<OT> New Posting: ROA-1031

[roa at ruccs.rutgers.edu]

ROA 1031-0609

Minimal words aren't minimal feet

Edward Garrett <heacu.mcintine at gmail.com>

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=1031


Abstract:
Since McCarthy and Prince (1986), most linguists have claimed
that the minimal content word of a language is equivalent
to the minimal foot allowed by the language.  In this paper
I survey minimal word restrictions in over fifty languages
to show that the minimal word syndrome is not connected
to foot structure.  Instead, in some cases the minimal word
of a language is connected to stress properties of the right
and/or left edge of the word.  For many languages the independent
ly necessary right edge constraint prohibiting final stress,
NON-FINALITY (Hyman 1977, Prince and Smolensky 1993, Hung
1994, Walker 1996), predicts minimal word constraints. 
To handle left edge effects, I introduce a constraint disfavoring
stressed syllables which are not preceded by unstressed
syllables (which therefore disfavors initial stressed syllables),
UPBEAT.  In a great many other cases, I show that there
is not even a connection between stress and minimality.
I account for the minimal word restrictions in these languages
with the phonetically motivated constraint BE-LONG, which
penalizes short words.

Comments: Garrett, Edward (1999). Minimal words aren't minimal feet. In Matthew Gordon (ed.), UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, no.1, Papers in Phonology 2, pp 68-105.
Keywords: minimal-word feet prosodic-structure stress
Areas: Phonology
Type: Journal Article

Direct link: http://roa.rutgers.edu/view.php3?roa=1031