Theoretical Issues in Dakota Phonology and Morphology

206 Pages·1980·14.943 MB·English

by  Patricia A. Shaw

Theoretical Issues
in Dakota Phonology
and Morphology
Patricia A. Shaw
s,3"ffiili,"x,i"*
MUnohen
r
Garland Publishing, lnc. New York & London
1 980
Outstanding
Dissertations
rn
Linguistics
edited by
r
Jorge Hankamer Harvard University
A Carland Series
r*"
1
PRXFACE
The present work is a revised version of nry 1975 tloctoral thesis
for the Unlverslty of Toronto. In rry continuing work on the Dakota language
tlnce then, I have not found evidence which vould alter the basic analyses
and ar.gumentatlon developedl vithin, although I have modifled antl expanded
lome of the theoretical discussion, particularly in the section dealing vith
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
putatlve constraints on globa1 rul-es in Chapter lr. Inevitably, the present
Shaw, Patricia A 1946-
Theoretical issues in Dakota phonology and atudy is linitetl in scope, focussing on an investigation of certein seLect
morphology.
processes which are both fundamental vithin the phonolory and morphologr of
(Outstanding dissertations in linguistics)
Dakota and are also of particular theoretical lnterest vithin the framework
Bibliography: p.
1. Dakota language-Phonology' 2. Dakota of recent generative proposals.
language-Morphology. l. Title. ll. Series'
PM1022.S5 497',.5 79-55856 A nurmber of people have contributed to the general tlevelopnent of
lsBN 0-8240-4562-9 qy linguistic thinking antl to the particular research vithin the present
nanuscrlpt, and I arn very grateful to them for the continuing guidance and
lupport whieh they have given me.
I am particularly indebteci to the Sioux speakers vho have workgd.
@) 1980 Patricia A. Shaw vlth me over the past several years. Their consid.erable patience and
All rights reserved
cnthusiasrn in teaching me about their language has been invaluably helpful
lnd constantly stimulating. From Sloux Valley, Manitoba, I would like to
thank lliltla Pratt, Art Wanbd.i, Bob Sioux, and Sarah Brandth, who served. as
tqp principal consultants. AIso, two Sioux Valley speakers who are currently
All volumes in this series are printed on acid-free, llvlng in Toronto have given me eonsistent help over the past several years
Printed in 2t5hOe -UYenaitre-dlif eS tPaatePse ro.f America end merit particular thanks; these are Audrey Ironman and., nost especially,
Cordelia Waiteite Cardinal. From Morley, Alberta, f wouLd like to thank the
brnd council antt the staff of the Stoney Cultr:ral Education Progra^n for
thelr cooperation ancl assistance, and. particul-ar1y Rotl Mark, John Robinson
11
Trroyoun6ucn, 0cor6c Ear, end 0lcnnr Wlldnur for thclr lnrtghtful and generoua
hclp utth the Stoney dlalect.
Anongst ry profeesora at the Unlverslty of Toronto, I an especlally
TABLE OF CONTENTS
grateful to q; advlsor, Jack Chambers, for having introduced me both to ::
linguistics and to Dalcota, and for having been such an unfailing source of i Chapter 1: IntroducEion I
t
!
inspiration, crltical guldance, and personal encouragement. I ar aLso .ta4i 1 Alrn and Scope I
I
greatly lntlebted to Jonathan Kaye, vhose critical acumen and perceptlve st 2 Dakotan dlalects z
inslght have consistently helped to clarlfY and shape rny thinking on a ,Ii/ 2.7. Genetlc classification
variety of problerns. In addltlon, f woul-d like to thank Professor Charles 2.2. Prevlous studies
5
W. Klsseberth of the University of Illlnois for having served as the external 1,
2.3. Data sources
7
1.
exa.niner for ny thesis, and Professors E.N. Br:rstynsky, J.J. Chew, Jr., H.A. e
{
Structural characterlstics
Gleason, Jr., H. Rogers, M. Swain, antl R. llardhaugh for thelr helpful 3 10
comnents as members of rny defense comittee. 3.1. Morphology and Syntax 10
For the painstaklng task of typing the manuscrlpt, f nust thank 3.2. Phonology 16
Wanda SzostaJ<, whose conscientious attention to detalls of etlitorlal con-
4. Phonological framework 22
sistency antl spelIing, as veI} as all those phonetic diacritics, vas much
Footnotes 29
appreciated.
For research firnctlng, I a:n very grateful to the Canada Council for Chapter 2: Some basic phonological- processes 30
thelr generous support during the acadenie year l97l+-75. Monles for lnfor-
0. Introductlon
30
mant fees vere also made available through Huma^nltles and Soclal Seience
1. Accent and boundary narking
30
Research Grants fron the Unlversity of Toronto.
