Towards a Generative Phonology of Daco-Rumanian Dialects

Author(s): E. Vasiliu
Source: Journal of Linguistics, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Apr., 1966), pp. 79-98
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4174919
Accessed: 05-12-2015 18:06 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Linguistics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Towards a generative phonology of

Daco-Rumanian dialects
E. VASILIU
Centrulde CercetdriFonetice i Dialectale, I94 Calea Victoriei, Bucharest
(Received 25 June I965)
The purpose of this paper is to outline a classification of Dacorumanian
dialects, according to certain morphophonemic particularities chosen as
criterial. This classification is (to be sure) only a first step, a kind of first
approximationto a more detailedspecificationof diverse dialectalmorphophonemic and phonemic structuresoccurringin this area.
The dialects spoken within Rumania are called 'Dacorumanian' (DRum.),
in contradistinction to the dialects spoken outside this territory, i.e. the
Arumanian (ARum.), Meglenorumanian (MRum.) and Istrorumanian
(IRum.) dialects.1
i. The morphophonemicsystem of ALL the Rumaniandialects is characterized
by many vowel alternationssuch as: /eiea/, /o-oa/, /a-.e/, /a-e/, /iti/, etc.
I. i. Only some of these alternationswill be taken into account below, namely:
-/e-ea/, phonetically [eea']: [leg,lea'ga elege] 'to tie' (pres. ind. Ist, 3rd
pers., pres. subj. 3rd pers.).
-/a-e/: /faita.fe'te/ 'girl, girls', /massac me'se/'table, tables',
/Jed--fJde/ 'to stay' (pres. ind. Ist, 3rd pers.).
-/a,.e/: /mar-me're/ 'apple, apples'.
The first two alternations can be reduced to a single one: /a-%.'e/is the
alternation/e-ea/ occurringafterlabials.
The environment which modifies the alternation/e-ea/ also determines the
alternation/;ae/.
These alternations can be explained by the subsequent phonetic changes:
(i) Lt. [e] > [ei] if followed in the next syllable by an [e] or [a] (in the same
way, Lt. [6] > [ea] in the same environment).
(2)
After a labial [e, ea']became [a, a'] IF there was no front vowel in the
next syllable). Thus [feata] > [fata], but [feate] > [fete] accordingto (i).
The same rule explains the [ave] alternation: [mer] > [mar], according
to (2), but [meaire] changes into [mere] according to (3) (see below);
the preceding labial did not change the quality of the next vowel,
because it was protected by the following [e].
[1] Editorial note. In the phonetic transcriptions in this article, IPA conventions are
modified to the extent that ' is used for palatalization and the acute accent over
vowels for stress.

79

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL

OF LINGUISTICS

(3) In a later stage of development of DRum., [ea'] > [e] when followed by
an [e] in the next syllable (while [eA] followed by an [o] kept its diphthongal status; the monophthongization did not affect [Qa] before [e]).
Thus a form such as [lege] 'to tie' (3rd pers. pres. subj.) is a product of
two previous stages: (i) [lege], (2) [leage]. Direct evidence for stage (2)
is provided by the oldest Rumanian texts (i6th century), which show
traces of this older stage. Other evidence is given by forms such as
DRum. [fipte, fJde] 'seven', 'to stay' (pres. ind. 3rd pers.), ARum.
[da'ci] 'ten', from necessarily previous [fQapte, Jfade, 4Qaice]forms. The
/a/ vocalism is to be explained by the influence of the preceding /f/ or

141.
From a purely distributional point of view the DRum. dialects may be
divided into three groups, according to the distribution of /e, i/ vs. /a, i/.
A. Dialects in which, after /f, 3/, only /e, i/ occur and never /a, i/.
B. Dialects in which, after /J, 3/, only /a, i/ occur and never /e, i/.
C. Dialects in which, after /J, 3/, the two pairs, /e, i/ and /a, i/, are in free
variation.
For a moment we shall consider only two dialects belonging to A or B.
For each A and B we find two distinct sets (I and II) of morphophonemic and
phonemic shapes of the following words and word forms always going together. They are, in standardized form, as follows:
'to stay' (pres. ind. ISt, 2nd, 3rd pers.).
(i) [fed-fez-.-faide]
'bladder', 'shirt', 'seven', 'snake'.
JaYrpe]
(2) [bafika, kamaifo, JaYpte,
(3) [uJf, Ji, gri33, ingri3i] 'door', 'and', 'care', 'to care'.
1.2.

B: Jf, Ji, 30, 3i

A: fle, f li, 3le, 3'i

1.

i.

