The focus prosody of Chichewa and the Stress-Focus constraint: a response to Samek-Lodovici (2005)
The focus prosody of Chichewa and the Stress-Focus constraint: a response to Samek-Lodovici (2005)
复制标题
奇切瓦语的焦点韵律和重音焦点约束：对 Samek-Lodovici (2005) 的回应
DOI：
10.1007/s11049-013-9192-x
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
B. Pompino
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Downing;B. Pompino
Samek-Lodovici (2005) 为韵律-焦点界面的工作传统做出了贡献，该传统提出，在跨语言上，最终韵律的突出性和焦点之间存在相关性。根据 Kanerva (1990) 的描述，奇切瓦语焦点韵律对于重音-焦点相关性来说是有问题的，因为具有原位焦点的单词不承担句子重音。为了解释奇切瓦语，Samek-Lodovici 提出，从本质上讲，奇切瓦语没有句尾焦点韵律，因为它没有句尾句子韵律。 Kanerva (1990:139-140) 认为奇切瓦语确实有句子级重音：语调短语 (IP) 的最后一个词的倒数被描述为具有“相当长的长度”，使其比任何 IP 内部重音音节“明显更长”，无论是否集中。然而，他没有提供音标来支持这一描述。令人惊讶的是，没有对奇切瓦语进行彻底的后续语音研究系统地研究这个问题。在本文中，我们介绍了在马拉维进行的一项实验的结果，该实验涉及几位非语言母语为奇切瓦语的人，该实验旨在测试 Kanerva (1990) 和 Samek-Lodovici (2005) 关于集中元音与 IP 最终位置的后元音相对长度的相互矛盾的说法。我们证明 Kanerva 的主张是正确的：IP 的倒元音明显长于 IP 中其他倒元音，包括焦点单词的倒元音。然而，我们的研究与 Kanerva (1990) 相矛盾，因为我们发现重点成分甚至不会引起短语重音。我们认为报告的焦点韵律实际上是强调韵律，并且奇切瓦语中没有强制性的焦点韵律。
Samek-Lodovici (2005) contributes to a well-established tradition of work on the prosody-focus interface, which proposes that, cross-linguistically, there is a correlation between culminative prosodic prominence and focus. Chichewa focus prosody is problematic for the Stress-Focus correlation, because words with in-situ focus do not bear sentential stress, according to Kanerva’s (1990) description. To account for Chichewa, Samek-Lodovici proposes that, in essence, Chichewa does not have culminative focus prosody because it does not have culminative sentential prosody. Kanerva (1990:139–140) suggests that Chichewa does, though, have sentence-level stress: the penult of the final word of the Intonation Phrase (IP) is described as having ‘considerable lengthening’ making it ‘noticeably longer’ than any IP-internal stressed syllable whether focused or not. However, he does not provide phonetic figures to support this description. Surprisingly, no thorough follow-up phonetic study of Chichewa has systematically investigated this issue. In this paper we present the results of an experiment conducted in Malawi involving several non-linguist native speakers of Chichewa, which set out to test Kanerva’s (1990) and Samek-Lodovici’s (2005) conflicting claims about the relative length of penult vowels in focused vs. IP-final position. We show that Kanerva’s claim is correct: the penult vowel of an IP is significantly longer than other penult vowels in the IP, including those of words in focus. However, our study contradicts Kanerva (1990), as we find that focused constituents do not attract even phrasal stress. We suggest that the focus prosody reported is actually emphasis prosody, and that there is no obligatory focus prosody in Chichewa.