Hulst, 1984: 124, who also gives an earlier unpublished reference Van der
Hulst, 1981, and Booij, 1984). The proposal suffered a setback in Trommelen
(1983: 13, 31), who argued against the idea on the ground that segmental
48
THE DUTCH FOOT
conditions need to be placed on the rule, and that the specific form of these
feet was not independently supported. It is true that the rhyme must consist
of a lax vowel and a sonorant consonant. Research on prosody-based rules
has shown, however, that simultaneous reference to prosodic constituents
and segmental information is commonplace (Kahn, 1976; Nespor & Vogel,
1986). As for the objection that the required foot structure is not
independently motivated, we have shown that the feet required for diminutive
a-Insertion are independently required by the chanted call and Pre-rLengthening, while below we will see that y'-Devoicing also requires these
structures. The sensitivity of a-Insertion to foot-structure is illustrated in (28).
Here, the (a)-examples trigger the rule, while the 'trochees' in (28b) do not.
(28) (a)
STEM
DIMINUTIVE
[rfrj]
[zon]
[udndalirj]
[horizon]
(b) [palirj]
[dlbvm]
[piton]
[satan]
[rfrjatja]
[zonatja]
[udndalirptja]
[horizonatja]
[pahrjkja]
[dlbvmpja]
[pitontja]
[satantja]
ring'
'sun'
'walk'
'horizon'
'eel'
'album'
'python'
'Satan'
Trommelen (1983: 47) observes that words of the type (28b) are sometimes
given with inserted schwa by native speakers. It is noted, however, first, that
the forms without schwa are always considered to be well formed; second,
that schwa-full forms are only given for words with [0, a] before the final
sonorant consonant, like 'python', 'Satan', which are recent borrowings,
and rare; third, that such data have been elicited, not observed. It is possible
that native speakers are simply insecure when asked to give the diminutive
forms of such words. It should be borne in mind that all other words ending
in [-ontja, -antja] contain stems ending in [-nt], and that the regularity that
words ending in [-an, on] take schwa (such as [kan] 'jug', [stadion] 'stadium')
must be very strong. That fact that schwa-less forms for 'python', 'Satan'
are well formed at all therefore constitutes strong evidence in favour of our
rule (29).
(29) Diminutive ^-Insertion
F
v
DIM
0
-
W
/
V
]
\
C
[ + son]
49
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
Interesting confirmation of the analysis is provided by the diminutive form
of [ontseny-in] ontzenuwing ' refutation', a noun formed by suffixing [-in] to
the verb [ont-zenyu]. Haverkamp-Lubbers & Kooij (1971) give it as [ontsenyirjkjg], that is WITHOUT inserted schwa. There is no obvious way in which this
word distinguishes itself from the words in (28a). If we assume, however, that
' refutation' is a single foot, like ' taxi-fication' (see (22a)), the failure of 3Insertion is precisely what one would expect, given the foot-based nature of
the rule. This analysis predicts the absence of a consonant in the onset of the
final syllable (see (23)). That is, underlying [u] of [zenyu] must be deleted
when [-in] is added, so as to cause the resultant segment string to conform
to the pattern of (22), third column. It can in fact be demonstrated that the
[w] of ontzenuwing is a postlexically inserted glide. One phonetic difference
between an underlying labial glide and an inserted one is that, in the onset,
the underlying one can be labio-dental rather than bilabial (see Zwaardemaker & Eijckman, 1928: 154). In ontzenuwing, the labio-dental
pronunciation is indeed excluded, showing the [w] is inserted. Consistent with
this is the fact that a 'chanted' realization of the diminutivized form has two
levels, just as does (22a).