(i) [J'ed-fJ'ezi'f'ade]
[bef' ika, kJmdfJ'e,Ja'pte,
J'arpe]

(i) [f9d

fJzIifdde]

(2)

(2) [beJliko, kamiJf, Jipte,

(3)[u'fe,fgi, gri le,itegri3"i]

(3) [ulfa,fi, gr1i3agtgri3i]

II. (I) [J'edfJ'ezi,fJ'ede]

komejle, fJ'epte,
(z) [befJ'tka,
J'rpel
(3) [ 'f Ie,f Ii, gri3'e, it gri3 i

II. (I) [f;ad,,f;zi,,fde]

(2) [befik;a,kameja, fa'pte,
farpe]
(3) [ufa, fi, gri3a, itegri3i]

fJrpe]

Table 1
In dialect A only rows I.(3) and II.(3) are identical, while I.(I) & (2) and
IJ.(I) & (2) are different.
8o

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOWARDS

A GENERATIVE

PHONOLOGY

OF DACO-RUMANIAN

DIALECTS

The differences within the dialects having THE SAME distribution of vowels
after /f, 3/ must be explained by the different chronology of the depalatalization of /f'/.
The relative chronology of this depalatalizationis already established. We
must assume a 'sharp' quality for Common Rumanian(CRum.) /I/, since this
consonant is the product of the palatalizationof Lt.[s] before an [1]or VLt.[j]:
Lt.sic > Rum. [fi] 'and', Lt. septem> CRum. [*sjepte] > [*fljepte] > [f'epte]
'seven', Lt. camisia> VLt. [*kamesja]> CRum. [*komef'ja]> [*kame'fa].
All CRum. [a] changed into [e] after a palatal consonant: CRum. [*pal'a,
*kudn'} (Lt. palea, cunea) became [*pal'e, *ku'nle].The same change occurred
when /a/ was preceded by /f'/: CRum. [*kome6'f > *kame'fe]. The stage
[*kamefle] must be postulated for CRum., since it underlies both DRum. and
ARum. forms.
The voiced phoneme corresponding to /f/ (i.e. 13/) is perhaps later than
CRum., but its distributionis quite parallelto that of /f/ in dialects which have
both /f/ aind/3/.
In many DRum. dialects /f'/ lost the 'sharpness' and became COMPACT (as
opposed to /s, z/ which are acute and noncompact).When /J'/ became compact,
/e, i/ > /a, i/ after it.
In some DRum. dialects /f'/ became compaCt BEFORE the change (2)
1.2.1.
(-[pa, e] > [a', ] after labials), and then forms like [*kamteafle,*bef iko]
became [*kamefaJ, befJka]. Under such conditions according to (2),
[kamoeafa,befika] > [kamafa, baflika] because the syllable following [pa, e]
no longer contained a front vowel.
At the same time, forms like [*fleade, *fleapte, *flearpe], resulting by (i)
from previous [*flede, *flepte, *fJlerpe],became [fade, fapte, farpe], perhaps
through the intermediate stage [*fpade, *fpapte, *f;arpe]; forms like [f'ed,
fJezi],which, normally,did not change by (i), became [fad, jazi].
In other dialects the loss of 'sharpness'by /f'/ occurred after change (3).
1.2.2.
In these dialects [kamea4'fe,bef'ika] were not affected by change (2),
because the next syllable containedan /e/.
Forms like [kameaJ'e, f'leade, f'leapte, f'earpe] became by (3): [kme'f'e,
f'ede, f'epte, f'erpe]; when /f'/ lost the 'sharpness' they became further
[kamefa, fade, f6pte, fArpe].
The difference in the relative chronology of the depalatalization of
1.2.3.
/f'/ explains the differences arising between the sets I.(i) & (2) and II.(i) &
(2) in dialects belonging to B.

The differences arising between I.(i) & (2) and IJ.(i) & (2) in dialects
belonging to A are to be explained as follows:
Some of the dialects which lost the sharpness of /f'/ before (2), repalatalized
/f/ in a later stage of their development and therefore [kama'f, bafika,
fad, faz'] became [kamaf'e, baffika, fled, flezi] together with [uifa, fi] which
8i