1.1. The DAKOTA ACCENT RrrLE (DAR) 30
Finally, I vould like to thank tvo very good frlends, Sarah Cumrins
L.2. Apparent exceptions to the DAR 32
andt Bob Anthony, for generously tlevoting thelr tlme to typlng, eclltlngt
L.2.1. C-fina1 stems 32
proofing, xeroxing, and collatlng varlous drafts of the nanuscrlpt and,
L.2.2. Vowel deletion and coalescence 3b
nost lnportantly, for thelr varm support, thoughtfulneea, andl unfalling
1.3. Boundaries 35
sense of humour.
1.3.1. Morpheme boundary 35
L.3.2. Lexlcal derivatlon boundary 37
1v
v
1.3.3. Enclltlc boundary 39 5.2.3. Naeal aselmllatlon ln Santee 107
1.3.4.
Word boundary Ur
5, t-PALATALIZATION u0
L.4 Morphologlcal function of accent
5L
Footnotes 1r3
l_. 5 Exceptions to the DAR 53
Chapter 3: ABLAIIT 115
Root-final frlcatlves
2 ,5
2.L. The alternatlon ,5 0. Introductlon 115
2.2. A volclng solutlon 56 1. Vowel-flnal and consonant-flnal roots 115
2.3. A devoiclng soluEion 1.1. Phonologlcal form 1r7
59
2.4. Concluslons 62 L.2. Accent 118
1.3. Lexical compounds 118
3 Ejectlves and Aspirates 63
1.4. Object Incorporatlon r19
3.1. Ejectlves
5L
1.5. Reduplication
120
3.1.1-. A gemlnate analysis
5l+
1.6.
STEM FORMATION 120
3.1.2. The alternatlve analyses 6,
1.6.1. Formulation 120
3.2. Asplrates
76
1.6.2. Rule orderlng relatlons t22
4 Syl1able strengthening processes 77 L.6.2.1. 0pactty of the DAR 122
4.1. A-DROP 't8 L.6.2.2, A counter-feedlng relatlon 125
4.2.
PROSODIC COALESCENCE 82
2 Environmental conditlons for ABLAIIT In Teton t29
4.3.
COALESCENCE 87
2.7. Effect of gramatlcal formatives t29
4.4. GLIDE EPENTHESIS 90
2.2. Derlved nouns 135
4.5. Resldue
95
2.3. Dependent verb stems 138
5 Nasalization 96 2.4. Changes to 1 and 1 1I1
5.1. Nasal vowels 95 2.5. Srmary 1!3
5.2. Nasal consonants 97
3. Ablauttng and non-ablautlng stems in Teton 113
5.2.L. Nasal asslmllatlon ln Teton 97
3.1.