3.2.4
j-Devoicing
The third rule which provides evidence for our analysis of Dutch foot
structure is y'-Devoicing. Syllable-initial [pj, tj, kj] display strong devoicing
of [j] in words like [kopja, s^atja, pakja] 'cup + DIM', 'darling + DIM',
'packet-!-DIM'. Initially in the word, the devoicing is not obligatory. This is
shown in (30). Now notice that in 'trochees' like [djokja] 'Jogjakarta' the
devoicing is obligatory, as shown in (31), which is evidence that they form
single feet. The prediction is also that in 'dactyls' like barbecue devoicing of
[j] is not obligatory, while in an otherwise similar word in which the third
syllable has schwa, like monnikje 'monk-DiM', the devoicing is obligatory
again. This is correct, and shown in (32). These facts are explained if we
assume that y-Devoicing is obligatory if the cluster is foot-internal rather
than foot-initial, assuming the foot structures in (23). The rule is given
in (33)(30) [pjotar]
[tjert]
[kjeld]
[kdtja]
[kopjo]
[bakja]
(31) [kitjap]
[djokja]
[pj]/[pj]
[tj]/[tj]
[kj]/[kj]
name
name
name
*[tj], [tj] 'cat + DIM'
*[pj], [pj] 'cup + DIM'
*[kj], [kj] 'tray + DIM'
*[tj], [tj] 'soy sauce'
*[kj], [kj] 'Jokjakarta'
50
THE DUTCH FOOT
(32) [bdrbakju]
[monakja]
(33)
[kj]/[kj]
'barbecue'
*[kj], [kj] 'monk+DlM'
j-Devoicing
[—cont]
[—voice]
3.2.5 Svarabhakti
Clusters of [r, 1] plus a consonant other than [t, s] are variably broken up by
[a] in many varieties of Dutch, as in [dr(a)m, del(a)ft, sr(9)kar] 'arm, Delft,
bay-window'. This rule, referred to as Svarabhakti, has generally been
characterized as syllable-based (Trommelen, 1983; Booij, 1984; Nespor &
Vogel, 1986), the claim being made that the cluster must be tautosyllabic.
Trommelen & Zonneveld (1989: 140) accommodate words like [er(a)kar]
under this analysis by leaving the last schwa of a word unsyllabified, causing
the preceding consonant(s) to be included in the coda of the preceding
syllable. This analysis is questionable, as it presupposes that the final
syllable is syllabified only after the postlexical rule of Svarabhakti has
applied. This means that Final Devoicing, a postcyclic lexical rule, is
incorrectly predicted to apply in words like vrede [vre:da] 'peace'. Moreover,
in non-standard western varieties, Svarabhakti also applies in 'trochees' with
a full vowel in the final syllable, as Aditi Lahiri pointed out to me. In
Amsterdam Dutch, for instance, it freely applies in the 'trochees' in (34a). In
(34b), by contrast, where the liquid and the consonant are not inside the same
foot, Svarabhakti never applies. The data can be explained by assuming that
stressed syllables add the initial consonant of a following weak syllable to
their coda; in standard Dutch, but not in the western varieties, the weak
syllable must be schwa (Rene Kager, personal communication; see also
Berendsen & Zonneveld, 1985). This solution assumes an ambisyllabic [k] in
['er(a)k3r] in Dutch generally, and ambisyllabic [m] in 'Helma' (34a) in the
west. All varieties then have the same syllable-based rule of Svarabhakti. The
required resyllabification rule creating ambisyllabic consonants in the
western varieties of course confirms the analysis of'trochees' as binary feet.
Alternatively, Svarabhakti could be formulated as a foot-based rule.
Whatever solution is chosen,4 reference to the foot will have to be made.
[4] The formulation of Svarabhakti is possible without reference to the feature [-coronal] if
coronal clusters are first made to share a place node, after which such clusters cannot be
broken up.
51
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
(34) (a)
(b)
3.2.6
name
['hel(3)ma]
['bal( 3 )kan] 'the Balkans'
'Volvo'
['fol(3)fo]
['kar(a)ma] ' karma'
[har'pun] "'[hara'pun] 'harpoon'
[bal'kon] "'[bab'kon] 'balcony'
[SYl'fit]
"•[svb'fit]
'sulphyte'
[tyr'keia] "'[tyra'keia] 'Turkey'
The distribution of h.
Lastly, there is a distributional fact that can be shown to confirm the
conception of foot structure presented here, of which I was reminded by
Harry van der Hulst. The segment [h] never occurs foot-internally in Dutch.
Instead of [h], we find the products of HOMORGANIC GLIDE INSERTION
wherever the glottal consonant might be expected to appear foot-internally
on the basis of the spelling. In (35a), [h] is pronounced: in all cases, it is not
foot-internal. By contrast, [h] does not appear in the 'trochees' in (35b),
regardless of the quality of the final vowel or of whether it is closed or open.
(I suspect [?] has the same distributuion as [h]; this question requires
experimental investigation.)