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL

OF LINGUISTICS

became [uif'e, f 'i]. The vocalism of words like [f'ade, flapte, f a'rpe] was not
affectedby this change.
Some other dialects belonging to A NEVER lost the sharpness of /f'/; under
such conditions, [kmoeafle, bef'ika] were not affected by (2) because they
contained an /e, i/ in the following syllable, whereas forms like [f'leade,
f'eapte, f'earpe, kameaif'e]changed to [f'ede, J'epte, J'erpe,kameJf'e]by (3).
It is easy to see forms I.(i) & (2) for A and B are chronologically more
related than A. I & II and also that II.(i) & (2) for A and B are also chronologically more relatedthan B.I & II.
Let us conventionally call dialects I. A, B Munteniantype dialects(because
they are spoken mostly in Muntenia) and dialects II. A, B Moldavian type
dialects(because Moldavia is included in the areain which they are spoken).
1.2.4. The dialects belonging to C (where /e, i/ are in free variation with
/a, i/ after /f, 3/) are either of Muntenian or of Moldavian type: Muntenian
Of /f, )/ is not consistent; Moldavian type
type where the REPALATALIZATION
of /f', 3'/ is inconsistent. We have therefore to
where the DEPALATALIZATION
expect:
(a) for Muntenian type: [fipte, Jarpe, faide] and, in free variation [kama'f,
bafika, fad, fazi] and [kamaJ'e, bal'ika, fed, J'ezi] (but never [kmeJfa,
befika] or [kmefI'e, bef'ika]);
(b) for Moldavian type: [f6pte, f6rpe, Jfde, kamefa, befika, fad, flzi] in free
variation with [f'epte, Je'rpe, f'ede, kme'f'e, bef'ikk, f'ed, fJezi] (but never
[kama'fJ]or [kamaJf'e],[bafiko] or [bfl'fka].
I.3. In some DRum. dialects replacement of /e, i/ by /a, i/ after /c, s, z/ also
occurs. This change is characteristicof Moldavian type dialects and for some
Muntenian type dialects. For dialects in which this change does occur,
literary Rumanian forms such as [mirsea'samirese] 'bride', 'brides',
[boteavz--boteze] 'to baptize' (pres. ind. 3rd pers.) (pres. subj. 3rd pers.),
[varsa-verse] 'to pour' (pres. ind. 3rd pers.) (pres. subj. 3rd pers.),
[invaic.iinvece] 'to learn' (pres. ind 3rd pers.) (pres. subj. 3rd pers.) correspondto: [mirieasa-mireso, botieaza-.-boteza,varsa-versa, invaca-inveca].
This change MUST follow (I), (2) and (3) in all the dialects.
If it was earlier than (2) we would expect forms like [*vairsa,*invaic9]
instead of the actual [versa, inveco] (i.e. homophony between present indicative
and present subjunctive in the 3rd person).
The old forms [*veajrse,tnveice] resulting from (i) would have become
[*vetarsa *inveaco] (following the assumption that [e, i] > [t, i] after [c, s, z]
preceded (2) and later, by (2), > [*varsa,*invaca].
If the change which we are concerned with was earlier than (3), we would
expect forms like [*boteajza,*mirea'sa]instead of the actual [boteza, miresa]
(i.e. homophony between indicative and subjunctive in the 3rd person
present). The old forms [*boteaze, *mirea'se]resulting from (i), would have
82

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOWARDS

A GENERATIVE

PHONOLOGY

OF DACO-RUMANIAN

DIALECTS

become [*boteaza, *mirea'sa]and therefore could not have been affected by

(3)
I.4. Some Moldaviantype dialects may furnish some evidence (weak evidence,
of course) for a special chronology of the vowel change after /c, s, z/, (more
precisely, only for /s/, but in order to obtain the most compact statement, we
may assume the same development for /c, z/). These dialects have the form
[Jfaso](like Mluntenian)but [f6pte, fJde, kamefa] etc. It is hard to assume that
[flasD]was simply borrowed from Muntenian dialects, for naturally we
should then expect the borrowing of [faipte]also, or some 'refashioning' of
either [fJpte]or [a'so] on the patternof the borrowedform.
Moreover,these dialects do not show any homophony of the kind discussed
above which would enable us to considerthis change as earlierthan (s).
In order to explain this situation, we might assume that the change /e, i/ >
/a, i/ after /c, s, z/ occurred BEFORE (3) but that it DID NOT affect vowels
separatedfrom /c, s, z/ by a morphemeboundary(symbolized below as &).
Thus, wvhen['lease] > [fresa], a word like [mireas&e]was not affected by
the change, for /e/ was an inflexion.
Therefore [mireas&e] became [mirese] according to (2), whereas [fpisa]
could no longer be affected by the change (2); when /f'/ became 'nonsharp',
i.e. AFTER (2), [flea's]
2.

> [fa'so].

The situation outlined above suggests that the DRum. dialects can be

described largely in terms of THE SAME RULES ordered differently. For our
purpose, which is not chiefly historical, we shall not begin with the CRum.
phonemic system (which, perhaps, did not contain two central vowels but a
single one, or which contained sharp consonants or tense phonemes: (e.g.
/i, 1, fi/ as opposed to lax /r, 1, n/ etc.).
2.I. The distinctive-feature matrix is given in Table 2. Notice that we will
put into the dictionary words like [frpte, kmeJfe, Ji] etc. without specifying the
vocalic feature which is predictable in terms of the preceding consonants;
therefore we shall leave aside the specification ACUTE for non-compact non-flat
vowels occurring after sharp consonants. The specification of acuteness will be
accomplished by means of a special rule.
2.2. The rules to be applied are given in Table 3. We now discuss these rules
and their effects.
Rule (A) specifies the feature ACUTE after sharp consonants including
If, 3/ also. It is the only MS rule (whereas all the following are phonemic
rules) and must be applied BEFORE rule (B) which requires a fully specified /e/.
Rule (B) is a reformulation of (i).
Rule (C) substitutes the feature /+compact/ for the feature /+sharp/,
expressing in this way the main change which differentiates the two groups of
dialects.
83

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

a u i
Cons

f-Cons

Voc

/-Voc

Comp

Diff
Flat

/-Comp

f-Diff
f-Flat
-Acute
0Acute
4
Stop f-Stop
Sharp f-Sharp
Strid f-Strid
Nasal -Nasal
Voiced-Voiced