V# stens ruI
5.2.2. Nasal asslnilatlon ln Sioux Valley 100
3.1.1. Class (t): a/l 1Ur
v1
v11
3.L.2. Claee (11): g// IT7
L.2. Envlronmental condlt lons ]-95
3.1.3. Class (111): A/l 1llB L.2.L. Rlght context l,6
3 .1.4. Class (lv): Ail r51
L.2.2. Palatalizatlon after i
L97
3.2 C/l stems 153
L.2.3. Palatalizatlon after underlying e t99
3.2.r. Class (v): C/l wlth non-ablauting a 153
L,2.4. Palatalization after derived e 201
3.2.2. Class (vi): C/i with ablauting A 1r!
2 Constralnts on Global Rules 210
4 Possible analyses 756
2.L. VEL PAI"AT as a neutralLzation rule 211
4.1. Phonological conditioning D6
2.2. Derlved input to VEL PALAT 213
4.2. Global dependence on STEM FORM t5T
2.3, The inadequacy of derlved forns as lnput 2t5
4.3. Abstract ablauting vowels 16o 2.4. VOWEL SH0RTENING in Klamath 277
4.4. Conclusion: A morphological analysis 153 2.5. Conclusions 222
5 ABLAIIT ln Sioux Va11ey t65 3 Cross-dialectal comparison of VEL PALAT 226
5.1. Environmental conditions t55
3.1. Implications 226
5.2. Input: Ablauting and non-ablauting stems 171 3.2. l-dlalects
230
5. ABLAUT in Stoney t7, 3.3. d-dialects 233
3.4, n-dlalects
235
7. ABLAUT in Assinlboine 181
4, A global- ruLe of E-DEL 237
8. ABLAUT 1n Santee 18'
4.1. Inplicatlons for unlversal constraints 237
9. Concluelon 185 4.2. Dlalectal variatlon 2\0
lootnot.r 4.2.L. Beuchelrs Teton: Loss of a global condltion 2[0
188
4.2.2. Other dialects 2\3
Chapter 4: Globel Rulea 191
Footnotes 2l+6
0. Introductlon 191
Chapter 5: NOMINAI DERMTIoN versus VERBAL ASLAUT 2ro
1. VELAR PALATIZATION t92
1.1. Palatallzeable velars 192 0. Introductlon 250
t
vt 1t 1x
1. Condltlong for vcrbal ABLAUT 25\ 2.L. REDLIP on V-flnal stems 328
2. Conditlong for eteo-flnal vowel alternation ln nouna 2514 2,2, REDIJP on C-flnal roots 330
3. Behavlour of wa-Preflxed nouns 255 2,3. Ordertng relations between P€DLIP and the phonologlcal
component 3l+1
4. Behaviour of nominal comPounds 27t
2,3.L. VEL PALAT and rule overappllcation 3LL
5. NOM DER and verbal ABLAUT: One process or two? 219
2.3,2, Verbal ABLAUT and the ldentity Constraint 350
6. Dlfferences ln phonologlcal behavlour between NOM DER and ABLAUT 281
6.1. VELAR PAI.ATALIZATION 281 3 REDLIP ln Sioux Valley 316
6.2. DAKOTA ACCENT RI'LE 285 3.1. GeneraL observatlons 355
6.2.L. NOM DER as a feature-changlng rule 289 3.2. FaiLure of verbal ABI,AUT 359
6.2.2. NOM DER as a suffixation rule 291+
4 REDLIP in Santee g6r
7. Concluslons 297 4.1. General processes 351
8. Inplicatlons for a Morphological Component 301 4.2. Dialect-speclflc processes 362
g, NOU DER and ABLAUT in Siou:c ValleY 307 4.2.L. VOICING ASSIMILATION 362
10. NOM DER and ABLAUT in StoneY 309 4.2.2. An SPC, a Conspiracy, and the Elsewhere Condltlon 36U
Footnotes 3Ill 4.2.3. Behavlour of root-final g and t 367
4.2.4. Behavlour of root-flnal E 372
chaDter 6: REDIIPLICATION 319
4.2.5. Behavlour of root-flnal k
371+
0. Introductlon 319
5 REDUP ln Stoney 3'15
1. Morphol-oglcal functlons of REDIIP 319
5.1. Baslc phonological processes 376
1.1. PluralltY 319
5.2. Fallure of verbal ABLAUT 381
L.2. Iteratlon 320
5.3.
ADVERSATIVE REDI]P 382
1.3. Distrlbution 322
1.4. Intenslficatlon 322 Footnotes 386
1.5. Non-verbal reduPlication 32\ Blbllography 392
1.5. Redupllcatlon of lexicalized stems 326
2. REDIIP ln Teton 328
Chapter 1: INTR0DUCTION
1. Aln and Scope
The present dissertation has two basic goa1s. The first is
to provlde an expllclt and coherent analysis of a variety of phonologlcal
and morphological processes withln the gram[ars of a number of different
dlalects of Dakota. Specifically, this study conslders two Canadian
dialects, the Waxpetgwg Santee dialect of Sioux Valley, Manitoba, and
the Stoney dialect of Morley, Alberta, whlch have not previousl-y been
descrlbed ln the published literature, and compares aspects of their
grammars with the relatively well-documented Teton and Santee dialects
and the less extenslvely docr:mented Assiniboine dialect of the northern
mld-west of the Unlted States. Thls cross-dialectal comparlson lntends
to provlde not only a deeper understanding of the lnternal synchronic
processes of the lndlvidual dialects, but also a more comprehensive view
of the lntricacies of the interrelatlonshlps amongst the various dialects
and thelr diachronic evolution.
The second major goal ls to investlgate the relevance of
I certaln aspects of the proposed analysls to partlcular tenets of the
i
rl
i,tI general theory of transformatlonal generative phonology and of recent
proposals regarding the role of norphology withln a generatlve framework.
Anongst the issues of current theoretical interest whlch recelve
particul-ar attentlon are the following: the necesslty of g1-obal rules,
and putatlve universal constraints on their appllcation and on the
2 3
dlrectlon of thelr dlachronlc change (Chapter 4); the role, place, and
functlon of a nrorphol-oglcal component wlthln a generatLve grarmar, wlth
partlcuLar consideration of the lnteractlon between morphology and phono- (o(6!.
oJ
logy (Chapters 5 and 6); the use of morphological diacritics as exception
features (Chapter 3); the phonological role of hlerarchically-ranked (! q,
,-o} 60
r!
d o
boundaries (Chapter 2); and, repeatedly, the questLon of the necessity +dJ o
(.) (! (!