(35) (a)
hoed
Abraham
Johannes
heraut
(b) Niehe
aloha
Johan
[hut]
[abraham]
[joh^nas]
[herout]
[nfo]
[alowa]
[j6wan]
'hat'
'Abraham'
'John'
' messenger
name
' aloha'
'John'
3-3 'Iambs'
We continue our investigation by returning to the chanted call, and turn our
attention to words with an initial pretonic syllable ('iambs'). When an
'iamb' occurs in second position in a compound, which structure has the
main stress on the first constituent, its first syllable does not trigger the
formation of a new pitch level. In the nominal compounds in (36a), the initial
syllable of the second constituent continues the pitch level that was started
on the main stress of the first constituent. By contrast, in (36b), which has
' trochees' instead of ' iambs' in second position, the initial syllable of the
second constituent does trigger a new pitch level. Observe that the durational
facts are independent of the word boundary: lengthening is not obligatory
for the first pitch level of (36a), since it is followed by the pretonic syllable
of the second constituent, which undergoes Tone Sharing.
(36)
: —
(a) [badrax]
[ei(:)nt badra:x]
52
'total amount'
THE DUTCH FOOT
[matrds]
[lv(:)xt matra:s]
'air mattress'
[kantor]
[pa(:)st kanto:r]
'post office'
[ekspres]
[betya ekspre:s]
' Betuwe express'
[dd:ns le:ra:r]
'dancing master'
[d(:)rbsits sxe:ma:]
'work schedule'
(b) [lerar]
These facts suggest that Dutch initial syllables do not form monosyllabic
feet. Regardless of the presence of a full vowel, or of a coda, such syllables
fail to trigger H-Spreading (17). The footless status of the initial syllable does
not depend on these words being disyllables: the initial syllable in [kantfna]
'canteen' is treated in exactly the same way (cf. [badreifs-kantina] 'factory
canteen').
3.4 Anapaests
Words with two syllables before the word stress, like [titafon] 'telephone'
allow H-Spreading (17) to apply to the initial two syllables. If we use such a
word as a second constituent of a compound, the level started on the first
constituent may be interrupted, and a new level be formed. It is to be noted
that a realization with a continued pitch level is also natural. Both variants
are given in (37). I will return to this point in section 4.1.
(37)
[otomat] (a) sixare(:)t3-o(:)toma:t]
(b) sixaret3-otoma:t]
'cigarette machine'
In words with three syllables before the main stress, like cardioloog
'cardiologist', marihuana, a separate pitch level appears on those syllables in
post-tonic position, as in ne'p-marihuana 'fake marihuana'. This confirms the
existence of initial ternary feet. In (38), the foot structures of 'mattress',
'canteen', 'telephone' and 'marihuana' are given in (38).
53
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
(38)
(
X)
(
X
)
(X)
(X . )
cr cr
ma tras
cr cr a
kan ti ne
(
X)
(X.)to
(
X
)
(X . .)(X. )
a a a
cr <r a crcr
te le foon ma ri hu a na
While after the main stress, the proposed footing is independently supported
by a number a phenomena, the proposed footing before the main stress is not
as amply supportable by other rules or distribution patterns. However,
interesting evidence can be found in durational facts.
3.4.1 Pre-s tress foot structure: Foot Deletion and Footless Vowel
Shortening
Our analysis will be uncontroversial where words with two or three syllables
before the main stress are concerned. In fact, the non-final ternary foot of
'marihuana' is independently supported by the distribution of [h]. In (39), we
see that the third syllable is not [hu], as it might have been on the basis of the
spelling, but [u], showing that syllable is foot-internal. And the initial two
syllables of an 'anapest' do indeed form a foot, as shown by Pre-rLengthening. I repeat (24d) in (40).
(39) [mariJuwana] 'marihuana'
(40) [phrament]
'barrel organ'
It is the footless status of initial prestress syllables that may appear
problematic. For example, the presence of [h] in initial position in 'iambs'
suggests that this syllable is a foot, since [h] typically occurs foot-initially (see
(35)). Our suggestion is that this syllable is indeed a foot in the lexicon, and
that defooting is a postlexical rule. The main argument for this solution is
based on the observation that when [r] follows a tense vowel in an initial
prestress syllable, there is no durational distinction between [i, y, u] and the
other (long) tense vowels. In this context, these vowels are long in careful,
dictation-style speech, but are shortened in ordinary speech. This is shown
in (41).