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

+-

o
o
o
o
o
o

+
o
o
o
o
o

o e

t
0

n d

++-o

+-

o
o
o
o
o

o o
o o
o o
o o
o oo

o
o
o
o
o

o o o
o o o
+ + +++
+ + +
+ + o o +
o o o
+ -

00

o
o

g' k' g k m b
+

+
-

-o

o
o

o
o

-+
-

--0

+-

o
o

o o o o o
o o o o o
++++ + + + + +

+
o

o
+-

Table 2

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

o
o

o
o
+-o

o
o

o o
+ +

TOWARDS

A GENERATIVE

PHONOLOGY

OF DACO-RUMANIAN

DIALECTS

Rule (D) is a consequence of (C): it shows that /e, i/ are replaced by /a, i/
after the depalatalizationof If', 3'/. This vowel substitution has great importance for the morphophonemics only if (C) is ordered BEFORE (E-F). In
such a case, all the following steps of the derivation are affected (positively or
negatively) by this rule. If (C) is appliedAFTER(E-F), only the final arrangement
of phoneme strings is determined by it. This fact is expressed in our grammar
by a special ordering: the consequences of (C) are no longer specified by rule
(D) but by means of the rules (H), (I); the consequences of the rule (C) are of
the same range as the consequences of the STRIDENCY, introduced by means of
rule (H).
Rule (E) is a restatementof (2), and (F) is a restatementof (s).
Rule (G) reintroducesthe feature /+sharp/ instead of /+comp/. The rule
is stated for the Muntenian dialects only. On the other hand, the application
of (G) makes possible a new applicationof (A), but at a very low level so that,
this time, rule (A) will not affectthe morphophonemicstructure.
Rules (J) and (K) are stated in order to obtain strings representing the
ACTUAL
phonemic sequences: to move the stress of such sequences as
*/ea, oa, 6a/ to /a/ and to delete /a/ in sequences of /sa/.
3. In this section we shall try to classify DRum. dialects according to the rules
stated in ?2, Petrovici (I943) is the corpus which furnishes us with the data
we have taken into account. In the next section we shall give, not the data, but
only the points on the maps in Petrovici (I956) representingthe villages where
the different dialects are spoken. The corresponding data may be found in
Petrovici (I943) under the points specified (together with the name of the
village).
3.. I Munteniantype dialectscan be definedas the totalityof dialectscharacterized
by ordering rules (C-D) before (E-F). The orderof rules is: (A-B-C-D-E-F).
There are three main varieties of this type.
3.II. The first variety, A, is represented by the dialect which DOES NOT
repalatalize /J, 3/. That means that this dialect does not apply rule (G), but
only rule (H). On the other hand rule (A) does not apply twice.
The whole set of rules is the following.:
(A-B-C-D-E-F-H-I-J-K)
The dialect is represented by points 872 and 79I (Muntenia) I72, 157,
235 (Southern and CentralArdeal).
3.12. The second variety, B, is characterizedby the PRESENCE of rule (G) and
the recursiveness of (A) after (G). That means that this variety repalatalized /f, 3/.
We can further divide this varietyinto two subvarieties:
(a) in which rules (H), (I) do not apply;
(b) in which rules (H), (I) do apply.
85
This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

- Cons
(A)

[ ]-[+Acute]inenv.

- Comp

[+Sharp]

-FlatJ
- Diff

(B)

-Cons

+Stress
|+ If/Acute/l

] in env.

+Comp
00

---([+Cons

.. ])

Diff
Flat

t/Flat/

[-Voc30
(C)

[+Sharp] --[+Comp]

in env.

(D)

(E)

-*

[-Acute] in env.

[-Acute] in env.

- Stop

Voc

-Stop
+Acute
+ Comp_l
- Voc
- Acute
- Comp

-Cons
- Comp

- Cons
- Diff
_
J

([+ Cons ..])

--

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

r- C
i-

Ac

(F

Cons

- Duff
n+Acute
nv
+Stress

(F + C ]0

(G)

(H)

[ ] --[+Strid]

(J)

Con

[
]|Diff]
+ Acu

[Cons
-..

- Voc
-Stop]

in env.

+Acute
I

[ ] t-

-Voc
- Stop
Acute

[+ Comp] -+ [+Sharp] in env.

