The prosodic foot beyond prosodic prominence: a preliminary survey

IF 1.7 2区文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS

Linguistic Typology Pub Date : 2022-12-26 DOI:10.1515/lingty-2022-0039

Kirsten Culhane

{"title":"The prosodic foot beyond prosodic prominence: a preliminary survey","authors":"Kirsten Culhane","doi":"10.1515/lingty-2022-0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper presents a preliminary survey of foot-sensitive phenomena and foot structure separate from prosodic prominence or classifications such as ‘iambic’ and ‘trochaic’. It considers the evidence for and structure of the foot in a sample of 30 languages which demonstrate at least one foot-sensitive phenomenon which cannot be attributed to prosodic prominence. It finds that in the sample, there is considerable diversity in terms of: a) the type of evidence for and role played by the foot, b) the extent to which there is evidence for the foot, and c) the segmental structure of the foot. These findings demonstrate that the role of the foot is more diverse than often characterised. The findings of this paper also demonstrate that cross-linguistic differences between foot structures are more fine-grained than differences in the distribution of prosodic prominence or syllable weight; accounting for the diversity observed requires reference to the segmental structure of feet. In light of these findings, this paper calls for more examination of the prosodic foot separate from prosodic prominence, and which takes into consideration the variables of cross-linguistic diversity documented here.","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"27 1","pages":"313 - 339"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Typology","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2022-0039","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This paper presents a preliminary survey of foot-sensitive phenomena and foot structure separate from prosodic prominence or classifications such as ‘iambic’ and ‘trochaic’. It considers the evidence for and structure of the foot in a sample of 30 languages which demonstrate at least one foot-sensitive phenomenon which cannot be attributed to prosodic prominence. It finds that in the sample, there is considerable diversity in terms of: a) the type of evidence for and role played by the foot, b) the extent to which there is evidence for the foot, and c) the segmental structure of the foot. These findings demonstrate that the role of the foot is more diverse than often characterised. The findings of this paper also demonstrate that cross-linguistic differences between foot structures are more fine-grained than differences in the distribution of prosodic prominence or syllable weight; accounting for the diversity observed requires reference to the segmental structure of feet. In light of these findings, this paper calls for more examination of the prosodic foot separate from prosodic prominence, and which takes into consideration the variables of cross-linguistic diversity documented here.

查看原文本刊更多论文

超越韵律突出的韵律脚:初步调查

摘要本文初步探讨了除韵律突出或“抑扬格”和“扬格”等分类外的足部敏感现象和足部结构。它考虑了30种语言样本中足部的证据和结构，这些语言至少证明了一种不能归因于韵律突出的足部敏感现象。研究发现，在样本中，在以下方面存在相当大的多样性:a)足部证据的类型和作用，b)足部证据的程度，以及c)足部的节段结构。这些发现表明，足部的作用比通常所描述的更加多样化。本文的研究结果还表明，与韵律突出或音节重量分布的差异相比，足部结构之间的跨语言差异更为细微;考虑到观察到的多样性，需要参考脚的节段结构。鉴于这些发现，本文呼吁将韵律脚与韵律突出分开进行更多的研究，并考虑到这里记录的跨语言多样性的变量。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Linguistic Typology Multiple-

CiteScore

3.70

自引率

5.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Linguistic Typology provides a forum for all work of relevance to the study of language typology and cross-linguistic variation. It welcomes work taking a typological perspective on all domains of the structure of spoken and signed languages, including historical change, language processing, and sociolinguistics. Diverse descriptive and theoretical frameworks are welcomed so long as they have a clear bearing on the study of cross-linguistic variation. We welcome cross-disciplinary approaches to the study of linguistic diversity, as well as work dealing with just one or a few languages, as long as it is typologically informed and typologically and theoretically relevant, and contains new empirical evidence.