(41)
Very formal Normal
(a) [za:rbryken] [zarbryken] ' Saarbriicken'
(b) [xiir'ldnda] [xirldnda]
'festoon'
(c) [ku:rta3a]
[kur'ta3a]
'estate agent's fee'
Pre-r-Lengthening applies in the lexicon: recall that ablauted past-tense verb
forms also fail to undergo Pre-r-Lengthening, that is, these forms are
exceptions to the rule. The fact that the words in (41) can be pronounced with
long pre-r vowels in careful, dictation-style speech indeed suggests that Pre54
THE DUTCH FOOT
r-Lengthening applied to them, and that in the lexicon the initial syllable
must be a foot. (As already shown by a-Insertion in diminutives, foot
structure is available in the lexicon; see Booij, 1988; Inkelas, 1989.) The
shortened forms are accounted for by assuming that postlexical Foot
Deletion is reflected in variable durational reduction of the stray syllable.
Indeed, all such initial defooted syllables are durationally reduced, regardless
of segmental composition.
While this shortening of unfooted syllables may be seen as resulting from
phonetic implementation rules, there is one context in which a categorical
shortening would appear to take place. The relevant data are given in (42).
They show that in dictation-style speech, long tense vowels are indeed long
in open prestress syllables, as in (42a, b), but that in ordinary speech styles
they merge with short tense [i, y, u], as shown in (42c), as well as with short
lax vowels, as in (42d).
(42)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Very formal
[pa:rat]
[a:nab]
[pirat]
[anata]
Normal
[parat]
[anata]
[pirat]
[anab]
' ready'
'anal'
'pirate'
' annals'
Of course, (42c) is straightforwardly accounted for, because (42c) never met
the structural description of Pre-r-Lengthening: [i] and [r] are in different feet
in the lexicon, hence [i] is not long, even in careful speech. Durationally, then,
this form is equivalent to (42d), which has a lax vowel. What is unexpected
is the merger in ordinary speech styles between long and short vowels, since
if durational reduction affects both types of syllable in equal measure, as
indeed we must assume, then the first syllables of (42a, b) should be shorter
than those in (42c, d). However, there seems to be no quantity difference at
all. This suggests that open-syllabled appendices lose a V-slot. Since short
vowels are lexically provided with a coda consonant, which will be
ambisyllabic if only one consonant separates it from the next vowel (Van der
Hulst, 1985), the representations of long and short vowels remain distinct
after the loss of the V-slot, which accounts for the subtle quality difference
that remains between shortened [a] and [a]. I give the rule in (44). Foot
Deletion, which precedes (44), is given in (43). The idea here is that with the
'x' also the constituent brackets are deleted. The representations of 'anal'
and 'annals' are given in (45a, b), respectively.
(
(43) Foot Deletion x -> 0/ ( _ )(x
a
(44) Footless Vowel Shortening V
55
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
(45)
(a)
°"
cr
a
(b) a
a
<r
A AH
KA A
(v)v CW CV
V CW CV
a
n a
1
V
a n a
3.5 Summary
The investigation of Dutch foot structure on the basis of the chanted call and
of Pre-r-Lengthening, a-Insertion, Svarabhakti,y-Devoicing, the distribution
of [h] and the durational reduction of initial prestress syllables has led to the
following two conclusions:
1. Contrary to what other proposals claim, trochees are single binary
feet, regardless of the composition of the final syllable.5
2. Initial monosyllabic feet are deleted postlexically.
Together, these conclusions amount - postlexically - to the generalization
with which we started this article. In the following section, some attention is
paid to previous proposals, and an argument is rejected for the traditional
view that words like hdrnas contain two monosyllabic feet.
4. COMPARISON WITH EARLIER PROPOSALS
Stress has been a very productive area in the Netherlands. Since the early
1980s there have been a number of proposals for the derivation of Dutch
word stress. In (46), I list representative foot structures as given in or inferred
from a number of publications. (The abbreviated references are, respectively,
Van der Hulst & Moortgat, 1981; Neijt & Zonneveld, 1982; Van der Hulst,
1984; Kager, 1985; Langeweg, 1988; Lahiri & Koreman, 1987; Kager, 1989;
Trommelen & Zonneveld, 1989.) The parentheses indicate foot boundaries,
while the square brackets indicate extrametrical elements. Observe that in
earlier proposals extrametrical syllables were assumed to be included in the
preceding foot in surface structure, but that the later proposals have
extrametrical feet in final position.