-4

(I)

Cons

-'0Sharp I

[-Acute] in env. [+Strid]

Cons
Co
|
np IStress

- Cons
+Comp
- Stress

-|

- Cons
- Comp
- Stress

- Cons
+Comp
+Stress

- Cons

(K)

-Acute
LK Flat

>0 inenv.--

[-C ons>

[+Comp

Table3

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL

OF LINGUISTICS

Dialect Ba is definedby the subsequent set of rules:

(A-B-C-D-E-F-J-K-G-A).
Notice rules (G)-(A) must be applied AFTER(J)
and (K) because otherwise we should againobtain forms like [feairpe].
On the other hand we must mention that, at some point, rules (G)-(A) are
that means that speakers vacillate between pronunciations
OPTIONAL;
[fe, fi, 3e, 3i] and [fo,fi, 3a, 3i].
Variety Ba is represented by the following points: I30, I82, I92 (Southern
Ardeal); 762, 769, 723, 728, 705, 899, 928 (Muntenia); 682, 987 (Dobrogea).
Dialect Bb is defined by the addition (sometimes optional) of rules (H) and
(I). That means that, in this dialect /e, i/ became /a, i/ after /c, s, z/. In some
villages the speakersvacillatebetween the two pronunciations.
The set of rules definingthis subvarietyis therefore:
(A-B-C-D-E-F-H-I-J-K-G-A).
Rules (H)-(I) have to be applied before (J)-(K) so that forms like [caapa,
s0ara] (resulting from the application of rules (H)-(I) to [cetapa, steara]
'thorn', 'evening', will be converted to [caipa,sa'ra]together with forms like
[miasa, faada] etc. (resultingfrom the previousapplicationof (C)-(D).
The dialect just described is represented by the points: 836, 848, 8Iz, 876,
886, 784 (Muntenia and Oltenia).
3.2. Moldavian type dialects.The dialects belonging to this type are characterized by the absence of rule (D) and by either ordering (C) AFTER rules (E)-(F)
or by the complete absence of (C). We have already seen that we may state
the consequences of (C) by rules (H)-(I), if (C) is orderedafter (F).
There are two main varietiesof this type:
Thefirst variety, A, is characterizedby the sharpness OfIf, 3/ which is
3.2I.
retained.After /c, s, z/, /e, i/ become /a, i/.
The data offered by our corpus indicate the stage /fe, Ji, 3e, 3i/ together with
/Ca, sa, ZG, ci,C
t, zt/ at points 334, 325, 3I6, 64 and 310 (Western Ardeal),but
there is no clear evidence which will permit us to decide whether this stage is
a conservative one or not. Only by corroboration of the data offered by
Pop (I938), which, indeed, does not includethe samepoints asPetrovici, (I943),
can we see that our points belong to the same area in which the stage with
sharp /f', 3'/ is archaic(see our map I).
We can, therefore, infer that this dialect is characterizedby the absence of
rule (C). The full set of rules will be:
(A-B-E-F-H-I-J-K).
The second variety, B, is characterized by the loss of sharpness of
3.22.
f, 31(C) and the change /e, i/ > /a, i/ after /c, s, z, f, 3/ (H-I).
Sometimes rule (C) is optional and we get fluctuations between /fe, fi, 3e,
3i/ and /fo, fi, 3a, 3i/. The effects of (C) are stated only by means of (H)-(I).
Therefore we may define varietyB by the following set of rules:
(A-B-E-F-C-H-I-J-K).
88
This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOWARDS

A GENERATIVE

PHONOLOGY

OF DACO-RUMANIAN

DIALECTS

The dialect with which we are concerned is represented by: 365, 386, 414,
537, 514, 53I, 574, 605 (Moldavia); 228, 2I9, 362, 353, 284, 250,
520, 55I,
26o, 346, 272, 279, 349, 95, I02, 105, I4I (Ardeal).
Some points belonging to Moldavian type B are characterized by the
presence of /jasa/ beside /jfide, fJrpe/ etc. (see ?I.24 above, points 2, 36, 53
(Banat) ).
If other, stronger evidence were found, we could provide for the chronology
of these dialects a particular ordering of rules as follows. In order to obtain
/Jaisa/ together with /fa'de/ we must apply rules (H)-(I) twice: first BEFOR,E
rule (F) and before the deletion of /&/. In such a way rule (F) does not
affect words like [mirea's&e] because /e/ after /&/ does not become /a/
by rules (H)-(I) which apply only within a morpheme. Second, AFTER the rule
deleting /&/; under the above conditions, rules (H-I) can be applied to
such forms as [mirese, invece] which then become [miresa, inveco].
Without any stronger evidence supporting this special ordering of rules, we
think it is safer to regard points 2, 36, 53, together with 47 (where we find
/fapte/) and 27, 29, 76 (which belong approximately to the same area but do
not show the 'diagnostic' word /fdisa/ or even /fJpte/) as loan forms coming
from neighbouring Muntenian dialects.
3.3. In the dialect represented by point 833 rule (E) does not apply and
therefore we get forms like [mea'sa], [mbjatk], [pomjaina] corresponding to
[maisa, imbaita, poma'no] 'table', 'to get drunk' (pres. ind. 3rd pers. sg.),
'alms' from the other dialects.
Rule (C) does apply and it follows rule (F), as in the Moldavian type
dialects; the change /e, i/ into /a, i/ after /f, 3/ is stated by rules (H) and (I).
The ordering of (C) after (F) is supported only in a negative way by a form
such as [Jfpte] 'seven'; this forrx proves that rule (C) cannot be ordered
BEFORE (F), because, otherwise, we would expect [fipte]; in the particular
case of [ffpte], [e] does not change into [a] after /f/, because it is protected
by the /e/ from the following syllable; this contextual restriction in application
of (I) is not specific for this dialect (see below ?3.4).
The whole set of rules characterizing this dialect is:
(A-B-F-C-H-I-J-K).
3.4. We omitted point 836 from our classification because the corpus does not
give enough evidence. In this dialect /J, 3/ are sharp and followed by /a,i /.
The phonemic structure of this dialect may be interpreted as a Muntenian
type influenced by Moldavian type B (then /a, i/ occur after /f , 3'/ but
did not change /a, i/ into /e, i/ after them).
Our description also has not dealt with all the details of the morphophonemic
or phonemic structure. For instance, in some dialects belonging to the
Moldavian type we find [Jfpte, fJde, sxeera] but [fad, Ji, sari] etc. That
means these varieties of dialects have a supplementary rule which imposes a
89

