P. 1
Accent in Proto Indo European Athematic Nouns

Accent in Proto Indo European Athematic Nouns

|Views: 24|Likes:
Published by sijnesio

More info:

Published by: sijnesio on May 25, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less






Some roots occur in both verbal and nominal forms. In this paper, I have made

certain claims about the lexical specifications of roots and suffixes. Specifically, I have

predicted that accent class is function of what types of roots and suffixes combine to make a

stem. It will be important in testing this analysis to see of the lexical specification I have

associated with any particular root can also be associated with that root when it forms a verb.

For example, if a root creates an acrostatic noun, my system predicts that this root must be

underlyingly accented. The question is then if this lexical specification can be associated

with the same root when it forms a verb. Similarly, if a root creates an amphikinetic noun,

this root is unaccented according to my system. Thus, when such a root forms a verb, it

should behave as an unaccented root is predicted to according to the constraint ranking

derived here. The roots of proterokinetic nouns cannot be associated with one particular

specification – they can either be unaccented or post-accenting. It is possible that if such

roots occur in other words, these words could provide evidence that could determine the

lexical specification of the root. For example, if a root that forms a proterokinetic noun

appears in a verb whose surface stress suggests that the root is unaccented, we can then


determine that the root is unaccented in the proterokinetic noun formation as well. Even if it

is determined that roots in verbs have different lexical specifications than the same roots in

athematic nouns, there is one possibility for amending the problem that does not requiring

revamping the entire system proposed here. The same root could have two different lexical

entries – one for the creation of a noun and one for the verb.

Another way to test the analysis proposed here is through a more thorough look at the

suffixes that derive athematic nouns. Suffixes that form acrostatic nouns are the only

suffixes that can either be accented or unaccented. This means that a suffix in a acrostatic

noun can also appear in any other accent class, and which accent class it appears in should

tell you what the underlying specification of the suffix is. In this way it can be determined

whether certain suffixes in acrostatic nouns are accented or unaccented. However, because

suffixes that create proterokinetic nouns must be accented and suffixes that create

hysterokinetic or amphikinetic nouns must be unaccented, the same suffix should not appear

in both a primarily derived proterokinetic noun and a primarily derived amphikinetic or

hysterokinetic noun. The system as a whole can then be examined more carefully by looking

for suffixes that appear in different accent classes and then checking if the different accent

classes make different predictions about the underlying specification for the suffix.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->