The explanation for the rather large differences between these proposals is
that it is only the main stress and the occurrence of schwa that provide easily
accessible phonetic evidence for foot structure: the main stress must be a foot
head, and schwa is categorically weak. By contrast, full vowels without main
[5] After completing this article, I learned that Geert Booij proposes an analysis of Dutch
stress in a forthcoming monograph on the phonology of Dutch which is entirely in keeping
with our conclusion here.
THE DUTCH FOOT
stress might or might not be feet. It is interesting to see that despite the fact
that the proposals have virtually exclusively been based on stress facts, and
have ignored evidence of the type presented in this article, the historical trend
is clearly towards the foot structure as proposed here, and summarized in
(47). For instance, except for ' trochees' with closed second syllables (harnas
and kayak), the representations in (46g) largely correspond with those in
(47), with 'violin' even having a stray initial syllable.
(46) (a) H & M 81
(sam)(ba)
(ka)(yak)
(har)(nas) (we)(du we)
(pa)(na)[(ma)] (al)(ma)[(nak)] (o)(to)(maat)
(b) N & Z 82
(har nas) (we du we)
(ka yak)
(sam ba)
(al ma nak) (o to)(maat) (
(panama)
(c) H 84
(har nas) (we du [we])
(ka)(yak)
(sam ba)
(o
to)(maat)
(
(pana[ma])
(al ma)(nak)
(d) K 85
(har)(nas) (we du [we])
(sam ba)
(ka)(yak)
(pana[ma])
(al ma)(nak) (o to)(maat) (
(e) Lg 88
(har nas) (we du we)
(sam ba)
(ka)(yak)
(pana)(ma)
(al ma)(nak) (o to)(maat)
(0 L & K 8 7
(har)(nas) (we du)[we]
(sam ba)
(ka)(yak)
(pana)[ma]
(al ma)(nak) (0 to)(maat) (
(g) K 89
(har)[(nas)] (we du [e])
(ka)[(yak)]
(sam [ba])
(pana)[(ma)] (al ma)[(nak)] (o to)(maat) vi(ool)
but: (kan) (toor)
(h) T & Z 89
(har)[(nas)] (we du [e])
(sam [ba])
(ka)[(yak)]
(pana)[(ma)] (al ma)[(nak)] (0 to)(maat) (vi)(6ol)
(47)
(sam ba)
(ka yak)
(har nas) (we du e)
(pana)(ma) (al ma)(nak) (o to)(maat) vi(ool)
and: kan(toor)
It is not, in fact, difficult to modify the more recent analyses so as to create
the structures of (47). For instance, Trommelen & Zonneveld (1989) assign
foot structure with the help of a quantity-sensitive trochee (a heavy plus light,
or a light plus light syllable, or else a heavy or light, assuming degenerate feet
are allowed; Hayes, 1981) from the right (see also Kager, 1989). The facts of
Dutch stress are, briefly, that main stress falls on one of the last three
syllables if the penult is open, and on one of the last two if the penult is
57
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
closed. Two assumptions produce the desired results. The first is that Dutch
treats tense vowels (generally analysed as W ) as light, and VC as heavy. The
second is that after the erection of foot structure, the final syllable is marked
as extrametrical, so as to prevent the word-level prominence-assignment rule
from placing the primary stress on a final monosyllabic foot ('late
extrametricality'). Words like Panama are provided with a lexical foot on the
final syllable, so as to force parsing from the penult. (The pattern * Panama,
which results if the final syllable is not prespecified as a foot, is the more
common pattern for V X - W - W . ) Lexical specifications are given in (48a).
In (48b), quantity-sensitive trochees are built, with 'late extrametricality'
applying in (48c), so that in (48d), the word-level prominence goes to the
correct syllable.6
(48) (a)
VC W
sam ba
VC
w
al
ma
VC VC
har nas
VC
w
VC
(X
.)
)
.)
(x
VC [W]
sam ba
(X
VC
(X)
(X)
(X)
W VC
W VC VC
ma nak
gi bral tar
) (x) (x)
(x .) (x)
[VC]
W W [W]
[W] VC
pa na ma
har nas
ba
.)