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A~jA

OAA~~~~~~LA A

cu

A ALP?
A A AA
AAAA?
AAA
A

AAA
A A
A

Q~bsin

Abef~~~A

~(U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
~
~
~
~

~A

O?

A
0

b~~~~~~~~~~fin
~
~
~
~
~
~
Mapz~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c
=

(basedon
Pop

A98

as2

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

AL

--

I
346
3

386

~~~~~~362

+
121

-12

27
'
316

272

1-4-

414

365o~Petrila>
5

~~~~
~~~26021

1unassigned
537

~~~~284

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

53~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3

14

76

105~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
36

25~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

25

812

Ma2

Geographical repartition of DRum. dialects

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL

OF LINGUISTICS

contextual restriction on rules (D), (I): before a syllable containing an /e/,

rules (D) & (I) do not apply.
We also have not specified various phonetic realizationsof the inflexion /i/,
conditioned by the quality of the final consonants of the stem, i.e. the realization of /&i/ after /c, s, z, f, 3/.
It is obvious that an ever more refined classification could be reached in
direct relation with the number and diversity of peculiarities taken into
account.
3.5. The geographical location of the dialects described above is shown on
map 2.
Theoretically, map 2 is supposed to agree in many respects with map I.
(i) The area marked by A of map i might be expected to cover the area
of MuntenianA dialect of map 2.
(ii) The area marked by 0 of map i might be expected to cover the area
of both MuntenianBa-ahd Bb dialects (because these two subvarieties,Ba and
Bb, cannot be distinguished by means of the dataofferedby map i).
(iii) The area markedby 0 of map i might be expected to cover the area
of MoldavianA dialect of map 2.
(iv) The area markedby A of map i might be expected to cover the area
of MoldavianB dialect.
As a matterof fact, maps i and 2 conflict in certainrespects:
(i) The SW and Centralareain which dialect MoldavianA (markedby 0) is
supposed to be spoken, accordingto map i, is not represented on map 2.
(2) The whole Southern area in which MuntenianA (markedby A
) is
supposed to be spoken, accordingto map i, is not representedon map 2.
The differences mentioned above must be explained in the following way:
(a) The network of points included in map i is different from that of
points included in map 2: the formeris based on maps 92 and 93 of Pop (1938),
whereas the latter is based on Petrovici (I956). The villages in which the
fieldwork was done for the two atlases are different. Under such conditions,
the differences between the two maps could be interpreted as showing real
dialectaldifferences.
(b) The network of Pop (I938) is more compact than the network of
Petrovici (1956). Under such conditions, we may expect a more refined
delimitation of dialects according to the data offered by a map based on the
former. In such a way, we can explain why the narrow Moldavian A SouthWestern area and Central area (marked by 0 ) is not represented on map z;
a quite similar explanationis requiredby the absence of the MuntenianA Southern areafrom the map 2.
(c) Map 2 represents the geographical distribution of the data offered by
texts (i.e. a large enough corpus from each point) whereasmap i representsthe
geographical distribution of the various answers to a SINGLE QUESTION of the
92