o
of language-speciflc extrlnslc rule ordering as opposed to unl-versal (! tdr
(, (, Y
rule ordering principles. o co
A
oI
In sumary, then, this thesis aims to contribute both to the
G
oe
more speciallzed area of Siouan linguistlcs and to general linguistic El
ti
o
theory. q
U)
E
2. Dakotan dialects h
o
F{
2.L. Genetic classiflcation F(.dl
By way of prellninaries, it wll-l be helpful to deLineate Ln tqr, .FAA{ h
general Eerms the baslcally acknowledged composltion of the Slouan famlly .vFo{) drooo{' ro(tJ.r,
o U)
of the Macro-Siouan phylun; the reader is referred therefore to Figure 1 .r{
o
(based on Voegelin 1941, and subsequent revlsions by Wolff 1950, Haas 1968, tr
'r{
o
F
Itratthews 1970, and Chafe 1973). a r{
I €d tr
j .r{
o
As indicated in Flgure L, Dakota ls a member of the Misslsslppi (! o
)T
Valley sub-famlly of Slouan and ls ltself generally considered to be
h
r.l
Acsuhsbasdrlnalvcibldteoeridnlz eel,nd ta oan sdf oLSuatorkn odetalya ) (leoTcnet t tohgner)o ,b uDapsaslks.o tToahf e(Sasena ng1tr:eodeu:)np, sac aondrrre eN saaplkoteontrdane an(Yctiaevn efkoltyorn, i .urh'E(t(Io.{dr,,{ r&rtIouoq>all rrjO \+\r//d J/a/n4/fdi Joudo(dl l>+,ooG(ndJr
the reflex of Proto-Slouan *r. Ttre followlng cognates exenpllfy this
rl \B
\o
basic correspofldence: "ltrlll (u) pEoI
o
.ror{al Il H
4 5
(1) Teton Santee Stoney (3) Ietlq s.v Santee Yankton Assln. Stoney
1o do no rmale speaker partlcler a. pteEela pteEeda pteEed4 pE"E"rr" pE.E"rr, 'short I
tsingt b. blaska bdaska mdaska bdaska mraOka I flat I
1ow{ dow{ nowa
tlaket
1re l-oe r-ne t fire t ble bde mde nne
wait6lake o,ait6dake wait6nake t love I bl-oketu bdoketu mdoketu umogedu t sunmer t
g16pa hd6pa hn6pa tvomit r c. bla bda mda rnna ttra t I go t
tI
bluha bduha mduha nnuha muha havet
This tripartlte subclasslficaElon is by no means clear-cut,
however. As the cognate sets below show, the demarcatlon between d and The data in (2) and (3) above are presented prlnarlly to
n dialects is partlcularly hazy. For example, on the basls of show that the relationships amongst the Dakotan dialects are not entirely
correspondences such as those in (2a), Yankton is generally termed an n straightforward. The present study is limited to an investigation of
dialect. However, as Ehe data of (2b) show, it frequently has a d certain select processes which are fundamental within the morphophonology
refLex. Slrnllarly, Riggsr (1890, 1893) Santee ls classed as a d dialect, of the individual dialects. Consequently, the treatment Ls far from
yet sometimes shows an n reflex, as evldenced by the data of (2c): exhaustive or defLnitive, and many problems both in synchronic and
(2) Teton Santee Yankton comparative-hlstorical analysls have been left either untouched or
a. rgo unresolved. A more comprehenslve and expllclt treatment of the inter-
g1.d n(la kn5 homel
b. 6g1e 6hde 6kde rshlrt, coatr dialectal relatlonships of the Dakota language requires, ln partlcular,
sLl hdf kdt rarrlve honer detalled lnvestlgation of Yankton, Asslnibolne, and Stoney, these belng
c.Illa nlna nlna tvery t Ehe least well-docrmented dlalects (ln publlshed sources, at least).
E{sEna Eistlna clscLna t 1lttle t Nevertheless, it is hoped that the present work not only contributes to
a deeper understanding of sooe of the synchronic and diachronlc I-ssues,
Indeed, lf we extend our comparative data baee to lnclude the Waxp6tgwg
but will also serve as a useful basis for further research.
dialect of Santee currently spoken ln Sloux yalley, Manltoba (abbrevlated
as S.V. below), ln contrast to the Mdewgkgtgwg dlalect of Santee recorded 2.2. Previous studies
by Rlggs (1890, 1893) (referred to aa Santee below), we note that the Conprehensive blbllographles of Slouan studles Ln general
interrelatlonehLps along the dlalect continuum are aomewhat Dore cooplex have been compiled by Chanbers (1968), Chafe (L972: l-178-1L81), and most
and the gradatlons Dore attenuated than a slnpllst{c trlpartite recently Rood (1975).
claselflcatlon loplles :