(x
VC W
al
ma
(d)
(X)
(x)
W
ma
bral tar
(x •) (x)
W W yv
pa na ma
nak
gi
(b) (X
) (x) (x)
VC W
VC VC
sam ba
har nas
VC
al
(c) (x
VC
sam
WW
pa na
(x)
[VC]
(x)
W
gi
(x) (x)
VC [VC]
bral tar
)
(x
.)
(x)
(x
W W [W]
pa na ma
(
(x)
W
gi
X
nak
(x
(x) (x)
VC [VC]
har nas
)
(x
.) (x)
(x
VC W [VC]
al
ma nak
)
(x)
(x)
VC [VC]
bral tar
[6] Final main stress is achieved by suspending extrametricality, either by lexical marking or,
in the case of superheavy syllables, which appear only finally and are frequently mainstressed, on the basis of syllable composition.
58
THE DUTCH FOOT
As said in section 3.5, a rule defooting initial monosyllabic feet will create the
required appendix. The non-distinctness of 'trochees' with open final
syllables and' trochees' with closed final syllables could be achieved by poststress destressing (cf. the Clash Resolution Hypothesis of Hammond (1984),
or our generalization in (1), which could be elevated to a constraint),
followed by stray adjunction. An analysis in terms of the foot templates of
Hayes, 1991, requiring a parse with the help of a moraic trochee (Lahiri &
Koreman, 1987) could be brought in line with (47) in the same way. The net
effect is that Dutch obeys (1).
4.1 Rightward stress shifts
Dutch has both leftward and rightward stress shifts: the prominence patterns
of words may be reversed from w-s to s-w in positions before a following
main stress, and from s-w to w-s in positions after a main stress (Kager &
Visch, 1988). Because rightward shift data have been used to argue for the
traditional analysis of Dutch foot structure, I will show how these data fit
into the present analysis. The conclusion will be that rightward shifts in
'trochees' involve lexically based prosodic restructurings.
Trommelen & Zonneveld (1989) claim that their analysis of Dutch foot
structure (see (46g)) is supported by the facts of rightward stress shift. Recall
that in their analysis 'trochees' are binary feet only if the word-final syllable
is open: samba is a single foot, but harnas and kayak each consist of two feet.
If rightward shift amounts to a foot-based relabelling of relative prominence,
rightward shift should apply in 'trochees' with closed final syllables, but not
in 'trochees' with open ones. In (49), from Trommelen & Zonneveld, this is
indeed the case. However, in (50), this generalization is shown to have
exceptions in both directions. On the one hand, there are many words with
final open syllables that do undergo the shift pasta, toffee, and on the other,
there are words with closed final syllables that do not undergo it le'raar,
oorlog, harnas.
Bos atlas
(49) atlas
kompas scheeps kompas
premie *jaarpremie
bougie hulp bougie
(50)
Bos atlas'
'ship's compass'
'annual premium'
'auxiliary spark'
RIGHTWARD SHIFT
NO RIGHTWARD SHIFT
tand-pasta
drop-toffee
jeugd-herberg
dwang-arbeid
Bos-atlas
aarts-bisschop
reis-schema
post-giro
dans-leraar
brood-oorlog
borst-haraas
aarts-hertog
' toothpaste'
'licorice toffee'
'youth hostel'
'forced labour'
'Bos atlas'
' archbishop
59
' itinerary'
' postal giro'
dancing master
' price-war'
' breastplate'
' archduke'
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
The existence of a relation between syllable weight and rightward stress shift,
first noted in Kager (1989: 296), in itself is not at issue: there are only two
cases in which open final syllables are strengthened but rather more in which
that syllable is closed (though here, too, such cases are the exception rather
than the rule, at least in my own speech). The shifts are clearly lexically
determined, and are more likely as the compound is more frequent or older,
and the final syllable 'heavier'. Novel compounds with 'trochees' as their
second member, which by their nature are not listed, do not have a stressshifted pronunciation. As may be expected, there is variation between
speakers. For instance, borst-harnas is given with shift by Trommelen &
Zonneveld (1989), but only occurs without in my own speech. It is dubious
if a case for foothood can be based on these facts. Rather, there would
appear to be variable restructuring from 'trochees' to 'iambs' when
occurring as the right-hand member of a compound. In (51), I give the
representations of 'hostel' (not right-shifted) and 'youth hostel' (rightshifted).
Restructuring to initially defooted ' iambs' predicts that the realization of
the chanted call will be sensitive to whether the 'trochee' has been rightshifted. This is correct. The items that have undergone the restructuring from
(51a) to (51b) behave exactly like embedded 'iambs'. Thus 'youth hostel' has
two levels, not three (see (36)).
(x ) (
x )
(x . )
(x ) . (x )
(a) herberg (b) jeugd her berg
It is generally assumed that 'dactyls' undergo rightward shift when used as
the second member of a compound. Trommelen & Zonneveld (1989) adduce
this alleged rightward shift in support of their foot-based formulation of such
a rule. Their prediction, therefore, is that the 'dactyls' in (52b) are
neutralized with the 'anapaests' in (52a) (p. 250) when used as the second
member of a compound.
(52) (a) peloton
veld peloton
(b) marathon
'field platoon'
maniak dorps maniak
almanak
'village fool'
dominee
matinee film matinee
'film matinee'
chocola melk chocola
camera
'milk chocolate'
?strand marathon
'beach marathon'
?staats almanak
'state almanac'
?dorps dominee
'country vicar'
?film camera
'film camera'
I do not believe that this neutralization in fact takes place. In 'film camera',
for instance, the final vowel [a] does not appear to be as long as the final
vowel in 'milk chocolate'. The realization of the chanted call, moreover,
60
THE DUTCH FOOT
speaks against a neutralization. H-Spread (17) treats' dactyls' and' anapaests'
differently: when they appear as second members in a compound, the initial
(weak) foot of' dactyls' can be skipped, but not the initial (strong) foot of
'anapaests'. In (53a), with chocold in second position, the level on choco need
not be realized. The foot came of camera in (53b) is not so skippable,
however. These data suggest that rightward shift does not generally occur in
' dactyls'. Thus, while the foot structure assumed by Trommelen & Zonneveld
for 'dactyls' is the same as that arrived at in this article, it is not
independently confirmed by any stress shift data. Since there is no general
rightward stress shift in 'dactyls', the case for a foot-based rule is weakened
further.
(53)
(a) [me(:)tak sjo(:)kola:tja:] [metak sjokola:tja:]
(b) [fi(:) lam ka(:) maraitja:] *[fibm kamarartja:]
5. CONCLUSION
In Dutch, words with the main stress on the penult end in binary feet,
regardless of the segmental composition of the final syllable, and words with
the main stress on the antepenult have a final monosyllabic foot, provided
the final syllable is not an onsetless syllable with [a] or, in derived words, [1].
Evidence for these representations is provided by the realization of the
'chanted call', by the lexical rules of Pre-r-Lengthening and a-Insertion
(which inserts [a] between monosyllabic feet and the diminutive ending), and
the postlexical rules y-Devoicing and Svarabhakti, as well as by the
distribution of [h]. Regardless of its segmental composition, a single syllable
before the main stress is unfooted postlexically, and is included in the Pword
as an appendix. Evidence for this aspect of foot structure comes from the
realization of the vocative chant and durational reduction effects. Rightward
stress shifts within the word, which have been analysd as s-w -> w-s
relabellings of feet, are shown to be confined to disyllables with the main
stress on the penult, and to involve lexically determined restructurings of a
binary foot to a combination of appendix plus monosyllabic foot.
More recent proposals for Dutch foot structure are in better agreement
with the foot structures argued for in this article than are the proposals made
in the early 1980s. Since all previous proposals have been based on stress
facts (as opposed to segmental and intonational facts) our analysis finds
additional support in the circumstance that consecutive proposals have
61
CARLOS GUSSENHOVEN
tended to produce foot structures that are increasingly like the ones proposed
here (see also note 5).
Author's address: University of Nijmegen,
Vakgroep Engels-Amerikaans,
Erasmusplein 1,
NL 6525 HT Nijmegen,
The Netherlands.
REFERENCES
Beckman, M. & Pierrehumbert, J. B. (1986). Intonational structure of English and Japanese.
Phonology Yearbook 3. 311-340.
Berendsen, E. & Zonneveld, W. (1985). Nederlandse schwa-invoeging op z'n Deens. Spektator
14. 166-196.
Berg, R. van den, Gussenhoven, C. & Rietveld, A. (1992). Downstep in Dutch: implications for
a model. In Docherty, G. J. & Ladd, D. R. (eds.) Papers in laboratory phonology II.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 335-367.
Booij, G. E. (1984). Syllabestruktuur en verkleinwoordsvorming in het Nederlands. GLOT7.
207-226.
Booij, G. E. (1988). On the relation between lexical phonology and prosodic phonology. In
Bertinetto, P.M. & Loporcaro, M. (eds.), Certamen phonologicum. Turin: Rosenberg &
Selier. 63-76.
Gibbon, D. (1976). Perspectives on intonation analysis. Bern: Lang.
Hammond, M. (1984). Constraining metrical theory: a modular theory of rhythm and destressing.
Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Haverkamp-Lubbers, R. & Kooij, J. G. (1971). Het verkleinwoord in het Nederlands.
Publikaties van het Instituut voor Algemene Taalwetenschap, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Hayes, B. (1981). A metrical theory of stress rules. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge MA.
Distributed by Indiana University Lingusitics Club. Published by Garland Press, New York,
I985Hayes, B. (1991). Metrical stress theory: principles and case studies. Draft. UCLA.
Hayes, B. & Lahiri, A. (1991). Bengali intonational phonology. NLLT9. 47-96.
Hayes, B. & Lahiri, A. (1992). Durationally specified intonation in English and Bengali. In
Carlson, R., Nord, L. & Sundberg, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1990 Wenner-Gren Center
Conference on Music, Language, Speech, and Brain. 78-91.
Hermans, B. (1992). On the representation of quasi-long vowels in Dutch and Limburgian. In
Bok-Bennema, R. & van Hout, R. (eds.) Linguistics in the Netherlands 1992. Amsterdam:
Benjamins. 75-86.
Hulst, H. van der (1981). A lexical-prosodic approach toward stress in Dutch. Unpublished
paper.
Hulst, H. van der (1984). Syllable structure and stress in Dutch. Dordrecht: Foris.
Hulst, H. van der (1985). Ambisyllabicity in Dutch. In Bennis, H. & Beukema, F. (eds.)
Linguistics in the Netherlands 1985. Dordrecht: Foris. 57-66.
Hulst, H. van der & Moortgat, M. (1981). Prosodische fonologie en de accentuatie van
Nederlandse woorden of: leeft het Nederlands op grote voet? Verslag /joe Vergadering van
de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Fonetische Wetenschappen. 1-25.
Inkelas, S. (1989). Prosodic constituency in the lexicon. PhD thesis, Stanford University.
Kager, R. W. J. (1985). Cycliciteit, klemtoon, en HGI. Spektator 14. 326-331.
Kager, R. W. J. (1989). A metrical theory of stress and destressing in English and Dutch.
Dordrecht: Foris.
Kager, R. & Ellis Visch (1988). Metrical constituency and rhythmic adjustment. Phonology 5.
21-71.
Kager, R. & Zonneveld, W. (1986). Schwa, syllables, and extrametricality in Dutch. The
Linguistic Review 5. 197-221.
Kahn, D. (1976). Syllable-based generalizations in English. Bloomington: Indiana University
Linguistics Club.
62
THE D U T C H FOOT
Kooij, J. (1982). Epenthetische schwa: Processen, regels, domeinen. Spekiator 11. 315-325.
Ladd, D. R. (1978). Stylized intonation. Lg 54. 517-540.
Lahiri, A. & Koreman, J. (1987). Syllable weight and quantity in Dutch. West Coast Conference
on Formal Linguistics 7. 217-228.
Langeweg, S. J. (1988). The stress system of Dutch. PhD Dissertation. University of Leiden.
Liberman, M. (1975). The intonational system of English. MIT Dissertation. Reproduced by
Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1978.
Neijt, A. & Zonneveld, W. (1982). Metrische fonologie: de representatie van klemtoon in
Nederlandse monomorfematische woorden. De Nieuwe Taalgids 75. 527-547.
Nespor, M. & Vogel, M. (1986). Prosodicphonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
Pierrehumbert, J. B. (1980). The phonetics and phonology of English intonation. MIT
Dissertation. Published by Garland Press, New York, 1990.
Trommelen, M. (1983). The syllable in Dutch: with special reference to diminutive formation.
Dordrecht: Foris.
Trommelen, M. & Zonneveld, W. (1989). Klemtoon en metrische fonologie. Muiden: Coutinho.
Yip, M. (1989). Contour tones. Phonology 6. 149-174.
Zwaardemaker, H. & Eijkman, L. P. H. (1928). Leerboek der Phonetiek. Haarlem: Bohn.