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOWARDS

A GENERATIVE

PHONOLOGY

OF DACO-RUMANIAN

DIALECTS

fieldworker.The texts show in many cases vacillationsbetween the old pronunciation and the innovating one. In such cases, one of the pronunciationsmay
be more frequent than the other, and this situation may be described as the
result of the optional application of a given rule. The dialectologist is in this
case able to assign the dialect to a type, taking account at the same time of
either pronunciation. Considering only the answer to a given question, this
kind of vacillation may not be observed by the dialectologist or, at least, may
not be representedon his map. If for instance, the fieldworkergets at question
nr. X the answer [kamiaJ] from an informant, there is nothing to guarantee
that the same informantdoes not use also forms like [ufe, ingri3i] etc.
Therefore, the two areas which are not represented on map 2 are not
necessarily representativesof MuntenaianA (Southern Area) or of Moldavian
A (SW and Central area).Map i does not guaranteethat, if rule (G) does not
apply to the form [bafina], it does not apply also to any word; it does not
guarantee that if rule (C) does not apply to the form [beJina],it does apply to
any word. In such a way, the two areas could belong either to MuntenianB
(with optional rule (G)), or to Moldavian B (with optional rule (C), respectively).
The consideration of full texts (as against the consideration of a single
answer to a given question) has enabled us to EVALUATE the data. For instance,
at points I72 and 157 of map 2, we found a few times the form [fi] 'and',
together with a very consistent distributionof [a, i] after [f, 3] (to the exclusion
of /e, i/). We considered that this is not sufficient evidence to assign these
points to MuntenianB. The pronunciation [fi] could be interpreted as simple
influence of the neighbouring dialects (points I92, i82, 784, I30 belong to
MuntenianB type); the fact that point 235 (which has no contact with dialects
with sharp [f, 3]) is more consistent (it has no cases where a front vowel
occurs after [f, 3]) supports our interpretation.
4. We are now able to represent our previous classification in a synthetic
fashion, defining each dialect, variety and subvariety by means of a set of
rules (examplesare given in Tables 4-7):
Muntenian A : (A-B-C-D-E-F-H-I-J-K)
Ba: (A-B-C-D-E-F-J-K-G-A)
Bb: (A-B-C-D-E-F-H-I-J-K-G-A)
Moldavian A: (A-B-E-F-H-I-J-K)
B: (A-B-E-F-C-H-I-J-K)
833: (A-B-F-C-H-I-J-K)
4.I. Rules (A-B-E-F-J-K) are common for all dialect types and varieties,
except for point 833, where rule (E) is lacking.

93
This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A
B
C
D
E
F
HI

fIs*d

fiE*d

fled

J'eda
f'eada
fJada
f6ada

fed
Jad
-

J K -

F Jad

f;a'*de
fe'de
f eade
f6ade
Jaade

K G fad
A f'ed

F Jad
HI J K G g'ad
A f'ed

Jaada
fida

faade
fide

f6ada
faida
Jida
fIAda

J6ade
faa'de
fade
f'Iade

Jaada

J6ade
-

faida
fida
fIadda

faide
fade

fade

MuntenianA
kame'fs* befIf*ka miresa mirese
kameJfe befIika
mir6asa mirease
kam6afIe kameafe befika
kameafa bef-ka
kamaaJa baftka
mirese
miresa
mirea'sa
kamoaaf
kamfaJ
Table 4

kamaf3a
kamaifa
kmaf
kamif4Y
kama'e

kamoafa

MuntenianBa
mireasa mirese
bafika
mireasa -

baf' -ka
lQk
baf'k

baftka

kamaaif;a
kamifa
kamafJI baf'tk
kamaJ'e baf'tka

invec

invea
-

tnvac

invaa
inva'

tnvaa
invac
invac
-

MuntenianBb
mireasa mirese
miresa,
mireasa -

Table 5

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

tnv6a

invai
inva'

f I*d
A f'ed
B E F -JIe'ede

f'6da
f'eada

fI*de
f'ede
Jfeade

JI*do

kame'f'*
kamef'e
kameaf'e

Moldavian A
befIf*ka mirese
mirese
beJ'ik
mireasa mirease

kameJf'e
f'ead

kz-

inv6

mirese
miresa

mireasa

invaa
nva'

invea

HI-

tnvec

Table 6

F f'ed
C fed
HI fad.

K-

J'eada
f6ada
f$ada
-aJ3ad3

fid

f'ede J'else kameJ'e

Je6de fJse kamefe
Jfde Jfsa kamefa
-

bef'ika
befika
beftka

Moldavian B
mireasa mirese
-

tnvw
-

miresa

mirea's

invaa
invac

Table 7

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL

OF LINGUISTICS

Muntenian dialects are characterizedby the addition of rules (C) and (D),
and Moldavian type dialects are all characterizedby the ABSENCE of (D); one
Moldavian variety is characterizedby the presence of (C) and the other by its
absence. When (C) is present, it is ordered (in contradistinctionto Muntenian
type dialects) after (F).
In Moldavian type dialects, rules (H-I) are always present, whereas in
Muntenian type (H-I) characterizeonly some varieties.
The main Muntenian varieties are characterizedby the PRESENCE VS. ABSENCE
of Rule (G), which, by its presence, determines the recursivenessof rule (A).
Rule (G) never occurs in Moldaviantype dialects.
4.2. The traditional historical approach to Rumanian phonetics and dialectology stated the relative chronology of the depalatalizationof If, 3/ and the
distinction, from this point of view, between Moldavian and Muntenian
dialects. This chronology suggests to us the system of classification given
above.
On the other hand, the relative chronology of the change /e, i/ > /a, i/ after
/c, s, z/ as it was established by some scholars requires some clarification;
we may not assume that, for instance, this change was common for DRum.
dialects without getting into trouble. We should not attempt to explain, in such
instances, WHY and HOW alternations such as /mireassa-mirese, invaccainvece, boteaza,boteze/ were kept, nor WHY and HOW the dialects which
'innovated' from /stngur, sari/ to /singur, seri/ never changed /so, sari, carm,
ztna/ to /*se, *seri, *cerm, *zfina/.
The rules stated above suggest that the change /e, i/ > /a, i/ after /c, s, z/
in such words as /sin, c{ca, cars, cari, carm, zin~/ is old; these forms are
common for both DRum. and non-DRum. dialects, but this has nothing to do
with the present stage attested in many DRum. dialects. The present stage is
the result of an OBLIGATORY application of rules (H-I) to ALL words and in
ANY position, whereas the forms above mentioned must be explained by the
OPTIONAL status of this rule which did not affect the inflexions in a very remote
linguistic stage. Thus, we no longer need to say that the dialects in which
rules (H-I) do not apply are innovating: they represent THE CONSERVATIVE
STAGE.

4.3. Our system of classification combines the traditional historical classification with the synchronic, distributional one in a system of ordered rules.
The generative approach seems to be more powerful than the purely
historical one and more powerful even than the synchronic distributional one.
It is more powerful than the first because it does not limit itself to establishing only WHEN a change occurred in relation to another, but its aim is the
inference of all the STRUCTURAL consequences resulting from the different
ordering in time of changes X and Y. In such a manner, the generative approach
enables us to establish a direct and coherent relationship between historical

96

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOWARDS

A GENERATIVE

PHONOLOGY

OF DACO-RUMANIAN

DIALECTS

change and its synchronic implications. Relationships of this kind are not
expressed in the traditionalhistoricalclassification.
In contradistinction to the purely distributional approach, the generative
approach enables us to set up a strong hierarchyamong the different features
considered. In purely distributional terms we might consider the Muntenian
dialects whose morphophonemics do not contain the cycle A-I-K-G-A to be
Moldavian dialects, because /J, 3/ are followed by /a, i/ and not by /e, i/; we
may also say the Moldavian dialects whose morphophonemics does not
include rules (C-D) are Muntenian dialects. But we are unable to assign in a
non-arbitraryway to the Moldavian or Muntenian type those dialects which
show fluctuations between /e, i/ and /a, i/ after /f, 3/ and therefore we must
establish a third class of dialects, in which /e, i/ are in free variation with
/a, t/. All these solutions are not INCORRECTbut are less comprehensive than
another, which takes into account the fact that there are Moldavian dialects
where we can find /fad, f5zi, f6de/ and 'apparently'Moldavian dialects where
we can find /fod, f6zi, faide/. In such cases how do we decide which criterion
has to be chosen as primary and which as secondary: the distribution of
/0, i/ and /e, i/ or the vocalic alternationpattern?
Our approach establishes an explicit hierarchy between these two criteria:
THE ORDERING
of the rule stating that the occurrence of /a, i/ after If, 3/
the
other
rules is much more important than THE SUBSTITUTION
among
of
/a, i/ for /e, i/ in itself. According to this criterion we have classified the
Moldavian A (which do not contain rule (C) ) with Moldavian B (which do
contain rule (C) ) as together opposed to Muntenian type dialects in whose
grammarrule (C) is located at a very high level.
We can say, in our case, that the generative approachis more powerful than
the purely distributionalsince: (a) it enables us to establish a hierarchyamong
various criteria of classification; (b) according to this hierarchy we can put
together dialects showing deeper morphophonemic identities (or only similarities) disregarding the more superficial distributional dissimilarities; the
distributional differences are taken as secondary criteria of classification;
(c) in terms of a generative model we can detect DIFFERENT RULES BEHIND
IDENTICAL
DISTRIBUTIONS;
mutatismutandis,we can say that it is a specific case
of describing (and defining) structural ambiguity by means of a generative
model.
REFERENCES
Densusianu, O. (1929; I938). Histoire de la Langue Roumaine, vol. i, Bucarest: Institutul
de Filologie ?i Folklor; vol. 2, Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Fodor, J. A., & Katz, J. J. (i964). The Structure of Language: Readings in the Philosophy
of Language. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Halle, M. (I964a). On the bases of phonology. In Fodor & Katz (I964: 324-33).
Halle, M. (I964b). Phonology in generative grammar. In Fodor & Katz (I964: 334-52).

97
This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL

OF LINGUISTICS

Jakobson, R., Fant, C. G. M. & Halle, M. (1952). Preliminaries to Speech Analysis.

Cambridge, Mass.; M.I.T. Press.
Texte dialectale. (Supplement to Atlasul Lingvistic Romdn, Vol.2.)
Petrovici, E. (I943).
Leipzig: Sibiu.
Petrovici, E. (I956). Atlasul Lingvistic Romdn, Serie Noua, vols. I & 2. Bucarest: Editura
Academici Republicii Socialiste Romania.
Philippide, A. (I927). Originea Romdnilor, Vol. 2. Iasi: Tipografia 'Viata Romaneasca'.
Pop, S. (1938). Micul Atlas Lingvistic Romdn, Partea 1. Cluj: Muzeul Limbii Romane.
Rosetti, A. (I964). Istoria Limbii Romane, vols. I, 2, 3, 6. Bucuresti: Editura StiintificA.

98

This content downloaded from 193.140.225.160 on Sat, 05 Dec 2015 18:06:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions