Isixhosa Tonology: An Optimal Domains Theory Analysis

Isixhosa Tonology: An Optimal Domains Theory Analysis Farida Cassimjee

1998 (1st printing) 2004 (2nd printing) LINCOM EUROPA

Published by LINCOM GmbH.

1998 (1st printing). 2004 (2nd printing).

LINCOM GmbH GmunderStr.35 D-81379Muenchen [email protected] http://home.t-online.de/home/LINCOM.EUROPA www.lincom-europa.com webshop: lincom.at All rights reserved, including the rights of translation into any foreign language. No part of this book may be reproduced in any way without the permission of the publisher. Printed in E.C. Printed on chlorine-free paper Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP Cataloguing-in-Publication-Data A catalogue record for this publication is available from Die Deutsche Bibliothek (http://www.ddb.de)

Contents PREFACE

Chapter 1

i

OPTIMAL DOMAINS THEORY

1

1.0. Introduction 1.1. Optimally Theory 1.2. Optimality Domains Theory 1.3. OTD and the analysis of Bantu tone

1 2 7 12

Chapter 2

24

THE LONG FORM OF THE PRESENT TENSE

2.0. Introduction 2.1. Toneless verb stems 2.2. High-tones verb stems 2 3 On the tonology of depressor consonants 2.4. The inclusion of an object prefix into the long present verb

24 24 36 S1 69

Chapter 3

88

3.0. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5.

MORE VERBAL FORMS WITH LEXICAL TONE

Introduction Short form of the present tense Interaction of the short present form with a following word (nominal) Interaction of the short present verb with a preceding word The perfective form of the verb Two High-toned verb prefixes

Chapter 4

GRAMMATICAL TONE

88 88 104 114 118 134 151

4.0. Introduction 4.1. Negative present 4.2. The negative of the /sa/ tense 4.3. The negative potential 4.4. Negative past 4.5. Negative infinitive 4.6. ka-negative 4.7. The short form of the perfect 4 8. Participial 4.9. Participial of the /sa/ tense 4.10. Participial perfect 4.11. Imperative 4.12. Plural imperative 4.13. Remote past tense 4.14. Conclusion

151 151 172 179 185 187 197 201 207 216 219 223 228 229 233

REFERENCES

235

Preface

The writing of this book was stimulated by the radical reorientation of phonology that was initiated by the distribution of two manuscripts, Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky, 1993) and Prosodic Morphology (McCarthy and Prince, 1993a) in the spring of 1993, as well as by the notion of "domains" of High tone-spreading developed in Kisseberth (1994). The first draft was completed in the Fall of 1994. Various factors prevented me from immediately undertaking a final revision of that manuscript, and the emergence of "Correspondence Theory" in Optimality Theory in 1995 prompted a decision to totally rewrite the manuscript. This revision was delayed while, in collaboration with C. Kisseberth, I worked on a very long paper developing a general account of Bantu tone based on what we refer to as Optimal Domains Theory. This paper, "Optimal Domains Theory and Bantu tonology: a case study from Isixhosa and Shingazidja" is included in Hyman and Kisseberth (1998). It was not until 1997 that I was finally able to return to work on this book. While I recognize that too much time has elapsed (when I completed the original version, I thought it would be the first extended analysis of a language in Optimality Theoretic terms!), I have no doubt that the final product is better than if I had rushed into print. This book would not exist were it not for three people: Mbulelo Jokweni and his wife Koleka, and my husband. Chuck Kisseberth. Mbulelo and Koleka provided an immense amount of data on their respective dialects of Isixhosa. Furthermore, Mbulelo provided an abundance of insights deriving from his own research into Isixhosa phonology (see Jokweni 1995). I thank them both for their efforts in behalf of this project. Chuck has guided my research on Bantu phonology (as he has guided so many other African students) from the beginning, and his work on domains of High-tone spreading was the starting point for this study of Isixhosa tonology. Most of what is good about this work derives directly from these three people; the failings are entirely my own.

CHAPTER ONE OPTIMAL DOMAINS THEORY 1.0. Introduction. In this book we shall explore in some detail the tonology of the verb in Isixhosa1, one of the major languages of the Republic of South Africa and a member of the Nguni subgroup of the Bantu language family. Other Nguni languages include Isizulu, Siswati, Zimbabwean Ndebele, Southern (Transvaal) Ndebele, Northern (Transvaal) Ndebele, Phuthi, Nhlangwini, etc. Isixhosa, like most languages spoken by a large number of people dispersed over an extensive area with a complex social and political history, has considerable variation (though this variation has received scant attention in the research literature). Tone is not something that is represented in the written form of the language, and thus it is not an aspect of the language that has been at all "standardized". This study is based on the speech of Mbulelelo Jokweni [=M], who comes from Mzimkhulu, and his wife Koleka [=K], who comes from Matatiele - both representing Transkei varieties of Isixhosa. Mbulelo's speech may reflect Bhaca roots, while Koleka's speech (in her assessment) reflects a Hlubi background. Bhaca and Hlubi are two of the Nguni subgroups dispersed as part of the Mfecane (i.e. the upheaval of Nguni peoples occurring during the period of Zulu expansion in the nineteenth century); the status of Bhaca and Hlubi as independent and identifiable languages today is a matter requiring research. Both Mbulelo and Koleka regard their own speech patterns as part of the Isixhosa speech continuum. Other speakers of Isixhosa also consider M and K to be speaking Isixhosa. The speech of both M and K exhibits the phenomenon we refer to as Depressor-Induced High Tone Shift [=DIHTS] - a phenomenon that has been (in the published literature) more associated with Isizulu than Isixhosa. While many forms of Isixhosa do not exhibit this phenomenon (and thus a not inconsiderable portion of this book on Isixhosa is irrelevant to such dialects!), the exact distribution of this feature in the Isixhosa continuum is unknown. We have, for example, noted its occurrence in the speech of a young man from the East London area, far removed from Mzimkhulu and Matatiele geographically. We hope that the present book will provide the foundation for a systematic exploration of Isixhosa tonal dialectology that might clarify not only the distribution of DIHTS but also the distribution of a number of other tonal patterns. We do not review here the history of research on Isixhosa tone. This book is based entirely on data collected from Mbulelo and Koleka (data which forms part of a much larger body of data collected from some ten speakers of Isixhosa, representing a variety of Isixhosa speech forms)2. We employ a theoretical framework radically different from any employed in the previous literature (which, in any case, is not extensive). Since we are not concerned here with providing a critique of structuralist linguistics, or rule-based autosegmental phonology, and since we are not here concerned with dialect comparison, we refrain from any discussion of previous research, theoretical or otherwise. The bibliography contains references to the most important (published) research on Nguni and Isixhosa tonology. Isixhosa nominal tonology does not differ in a substantive way from the verbal tonology. Space limitations preclude the possibility of providing a complete exposition of both verbal and nominal tonology; since the verbal tonology presents the most complexity, we have opted to focus on it. 3 These data were collected in conjunction with Mbulelo Jokweni and Chuck Kisseberlh and will eventually form part of a monograph on Isixhosa tonal dialectology that the three of us intend to write. 1

It is fair, we think, to say that the following monograph represents the most comprehensive study of Isixhosa verbal tonology available. Furthermore, it is cast within an explicit theory of phonology that attempts to characterize the phonological principles that permit a native speaker to select the appropriate pronunciation for any given utterance in her/his language. Nevertheless, space limitations have prevented us from including a discussion of every verbal construction in Isixhosa. We believe that the constructions that we do examine are sufficient to establish the major elements of the Isixhosa tonal system This monograph also represents the first attempt to provide a comprehensive account of the tonal structure of a language within the framework of Optimal Domains Theory [=ODT]. Optimal Domains Theory is a particular implementation of Optimality Theory [=OT] (cf. Prince and Smolensky 1993 and much subsequent literature). In this chapter we provide an overview of OT in general and ODT in particular. We hope that this overview will be sufficient for the reader to follow the analysis of Isixhosa developed in later chapters. A somewhat more developed introduction to ODT and Bantu tonology is found in Cassimjee and Kisseberth (1998). 1.1. OptimaHty Theory. Optimality Theory represents a radical departure from the Generative Phonology [=GP] paradigm that has guided phonological theorizing over the past three decades. In Generative Phonology, the phonological component of a speaker's grammar consists of a set of principles [=rufes] that map an underlying representation onto a phonetic representation. Rules are expressed as procedures (e.g. deletions, insertions, and feature changes) which take an input representation and yield an output representation. Rules are applied sequentially, thus there are potentially many intermediate representations between the underlying representation and the final phonetic representation. GP is thus a procedural, derivational modeL In GP, the speaker must acquire both the underlying representations of morphemes and the rules that specify the surface forms of these morphemes. A given alternation pattern in the shapes of morphemes, and a given generalization concerning the distribution of features, is generally the consequence of rules. Rules represent phonological truths that are valid for all (unexceptional, regular) structures at the point in the derivation where the rule applies. Rules are learned just in case the data require them. Any rule can be learned provided that it is expressible in terms of the algebra governing rules and representations. Rules do not exist in the grammar unless there is positive evidence that requires them. The view that Optimality Theory takes is quite different (the reader is of course referred to Prince and Smolensky (1993) as well as McCarthy and Prince (1993a,b; 1995) for a full account of the OT approach to phonology, our summary here merely attempts to sketch the leading ideas of the theory). In OT, phonological principles are expressed as constraints, not rules. A given pattern of alternation or a given distribution of a feature is not generally the direct consequence of a single constraint but rather the result of the interaction of a number of general constraints. For example, what in a rule-based model might be expressed as a rule inserting a vowel in a particular position will be seen in OT as the interaction of constraints on syllable shape — e.g. No Complex Codas, No Complex Onsets — with constraints barring epenthetic material, constraints requiring input consonants to be present in the output, etc. In other words, there is no direct relation between a particular "phenomenon" and a particular constraint in the way that the rule-based models suggest. Constraints are not procedures for converting one phonological representation into another, but rather are the means for selecting the best (=optimal) output candidate for any given underlying representation (input structure). A given output candidate either satisfies or fails to satisfy a given constraint If the constraint is satisfied, there is nothing further to be sakl. But if an output candidate fails to satisfy a constraint, the situation is a bit more complex. Violations 2

may either be non-gradient or gradient (in the sense that there may be different degrees of violation). For example, a constraint such as Onset says that a syllable must have an onset A syllable that has an onset satisfies the constraint. A syllable with two consonants in onset position does not better satisfy the constraint than a syllable with a single consonant in onset position. In both cases the constraint is simply satisfied. A syllable that lacks an onset violates the constraint. There is no relevant sense in which one candidate that lacks an onset can violate the constraint to a greater or lesser degree than some other candidate that lacks an onset. Violation of Onset is non-gradient. Now consider the constraint No Coda, which says that a syllable may not have, a coda consonant. A syllable that ends in a vowel satisfies the constraint A syllable that ends in a consonant violates the constraint. A syllable that ends in two consonants violates the constraint two times. We thus have a situation where there can be greater or lesser violation of a constraint. Violation of No Coda is gradient. Constraints do not represent absolute truths about optimal output candidates. Constraints are vlolable. A constraint exists in the grammar of a language even though it is sometimes or even often violated by optimal ouput forms. Constraints are violated in OT due to the existence of other, more highly ranked constraints. A less highly ranked constraint will be violated in order to better satisfy a more highly ranked constraint. For example, in a given language L it may be true that syllables generally have an onset. However, syllables with h as onset "elide" this h. Without going into any detail regarding the proper formulation of the constraint that bars h as an onset, we shall simply refer to it as *h-Onset. *h-Onset is more highly ranked than Onset in L. As a consequence, Onset will be violated in order to satisfy *h-Onset. There is thus a deep connection between constraint violation and constraint ranking. Let us spell out this approach in more detail. The grammar of a language consists of a set of constraints. The constraints are ranked. For any given underlying representation there is a set of possible output candidates (see below for discussion of how this set is defined). These output candidates are evaluated as to which one best satisfies the constraint system Evaluation works as follows. All potential outputs are evaluated in terms of each of the constraints. We can represent this evaluation in the form of a table. The candidate set will be given on the vertical axis, the constraints on the horizontal axis. The constraints will be given sequentially: more highly ranked constraints before less highly ranked constraints. However, since not all constraints are critically ranked, it will be useful to distinguish between constraints that are critically ranked and ones which are not. It is not possible to fully indicate all critical rankings in the table-format What we will do is separate the columns of constraints that are not ranked relative to one another with dotted lines; a constraint that is critically ranked with respect to at least one of the preceding (group of unranked) constraints will be separated from those constraints by a solid line. In the text we will make clear which constraints are critically ranked. If a candidate satisfies a constraint, the cell in the table for that constraint will be left empty. If a candidate violates the constraint, this violation will be indicated by an asterisk. If the constraint is multiply violated, each violation will be indicated by an asterisk. (Sometimes, in the interest of clarity, the phonological element that is in violation will be listed instead of the asterisk.) An exclamation mark will be placed after an asterisk to indicate that this violation is fatal with respect to the possibility that the candidate in question can be the optimal candidate. What makes a violation fatal? In Optimally Theory, a candidate x is less optimal than a candidate y if, for all the constraints (if any) more highly ranked than some constraint C, they are equal in their satisfaction of the constraints, but x fares less well with respect to C than y. The failure of x to match its competitor with respect to C means that x's violation (or greater violation) of C is fatal for its chance to be the optimal candidate. Saying that two or more candidates are "equal" in their satisfaction of a set of constraints means that they have exactly the 3

same evaluation (Le. they satisfy the same constraints and violate the same constraints to the same extent). A violation that serves to render a candidate nonoptimal (due to the existence of at least one alternative that is more optimal) is a fatal violation. In the interest of visual clarity, we shall shade all of the cells in a row following the occurrence of a fatal violation. This shading is meant to highlight the fact that once a fatal violation occurs, the extent to which that candidate violates the remaining constraints is entirely irrelevant. Shading is thus a visual mark of irrelevance. Some simple examples will help to make evaluation of output candidates clearer. Consider first an input /ha/ and the following two output candidates: a and ha. Given the two constraints *h-Onset and Onset (where *h-Onset dominates Onset), the following table will illustrate the evaluation of the two candidates by these two constraints.

Hi Candidates -»

*h-Onset

Onset

*

a

ha

•I

The arrow indicates what in fact is the optimal candidate in the language in question. We see that (of the two candidates being considered here), the candidate ha violates the most highly ranked constraint (*h-Ohset) while the other candidate, a, does not. The asterisk indicates that ha violates *h-Onset. The exclamation sign is meant to indicate that this violation is fatal with respect to the opportunity of ha to be the optimal candidate. Notice that both candidates violate a single constraint. But since ha violates the more highly ranked constraint, it is non-optimal. The notion "optimal output" has nothing to do with how many constraints are violated in total, nor does it have to do with the total number of constraint violations. The optimal output is the one that better satisfies the more highly ranked constraints than does any of its competitors. Now consider an input Aahi/. An unviolated *h-Onset predicts that in the optimal output the input h will not be an onset One way in which to insure this result is, of course, to delete the h. Another way to achieve this result is to delete the last vowel of Aahi/, thereby making it possible for h to surface as a coda: tab. Let us assume, for convenience, that in the hypothetical language under discussion, h is indeed a possible coda but that tah is not the optimal output rather U.I is optimal, where the dot indicates a syllable boundary. Thus there must be a highly ranked constraint that makes deletion of the final vowel in Aahi/ undesirable. In Optimalhy Theory, failure to pronounce an underlying element is treated as a violation of a constraint type referred to as Max (segment). Max (segment) is a member of what in OT is referred to as the Faithfulness family of constraints. (We should note that we follow here the Correspondence Theory approach to Faithfulness found in McCarthy and Prince (1995) rather than the Containment Theory approach used in Prince and Smolensky (1993). We will have more to say on this matter in the discussion of ODT.) Faithfulness constraints are, in effect, constraints that prefer output candidates to be Identical to the input. Max (segment) says that segments that are in the underlying representation ("sponsored'' by the underlying representation, to use some terminology suggested by McCarthy) should have a corresponding segment in the output. Max (segment) is, of course, a family of constraints - Max (vowel) and Max (consonant), where these are themselves families of constraints (e.g. Max (low vowel), Max (mid vowel). Max (high vowel), etc.). The different members of this family of constraints are independently rankable. Thus if Max (vowel) is ranked higher than Max (consonant), then the non-optimal candidate tah will violate the more highly

4

ranked constraint Max (vowel) while the optimal candidate ta.1 violates the more lowly ranked constraint Max (consonant). By having *h-Onset and Max (vowel) undominated and having *h-Onset dominate both Onset and Max (consonant), we guarantee that ta.i will fare better than ta.hi and also tah. The following tableau illustrates. (2) Candidates ta.hi tah -»ta.i

Max (vowel) *h-Onset

Max (cons)

•1

,,'i~tF:K

Onset

^.fc" * -.

•! ,*

"•

*

fcVp****1,

;-»'. i ^HHH *

This tableau illustrates one very important point. The total number of violations of constraints is irrelevant to the evaluation of the optimal output candidate. For example, the output candidate ta.nl has a single violation, whereas the optimal output ta.i has two violations. But the total number of violations does not matter. What is critical is that ta.hf violates the most highly ranked constraint, *h-Onset, while ta.i does not. Similarly, the candidate tah has a single constraint violation, but it violates the more highly ranked constraint Max (vowel) which ta.i satisfies perfectly. It does not matter that ta.i violates the more lowly ranked constraints Max (consonant) and Onset. Max (segment) is just one type of Faithfulness constraint. A second type of Faithfulness constraint is Dep (segment). Dep (segment) requires that every segment in the output correspond to a segment in the input. In effect, Dep (segment) bans epenthesis. Constraints like Onset, if ranked above Dep (segment), will be best satisfied by outputs containing epenthetic material that violates Dep (segment). This ban on epenthetic segments is just one aspect of a general ban against all phonological structure (the *Struc family of constraints). ''Struc simply says that it is better for there to be no "structure" (no features, no segments, no syllables, no feet, no prosodic words, no prosodic phrases) than for there to be structure. In other words, structure should not be included in an output unless required. There are various types of constraints which, if ranked above *Stmc, will force violations. Max (segment) of course requires that elements of underlying representation be pronounced in the output candidate. Thus Max (segment) if ranked above *Struc requires the presence of a segment, in violation of "Struc. And if segments are to be pronounced (as required by Max (segment)), they must be part of syllables (on the assumption that unsyllabificd material cannot be pronounced); thus syllables must be present in the output candidate, again in violation of "Struc. For the time being, we will eschew discussion of the OT treatment of featural Faithfulness (see McCarthy and Prince 1995). This is a central concern of ODT and we will examine the matter closely in the next section. We have mentioned two classes of constraints that are especially important in OT: the Faithfulness family of constraints. Max (segment) and Dep (segment), and the phonological constraints on syllable structure (e.g. Onset, No Coda, No Complex Onsets, No Complex Codas). There is a third type of constraint in OT that will be of particular importance to the analysis of tone. This is the Alignment family of constraints (cf. McCarthy and Prince 1993). The Alignment family of constraints requires that edges of various constituents (e.g. morphological categories, prosodic categories) be aligned with edges of other constituents. For example. (3)

Align the Right edge of a Foot with the Right edge of a Prosodic Word. 5

There is one particular point about the formulation of Alignment constraints that must be emphasized. The argument "the Right edge of a Foot" in (3) is to be understood as universally quantified, while the argument "the Right edge of a Prosodic Word" is to be understood as existentiaDy quantified. Thus (3) is to be understood as requiring that the Right edge of every foot be aligned with the Right edge of an Instance of a Prosodic Word. The following constraint, (4)

Align the Right edge of a Prosodic Word with the Right edge of a Foot.

on the other hand, is to be understood as requiring the Right edge of every Prosodic Word to be aligned with the Right edge of an instance of the category Foot. Alignment constraints are (usually considered to be) gradient constraints. They are satisfied when the two edges coincide. They are violated when there is misalignment between the edges. But misalignment is a matter of degrees. For example, in the case of (4) above, a Prosodic Word of the structure a(oo)a] is misaligned with the Right edge of a Foot by one syllable, whereas (oo)oo~] is misaligned by two syllables. The latter represents a greater violation of Alignment than the former. Let us now turn our attention to how we know what constitutes the set of output candidates for a given underlying representation. In OT, the output candidates are assumed to be defined by a function Gen(erator) which takes an underlying representation and (a) assigns every possible prosodic structure (e.g. syllabification, foot structure) to the output; (b) inserts morae, segments, and features freely, and (c) deletes morae, segments, and features freely - all of this subject only to the limitations imposed by the existence of inviolable well-formedness principles. Gen defines an indefinitely large set of possible candidate outputs for any given input form. It is of course not practical to try to list of all these candidates when discussing particular examples. The vast majority of the members of this set will obviously be nonoptimal. We will restrict our attention to what are the most likely candidates for any given input. We have not yet addressed one of the central aspects of OT. The constraint system is universal. Constraints are not like the rules of GP, which the speaker acquires on the basis of the data to which she is exposed while learning the language. The constraints are the expression of the Interaction of the communicative function of language with the articulatory and acoustic principles that underlie the human language faculty. The constraints are not learned. They are simply the array of principles that determine the sound pattern of human language. Grammars differ in terms of the set of initial representations. Grammars differ in terms of the ranking of the constraints. (Grammars also differ in terms of the precise interaction of the constraints with the lexicon and the morphological structure of the language, though we do not here pursue this matter in any detail.) Grammars do not differ in terms of the set of constraints themselves. Grammars do not lack a given constraint; they simply rank the constraint so lowly that it has little if any opportunity to participate in selecting an optimal candidate. It is an empirical question as to what constitutes the set of universal constraints. In many cases we do have some general idea concerning the basic nature of a given constraint, but the precise formulation of these constraints remains to be determined. And deepening knowledge of the phonological structure of the world's languages may lead to the identification of hitherto undetected (or very imperfectly understood) constraints. In a certain sense it is impossible to give an analysis of any language's grammar without knowing what the universal constraint set is. On the other hand, determination of the constraint set can only proceed by the intensive study of the phonological systems of the world's languages, phonological change, and the acquisition of phonology, as well as exploration into the articulatory and acoustic bases of human speech. Thus

6

there is no option but to attempt to explore the constraint systems of particular languages in the absence of a full understanding of the universal constraint set 1.2. Optimal Domains Theory Up until this point we have simply sketched the principal features of Optimality Theory. Let us now turn to the implementation of OT known as Optimal Domains Theory. The origins of ODT can be found in Kisseberth's (1994) analysis of Xitsonga, a Bantu language spoken in South Africa, where he attempts to develop an account of the extent of High tone spreading in Xitsonga that is independent of autosegmental representations and that allows a collection of independent principles to jointly define the precise extent of spreading. The rise of Optimality Theory permitted a further development of these ideas, resulting in a series of papers on harmony by Cole and Kissebenh (1995a,b,c, 1997) and in Cassimjee and Kisseberth's (1998) examination of Bantu tonology, with particular reference to Isixhosa and Shingazidja. ODT is in essence a proposal about featural phonology in OT (the seminal works in OT grappled primarily with "suprafeatural" problems — syllabification, stress, reduplication, epenthesis, etc.). The basic idea is simply this: a phonological feature F can be realized phonetically only by means of the organization of one or more segments/moras (whatever the appropriate feature-organizing unit is taken to be) into a "domain of segments" (henceforth, Fdomain) over which it (potentially) may find expression. A feature cannot be realized on a segment/mora unless that segment/mora is inside an F-domain. In ODT, whether a segment/mora inside an F-domain actually bears the property F is itself resolved by virtue of constraint ranking. Specifically, ODT proposes that there is a constraint family Express. Express (F) requires that all segments in an F-domain bear the feature F. A segment inside the F-domain satisfies Express provided it has an F-specification, regardless of whether this specification is an underlying one or one provided by Oen. But an output candidate may have segments inside the F-domain that do not bear a specification for F (Le. such representations are not prohibited by inviolable principles of phonology). Such segments do violate Express, but violation of Express will be optimal if there is some anti-expression constraint (Le. a constraint which bans particular features in particular contexts) ranked above Express. In other words, Express will be violated in order to better satisfy a constraint against a particular feature in a particular context. Given this conception of features and their realization, Faithfulness turns out to be a notion that requires deconstruction. Let us begin by briefly reviewing the treatment of featural faithfulness in McCarthy and Prince (1995). They propose that there is a family of constraints Idem (F) which require that a segment in the output be featurally identical to its correspondent in the input. If a segment in the input bears a feature (value) F that its correspondent in the output does not bear, this is a violation of Idem (F). If a segment in the output bears a feature (value) F that its correspondent in the input does not bear, this is also a violation of Idem (F). It seems then that just as Max (segment) and Dep (segment) are distinguished, it is also the case that there are two aspects to Idem (F), though McCarthy and Prince (1995) to do not provide separate labels. We might refer to these two aspects as Max (feature) and Dep (feature). This account of featural Faithfulness misses the fact that in the arena of features there are degrees of faithfulness. For example, suppose that there is an input sequence jk and j bears F but k does not; suppose further that while j's correspondent in the output does not bear F, k's correspondent does. We have here a violation of Max (F) and also of Dep (F). The correspondent ofy is in violation of Max (F); the correspondent of * is in violation of Dep (F). But surely this is a case of "displaced" contrast and represents a form of faithfulness that is not recognized as such by just counting up violations of Max (F) and Dep (F).

7

ODT proposes a rather more complex view of feature! faithfulness, one that recognizes that there is imperfect faithfulness that is not complete infidelity! The following Faithfulness constraints are proposed: (5)

DomCor (F-sponsor) For every F-sponsor (Le. segment/more specified as F) in the input, there is a 'corresponding' F-domain in the output

(6)

Incorporate (F-sponsor) Every F-sponsor is in an F-domain.

(7)

Express (F) Every segment/mora in an F-domain should bear the feature F.

(8)

Basic Alignment BAL: Align the left edge of an F-domain with the left edge of the F-sponsor to which it 'corresponds'. BAR: Align the right edge of an F-domain with the right edge of the F-sponsor to which it 'corresponds'.

(We should note that yet another constraint can be motivated - Uniqueness (F-sponsor) - which says that there is at most one F-sponsor in an F-domain. See 1.3 below for some discussion, as well as Cassimjee and Kisseberth (1998), where the role of this constraint in the analysis of Shingazidja is shown to be critical.) Faithfulness to an underlying F-specifkation occurs when F is phonetically realized on the sponsor and no nonsponsor bears F. Let us review how, in ODT, each of the above constraints participates in achieving faithfulness. DomCor requires that there be a domain for each input F-specifkation. The presence of a domain is a necessary ingredient to faithfulness since a feature F cannot be realized phonetically on an element unless that element is inside an Fdomain. Incorporate says that an F-sponsor is required to be in a domain. The inclusion of the sponsor inside the F-domain is, in ODT, the only means for that sponsor to actually be realized with F. Since being in an F-domain is not sufficient for a segment/mora to realize F, there must also be a constraint that actually requires the elements in the domain to realize F. This is the role of the Express constraint BAL and BAR require that no element other than the sponsor be in the domain (BAL requires that the sponsor be at the left edge of the domain and BAR requires that the sponsor be at the right edge of the domain). BAL and BAR thos do the same work as McCarthy and Prince's Dep constraint - they prevent a feature from appearing other than on the sponsor. If (5)-(8) are all undominated constraints, then each underlying F-specifkation will result in a surface form where F is realized on each sponsor and only on the sponsor. We may refer to this as perfect faithfulness to the input. But very often one or more of these Faithfulness constraints is violated (due to being dominated by a Phonoconstraint) and only an imperfect 3

There are, of course, other possible ways of getting at the idea that only sponsors should be inside domains. The Basic Alignment version is motivated by the fact that there appear to be cases where a sponsor is prevented from being inside the domain, but the domain is formed as near to the sponsor as possible. Bask Alignment, being a constraint that can be gradlently violated, allows one to capture this fact The issue does not arise in the context of Isixhosa, thus a constraint that directly banned nonsponsors from being inside domains would work equally as well as Basic Alignment. 8

faithfulness is achieved. Various examples of imperfect faithfulness will be exemplified in this and subsequent chapters with respect to tonal phenomena. Let us now begin to look at how these Faithfulness constraints work to select optimal outputs. F-domains are-aspects of phonological structure, not different in principle from other sorts of domains that are formally part of phonological representations (e.g. syllables, prosodic feet). As such. Gen freely generates output candidates with all possible F-domain structures (including the absence of F-domains). In the optimal output, a domain will exist just in order to satisfy either (i) a Faithfulness constraint (DomCor or Incorporate are the two Faithfulness constraints that need a domain in order to be satisfied) or (ii) some Phonoconstraint that demands the presence of F (thereby requiring a featural domain, since a feature cannot exist in the output without a domain). Faithfulness or Phonoconstraints can have the effect of demanding a domain only if they are ranked above the member of the *Struc family of constraints that bans feature domains. Any domain not motivated by Faithfulness or Phonoconstraints will necessarily be nonoptimal by virtue of *Struc. The Faithfulness constraints Express and Basic Alignment are vacuously satisfied if there is no F-domain at alL If they are undominated, then an underlying F-specification will be realized on the sponsor. Violations of Express occur when a Phonoconstraint prohibiting the feature F in some context domainates Express. Violations of Basic Alignment arise when domains are either wider than the sponsor of F or do not include the sponsor. There are two functional motivations for wide domains. One functional motivation can be referred to as Articulator Stability (or Ease of Articulation). From the point of view of articulation, it is easier to maintain a a gesture rather than to shift back and forth between gestures. The second motivation can be referred to as Perceptual Enhancement. From a perception point of view, a feature's perceptibility is enhanced if the feature can be extended over more segments. Notice that Articulator Stability and Perceptual Enhancement both prefer outputs where a domain is wider rather than smaller. (See Cole and Kisseberth 1995a and Kaun 199S.) We take the view that Articulator Stability and Perceptual Enhancement are not constraints themselves, but rather the motivation for constraints that align F-domains with the edges of constituents such as the word or phrase. Thus we propose a category of Widescope Alignment constraints which seek to align the edges of every F-domain with the edges of prosodic constituents. If Widescope Alignment constraints are dominated by Basic Alignment, then the optimal candidate will have a narrow domain consisting of just the sponsor. If, however, a Widescope Alignment constraint dominates Basic Alignment, the optimal output will have wider domains. For example, we know that in certain languages a feature F, sponsored by a given segment, may extend its influence from that segment to the end of the word, or to the beginning of the word, or bidirectionally throughout the word. We list these three cases as (9a,b,c). (9)

a. Feature F propagates from sponsor to the end of the word. b. Feature F propagates from sponsor to the beginning of the word. c. Feature F propagates from sponsor to both the beginning and the end of the word

The subtypes in (9) can be characterized by appealing to the following two Widescope Alignment constraints: (10)

Align Word R: Align the Right edge of an F-domain with the Right edge of a Word. Align Word L: Align the Left edge of an F-domain with the Left edge of a Word. 9

Case (9a) is predicted by having Basic Alignment Left and Align Word R undominated, and having Align Word R dominate Basic Alignment R and having Basic Alignment Left dominate Align Word L. The tableau in (11) illustrates. (When either of two mutually unranked constraints would evaluate a candidate as nonoptimal, we place parenthesized exclamation marks in both columns.)

The undominated BAL constraint eliminates any candidate where the initial element a is inside the domain. The undominated Align Word R constraint eliminates any candidate where the domain is not aligned with the right edge of the word. The only candidate that survives these two constraints is the optimal one — a (b'c) - which violates the two lowly ranked constraints, BAR and Align Word L. The (9b) case will follow from having BAR and Align Word L undominated, and having Align Word L dominate BAL and BAR dominate Align Word R. The tableau in (12) illustrates.

02) input: a b' c (a'b'c") aMc

-WbOc1

a (b'c )

BAR *!

Align Word L

BAL *

*!

Align Word R ;.*:-

*(«>

%£•'••••:

4

* *(!)

Given this constraint ranking, BAR eliminates all candidates where the domain is aligned with the right edge of the word and Align Word L eliminates all candidates that fail to align the domain with the left edge of the word. The optimal output - (a ( br) c - violates the two most lowly ranked constraints, BAL and Align Word R. Case (9c) derives from a constraint ranking where Align Word R and Align Word L are undominated, with Align Word R dominating BAR and Align Word L dominating BAL. Given this ranking, nonsponsors that help extend the domain either to the Right or the Left edge of the word will be incorporated into the domain. (13) input: a b1 c -Xa'b'c 1 ) a(b*)c (a'bnc a (b'c1)

Align Word R

Align Word L

*(!)

*(!)

-

*!

BAL *

BAR *

* .

*i

*

.

'

•

•

.

•

•

-

We have seen that by ranking Widescope Alignment constraints and Basic Alignment, we can obtain differing patterns of domain structure. By ranking Widescope Alignment 10

constraints with Express we can also obtain the phenomena known in the harmony literature as opacity and transparency (cf. Cole and Kisseberth 1995a). We review this point below. Given that Express is a constraint, it is violable. Express may be violated as a consequence of a constraint that bans the combining of a feature F with a feature G (call this a combinatorial or clash constraint). For example, assume an ATR-domain. Express would demand that the feature ATR be linked to every ATR-bearing element in the domain (for our purposes, let us assume that only vowels bear ATR). But suppose that there is a constraint that bars the combination of ATR and Low. This constraint favors output candidates where low vowels are not ATR. If Widescope Alignment and Express are ranked above the clash constraint *[ATR,Low], then a domain will extend past both Low and High vowels to the edge designated. Harmony results, with neither opacity nor transparency. However, if Express and *[ATR,Low] outrank Widescope Alignment, we have a situation where the extent of the domain is restricted so that the Low vowel will not be included in the domain. This is opacity. If Widescope Alignment and *[ATR,Low] dominate Express, it will be better to incorporate the Low vowel in the domain but not express ATR on that voweL This is transparency. (See Cole and Kisseberth (1995a) for discussion and exemplification.) The ODT approach to harmony thus allows both transparency and opacity to be characterized in terms of the interaction of Express with Widescope Alignment. There is a problem with this analysis. A single language may (conceivably) have both transparent and opaque targets in connection with the same F-domain. This leads to an apparent paradox: Express must dominate the widescope-constraint to get opacity, but the reverse ranking is required to get transparency. Consider a hypothetical example. Suppose we have a language with ATR harmony which extends bidirectionally throughout the Word. Thus the ATR-domain will be affected by the two widescope-driving constraints Align Word R and Align Word L. For convenience, we will simply refer to these two constraints as Widescope Alignment. Now, suppose that Low vowels are opaque (Le. an ATR-domain triggered by an ATR-sponsor cannot be extended onto or across a Low vowel). Furthermore, suppose that schwas (=Placeless) vowels are transparent (they do not bear the ATR feature and the ATR-domain extends across them). *[ATR,Low] predicts that ATR will not be realized on Low vowels inside an ATRdomain. "'[ATR, Placeless vowel] predicts that ATR will not be realized on a Placeless vowel in a ATR-domain. But now we are in a bind. If Express is ranked above Widescope Alignment, then we predict that both Low vowels and Placeless vowels will be opaque. If Widescope Alignment is ranked above Express, then we predict that both Low vowels and Placeless vowels will be transparent. We thus have an apparent paradox. One possible way out of the paradox would involve what in the OT literature is known as the "explosion" of a constraint into a family of constraints. Suppose that Express [ATR] is actually a family of constraints, including the following two members: (14)

Express [ATR on Low vowels]

(15)

Express [ATR on Placeless vowels]

The various members of this constraint family need not be ranked in an identical fashion. Thus, if the clash constraints are undominated, and if Express [ATR, Low vowel] is ranked above Widescope Alignment, but Express [ATR, Placeless vowel] is ranked below Widescope Alignment, then we have a situation where Low vowels are opaque and Placeless vowels are transparent.The tableau in (16) illustrates. Underlining indicates [+ATR]. Consonants are ignored. 11

(16) input: i o 11 i a i *[ATR, Low] (JailiaD

*(!)

*[ATR, Express Placeless V] IATR,Low]

Express [ATR. Place less]

ai

*

M) •1

GsuDai ->G»Ui)ai

(isaiai) (iouiaD

Wide scope Alignment

*!

SiiippiH

•1

i s a!i

iadiDai

Furtherresearchisrequiredto determine whether this is a linguistically appropriate solution to the problem. The issue is, however, rather tangential to the tonal concerns of the present work. It will be useful to discuss one additional general matter before turning to the ODT treatment of tone. F-domains, we have suggested, have the same status as other types of domains (syllables, feet, prosodic words, prosodic phrases, etc.). A very common assumption about these other domains is that they are non-overlapping (a possible, but not universally agreed upon, exception to this being "ambisyllabicity", where a consonant is considered to be simultaneously part of two different syllables). The ban on overlapping structure has generally been viewed as an inviolable aspect of phonological structure. Weregardit, however, as a constraint: (17)

"Overlapping Prosodic Structure Prosodic structure (Syllables, Feet, F-domains, Prosodic-domains) do not overlap.

As a constraint, it is violable. Thus we consider it possible that there might be other constraints that would be best satisfied by an output candidate that violates "Overlapping Prosodic Structure. A possible example arises in our analysis of Isixhosa. 1.3. OTD and the analysis of Bantu tone. At this point, let us consider the application of ODT to tonal systems and more specifically Bantu tonal systems. We follow the general consensus that in Bantu languages, the lexical inputs to the phonology have specifications for High tone but no other tonal specifications (specifically, there are no Low tones in lexical inputs). In autosegmental phonology, it has been common to view tonal features as anchored to either the mora or the syllable. We believe that tone is specified on moras, and that the role of the syllable in tonal structure can be accounted for without claiming that tone is specified directly on the syllable. This will not however be a theme that we dwell on here; we simply assume that tone in Bantu languages is specified on moras. [Onset consonants, since they are not moraic, will play no role in our discussion immediately below. We will assume that High [Tone] Domains prefer to align with syllables, and thus when the vocalic nucleus of a syllable is inside such a domain, we will assume that the onset to that syllable is also in the domain. It should be noted that onset consonants in Isixhosa, as in other Nguni languages, can play a critical role in the tonal system. We deal with this at great length in Chapters Two through Four. To varying degrees, the location of High tone specifications in Bantu languages may be a function of the morphological structure. We will not be concerned here with the predictability of the location of some High tone specifications in Bantu. We rather are concerned with the phonological patterning of tones given that they are specified on particular moras. The reader 12

should not take these comments to mean that there is nothing theoretically interesting about how (predictable) tones come to be located on particular morae. The issue is of great import; it is just beyond the scope of our concerns here. Suppose that we have a mora that sponsors a High-tone specification in the underlying representation. In ODT, DomCor requires that this High tone be parsed into a High Domain so that it can be realized phonetically. Incorporate requires that the sponsor of the feature H be Internal to the HD. Basic Alignment requires that the HD's edges be aligned with the edges of the H-sponsor. The constraint Express requires the moras inside the High Domain to bear the feature High tone, in violation of *Stmc (which bars all features as well as all domain structure, etc.). As mentioned earlier, if all of these Faithfulness constraints are satisfied, we will have "perfect faithfulness" - a High tone will appear on each sponsor and there will be no other High-toned moras. The vast majority of Bantu languages seem to be only imperfectly faithful, sometimes to quite astonishing degrees. In the remainder of this chapter, we will sketch the most pervasive tonological phenomena in Bantu and show how these phenomena can be understood to be the consequences of the interaction of a relatively small number of universal phonological constraints interacting with the various (featural) Faithfulness constraints that ODT postulates. The most fundamental phenomenon in Bantu tonology is the extension of a High tone from the sponsor of High to one or more neighboring moraic elements. When the extension is just onto a neighboring moraic element, the phenomenon is often referred to as High Tone Doubling or (Local) High Tone Spreading. When the extension is not so restricted, it is usually referred to as (unbounded) High Tone Spreading. In ODT, as noted above, the extension of a feature is viewed as being functionally motivated. In particular, a feature is perceptually enhanced if it is extended over more than one bearer of the feature. Ease (or Stability) of articulation also enforces maintenance of an articulation over multiple elements. Let us consider first those Bantu languages where a High spreads one mora to the right (or left). We propose that this type of spreading represents a minimal violation of Basic Alignment, this minimal violation being necessitated by the existence of a constraint that requires a degree of unfaithfulness. The constraint that we propose is the following4: (18)

*Mono(moraic) HD H-Domains do not consist of a single mora.

*MonoHD demands in effect that the High tone achieve some increased perceptibility by virtue of expanding beyond the sponsor to include at least an additional mora. Satisfaction can, of course, be achieved by expanding either to the Left or the Right of the sponsor. Satisfaction of *MonoHD often can be achieved only by including a nonsponsor in the domain, thus violating Basic Alignment (since the HD will be misaligned with the sponsor). When Bask Alignment is an undominated constraint, there can be no spreading of a High tone. If *MonoHD is ranked above Basic Alignment Right, then it will be optimal to extend a HD from the sponsor to the following mora in order to satisfy *MonoHD. But Basic Alignment will be violated minimally - i.e. the HD will extend only one mora since extending the domain over additional moras will incur a greater misalignment of the right edge of the H-domain with the Hsponsor without yielding a better satisfaction of *MonoHD. If, on the other hand, *MonoHD 4

One might reasonably propose an alternative (positive) constraint requiring binarity in the High Domain. We suspect that the explanation for binarity in stress domains does not carry over to pitch domains and that the negative constraint given here is more likely to be correct. However, nothing in the present work rests on the assumption that *Mono(moraic) HD and not Binarity is the appropriate constraint.

13

outranks Basic Alignment Left, the High Domain will extend to the left (since vioalting BAL is countenanced if the result is a domain that is not monomoraic). Let us illustrate this analysis with a concrete example. Emakhuwa (a Bantu language spoken in Mozambique and Tanzania) has "doubling" to the right The Emakhuwa tonal pattern has been analyzed in detail in Cheng and Kisseberth (1979,1980,1981). We have underlined the sponsors of a H tone in our examples. The placement of three dots after the item is meant to indicate that the item is in medial position in the phrase. (The significance of this will be dealt with later.) In (19) we show that the mora after a H-sponsor is regularly High in Emakhuwa. (19)

imipl.. 'house* nttjindtf... lull' nr£re'rn£l&... 'eel' nthgnd6ro... 'a long rope' umfri.. 'to fall' uhjpdttha... 'to hunt' urjikun]ist..'to turn over' Emakhuwa, as illustrated above, requires the following constraint system:

(20)

DomCor, Incorporate, *MonoHD, Express, BAL BAR - dominated by *MonoHD

undominated

The following tableau illustrates. To simplify, we have used the label "Max" to stand for DomCor, Incorporate, and Express. (21) Candidates ulupattha ufllppanha uhj(pfl)ttha

•MonoHD

as^smmimmmasmmmmm§mm Mdncor)

u(lflpfoM) (uljDpattha u(lupa~)ttha • u(Ujpa)ttha

oo\plllllBHIIIII^I

-

TOl

"[(Express)

Notice that the candidate (ulupattha -with "doubling" to the left -- would be optimal were BAR undominated and *MonoHD ranked above BAL. Even if *MonoHD is ranked higher than BAR, there may be other constraints - more highly ranked than *MonoHD - which will in effect prevent the doubling. We present two cases here. The first case is exemplified by Emakhuwa. We have seen that there is evidence that a H tone "doubles" to the right in Emakhuwa.. But this does not occur when the mora to the right is final in the (intonational) phrase (~IP)5. 5 We should note that while the failure to double onto an IP-final mora is a quite general phenomenon in Emakhuwa, there is at least one dialect - Enlai, spoken in the Angoche district of Nampula province in Mozambique - where a High tone does double onto an IP-final mora (unpublished research of C. Kisseberth and Francisco Ussene Mucanheia).

14

(22)

injpa 'house' nttunda 'hiU' nrgre'mgla 'eel' uirgra 'to fall' urjkungsa 'to turn over'

We propose to account for this failure to "double" in terms of a constraint belonging to the family of constraints known as Nonfinality. (23)

Nonfinality (HD) The R edge of a HD may not be aligned with the R edge of an IP.

If Nonfinality (HD) dominates *MonoHD, then we correctly predict the Emakhuwa data, as shown by the following tableau.

gfiCandidates umora ume(rd) (um£)ra

Max

Non-finality (HD)

•l(DomCor) *!(Incorp)

&#*dfevta #^§* !l: a!

BAR *' a

•'

' t \ • •

-Mi(m<S)ra

u(mgrif)

BAL •MonoHD 1 '."/Ifr.M&i IW*?-. -- '

.

*!

a

Setswana (a Bantu language spoken in South Africa and Botswana) provides a second example where a constraint dominates *MonoHD and consequently makes "doubling" nonoptimal The data and analysis of Setswana are from Mmusi (1992). The following data set illustrates that Setswana "doubles" to the right. The mora sponsoring a High tone is again underlined. (25) gofd 'to die' gorfka' 'to buy' gob£l£ya 'to kill' goigisanya 'to live in harmony' gokhunimeletsa 'to cover for' cf. toneless verbs: gowa 'to fall' golema 'to plow' gotsamaya 'to walk' In (25), we see infinitive verb forms where, if the stem has a High tone on the first mora, then that High doubles onto the second mora. Doubling may also go from a prefix to another prefix. For example, the High of the subject prefix in jdlema '(s)he is plowing' where a High-toned subject prefix doubles onto the following /a/ prefix. The stem /lema/ in dilema is toneless. (26) below shows a High verb stem. Notice that there is no doubling from the subject prefix to the /a/.

13

(26)

£ a Tiki '(s)he is plowing' d. a bghlya '(s)he is killing'

What is going on here is a well-known phenomenon from Bantu: a High tone does not double onto a vowel that is followed by a High-toned vowel (an effect of the so-called "Obligatory Contour Principle" proposed in autosegmental phonology). We propose the following constraint: (27)

No Adjacent Edges Domain edges may not abut

If No Adjacent Edges is ranked above *MonoHD, then we will account for the Setswana data. We do not illustrate here the role of the Faithfulness constraints other than Basic Alignment Thus we only include candidates that do not violate these other Faithfulness constraints.

(2§1 Candidates (eaXboJa)ya (fi)a(ba)laya -> fo) a (bg.la)ya

BAL

No Adj Edges

•MonoHD

BAR

»*! *

lilllflllilil

*l a

So far we have illustrated the phenomenon of "doubling" of High tones in Bantu and we have also illustrated how certain constraints, Nonfinality (HD) and No Adjacent Edges, may lead to violations of *MonoHD, the constraint that forces doubling. We have also seen how the domination of BAR by *MonoHD accounts for the rightwards doubling in Emakhuwa and Setswana. Let us now turn to see how ODT accounts for the unbounded extension of High tone. In Xitsonga (a Bantu language spoken in Mozambique and South Africa) a H tone will "spread" (using autosegmental terminology) in an unbounded fashion (see Kissebcrth (1994) for discussion). Consider the following examples. The left-hand column shows toneless verb stems in the first person singular present tense, while the right-hand column shows the corresponding third person plural forms. As in many other Bantu languages, third person subject prefixes sponsor a High tone. (In the interest of accuracy, we should note that there is an /a/ prefix located between the subject markers, /ndzi/ and /vg/, and the verb stem in (29). The subject prefix vowel elides. We nevertheless, in the third person case, underline the surface /a/.) (29) ndzatirrha vftfcrha (work) ndzatsutsu:ma v(Jtsutsu:ma (run) ndzatk>mute:la vjtl6mtft£:la (fish) ndzixava nya:ma vjxiva' ny£:ma (buy meat) From these data, we see that the High tone of the third person subject prefix spreads through the penultimate syllable of the phrase (the last example cited shows that the spreading crosses from the verbal word to a following complement and therefore is not a word-level phenomenon). When a domain extends in an unbounded fashion towards the end of the word, ODT appeals to the constraint aligning the R edge of a domain with the R edge of a word. But 'word* is just one of the possible categories that a domain may align with. The "prosodic phrase" (=PP) is another possibility. We propose that in Xitsonga it is Align PP R that is active (i.e. highly enough ranked to have an effect on the selection of optimal outputs).

16

(30)

Align PP R Align the R edge of a HD with the R edge of a Prosodic Phrase.

(See Kissebeith (1994) for a pre-OT discussion of the notion "Prosodic Phrase" in Xitsonga.) If Align PP R is ranked above BAR, we will characterize the situation where a High tone spreads as far as possible towards the Right edge of a PP. In Xitsonga, Nonfuiality (HD) dominates Align PP R and thus prevents an IP-final mora from being included in the HD. This explains why a H spreads only to the penult and not to the final syllable in the examples in (29). The following tableau illustrates the analysis of Xitsonga. We do not include the Faithfulness family of constraints other than Basic Alignment Right and therefore do not consider candidates where such constraints are violated.

(3D Candidates (v6tkSmrite\l£) (vDtk>mute:la (v|tl6)mute:la (vftldmu) te:la -> (v|fi6mut&)la

Nonfinality(HD)

Align PP R

BAR tk>muie:lo

*i

tlomulte; Id mute:! la te:la!

la

•

-

tlo tlomu tlo mute:

This tableau illustrates clearly the role that gradient violation of Align PP R plays. The first candidate, which is the only one that satisfies Align PP R perfectly, is rejected on the basis of the more highly ranked constraint Nonfuiality (HD). It is simply impossible to satisfy both Nonfuiality (HD) and Align PP R perfectly. It is worse to violate the more highly ranked constraint (Nonfuiality (HD)) than the less highly ranked constraint (Align PP R). Of the remaining candidates, the most optimal is the one that best satisfies Align PP R - i.e. the last candidate, which is misaligned from the R edge of the PP by a single syllable. We have seen that Nonfuiality (HD) constrains the alignment of a HD with the R edge of the PP. The constraint No Adjacent Edge has a similar role. We can see this by considering examples where a verb is followed by a nominal complement with a High tone. (32)

ndzixava ta:ndzjj 'I am buying an egg' Vjixdva' ta:ndz4 'they are buying an egg' ndzixava mata:ndzi 'I am buying eggs' vfixdva" m£ta:ndzg 'they are buying eggs'

The HD initiated by the subject prefix of the verb clearly extends rightward. It cannot, of course, extend all the way to the end of the phrase without overlapping the HD containing the final vowel of the nominal. (In the course of our analysis of Isixhosa, we will address the issue of whether the ban on overlapping domains is an inviolable or a violable one. Whatever the answer, Xitsonga does not permit overlapping HD's.) Furthermore, (32) shows that the subject prefix's domain also does not extend onto the syllable in front of the HD in the nominal. Clearly, No Adjacent Edges constrains the alignment to the Right In this language, just as in Setswana. The following tableau illustrates the analysis of Xitsonga. As usual, we ignore those constraints that are not directly pertinent to the present discussion, and therefore we also ignore candidates that violate those constraints.

17

(33) NoAdjacent Edges Align PP R BAR Candidates (yixAvi mit£0(ndzal 1* ^R\p§lH§SH^p (vi)xava mata: (ndzd) xavamalta: ndza/ 0 vamata-.'.ndza/ 0 (v4xa)va mata: (ndzd) (vtfxivd) mata: (ndzi) mata: ndza!/ 0 xavama ta:ndza/ 0 -HvaxavintiUta: (ndzd) (In the column dealing with Align PP R, to the left of the slash we indicate the extent to which the first HD fails to be aligned with the R edge of the prosodic phrase; to the right of the slash, we indicate the fact that the second HD is perfectly aligned.) In the examples so far discussed, Express has been an unviolated constraint when it comes to m o n k elements in the domain. But there is another widespread phenomenon in Bantu tone systems that ODT treats as representing the situation where total satisfaction of Express is not achieved. Bantu languages are, in the autosegmental literature, regarded as either being spreading languages (a High tone on the sponsor is heard not only on the sponsor but one or more moras to the right or left) or shifting languages (the High tone is not heard on the sponsor but rather on some other mora to the right or left of the sponsor). Of course, shifting languages in some cases were analyzed as involving the same spreading as observed in the "spreading" languages, but with an additional phenomenon of the delinking of the High tone from all of the moras up to the surface site of the High tone. Let us turn our attention now to some examples of "shifting" languages. Let us begin with a shifting language where the High tone extends just one mora to the right. Kijita (see Downing 1990) represents a typical example. In Kijita, a High tone spreads (in autosegmental parlance) one mora to the right, but delinks from its original mora. Furthermore, the High does not spread onto an IP-final mora. (34)

okufwi'todie' kumugera T>y the river* okufwa. kdmugera 'to die by the river* okuf&na 'to see' okuPsnana 'to see one another1 okuPflni i:nyonyi 'to see a bird' cf. oku()uma 'to hit' okujJumana 'to hit one another'

A word with a final High tone, like okufwg (we ignore a phonetic rule that make a final H falling in Kijita), will retain the H on this syllable in IP-final position, but the H will "shift" onto the following syllable in IP-medial position (cf. okufwa kumugera). Verbs in Kijita are either Hightoned or toneless (cf. okuflgna vs. okufluma); the High toned verbs will have the High tone dock to the first stem syllable (cf. okup^na). When the first stem syllable is penult in the IP, then the H will remain on that syllable, since the H will not shift onto the final syllable of the IP. However, once the word is IP-medial, then shift (Lc. spreading/delinking) can occur. This 18

explains the contrast between okupgna and okupjmd i:nyonyi as well as between okuJJgna and okuflgnana. Part of the ODT analysis of Kijita is immediately evident. Clearly, Nonfinality (HD) dominates *MonoHD, and *MonoHD dominates the BAR part of Basic Alignment. In other words, it has the same system as Emakhuwa. In Kijita what we must explain is why a High tone Is expressed on the second mora in the domain and not the first. We propose the following analysis. Domains are headed phonological structures - either Right- or Left-headed. We suggest that HD's in Kijita are Right-headed. We then propose that there is a constraint: (33)

*(High tone, nonhead)

which bans realizing High tone on nonheads. If (35) dominates Express (H) in Kijita, it will prevent a High from being realized on the first (nonhead) mora in a bimoraic domain. We will achieve the effect of "spread" and "delink". Notice that in order for this analysis to succeed, *MonoHD must dominate Express (H). If the ranking were the reverse, then it would be better to have perfect satisfaction of Express even if that could only be achieved by having a HD that contains only the head (thus violating •MonoHD). By ranking *MonoHD over Express, we require the presence of a mora in the HD that does not realize High tone. This represents the same kind of interaction that constitutes "transparency" in harmony systems (see the preceding section). Kijita illustrates the role of (35) in a system where *MonoHD is the only widescopedriving constraint ranked above BAR. Mijikenda (the data cited here is from work in progress by C. Kisseberth and myself) represents a language family where (35) is operative in conjunction with much wider domains than the bimoraic domains of Kijita. Mijikenda is like Xitsonga in that a H tone that originates to the left in the word will surface on the penultimate mora (of the Prosodic Phrase). However, whereas in Xitsonga all the moras from the point of origin to the penult vowel are High, in Mijikenda only the penult vowel is High. (36)

ninarima ninagula ninalamusa ninavumikiza ninagula nyama ninalamusa muganga

yunarfma yjHiagtila yunalamusa yu.navumikfza yjmagula nydma yjjnalamusa mugringa

(cultivate) (buy) (greet) (agree) (buy meat) (greet doctor)

On the basis of these data, we assume that Align PP R outranks BAR in Mijikenda, and that Nonfinality (HD) outranks Align PP R. Up to this point, there is no difference between Mijikenda and Xitsonga. The difference between the two systems will derive from the fact that in Xitsonga, Express dominates *(High, nonhead), while in Mijikenda the reverse ranking obtains. Furthermore, Align PP R must dominate Express in Mijikenda (whereas in Xitsonga these constraints are not necessarily ranked, due to the fact that Express is an undominated constraint). As a consequence, the domain will be as wide as possible (even though Express (H) is grossly violated and only the head of the domain is realized on a High tone). The tableau in (37) illustrates. (Note that sometimes a candidate violates two different constraints that are unranked with respect to one another, and either violation could be regarded as fatal to that candidate's chances to be optimal. In such cases we enter "I" after both violations but place the symbol in parentheses.)

19

(37) Candidates (yunalamusa) (yAnihfmusf) (y]j)nauunusa (y£ndl4mtf)ga -Hyunalamu)sa

•(H.nonhead)

Nonfinality

•1

*(!)*** *!**

Align PP R

BAR

Express

SgSSlSSti l*i«^-*SSMBSll:ipS^

lt| : itlSlMl^nM3^KiPlli : l*ip mnnniwssKiisasssss? ftilSliliSl£fiM»iiSllM;Sij®M^^^8^i *(l)

| sa

| nalamu

| ***

]

So far we have examined, from the ODT perspective, the pervasive Bantu phenomena of "spreading" and "delinking" of High tones. In so doing, we have had occasion to appeal to a Nonfinality constraint and a No Adjacent Edges constraint. These two constraints have to do with two other very pervasive aspects of Bantu tonology: phenomena having to do with the Right edges of words/phrases and phenomena having to do with the avoidance of adjacent High tones the so-called Obligatory Contour Principle (=OCP). For our present purposes, it is not necessary to explore in any more detail the role of right edge effects in Bantu tonology. However, it will be useful to look in a bit more detail at the ODT treatment of the Obligatory Contour Principle. We shall argue that the OCP is a family of constraints. Bantu provides examples of the various members of this family. We have already seen one expression of the OCP in ODT: namely, the constraint No Adjacent Edges. In the examples discussed earlier, we saw how No Adjacent Edges, if ranked above widescope-driving *MonoHD and Align Word/PP R constraints, expresses the case where the OCP prevents the spreading of High tones when spreading would produce a violation of the OCP. Another manifestation of the OCP in Bantu tone is the phenomenon that is referred to as fusion. In autosegmcntal parlance, "fusion" is the case where two or more High tones are fused into a single, multiply-linked High tone. In ODT terms, "fusion" is a case where two Highsponsors are placed into a single HD (violating Domain Correspondence, which requires a domain corresponding to each sponsor, but satisfying Incorporate). The evidence for fusion involves showing that two separate High-sponsors behave as though they are included in a single domain. Isixhosa represents a language where there is unambiguous evidence for fusion, so we will not here attempt to motivate fusion - rather, we will show how an appropriate ranking of the constraints will make fusion an optimal output. Assume a hypothetical language that lacks any spreading (Le. the constraints driving wide domains are ranked below Basic Alignment). Now, given an input nak|bona in this language, the perfectly faithful output would be na(k{)(bg)na. If No Adjacent Edges is ranked above DomCor, it will be better to minimally violate DomCor if by so doing we can avoid adjacent domain edges. Thus the ranking of No Adjacent Edges over DomCor will prefer a fused output such as na(kfb£)na over the perfectly faithful one. An undominated Incorporate constraint will prefer this fused output na(kfbg)na over na(kfjbgna. The latter has the same DomCor violation as the former, but in addition violates Incorporate and thus will be nonoptimaL The following tableau illustrates: (38) Candidates nakjbana naflcfjbpna ->na(kM)na na(kf)(b6)na

Incorporate •I* •1

No Adjacent Edges I DomCor

l^PSIWIiPffll T?y20

Fusion Is not the only way in which an OCP violation can be avoided. One of the best known phenomenon in Bantu tonoktgy is "Meeussen's Rule", which (in a procedural model) has the effect of deleting a H tone adjacent to a High tone. In ODT, Meeussen's rule is interpreted as a case, like fusion, where an OCP constraint (e.g. No Adjacent Edges) dominates DomCor. However, they differ in that the Meuussen's Rule phenomenon leaves one of the two H-sponsors outside a HD (though, of course, an independent principle may lead to its being incorporated into a HD - see the discussion of Emakhuwa below). How do we select as optimal an output that reflects Meeussen's Rule rather than fusion? We propose that the burden falls upon another Faithfulness constraint. Uniqueness, given below in (39). (39)

Uniqueness (F-sponsor) Each F-domain includes a single F-sponsor.

If Incorporate (H-sponsor) outranks Uniqueness, it will be better to incorporate multiple Hsponsors into some HD than to fail to incorporate one or more H-sponsors. This ranking thus leads to "fusion". To avoid "fusion", Uniqueness must dominate Incorporate (H-sponsor). Thus it will be better to fail to incorporate a H-sponsor if by so doing Uniqueness is better satisfied. To get fusion we must have the constraint rankings: (40)

Incorporate > Uniqueness OCP (e.g. No Adjacent Edges) > DomCor

to get Meeussen's Rule rather than "fusion", we must have the rankings: (41)

Uniqueness > Incorporate OCP (e.g. No Adjacent Edges) > DomCor Let us illustrate. Recall our hypothetical input nakibona in a language where High tones do not spread. We have seen how the ranking in (40) will yield na(kfbg)na as optimal In (42), we see how the rankings in (41) will yield as optimal either na(kf)bgna or nak[(b^)na. (42) Candidates nakjbena na(kfjbg.na na(kjb£)na naki(b£)na na(k£)(b6)na

No Adj Edges

Uniqueness

Incorporate

**! * •I * *!

DomCor

*

^3S38KiiS3S *

mmmmim?8$-ll§lill8f8

From this tableau, it is apparent that in the case of Meeussen's Rule, we have a directionality problem - which of the High tones is not parsed into a domain? Since Isixhosa does not make use of the Meeussen's Rule strategy, we do not undertake here a discussion of the problem of getting at directionality in Optimality Theory. One possible analysis is that, given the two alternatives na(k[)bo.na and naki(bg)na, the choice between these alternatives falls upon whether the language prefers domains to be aligned with the left or the right edge of the word We leave this matter for further research.

21

We indicated above that the OCP wilt turn out to be a family of constraints. So far we have mentioned only No Adjacent Edges. There is evidence that No Adjacent Edges is insufficient and that there must a second OCP constraint, one that we refer to as No Adjacent Sponsors. This constraint is given in (43). (43)

No Adjacent Sponsors *F-sponsor)(F-sponsor

This constraint bans adjacent High Domains, but just in case the sponsors are also adjacent. Emakhuwa provides evidence that No Adjacent Sponsors is needed in addition to No Adjacent Edges. We have already seen that in Emakhuwa, *MonoHD dominates BAR, resulting in the doubling of High tones. Nonfinality (with reference to the IP) dominates *MonoHD. However, there is clear evidence that in Emakhuwa No Adjacent Edges does not dominate *MonoHD. This is shown by the fact that a High tone "doubles" onto a mora that is in turn followed by another High-toned mora. In the following examples we, as usual, underline the H-sponsors. We do not here attempt to justify the claim that the underlined morae are sponsors. The reader is referred to the papers by Cheng and Kisseberth (1979,1980,1981) for argumentation. (44)

kingtfllma'... kingoijpl.. kinASrgkdngsl-

1 will cultivate...' 1 will bathe...' 'I will turn over...'

But just because No Adjacent Edges is violated does not mean that there are no OCP effects in Emakhuwa. The examples in (45) represent one situation where two H-sponsors are adjacent in the input. (45)

kahglfma... 1 cultivated...' kahfrgkuniisl.. 'I turned over...'

While the second H-sponsor is realized with a High tone, this High tone is simply the consequence of "doubling" from the first sponsor. If both H-sponsors triggered the formation of a HD, we would expect ka(hgj(lima)... and the pronunciation *kahgl{mi... In order to achieve the correct pronunciation, DomCor must be violated; there must be just one domain, not two: ka(hojj)ma... From these data it is clear that there must be some constraint that is ranked above DomCor (H) that makes it better to fail to parse a High into a HD than to violate that constraint. The issue is simply: what is the constraint in question? It cannot be No Adjacent Edges, as the following tableau illustrates.

/urujcunusa.../ u(ry)ku(nusa)... u(rujcu)(n]isa)... -»*u(ryku)nu.sa

•MonoHD

No Adj Edges

DomCor

*! *l *

Ranking No Adjacent Edges above DomCor incorrectly predicts the pronunciation ur&ktinusa... To obtain the correct pronunciation, urgktingssi..., No Adjacent Edges must be ranked below DomCor (H). Thus we need another OCP constraint, No Adjacent Sponsors, to be ranked above 22

DomCor (H). No Adjacent Sponsors has no bearing on an example like u(rgk(i)(ngxi)... and thus permits both H's in this example to be parsed; it does have a bearing on an example like ka(h£r£lku(n£x£)...and will prevent the second of the successive sponsors from being parsed into its own unique domain. We will not undertake here an elaboration of the details of the constraint system in Emakhuwa that will yield examples like ka(hgr£}ku(n£xa)... as optimal since our primary concern is to show that the OCP must be a constraint family, and that No Adjacent Edges and No Adjacent Sponsors are likely two members of this family. There are many additional aspects of Bantu tonal structure that merit discussion; but our purpose in this chapter has been to provide a sufficiently full introduction to Optimal Domains Theory to lay the groundwork for our discussion of the tonal pattern of Isixhosa. We now turn to Isixhosa.

23

CHAPTER TWO THE LONG FORM OF THE PRESENT TENSE 2.0. Introduction. We will initiate our study of the Isixhosa tonal system by examining the tonal pattern of the (long form of the) present tense. The morphological structure of this tense is fairly straightforward. Then is an obligatory subject marker at the beginning of the form, followed by a prefix that has the underlying phonological shape ya (this prefix cannot readily be identified as the "present tense marker" since it does not occur in the so-called "short form'' of the present tense dealt with in Chapter Three), followed by the verb stem, which always ends in the "final vowel" a in this tense. An object prefix may be intercakated between ya and the verb stem. The verb stem consists of a verb root plus one or more verbal "extensions"; these extensions, while extending the length of the verb stem, do not have any direct effect on the tonal pattern of the verb (Le. they fall into the category of "toneless" elements in the system; this notion is developed immediately below). 2.1. Toneless verb stems. It is by now fairly standard practice in Bantu studies to view Bantu languages as revolving around a fundamental contrast between High tone and the absence of High tone (tonelessness), rather than a contrast between High and Low tone. In the present study, we follow this standard practice without any attempt to argue the point. The Isixhosa data at every point support the standard view. There are two principal types of verb stems in Isixhosa: (a) toneless verb stems and (b) High verb stems. The characteristic feature of the toneless type is that they do not contribute a High tone to the input representation. The High verbs do. Since the toneless type is the simplest type to describe, we will begin our study with them. We begin by examining cases involving toneless verb stems in the present tense with first and second person subject prefixes (rjdi 'I'. U 'you (sg.)\ sj 'we', nj 'you (pL)'). These subject prefixes are the only ones in Isixhosa which do not contribute a H tone to the underlying representation. (The significance of the underscoring of certain consonants and vowels in our examples will be explicated later.) Examples in this study (if not followed by ...) are transcribed as though they constitute a complete utterance. In particular, our transcriptions reflect the automatic lengthening that affects the penultimate syllable of a word that stands in utterance-final position. We indicate a lengthened syllable by doubling the (vocalic) nucleus of that syllable. Forms which are specific to the speech of Mbulelo Jokweni will be labeled [M], while those specific to his wife Koleka will be marked [K], Forms left unmarked can be assumed to be equally valid for both varieties. Examine the examples in (1): 0)

ndiyacaciisa 'I am explaining' rjdjyaxoleela 'I forgive' rjdiyachukuirdisa 'I am provoking' rtdiyahlambeela 'I am washing for' 24

ndiyaffoniisa 1 am dancing' ndiyajjkeela 'I am turning aside' odiyalondglooga 'I am keeping safely' ndiyerxJcc'a (from: /ndi-ya-endela/) 'I am marrying at' ndiyandlflflla (from: /ndi-ya-andlala/) 'I am making the bed' s.iyalindeela 'we are waiting for' s.iyayumeela 'we are permitting' sjyamoneela 'we are jealous' s.iyalunfliisa 'we are putting right' s.iyagu£U\j1a 'we are scraping off s.iyaflibiseela 'we are throwing' s.iyaflp.et»b80qeet»h.3 'we are hitting repeatedly' sjyabaliseela 'we are narrating to' njyabaliisa 'you pi. are narrating' njyashukumiisa 'you pL are shaking' niyanamatheliisa 'you pL are cementing' niyakhohlakaleela 'you pi. are being cruel for' niyaqononoodiisa 'you pi. are making clear, emphasizing' niyabanekiseela 'you pi. are illuminating for1 There are no surface High tones in these forms, which suggests that there are no underlying High tones. If there are no underlying High tones, then it is reasonable to conclude that not only are the verb stems and subject prefixes toneless, but the prefix ya is also toneless. There are two different positions available as to what tonal information is present in the phonetic representation of the examples in (1). One position is that only High tones are represented in phonetic representation (just as only High tones are represented in the underlying representation). Syllables that are not High simply have no tonal specification. Languagespecific principles of phonetic implementation then determine exactly what the pitch shape of a sentences is, and in so doing they specify what the realization of any given toneless syllables is. The second position is that syllables that are not specified with a High tone in the output are specified as Low. The principles of phonetic implementation then determine the actual phonetic realization of both High and Low syllables. We shall assume the former approach, though admittedly largely ignoring any analysis of the phonetic implementation. Since the examples in (1) have no High tone in underlying representation, DomCor (H) does not necessitate the appearance of a High Domain in the optimal output candidate. Consequently, the constraint *Struc will reject all candidate outputs where Gen has provided a HD. In order for structure provided by Gen to be optimal, it must be needed in order to satisfy some constraint that is more highly ranked than *Struc. There is no constraint in Isixhosa that is ranked high enough to require, in the case of (1), a HD to be present in the output. So far we have cited examples of trisyllabic and longer verb stems of the toneless class in the first and second person forms of the long present tense. Substituting a third person subject prefix (e.g. bfi [cL 2], ^J [cl. 10]) provides some complications ("[cl. 2]" and "[cl. 10]" refer to

25

the traditional numbering of Bantu noun classes and the morphemes that "agree" with these noun classes). bayac&ciisa bayaltirjsijsa bayamoneela bayaxoieela baye^deeja bayindjaala zjyahtombeela zjyabiliisa bayagjbfseela bayachuktimiisa zjyabaliseela juyashukrimiisa zjyanamatheliisa bayaqonontfrjdjjsa bayakhohlaktfleela bayabanekiseela

(explain) (repair) (be jealous) (forgive) (marry at) (make the bed) (wash for) (narrate) (throw) (provoke) (narrate to) (shake) (cement) (emphasize) (be cruel for) (illuminate for)

Notice that these forms do have a High tone. We saw above that the ya prefix is toneless and that these particular verb stems are toneless. It follows that the source of the High tone in the words in (2) must be the third person prefix (ba, zj). However, even though the third person subject prefix is the underlying source of the High tone in these words, it does not bear the surface High tone - rather the antepenult syllable bears the High tone. Before entering into the development of an analysis of the data in (2), we must elaborate a bit on the phonetic pattern of these examples. We have transcribed the antepenult syllable in these words with a High tone. This transcription reflects what seems by far the clearest aspect of the interpretation of these data: from a phonetic point of view, the pitch peaks on the antepenult syllable. This syllable has, in the literature, always been regarded as High-toned. We believe this to be correct. The phonetics of the penult syllable requires comment This syllable is lengthened when the verb stands in the appropriate position in the sentence. In many of the above examples, this lengthened penult syllable will display a very clear falling pitch. One might very well have transcribed such words as follows: (3)

bayacAcfisa bayax6le*ela etc.

We have chosen not to do so. This railing pitch is entirely predictable from the High tone on the antepenult syllable: Le. a lengthened penult is predictably falling in pitch after a preceding High tone. Furthermore, there are true falling tones on penultimate syllables in the language which may in turn be preceded by a High-toned syllable (cf. Chapter Four, for example), and these falling-toned syllables contrast phonetically with the type of descent in pitch found in the present

26

examples. We therefore relegate the sort of descent in pitch observed in the examples in (2) to the phonetic implementation component of the grammar. Actually, there is a restriction on this phonetic falling pitch that merits comment. No fall appears when the penult has an onset consonant that belongs to the set of consonants commonly known in the Bantu literature as "depressor" consonants. In our transcription, we underscore these consonants throughout this study; since the nucleus of syllables with depressor onsets is depressed, we have also underscored the nucleus. Some examples: (4)

bayend.e.fila [*bayendfola] bayandJaala [*bayandjaala] bayahWirjljeela [*bayahla'mt}|$e>] bayaqonon6ndi.isa[*bayaqonon<5fldtisa]

Finally, let us conclude this discussion of the phonetics of the examples in (2) with some remarks on the syllables preceding the antepenult. In forms such as those under discussion, where there are two or more syllables preceding the antepenult, and none of these syllables ore depressed, the pitch level is fairly raised, but does not reach the level of the antepenult syllable. We follow traditional practice in Nguni and interpret these syllables as toneless and will so transcribe them. However, we return to this matter below, when we examine High verb stems; we shall demonstrate that there are "toneless" syllables whose pitch implementation is markedly tower than the toneless syllables in die pre-antepenult syllables in the preceding example. We shall at that time suggest how the phonetic implementation rules can predict the difference. Let us now begin to build an analysis of Isixhosa tone in general and the data in (2) in particular. Given that the subject prefix sponsors a High tone, if DomCor (H) dominates *Struc, then the optimal output must have a HD. However, DomCor (H) is not the only constraint that could -- by outranking *Struc - necessitate a HD in the optimal output. The ODT constraint Incorporate (H-sponsor) requires a H-sponsor to be in a HD. Thus if Incorporate (H-sponsor) outranks *Struc, it will demand a HD in the output. At this point in the discussion, we will simply assume that both DomCor (H) and Incorporate (H-sponsor) dominate *Stmc in Isixhosa. Recall that there are two constraints, together referred to as Basic Alignment, that prefer a HD to be aligned perfectly with the sponsor to which the HD "corresponds". These two constraints, Basic Alignment Left (=BAL) and Basic Alignment Right (=BAR), are independently rankable. We will assume that there is an undominated constraint, Syllable Alignment.which aligns HD's with syllable edges. Syllable Alignment, by dominating Basic Alignment, leads to a rather minor violation of BAL in that an onset is incorporated into the domain with the sponsoring mora. Finally, wee assume that there is an inviolable constraint that bars consonants from "bearing" tone. If DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), and the Basic Alignment constraints are all undominated, then High tone will be stable and will appear only on the sponsor itself. But the data in (2) show that High tones are not stable in Isixhosa. The H of the third person prefix must appear on the antepenultimate syllable of the word. In other words, even though the H tone originates at the left edge of the word, it finds its expression indefinitely far away to the right, on the antepenult. In order to account for the appearance of the High tone on the antepenult, there must be some constraint, ranked higher than the BAR member of Bask: Alignment, which forces the HD to be aligned towards the Right edge of the word. Recall that alignment constraints may align the edges of F-domains with the edges of prosodic/ morphological/syntactic constituents. The antepenult of the word does not constitute the edge of any such constituent. Consequently, it

27

is apparent that there is no constraint that is formulated to align the HD directly with the antepenult We propose that the constraint that drives wklescope alignment to the right in Isixhosa is one version of the constraint given as (5) (5)

Align Word R (a) Align the Right edge of every HD with the Right edge of a Word. (b) Align the Right edge of every Word with the Right edge of a HD.

(Sa) requires that the Right edge of every HD be as close to the Right edge of a word as possible. (5b), on the other hand, wants the Right edge of a word to be aligned with a HD. (5a) will be motivated if it turns out that all HD'g extend as far to the Right as possible. (5b) will be motivated if only the last HD in the word extends as far right as possible. It turns out that evidence choosing between these two analyses is sparse. We should note that if (5b) is part of the constraint set, then it must be dominated by *Struc. Why? (5b) prefers every word to have a HD aligned with its Right edge; but toneless words in the input do not have a HD in the output as a means of satisfying (5b)! In other words, (5b) cannot require a HD in violation of *Struc - only DomCor (H) /Incorporate (H-sponsor) are ranked highly enough to necessitate a violation of *Struc. Clearly (5) is just the beginning of the story. There must be some constraints that outrank (5) and result in optimal outputs where a HD is not perfectly aligned with the Right edge of the word. Setting aside these additional constraints, we have so far established the following constraint set: (6)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), BAL, Syllable Alignment -- undominated •Struc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Align Word R - dominated by 77 B A R - dominated by Align Word R

These constraints and this domination hierarchy explains why the HD initiated by the prefix in (2) wants to he aligned with the Right edge of the word. It does not explain why the HD does not succeed in being so aligned. Given an input such as /bayacacisa/ (we underline the sponsor of a High tone), the analysis developed so far would predict the HD structure (bgyacadisa). To explain why the H surfaces on the antepenult requires that there be a constraint (or constraints) more highly ranked than Align Word R. We suggest that one such constraint is: (7)

Noniinality (HD) The Right edge of a HD may not be aligned with the Right edge of a Word.

Nonfinality (HD) and Align Word R are in direct conflict: the former does not allow the end of a word to be aligned with a HD while the latter demands such an alignment. Since the optimal outputs are consistent with the former constraint and not the latter constraint, we know that Nonfinality (HD) must be ranked above Align Word R. As a consequence, in the optimal output candidate, the HD initiated by ba. may not include the final syllable of the word. It is better to violate Align Word R than to violate Nonfinality (HD), given that Nonfinality (HD) dominates Align Word R in the dominance hierarchy. Before continuing with the issue of what else is required, besides Nonfinality (HD), in deriving an antepenult High tone in (2), let us consider how Nonfinality (HD) must be ranked in 28

Isixhosa. If Nonfinality (HD) were an undominated constraint, we would not be able to have High tone expressed on a final syllable (since a High tone cannot be pronounced unless its bearer is inside a HD and Nonfinality (HD) bans a word-final syllable inside a HD). But when we consider nouns such as those in (8) and High-toned verbs such as those in (9), it is apparent that there are word-final High tones in Isixhosa and thus it must be possible to parse word-final syllables into HD's. (8)

islhlaanal\i amaceephle' Ubooyii fkomaanli

'shoe' 'spoons' 'wool' 'Queenstown'

(9)

Tjdjyaatyi ajyaaft njyaakha'

'I am eating' 'we are dying' 'you pL are drawing (water)'

Such forms violate Nonfinality (HD) but are still optimal. Thus there must be a constraint more highly ranked than Nonfinality (HD) which requires the final syllable of these forms to be (inside) a HD. DomCor (H) does require that there be a HD corresponding to the word-final Hsponsors in (8) and (9); however, DomCor (H) could be satisfied by constructing a HD not over the final syllable but over the syllable to its left ("retraction of High tone away from a word-final vowel). The fact that this does not happen can be attributed to Incorporate (H-sponsor). Incorporate (H-sponsor) not only requires that there be a domain (it cannot be satisfied without a domain) but also requires that the sponsor be in that domain. By ranking Incorporate (H-sponsor) above Nonfinality (HD), we will guarantee that the forms in (8) and (9) will be optimal. Let us summarize the dominance hierarchy so far established: (10)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), BAL, Syllable ALignment - undominated *Struc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) Align Word R) - dominated by Nonfinality (HD) BAR - dominated by Align Word R

The analysis developed so far incorrectly predicts the following domain structure as optimal: *(bayacacii)sa. The final constraint required in order to get the prefix H to the antepenult syllable is one that we did not discuss in Chapter One. We give, in (11) two possible formulations. (11)

Avoid Prominence (a) The R edge of a HD may not be aligned with the R edge of a prominent syllable. on (b) A prominent syllable may not be internal to a HD.

In Isixhosa, the penult syllable of a Prosodic Word in phrase-final position is lengthened and considered prominent (we have transcribed such syllables with a doubled vowel). Thus either formulation of (11) would bar the output *(bayacacii)sa.

29

Given that in some languages (e.g. Xitsonga, Mijikenda, Chizigula) one finds mobile High tones surfacing on penultimate syllables, and since the penult is a position associated with vowel lengthening in these and other Bantu languages, one might plausibly explore the idea that in these languages wide domains are being driven not by Align W/PP R but another constraint that requires a HD to be aligned with the R edge of a prominent syllable. The need for such a constraint is not yet proven. In all the cases mentioned above, the prominent syllable is in fact penultimate, and thus Align W/PP R and Nonfinality (HD) together yield the correct result It is an important research desideratum to discover whether there are clear-cut cases where HD's have widescope due to the need to align with a prominent syllable. Such cases may exist. If they do, would it not be contradictory to also postulate Avoid Prominence as a universal constraint? Contradictory constraints are not, in OT, particularly alarming. They represent part of the tension of phonology. We have already encountered contradictory constraints (e.g. Nonfinality (HD) and Align Word R). The question is really whether Avoid Prominence can be motivated by other languages in addition to Isixhosa. We are familiar with two other potential supporting examples -- namely, Chizigula (see Kisseberth (1992) and Chichewa (see, e.g., Kanerva (1990)). In Chizigula, a "floating" High tone at the end of a word surfaces on the prominent penult syllable of the following word, whereas a linked High tone spreads as far as the antepenult syllable of a following (toneless) word. In ChichevPa, a High tone doubles onto the following syllable (according to Kanerva) "as long as that syllable is not in the domain-final (disyllabic) foot"1. Let us assume the viability of Avoid Prominence as a universal constraint. In Isixhosa, Avoid Prominence must dominates Align Word R. Otherwise, it would be better for a HD to be aligned closer to the end of the word even if the consequence were that the penultimate syllable were included in the HD. We should observe that given the formulation in (1 lb), the data in (2) would not necessitate that Nonfinality (HD) be highly ranked since the extension of the HD to the very end would be ruled out by (lib) without any appeal to Nonfinality (HD). The formulation in (11a), on the other hand, would require having Nonfinality (HD) outrank Align Word R. We shall see later, however, that in any case Nonfinality (HD) must be ranked above Align Word R. Let us summarize the dominance hierarchy so far established: (12)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), BAL, Syllable Alignment, Avoid Prominence undominated •Stroc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) Align Word R - dominated by Nonfinality (HD), Avoid Prominence BAR - dominated by Align Word R

The following tableau illustrates how the appropriate domain structure for the forms in (2) are selected as optimal by the above constraint hierarchy. We have omitted various candidates. Specifically, we have not illustrated cases where additional HD's occur beyond the one motivated by the underlying High tone. We have presented only one of the possible candidates violating Incorporate (H-sponsor) while satsifying DomCor (H). The constraint *Struc is 1 It Is worth noting that the Esaaka tfialect of Emakhuwa exhibits, like Chichewa, High tone doubling to theright,and It also foils to double onto the penult mora In the phrase. Esaaka, however, does not have any lengthening of penultimate vowels. Thus there is no surface evidence for penultimate stress. If one does not require any overt evidence of prominence, then Esaaka would constitute a third language supporting Avoid Prominence.

30

omitted, and we have also ignored the fact that, due to Syllable Alignment, HD's violate BAL to a minor extent. The constraint Avoid Prominence may or may not be fatal for the (a) candidate, depending on its correct formulation - we indicate this by placing a question mark after the "I" symbol.

iiaCandidates a

DomC or

Incorp

Avoid Prom *d?)

(bayacaciisa)

b. (bflyacacii)sa -» c. (bayaca)ciisa d. (baya)caciisa e. (ba)yacaciisa f. ba(yaca)ciisa g. bayacaciisa

BAL

M>

*!

1 1

M)

*(!) *<«>

ba(»; '

ie~

' %*

Nonfinal

.

Align Word BAR R yacuciis a" vacacii sa yaca cu iJ ca en sal ¥S vacK.il 1 sa Cliia ywa 4

••

•

•

At this juncture in our development of the constraint system, DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), Avoid Prominence and BAL can all be considered undominated. Candidate (g) in (13), bajacadisa (which violates DomCor (H) and Incorporate (H-sponsor), and candidate (f), bg(yaca)ciisa (which violates Incorporate (H-sponsor) as well as BAL), are immediately rejected as nonoptimal due to their multiple violations of undominated constraints.. Candidates (a)-(e) are equal with respect to three of the undominated constraints - namely, DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), and BAL. However, candidate (a), where all the syllables in the word following ba. are gathered together into the HD, possibly violates Avoid Prominence and certainly violates Nonfinality (HD) and is thus nonoptimal. Candidate (b), where all but the last syllable is included in the HD, violates the undominated constraint Avoid Prominence and is thus rejected as non-optimal. Candidates (c)-(e) all satisfy the undominated constraints as well as Nonfinality (HD). All three of these candidates do violate Align Word R. Nevertheless, they differ in the extent to which they violate Align Word R. The Right edge of the Word in the optimal representation (c) is misaligned with the HD by virtue of the two syllables cil sa, whereas candidates (d) and (e) are misaligned by three (ca cil sa) or four (ya ca cil sa) syllables. Consequently, candidates (d) and (e) fail to be optimal It is, of course, totally irrelevant that the last candidate is the only one to satisfy the lowest-ranked constraint, BAR. Since Align Word R prefers (bgyaca)dlsa to *(bg)yacacilsa, it is immaterial whether a lower ranked constraint is violated by the former and satisfied by die latter. We have now postulated a set of constraints that will evaluate as optimal an output candidate where a HD extends from the sponsor through the antepenult. Recall that in ODT, a constraint Express (H) requires the feature H to be realized on each element in the HD. If Express (H) is undominated, then it will be the case that each element in the domain is specified as High-toned. There is, however, in Isixhosa a constraint that dominates Express (H) - namely, the same constraint that we saw operating in Kijita and Chidigo in Chapter One: (14)

*(H,nonhead)

(We propose that HD's in Isixhosa, as in Kijita and Chidigo, must be Right-headed.)

31

Given that *(H,nonhead) dominates Express (H), it will be better if nonheads are not specified High than for them to be specified High in accordance with Express (H). If Express (H) were ranked above Align Word R, then it would be better to have domains where all the anchors are specified with a H tone than to have widescope domains. In other words. Express (H) would be better satisfied by *(bA)yacadlsa than by the correct (bgyac6)disa. Thus it is necessary that Align Word R be ranked higher than Express (H). We review again the constraint system we have motivated. (15)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), BAL, Syllable Alignment,Avoid Prominence, *(H, nonhead) - undonrinated *Struc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) Align Word R - dominated by Nonfinality (HD), Avoid Prominence BAR - dominated by Align Word R Express (H) - dominated by Align Word R and *(H, non-head)

The following tableau illustrates how, given the domain structure selected as optimal (see (13)), the correct surface tone shape is predicted by the two constraints involving expression. (16)

Candidates -» (bayaca*)ciisa (bayaca)ciisa (bayicOciisa (biyac£)ciisa (b£yaca)ciisa

*(H, nonhead)

Express (H) *•

*!

v .
*•*!

•1*

,

*!•

? ? S * A J < I O . V.

There is one point that we have not dealt with explicitly yet. Recall that the penultimate syllable of the utterance in Isixhosa is always lengthened (i.e. consists of two moras rather than the one that exists in UR). Could Avoid Prominence be satisfied by aligning the HD with the R edge of the first mora of the lengthened penultimate syllable (thereby not literally violating either formulation of Avoid Prominence in (11))? Were this possible, then we would predict •bayacaclisa- Recall that we suggested earlier that there is an undominated Syllable Alignment constraint in Isixhosa -- Le. a constraint that says HD edges should be aligned with syllable edges. This constraint will have the effect of rejecting the candidate that yields *bayacaclisaSo far all of our example have involved trisyllabic or longer verb stems. In (17) we illustrate bisyllabk toneless verb stems. (17)

nfliyafiika, bayaTiika (arrive) rjdjyahlaaba, baydhlaaba (stab) ndiyahleeka, bayihleeka (laugh) ridiyagcaada, bay4geaada (roast)

ndjyabaala, baydbaala (count) ndjyaliima, bayaliima (cultivate) rjdjyacuula, bayacuula (sing) ndiyachuucha,bay4chuucha (cut holes in)

sjyahlaala, sjydhlaala (sit) s.iyaguula, ziyfiguula (be sick) sjyeensa, ziy&xm (do)

siyaxeela, gjyfixeela (say) siyayaala, ziy4y«ala (shut) siyaphiindfl, ziydphiin^S (turn over) 32

These Disyllabic verb stems require no modification in the constraint system sketched above. The first and second person forms simply lack an underlying High tone and thus there is nothing that forces a violation of *Struc. When there is a High-toned subject prefix, the H tone surfaces on the element ya- Both syllables of the verb stem are excluded from the HD initiated by the subject prefix due to Avoid Prominence (and Nonfinality (HD)). There is a small class of Disyllabic verb stems that are indistinguishable in the present case from the regular class illustrated above. These are the bisyllabic stems derived from monosyllabic verb roots, (18)

niyawiisa sjyahliisa ndjyalwiisa

liyiwiisa bayShliisa juyilwiisa

(drop) (lower) (make fight)

These data require no modification of the constraint system. Later we will see that there are complexities associated with this class of verb stems in other contexts. We have not yet examined what we shall refer to as "monosyllabic" toneless verb stems.These are stems built from asyllabic roots (e.g. /lw/, /w/) which become monosyllabic only upon the affixation of the final voweL (19)

ndjyaalwa, bay441 wa, njyaalwa, Hy&alwa ndjyaasa, bayiAsa ndtyaawa, bayiiwa ndiyaatsho, bay&itsho

(fight) (take) (fall) (declare so)

These data2 require some discussion. Notice that in the third person case, the HD extends from the subject prefix to the penult syllable, in violation of Avoid Prominence. There must be a constraint therefore that is more highly ranked than Avoid Prominence that will force a wider domain. The constraint cannot be Align Word R, since we know that Avoid Prominence dominates Align Word R. We propose that the required constraint is *MonoHD (see Chapter One). We will see later that *MonoHD is independently motivated by High-toned verb stems. (20)

*MonoHD HD's are not monosyllabic.

If *MonoHD dominates Avoid Prominence, then a HD will violate the latter constraint in order to have sufficient syllables in it to avoid violating *MonoHD. Recall that we pointed out that the (1 lb) formulation of Avoid Prominence could reject a candidate like (bgyacaciisa) without any appeal to Nonfinality (HD). The data in (19) show that we must have a Nonfinality (HD) constraint ranked above Align Word R. Why? If *MonoHD is going to compel a violation of Avoid Prominence, then why is (bayaa)lwa more optimal than •(bajaalwa)? Both these candidates violate Avoid Prominence, but the former violates Align

2 We have omitted one phonetic detail from the data in (19) as well as subsequent data throughout the book. In [K], but not [M], a non-depressed IP-final mora is raised to High when it is preceded by a level penult High tone. This phonetic raising does not occur in IP-medial position or on IP-final depressed syllables.

33

Word R while the latter does not Ranking Nonfinality (HD) above Align Word R is necessary if we are to explain the data in (19). At this juncture, we do not have data that will indicate whether *MonoHD dominates Nonfinality (HD) or vice versa. In our discussion of High verb stems below, we will see that *MonoHD is dominated by Nonfinality (HD). Although this ranking has not yet been demonstrated, we will assume it in the following tableau, illustrating the selection of the optimal output candidate bayrftflwa foe the input /bjiyalwa/. (We Illustrate only with reference to the domain structure and not with respect to the expression of the tone, and we ignore all candidates ruled out by DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), Align L, and *Struc (this in the interest of conserving space).)

(21) Candidates (b&yaalwa) (bajyaalwa -»(bflyaa)lwa

: Non-finality

•Mono HD

Avoid Prom

*1

WmXSSSm.MM^SSMM * lwa

*!

We should mention one point concerning the expression constraints. *MonoHD is a widescope-driving constraint. It must outrank Express (H) since it is better to have an extended domain than to fully satisfy Express (H). We show the constraint hierarchy as it now stands in (22): (22)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), BAL, Syllable Alignment, *(H, non-head) undominated *Struc - dominated by DomCor(H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) — dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) •MonoHD -- [later evidence that *MonoHD is dominated by Nonfinality (HD)] Avoid Prominence -- dominated by *MonoHD, Syllable Alignment Align Word R -• dominated by Nonfinality (HD), Avoid Prominence BAR ~ dominated by Align Word R Express (H) - dominated by *MonoHD, Align Word R and *(H, non-head)

Up until this point we have restricted our discussion to consonant-initial toneless verb stems in Isixhosa. Below we illustrate vowel-initial verb stems. These stems do not present any new difficulties. The vowel of/ya/ elides in front of a vowel-initial verb stem. As a consequence, /ya/ + /V/ forms a single syllable in the surface structure. Consider quadrisyllabic or longer stems first: (23)

njyaneliisa njyalamaniisa ndjyonakaliisa

liyaneliisa liyatam&niisa bayonak&liisa

(satisfy) (connect with) (damage)

Notice that the H tone of the prefix surfaces on the antepenult syllable, which in these examples is a non-initial syllable of the stem The constraint system developed above obviously predicts these facts. In trisyllabic stems, the H appears on the antepenult, which is in fact the "merged" syllable at the juncture of/ya/ and the vowel-initial verb stem

34

(24)

njyoluula ndjyaluuka ndiyaleeka

ndiyambaatha ndjyandjaala

ndiyendiisa ndiyothuusa ddiyohlwaaya

(stretch) (be circumcised) (put on over) (put on some covering) (make a bed) (give in marriage) (frighten) (punish)

liytiluula bayaluuka baydleeka baydmbaatha bayfindlaala bay^ndttsa bayfithuusa baydhlwaaya

Again, the constraint system we have developed predicts this surface form directly and requires no discussion. Bisyllabic vowel-initial toneless stems show that *MonoHD will drive an output where the High of the subject prefix extends to the merged syllable, even though that syllable is in the penult (prominent) syllable. (25)

ndiyeehla, bay6€hla ndiyeetha, baye^tha ndiyaaba, bayddba, giyd&ba Odiyaanga, bayddoga ndiyoojft, bay66ja ndiyeela, bay&la njyoosa, Hy66sa, ay6<5sa Odiyeen^a, bay66am, a y « I H » ndiyoopha, bayWpha, sjy66pha

(go down) (subside) (distribute) (kiss) (roast) (winnow) (roast) (do) (bleed)

The analysis developed so far accounts for all the data involving the long form of the present tense where the verb stem is toneless (and there is no object prefix -- see below). At this point we need to point out that there is an altemative story that one might tell about these data which, while broadly similar, would differ in a crucial way. In the analysis developed above, a HD extends from a subject prefix to the antepenult (or penult in the case of shorter verb stems) of the word. However, only the last vowel in the domain actually bears the High tone in the optimal output. An altemative to this view would involve claiming that the High-toned syllable is in fact the only syllable in the domain. Let us look at how such outputs could be rendered optimal. If the correct domain structure for bayaedciisa is baya(c£)ciisa rather than (bajraci)ciisa, then the optimal output is one that violates Incorporate (H-sponsor), since the subject prefix vowel is not in the domain. The question then is this: what constraint could be more important than Incorporate (H-sponsor)? The answer is clearly Express (H). By violating Incorporate (H-sponsor), the candidate bgya(c£)ciisa succeeds in satisfying Express (H) perfectly as well as Align Word R, etc. But now this analysis faces a problem: is it possible to derive all the data with a constraint ranking Express (H) > Incorporate (H-sponsor)? The constraint Nonfinality (HD) poses a problem. We noted earlier that there are words with a final H-sponsor and this sponsor surfaces as High (Le. is in a HD, since a segment can be High-toned only if in a HD) ~ e.g. ndjyaatya* (see below for discussion of High verb stems). In order to have a HD on the last vowel, it is necessary that Incorporate (H-sponsor) outrank Nonfinality (HD) so that there will be a domain and the

35

word-final H-sponsor will be in it Thus we must have the constraint ranking Incorporate (Hsponsor) >Nonfinality (HD). But if Express (H) outranks Incorporate (H-sponsor), and if Incorporate (H-sponsor) outranks Nonfinality (HD), then it follows (by the transitivity of constraint rankings) that both Express (H) and Incorporate (H-sponsor) should dominate all those constraints that Nonfinality (HD) dominates. In particular, Express (H) should outrank Align Word Rl But this is disastrous. If Express (H) is more important than extending the domain to the R edge of the word, and if Incorporate (H) must be satisfied), and if only one syllable in a domain can be High tone (due to the fact that *(H, non-head) outranks Express (H)), then the optimal output is one where the High tone surfaces on the sponsor. But this is entirely wrong. The constraints we have proposed cannot in fact be ranked so as to get *baya(ca)disa to be optimal rather than (bayac4)ciisa. We will see later that there is empirical evidence strongly supporting the domain structure (bayac6)cilsa. 2J. High-toned verb stems. Let us now turn our attention to High-toned verb stems. We must begin by noting that in Isixhosa, as in most if not all Bantu languages, if one knows that a verb stem is High-toned (as opposed to toneless), then one also knows the tonal shape that this stem will exhibit. There are no lexical contrasts in the underlying location of High tone (and whether and how this H tone "spreads" is rule-governed). In rule-based autosegmental analyses. High-toned verb stems have been viewed as lexically having a floating High tone. This sort of analysis required the population of a rule of tone association. In the vast majority of cases, the High tone can be argued to associated to the first mora of the stem There are a variety of ways in which, within ODT, one might attempt to get at the predictability of the location of the High tone in the High verb stems in Isixhosa and other Bantu languages. We will not address this issue here; instead, we will assume inputs where the first mora of the High verb stems is specified as High and no other mora is (at least in the verb tense currently under discussion). We make this assumption partly in anticipation of the fact that the first mora of a High verb stem does not behave differently from any other High sponsor. There is nothing distinctive about the lexical H of a verb stem in comparison with any other High tone. We begin our discussion with quadrisyllable or longer stems and a toneless subject prefix. (26)

njyabonisiisa sjyaphuhtphuula

(show clearly) (listen)

sjyasebeoseeja (work for) odiyaphakdmiisa (raise) njyanyinyithlkiisa (make slippery) sjyabonakaliisa (make visible) qdjyathelekeleela (estimate) Notice that the H tone located in the input on the first stem mora surfaces on the antepenult syllable. The analysis so far developed obviously predicts this, as the following tableau illustrates. (As usual, we do not consider candidates that fatally violate constraints such as DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), *Struc, BAL.)

36

(27) Candidates niya(bonisiisa) nlya(bo_)nisiisa niya(bfinisii)sa

Nonfinalitv

•MonoHD

Avoid Prom

Alien WordR

*l *i

TlUllJHK^^^^^^^^^

•1 siisa

-¥

niya(bo_ni)siisa Trisyllabic verb stems are more interesting. Consider the following data. (28)

rjdjyabuUala ndjyaqwebee'la s.iyazjme'ela siyafinye^za. OdiyasebSeriza fldiyafumdAna ndiyabonifsa sjyagaje'eia sjyahloniipha

(kill) (accumulate) (hide) (shorten) (work) (get) (show) (pour) (indicate respect)

Notice that in these examples, the H tone does not appear on the antepenult syllable but rather the penultimate syllable. The explanation for this phenomenon is simply the presence of the constraint *MonoHD. Recall that the first stem mora sponsors a H tone. The root initial syllable is the antepenult syllable in the word If it were not for the presence of "'MonoHD in the grammar, then Nonfinality (HD) and Avoid Prominence would prevent the HD from extending beyond the initial syllable of the verb stem. But *MonoHD requires a HD to be larger than monosyllabic. Thus *MonoHD requires the HD to be extended through the penult syllable. The following tableau illustrates.

No discussion is required. In many Isixhosa dialects, there is a lexical contrast between verbs that exhibit the above tonal pattern and another group of trisyllabic verbs. (Quadrisyllable or longer verbs do not show any contrast.) K exhibits this contrast; M recognizes its existence, but does not himself ordinarily utilize it. (30)

sjyabuleela rjdjyabtfliisa ndiyafurjdiisa fldiyakhuseela

(thank) (greet) (teach) (shield, protect) 37

rjdjyamdmeela ndjyatyeleela rjdiyatsmlyeela

(listen to) (visit) (sweep)

(In M these would ordinarily be Qdjyabulltsa. Odjyafun,d.Usa. etc.) Notice that in these verbs *MonoHD is violated and the HD consists just of the first syllable of the stem, The historical source of this contrasting pattern of behavior has apparently to do with historical vowel length in Isixhosa; specifically, these verb stems originally had a bimoraic initial syllable. Under the assumption that *MonoHD referred to moras, these verbs would have satisfied *MonoHD since the first syllable of the stem was bimoraic. When vowel length was lost, these items came to violate *MonoHD. In M's dialect, the domain structure was altered so as to satisfy *MonoHD. In K's dialect, the offending structures were retained. We propose the following treatment of the data in (30). We suggest that a morpheme may be exceptional in ODT by virtue of being exempted from a particular constraint. The verb stems in (37), in the dialects that have the contrast in question, are exempt from *MonoHD. What does it mean for a verbal root to be exempt from *MonoHD? It means that the root cannot contribute to the non-optimality of a candidate by that root (alone) violating the constraint *MonoHD. We illustrate the evaluation of ndjyabtiliisa. Brackets indicate that a mark is inoperative due to the exceptional status of the verb stem.

131)

We must now examine the bisyllabic High verb stems in Isixhosa with a toneless subject prefix. Some representative data: njyabMka iMyamlema rjdjyafiHjnga. sjyaWdna niyasuiila sjyashiiya ndjyalritfma sjyas£eia s.iyabtiiSjja

(place) (invite) (swear an oath) (see) (wipe) (leave behind) (bite) (drink) (ask)

These show that Nonfinality (HD) must outrank *MonoHD. The HD initiated by the verb stem does not extend to the final syllable of the bisyllabic verb stem. *MonoHD would demand that this extension occur, but given a more highly ranked constraint Nonfinality (HD), *MonoHD must be violated so that Nonfinality (HD) be satisfied. The following tableau illustrates.

38

Candidates

Nonfinality *MonoHD

Avoid Prom

Align Word R

ndiya(lu,u)ma Notice that the optimal candidate violates three of the four constraints, and the non-optimal candidate violates only one constraint. However, the number of violations does not matter. The only important issue is which of the candidates best satisfies the most highly ranked of these constraints. Let us review our constraint system once again: (34)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), BAL, Syllable Alignment, *(H, nonhead) — undominated •Struc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) •MonoHD - dominated by Nonfinality (HD) Avoid Prominence - dominated by Syllable Alignment, *MonoHD Align Word R - dominated by Nonfinality (HD), Avoid Prominence BAR - dominated by Align Word R Express (H) — dominated by *MonoHD, Align Word R and *(H, non-head) Consider monosyllabic High verb stems next.

(35)

niyaatya siyaafd ndjyaaphA s.iyaakhd

(eat) (die) (give) (draw water)

These data were mentioned earlier in that they provide evidence that Incorporate (H-sponsor) must dominate Nonfinality (HD). In other words, in the optimal output there is a HD that spans the final syllable of the word. If Nonfinality (HD) were undominated, this would have to represent a non-optimal candidate.

So far we have only looked at High verb stems preceded by a toneless subject prefix. The forms where a High subject prefix precedes are particularly illuminating. In (37) we give trisyllabic or longer verb stems, in (38) bisyllabic stems, and in (39) monosyllabic stems.

39

(37)

Wvafum.'ia'na btfyasebi&riJKL biyagalteela biyahlon.'lfpha llyabonlilsa bdyaballeelca Wyabliileela [K] Myafliirjdiisa [K] biyabontfsiisa Ifyanyinyithtekiisa

(get) (work) (pour) (indicate respect) (show) (run) (thank) (teach) (show clearly) (make slippery)

(38)

bdyabldona (see) brfyaslilula (wipe]I lfyabl66ka (place') b4yath!6e'rjga (buy) Myayltftika (wake up)

(39)

Hyeatyld Myaafli WyaaphlS bdyaakhla'

Wyab'.dtisa biyalltitima liyamlMma MyashMiya bdyadjlgjla

•

(ask) (bite) (invite) (leave behind) (play)

(eat) (die) (give) (draw water)

Notice that in each case there is a High tone realized on the subject prefix, and the verb stem also has a High tone in the same position as it would be if there were a toneless subject prefix. In other words, the subject prefix H tone does not qffect the location of the stem H tone. Notice also that the stem H is downstepped (indicated by the exclamation sign). The downstepping is particularly radical when the two High tones are separated by a depressed syllabic (underscored in our transcription). We will deal in detail with downstepping later in this chapter. These examples represent the first case we have encountered where there are two High tone sponsors in a word (the subject prefix and the first stem mora). There are, of course, various possibilities as to what fate might befall a word with two High-sponsors. For example, in autosegmental terminology, the two High tones might fuse into one, or one of the High tones might be deleted, etc. The data in (37)-(39) show clearly that these things do not happen in Isixhosa in the present case. Rather both High-sponsors trigger the formation of their own HD. This is entirely expected if DomCor (H) is undominated: DomCor (H) demands that there be a (distinct) HD in the output corresponding to each High specification in the input. Given that there are High-sponsors, what will be the extent of each of their domains? We have already determined how the constraint system will establish the domain of the second Hsponsor. But what about the first H-sponsor? Recall that we earlier provided two possible versions of Align Word R: one would require only that the R edge of a word be aligned with a RD and thus would make no prediction about die alignment of a non-final HD. The second version of Align Word R predicts that all HD's try to align with the R edge of a word. The data in (37)-(39) do not provide any assistance in choosing between these two versions of Align Word R. However, were we to opt for a version where all HD's want to align with the end of the word.

40

we would need to explain why an output such as *(bgya)bgnii)sa is non-optimal. We could readily do this on the basis of a constraint which we call "'Overlapping (see Chapter One): (40)

"Overlapping A segment may not be simultaneously a member of two different domains (of the same type).

By assuming that ""Overlapping is an undominated constraint in Isixhosa, we delimit the possibilities of how far the HD triggered by the subject prefix can extend when there is a Hightoned verb stem. Specifically, the subject prefix's HD cannot include any syllable in the stem HD within its scope. Regardless of whether Align Word R demands that the subject prefix's HD try to extend to the Right, *MonoHD certainly predicts that the domain should not consist just of the prefix. Thus we would expect the domain structure in *(bgya)(bonli)sa to be optimal rather than (bg) ya(bonii)sa, since the initial HD in the former satisfies *MonoHD but the initial domain in the latter does not. But *baytfbon!ffsa is not the correct pronunciation. We propose that there is a constraint that outranks *MonoHD and compels a "small" domain in violation of *MonoHD. This constraint is No Adjacent Edges. (41)

No Adjacent Edges [=NAE] *)(

The constraint No Adjacent Edges is, as discussed in Chapter One, an ODT implementation of the notion Obligatory Contour Principle [«OCP]. The idea behind the OCP is that adjacent High tones (at some level of representation) are avoided. If two HD's share an edge, then we have a situation where the High tones in these domains may be realized on adjacent moras. By ranking No Adjacent Edges above *MonoHD, it will be better to avoid adjacent domains than to satisfy •MonoHD. The following tableau demonstrates the point. (42) Candidates (bgya)(sebeenza) (baya)(se.bee)nza (baya)(s£)beenza (ba)ya(s£beenza) -Kba)ya(se.bee)nza (ba)ya(se)beenza

Nonfinality NAE *(!)

•MonoHD Avoid Prom

Align WordR

•
1*1 1

* • •

"

*! •

••i

i

* -

nu beenZH

•

*

n&i

becnza

No Adjacent Edges dominates *MonoHD, as shown above. Transitivity of constraint ranking makes the following prediction: given that NAE dominates •MonoHD, and given that •MonoHD dominates Align Word R, then NAE also dominates Align Word R. This ranking is critical, of course, only if Align Word R is formulated so as to demand that all HD's try to align with the R edge of a word. While the tableau in (42) omits any reference to •Overlapping, we should note that this constraint must dominate NAE - otherwise it would be optimal to avoid adjacent domains by creating an overlapping domain structure. We have not yet encountered a situation where there are adjacent High-sponsors and thus we have no basis for determining the interaction of No Adjacent Edges with DomCor (H) and 41

Incorporate (H-sponsor). Adjacent sponsors will arise later, so the matter of the interaction of No Adjacent Edges (and the other OCP-constraint cited in Chapter One, No Adjacent Sponsors) with DomCor (H) and Incorporate (H-sponsor) will eventually have to be determined. The constraint system as it now stands: (43)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), BAL, Syllable Alignment, *(H, nonhead), •Overlapping - undominated •Struc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) No Adjacent Edges -dominated by "Overlapping *MonoHD - dominated by Nonfinality (HD), No Adjacent Edges Avoid Prominence - dominated by Syllable Alignment, *MonoHD Align Word R - dominated by No Adjacent Edges, Nonfinality (HD), Avoid Prominence BAR - dominated by Align Word R Express (H) ~ dominated by Align Word R, *MonoHD and *(H, non-head)

At this juncture let us go back to an issue raised at the end of our discussion of toneless verb stems in the long present. We discussed there the possibility of claiming that the HD consists just of the syllable that expresses a High tone. This sort of analysis would necessitate Express (H) being ranked above Incorporate (H-sponsor), and we argued that this ranking cannot be maintained (given transitivity of ranking). But suppose that there were some analysis whereby one could claim that surface structure domains were in fact limited to the syllables that manifest the High tone (call this the WYSIWYG analysis - i.e. the "what you see is what you get" analysis). Let us consider what such an analysis would have to say about the data from High verb stems -- specifically, the data involving a High-toned subject prefix. WYSIWYG would have to explain why the subject prefix High does not surface on the syllable /ya/ in a form like bdyanyinyith-'lkiisa- Our analysis invokes No Adjacent Edges to account for this phenomenon. In WYSIWYG, the domain in the verb would be around the syllable /the/ Consequently, the syllable /ya/ would not be next to another domain. No Adjacent Edges would not be relevant. So what constraint must the WYSIWYG analysis invoke? The constraint would have to appeal to the fact that the stem-initial syllable /nyi/ sponsors a High tone in the input. Thus the following constraint would have to be involved: (44)

*[H-mora in output] [mora in output whose correspondent in the input is High-toned]

This constraint would replace the No Adjacent Edges constraint that we invoked. Notice that this constraint introduces reference to the input structure into this member of the OCP constraint family. Our analysis, through domain structure, does not necessitate reference to the input. Whether this result of our analysis is decisive in its support depends of course on the ultimate determination of the answer to the question: which constraints have access to the input and how? But WYSIWYG is not yet home free even assuming (44). It must also explain why the High tone does not surface on say the second nyi syllable in WyanyinyitbJelciisa. Our analysis explained this in terms of "Overlapping. But that analysis is not available to WYSIWYG. To effect the right results, WYSIWYG would have to propose something like the following: (45)

given an input a (which is a H-sponsor) located to the Left of b (which is a H-sponsor), an output mora bearing a High tone corresponding to the High tone on a may not have b 42

as its input correspondent nor may it have any mora located to the Right of b as its input correspondent (45) would prevent the High tone of the subject prefix from appearing on the first vowel of the verb stem (since this vowel's underlying correspondent is H-toned) or any vowel to the Right of the initial vowel of the verb stem (since these vowels have input correspondents to the Right of the input correspondent of the initial vowel of the verb stem). (45) depends on a theory where correspondence of features can be invoked independently of segments (contra the McCarthy and Prince (1995) view of Correspondence Theory). But regardless of whether this is theoretically desirable, (45) seems to be making a strikingly wrong prediction. For example, (45) predicts that if an epenthetic vowel (remember, such vowels have no input correspondent) appeared in a verb stem before the antepenult High tone, then the subject prefix H could indeed appear on it since there would be no violation of (45). Why would there be no violation of (45)? Because (45) bars a H only on vowels which have a correspondent in the input! We believe that this is a ludicrous claim and thus (45) cannot be correct. WYSIWYG appears to us to end in a quagmire while offering no advantages to the analysis that we have developed (other than a more transparent relationship between "phonetic representation" and overt sound than our analysis offers). We will thus leave WYSIWYG to others who might find it attractive to see whether it can leap out of the quagmire and offer real insights. The ODT account of Isixhosa sketched above is, in our opinion, a relatively elegant analysis where there are various faithfulness constraints that refer to the input structure and other phonological constraints (such as No Adjacent Edges, *MonoHD, Nonfinality (HD), Avoid Prominence, Align Word R, *(H, non-heads)) which do not. We shall assume this analysis throughout the remainder of this study. We shall also provide considerable positive evidence in support of domains where only the final mora bears High tone. Let us now return to the Isixhosa data. All our examples of High verb stems have been consonant-initiaL Vowel-initial verbs are somewhat intractable in that what would appear to be the most elegant solution to a portion of the data turns out not to extend neatly to the full range of data. The full range of data seems to necessitate a certain degree of stipulation. In the hope that future research may clarify the issues, we will discuss the full range of data from the dialects we have studied, and discuss possible interpretations of these data, while admitting that in the end there is much uncertainty about the proper analysis. Recall that the vowel of the syllable /ya/ is not realized when it stands in front of a vowel-initial verb stem, /ya/ and the initial vowel of the verb stem merge into a single syllable. We begin our discussion with forms where the subject prefix is toneless and the verb stem has four vowels. (46)

njyonw4biisa ndjyome1ee?a ajyakhe'laana rjdjyalilphaala (idjyomlleela (|djyal4thiisa sjyohlukaana njyahlukiniisa

(make happy) (strengthen) (build for one another) (break down) (be strong) (cause to see where pointing) (part, differ) (disunite)

43

If these data were the only data, there would be nothing to be explained: assuming that the HD starts with the High-sponsor, we would expect the domain to extend to the antepenult syllable, resulting in the observed pronunciations: e.g. ni(yonw£)biisa. There is however a second pronunciation available for the above items, one in which there is a High tone on the penultimate syllable: (47)

rjdjyomelWga., ndjyalathtfsa, siyohluk&na, etc.

These variant forms require explanation. This variation seems to be connected to a phenomenon attested in other Nguni languages (see Downing (1995) for discussion of Siswati data) whereby stem-initial vowels are disregarded (not "counted") by the phonology. The data in (47) seem to reflect a HD from which the initial vowel is excluded, resulting in structures like niyoXnwabfQsa (similar to consonant-initial cases like nfyafbonfQsa). If it is correct to interpret the data in (47) as excluding the initial vowel of the verb stem from the HD, then a constraint is required that outranks BAL and Incorporate (H-sponsor) because these two constraints prefer HD's whose left edge is aligned with the sponsor, Le. the initial vowel of the verb stem. What could that constraint be? One possibility is a constraint which says that the L edge of a HD may not be aligned with the L edge of a vowel-initial verb stem. (48)

Noninitiality (HD) The Leftmost mora in a HD may not be initial in a verb stem.

This constraint is very stipulative in nature, since it bans alignment of the HD with an entity (=*vowel-initial verb stem) that does not have any particular status in prosodic or morphological structure. In particular, (48) does not take advantage of the major distinguishing factor between consonant-initial and vowel-initial verb stems: when the stem starts with a consonant, that consonant is the Left edge of a syllable; when the stem starts with a vowel, that vowel must join with a preceding prefixal consonant to form a syllable. An alternative analysis would invoke the notion of a prosodic stem, distinct from the morphological notion stem (parallel to the distinction between prosodic word and word). Given the notion prosodic stem, we could propose a constraint requiring the prosodic stem to be aligned with the Left edge of a syllable. (49)

Align the L edge of a Prosodic Stem with the L edge of a Syllable.

Assuming that (49) dominates a general constraint (SO) aligning the edges of a Prosodic Stem with the edges of a Morphological Stem, we could get the Prosodic Stem to omit the initial vowel of all vowel-initial stems? (50)

Align the edges (L,R) of a Prosodic Stem with the edges (L,R) of a Morphological Stem.

5

(49) potentially might be satisfied by having the vowel-initial verb stem "annex" the preceding prefix consonant to fonn a Prosodic Stem rather than by omitting the Initial vowel. The reason that there is "contraction" rather than "expansion" of the Morphological Stem conceivably could be due to a requirement that all elements in a Prosodic Stem must also be in a Morphological Stem. We will, however, leave this matter for future research. 44

To complete this particular story, we would require a means of getting the prosodic stem to affect the construction of HD's. The constraint may be as simple as (51): (51)

Align the Left edge of a HD with the Left edge of a (Verbal) Prosodic Stem.

(HD's in nouns may be located internally to prosodic stems, whereas this does not happen in the case of verbs in the long form of the present tense. Verb tenses dealt with later introduce additional complexity.) Another possibility has to do with the predictable location of the sponsor in High verb stems: the sponsor is always the first mora. But perhaps it is not the Morphological Stem that is relevant but rather the Prosodic Stem. In other words, perhaps the Prosodic Stem can play a role in how the High tone gets located in the input to the phonology. If so, then there is no need to stipulate that the HD aligns with the Prosodic Stem as in (48). Basic Alignment forces a HD to align with the sponsor, and it the role of the Prosodic Stem is to determine what mora sponsors High tone. In the following discussion, we will assume an analysis where the Prosodic Stem functions to locate the sponsor. However, nothing about the subsequent discussion ultimately rests on the correctness of this assumption. Given this assumption, the data in (47) may be analyzed as instances where (49) yields a Prosodic Stem which excludes the initial vowel, with the consequence that the High-sponsor is the second vowel of the Morphological Stem and not the first. Recall, however, that (47) represents just one variant; the pronunciations in (46) are also possible. How are we to understand this variation? The answer that immediately suggests itself is that while (49) may dominate (50), in which case the initial vowel of the Morphological Stem is outside the Prosodic Stem, it is (optionally) possible for (50) to dominate (49), in which case the initial vowel of the Morphological Stem is included in the Prosodk Stem. The idea that variability in the optimality of output candidates is nothing more than variability in constraint ranking is an attractive one. However, evidence from forms with High subject prefixes will cast serious doubt on the viability of taking the data in (46) as representing a case where the first vowel of the morphological stem is the sponsor. The data will suggest that in both (46) and (47), the constraint (49) is obeyed: the Prosodic Stem always is aligned with a syllable and the initial vowel is always excluded from the Prosodic Stem If this is the case, then some other account of the variation between (46) and (47) is required. From a purely descriptive point of view, the variation between (46) and (47) could be viewed as a variation between whether *MonoHD is respected (as in (47)) or not (as in (46)). This description of the data is available only on the assumption that in both cases the initial vowel of the verb stem is not the High-sponsor (a point of view that we indicated above will be supported by later data). But why should there be variation between whether *MonoHD is respected or not? There is, of course, another case where *MonoHD is not respected. Recall the variation in K's dialect between trisyllabic stems like /bfintlsa/ and stems like /billiisa/. This variation has its origins in a vowel-length contrast that originally existed in Nguni (the stem in /bo.niisa/ had a short first vowel, while the stem in /billiisa/ had a long first vowel). It is not clear that there is any connection between these examples from K and the variation in (46) and (47). Nevertheless, the only descriptive account of (46) and (47) that we can suggest is that •MonoHD is optionally upheld in the case of vowel-initial High verb stems. (We have seen that vowel-initial toneless verb stems behave normally with respect to *MonoHD.) When a stem is longer than in (46) — e.g. n.jyonwablsaana the Prosodic Stem (which excludes the initial vowel of the Morphological Stem) will be at least four syllables and will

45

behave Just like four syllable or longer consonant-initial High verb stems and have a HD that extends to the antepenult syllable. They pose no problem. Let us look now at trisyllabic vowel-initial High verb stems with a toneless subject prefix: (52)

njyoyifka ndjyahltfula ndjyalfia'tha ndjyoyltsa rjdjyaphtMla ndjyonwda'ba

(fear) (separate) (point at) (defeat) (break) (be happy)

If we adopt an analysis where (49) is always obeyed (i.e. the Prosodic Stem is always aligned with a syllable and does not include the initial vowel), then the examples in (52) have a bisyllabk Prosodic Stem. The HD will necessarily consist just of the sponsor (the second vowel of the Morphological Stem) due to the high ranking of Nonfinality (HD): Qdjya(hl]}tf)la. If we adopt an analysis where (49) is variably ordered with (SO), either ranking of those constraints will lead to the same pronunciation: n,djya(hlj}il)la if (49) dominates (50), n,dj(ya.hl\lii)la if (50) dominates (49). In the former case, as noted above, Nonfinality (HD) prevents the domain from extending to the final vowel; in the latter case, *MonoHD demands that the domain extend to the penult, but Nonfinality (HD) prevents it from extending further. The data in (52) thus do not help us in deciding between a variable ranking of (49) and (50) versus an absolute ranking of (49) over (50). Bisytlabic vowel-initial stems are particularly interesting. Once again we find that there are two pronunciations possible, but these two pronunciations do not seem to be in free variation: our consultants prefer one pronunciation for certain lexical items, the other pronunciation for other lexical items, and either pronunciation for yet other lexical items. Examination of the published Isixhosa literature reveals similar variation in other dialects. One pronunciation type is shown in (53). (S3)

njyaakhfi ndjyeemfi

(build) (stand) (fear) (spoil)

ndiyeeyfl

ndiyooni

The second pronunciation type is sho (54)

rjdjyodna sjydVSma ndjy&ba rjdjy«si ndjyfidkha

(spoil) (dry) (steal) (know) (build)

In an analysis where (49) is variably ranked with respect to (50), the above data are very straightforwardly accounted for. The lexical items in (53) would be specified as having (49) dominate (50). As a consequence, the Prosodic Stem would consist just of the last syllable of the 46

Morphological Stem. The final vowel would therefore be the sponsor of a High tone. The result would be a HD that includes just the last vowel of the word (violating Nonfinality (HD) in order to be faithful to the underlying High). The lexical items in (54), on the other hand, would be specified as requiring the ranking of (SO) above (49). Consequently, the initial vowel of the verb stem would be Initial in the Prosodic Stem and would be the High-sponsor. Nonfinality (HD) prevents the domain from extending through the final vowel. If we assume an invariable ranking of (49) above (50), then the data in (S3) are entirely expected. However, to account for the data in (54), we would need to invoke some constraint C that (for the relevant lexical items) outranks (49), a constraint that would have the consequence that (49) would be violated in order to better serve it. Recall that (49) and (50) are constraints on the formation of a Prosodic Stem, and that the Prosodic Stem plays a role in determining the location of the High-sponsor. It would appear that C could be a member of the Nonfinality family of constraints, one that prefers a sponsor not to be word-final. If Nonfinality (Sponsor) is dominated by (49) for the items in (53), then the Prosodic Stem will align with a syllable and the sponsor will be word-final. If, however, Nonfinality (Sponsor) dominates (49) in the case of the lexical items in (54), then it will be better to not have a word-final sponsor even if this means that the Prosodic Stem will not be aligned with a syllable. Given this explanation for the data in (53) and (54), these data would not help to determine whether (49) and (50) are variably ranked or whether (49) is invariably ranked above (50): the correct results can be derived under either analysis. As indicated earlier, forms where a High-toned subject prefix is used in conjunction with a vowel-initial High verb stem provide significant evidence on the ultimate analysis of these stems. Let us turn our attention now to these forms. We begin with cases where the Morphological Stem has four vowels. There are two pronunciations available. (55)

Ifyonwl&biisa b£yom!61eeza. biyakh!6Iaana brfyalluphaala b4yoml6leela bdyalla'thiisa bdyohllif kaana lfyahlukldniisa

(make happy) (strengthen) (build for one another) (breakdown) (be strong) (cause to see where pointing) (part, differ) (disunite)

as well as the alternative forms: ba'yomel!6e'za, tayalathliisa, bdyohluklia'na, etc If we accept the analysis that (49) is invariably ranked above (50), then the surface tone pattern simply shows the effects of No Adjacent Edges (which will keep the HD corresponding to the subject prefix High from extending onto the initial vowel of the Morphological Stem) combined with variation as to whether the stem HD is required to obey *MonoHD or not. If, on the other hand, we appeal to variable ranking of (49) and (50), we encounter a problem — though the problem only emerges clearly when additional principles of Isixhosa tonology are understood. We shall see later that when two adjacent HD's might be expected, one of two things may occur: (a) the adjacent domains may both appear in the output, but all of the syllables in the second domain will be pronounced High on the surface (and not just the last syllable of the domain), setting aside disrupting effects caused by depressor consonants; or (b) all 47

of the syllables that would be in the two domains will appear inside a single domain (in which case only the final syllable will realize a High tone on the surface). Now, notice that if (SO) dominates (49), then we would at first glance expect a domain structure where there are adjacent domains: (bg)(ysnwa)bilsa. This structure is, however, incompatible with the observed pronunciation — namely, a High on the heads of the two HD's. As stated in the above paragraph, such structures in the language actually produce *bdyt)nw
lfyoyllfka MyahliMla bdyalladfha WyoyUfsa biyaphlittla ba"yonw!Wba

(fear) (separate) (point at) (defeat) (break) (be happy)

These data are consistent with the interpretation that the initial vowel is simply excluded from the Prosodic Stem and thus does not sponsor a High tone. No further discussion is required. When blsyllabk vowel initial stems (which exhibit two possible tonal shapes in the output) are preceded by a High subject prefix, we get the following results: (57)

[58)

ltyaakhla ba'yeemia' WyeeylfJ biyoonla

(build) (stand) (fear) (spoil)

bay<5<5na, zjy6(5na sjy&Sma, zjyodma bay£6ba, zjy&ba bayMzj, ziytfzj bayfiakha, zjyaakha

(spoil) (dry) (steal) (know) (build)

In (57), where the word-final syllable is the H-sponsor, No Adjacent Edges will explains why the High Domain initiated by the subject prefix cannot extend to the initial vowel of the 48

Morphological Stem: (bg)yee(mg). The data in (38), however, require more discussion. Here the H-sponsor is the first mora of the Morphological Stent We expect the following domain structure to be optimal: (baJ(yop)na. Such a domain structure would predict the incorrect pronunciation "btfyddna (both heads would be pronounced with a High tone). In order to have a constraint system which yields the correct pronunciation, we must have it evaluate (bft)(yoo)na as less optimal than (bgyoo)na (the domain structure that would yield a surface High tone only on the penult syllable). So there must be a constraint that (bg)(yop)na violates and which, by outranking DomCor, can force (bgyoo)na to be optimal (despite its having only a single HD corresponding to the two H-sponsors). What is the constraint in question? The constraint clearly is some form of the OCP. (ba)(yoo)na) violates both of the OCP constraints discussed in Chapter One: No Adjacent Edges and No Adjacent Sponsors. The former constraint we have already discussed and motivated as playing a critical role in Isixhosa (in that it constrains the expansion of a HD). The latter constraint, which bars adjacent domain edges where sponsors are also adjacent, has not yet been determined to be critical to the Isixhosa constraint system. The examples in (58) represent the first instance where we have encountered adjacent sponsors and thus this is the first case where we can determine whether the OCP has effects beyond restricting the expansion of HD's - specifically, whether the OCP serves to bar the satisfaction of DomCor (H). The data in (58) motivate ranking one (or both) of the OCP constraints high enough in Isixhosa to force an optimal output candidate that is not entirely faithful (specifically, where DomCor (H) is violated). Given that (bgygp)na is the optimal output candidate, then the data in (58) represent the case where an expected sequence of adjacent HD's are in effect "fused" into a single domain (see Chapter One for discussion). Being fused into a single domain, there will be, in Isixhosa, just one High tone — since only the head of a domain is realized on a High tone. In Chapter One, we sketched the development of a treatment of the OCP in general and "fusion" in particular that involved the interaction of the constraints in (59): (59)

DomCor (H), Incorporate (H-sponsor), Uniqueness

with the family of OCP constraints - specifically, No Adjacent Edges and No Adjacent Sponsors. We review now how the constraint set can be structured so as to yield the outputs in (58). Consider the following candidate outputs for the input /ba-ya-o_na/. We have only included candidates which (i) satisfy the constraint that leads to the vowel of /ya/ not being parsed and, and (ii) do not violate Nonfinality (HD). These omissions are simply in the interest of simplifying the discussion. (60) (a) ba. yo.ona (b) ba (ygo)na (c) (ba) yopna (d) (ba )(yo.o)na (e) (ba yoo)na (e) represents the optimal candidate; the constraint system must rule out all the other candidates. If we assume that one of the OCP constraints, either No Adjacent Edges or No Adjacent Sponsors, outranks DomCor (H), then (d) can be eliminated as nonoptimal: while it perfectly parses the underlying High tones into two domains, it violates the more highly ranked OCP constraints). Alt the remaining candidates:

49

(61)

(a) (b) (c) (e)

bayfiona ba(yao)na (bfl) ypona (ba. yo.o)na

satisfy the OCP constraints No Adjacent Edges and No Adjacent Sponsors. However, (a) violates DomCor (H) twice, whereas the others violate DomCor (H) just once. Thus (a) will be rejected as long as there is no other constraint that is more highly ranked than DomCor (H) on which (a) does better than the other candidates. (Later in this study we will see that three successive sponsors must be fused into a single HD; for this to happen there must be a constraint more highly ranked than DomCor (H) - namely, Incorporate (H-sponsor), but this constraint is one that (a) also violates twice. Thus (a) stands no chance of being optimal.) The remaining three candidates, (62) (b) ba (yao)na (c) (bfl) ypona (e) (ba yfio)na all violate DomCor (H) once. The faithfulness constraint Incorporate (H-sponsor) serves to eliminate all but the optimal candidate (e). Both (b) and (c) fail to incorporate one sponsor into a HD, whereas (e) incorporates both sponsors. In order for Incorporate (H-sponsor) to have the effect of ruling out (b) and (c), there must not be another constraint more highly ranked than Incorporate (H-sponsor) that would prefer (b) and (c) to (e). Uniqueness (which allows only one sponsor to a domain) would indeed prefer (b) and (c) to (e). Thus, in the cased of Isixhosa, where we want (e) to be optimal. Incorporate (H-sponsor) must dominate Uniqueness. We thus have the following constraint hierarchy: (63)

No Adjacent Edges (and/or No Adjacent Sponsors), Incorporate (H-sponsor) DomCor (H) — dominated by No Adjacent Edges and/or No Adjacent Sponsors Uniqueness - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor)

The data so far discussed do not determine a ranking of DomCor (H) and Incorporate (Hsponsor). As mentioned above, data involving three successive sponsors will show that Incorporate (H-sponsor) dominates DomCor (H). Let us summarize now the entire (phonological) constraint system we have developed to this point. (We do not include the constraints which determine the Prosodic Stem and which locate the sponsor in the stem.) (64)

Incorporate (H-sponsor), Syllable Alignment, *(H, nonhead), '"Overlapping, BAL — undomlnated No Adjacent Edges (and/or No Adjacent Sponsors) - dominated by 'Overlapping DomCor (H) - dominated either by No Adjacent Edges or No Adjacent Sponsors or both [later we will see that Incorporate (H-sponsor) also dominates DomCor (H)] Uniqueness - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) *Struc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) •MonoHD - dominated by Nonfinality (HD), No Adjacent Edges Avoid Prominence — dominated by Syllable Alignment, *MonoHD Align Word R — dominated by No Adjacent Edges, Nonfinality (HD), Avoid 50

Prominence BAR -- dominated by Align Word R Express (H) - dominated by *MonoHD, Align Word R and *(H, non-head) This account of the baytfdna type of data in (58) will be utilized extensively in the next chapter for much more robust data. Two concluding comments about the analysis: (i) Notice that we have assumed that the correct domain structure is (bfiyop)na and not ba.(ygp)na. Evidence for this assumption will emerge later in this chapter, (ii) This analysis ofbayddna illustrates why we could not consider bdyonwabJilsa to have an input structure /bflyflnwabisa/, since that would necessarily result in the domain structure (bayonwabll)sa and the incorrect pronunciation •bayonwibiisa. 23. On the tonology of depressor consonants. In this section we turn our attention to a phenomenon found in both the dialects of Isixhosa that form the basis of this study, but which is absent in (many) other varieties. This phenomenon has to do with what is, in autosegmental terms, the spread of a High tone from a depressed syllable onto the following mora, provided that the following mora is not also depressed, and the delinking of this High tone from its original position. Call this phenomenon Depressor-Induced High Tone Shift [=DIHTS]. DIHTS is also found, for example, in Isizulu, Siswati, and Phuthi. This phenomenon is of considerable interest when viewed from an OTD perspective and represents in our view a significant challenge to the OT program in general. Attempting to incorporate the DIHTS phenomenon into the constraint system we have developed turns out to be no simple task. We will at first try to account for the phenomenon without expanding our conceptual structure at alL This will involve proposing plausible constraints that might appear to be at work in DIHTS. But in the end we will see that each move one might make runs into fundamental difficulties. In the end we suggest an analysis involving a degree of "serialism" in the system of evaluation and raise the issue of whether in the end DIHTS suggests a deeper problem in the OT architecture. Since the data from the long present tense do not constitute the full range of DIHTS data that needs to be accounted for, we cannot cover all aspects of the phonology of depression in this chapter, but rather must return to these matters in the next chapter as welL One of the most visible cases where we observe DIHTS is when we would expect a High tone to "shift" from the prefix onto the antepenult syllable of a toneless verb stem, but the antepenult syllable has a depressor consonant in onset position. We see that in these cases, the antepenult syllable is toneless, while the lengthened penult syllable has a Falling tone. (65)

ndiyasomtjuluula, bayasombulriula (idiyamangaleela, bayamangale'ela fldiyadaniisa, bayadaniisa Tldiyayaleela, bayayale'ela n.djyahlangabeeza, bayahlangabeeza. ndiyaphagamiisa, bayaphajamiisa (idiyahlanganiisa, bayahlanganiisa Odiyalondfllooja, bayalondo.Ido?;a ndiyayoko?filiisa, bayayoko;e.Uisa

(solve a problem) (take to court) (dance) (lock in) (meet halfway) (disturb) (put together) (keep safely) (decorate with many colors)

51

If, however, the penulimate syllable has a depressed onset of its own, the "shift" cannot occur. (66)

ndjyabtmdfifila, bayabbddCfila ndiyaguzuula, bayagfouula OdiyayJOOCflela, bayay.tngc,(»la t)dtyabh«naiisa, bayabbtinflu'sa ndiyadudeelwa, bayadfldeslwa

(talk nonsense) (scrape) (stop) (discuss an issue beforehand) (pass the age for marrying) (limp) (blow up a baloon)

5diyajing5c«la, bayajjn.gxe.eja Hdiyagqabhuuka, bayagqjfobuuka

High verb stems also exhibit the DIHTS phenomenon. When the stem is quadrisyllable or longer, and the antepenult syllable is depressed, the lexical H tone surfaces as a Fall on the penult. (67)

sjyapharobanlisa, Wyapharntjanltisa ndiyaphambukeela, bayaphambukleela s.iyakhandaniisa, liyakharidanlfisa ndiyaphembcle'da, Myaphernbe.lle'ela ndiyadMldulduka, Myadand»lWuka ndiyafurjdekftela, bayafundekllela ndiyafufhjmdala, bayafudumla'ala ndiyajiiith6eka, btfyajjjjthleeka

(turn upside down) (turn aside to) (weld) (influence) (call aloud) (make noise) (become warm) (racked by pain)

The High-toned verb stems show that the shift does not occur when a High tone appears on a depressed penult syllable. Bisyllabk and trisyllabic High verb stems illustrate this point: (68)

s\y*\i$$mb* ndjyang&na

niyaWnHJla ndjyasundiWza sjyaseng^la ndiyahlungtfsa

(go) (enter) (thresh wheat) (push) (milk for) (cause pain)

MyahJMratM Myangl&na "yabb'VSaia Myasundl\J(fca llyasenglftla b2yahlung!.tfsa

In other words, the H on a depressed syllable may not shift onto a word-final syllable. There is also, of course, no shift off a word-final depressed syllable. This is shown by the example:

(69)

odiyaadltf

(eat)

In other words, in the absence of any following syllable, one does not avoid a High depressed syllable by retracting the High tone. The data in (65)-(69) illustrate the most fundamental facts about DIHTS. We must now attempt to see how we might go about incorporating these data into our analysis. A possible constraint that comes immediately to mind is one that specifies an incompatibility (clash) between High tone and depressed syllables. A possible formulation of this constraint is (70). 52

(70)

"(Depressed Syllable, H) H may not be realized on a depressed syllable.

Now, one way of satisfying (70) would be to simply fail to realize a High tone that would be expected to occur on a depressed syllable. But this is wrong. The High tone does not simply fail to surface; rather, a High tone appears on tho following syllable and not on the depressed syllable Itself. The fact that the H tone does not simply delete will follow from ranking DomCor (H) and Express (H) above (70). These rankings mean that that if there is a H in the input, there must be a domain in the output and Express (H) must be satisfied (except to the extent dictated by *(H, non-heads)), even if satisfaction of these constraints might lead to a violation of (70). There are two ways in which DomCor (H), Express (H) and (70) can be all be satisfied in the case of data like those in (65) and (67). One way is to "contract" the domain so that it does not extend as far as the depressed syllable that would be a violation of (70). The other way is to "expand" the domain past the depressed syllable in question. In Isixhosa, (70) is avoided by expansion rather than contraction (shift to the right rather to the left). We have examples like bayadanlisa and not *bayd(|aniisa. It would seem desirable to have Align Word R account for why there is expansion rather than contraction of the domain. Let us see whether in fact we can utilize Align Word R to achieve a preference for expansion of the domain over contraction. Given an input /bayadanisa/, we have four candidates to consider: bayadantisa, *bayad((niisa *baya<janiisa, and "bayafonltsa. We will assume that the optimal output, bayatfantisa, does not violate Avoid Prominence. If so, then Avoid Prominence will serve to eliminate *baya(Janilsa from consideration. If (70) is ranked above Syllable Alignment, then it will prefer bayajgnfisa to *bayad^niisa However, recall that Syllable Alignment must dominate Avoid Prominence (since bayabonllsa is optimal and not *baybontisa) and Avoid Prominence dominates Align Word R. But this is a disastrous set of rankings in the case under discussion, since now Syllable Alignment will prefer *baya'd.a.niisa over the optimal bayatfaniisa. Align Word R is too lowly ranked to get a chance to choose bayadanlisa over *bayi(Ja,niisa (70) cannot be ranked in such a way as to be consistent with all the data. Let us step back from the data for a moment and highlight one of the fundamental problems that DIHTS poses: a penult syllable is falling-toned when the domain has been extended in order to avoid a violation of (70), but it is not falling-toned when the domain has been extended rightwards to include the penult syllable in order to avoid a violation of *MonoHD. In OT, one does not expect the shape of the penult syllable to be in any way linked to which constraint is motivating the extension of the domain! Thus one must conclude, under the standard OT view of matters, that the extension rightward in the DIHTS phenomenon cannot simply be attributed to Align Word R interacting with (70). Let us now explore backing away from the idea that Align Word R is the driving force behind the rightward extension of the domain to avoid a depressed High-toned syllable. The problem becomes one of finding a universal constraint that could be proposed to do the necessary work. Let us begin with a phonetic note: when a High tone remains (for any reason) on a depressed syllable, the pitch is phonetically rising rather than level. Suppose that we build an analysis around this phonetic fact. Specifically, let us distinguish between "level" High and "rising" High and replace (70) with a constraint barring rising High from appearing on a monomoraic vowel. Call this constraint *MonomoraicRise. Consider bayad.a.ntisa: a constraint like *MonomoraicRise would obviously disfavor *bayaddniisa> b<" in no way does it prefer

53

bayatfanlisa over 'bayrfdaniisa. The problem is simply this: disfavoring a certain configuration does not tell us how to avoid it. In OT, the particular means of avoiding a situation must follow from the disfavoring of all other means due to their violating particular constraints. But if not Align Word R, what is the constraint that *bayd<|a,niisa violates? A ready answer is not available given the constraint given as (70). In an attempt to explicate the direction of shift (and to free shift from any connection with Align Word R), one might suggest the following view of things. What triggers DIHTS is not a simple ban on combining High tone and depression. Rather, it is (70)' that is at work. (70)' When a High-toned syllable is depressed, the initiation of the High tone must be delayed. There is no way of satisfying (70)' other than by delaying the beginning of the High tone. Now let's look at the question of the extent of the delay. Since (70)' can be satisfied by simply delaying the onset of the High tone until some later point in the syllable, one would not expect (70)' to lead to an expansion of a HD. But we must obtain expansion in the dialects under discussion. This expansion seems to be motivated by a ban against monomoraic Rising tones. This ban makes it more optimal to delay the initiation of die High tone until the next syllable. This account makes sense out of the rightward shift of the High tone, but it has fairly obvious problems. The first problem with this analysis, from an OT perspective, is (70)' itself. As formulated, it is not a constraint: it is an instruction about initiating a phonetic property, a procedure. This instruction-like formulation of (70)' is motivated by the desire for there to be only one possible means of satisfying it. Thus if (70)' is to be permitted in OT, then the nature of Con (the universal "constraint" system) would be fundamentally altered - it would not consist simply of negative and positive constraints referring to configurations. The second problem is that we still must explicate why, when the following syllable is depressed, the delay of the initiation of the H may not extend into that syllable (cf. (66)). We thus need to ban a situation where delaying the H crosses a depressed consonant; this ban, however, by its reference to "delaying" the High, continues to have a procedural character. But even if we permit, in essence, a procedure like (70)' and a restriction on this procedure, we are still unable to properly integrate the constraint ^Monomoraic Rise with the other constraints.Why? For the same reason that (70) failed. The expansion of the HD triggered by (70)' and "'Monomoraic Rise yields a Falling tone in the output This optimal output violates Syllable Alignment. It follows, then, that (70)' and *Monomoraic Rise must dominate Syllable Alignment. Syllable Alignment must dominate Avoid Prominence and Align Word R. But these rankings will again choose incorrect outputs. Given an input /ba-ya-danisa/, the optimal candidate will be *(baja)daniisa (which violates only the lowly ranked Align Word R) rather than (bgyadanl)lsa (which violates Syllable Alignment) or *(b§yada)nilsa (which violates *Monomoraic Rise) or *(bgyadanli)sa (which violates Avoid Prominence). The preceding analysis fails because it is essentially procedural in nature and it is looking for an input representation where there is a High tone on a particular syllable so that it can demand that the High tone be delayed. But given the OT parallel evaluation of inputs and outputs, there is no such representation available. The analysis demands serial evaluation. We have been unable to find an analysis of the DIHTS phenomenon that maintains the concept of parallel evaluation fully intact. The analysis we propose is one that seeks to confine Con to constraints rather than procedures, but does so by introducing a degree of serialism. Specifically, we take bayad^niisato be the output of one constraint. Call this constraint system S4

"A". We propose that this output is input to a second constraint system, "B" — where B may have constraint rankings different from A. We then use Align Word R to select bayadgnfisa M mora optimal than *baya()((niisa in the output of the B system (a move that was not possible with a single constraint system). Before developing the details of this scenario, let us note the implications of such a move. If the A and B constraint sets could be identified with some independently defined parameter (e.g. lexical vs. post-lexical systems, or phonology vs. phonetic implementation), then the move might be taken as essentially preserving the notion that OT requires parallel and not serial evaluatioa If A and B cannot be so distinguished, then the notion of parallel evaluation would be seriously undermined However, it has been noted before that the rejection of parallel evaluation does not necessarily entail a total abandonment of the OT theoretical architecture (cf. Prince and Smolensky 1993, McCarthy and Prince 1993). We know of no viable analysis of DIHTS that does not involve some element of serial evaluation; all of the lines of attack that we have pursued appear to us to be notational variations of serial evaluation. We therefore shall proceed to develop the analysis sketched above where a second constraint set is involved in the evaluation, regardless of whether there is any independently-motivated basis for the distinction (we do not see that there is much likelihood that the outputs of the A system correspond to any independently motivated linguistic notion). We take as our initial assumption that A and B consist of the same set of universal constraints - in other words, the difference between the different constraint systems is in the nature of their inputs and (possibly) the ranking of the constraints. We assume that DIHTS is motivated by (70) - Le. a constraint that bars depressed High syllables, but it would be equally possible to develop an analysis based on the idea that a High tone on such syllables is rising and that rising tones are barred on monomoraic syllables. We adopt the formulation in (70) just for convenience. In the A system, (70) is very lowly ranked and has no effect on the evaluation. Specifically, Syllable Alignment and Avoid Prominence outrank (70); one cannot extend a HD to the Right of a depressed antepenult syllable because any output candidate where this has occurred is rendered nonoptimal by a more highly ranked constraint (like Syllable Alignment or Avoid Prominence or Nonfinality (HD)). Let us now see how the B system can be constructed to achieve the correct output First of all, it should be pointed out that the output of the A system has been assigned a domain structure and features have been expressed. All of this information is in the input to the B system. Given this, we must address the issue of how, in the B system, faithfulness is to be viewed. We have adopted the view that the inputs to the A system do not have domain structure (Le. featural domains, syllables, feet are generally not part of the input), thus we did not need to formulate any faithfulness constraints relevant to featural domains. Now we must introduce a Domain-Faithfulness constraint. We propose the constraints in (71). (71)

Domain-Faithfulness (a) If an input element x is in a HD y, then the output correspondent of x is in the output correspondent of y. (b) If an input element x is not in a HD, then the output correspondent of x is not in a HD.

If (71) is undominated, then the output of the B system will have exactly the same HD structure as the input (i.e. the output of the A system). This is indeed the case in Isixhosa, with one exception - namely, the domain structure must be altered to accommodate the DIHTS phenomenon. 55

How are we to achieve the necessary adjustment? We can view the DIHTS phenomenon as resulting from the fact that in the B system, (71a) is undominated, (70) outranks the (71b) part of Domain-Faithfulness so that (71b) may be violated in order to avoid a violation of (70). (70) must also outrank Syllable Alignment in the B constraint system, otherwise DIHTS would not yield a falling-toned penuh but a level-toned penult. (70) must be dominated by Nonfinality (HD) since no shift occurs onto a final syllable. In this analysis, then, the output of the B system will have exactly the same domain structure as the input, except that a depressed High tone will be avoided by extending the domain onto the following mora (the minimal violation of (71b)). Notice that while the input (bgyad6)nlisa has a H tone on the antepenult, the output cannot be faithful to this High tone specification. Why? Domain-Faithfulness (71a) is undominated and requires that regardless of where High tones are specified in the input, moras in a HD in the input remain in the same HD in the output. When (70) demands a violation of (71b) and causes a new mora to be added to the HD, the result Is that the mora bearing H-tone in the input comes to be in a nonhead position in the domain. *(H, nonhead) will require that this mora not have a High tone. Let us look now more closely at the question of why (bflyadani)lsa is preferred to *(bgra)danilsa. In terms of Domain-Faithfulness, the former adds a mora to the input domain while the latter subtracts a mora from the input domain. If (71a) outranks (71b), then it will be better to extend the domain than to contract it and thus (bayad,8jn$isa will be preferred. In other words, this analysis accounts for the direction of the movement of the High tone in terms of the relative ranking of (71a) and (71b). The direction of the movement of the High tone is arbitrary to the extent to which the ranking of these constraints is arbitrary. We suspect that this ranking is not arbitrary but functionally motivated, but do not here attempt to provide support for this hunch. We can summarize the rankings of the B system that have so far been established: (72)

(7 la) - undominated Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by (Jla) [a final HD in the input to B will remain in the output, showing that (71a) is undominated] *(H,Depressed Syllable) -(70) - dominated by Nonfinality (HD) Syllable Alignment -• dominated by (70) (71b) - dominated by (71a), (70)

One very significant point still requires analysis: we must block DIHTS when the syllable following is depressed. Consider the input to the B system: (bayagu)zuula. The optimal output is one where the output of B is identical to the input. We do not want to extend the domain to include the following depressor. It is important to note that additional data will show that this is true no matter whether the following depressor is in a monomoraic syllable or a bimoraic syllable and no matter whether the depressor is in the penult or further forward in the word The domain never extends past a following depressor. Getting at this "blocking" effect of the depressor is of some theoretical interest. We propose that the blocking effect of the depressor consonant is to be gotten at by seeing (70) as just one of a family of constraints. (70) bars realizing High tone on a depressed syllable. (73) below bans a depressed syllable from being inside a HD. (73)

(...Depressed Syllable...)HD

56

If (73) dominates (70) in the B system, it will not be possible for the input (bayagti)zuula to avoid a violation of (70) by extending the domain since that would violate the more highly ranked (73). Of course, (71a) must dominate (73), since a depressed syllable that is in a HD in the input to B must remain in that HD. Note that (73), like (70), must be lowly ranked in the A constraint system since depressed syllables are freely included in HD's if required by Incorporate (H-sponsor), *MonoHD, and Align Word R. In the ODT view, many constraints may be focused either on the expression of a feature or the domain structure for that feature. (70) and (73) represent a very typical situation from that point of view. We will suggest later that Nonfinality similarly represents a constraint family that may focus on domains or expression. In our discussion of the basic DIHTS facts above, we did not discuss one point that deserves mention. Consider the High verb stems in (74): (74)

nd.iyajime'eMa ndjyagawtftfla ndiyajabtitila

biSyazimle'eia btfyagawliiiila ba"yajab!iitila

(hide) (chop) (be happy)

The initial syllable of the verb stem in these examples (a) has a depressed onset, (b) is a Hsponsor, and (c) is the antepenult syllable in the word. Notice that its H does not shift onto the penult to form a Falling tone. Rather it shifts to the penult as a level High tone. The reason for this should be clear. The HD initiated by the first syllable of these verb stems extends to the penult syllable as a result of the ranking of *MonoHD over Avoid Prominence in the A system. The depressed penult syllable is thus not final in the HD in the output of the A constraint system. The B constraint system will have no affect on such an input Recall that in some varieties of Isixhosa (including K's variety), there are verb stems that are specified as exceptions to *MonoHD. One verb of this type has a depressed onset, and in this case K will then shift the H: rjdiyajftllisa This example shows that when a depressed syllable for any reason is HD-final in the output of the A constraint system, then the B constraint system will extend the domain one mora to the right provided (73) is not violated. We have so far in this section presented the basic facts about DIHTS in the long present tense and offered an analysis of these facts that depends (a) on a serial rather than a parallel system of evaluation and (b) on the invocation of the constraints (70), (71), and (73) as the primary agents in the B constraint system of the changes that we refer to as DIHTS. We list the required constraint rankings in (75): (75)

(71 a) - undominated Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by (71a) (73)-dominated by (73) *(H, Depressed Syllable) =(70) -- dominated by Nonfinality (HD), (73) Syllable Alignment - dominated by (70) *(71b) -- dominated by (71a), (70)

In the remainder of this section we examine the facts about DIHTS associated with depressed High-toned subject prefixes in the long present. When the verb stem is toneless, the fact that the subject prefix has a depressed onset is phonologically irrelevant, since the depressed syllable will normally not be the head of the HD that it initiates. Some representative examples of monosyllabic verb stems:

57

(76)

zjyaalwa siy<6mba

(fight) (dig)

zjyitfwa zjy&tsho

(fall) (declare so)

In the A system, *MonoHD requires that the syllable /ya/ be included in the same HD with the subject prefix. Because of this, there is no depressed head of a HD in the output of the A constraint system and thus no further "shift" of a H in the output of the B constraint system. Bisyllabk and trisyllabic stems are shown in (77): (77)

zjyarileeka aiyamla Kiyibaala Jiiytfboooga SiyaMrjfliisa zjyacAciisa zjyadaniisa

(laugh) (close) (count) (thank) (repair) (explain) (dance)

zjyaxeela

ayaguula ayddliisa zjytfcuula zjyax61eela iiyagiJzuula Siyahl<5meela

(say) (be sick) (feed) (sing) (forgive) (scrape) (add)

In each of these examples, the subject prefix initiates a HD that must (in the output of A system) extend beyond the subject prefix; consequently, the depressed subject prefix is not the head of a HD. Longer verb stems will of course reflect exactly the same point. Let us consider High verb stems next. In this case, the subject prefix should be at the end of a HD due to the effects of No Adjacent Edges. Thus we would predict that DIHTS would induce a shift to the /ya/syllable. This happens in both of the varieties of Isixhosa under consideration here. Monosyllabic stems are shown in (78): (78)

ziyaaty!* siyaakhla" zjyaaphJa'

cf. cf. cf.

bdyaaty'.a' brfyaakhla' bdyaaphEA

(eat) (draw water) (give)

This case of DIHTS is exactly parallel to ones that we have already observed; the High "shifts" onto a long penult syllable, where it forms a Falling tone. There is a downstep between the two High tones -- but so far we have in fact found downstep between every pair of High tones when they are separated by one or more toneless moras. We turn to downstepping in detail below. Consider bisyllabic H stems next This will be OUT first example where DIHTS causes the "shift" of a High onto a short voweL In this case, the short /ya/ syllable is located infrontof a High syllable. It is at this point that we encounter a significant difference between K and M. In K's speech, the syllable /ya/ is realized on a pitch somewhat above the first stem syllable. The lowering of the stem syllable is not dramatic, but very consistent in the data. (79) illustrates K's speech: (79)

siyable'e'ka zjyrfbl&tha zjydph!e*ern.tm zjyfthle'enoa. zjydbidona zjyasliiula

(place) (beat) (make fire) (buy) (see) (wipe) 58

In M's speech, on the other hand, this downstep does not occur (80)

jUy6b<$<5na %jydb££tha Siyaluiima

xiy«th«oga Siyasiiilla iiyashiiya

(see) (beat) (bite) (buy) (wipe) (leave behind)

Setting aside the matter of the downstep, our analysis will account for these data as follows. The output of the A constraint system will be (j()ya(b«)tha etc. (70) will force the extension of the initial domain so that /ya/ is included. To achieve this, it will be necessary that (70) outrank No Adjacent Edges in the B constraint system. We will discuss the downstep phenomenon in K below. (81) shows the constraint rankings we have established for the B system. (81)

(71a) -- undominaled Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by (71a) (73) - dominated by (71a) *(H, Depressed Syllable) -(70) - dominated by Nonfinality (HD). (73) No Adjacent Edges ~ dominated by (70) Syllable Alignment -- dominated by (70) *(71b) - dominated by (71a), (70) No Adjacent Edges - dominated by (70)

Let us now return to the discussion of High-toned depressed subject prefixes in combination with High toned verb stems. When the stem is trisyllabic, both K and M continue to show the H of the subject prefix shifted onto /ya/. But we again find a difference between K and M. In the speech of K, the first syllable of the stem is low in pitch. In M, on the other hand, the first syllable is at the same level as the preceding syllable. We cite relevant formsfromK in (82) andfromM in (83). (82)

KJyaiumia'dna siyasebtee'nza jjyabonliisa Xtyahlonliipha 2Jy4bal!£6ka ayacebtiisa jjyibulldala aydfiny!«sft

(get) (work) (show) (indicate respect) (run) (advise) (kill) (shorten)

(We should note that these transcriptions are by no means entirely obvious. The going down of the stem-initial syllable may be fairly slight and the downstepping is not radical. As the verb stem gets longer, the going down becomes more obvious, however.) 59

(83)

nyitfny66u zjyaTiiina'ina W&b&]66ka zjydc£bffsa

jay<s6Menj» zjyfib<5rilisa 5Jy4bill«la zvjyAhldnftpha

(shorten) (get) (run) (advise) (work) (show) (kill) (indicate respect)

The phenomenon involved in the datafromM - where the first syllable of the stem is raised in pitch, in contrast to forms such as ba,yaseb!£e'n.za; (where the subject prefix is not depressed) will bereferredto as protection (or plateauing). We will see throughout this study that protection is a widespread phenomenon found In both K and M, even though in the data currently being discussed it is not observed in K. Recall that there are trisyllabic verbs that in many varieties of Isixhosa are marked as exceptions to *MonoHD. These verbs realize their High on their antepenult rather than their penult syllable. K maintains the contrast between these trisyllabic verbs and the regular trisyllabic verbs thatrealizetheir High on the penult. M, while not using the exceptional forms regularly, recognizes their existence and can readily reproduce the exceptional pronunciation. Let us consider now what happens when a depressed High-tone subject prefix is used with these exceptional verbs. In the speech of K a downstep will appear between /ya/ and the stenvinitial High tone. When M uses the exceptional pattern, there will be no downstep. This contrast between K and M is shown below. (For M we also show the pronunciation of the verb in its regular form.) (84)

zjyibldliisa [K], sjydbuliisa (on siyibuTifsa) [M] Siydbfdleeia [K], zjydbuleela (or siyibd^ela) [M] zjyfifldndusa pq, ziyftfdndAjsa (or: zjytfundUfca) [M] zjytfmldmeela [KJ, z.iyima'meela (on zjydma'me'ela) [M zjydtsh.'&yeela [KJ, zjyfitshiyeela (or zjydtshtfygela) [M]

(greet) (thank) (teach) (listen to) (sweep)

In the following data set we have examples of longer High-toned verb stems used with a depressed High-toned subject prefix: (83)

£jyashum!a'yeez4 [K], zjydshdma'yeeza [M] zjy£qaq!a*it|bjjsa [KJ, zjy6qaqdm.b,ijsa [M] ftiyftkhathldzjeejca [K], jciydkhfith dzfieka [M] Siyiikhablfl-laaza. [K], zjy4khdbi«aaza. [M] gjydbekllsiisa [K], gjyAbe'klsiisa [M] zjydbonaklaliisa [K], gjyibo'nikiliisa [M] ay4khawTil!exusa [K], ziy6kh&wtfl6zAJsa [M] ZJytfthelek.'eleela [K], xjytfthelgkeleela [M]

60

(proclaim) (make ache) (be troubled) (kick) (lay thoroughly) (make visible) (be quick) (estimate)

We find here the expected contrast between K and M. In K, the stem-initial syllables (prior to the antepenult H) are going down in pitch. In M, "protection" occurs and all of the syllables in the stem are raised in pitch through the antepenult. We have so far systematically excluded from consideration High verb stems with depressor consonants (except for those cases where the depressor is located in a syllable later than where the High tone of the verb is realized). We discuss such examples later. But it must be emphasized that the generalizations we make immediately below are based on the preceding data and not on the data where the verb stem has a depressor consonant, since depressed syllables have a major impact on the phonetic pattern. Let lis review the facts that must be analyzed concerning the interaction of a depressed High-toned subect prefix and a High verb stem. First, we observe that in the input to the A constraint system, there are two HD's that are not adjacent (this is due to the effects of No Adjacent Edges). In the output of the B system, the corresponding HD's are adjacent (in all but the monosyllabic verb stem examples) due to the fact that (70) dominates No Adjacent Edges. Now, in K, there is a downstep between these adjacent HD's, but not in M. Furthermore, we find that when there are two adjacent HD's, and the second HD consists of more than one syllable, there is no protection in K of the nonhead syllables in the second HD but there is protection in M. From these two observations we conclude that there Is some deep connection between downstep and protection. Let us build an analysis that relates the two. (Data from Chapter Three will show that protection does occur in K in other circumstances, so our analysis will need to ultimately predict when protection occurs in K.) Let us begin by considering the matter of the downstep in K versus its absence in M. Recall that both K and M show downstep between High tones when they are separated by one or more toneless morae. We will thus want our analysis of downstep in K to be able to include the regular downstepping just mentioned that is found in both varieties. We suggest that downstep in Isixhosa (indeed, all languages) is a function of the organization of the phonological representations into what we shall call Register Domains (=RD's). Register Domains, like other domains - prosodic feet, featural domains - are taken to be overt aspects of structure and encoded in the output of the constraint system(s). We propose that whenever there is downstep between two High tones, these High tones are in separate Register Domains; when there is no downstep between two High tones, these High tones are in the same RD. Thus, in both K and M, whenever there is a toneless mora between two High tones, those High tones are in separate RD's. In examples like zjydsMtila in K but zjydstftflau1 M, then, the difference is that there are two RD's in K but only one in M. Under this analysis of downstep, the issue that concerns us is simply: what determines the structure of Register Domains? Let us propose an analysis within ODT. We assume that Gen provides candidates with all possible Register Domains (just like Gen provides candidates with all possible syllabification and all possible F-domains). A principle of phonetic interpretation lowers the pitch level of a High-toned mora relative to a preceding High-toned mora unless the two moras are in the same Register Domain. Let us begin to develop the constraint system governing Register Domains. Recall that H tones are realized in High Domains. Thus we expect that there will be a close connection between a RD and a HD. Isixhosa is a bit complicated by the fact that the HD-structure in the output of the A system is different from the HD-structure in the output of the B system; consequently, the RD-structure of the A output would be expected to be different as well from the RD-structure of the B output

61

We suggest that the following constraints play a role in defining RD-structure (but would be the first to admit that much comparative research is required to verify the appropriateness of these suggestions — in other words, they do not constitute anything but suggestions). (86)

HD/RD Correspondence For every HD, there is a "corresponding" RD.

(87)

(a)

HD-mora Incorporation If a mora is in a HD, then in it is in a RD.

(b)

HD-extemal-mora Exclusion If a mora is not in a HD, then it is not in a RD.

(86) predicts that for every HD, there is also a RD; (87a) says that all moras in a HD are in a RD, and (87b) says that no other moras are in a RD. One consequence of (87a-b) is that that edges of RD's will be expected to coincide with the edges of HD's. It would be possible to invoke some such direct alignment of RD edges with HD edges, but at a subsequent point in the development of our analysis we will appeal to the specific formulation of (87). (86) and (87) together predict that each HD constitutes a RD as well, and (as a consequence of the suggested principle of phonetic interpretation) the High tone in one HD is downstepped relative to the High tone in a preceding HD. For the data so far given, this prediction is entirely correct for K but not for M. However, subsequent data will show that in the end it is not entirely correct for K either. Given the present data, we can only use the data from M to establish what limitations on (86) and (87) exist. Consider an example like M's uydftftna'a'na The HD-structure of the output of the B system is (ziya)(f«lms:aOna.What we see is that if the HD's in the output of the B constraint system are adjacent, then there is no downstep between these High Domains and thus these domains must be in the same Register Domain. Thus we want the optimal output to be {(jjya'Xfu'ma'aDna (where Register Domains are indicated by curly brackets and HD's by parentheses). We propose (88) as the relevant constraint that drives ((zjy4)(ftima*a0}na: (88)

No Adjacent RD Edges [=NARDE] RD's may not be adjacent.

NARDE militates against adjacent RD's and thus would be violated if adjacent HD's were to be organized into adjacent RD's: *((zjyd)}((fum4i)}na (phonetically: zjya'fiinitt&'na). If (88) outranks (86), we can make an output where the two HD's are located in a single RD more optimal than an output where there are two adjacent RD's. Notice that we must guarantee that other ways of avoiding a violation of NARDE are not selected as optimal Specifically, we must make sure that the optimal output is not one where there are two RD's but they are not adjacent Adjacency could be avoided by misaligning the RD with the HD; e.g. *{(ljya1)(fu{md8t)}na- We must guarantee that this is not a viable option. Constraint (87a) rules out *{(%iy6)}(fu{ni44)}na since this candidate has a HD mora that is not inaRD.. Given that (88) dominates (86), and that (87a) is so far undominated, then the only means of avoiding adjacent RD's is by putting the two HD's in the same RD. Note that one cannot avoid 62

adjacent RD's by just not forming a RD at all; to have no RD would violate (86) twice, while to put the HD's into a single RD violates (86) only once. (89) shows the constraint rankings we have so far proposed: (89)

NARDE (=88), HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)), HD-extemal-mora Exclusion (=87b) - undominated HD/RD-Cor (=86) -- dominated by NARDE

We must now look more closely into Register Domains and the A and B constraint systems. In both K and M, in the output of the A system, we do not have (in the long present tense) adjacent HD's (in Chapter Three we will see that there are cases where the output of the A system does contain adjacent HD's and that NARDE does force a single RD). Consequently, given the constraint system shown in (89), NARDE will never prevent satisfaction of HD/RDCor in the output of the A system (in the long present tense). Each HD in the optimal outputs of A will also be a RD. In some cases, however, outputs of A that do not have adjacent HD's will have adjacent HD's when they emerge from the B system For example, (fct)ya(s«iiDla is the output of A, but (%jya)(sdd)la is the output of B. Assuming that the rankings in (89) are part of the A constraint system, they predict two RD's in the output of A. But now what happens in the B system? We assume that - like other domains - there is a RD-Faithfulness constraint that wants the RD's in the input to B to appear unaltered in the output of B. (90)

RD-Faithfulness (a) If an input element x is in a RD y, then the output correspondent of x is in the output correspondent of y. (b) If an input element x is not in a RD, then the output correspondent of x is not in a RD.

If (90) is undominated, then the domain structure that arises from the A system will remain intact in the B system (changes in HD-structure will not yield a difference in RD-structure between the optimal outputs of A and the optimal outputs of B). In both K and M, RD-Faithfulness is violated in the interest of expanding the RD in order to include the a new mora that is added to the HD in the output of the B constraint system (Le. the mora that receives the "shifted" High from the preceding depressed syllable). This means that in both K and M, HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)) must dominate RD-Faithfulness (specifically, the (b) clause of RD-Faithfulness) in the B system.. How do K and M differ? We claim that in the case of K's dialect, RD-Faithfulness is more highly ranked than NARDE; as a consequence, K violates NARDE in the interest of maintaining identity between the RD-structure of A outputs and the RD-structure of B outputs. In M, on the other hand, NARDE outranks RD-Faithfulness in the B system. The RD-structure of the input to B must be adjusted so as to avoid adjacent RD's. Specifically, the RD structure will be altered to yield a single RD in the output of B. Given the above account, K and M will differ just in the cases where there is a difference in outputs between the A and B systems, and then just in the cases where NARDE is relevant. Thus we expect to find that in all other cases, the RD structure of K and M will be the same. Subsequent data will confirm this. Specifically, we shall see in Chapter Three that both K and M show examples where adjacent High Domains in the output of A must be gathered together into a

63

single RD — Le. in both varieties there are cases of sequences of High tones that are in separate High Domains but are not downstepped. Let us summarize the constraint rankings we have proposed for RD-structure: (91)

The A system: NARDE (=88), HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)), HD-extemal-mora Exclusion (=87b) - undominated HD/RD-Cor (=86) - dominated by NARDE (RD-Faithfulness has no work to do since there are no RD's in the inputs to A. Its ranking is therefore irrelevant) The B system: K's dialect HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)), HD-extemal-mora Exclusion (=87b) - undominated RD-Fahhfulness •- dominated by (87a) NARDE (=88) ~ dominated by RD-Faithfulness No Adjacent Edges ~ dominated by (70) (Ranking HD/RD-Cor (=86) is not critical, if RD-Faithfulness is highly ranked.) The B system: M's dialect NARDE (=88), HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)). HD-extemal-mora Exclusion (=87b) undominated RD-Faithfulness - dominated by (87a), NARDE HD/RD-Cor (=86) - dominated by NARDE No Adjacent Edges - dominated by (70)

There is one matter that we are not in a position to exemplify in detail now, but which merits being noted in anticipation of data to come in Chapter Three. Recall that we used (87a) to explain why we locate both of two adjacent HD's into a single RD rather than simply misaligning the RD's in an effort to avoid No Adjacent RD's. Situations do arise in Isixhosa where three HD's may be adjacent to one another: (x) (y) (z). We shall see later that in the optimal output, they all must group into a single RD (since there would be no downstep between the domains): {(*)(y)(z)). We must explain why this output is superior to {(x)} (y) {(z)} - Le., an output where only two of the HD's are located inside RD's and as a result the RD's are not adjacent. An output like *{(x)) (y) {(z)) does avoid a violation of NARDE, but unlike the optimal candidate it violates the undominated constraint HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)). Now let us consider how we are to account for what we have referred to as "protection" in M and its absence in K in examples like zjyaTtimddnalML zjyrffumia'dna [K]. Notice that if two HD's are placed together in a single RD, and the tone realization principles we have articulated are not expanded in any way, we would expect an output such as 'zjya'fumda'na m M rather than zjyifdrmta'na- This output would indeed be a surprising one — we know of no cases where low-toned morae typically trigger downstep, but there are some surface low-toned moras that do not We suggest that diere must be some constraint that would be violated by an output such as *zjya'fum6a'na. We propose that this constraint is the one formulated in (92) below:

64

(92)

Plateau *HO in the same Register Domain.

(At first glance, a formulation like *HOH might seem more appropriate; data discussed later supports the interpretation that the ban is against a HO sequence.) Assuming the constraint Plateau, let us consider the M case. We have seen that adjacent HO's in the output of the B constraint system are placed into the same RD in M (due to die fact that No Adjacent RD Edges outranks Faithfut-RD's in M). Given this. Plateau will require that the non-heads in the second of these domains be realized as H (since these moras will be preceded by the High-toned head of the first HD and Plateau does not allow a HO sequence in thoRD. In the data so far discussed, the effects of Plateau are evident only in M's dialect and then only in the B system as a consequence of die interplay of the DIHTS phenomenon and Register Domain formation. In Chapter Three, we will see that Plateau is evident in cases totally unrelated to the DIHTS phenomenon. (92) must dominate *(H, nonhead) in the B system, and we will assume also in the A system. This ranking is required in order for non-head moras to be realized on a High tone (cf. zjytfftfma'inatM], where the syllable fd is not the head of a High domain). Protection (plateauing) will not occur in K in the examples under discussion, however, since the adjacent HD's are not in the same RD either in the output of the A or the B constraint systems. The non-head moras in the verb stem are not in the same RD as the syllable /ya/ that is the head of the first HD and thus Plateau can have no effect. (Of course, if there are ever adjacent HD's in K in the output of the A constraint system, they will be placed in the same RD and there will be protection. We will see just this situation in Chapter Three.) We have noted that Plateau must dominate *(H, non-heads) in the constraint ranking, otherwise it would be more important to obey the latter constraint than the former. But to rank Plateau over *(H, non-heads) does not yield the correct results if we leave Express (H) unaltered. Recall that *(H, non-heads) must dominate Express (H). The following tableau illustrates the problem:

(931 Candidates ((zjy4) (fum£4))na ((zjya)(fumaa))na {(ziya) (fSmiia))na {(ziya) (fumaa))na - • ((ziya) (fumii) J na ((ziya) (f]imaa)}na

Plateau •1

*(H, non-heads) Express (H)

tllllliMSlllli!! ;ilMiiiiiif ****!*

*i

*l

*

*!*

•*

^s^Sfeh'*** nw^twi

Given a ranking of Plateau over *(H, non-heads) and *(H, non-heads) over Express (H), it would be better to not have High expressed on the head of the first domain (and avoid a violation of Plateau) than to have a non-head with a High tone on it. We thus incorrectly predict *zjyafuirufina as tR e optimal output. We can solve this problem if we explode the Express (H) constraint into the following two constraints: (94)

Express (HD-head) H is realized on the head mora of a HD. 65

(95)

Express (H) H is realized on every mora in a HD.

The constraint Express (HD-head) is an undominated one for all of the data that we have considered up to this point. A head cannot fail to express High in order to avoid a violation of another constraint (such as *(H, non-head)). Plateau is also undominated. *(H, non-heads) is dominated by Express (HD-head) and Plateau, and * (H, non-heads) in turn dominates the general Express (H) constraint. The following tableau illustrates how this constraint ranking yields the correct output (96) Candidates l(zjyfl) (fflmii))na Kzjva) (famaa))na »{(zjyi) (fiimd6))na ((ziya)(rflmaa))na ((zjva) (
Express head)

(HD- Plateau

*(H, non-heads) Express (H)

*| •I* •I* •!

•I*

This explosion of Express (H) into two submembers and their relative ranking can perhaps be interpreted as reflecting the stronger preference for heads of a domain to realize a feature than for all anchors in the domain to realize the feature. However, we must observe that all the evidence for the headedness of featural domains comes from tonal systems as opposed, for instance, to harmony systems. We shall see below that this account is not quite sufficient to account for the full range of facts concerning Register Domains and further discussion is required. But nevertheless it represents the beginnings of an analysis of downstep in Isixhosa. We have not yet had the opportunity to pursue the study of a universal set of constraints concerning Register Domains. In the absence of such a study, the above account of Isixhosa must be regarded as extremely tentative. But the Isixhosa data seem to be of considerable value with respect to an understanding of RD structure, and we believe that these data will provide many useful clues as to what a proper universal characterization of RD structure might be like. We grant a certain arbitrariness in what we have proposed, but we are not inordinately apologetic: we believe that the Isixhosa data are rich and complex, and that our analysis highlights the generalizations that any more adequate theory must express. So far we have not considered cases of High verb stems preceded by a depressed, Hightoned subject prefix where the stem has a depressed syllable internal to its HD. Consider first data with a depressed consonant in initial position in the verb stem. (97)

zjyAgglte'ela zjydgawliiiila iiydnflfinlllsa zjya'zjmte'ela zjy«W»H itsa zjyad.ub!iMla zjyidWfiU Hsa

(pour) (chop) (cause to enter) (hide) (register) (shoot) (list things) 66

»yaW<$m,b.Usa (R] (or: z.iy4h.gmMtsa [M]) zjydzalltisa (K], (or: aiyizallttsa [M])

(cause to decorate) (fill)

What we see here is that the depressed initial syllable of the stem blocks protection in M as well as K. This lack of protection is clearly due to the depressed syllable at the beginning of the stem There is always downstep between two High tones separated by a depressor consonant. We suggest that there is a constraint. Depressed Syllable Alignment, which wants every depressed syllable to initiate a RD. (98) Depressed Syllable Alignment The Left edge of a depressed syllable is aligned with the Left edge of a RD. To establish the ranking of (98), let us consider some of the candidates that must be evaluated by the RD system: (99)

(a) (b)

((xiy4))((gal^)}la-- the optimal candidate ((siy*)(Qal<<6)]la

(c) (d) (e)

Kziy4)){(ga)l&)la t(ay«)(g»i«)ia ((si >yaM(oai«ia)}

Notice that the optimal form (99a) violates NARDE; thus (98) must outrank NARDE in order to have (99a) be evaluated as optimal. While (99b) avoids a violation of NARDE by organizing the two HD's into a single RD, it does so at the expense of violating (98) and thus is less optimal than (99a). (99c) obeys (98) just as the optimal (99a), and violates NARDE just as the optimal candidate does; however, (99c) violates (87a) by not including the High-toned penult syllable in the RD, a constraint that (99a) does not violate. The candidate (99d) does not violate NARDE, but does violate (87a), an undominated constraint, as well as (98). (99e) is an important candidate to consider: it violates neither (98) nor NARDE, whereas the optimal candidate (99a) does violate NARDE. Thus in order to rule out (99e), it must violate some constraint ranked higher than NARDE. The constraint that (99e) violates is (87a), since the High-toned syllable /yaV is not in a RD. Thus it must be the case that (87a) dominates NARDE. The following constraint system (A system) achieves the desired RD-structure for the data so far considered: (100) Depressed Syllable Alignment (=98), HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)), HDexternal mora Exclusion (=87b) ~ undominated NARDE (=88) - dominated by (98) and (87a) HD/RD-Correspondence (=86) - dominated by NARDE Depressed Syllable Alignment predicts that whenever two High tones are separated by a depressor consonant they will be separated into different RD's. This is in fact an unviolated generalization about Isixhosa. In the preceding examples, the depressor was initial in a HD. We must next consider cases where the depressed syllable is internal to a HD. (101) provides examples of High verb stems with an HD-internal depressed syllable. (101) zjyathengUfsa zjyasirnjlfjsa zjySbizltfgla

(sell) (save) (call for) 67

aydhlungl.Usa ?jyaTurigI.Usa zjytfurjgislrfana zjyasindjsla'ana zjyaseberjgej liana

(pain) (cause to vow) (cause e.o. to vow) (save each otheT (workforeach other)

Notice that the High tone on the syllable /yaV does not lead to the protection of the initial nonhead syllables) of the verb stem In other words. Plateau does not have any effect, suggesting that these syllables are not in the same RD as the ly&J. Thus the correct RD-structure must be one where /yaV and Ahe/ in zJytftheQjjiXIsa, for example, are not in the same RD. There are two possibilities: /the/ isnotinaRDatalLoritisina different RD from the preceding /yd/: either {(ziyi)} (the{ngH)} sa or {(riy4)}{(Uie){ngff)}sa. Both of these candidates satisfy (98); the former violates (87a) while the latter violates NARDE. Given the system in (100), we would expect the latter form to be optimal. There is no direct evidence that {(riya)}{(lhe}{ngff)}sa is wrong since it does yield the correct surface shape. However, we will see immediately below that there is a constraint - Cohesion - that must be postulated which would in fact evaluate {(ziya)}{(the}{ngfQ}sa as non-optimaL Furthermore, {(a'y4)}{(the}{ngff))sa has a totally extraneous RD for which there is no phonetic evidence at all. One might very well in principle wish to ban RD's that do not have a High-toned mora in them. We will therefore take {(ziyi)} (Ihe(ngfO) sa as representing the optimal RD structure. Below we illustrate some of the candidates that must be evaluated by the constraint system: (102) (a) {(ziy£))(the(rjgft)) sa - the optimal candidate (b) {(ziya)>{(thengfl)) sa (c) ((ziy«) (theoflii)) sa (d) {(ziyd) (the KrjgiOJsa In (102b), (98) is violated and thus this candidate is judged non-optimaL In (102c), both (98) and NARDE are violated and thus this candidate is rejected. In (102d), (98) is satisfied just as in the optimal candidate; since (102d) incorporates all HD-morae into RD's, it fares better with respect to (87a) than does (102a) and thus should be optimal. We must therefore explain why (102d) is not optimal. Notice that (102d) takes material that is part of one HD and separates this material between two different RD's. We suggest that this is the source of the non-optimality of (102d). We propose the Cohesion constraint in (103): (103) Cohesion The moras in a HDj must not be assigned to different RD's. Notice that, in this formulation, Cohesion is not violated by omitting some HD material from a RD while including other HD material into a RD. If Cohesion is ranked above (87a), then we will omit the syllable /the/froma RD rather than include it in a RD that differsfromthe one that includes /the/'s domain-mates. Thus (102a) will be more optimal than (102d). In our discussion of object prefixes below we will see that there is an extremely interesting emendation to the above analysis that must be made. But for now we conclude this 68

section with a summary of the RD-structure constraints we have proposed, as well as the constraints bearing on the realization of High tones. (104) The A system: Depressed Syllable Alignment (=98), Cohesion (=(103)), HD-extemal-mora Exclusion (=87b) -- undominated HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)) -- dominated by (98), (103) NARDE (=88) - doiminated by (87a), (98) HD/RD-Cor (=86) -- dominated by NARDE (RD-Faithfulness has no work to do since there are no RD's in the inputs to A.) The B system: K's dialect Depressed Syllable Alignment (=98), Cohesion (=(103)), HD-extemal mora Exclusion (=87b) — undominated HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)) -- dominated by (98), (103) RD-Faithfulness - dominated by (87a) NARDE (=88) - dominated by RD-Faithfulness, (98), (87a) HD/RD-Cor (=(86) - dominated by NARDE No Adjacent Edges - dominated by (70) The B system: M's dialect Depressed Syllable Alignment (=98), Cohesion (=(103)), HD-extemal-mora Exclusion (=87b) - undominated HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)) - dominated by (98), (103) NARDE (=88) - dominated by (98) RD-Faithfulness - dominated by (87a), NARDE HD/RD-Cor (=86) - dominated by NARDE No Adjacent Edges - dominated by (70) (We have assumed that the rankings of the A system hold in the B system unless there is evidence to the contrary.) (105) Realization Constraints Express (H, heads of HD), Plateau - undominated *(H, nonheads) - dominated by Express (H, heads of HD), Plateau Express (H) - dominated by *(H, non-heads) In our discussion of object prefixes in the next section, we shall return to the matter of RDstructure. 2.4. The inclusion of an object prefix into the long present verb. We have so far surveyed the tonology of the long form of the present tense verb in fairly exhaustive detail, except that we have not yet looked at the effects of placing an object prefix in front of the verb stem. We turn to this matter now. There is immediate evidence that object prefixes must sponsor a High tone in Isixhosa. Forms where both the subject prefix and the verb stem are toneless establish this point. Consider the examples in (106). The object prefix immediately follows /ya/. 69

ndjyayis<5ndee> ndjyakux61eela siyasiWnaiisa sjyagjhldmeela njyawabaliisa njyawashuktimiisa njyawanamatheliisa uyabayume'ela Wyayigfauula

(approach) (forgive) (fix) (add) (narrate) (shake) (cement) (permit) (scrape)

First, we note that there is a High tone in these forms even though the subject prefixes are all toneless and the verb stems are all toneless. Clearly the object prefix must be the source of this High tone. Second, we see that the H tone sponsored by the OP "shifts" according to the very same principles as the H tone sponsored by a subject prefix. When the stem is sufficiently long, as in the above data, the Hfromthe OP surfaces on the antepenult syllable, provided that this syllable is non-depressed. If the antepenult is depressed, and the following syllable is not, then the High will appear on the penult as a Falling tone. All these data follow directly from the constraint set we have developed above. Bisyllabic toneless verb stems are examined next. (107) ndiyayipheelca njyawabda'la s.jyabakhddba sjyajjblila

(cook) (count) (kick) (boil)

ndiyayigcMdB

(roast)

From these data, we see that again the object prefix contributes a H tone to the representation. Its HD extends to the initial syllable of the bisyllabic stem, in violation of Avoid Prominence. It is of course the constraint *MonoHD that explains this violation. A problem arises at this juncture with the small class of bisyllabic stems derived from monosyllabic verb roots. We give afewexamples in (108): (108) ndjyatelwiisa niyawawiisa s.iyayihliisa

(cause to fight) (drop) (lift)

What we see here is that *MonoHD cannot drive a violation of Avoid Prominence if it means incorporating a monosyllabic root into a HD. But it is not the case that a monosyllabic root can never be incorporated into a HD. If the stem based on a monosyllabic root is trisyllabic, then Align Word R will result in the first (Le. the root) syllable being included in the HD: (109) sjyabahliseela siyabawtseela

(lift for) (drop for)

70

It appears then that (108) is somehow connected to the failure of *MonoHD to be respected (while (109) shows that Align Word R must be respected). To account for the failure of *MonoHD to lead to the rejection of the data in (108), we might try to go in the direction of finding a constraint that would be more highly ranked than *MonoHD and would thus counteract its influence. But we are unaware of any well-motivated constraint that could do this. We suggest Instead that we are dealing with an exception to *MonoHD rather than some more highly ranked constraint. Specifically, we propose that stems based on the "monosyllabic" roots /lw/, /w/, /hi/ etc. are marked as exceptions to *MonoHD. This means that any mark that a candidate receives for violating *MonoHD will be irrelevant to the evaluation if the only way of satisfying the constraint would be to include the stem in question into the domain. We have used exceptionality to *MonoHD in two places in this chapter - specifically, to account for the trisyllabic stems in K that do not obey *MonoHD, like s,jyabdleela, and to account for the behavior of the vowel-initial verb stems. It should be obvious that all of these analyses are dependent upon their being consistent with a well-developed theory of exceptions in Optimality Theoiy. We think that the three cases discussed here should fall within the scope of such a theoiy, but admit that little work has been done up to this point on the analysis of exceptions in OT terms and thus our proposals are tentative in the extreme. The following tableaux show that the above treatment of the data in (108) will correctly predict both rjdjygba'lwiisaand sjyabahltseela In the interest of brevity, we ignore candidates that do not parse the H of the object prefix into a domain or do not incorporate the object prefix into a HD. We place a violation mark in brackets if it is irrelevant due to exceptionality. (The question mark in the tableau concerning whether Avoid Prominence is violated has to do with the fact that we have two alternative formulations of Avoid Prominence - one referring to whether the domain contains a prominent syllable and one referring to whether the domain's Right edge coincides with the Right edge of a prominent syllable.) (110) (a) Candidates ndiya (balwiisa) ndiya(balwii)sa ' ndiya(ba)lwiisa

Nonfinality

*MonoHD

Avoid Prom

*l [*]

(b) Candidates siya(bahliseela) siya(bahlisee)la > siya(bahli)scela siya(ba)hliseela

Nonfinality

•MonoHD

Avoid Prom

Align Word

seela hliseella

EL

In (110a), the verb stem is bisyllabic; given that the violation of *MonoHD is immaterial to the evaluation, the best candidate will be one that avoids violations of Nonfinality and Avoid Prominence - thus we derive rjdiyabdlwiisa- In (110b), the verb stem is trisyllabic. Now, given that *MonoHD is irrelevant, the best candidate will be one that avoids prominence but is aligned as far to the right as possible - i e . sjyabahllseela. We thus achieve the correct results.

71

If we simply consider verbs derived from monosyllabic roots to be exceptions to •MonoHD, then it follows that we expect the DIHTS phenomenon to lead to the shift of the H awayfroma depressed object prefix onto such stems. This in fact is what happens, as we see in (HI): (HI) ndjyaziwlisa Odiyasilwiisa

(drop) (cause to fight) (tower)

ndiyasihiiisa

The tableau in (112) shows what the optimal HD structure of these items will be in the output of the A system: (112) Candidates ndiya(iilwiisa) ndiya(zilwii)sa -» ndiya(z£)lwiisa

Nonfinality

•MonoHD

Avoid Prom Align Word

*! *e lwiisa

f]

Now, given this HD structure as input to the B system, the ban on depressed High tones will force the expansion of the HD, resulting in rj4jyajilwlisa( se e the analysis in the preceding section of this chapter). It is only *MonoHD that does not drive the extension of a HD into a monosyllabic root syllable. To continue our discussion of the effects of placing a High object prefix in front of a toneless verb stem: When the object prefix is located in front of a monosyllabic verb stem, then Nonfinality prevents the extension of the HD to the final syllable. The exceptionality of the stem to *MonoHD has no effect since the higher ranked Nonfinality in any case nullifies the effects of *MonoHD. Notice that a depressed object prefix cannot induce a wider HD in the B system due to the high ranking of Nonfinality in the B system (113) sjyaylilwa rjdjyaylfsa ndiyasttsa

(fight it) (take it to) (take them to)

So far we have examined the behavior of the object prefix in front of toneless, consonantinitial verb stems. Toneless vowel-initial verb stems are for the most part straightforward, but they do have one attribute that is of some interest. (114) provides relevant data for trisyllabic or longer stems. (114) ndjyaydlaama ndjyaydbuula niyawdtuula niyawaneliisa niyawalamdniisa

(see something unexpected) (peel off) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

72

The longer forms are entirely obvious. The trisyllabic forms require a bit of discussion. The input for adiyayilaama is /ndi-ya-yi-alama/. The mora that sponsors the High tone is not present in the output But notice that in the optimal output the HD initiated by the deleted mora extends only as far as the mora that follows the deleted mora, even though on the surface there is an apparent violation of *MonoHD. What appears to be happening is that the deleted mora "counts" towards satisfaction of *MonoHDI In the "Containment" version of OT advanced in Prince and Smolensky (1993), the data in (114) are not particularly problematic. According to the Containment principle, no underlying material is ever absolutely deleted; a sound may be unparsed and thus not pronounced, but it still is part of the output. Consequently, a constraint such as *MonoHD could be seen as ambiguous between requiring at least two parsed mora and simply requiring at least two moras in the domain, irrespective of whether the moras are parsed or unparsed. If Correspondence Theory is taken to mean not just that deleted material does not necessarily remain in the output, but rather that deleted material may not be contained in the output, then the data in (114) are problematic. *MonoHD would have to be somehow satisfied not by virtue of the output structure, but rather by virtue of some sort of reference to the input. The datafromIsixhosa on this point is not sufficiently rich to fully address these issues; we will assume a version of Correspondence Theory where deleted material may in fact have a "trace" in the output, and that *MonoHD in (114) is satisfied by virtue of the presence of that trace. (In other words, we assume that when the trace is present in the output, then it must be "counted". If there is no trace, then it is of necessity ignored.) We do not however undertake to develop in detail the precise mechanism for how to ensure the presence of such traces versus their absence. (113) provides an illustrative tableau: (115) Candidate Nonfinality *MonoHD Avoid Prom -**•..'•';4-.n«.:. ndiya (y alaama) •I *! ndiya (y alaa)ma ndiya (y<j>) alaama •I -Midiya (y a) laama ,

. : " • : , « .

•:.

Align Word R

•ma "!• 'SS/iL.' ipt^' "• , . alaaniiSiiSi laama

In the examples in (114) the coalesced syllable did not have a depressed onset. In (116) it does, and we see that DIHTS will occur. (116) ndiyazajifama ndjyajjQbiiula

(see s.t. unexpected) (peel off)

The tableau in (1 IS) shows that the optimal HD will end at the coalesced syllable in the output of the A system. But when that coalesced syllable is depressed, the optimal HD structure will extend (as a consequence of the B constraint system) to the first mora following the coalesced syllable (in order to avoid a depressed High-toned syllable). No tableau should be necessary. In the case of shorter vowel-initial stems, Nonfinality (HD) will of course prevent any extension of the HD beyond the coalesced syllable. (117) illustrates:

73

(117) njyawtasa TjdjyaztHba ndjyay«la

ndiya^nza

(roast) (distribute) (winnow) (do)

In our discussion of object prefixes, we have so far looked only at toneless verb stems and only at cases where the subject prefix is toneless. Now let us expand the discussion to include High-toned subject prefixes. Some examples where the subject prefix is not depressed. We include both non-depressed and depressed object prefixes. (118) llyawlttlwa Myawlawiisa Hyawab'.adla Hyawablaliisa HyawashukMmiisa Hyawanamath lei i isa

MyazJUflwa lfyazjwltisa WyazjbWala bdyazjblaliisa bdyazjshukitimiisa btyaztnamathle'liisa

(fight) (drop) (count) (narrate) (shake) (cement)

These data show nothing more than that No Adjacent Edges serves to provide a buffer between the HD initiated by the subject prefix and die HD initiated by the object prefix. In this respect, No Adjacent Edges has exactly the same effects as we saw in the case of High subject prefixes and High verb stems. No tableau is necessary. Now consider the forms with a depressed High-toned subject prefix. We exclude from consideration, for the time being, cases where there is a depressed object prefix or a depressed consonant in the HD initiated by the object prefix. Given that the subject prefix is depressed and High-toned, we expect to find the DIHTS phenomenon. And we do. (119) illustrates data from M. (119) zjyiwdaiwa zjyawdwiisa zjyawabtfala zjyawAbaiiisa Siy6washukumiisa giyawandmithel i isa zjyayilsa zjyayadba

(fight) (drop) (count) (narrate) (shake) (cement) (take to) (distribute)

The H from the subject prefix appears on the syllabic /ya/. As expected, we find that in M there is no downstep between the shifted H and the H on the object prefix in examples like zjydwialwa Md zjya'wa'wiisa. Furthermore, this shifted High serves to protect the non-heads in the following HD, causing them to be realized with High pitch: cf. ziyaVashdkdmiisa These facts follow directly from our analysis of Register Domains in M and the postulation of the constraint Plateau. Let us review that analysis briefly, so that it remains clearly in mind. In M, adjacent HD's must be gathered into the same RD (unless this is prevented by the more highly ranked constraint Depressed Syllable Alignment). In the examples in (119), the first HD extends from the subject prefix through the syllable /ya/ as a result of the B system. The 74

second HD starts with the object prefix and extends into the verb stem when driven to do so by *MonoHD and Align Word R and not barred from doing so (e.g. by Nonfinality (HD)). Thus we do have adjacent HD's in the output of the B system. Since this sequence of HD's does not have any internal depressed syllables, they will form a single RD. Consequently, there will be no downstep and Plateau will affect the non-heads in the second HD. The forms in K that correspond to (119) are shown in (120): (120) zjyayiffsa zjyayidSba Z\y&y\66\a zjyiwla'a'lwa zjyawabl&ala Siyawabldliisa iuyiwashukliimiisa £jy6wanamath!£liisa

(take to) (distribute) (winnow) (fight) (count) (narrate) (shake) (cement)

In the K forms in (120), the B constraint system also yield adjacent HD's, but these adjacent HD's are not enveloped into a single RD in due to the fact that RD-Faithfulness dominates NARDE. Since the two HD's are in separate RD's, there will be downstep between them and no protection. A significant complication arises when there is a depressed syllable internal to the second HD. We cite relevant data in (121) from M: (121) siyawaglvjzuula zjyAwfihlangabl&ga zjydb&man.ga.lle'ela

(scrape them) (meet them halfway) (take them to court)

The preceding data present a critical fact that our analysis does not account for. Due to the presence of the depressed consonant in the second HD in the examples in (121), it is impossible for both HD's to be in the same RD (even though adjacent HD's would like to be in the same RD). The depressed syllable in the verb stem must initiate the second RD. As a consequence of this, we expect the head of the second HD to be downstepped. But examination of (121) shows that the object prefix itself is realized with a High tone, even though nothing in our account so far predicts this fact: we would expect *zjydbaman.ggf &la and not zjydb4man,gaf4ela. What appears to be necessary to achieve the correct output is to force a violation of the Cohesion constraint (requiring that moras that are in a given HD are not incorporated into different RD's) that so far is an undominated constraint in Isixhosa. We have already seen that in general Cohesion dominates (87a) and forces the initial stem syllable(s) in (101) -- e.g. zjydtherjc-JI sa - to be excluded from the preceding RD. While this is the case for the initial stem syllables in (101), it is not the case for the object prefixes in (121). In (121) the object prefix must be in the same RD as the preceding syllable in order for the object prefix to be affected by Plateau and therefore be raised in pitch. How can we obtain the correct results? We know that there are many cases where a particular morphological element (or class of morphological elements) exhibits a property different from what the general system predicts. How, in OT, are these idiosyncratic behaviors to be accounted for? One idea is that perhaps the special behavior of a morpheme M represents that morpheme's adhering better to a constraint C 75

than do the regular morphemes. One way of implementing this idea would be to claim that the constraint C in question is ranked below some constraint F which prevents optimal candidates from satisfying C. However, an exploded version of the constraint C, which relativized it to the morpheme M, is ranked higher than F. This means that it will be more important for M to satisfy C than for It to satisfy F, while for other morphemes it will be the other way around. Suppose that we were to try to apply this idea to the prefixes in Isixhosa. We would first of all have to identify some constraint that the prefixes are obeying that is generally not being obeyed due to some more highly ranked constraint(s). Clearly, (87a) - which requires a mora in a HD to be incorporated into a RD—is the constraint that the prefixes are obeying, and Cohesion is the constraint that generally bars (87a) from being fully satisfied. Now, suppose that we said that HD-mora Incorporation is "exploded" into a general constraint, (87a), and a "relativized" form (122): (122) HD-mora Incorporation (prefixes) Prefixes that are in a HD are incorporated into a RD. With this relativized version of (87a) ranked above Cohesion, and Cohesion dominating the general form (87a), we are able to guarantee that the data in (121) will be selected as optimal. In order to satisfy (122), Cohesion will be violated. We want it to be violated by placing the prefix inside a preceding RD and not by placing the prefix into its own RD. As mentioned earlier, perhaps what is wrong with the latter candidate is that it would have a RD without a High-toned syllable inside i t Perhaps this is ruled out by a general ban on such a configuration. Or perhaps the reason that {(zlyi)(ta}ma{ngate)}ela is preferred over *{(zfyd)} {(ba> ma {ngaK))ela is that the former has an extra RD (in violation of the general principle that all structure is barred unless it is required in order to satisfy a constraint) that is not required in order to place the prefix into a RD. A prefix is incorporated into a preceding RD just in the event that the prefix is preceded Immediately by another HD. If we have the following structure: (x)y ## (prefix....dep syll z)..., then the prefix cannot "drag" the preceding y element into the RD that incorporates x. Moras that are not in a HD are never in a RD in Isixhosa. In order to restrict (122) properly, we must assume that (87b) — HD-external mora Exclusion — is undominated; therefore, one cannot achieve locating the prefix in a RD at the expense of locating a HD-extemal mora in a RD. (It is of course possible to satisfy (122) in the above situation by locating the prefix inside a RD of its own; this has no phonetic effect, but could perhaps be ruled out, as mentioned above, by a general ban on RD's that do not contained a High-toned mora.) The tableau in (123) shows the evaluation (in the B constraint system) of the data in M (we have not shown candidates where there is a RD that does not contain a High-toned mora, on the assumption that such structures may well be absolutely ill-formed):

11231 Candidates

Dep Syll (122) Align

{(ziya)} {(bamangale) }ela ((ziya)} (bama {ngale)} ela {(ziya)(bama) {ngale) }ela -> ((ziya)(ba} ma{ ngale)) ela

•I

Cohesio n

(87a)

NARDE

W$X!BM ba! bama!

ba

76

liiiiiiiiii ttlilllllii iiiiiifft ma

Plateau will guarantee that the prefix in the optimal output above is realized on a High tone, lince there is a ban on *H0 in a RD. The data in (121) represent the pronunciation of M. What about K? (124)

zjyiiwagltfzuula zjyaVahlanga.ble'eza zjy£bairtanga.]!e'e1a %iytfyiphakamt(isa aiyfiwallunaiisa

(scrape them) (meet them halfway) (take them to court) (disturb them) (repair them)

In K, the HD structure in B is the same as in M, but the ranking of RD-Faithfulness over NARDB in K's B system means that there will always be two RD's in these examples. Depressed Syllable Alignment guarantees that the second RD is initiated by the depressed syllable in the stem and not by the object prefix. Now, if (122) were ranked above Cohesion in K, we would expect the object prefixes in (124) to be High. They are not, in contrast to the case in M. This will follow if (87a) is not "relativized" to prefixes in K (or, more precisely, as long as such a relativized version of the constraint does not dominate Cohesion). We will see, however, in Chapter Three that the situation is more complicated: K does show an unexpected inclusion of a prefix in a preceding RD in some cases. We will thus have to return to this matter again when these data are discussed. The tableau in (125) illustrates the evaluation in JC (125) Candidates {(ziya)} {(bamangale) ] ela -> {(ziya) )(bama(ngale)} ela {(ziya)(bama} {ngale) )ela {(ziya)(ba) ma{ngale))ela

DepSyll Cohesion Align *i

mmm:

(87a)

NARDE (122) -- if present

bama

ba

•vi . fc» , . ,

* '

batma

bal

1 mi

*

*

'

i-

We have seen two differences between M and K. (a) In M, adjacent HD's resulting from DIHTS are merged into a single RD (due to the ranking of NARDE over RD-Faithfulness in the B system), while in K adjacent HD's resulting from DIHTS do not merge into a single RD. (b) In M, prefixes are joined with a preceding RD in those cases where Depressed Syllable Alignment prevents the HD's from being joined together into a single RD; in K, the prefixes are not affected. The analysis that we have given sees no necessary connection between these two differences. We suspect however that this may be erroneous. Specifically, it may be the case that the raising of the prefix in zjydba'maaggfe'ela is directly related to the fact that this prefix would be raised in forms such as zjydba'ba'ila 'they are counting them' (as a result of the merger of the HD's into a single RD and the effects of Plateau). If this is in fact the proper explanation for the High-toned prefix of an example like zjydbdmarjga^ela. then we would be justified in in abandoning (122) and invoking an analysis that would see an optimal output for one input (e-I- iiya'bdmangalteela) as being determined by other optimal outputs (e.g. zjydba'ba'dla)This sort of analysis would involve an elaboration of the Correspondence Theory of McCarthy and Prince (1995) involving the notion of Output-Output constraints (cf. Benua (1995), Kenstowicz (1996), Kraska (1995) for discussion). We will not undertake to develop such an

77

analysis here, but would suggest that it may be more explanatory than the analysis developed above invoking (122). Let us conclude this discussion of object prefixes in conjunction with toneless verb stem by considering the case where the depressed subject prefix is followed by a depressed object prefix. For all but the last example in (134), it is obvious that the object prefix's HD wul necessarily initiate a RD due to the constraint Depressed Syllable Alignment. Since the object prefix is in the second RD in the word, there is no possibility for it to be in the first Consequently, K and M will have exactly the same tonal partem: the object prefix will not be affected by Plateau. (134) zjyaztltlwa ZJytf2Jbta*6Ia zjyftzjblaliisa zjydzjshuklrimiisa zjyazjnamathteliisa jaya^'.Usa Ziy6z!tf$ba siy£?!
(fight them) (count them) (narrate them) (shake them) (cement them) (take them in) (distribute them) (winnow them) (do them) (take them to court)

The example zjydzjrnan.ggl<ela requires some discussion. Notice that Depressed Syllable Alignment predicts that the object prefix is at the Left edge of a RD. However, there is a depressed syllable further on in the HD, which also must be at the Left edge of a RD. This means that if we place the object prefix in a RD, it will be a RD that has no High-toned syllable. Thus once again we can either allow a RD that has no phonetic effect or we can exclude RD's that do not contain a High-toned syllable. If we decide to take the option of not allowing RD's without a High tone, then we have a problem that must be addressed. If we do not place a RD edge in front of the depressed object prefix (since that would yield a RD with no High tone), then we must explain why the object prefix is not incorporated into the preceding RD in order to satisfy (122)! A possible way around this problem would be to modify Depressed Syllable Alignment to say: a depressed syllable may not be joined into a RD with a syllable to its Left This formulation does not require a RD edge to be present in front of a depressed syllable, but rather prevents RD structure where a depressed syllable is joined into a single RD with a preceding mora. This formulation would yield the correct result In JUyrfzjmaQgaf e'ela. the second depressed syllable and the subsequent mora in the HD will be organized into a RD because to do so will not violate the new formulation of Depressed Syllable Alignment and will (partially) satisfy (87a). The first stem syllable cannot be organized into a RD due to Cohesion. And while (122) would like the prefix to be organized into a RD even if it is at the expense of violating Cohesion, the new formulation of Depressed Syllable Alignment would prevent this incorporation. This amended form of Depressed Syllable Alignment will achieve die desired results and perhaps better reflects what is going on. We will assume it in the remainder of this study. Let us repeat the constraint rankings with respect to RD structure that we have suggested:

78

(127) The A system: Depressed Syllable Alignment (=98,revised), HD-extemal mora Exclusion (=87b) undomitiated (122) in M ~ dominated by (87b),(98) Cohesion (=(103)) - dominated by (122) HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)) - dominated by (103), (98) NARDE (=88) - doiminaled by (87a), (98) HD/RD-Cor (=86) ~ dominated by NARDE (RD-Faithfulness has no work to do since there are no RD's in the inputs to A.) The B system: K's dialect: Depressed Syllable Alignment (=98.revised), Cohesion (=(103)), HD-extemal mora Exclusion (=87b) -- undominated HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)) - dominated by (103), (98) RD-Faithfulness -- dominated by (87a) NARDE (=88) - dominated by RD-Faithfulness, (98), (87a) HD/RD-Cor (=(86) - dominated by NARDE (122) - dominated by (103) No Adjacent Edges - dominated by (70) (We assume that the rankings of the A system hold in the B system unless there is evidence to the contrary.) The B system: M's dialect Depressed Syllable Alignment (=98revised), HD-extemal- mora Exclusion (=87b) undominated (122) - dominated by (98) Cohesion (=(103)) - dominated by (122) HD-mora Incorporation (=(87a)) ~ dominated by (103), (98) NARDE (=88) - dominated by (98) RD-Faithfulness -- dominated by (87a), NARDE HD/RD-Cor (=86) ~ dominated by NARDE No Adjacent Edges - dominated by (70) Realization Constraints: Express (H, heads of HD), Plateau - undominated *(H, non-heads) - dominated by Express (H, heads of HD), Plateau Express (H) - dominated by *(H, non-heads) At this juncture we turn to the case where an object prefix is added in front of a Hightoned verb stem. We find that (generally) the H-toned object prefix and the H-toned verb stem result in the surfacing of a single H tone at the end of the domain of the stem H. (128) njyawaWe'ka njyabam&ma sjyayib66na sjyawathWnoa ndjyabayMsha

(place) (invite) (see) (buy) (wake up) 79

njyababtiliisa [K]/niyababuIltsa[M] njyawabonllsa n.iyayibonlsiisa sjyayigawiidla sjyawagim661a s,iyabaseb6nj;iisa ndjyayiphambj»niisa njyabaphuldphula sjyayiphakAmiisa njyayidjWleela

(greet) (show) (see clearly) (chop) (hide) (make work) (turn upside down) (listen to) (lift up) (bury)

The vowel-initial High verb stems are paraUel: (129) njyawoyitka ndjyayal&tha ndjyayaWdsa Hjyawonwfibiisa njyawahluktfniisa

(fear) (point at) (herd) (make happy) (differ from)

We propose to account for these data just as we accounted for the examples like bayddkha from /bg-ya-akha/ above. In other words, we appeal to the ranking of No Adjacent Edges (or, alternatively, No Adjacent Sponsors) and Incorporate (H-sponsor) over DomCor (H) (and Incorporate (H-sponsor) over Uniqueness). The following tableau illustrates how the evaluation will choose the optimal output candidate. 030)

There is one aspect of the data in (128) that merits discussion. Consider the example njyaw&bonltsa- Notice that when there is no object prefix, tviyabonttsa. we invoke *MonoHD to explain why the HD structure in niva(bonii)sa rather than *niya(bfl)nlisa. But when there is an object prefix, this object prefix is going to be fused into the same domain as the Initial stem syllable. So, now, why is *nlya(wa.D2)niisa less optimal than nlya(wabgnii)sa? Both of these candidates satisfy *MonoHD, so Avoid Prominence should prefer *nlya(wa.boJniisa over niya(wa.bonii)sa! We suspect that the proper solution to this problem involves, again, a kind of Output-Output faithfulness holding between the "simple" form of the verb stem (i.e. without object prefix attached) and the "derived" form of the verb stem (Le. with object prefix attached). We do not attempt to develop this point of view fully here, but it is a mode of explanation that will arise more than once in our attempt to understand Isixhosa tonology.

80

Monosyllabic stems, however, pose a complication, whether they are CV stems or VCV Hems that behave like CV stems. (131) niyawiitya s.jyataipha Odiyay&kha niyaw&ba niyawda'kha

(eat) (give) (pick) (steal) (build)

If we assume that Syllable Alignment is undominated (in the A system), then we would predict the HD-structure: niya(wga) (tya} were H not for the OCP (either No Adjacent Edges or No Adjacent Sponsors). But given that the OCP dominates DomCor (H), and Incorporate (Hsponsor) dominates Uniqueness, we predict fusion of the object prefix and the verb stem into a single domain. But if this were to happen, we would have the incorrect output *njyawaaty4 It seems apparent that Nonfinality (HD) must play some role in accounting for the actual output niyaw&rftya- But how exactly? Recall that given an input aa#, and the three output candidates in (132), (132) (a) a(s)#" optimal (b) (a)a# (c) aa# we want to select (132a) as optimal in Isixhosa. The ranking of Incorporate (H-sponsor) over Nonfinality (HD) guarantees this result. (The ranking of DomCor (H) over Nonfinality (HD) could also serve to guarantee (132a) as optimal over (132c), but does not guarantee that (132a) is preferred to (132b).) But given an input fia# and the output candidates in (133), (133) (a) (b) (c)

(g)a# - optimal (aa)# a(ft)#

we need Nonfinality (HD) to be more highly ranked than DomCor (H) and Incorporate (Hsponsor) so that (133a), which docs not violate Nonfinality (HD) but does violate both DomCor (H) and Incorporate (H-sponsor), can be more highly valued than (133b), which violates DomCor (H) once, and (133c), which violates both DomCor (H) and Incorporate (H-sponsor) once. So we have a major dilemma. Nonfinality (HD) must be ranked above Incorporate (Hsponsor) in order to explain the selection of (&)a# as optimal, but it must be ranked below Incorporate (H-sponsor) to explain the optimality of a(g)#. We see no way out of this dilemma without exploding Nonfinality (HD) into two separate constraints: (134) (a)

(b)

Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) *(...oa)# Nonfinality (HD) *)#

81

The flrat member of the Nonfinality family, (134a), says that is nonoptimal for a polysyllabic domain to be aligned with the Right edge of the word. The second member, (134b), is more general and disfavors any domain at the Right edge of the word. Given this recognition of two constraints, we can locate (134a) above Incorporate (Hsponsor) and (134b) below Incorporate (H-sponsor). This ranking will allow us to select all the appropriate outputs. We demonstrate this below with sample tableaux for several critical cases. First consider the case of njyawdtftya.

-> niya(waa)tya |

[

|^

|

[^

In this tableau we see that both members of the Nonfinality constraint family play a role in choosing njyawMtya as optimal The constraint on polysyllabic domains rules out the fused domain in nlya(waatyg). The more general constraint favors niya(waa)tya over niyawaa(tya). Notice, incidentally, that there is no evidence yet of the relative ranking of (134b) and DomCor. In Chapter Three we will find evidence that (134b) must dominate DomCor (H). Consider next the derivation of njyaaty 1 (136) Candidates niyaatya ni(yaa)tya

No Edges

Adj (134a)

Incorporate (134b)

•I

§^Pl£iij£iiSlij&&

•1

*

-»niyaa(tya)

DomCor

BR

The highly ranked constraint on polysyllabic word-final domains has no relevance to this case, where the sponsor is the last mora of the word. The relatively lowly ranked general Nonfinality constraint has no effect since all the alternative candidates are rejected by the higher ranked Incorporate (H-sponsor). Ranking either (134a) or (134b) above *MonoHD and Align Word R will account for the fact that widescope domains cannot be extended to include word-final syllables. We will assume that it is (134a) that constrains the extension of a domain onto the final syllable. Is it motivated, on cross-linguistic grounds, to see Nonfinality as a constraint family that includes both (134a) and (134b)? We are not aware of any clear supporting evidence, so consider it worthwhile to consider alternatives. There is one alternative to the explosion of Nonfinality that is certainly worth considering. Borrowing from Odden's (1982) analysis of similar data from Shambaa, we might propose the following constraint: (137) ^Stressed Non-heads Non-head syllables in a HO may not be stressed. (137) would reject niya(waatyg) not because it has a word-final polysyllabic HD but rather because it has a nonhead syllable that is stressed (prominent). We leave open the issue of 82

whether 'Stressed Non-heads or an exploded Nonfinality constraint is responsible for the rejection of niya(woatyg), but come back to the issue later. Below we give the set of constraints governing HD structure and the realization of High tone that we have so far developed. (We do not repeat here the RO-structure constraints discussed above.) (138) Constraint System A: Syllable Alignment, Express (H, head of HD), 'Overlapping, Nonfinality (polysyllabic domain) or 'Stressed Non-heads, BAL, Plateau—undominated *(H, non-head) - dominated by Express (H, head of HD), Plateau Incorporate (H-sponsor) — dominated by Nonfinality (polysyllabic domain) or 'Stressed Non-heads Uniqueness — dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) No Adjacent Edges -dominated by 'Overlapping No Adjacent Sponsors — (it is not yet possible to determine whether No Adjacent Edges or No Adjacent Sponsors dominates DomCor (H) and thus results in "fusion"; indeed, as yet there is no evidence that No Adjacent Sponsors plays a critical role in the system, while there is evidence that No Adjacent Edges must dominate 'MonoHD and Align Word R) - dominated by 'Overlapping DomCor (H) - dominated by No Adjacent Edges (alternatively No Adjacent Sponsor); later we will see that Incorporate (H-sponsor) also dominates DomCor (H) 'Struc - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) 'MonoHD - dominated by Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD), No Adjacent Edges Avoid Prominence - dominated by Syllable Alignment, 'MonoHD Align Word R ~ dominated by No Adjacent Edges, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD), Avoid Prominence BAR - dominated by Align Word R Express (H) -- dominated by 'MonoHD, Align Word R, *(H, non-head) Constraint System B: (71a) - undominated Nonfinality (HD) - dominated by (71a) (73) - dominated by (71a) *(H, Depressed Syllable) (=(70)) - dominated by Nonfinality (HD) No Adjacent Edges — dominated by (70) Syllable Alignment - dominated by (70) *(71b) - dominated by (71a), (70) (Recall that (71a-b) refers to the two aspects of Domain-Faithfulness: (71a) requires that elements incorporated into a HD in the output of A should be incorporated into the corresponding HD in the output of B; (71b) requires that elements that are not in a HD in the output of A should not be in a HD in the output of B. (73) bars depressed syllables from being inside a HD.) Let us return briefly now to the examples in (131). The pronunciations cited are certainly valid pronunciations in Isixhosa. But we should note that there is another pronunciation available: sjyaylitya. sjyaydakha etc. In the context of the present chapter, it is not really possible to understand this variation. We will simply note that in Chapter Four, we present

83

evidence that penultimate Falling tones on a lengthened vowel (which are not the result of da DIHTS phenomenon) are to be understood as an IP-final tonal pattern that correlates with I word-final High tone in medial position. Examples like sjyaylitya have an altemath* pronunciation sjyayiityd under certain circumstances (see Jokweni 1995), suggesting that thek analysis is entirely parallel to the analysis of the similar data discussed in Chapter Four. We have not yet illustrated the case where a depressed object prefix is placed in front of i High verb stem A depressed object prefix does not produce any difference from the case when the object prefix is non-depressed. The reason for this is simple: depression does not interfere in any way with "fusion" (Le. the placement of two or more H-sponsors into a single HD). 4 A few examples illustrate: (139) njyaglftya (on niyaaiitya) niyazibddna s.iyaabonffsa sjyazjbonfsiisa

(eat) (see) (show) (see clearly)

We repeat examples from (131) which show that fusion also occurs regardless of the presence of a depressed syllable in the stem: (140) sjyayigawUiila sjyawajjm^ela

(chop) (hide)

Depressed syllables both in the object prefix and the stem likewise do not interfere with fusion: (141) sjyagigflwiitfla sjyaaisjme'61a

(chop) (hide)

In order for depressed syllables to block fusion, there would have to be some high-ranked constraint (connected to depressed syllables) that would be better served by avoiding fusion. We have postulated a constraint that bars a depressed syllable inside a HD. But there is no way in which adjacent HD's rather than fused HD's will lead to a better satisfaction of this constraint. In any case, the ban on depressed syllables inside a HD is so lowly ranked in the A system that it has no effect on the formation of domains. We have now explained the fusion of object prefixes with High-toned verb stems. But we have only looked at such configurations when the subject prefix is toneless. In (142) below we show the forms that occur when there is a High-toned subject prefix: 4

It is perhaps worth noting that the need to expand a HD so as to avoid a depressed High tone does not trigger fusion. For example, in K we haveftiya'fumtta'naand In M we have Kiytffif mMiM but in neither dialect do we have *&|yar\imia*na, which would be the fused form. So, how do we explain the fact that depressed syllables do not trigger fusion In the B system? In principle, the DIHTS could lead to fusion. But it does not In IsUhosa. We can explain this by the high ranking of Domain-Faithfulness In the B system: we assume that Domain-Failhnilness (specifically, the aspect of Domain-Faithfulness that requires any mora In an input HD to be In the corresponding HD In the output) outranks No Adjacent Edges. In other words, It is more Important for the output of B to be faithful to the HD structure of the input to B than It is to avoid adjacent High Domain Edges in the output of B.

84

(142) Ilyawlditya (or: Hyaawta'atya) HyawabtWka llyabamteima bdyabablddna biyabayltftfsha llyawabluliisa [K] / liyawabullfisa [M] biyababon'iisa biyawabonltsiisa Hyawl&ba Ifyawt&Ekha Iiyawoylifka IlyonwWbiisa Hyahlukla'niisa

(eat) (place) (invite) (see) (wake up) (greet) (show) (see clearly) (steal) (build) (fear) (make happy) (differ from)

At expected, we see that No Adjacent Edges requires that the domain initiated by the subject prefix not extend onto the syllable in front of the object prefix. Turning to the case where the High subject prefix is depressed (and the object prefix not depressed): (143) ny&v/Aitya [M], giydwtfdtya [K] Xjyaw4b«ka [M], zjya>ab!6eka [K] %jy6wa,me'£ma [M], gjydwamle'e'ma [K] XJya>4biSMisa [M], jjyaVablilliisa [K] giydwibdnifsa [M], giyAwabonlffsa ZJydwdbdnlsiisa [M], zJyAwabonlfsiisa SJyaw«ba [M], zjyiwle^ba [K] Ziyiwdyiika [MJ, zjyiwoylilka [K] SJy4w6nwdbiisa [M], ziyiwonwldbiisa [K\

(eat) (place) (invite) (greet) (show) (see clearly) (steal) (fear) (make happy)

(143) shows, when there is a depressed subject prefix, its H will shift to the prefix /ya/. In the case of K, there will be downstep between the H tone on /ya/ and the head of the following HD (and there will be no protection of non-heads following /ya/). This all is due to the fact that in K there is a register domain separation between /ya/ and the object prefix. In M, on the other hand, the shifted H on /ya/ will not be separated from a following HD-head by downstep and there will be protection of following non-head syllables. This is due to the fact that in M the /ya/ and the following object prefix are in the same RD. However, when the stem has a depressed syllable, as in (144), that depressed syllable will initiate a RD due to Depressed Syllable Alignment. Cohesion prevents stem syllables in front of the depressed syllable from being incorporated into a preceding RD, while in M, the HD-mora Incorporation (Prefix) constraint will force the object prefix to be included in the preceding RD. Plateau will force the object prefix to appear with a High tone. In K, the object prefix is toneless. The difference is attributable to the fact that in K prefixes are not incorporated into a preceding RD. (But see Chapter Three for more discussion.)

85

(144) ay«ytflall<ela[M],iriy4yigal!e-elB[Kl zjyiwflgflwlilula [Ml, zjyAwagawlritfla [K] zjyawfthengUlsa [Ml, zjyiwithenglilsa [K] zjyAbdsebenzjsIlela [M], zjytfbaseberjzjsllela [K]

(pour) (chop) (sell) (cause to work for)

These examples in no way differ from the cases discussed above where a High-toned subject cooccurs with a High-toned object prefix and a toneless verb stem. The object prefixes in (143) and (144) were not depressed. If the object prefix is depressed, as in (145), then in both K and M the object prefix will not be in a RD with /ya/ due to the high ranking of Depressed Syllable Alignment, which (as reformulated) bars a depressed syllable from being included in the same RD as a preceding syllable. Since neither the object prefix nor any of the material following the object prefix can be in the same RD as the /ya/, then there must be a downstep between /ya/ and the head of the next HD and there can be no protection of following non-heads.

(145) wy^sUitya

ziytaib.'ddna zjydzjbonlifsa

jaytoioawiiNiia siydsithengl.Usa zjya'zjbonlisiisa

(eat) (see) (show) (chop) (sell) (see clearly)

zjydzjsebenzjsle'ela (make work for) We have now reviewed the tonal behavior of (High-toned) object prefixes in front of both High and toneless verb stems, with both High and toneless subject prefixes. This essentially completes our study of the long form of the present tense. The object-prefix data in every way substantiate the analysis developed earlier; their sole peculiar property is that in M they may be organized into a preceding RD, in violation of Cohesion, and thus surface as High due to Plateau. In Chapter Three we will see that it is not just object prefixes that have this character, but subject prefixes and noun class prefixes as welL In the next and concluding section of this chapter, we discuss a specific point about phonetic implementation. IS. A matter of phonetic interpretation. We have ignored a certain point up until now that needs to be made explicit. When non-heads are not realized as H due to the constraint (146) *(H. non-head) the fact of the matter is that they are realized at a relatively raised pitch level if they are not preceded by a depressed syllable. This is particularly noticeable in phrase-initial position when the non-head is immediately followed by the head. Thus in an example such as baytfliima from /bsyaliima/, the initial syllable may be quite raised in pilch. As the number of non-heads increase, it is perhaps more obvious that these syllables are lower than the head in pitch.

86

Given this phonetic raising of the non-heads, there is a phonetic contrast between bayacdciisa (where the subject prefix sponsors a H tone) and sjyabjileela [K] (where the •object prefix is toneless). The initial syllables in the former are raised in comparison with the latter. The underscoring of the vowel of the subject prefix in the latter case is meant to indicate the relative fewness of these syllables. AH that is meant by this underscoring is that the subject prefix in these cases has a lowering effect analogous to that triggered by depressed consonants. This marking does not represent a claim that these syllables are necessarily "depressed" in any other sense. (The "depressing" nature of the underscored subject prefixes has been recognized by various researchers dealing with Nguni languages; phonetic research is badly needed to determine whether there is anything other than pitch that would lead one to conclude that these syllables are in fact depressed.) The initial syllables in sjyabilleela are not part of a HD in contrast to the initial syllables in bayaclciisa. The former has the domain structure siya(bji)leela whereas the later has the domain structure (bgyaca)disa. We suggest that phonetic interpretation is sensitive to domain structure. Specifically, we suggest that toneless non-heads are relatively higher in pitch than toneless mora that arc not parsed into domains. Given this analysis, there is no need to consider the subject prefix in sjyabilleela to be in fact depressed. The details of the phonetic implementation require careful investigation. No raising of non-heads in a phrase-initial HD seems to occur when there is a depressed syllable in that HD. Furthermore, it is not clear that there is raising in HD's that are not phrase-initial.

87

CHAPTER THREE MORE VERBAL FORMS WITH LEXICAL TONE 3.0. Introduction. In Chapter Two, we examined the tonology of the long form of the present tense. This tense provided us whh an overview of many of the complexities of the Isixhosa tonal system. In this chapter we continue our exploration of the tonal pattern of tenses where the verb stem continues to display the lexical tone patterning noted in Chapter Two (Le. the obvious differentiation into toneless and High verb stems). 3.1. Short form of the present tense. In this section we will examine the tonology of the short form of the present tense. The short form of the present tense differs from the long form in lacking the prefix /ya/. As a consequence, in the short form, the subject prefix abuts directly the verb stem. Roughly speaking, the long form of the present tense is used when the verb is final in its clause; the short form is used when the verb is non-finaL. One point needs attention immediately. In our analysis up to this point, we have formulated Nonfinalhy to refer to the word. We have also formulated our widescope-driving alignment principle (e.g. Align Word R) to refer to the word. There are Bantu languages where HD's extend beyond the limits of the word, and where Nonfinalhy refers to the phrase rather than the word (more precisely, where Nonfinalhy (Phrase) is ranked highly and helps choose optimal outputs, while Nonfinalhy (Word) is lowly ranked and had no significant effect). In Isixhosa, however, we do not generally find domain structure crossing word boundaries. The word edge continues to be significant even when looking at phrases. This observation will be important since the short form of the present tense is never used in phrase-final position but only phrase-medially. We will first examine the shape of the verb as it would appear in phrase-initial position (and ignoring its interaction whh a following word). Later we will look at the interactions of the verb with a preceding word as well as with a following word. In the non-third person short present tense form of toneless verbs, there is of course no overt High tone present in the verb. (1)

n.djlwa.../5jlwa... nd(5nzn./sGnza.... ndjwa... /sjwa... ndipheka..7s.jphekB... ndjlima.../s;jlima... ndjhleka.../s,jhleka... ndjwisa..y§jwisa... ndjlwisa.../$jlwisa... ndjbalisa.../sjbalisa...

(fight) (do) (fall) (cook) (cultivate) (laugh) (drop) (cause to fight) (narrate) 88

fldjcacisa.../ sjcacisa... (explain) nd.jlunflisa.../«luriaisa» (repair) tldjkhohlakala.../ sjyakhohlakala...(be cruel) ndiflibisela.../ sjajbisela... (throw) ndjmangalela.../ sjmangalela... (accuse) Nothing needs to be said concerning the above forms. There is no mora that sponsors a H in the underlying representation, consequently these verbal forms lack any HD-structure. When there is a High-toned subject prefix, and the verb stem is monosyllabic, we find data as in (2): (2)

Mlwa... b4wa... Wrn.ti»... WnjCB...

(fight) (fall) (dig) (do)

These data show, as mentioned above, that Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) in Isixhosa refers to the word rather than, say, the Intonational Phrase, since tbe HD initiated by the subject prefix cannot extend to the word-final syllable even though that syllable is phrase-medial. BisyUabic toneless stems used in conjunction with a High subject prefix appear in (3): baphgka... babala... baytfla... bagtfla... bahieka... bacula... bag&a... ballma...

(cook) (count) (close) (be sick) (laugh) (sing) (bemad) (cultivate)

In these data we see that the HD initiated by the subject prefix extends through the penult syllable. This could reflect the fact that *MonoHD dominates Avoid Prominence. However, since the penultimate syllable is not lengthened in the medial position, it is not apparent whether this extension of the HD through the penult is actually a violation of Avoid Prominence. If there is no violation of Avoid Prominence involved, then the extension of the domain is the optimal satisfaction of *MonoHD, Nonfinality, and Align Word R. The data involving bisyllabic verb stems based on monosyllabic roots is of some interest in connection with the issue of whether Avoid Prominence is at work in the short form of the present tense. (4) biwisa... or bawisa... (drop) lilwela... or ulw61a... (fight for) bdhlisa... or bahlisa... (lower) Recall that we have suggested that these verb stems are exceptions to *MonoHD. This exceptionality will explain the pronunciations like bdwisa... as long as Avoid Prominence is in 89

fact (at least optionally) in effect in these short forms of the present tense. If Avoid Prominence were not in effect, then it would not matter whether these stems were exceptions to *MonoHD since the constraint Align Word R would (in the absence of Avoid Prominence) require the HD to extend as far right as possible. The following tableau illustrates that if Avoid Prominence were inapplicable, due to the absence of prominence, we would generate bawflsa as the (only) optimal output.

(5) Candidates (bawisa)... -» (bawfysa... (bsjwisa...

Nonfinality

•MonoHD

Avoid Prom

^A%nWordR

[irrelevant]

sa

I* wi!sa

[*]

In order to generate bdwisa..., we need Avoid Prominence to be (optionally) applicable and to dominate Align Word R:

(6) Candidates (bawisa)... (bgwQsa... -»(ba)wisa...

Nonfinality

*MonoHD

!*

Yrwj^^nn^K^m %%"^?k&3^M?$£$%3^ | wisa

[*]

(Recall that we enclose in brackets violation marks that are inoperative due to the item in question being an exception to the constraint.) To conclude: we need Avoid Prominence to be relevant in the short present form in order to have the evaluation in (6), but we also need it to be optionally inapplicable (presumably due to the fact the penult syllable is no longer actually prominent in medial position) in order to have the evaluation in (5). Given the assumption that bawisa... reflects the surface lack of prominence on the penult and that bdwisa--- reflects an abstract prominence on the penult, then our analysis of verbs derived from monosyllabic roots as exceptions to *MonoHD yields the correct results. Turning to trisyllabic or longer stems, we find the HD initiated by the subject prefix extends to the antepenult (in the case where the penult is taken to be prominent) or to the penult (in the case where the verb is treated as lacking prominence and thus Avoid Prominence is irrelevant). (7)

babaMisa... or babalisa... baedcisa... or bacaclsa... baluflflisa... or balungisa... baxolela... or baxolila... banabulula... or banabuldla... bajacdjtela... or bajacujtffla... bahlehtezeja... or bahlehlez#la... baqonondrjdjsa... or baqononondjsa... baqhathanisela... or baqhathanisgla...

90

(narrate) (explain) (repair) (forgive) (stretch the body) (go about in rags) (retreat hastily) (emphasize) (be dishonest)

If the antepenult syllable is depressed, then we find the DIHTS phenomenon. There will then be only one pronunciation available: (8)

bayymela... badantsa... bamangal6la... oahlajjulula... baphajjamtsa... baphengultfla...

(permit) (dance) (accuse) (spread) (disturb) (search out)

There is only one optimal output due to the fact that two different evaluations yield the same output. Let us see why this is so. Take the case where the penult syllable is considered as prominent Then the HD structure will be (ba.vu)mela... as a consequence of the A system, but (bgvume)la... as a consequence of the B system. In other words, the High will be shifted to the penult in the final output. Now take the case where the penult syllable is not considered to be prominent. The HD structure will be (ba.vume)la... as a consequence of the A system, and the B system will not alter this in any way. The result will be a penult High tone. Thus it does not matter whether Avoid Prominence is applicable or not; the same form will result in either case. If the antepenult syllable is depressed and the penult syllable is also depressed, then we would expect two different pronunciations to be available - and this is what we find. (9)

bayagdduka... or bayagodtfka... bahlunfllizela... or bayahlungujgla...

(go home) (shake the head)

The reason for the two pronunciations should be clear. If Avoid Prominence is operative, then the output of the A system will be (bahlungu)zela... The depressor in the penult will, however, mean that even in the output of the B system the HD-structure will be the same. Thus we predict the form bahlurjgtf2g]a.. But if Avoid Prominence is inapplicable because die penult is not prominent, then the A system will yiekl (bn,hlungU2e)la... and the B system will not alter this in any fashion. Thus we predict the pronunciation bahlurigu^gla-Up until this point we have set aside examples where the subject prefix is depressed. Such examples are for the most part indistinguishable from the case where the subject prefix is not depressed, since the head of the HD is not the subject prefix in most cases. (10)

fcflwa...

(fight) (close) (be sick) (laugh) (sing) (drop) (make fight) (forgive) (get used to) (explain) (dance)

siytfia... zigtfla... KJhlgka... iiciila... jjwfsa... Sllwlsa... Kix61ela... or aixotela... SJqhilisa. '• or juqhelisa... jjcacisa... or jjyacacisa... aid»n1sa... 91

SJyumeia... Cjnabuiula... or zjnabulula... Ojactizela... or gjjacuftila... Zjhlehl6;eja... or zihlehleg£la... z.jmangaje'la... zjphaza.misa... Siqonon6ndisa— or siqononoridjsa... Uqhathanlsela... or sjqhathanis61a...

(permit) (stretch the body) (go about in rags) (retreat hastily) (accuse) (disturb) (emphasize) (be dishonest)

We see that in the one case where the head may be the subject prefix — namely, in the case of verbs like /wisa/ (cf. bdwisa—) - the DIHTS phenomenon is observed. As a consequence, ZJwlsa... is the only available pronunciation, in contrast to bdwisa-Zbawlsa... The most important thing that we have learned from the toneless verb stem in the short form of the present is that there is optionally with respect to whether the penult vowel of the verb Is considered to be prominent or not. The consequence of this is that we have alternative forms available, since when Avoid Prominence is not operative, Align Word R may enforce a wider domain than otherwise. We will see this same phenomenon in the High verb stems. In the case of the short present tense form of High verbs (with a toneless subject prefix), some discussion is required. If the verb is a monomoraic H verb, in phrase-medial position the H tone is not retained.

(11)

n.djtya..Vsitya... ndjdWsidla. ndikha... Odipha...

(eat) (cat) (draw water) (give)

How are we to account for the absence of the word-final High tone in these examples? Recall that at the end of Chapter Two, we proposed that Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is ranked higher than the other, more general version of this constraint, Nonfinality (HD). This ranking explained why certain final High tones could not be incorporated into a HD, if to incorporate them would have required a polysyllabic HD aligned with the R edge of the word. At the same time, it allowed those final Highs that could be incorporated into a monosyllabic wordfinal HD to be optimal. Now we see that in phrase-medial position, the final H observed in the long form n.diy&atya' is missing in the short form rjdttya... There are two possible explanations for this: either monosyllabic word-final domains are not allowed in phrase-medial position or their High is not allowed to be expressed. We believe that there is evidence that the domain must exist but the H is not expressed The relevant data involves words of the structure CVCVCV. In phrase-final position, such words would have die HD structure (CV) C W (CV) due to the fact that No Adjacent Edges outranks *MonoHD . But now consider the phrase-medial position. Assume that no domain structure were built over the word-final H-sponsor. Then No Adjacent Edges could not prevent the HD initiated by the first H-sponsor from extending to the penult Thus it would be predicted that the optimal domain structure would be (CVCV)CV. This, however, is incorrect A noun such as fmiityid 'straps,' when it is phrase-medial, is pronounced Imitya... and not *imltya— This medial pronunciation suggests that there must be a word-final

92

HD to explain the role that No Adjacent Edges plays in preventing the extension of the initial HD in tmitya... We conclude then that the data in (11) involves not the failure to parse the H-sponsor into a domain, but rather the failure of Express (H) to be satisfied — Le. the existence of some constraint that outranks Express (H). The relevant constraint is a form of Nonfinality, but one which is specifically about realization of High tone and not about domain structure. (12)

Nonfinality (H) The final mora in a representation may not bear H.

(12) is of course a constraint family, referring to either "word"- or "phrase"-final elements. In Isixhosa the "wonT-final version of this constraint is highly enough ranked to have impact. However, in Isixhosa, this constraint impacts only on word-final mors in medial position in the phrase. Word-final moras are High-toned when they are also phrase-final. To get at the difference in behavior between phrase-medial and phrase-final High tones in Isixhosa, we propose a solution similar to the one that was adopted in our account of "protection" in Chapter Two. We assume that Express (H) is a family of constraints. Specifically, while in general it is best to express the feature throughout the domain, it may be even better to express the feature in particular positions. Thus we earlier proposed that expressing High on heads was a separate, independently rankable constraint from the general Express (H) constraint. Now we suggest another member of the Express (H) family. (13)

Express (H, phrase-final mora)

If (13) dominates (12), while (12) dominates Express (H, head), then we will express H on phrase-final heads but not on phrase-medial heads. This account is adequate only if (13) is plausible — Le. if there is real cross-linguistic evidence that phrase-final position is somehow a "stronger" (more favored) bearer of High tone that phrase-medial position. The immediate problem with this claim is that there seems to be cross-linguistic evidence for phrase-final position to be associated with the lowest pitch level in the phrase! Thus (13) seems to be contrary to a better-motivated universal principle. However, contradictory constraints are not necessarily inconsistent with the OT model; so it may be that (13) can in the end be sustained. We do not, however, have any specific evidence of a cross-linguistic nature supporting a preference for High tone in phrase-final position in contrast to phrase-medial position. In the absence of such evidence, (13) represents a dubious move. However, since we have no better explanation, we will assume an undominated (13). Let us summarize, then, our system of realization constraints: (14)

Express (H, phrase-final mora) ~ undominated Nonfinality (Word-final H) - dominated by Express (H, phrase-final mora) Express (H, head) - dominated by Nonfinality (Word-final H) Plateau -- dominated by Express (H, head) *(H,non-head) - dominated by Plateau, Express (H, head) Express (H) - dominated by Nonfinality (H), *(H, non-head)

The tableaux in (IS) illustrate how the two different pronunciations (phrase-medial and phrasefinal) will be selected under this analysis. These tableaux are confined to the constraints concerning expression and assume the optimal domain structure:

93

(15)

fldiyaatya" Domain structure: ndiyaa (tyg)

rjdjtya... Domain structure: ndi (tyg)™ Candidates

Express (H, phrase- Nonflnality final) (Word-final H)

ndi(tya)... -> ndi (tya)».

j*

Express (NHLheodJt^

P^^^^^^^^^^ *

As noted above, there is evidence for a preference for IP-final moras to be low in tone. Thus it is not difficult to find languages with data that are just the opposite of Isixhosa. For example, in Mijikenda there are no word-final High tones in phrase-final position, but word-final High tones can be realized in phrase-medial position. Mijikenda could be analyzed as follows: Nonfinality (Phrase-final H) is active in the language and dominates the entire family of Express (H) constraints. The Nonfinality (Word-final H) constraint is inactive, being lowly. While the line of analysis that we have developed does allow us to account for both Isixhosa and Mijikenda, we have not attempted to explore what the exact range of systems is that our analysis predicts as possible. Thus we do not want to claim too much for our analysis. We do believe that the idea of seeing Expression as a constraint family is plausible. It is also plausible to propose the existence of a hierarchy of positions that favor expression. Our analysis of the data in (11) claims that phrase-final position is one of the positions that may be promoted to a higher ranking than the general expression constraint. There may be evidence from the languages of the world to support this idea (e.g. cases where phonological contrasts are tolerated phrase-finally and not elsewhere), but we have not yet searched out an array of such evidence. Thus this treatment of the data in (11) must be considered speculative at best. Let us now return to the presentation of the surface forms of High verb stems in the short present (when there is a toneless subject prefix). Consider next Disyllabic High verb stems: (16)

ndjbdna.../sjb6na... HdttMngaVsjtMn.gft. ndistila.../s,jsrila... ndjb£ka.../s,jbe'ka...

(sec) (buy) (wipe) (place)

ndidlftia..vMW»-

(play)

If the verb stem is bimoraic and H, the H is linked to the first stem mora in the short form as in the long form. This is of course completely predictable, since Nonfinality (polysllabic HD) continues to delimit the scope of a HD regardless of the medial position. Next consider trisyllabic or longer H verb stems:

94

(17)

siseWrjja. ndjgaWlasibonisa... ndjfum&na... tldiphuliphula.../ ndiphulaphula... s.ingxab«la«iy5igx»bala«i. Odjqaqimb.jsa.../ndjqaqamb.{sa... Sljsebenseja... / sjsebenj^la... ndiphambanisa... sjbonakalisa...

(work) (pour) (show) (get) (listen) (straddle) (make ache) (work for) (turn upside down) (make visible)

Nothing much needs to be said about these data. The High tone of the verb stem behaves the same in the short form as in the long form, except for the possibility of Avoid Prominence being rendered inapplicable due to the verb (optionally) lacking prominence. In those speech varieties where /bujisa/ retains the H on the first stem mora in the long form, the short form may show this same property (as long as Avoid Prominence is inapplicable due to the verb lacking prominence): (18)

odibulisa.... or ndjbulisa... ndifufldisa... or ndifundjsa...

(greet) (teach)

Vowel-initial High verb stems, as usual, require some discussion. Recall our analysis of such stems from Chapter Two. We assume that the constraint that wants a Prosodic Stem to be aligned with a syllable (2:49) is more important than the constraint that wants a Prosodic Stem to be aligned with the Morphological Stem (2:50). This means that the H-sponsor is going to be the second stem mora rather the first. However, in the case of VCV stems, while some steins do have a final H-sponsor as expected, others have a penult H sponsor. Another complicating factor is that VCVCVCV show variation as to whether *MonoHD is enforced or not. In (19) we illustrate the pronunciation of various V-initial stems in the short form of the present tense: (19)

nakha... (build) ndoma... (dry up) ndgna... (spoil) (We have not observed pronunciations like *ntfkha..., *rjdd"na... even though a penult H can be observed in phrase-final position.) Hdaliisa... ndoylsa...

(herd) (defeat) rjdQnwaba... (be happy) tldala'tha... (point at) naliliikana..7 nahlukina... (differ from) ndalu'sela.../ ndahislla... (herd for) nonw4bisa.../nonwabisa... (make happy)

9J

The VCV roots are uniformly treated like CV roots (Le. the Prosodic Stem is always aligned with the syllable rather than the Morphological Stem). As a consequence, the final vowel is the Hsponsor and is organized into a HD; but expression of the H on the head of this domain is barred in phrase-medial position for the same reason that we have Qdjtya-.. and not *ndjty4.. We do not know why (in the speech of our consultants at least) a VCV stem never permits the first vowel to be the sponsor in short forms but does in long forms. The trisyllabic and longer stems in (19) are consistent with assuming that the second stem mora is the H-sponsor as a result of an undoirdnated (2:49). Recall that we suggested in Chapter Two that V-initial verbs are optionally exceptional to *MonoHD. This has no consequence for a VCVCV stem: the second stem vowel is the H-sponsor and Nonfinality (HD), which dominated •MonoHD in any case, will prevent the HD from extending onto the final syllable. Longer verb steins have two possible pronunciations. These two pronunciations follow from the fact that (a) in the short form of the present tense the penult is only optionally considered prominent (thus Avoid Prominence may or may not be relevant) and (b) in the case of V-initial stems, *MonoHD may be respected or not A pronunciation such as nflhldkana— is predicted if the penult is considered prominent and *MonoHD is inoperative, while ns)hlukdna>» is predicted either by virtue of *MonoHD being enforced or by virtue of the penult not being regarded as prominent Let us now consider High verbs with High subject prefixes in the short form of the present tense. We begin with bisyllabic stems. We include both depressed and non-depressed subject prefixes since no difference results from this contrast (20)

bab<5na..., sjbdna... HWka..., jjbelca... bastila..., asiila... baWtha..., sjbe'fha... bathenga.. aitMnga. badjgla..., sidjfjla...

(see) (place) (wipe) (beat) (buy) (play)

While there are two H-sponsors in the input (the subject prefix and the verb stem), it is clear that there are not two HD's in the output: if there were, we would have a High tone on both the subject prefix and the first syllable of the verb stem. We must have a single HD in order to account for the fact that there is only one High tone heard. The presence of a single HD can be explained by the high ranking of an OCP constraint (either No Adjacent Edges or No Adjacent Sponsors) that we suggested in Chapter Two. Were it not for the OCP, we would expect (ba)(bo)na as the HD structure. The fact that the OCP and Incorporate (H-sponsor) dominate DomCor (H) means that it will be better not to have adjacent HD's than to assign each H-sponsor to a separate domain. In the following tableau we illustrate various candidates provided by Gen. We include only the relevant constraints.

QQ__

Candidates OCP (a) babQpha -Kb) (babojpha (c)ba(bfl)pha (d) (ba)bpj>ha (e) (beMbpJpha •!

Incorporate

DomCor

*;*

•**&hH>=m *

*!

ftf***ltotl ££$-'M>::*-:M

*i

ifetoiiiPi 96

Candidate (e) is rejected since it violates the OCP; (a), (c), and (d) are rejected since they violate Incorporate (H-sponsor). (b) is the only remaining candidate. The data cited do not in fact show that the HD is initiated by the subject prefix. In other words, (c) would explain the surface forms as well as (b). We shall see later in this chapter that a candidate such as (b) is required in order to characterize "protection" facts (see Chapter Two for a discussion of Plateau and the phenomenon of protection). There is one additional point that bears (repeated) emphasis. With respect to the fusion of domains, depressed syllables play no role whatsoever. In Chapter Two, we saw that the object prefix High and the verb stem H fuse regardless of whether either is depressed -• e.g. njyayiggwiliila and njyazjthengt]sa b o th s n o w fusion. Similarly, we find fusion in badjtfla... just like in basildla... Depressors play no role at all in determining the HD-structure of the output of the A system. Their role is restricted to the B system. Next consider trisyllabic and longer H stems with a H subject prefix. (22)

baseb£nza., zjseWnza. bagajela..., zjgalela... babonlsa..., zjbonisa... bafumdna..., zjfumAna... bafundjsa..., zjfundjsa... boyika..., zqyika... babonlsisa... or babonisisa... baphulAphula... or baphulaphtila... zjsebdnjela... or zjsebenz£1a... baphambanfsa..., zjphambanfsa... lonwibisa... or lonwabisa... lahlukdnisa... or lahlukanisa... babonak&lisa..., zjbonakalisa... bashumay6zana..., sjshumayezana... bashiyiselana..., bashiyiselina...

(work) (pour) (show) (get) (teach) (fear) (see clearly) (listen) (work for) (turn upside down) (make happy) (disunite) (make visible) (preach to each other) (compete in running) Again, we see that there is a single surface High tone which appears in the location where the verb stem High would be expected to appear. The subject prefix High does not surface. These data (like the data in (20)) are consistent with either an analysis where the two High-tone anchors are fused into a single domain or an analysis where the first High tone simply fails to trigger a HD. We analyze the data in terms of fusion. The tableau in (23) illustrates babonakaltsa--, but we omit from consideration all of those constraints that guarantee that the domain will extend as far Right as possible (e.g.. Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD), Avoid Prominence, Align Word R) since they are irrelevant to the main point. (23) babonakallsa.. Candidates (a) bflbanakalisa... •(b) (babgnakali)sa... (c) ba (bpnakali)sa (d) (bajbanakalisa (e) (baj(bonakali)sa

OCP

Incorporate

*!

DomCor

¥h®&$9
We have postponed die discussion of the monosyllabic verb case. (24)

Mrya..., rftya... Weils-... *fdla... Mkha.... ajkha... bapha..., slpha...

(cat) (cat) (draw water) (give)

Notice the problem posed by these data is the same problem that we discussed in Chapter Two for the case where a High-toned object prefix is combined with a High-toned monosyllabic verb stem. We have an input where there are two adjacent sponsors, but the second is word-final. What we saw in Chapter Two was that in such cases the final High sponsor is not parsed into a domain - cf. rjdjyaytttya and not the *ndjyayiitya' that would be predicted if both sponsors were parsed into a fused domain. The analysis that we proposed in Chapter Two will also account for the data in (24). The tableau in (25) demonstrates this point. (25) Candidates («)batyi (b)(ba)(tyi) (c) (batya) (d)bi(tya) -*(e) (ba) tva

OCP

Nonfinality (polyHD)

*!

TSTKMW1K? •1

Incorporate

DomCor

Nonfinality (HD)

Ul^^msmmm&mmmmm ipt^'^-^\' lattf*?-* ;'20*f«if' * *« * ~ ' * •; • '*S ««" >i * ; » * * . $ • **>

* *

i

• *

*!

The vowel-initial verb stems of the shape VCV require, as usual, a bit of discussion. When the subject prefix is toneless, we recorded rjdjkha... (build), without any High tone, and we did not record *nd. j k h a - We suggested that this indicates that the VCV stems in the short form of the present tense uniformly have their final vowel as the H-sponsor. Now, when we place a VCV High verb stem after a High-toned subject prefix, we uniformly find data like bdkha.. Does this pronunciation follow from the assumption that the VCV stem has a final Hsponsor? The tableau in (32) shows that indeed the correct output will result if the High-tone sponsors are the subject prefix and the final vowel: /ba. akha/ (though the same form would also result from the assumption that the sponsors are the subject prefix and the first vowel of the Morphological Stem: /ba. akha/). We present only candidates that do not violate the highly ranked OCP constraint and which do not violate the undominated Syllable Alignment (undominated in the A system). (26)

(a)

Candidates lxa>akhi (bakha) ba(kha) -»(ba)kha.

assuming: ba. akha. Nonfinality (polyHD)

Incorporate DomCor Nonfinality


*!* *i

• * . . * * ' « & .

* *

* *

98

A

•1

,•>•>.•:*.•:•••

(b)

assuming: ba. akha

Since either analysis yields the correct output, we will continue to assume that VCV in medial position are unexceptional and have a final H-sponsor - Le. that (26a) is the correct tableau. At this juncture we turn our attention to the inclusion of an object prefix in the short form of the present tense. We begin as usual with toneless verb stems. The data in (27) illustrate the toneless subject prefix case. njyilwa... njwrfwisa... or njwawisa... njwabala... niyiMlisa... or njyiballsa... njwashukumisa.. or njwashukumisa... njwanameth^lisa... or njwanamathelisa... njwdsa... njwdlula... or njwoluia... njwanelisa... or njwanelisa... njwalamanisa... or njwalamanisa...

(fight) (drop) (count) (narrate) (shake) (cement) (bake) (stretch) (satsify) (connect with)

The data in (27) show that the object prefix initiates a HD. In the case of a monosyllabic stem like /Iwa/, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) prevents the domain from extending onto the final vowel: niytlwa... In the case of a verb stem like /wisa/, the domain cannot extend into the verb (due to the fact that these verbs are exceptions to *MonoHD) as long as the penult is regarded as prominent and thus Avoid Prominence is in force: njwdwisa.-. If Avoid Prominence is irrelevant (as it optionally may be in the short present), then the domain will be extended (not by virtue of •MonoHD, but rather by virtue of Align Word R): njwawisa... In the case of the other consonant-initial stems, the HD initiated by the object will extend some ways into the verb according to the way that widescope alignment constraints interact with Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) and Avoid Prominence. The vowel-initial examples in (27) require no particular discussion. Tableaux are not necessary. Let us look at the case where there is a High subject prefix in front of the object prefix attached to a toneless verb stem. (28)

liwalwa... liwaVisa... or liwawisa... liwabala... liwaMlisa... or liwabalisa... liwashukiimisa... or liwashukumisa...

99

(fight) (drop) (count) (narrate) (shake)

liwanamatheiisa... or liwanamathellsa... liwdsa... liwdlula... or liwolilla... liwanelisa... or liwanelisa... liwalamdnisa... or Iiwalamanisa...

(cement) (bake) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

These data demonstrate that the subject prefix and the object prefix are inside the same HD ("fusion" has occurred); there is just one High tone in the output (which indicates that there is one HD), even though there are two High tone sponsors. Obviously, the OCP is responsible for this failure to have two HD's in the output. The following tableau illustrates how our analysis accountsforthis case of fusion: (29) Candidates liwabala... (ID(waba)la... (IDwabala... U(waba)la... -Ktiwa.ba)la... (Ijwajbala... (Ijwabala)...

Nonfinality OCP (poly HD) *l

Incorporate

DomCor

•MonoHD

*?s?gs3ss^fs*s3 w^mkAsH^i f w^vSSsgSfM *i •i

KStiii^llSiiBili

isisiiiiii wsssxsi * *

•I

*!

Of course, the surface forms shown in (28) do not demonstrate that the correct surface form is (liwabtf) la..., since lj (waM)Ia... would yield the same surface form, "Protection" phenomenon cited below will establish that the former is indeed the correct representation. We have now covered the behavior of object prefixes with toneless verb stems. Let us look at High verb stems next. (30) shows what happens when the subject prefix is toneless. (30)

njwa*tya... njwabe'ka... njwame'ma... njwabiilisa... ornjwabuMsa... HJwabonlsa... njwabonisisa... or njwabonisisa... njwanyinyithekisa... or njwanyinyithekisa... njwe'ba... njwdkha... njwoylka... njwonwa'bisa... or njwonwablsa... njwahlukdnisa... or njwahlukanlsa...

(eat) (put) (invite) (greet) (show) (see clearly) (make slippery) (steal) (build) (fear) (make happy) (disunite)

Except for the njwrftya... case, the object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor are fused into a single HD as a consequence of the OCP's high ranking. This is exactly what was observed in the long form of the present tense and requires no discussion. The 100

njwa'tya... example also parallels what is found in the long present. In Chapter Two we explained why there is a High tone on the object prefix and not on the verb stem as follows: we ranked Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) above Incorporate (H-sponsor) and the general Nonfinality (HD) constraint below Incorporate (H-sponsor) and DomCor (H). This ranking rules out having both the object prefix and the monosyllabic stem fuse into a single domain. Rather, the verb stem High-sponsor is simply not parsed into a HD. See Chapter Two for full discussion of this point Recall, however, that in Chapter Two we discussed the possibility of replacing this account of the facts with an account where a constraint 'Stressed Non-heads blocks the domain structure ni(wglyg)... The data currently under discussion provide an argument against the appeal to 'Stressed Non-heads. Why? Recall that in the short form of the present tense, it is optionally possible to treat the verb as lacking a stressed syllable. If so, then it should be possible to regard ni(wfltyaj... as not violating 'Stressed Non-heads and therefore a surface form such as 'njwatya... should be possible (a High on the head of the domain would not surface in phrasemedial position, thus the absence of any high tone). But this is not a possible pronunciation. We will therefore assume that the analysis exploding Nonfinality (HD) into Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) and Nonfinality (HD) is warranted. No particular discussion of the other forms in (30) is required since they entirely parallel the long form of the present tense. We should perhaps just remind the reader that an example like njwabonisa— cannot rely simply on *MonoHD to explain the extension of the HD onto the penult syllable; in Chapter Two we suggested that an output-output faithfulness constraint may be at work. When a H subject prefix is in front of a High object prefix that is in turn attached to a High verb stem, we find the following data. (31)

liwa'tya... liwamema... liwabiilisa... or liwabulisa... liwabonisa... liwabonlsisa... or liwabonisisa... liwanyinyith€kisa... or liwanyinyithekisa... liwe'ba... liwoyika... liwonwdbisa... or liwonwabisa... liwahlukfinisa... or liwahlukanisa...

(eat) (invite) (greet) (show) (see clearly) (make slippery) (steal) (fear) (make happy) (disunite)

We see only one High tone on the surface in these forms, despite the fact that there are three High-tone sponsors in the representation (the subject prefix, the object prefix, and the verb stem's initial vowel). Obviously, this "reduction" in the number of High tones results from the fusion of elements into a single domain. Consider first the monosyllable stem case. The following tableau illustrates that an incorrect result will follow from ranking DomCor (H) over the general Nonfuiality (HD) constraint since *ltwaaty!a* will be selected as optimal.

101

(32) Candidates

OCP

Nonfinality (poly HP)

»iwi'ya iliwaiaL

Incorporate DomCor

Nonfinality (HD)

*]**

•I

(liwajtya

*i* *!*

««•)«» (IPwatva •!«

m*M*ti

. ; 1 P v . » . »£TTi3--a.'.^, ..;'••>•

•1

(U)(wa)tya ••-»(lDwa(tyft)

The correct output can be achieved if Nonfinality (HD) dominates DomCor (H)

(33JL Candidates

OCP

ljwfltya. (ijwatya) »(Uwa)tyi lj(wfl) tya. (Ipwatya

Nonfinality (polyHD

Incorporate Nonfinality DomCor (HD) (H)

*!*• •I

a B I O S rt^>

•i* *i*

** ?

&^#fo£-&

(a(wa)(tva) • I * (lD(wi)tya (Ij)wa(tya)

I.* ' f ''J. V -I

From this we can see that Incorporate (H-sponsor) must dominate DomCor (H) as a result of transitivity (since we know that Incorporate (HD) must dominate Nonfinality (HD) in order to guarantee that a word-final H-sponsor will trigger formation of a domain). The evaluation of Uwabeeka— demonstrates that independently of Nonfinality (HD), Incorporate (H-sponsor) must dominate DomCor (H).

Here we have conclusive evidence that Incorporate (H-sponsor) must dominate DomCor (H). The optimal candidate (l{wgbee)ka has two violations of DomCor (H) while the non-optimal candidate (li)wa.(bee)ka has only one — but the non-optimal candidate has a violation of

102

Incorporate (H-sponsor) that the optimal candidate does not have. Thus by ranking Incorporate (H-sponsor) over DomCor (H) we can generate the correct output Extension of the HD onto the penult in examples like liwabonltsa... cannot be explained through an appeal to *MonoHD; output-output faithfulness seems to be at work here. To emphasize this point, we show in (35) the evaluation ignoring *MonoHD and Avoid Prominence for the moment: (35) Candidates

OCP

Nonfinality (polyHD)

Incorporate Nonfinality (HD) (H-

DomCor

sponsor)

liwflbgniisa (ID(wj)(bonii)sa

•I*

(lp(wa)bflniisa

*l

(lflwflbflniisa (Ijwabojniisa

r

*Viig»,.

•p; {$ t

."M • 'li j ' n ' i ffi.i

"I*

.TVi*..:

(liwabgnii)sa

(li)wfl(bQnii)sa

•I

:

• >

•«'•

'•»"»&•.-»

We want Oiwabflnil)sa to be optimal, but in the above evaluation it has the same evaluation as (Hwajbojniisa. *MonoHD is equally satisfied by both of these candidates. Consequently, it would seem that Avoid Prominence should prefer (Hwabpjnlsa... over (liwa.bgni)sa... (although the latter would also be a possible pronunciation due to the fact that the penult vowel in short forms may be treated as lacking prominence, thereby permitting the HD to extend through it). But we do not want fllwflbojnllsa... to be judged optima] under any circumstances. The pronunciation *liwab6nisa... is not possible. The idea behind an output-output constraint is that the optimal form (!lwa.botti)sa... wants its stem to have the same domain membership as in a surface form such as ni(bo.ni)sa (where there is no High-toned subject prefix and no object prefix and where •MonoHD drives the High Domain onto the penult syllable). In other words, (liw§bflnl)sa... mimics the domain structure of output forms where the stem's tone is unobscured by other factors (a preceding High tone). While we believe this approach is on the right track, there are many questions that would need to be addressed in order to develop it in detail We do not deal with this matter further. At this juncture, let us repeat the set of constraints and their dominance relationships that we have motivated for HD-structure and expression (restricting ourselves to the A system). (36)

BAL, Syllable Alignment, "Overlapping, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD), Express (H, phrase-final mora) - undominated Nonfinality (Word-final H) - dominated by Express (H, phrase-final mora) Express (H, head) - dominated by Nonfinality (Word-final H) Plateau - dominated by Express (H.head) *(H,nonhead) - dominated by Plateau, Express (H, head) No Adjacent Edges —dominated by "'Overlapping No Adjacent Sponsors (possibly an alternative to No Adjacent Edges as the OCP constraint that drives fusion in Isixhosa), but not yet independently motivated) - dominated by "Overlapping Incorporate (H-sponsor) - dominated by Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) Nonfinality (HD)— dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) 103

DomCor (H) - dominated by No Adjacent Edges and/or No Adjacent Sponsors, Incorporate (H-sponsor), Nonfinality (HD) Uniqueness -- dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) •Structure - dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) •MonoHD - dominated by No Adjacent Edges, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) Avoid Prominence - dominated by Syllable Alignment, *MonoHD Align Word R - dominated by *Structure, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD), Avoid Prominence BAR - dominated by Align Word R Express (H) - dominated by *MonoHD, Align Word R. *(H, non-head) 3.2. Interaction of the short present form with a following word (nominal). In this section we consider die interaction of a short present form of the verb and a following nominal (including the infinitive form of the verb, which is structurally a nominal) in order to (a) expand briefly on the discussion of the DIHTS phenomenon, (b) demonstrate the generality of the phenomenon of "protection" discussed earlier, and (c) provide evidence in favor of our claim in the preceding section that the short present tense form involves fusion of multiple H-sponsors into a single HD where only the head of the HDrealizesthe High tone. We do not undertake here any detailed discussion of sentence phonology in Isixhosa (see Jokweni 1995 for an analysis) and limit ourselves to matters that are directly pertinent to our analysis of the word-level tonology. The aspect of Isixhosa sentence phonology that is of some relevance here is the fact that the final vowel of the verb will elide in front of a vowel-initial complement that is in the same "phrase" as the verb (we are not here concerned with defining the phrase domain). Nominals in Isixhosa, as in all Bantu languages, are sorted into noun classes. Noun class membership is Indicated by prefixes. The prefixal structure of Isixhosa nominals involves two independent elements*, a preprefix and a prefix. In some cases these two elements may be fused phonologically. In certain contexts, the preprefix may be omitted. But all the examples we discuss here contain the preprefix. This preprefix is important for our concerns because it is always specified with a High tone. This High tone behaves much like the High tones we have been discussing - it initiates a HD that will extend to the Right under appropriate circumstances. The first class of data that we consider involves a verb that has a depressed final syllable and a following nominal that would, in its isolation form, realize a High tone on the first syllable: e.g. Icuuba 'tobacco', ithaagga 'pumpkin', illuuth.'f 'stick,' etc. The contraction of the depressed syllable of the verb with the initial High-toned syllable of the noun produces the results shown in (37), where we place the verbal form n.djthe'nga 'I am buying' in front of nouns with an initial High tone. (37)

ndjth6ng jciiiuba 'I am buying tobacco' (cf. icuuba 'tobacco') Qdjthgng jthld&rjga 'I am buying a pumpkin' (cf. tthaanga 'pumpkin') ndjthe'ng ul!tiuth!( 'I am buying a stick' (cf. dluuthti 'stick') ndjthgng jmltipltl 'I am buying guns' (cf. fmiipld 'guns') ndjthlng utyw!a*al!ti 'I am buying beer' (cf. dtywaallS 'beer') rjdjthlng ubldoyla' 'I am buying wool' (cf.tibooy.'a*'wool') 0dith«00 jq!aand!<( 'I am buying an egg' (cf. fqaandj-i. 'egg') ndjthtfng jncwlaad (f 'I am buy a book' (cf. lncwaad!.( 'book') ndjth£ng jnktdom.'d 'I am buying a cow' (cf. inkoomld 'cow') 104

These data are interesting in that we see that when there is resyllabification across word boundaries, and the depressed consonant becomes the onset of a High-toned syllable, this depressed H syllable displays the DIHTS phenomenon. Earlier we saw that DIHTS must be sensitive to the word edges (because Nonfmality (HD) blocks DIHTS effects). Thus we have a situation where the end of the word blocks DIHTS, but DIHTS still occurs across words (when there is resyllabification). Suppose that we were to adopt a "rule-based" theory of phonology. It is clear that DIHTS would have to be barred from moving a High tone onto a word-final syllable. This would seem to suggest that DIHTS is a word-level rule (on the assumption that phrase-level rules do not distinguish the beginnings and ends of words). But the data in (37) establish that in effect DIHTS applies across word-boundaries. Thus DIHTS is a phrase-level rule. In order to reconcile this contradiction, one would have to allow that phrase-level rules have access to information about word edges. In ODT, we have to say, first of all, that Nonfmality (HD) does control whether a HD can be expanded to avoid a depressed H tone. But it is also true that in (37), Nonfmality (HD) is irrelevant to whether the HD initiated by the initial syllable of the noun can be extended. The question of whether the constraints are word-level or phrase-level is not at issue. The issue is how does Nonfinality (HD) affect domain structure. It is irrelevant to (37) since the depressed syllable is nowhere near the edge of a word. In this view, of course, the entire phrase is subject to evaluation and a constraint like Nonfinality (HD) must have accessible to it where word edges occur. When the initial H of the noun is "shifted" away from the preprefix (as a result of the contraction of the preprefix with the final syllable of n.dithe'oga). we expect (on the basis of the data in Chapter Two) to find a difference between K and M. In K, we expect the shifted High to always be in a RD that is different from an Immediately following HD. As a consequence, a High tone following the shifted High tone will be downstepped. In M, on the other hand, we expect there to be no RD break between the syllable bearing the "shifted" H and the following HD, thus there will be no downstep. (We ignore here the case where a depressed syllable interferes with the expected pattern.) This predicted difference is confirmed by examples such as those in (38). (38)

ndjthdng jslltlddyu. [K], ndjthgng js'Uddyu [M] *I am buying a stove* (cf. fsit'dyv. 'stove') ndjthgng jslfptftlf [K], ndjth6n.g js!f pftli [M] 'I am buying a mirror' (cf. isipmi 'mirror') ndfthenfl am!a1!«phu [K], ndithdng amlaliiphu [M] 'I am buying cloth' (cf. rfmallifphu 'cloth') ndjthe^fl .is!U!«na [K], rjdith6n.g .js!f t£e*na [M] 'I am buying a brick' (cf. isitie'e'na 'brick') Odithgng amldclflci [K], ndjth6ng am'dcii'ci [M] 'I am buying ear-rings' (cf. imac'ffci 'ear-rings')

Let us review our account of this difference from Chapter Two. We propose that in K, RD-Faithfulness is more highly ranked than No Adjacent RD Edges (=NARDE); as a consequence, K violates NARDE in the interest of maintaining Identity between the RDstructure of A outputs and the RD-structure of B outputs. The RD-structure of the A outputs in (38) has two RD's; because of RD-Faithfulness, there will still be two RD's in the output of the 105

B system. These RD's are adjacent (due to the DIHTS phenomenon in the B system and the need of the first RD to expand to match the expanded HD). In M, on the other hand, NARDE outrank! RD-Faithfulness. The RD-structure of the input to B must be adjusted so as to avoid adjacent RD's. Specifically, the RD structure will be altered to yield a single RD in the output of B, even though this violates RD-Faithfulness. Thus in the case of qd.ithe'ng jsHt!<56\u we will have - in K - the RD structure ndlthe(nglsi}{too}vu and there will be a downstep between the shifted H on /si/ and the following H on Aoo/. In M, on the other hand, NARDE will not allow RD edges to appear between /si /and /too/(since it outranks RD-Faithfulness) and thus they will be in the same RD: ndi(he{ngtsitoo}vii. Of course, when there Is a depressor consonant in between the syllable bearing the "shifted" H and the foUowing HD, then both K and M locate a RD break at the location of the depressor consonant due to the principle of Depressed Syllable Alignment. (39)

ndjthgrjg js!ty!((a'tho 'I am buying a garment' (cf. fstyltftftho 'garment') ndjthe'ng Bmla'hlflfl'she 'I am buying horses' (cf. rfmahltftfshe 'horses') Tidithgng amlfivUUi 'I am buying wheels' (cf. dmayl.Uli 'wheels') ndjthe'og amla'diaijmbc 'I am buying a type of potato' (cf. dmadlMtnbe 'type of potato')

We have seen that the DIHTS phenomenon occurs when (at the phrasal level) the final syllable of the verb and the initial syllable of the noun are contracted into a single syllable. However, if the second syllable of the noun has a depressed onset, then the shift is blocked and the H remains on the initial vowel of the noun. (40)

fldjtheng ndjtheng ndjtMng ndjtheng nd.ith.4ng ndjth6ng ndjtheng

l.tguusha 'I am buying a sheep' IfciinthH 'I am buying sticks' foiinjitf 'I am buying dogs' l.lgaabla" 'I am buying a hoe' IJsitlddyy 'I am buying stoves' !Jay!f(ath!<5 'I am buying garments' t.laipUiH 'I am buying mirrors'

The shifting also cannot have a monosyllabic stem as its target destination: (41)

ndjthe'ng UUt 'I am buying tea' (cf. iltf 'tea', from/f + tV)

If the High tone of the nominal complement has "shifted" away from the initial prepreGxal vowel (due to wktescope-driving alignment — either *MonoHD or Align Word R ), then the contraction of a verb such as /thing/ with the noun has no affect on the following noun's basic tonal shape. (42)

rjdjthigg amldthaarjga ' I am buying pumpkins' ndjth^ng js!f qhaamo 'I am buying a piece of fruit' ndjthgrjg jjjqhla'amo 'I am buying fruit' 106

ndithfirjg jslibaane 'I am buying a torch' ndjthirjg .fcjbitfane 'I am buying torches' ndithe'ng jslifya' 'I am buying a plate' ndithlng jijcUIyf 'I am buying plates' ndithinfl.amldgaabld 'I am buying hoes' ndjthing amMqaandltf 'I am buying eggs' ndithe'ng js!fh]aangl\] 'I am buying a shoe' fldithe'ng .izjhl!a*ang!|i 'I am buying shoes' The reason that the contraction of the verb and the nominal complement has no effect on the shape of the nominal is simply this: the contracted, depressed syllable is not the head of a HD. Thus the DIHTS phenomenon will not occur. The entire range of facts with respect to the interrelationship of DIHTS and Register Domain structure can be seen from considering the combination of a verb ending in a depressed syllable and a following infinitive. The infinitive has the form of a nominal. It consists of a preprefix /u/ which is specified with a High tone followed by the class prefix IkvJ followed by the verb stem, ending in the final vowel /a/. When a toneless verb stem is used in the infinitive, the High of the preprefix surfaces to the right, according to the expected partem. This is demonstrated by the examples in (43): (43)

ukUulwa uktiuwa ukuiiima ukiiyftala ukrihleeka ukucdciisa ukuxdleela ukudaniisa ukuluTifltjsa ukuchukumiisa ukumanggMela

'to fight" 'to fall' 'to cultivate' 'to close' 'to laugh' 'to explain' 'to forgive' 'to dance' 'to repair' 'to provoke' 'to sue'

When a High verb stem is used in the infinitive, the preprefix High is kept on the preprefix due to the effects of No Adjacent Edges: (44)

tikuutyia' likuufla' likub.'ddna ukulldala dkuthMe'nga ilkubonHfsa ukuthengl.lfsa likugawldula

'to eat' 'to die' 'to see' 'to sleep' 'to buy' 'to show' 'to sell" 'to chop'

107

tikuphulla'phuula ilkusebKnjeela likupharoljan llisa iikufudumla'ala dkudjbelKleela

'to listen' 'to work for' 'to turn upside down' 'to get warm' 'to bury under ground'

Now, let us examine what happens when we locate an infinitive after a High-toned verb such as /thanda/ 'like, love'. We begin with a few examples of toneless verb stems. (45)

ndjthind. ukltiulwa nd.ith.4nd. ujctuliima ndjthind u,klucAciisa

'I like to fight' 'I like to cultivate' 'I like to explain'

There is nothing of interest here. The preprefix in the infinitive sponsors a H tone, but it is not the head of a HD and thus coalescence is not going to yield a structure that has a depressed H syllable. But now consider the case where the infinitive is based on a High verb stem The following data represent the pronunciation of M. (46)

ndjthand ukliiutytandjtMnd uk!
'I like to eat' 'I like to tie' 'I like to show' 'I like to chop' 'I like to sell' 'I like to listen' 'I like to work for' 'I like to be tidy' 'I like to turn upside down' 'I like to become warm' 'I like to bury'

In the infinitive form of a High verb stem, No Adjacent Edges forces the domain initiated by the preprefix to consist just of the preprefix. The prefix /ku/ cannot be included in the domain without making the domain adjacent to the verb stem HD. This being the case, when a verb such as Ananda/ in (46) coalesces with the initial syllable of the infinitive, a depressed High-toned syllable is created by the A system. The B system does not tolerate such syllables, so the HD of the preprefix must be extended to avoid a depressed head. The B system will thus yield an optimal output where the syllable /ku / is the head of the HD initiated by the preprefix. This means that the prefixal HD and the verb stem HD will be adjacent (except in Qdjtha'nd ukfdutyti, where vowel length allows the adjacency to be avoided), in violation of No Adjacent Edges. Now (setting aside the effects of a depressed syllable), this domain structure means that in M - where NARDE dominates RD-Fahhfulness - these adjacent HD's must be inside the same RD. And if these two HD's are in the same RD, there will be no downstep of the second HD and there will be protection of the nonheads in the second HD. This is indeed what 108

we find - cf. rjdjthdn.d ukJdbddphafor the lack of downstep and rjdjthfirjd uV-^PliiIliphuula for protection. However, when there is a depressed syllable in the second HD, that syllable will initiate a RD (per Depressed Syllable Alignment) and the preceding syllables cannot be gathered into a RD (due to Cohesion - see Chapter Two). Thus whenever there is a depressed syllable in the verb stem, there will be no protection of any of the HD non-heads in the verb stem's HD. This is shown by examples like n.ditha'n.d \»k!dphamb.ai>'lisa and n.dithdrjd u.k?ddjb!
ndjthfind. ukluutyiii ndithdnd \|klub!<S<3pha ndjthdnd u,k!ribon!ftsa ndjthdnd. ukhigflwluula (|djth&n<| uk!iithengl.lfsa ndjihind ukluphulliphuula odjthind \|k!usebldrj2e«la ndithand uklusullungeeka rjdithand uktupharrjIjanMisa ndithfind uk!ufu<Jum!ft'ala odtthdnd uk!iidjb!^leela

'I like to eat' 'I like to tie' 'I like to show' 'I like to chop' 'I like to sell' 'I like to listen' 'I like to work for' 'I like to be tidy' 'I like to turn upside down' 'I like to become warm' 'I like to bury'

We have so far examined simple infinitives based on toneless and High verb stems located after n,dithdn.d£ let us now look at infinitives where an object prefix is included. We begin as usual with toneless verb stems. The object prefix in these cases initiates a HD. The following data are from M: (48)

ndithand (idith&od rjdithand fldithdod ndjthind ndithind

ukMytilwa ukttiwdlflma ukluwa'hlo'meela ukltibiy.umle'ela uk!iiba"chtfkiimiisa ukMMmarjgalteela

'I like to fight it' 'I like to cultivate them' 'I like to add them' 'I like to permit them' 'I like to provoke them' 'I like to sue them'

(48) shows that in M, the shift of the H from the preprefix to the prefix protects the HD initiated by the object prefw High -- cf. nditMrjd ukMwdhldmeela and ndithdnd u^^bdchdkvJmiisa This is obviously because NARDE in M forces the preprefix HD and the object prefix HD into a single RD. However, if there is a depressed syllabic in the HD of the verb stem, then that syllable must initate a RD and the preceding stem syllables will not be in any RD due to the fact that to locate them in a RD would violate Cohesion (which wants moras in the same HD to be in the same RD). However, the object prefix is located in the preceding RD due to the fact that the constraint HD-mora Incorporation (prefw) - see Chapter Two ~ outranks Cohesion (while 109

Cohesion outranks the general HD-mora Incorporation constraint).Thus we have examples like n.djthtfnd. yktilba'nian.gglle'ela and Qdithdnd utf dwajukiujceja. Now, in K, the facts will be different since NARDE will be violated in order for the output of die B system to be faithful to the RD structure of the input to the B system (as far as this is possible). Recall that in Chapter Two we found no evidence that K has a form of HD- mora Incorporation relativized to prefixes. The data below continues to be consistent with the absence of a raising of the prefix tone. (49)

ndjthand uk!uy!Hlwa ndjthand ukluwalliima Odithdnd ukhlwahlldmeela ndithtfnd. ukltibavumltfela ndithdnd u,kttlbBchuk!dmiisa ndithaad «kWbamaqgal !e"ela

'I like to fight it' 'I like to cultivate them' 'I like to add them' 'I like to permit them' 'I like to provoke them' 'I like to sue them'

Recall that, in K, the two adjacent HD's (resulting from DIHTS) are in separate RD's; thus k OdithtfQd ukrdbamarjga^ela there will be no Plateau effect on the object prefix since it is no in the same RD as the preceding domain. We have not yet examined the case where an infinitive based on a High verb stem has ai object prefix and is located after fldithdrida" some examples from M are given in (SO): (50)

Qdithand fldithdnd ndithdnd Odithifld ndjthAnd ndith^nd ndtthfind Tlditha'nd ndithdnd

ukltiwrftftya ukUSwiWdpha u,k!tiWbdnlisa ukluwdgawliitila ukltiwfl'thengl.Usa ukltiMphu'ltfphuula «k!uMsiWozfiela ukidw^phajRimliisa u.kitiwa'dible'leela

'I like to eat them' 'I like to tie them' 'I like to show them' 'I like to chop them' 'I like to sell them' 'I like to listen to them' 'I like to work for them' 'I like to turn them over' 'I like to bury them under ground'

Once again we see that the shift of the High away from the preprefix onto the prefix protects the HD initiated by the object prefix (remember that the object prefix High and the verb stem High are rased into a single widescope domain) in examples like rjdjthijid wkdbdphtiUphuula ™s is simply the consequence of the high ranking of NARDE in M with respect to RD-Faithfulness. Of course, the presence of a depressed syllable in the verb stem will require that syllable to initiate a RD. The consequence is that preceding syllables in the HD will not be located in any RD — except for the object prefix, which will be incorporated into the preceding domain by virtue of HD-mora Incorporation (prefix): n.ditha*rjd. ukilwa'phajatn' ,S8 In K, on the other hand, NARDE is outranked by RD-Faithfulness and there is no evidence that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) is separated out from the general HD-mora Incorporation constraint and ranked above Cohesion. Consequently, the shifted H tone will be separated from a following H by downstep, and Plateau will not raise a following object prefix to H.

110

(51)

adjthfind \»kluw!Mtya ndjthand «k!ilwabl<5<5pha Tjdithdnd «k!ubabon!itsa ndith£n.d ukliiwagawliiula ndithdrjd «k!iiwatheng!.Usa ndjth4nd u.k!ilbaphull4phuula ndUhdnd u.k!\lbaseb!<nse.ela lldithiod wkltiwaphazajnliisa rjdjthfind ujdtiwadibieleela

'I like to eat them' 'I like to tie them' 'I like to show them' 'I like to chop them' 'I like to sell them' 'I like to listen to them' 'I like to work for them' 'I like to turn them over' 'I like to bury them under ground'

One final point about the infinitives with an object prefix. If the object prefix is depressed, then it cannot be joined into a RD with an element to its left (because of Depressed Syllable Alignment) and thus in neither M nor K can there be any protection of it or of the nonheads following. (52)

ndjthdnd YlkhizjhHdmeela ndithirjd ukldzjchukltimiisa

'I like to add them' 'I like to provoke them'

One final point about the above data. The behavior of the infinitival complements after the verb /lan.(Ja/ consistently supports the HD-structures that we have postulated, where HD's often contain one or more moras that are not actually pronounced with High pitch. The only toneless syllables that get raised to High by Plateau are the toneless syllables that we analyze as non-heads in a HD. The importance of this phrasal evidence cannot be emphasized too much. We will see more phrasal evidence later supporting the postulated HD-structures. So far we have been concerned with just a single situation involving a short present form of the verb and a following nominal complement - namely, the situation where the verb triggers DIHTS of the initial High tone of the nominal. There is one other interaction between a verb and a following nominal complement that bears on the analysis of Isixhosa tonology that we have so far developed. Consider the juxtaposition of a verb and a following noun complement when the following conditions are met: (a) the verb has a penultimate High tone and its final syllable is non-depressed, and (b) the nominal has an initial vowel which is underlyingly High (this condition is met by all nominals containing a preprefix, since preprefix vowels are underlyingly High). The contraction of such verbs and such nominals produces very interesting results. We catalogue the interaction below. If the noun has an initial H that has not been able to shift, then there is no difference between the isolation form of the noun and the post-verbal form In (55) we illustrate different types of nouns where the preprefix is realized with a High tone. (53)

rjdiphAth ndiphith rjdiphAth ndiphith rjdiphdth rjdiph&h ndiph£th

leuuba 'I am getting tobacco' iguusha 'I am getting a sheep' utywaallrf 'I am getting beer' libooylfi 'I am getting wool' tiluuthif 'I am getting a stick' itti 'I am getting tea' isitlddyu. 'I am getting a stove' HI

ndjph&th IsiyltfAthri 'I am getting a garment' ndjphith tibiiusi 'I am getting honey' ndifttn uJcublddna 'I want to see' ndjfiin tikubonltfsa 'I want to show' rjdjfiln tikusebMnzeeJa 'I want to work for' What we see from these data is that the HD in the verb consists of just the last overt syllable of the verb. The initial HD of the nominal consists of just the coalesced syllable (Le. the last consonant of the verb and the initial vowel of the nominal). We thus have two adjacent domains, but notice that they have not fused (if they had fused into a single domain, then the High on the verb would not be realized). There is no fusion across words in Isixhosa. We assume that the OCP In Isixhosa blocks adjacent edges (or sponsors) only Inside words and not across words. Given that the two HD's have not fused in (53), we expect both of the heads to be realizerd as High. They are. Next let us consider nominals where the HD of the preprefix extends onto the following voweL Some examples: amdthaanga. 'pumpkins', istqhaamo 'a piece of fruit', isfbaane 'torch', istttya 'plate', isfloorjdq 'wound', abdintu 'people'. These examples show the expected tone realization: the head of the domain is realized as High, the initial nonhead is realized without High. In (54), we see the result of locating these nouns after the verbal type under consideration: (54)

ndjph&th im&thaanga. 'I am getting pumpkin ndjphfith islbaane 'I am getting a torch' ndjbdph istloontfa, 'I am wrapping up a wound' fldjfumdn db6a*ntu 'I am getting people' ndjfumdn tfbintwaana 'I am getting children' (cf. abAntwaana 'children') Qdjfurmin lsftrobaatho 'I am getting clothing' (cf. isdrn.bflf)tho 'clothing') ndiphAth AmAgeBbla* 'I am getting hoes' (cf. amigaabia' 'hoes') fldiphith Amdqaandld 'I am getting eggs' (cf. amdqaandld. 'eggs') ndjphdth isfhlaarjg!\I 'I am getting a shoe' (cf. isfhlearjglvt 'shoe') (ldjfiin ukdiilwa 'I want to fight' (cf. ukriulwa 'to fight')

Examination of the data in (54) reveals that the coalesced syllable, which contains the non-head in the initial domain of the noun, is realized with a High tone. Why is this? The answer is simple: Plateau. Due to contraction, we will have adjacent (unfused) HD's. These adjacent HD's do not arise as a consequence of the B system (Le. from DIHTS), but rather are in the output of the A system. Thus in both K and M these domains will be subject to the NARDE constraint on Register Domains. As a consequence, these two HD's will be organized into a single RD. This means that Plateau will outlaw HO and thus force the non-head in the second HD to be realized as High. Before looking at complications in the picture due to depressed consonants in the nominal, consider some nouns where the word-initial HD has two or more non-head moras: e.g. imihUkuulo 'spades,' abantwdnaana 'small children,' isildndflgna 'wound,' imihlakiilwaana 'small spades.'

112

(55)

n.djph£th imfhlfikuulo 'I am getting spades' ndifumdn dbintwAnaana 'I am getting small children' ndjbdph isfldndaana >i am wrapping up a small wound' tldjfun Imlhl&ktilwaana 'I want small spades' ndjfiin tikucdciisa 'I want to explain' l)djftin riktixdleela 'I want to forgive' fldjfun tiku1iln.g.iisa 'I want to repair' fldjfun tikiikh6hlfik41eela 'I want to be cruel to' ndjfun \ikdq6n6n<5nd.iisa 'I want to emphasize'

In these data we see two or more non-head syllables all being raised as a result of Plateau. The discussion of the examples in (54) carries over directly to these data as welL The failure of the OCP to affect domain structure across words means that the adjacent domains arising from contraction will not be fused into one domain; NARDE will force a single RD in both K and M. There will be no difference between these dialects. At this juncture, we need to explore the effects of a depressor internal to the initial HD of the nominal. Consider first of all the case where the preprefix is followed by a depressed noun class prefix: izjqhiamo 'fruit', izjbdanc 'torches', izJUtya 'plates', izjza.athu 'reasons', izjlrionda, 'wounds', izjhla'ang.'tf 'shoes.' (56)

odjphith Isjqhldamo ndjph&th iz.jb!4ane (ldiph£th iz!.tftya ndjfun tzUzaathu ridjbdph izjlldondft ndjbdph Isil'dodjana ndjbdph IzjlondanlAana n.djpha'th iz.jhl!dang!tf

'I am getting fruit' 'I am getting torches' 'I am getting plates' 'I want reasons' 'I am wrapping up wounds' 'I am wrapping up small wounds' 'I am wrapping up tiny wounds' 'I am getting shoes'

Examination of these data show that the depressor consonant in the noun class prefix requires that the head of the nominal HD be in a separate RD from the head of the verb HD. For that reason there is downstep between these two High tones. However, the coalesced syllable ~ a non-head in the nominal HD - is realized with a High tone. Why is this? The answer seems to rest with the constraint HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). However, recall that earlier in this chapter and in Chapter Two, the data indicated that K does not seem to exhibit any effect of HDmora Incorporation (prefix). The data in (56) is, however, the same for both K and M. Thus we now have a case where HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) is operative in K. There arc two possible explanations for why K raises the tone of the prefixes in (56) but not in the earlier cases. The earlier cases involved object prefixes; the present case involves a noun class preprefix. Thus perhaps K differs from M in the range of prefixes that are included in HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). A second difference between this case and the preceding ones is whether the HD initiated by the prefix is preceded immediately by another HD only in the output of the B system (the earlier examples) or whether the adjacency is present in the output of the A system as well - Le. adjacency does not arise from DIHTS (the case presently under consideration). If this is the critical difference, then we could account for K by saying that HD113

mora Incorporation (prefix) dominates Cohesion in the A system but Cohesion dominates HDmora Incorporation (prefix) in the B system. Thus the prefix will be incorporated into i preceding RD (in violation of Cohesion) when there are adjacent HD's in the output of A; the prefix will be unincorporated when the adjacent HD's are in the output of B. In M, on the other hand, HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) would dominate Cohesion in both the A and the B systems. The data presently available to us does not choose between the above two accounts of the distribution of prefix tone raising in K; we leave the matter open pending the discovery of additional pertinent data. In (57) we offer examples where the depressed consonant in the nominal is in the stem: isilondanaana 'tiny wound', isarp,bathwaana 'small clothing', isarnbathwdnaana 't^y clothing', ukutfanfisa 'to dance', ukupha;amfisa 'to disturb*. (57)

ndibdph Isilondanldana 'I am wrapping up a tiny wound' rjdifuman fsambflthwla'ana 'I am getting small clothing' tldtfuman fsarnbflthwldnaana 'I am getting tiny clothing' tldifun tiktidgnllisa 'I want to dance' tidifun tfkiiphagam'f isa 'I want to disturb'

In these examples, we see again that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) plays a role in both K and M. The depressor in the stem means that it cannot be placed in an RD with elements to its left; the stem syllables to the left cannot be in any RD due to Cohesion, while prefixes will be grouped with the preceding RD due to the constraint HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). Note incidentally that two prefixes may be affected by HD-mora Incorporation (prefix): rjdifiln ilkJphajflrrf'isa. We have demonstrated in this section that the phrasal data involving a short form present tense verb and a following nominal provide significant evidence in favor of the HD-structures that we have postulated and the constraint system that we have developed. In the following section we show that the combination of a subject noun phrase and a verb in the short present tense provides additional support of the proposed HD-structures and our analysis. 3J . Interaction of the short present verb with a preceding word. We have not yet provided any hard evidence for the "fused" HD's (Le. HD's that locate a sequence of H-sponsors within them) that we claim occur in the short form of the present tense. We will briefly present evidence for these fused domains now, evidence derived from the phrasal phonology created by the juxtaposition of a subject noun phrase and the short form of the present tense verb. When the verb begins with a vowel-initial subject prefix, then the final vowel of a preceding subject noun will be elided (e.g. tince'e'ba (proper name) will surface as tince'b and tfsdtfba (proper name) will surface as tisdb). When the penult vowel of the noun is toneless, then there are no interesting surface effects on the verb. In other words, the short form of the verb has the shapes exemplified earlier in this chapter. However, when the penult vowel of the subject noun is High-toned, we find some interesting results. Below we will contrast the case of a subject lite tisrfba, where there is contraction with the following verb, and the corresponding plural form dostiUba. where there is not (dsiba will elide its final vowel since it requires a vowel-initial subject prefix, while dosldiba will not elide its final vowel since it requires a consonant-initial subject prefix). The subject prefixes on the verb (/u/ and /ba/) both sponsor a High tone. 114

We discuss toneless verbs first. A monosyllabic stem is shown in (58). (58)

lisab ulwa...

dosla'ba bldlwa...

(fight)

Because the HD in the nominal and the HD constituted by the subject prefix of the verb are adjacent when coalescence occurs, they will be located in the same RD and there will be no downstep between them This will be true in both K and M. When no contraction occurs (as in dosla'ba bldlwa...), then there are no adjacent HD's and thus two RD's will be formed. When the verb stem is bisyllabic, we find the following data: (59)

VisSb uphlnda... us4b tikhaba... visfib lillma... lisdb liciila...

dosliba dosliba dosla'ba dosla'ba

baphlindabakhliba... balllma... bac.'iila...

(turn over) (kick) (cultivate) (sing)

The verb has, in our analysis, a HD that is initiated by the subject prefix and extends to the first syllable of the verb stem. When there is coalescence (as in tfsdb ilphlrjda—), the HD of the verb will be located in the same RD as the nominal (because they will be adjacent in both K and M in the output of the A system) and the constraint Plateau will require that the subject prefix be High-toned. Of course, if the verb has an initial depressor, then the subject prefix and the verb stem will be in different RD's. (60) tisdb uylaMa...

dosla'ba bay!tfla...

(close)

This example shows once again that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) is at work in K as well as M, since in both dialects the subject prefix is High-toned even though it is not the head of a HD. Recall that we suggested earlier two possible explanations for why prefixes are sometimes affected by Plateau in K and sometimes not. One explanation was to restrict HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) to specific prefixes. (60) shows that, given such an account, both noun class prefixes and subject prefixes would have to be susceptible to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix), but not object prefixes. The second analysis was to say that in K the constraint HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) dominates Cohesion only in the A system and not the B system This analysis will account for (60) without the need to make any adjustments to it. Below we shall see that there is further evidence to support the latter explanation. Turning to trisyllabic and longer verb stems, we see the subject prefix and other nonheads will be raised in pitch when they are in the same RD as the preceding nominal: (61)

lisdb uxdlela... tisfib uliinaisa... usfib ucicisa... lisSb iikhdhl£kala... usfib ushuktfmisa... lisab tibrfnlklsela... tfsib uqdndndndjsa... lisab ukhdhlakalela....

dosla'ba baxldlela... dosliba ballurigisa... dosldba baciicisa... dosla'ba bakhohllikala... dosldba bashuklvSmisa... dosla'ba babanekMsela... dosla'ba baqononldndjsa... dosla'ba bakhohlaklalela...

us

(forgive) (repair) (explain) (be cruel) (shake) (illuminate for) (emphasize) (be cruel for)

(There Is of course another pronunciation available for these items where the HD of the verb extends to the penult, due to the possibility of beating the short present as lacking prominence on the penult) From these data we see that the stretch of material in the verb from the subject prefix to the antepenultimate mora is all High-toned under the effect of Plateau. For this to be the case, that material must be in the same HD - as we have claimed, in our analysis, it is. In other words, the phrasal data supports an analysis where the HD in the verb begins with the subject prefix and extends through the antepenult, even though the High is heard only on the antepenult in all cases except where Plateau comes into play. A depressor in the stem will of course block protection of non-heads in the verb stem, bat prefixes in the verbs will be grouped into the RD of the preceding nominal: (62)

lisib ildanlisa... risib dphajsmlfsa...

6os)4ba badanHsa... riosldba baphaza.m!fsa...

(dance) (disturb)

Let us turn our attention now to high verb stems, where our analysis claims that a subject prefix High-sponsor fuses with the lexical H of the verb stem in all but the monosyllabic stem case (where Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) bars the incorporation of the word-final H-sponsor into a domain). (63) illustrates the monosyllabic stem case where the verb HD consists just of the subject prefix. (63)

risib lisftb upha... ilsib ukha...

rftya...

dosldba bWtya... dosltfba bldpha... dosliba bldkha...

(eat) (give) (build)

Since the subject prefix is the head of a HD, we naturally expect that it will surface as Hightoned regardless or wheher h coalesces with the preceding nominal. The subject prefix will be downstepped in dos-'tfba b.'dtya... since it is in a separate RD from the nominal when there is no coalescence. The subject prefix is not downstepped in ustfb titya... The explanation is clear. The two HD's are adjacent in the output of the A system in both K and M and thus subject to NARDE. Being in the same RD, there will be no downstep. In (64) the verb has a HD that, in our analysis, extends from the subject prefix to the first stem syllable. (64)

ilsab tithlnga... tisdb ubdna... tislb tisdla... tlsib ujldndft-

dos!6ba dosldba dosldba dostdba

bathlenga... bab!6na... bastula... baz!($rjdft...

(buy) (see) (wipe) (hate)

In the verb's HD, the subject prefix is the only non-head. It is realized as High, due to the protection afforded by the nominal, in examples like ustfb dthe'Qga/- When the stem begins with a depressed syllable, we still find the subject prefix High: d s i b dZ/tfn^a/.- This can be attributed to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). Recall that the initial depressed syllable must initiate a RD. This leaves the subject prefix potentially unaffiliated. However, HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) will prefer an output where the subject prefix is grouped with die preceding (adjacent) RD and is thus in an environment to be affected by Plateau. In (65) we provide examples of trisyllabic and longer High verb stems. 116

(65)

dsib usAb Usib lisab dsib lisAb lisab

tiflnyega... tifiimdna... tigawliila... lithengljsa... tiphtilAphula... tipharobanllsa.. ubdnakalisa...

(ioslfiba bafiny!6za dostdba bafumlrfna... <5o?aba bagawliila... dosldba bathenglfsa... dosldba baphuliaphula... dosldba baphamtfflnitsa... dosldba babonaklilisa...

(shorten) (obtain) (chop) (seU) (listen) (turn upside down) (make visible)

The H on the penult of the subject noun "protects" the fused HD that is initiated by the subject prefix; this HD extends from the subject prefix as far as the antepenult/penult vowel in the verb stem. These pronunciations are inexplicable if there is not a HD starting at the beginning of the verb. A sequence of toneless syllables in Isixhosa is never subject to raising; a sequence of nonheads in a HD is raised, but only (at least in the dialects discussed here) when protected. Finally, let us consider the inclusion of an object prefix in the verb. Take the toneless verbs first. (66)

dsab tiwdliingjsa... ilsab ribdqdndndndjsa.. tisdb uwdphazamlisa...

dosldba bawalliioflisa... dosldba babaqononldgdjsa... dosldba bawaphazamllsa...

(repair) (emphasize) (disturb)

In our account of the isolation form of the verb, we claim that the subject prefix and the object prefix fuse into a single HD. The data in (66) confirm this, since we see the non-heads of die domain surfacing as High under protection in tisdb dwdltirjgjsa— Of course, when the stem has a depressed syllable, the preceding stem syllables will be outside a RD (as a result of Cohesion), while prefixes will group with the preceding RD and be subject to Plateau: tisdb liwdphazamllsa... This last example is critical in establishing what is going on in K with respect to prefixes. Earlier we discussed the possibility that perhaps K allows noun class prefixes and subject prefixes but not object prefixes to be affected by HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). (66) shows that this is not so: object prefixes here do get incorporated into a preceding RD. Thus we are left with just one explanation for when K raises the tone of prefixes: namely, HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) in K dominates Cohesion in the A system but not in the B system. Thus HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) will be operative for K in the data in (66) since the necessary conditions (adjacent HD's) exists in the output of the A system. Turning to High verb stems, we find: (67)

lisab uwdthe^ga... usab dbdz !
dosldba dosldba dosldba dosldba dosldba dosldba dosldba

bawath.'e'nga... babajltfndj... bababonltsa... bawagawltila... bawathengljsa... baphakldmisa... bawapharntftnlisa...

117

(buy) (hate) (show) (chop) (•ell) (raise) (turn upside down)

In our analysis of H verb stems with a H subject prefix and a H object prefix, we propose that all three sponsors are fused into a single HD initiated by the subject prefix and extending through the antepenult/ penult vowel of the word. The data in (67) show that the whole domain is realized High when protected (in the same RD as what precedes): ilsdb u'bdpha'ka'misa" " t n e r B '" a depressor Internal to the verb stem, then we find that this depressor initiates a RD and the preceding syllables will be outside a RD - except for prefixes, which will be included in the preceding RD due to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) and raised in pitch as a consequence of Plateau. We should perhaps remark that when the object prefix is depressed, then it will initiate a new RD and thus there will be downstcp and no protection across the object prefix: (68)

dstfb tizjhlldmela... (add) risdb rizjbonltsa... (show)

Interestingly, the constraint HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) will correctly include the subject prefix in the same RD as the preceding nominal. Let us summarize now what the phrasal data cited in this and the preceding section have shown. First of ad, we have seen that the DIHTS phenomenon occurs across words when ^syllabification creates a new depressed High syllable. We saw that these new cases of DIHTS provided data consistent with our earlier analysis of RD-stnicture and the constraint Plateau. Second, we have seen that verbs may serve to protect non-heads in the nominal. Third, we have seen that a subject nominal may serve to protect the non-heads in a verbal word. The protection phenomenon serves to provide evidence for the fused domains that we have postulated in the short form of the present tense. We rum in the next section to the perfective form of the verb. While there is much that the perfect shares with the present tense in terms of its tonal pattern, there is a very critical difference that provides even more evidence for the "protection" phenomenon discussed above. 3.4. The perfective form of the verb. The perfective stem involves suffixing /il/ to the verb stem and appending a final vowel hi. A toneless verb stem in the perfect parallels the behavior of a toneless verb stem in the long present form. When the subject prefix is toneless, then the entire form is toneless. When the subject prefix is High-toned, that High tone reassociates rightward in accordance with the pattern established in Chapter Two. The following examples illustrate reassociation to the antepenult syllable in the case of trisyllabic or longer stems. vs. ndishukumisiile bashukumisiile, zjshukumtsiile (shake) vs. s.jnamathelisiile banamathelisiile, zjnamathelisiile (cement) vs. bacacisiile, zjcacisiile (explain) ndjeacisiile vs. s.ichukumisiile bachukumlsiile, zjchukumisiile (provoke) vs. babalisiile, zjbalfsiile (narrate) i\jbalisiile ndoluliile vs. boluliile, zgluliile (stretch) sanelisiile vs. banelisiile, ganelfsiile (satisfy) vs. ndalamanisiile balamanlsiile, zajamanlsiile (connect with) No discussion is required, since the partem is entirely in accordance with what we expect on the basis of the long present tenseformsof toneless verb stems. (69)

118

In (70), we illustrate the perfect of trisyllabic or longer toneless verb stems with a depressor consonant or consonants in various locations in the stem Again, the pattern is entirely expected. (70)

ndjdanisiile vs. badanisiile rjdjsorobululiile vs. basornbulUliile ndilondQlosiile vs. balondo.lditi.ile rjdjyokozglisiile vs. bayoko^gllsiile

(dance) (solve a problem) (keep safely) (decorate)

In these cases the depressor is internal to the HD (being located in pre-antepenult position in the word) and thus unable to lead to the DIHTS phenomenon. But in the examples below wc sec that a depressed antepenult syllable will induce the DIHTS phenomenon: (71)

ridjjjkeele vs. bajjklele ndivuleele vs. bayu.le'ele ndMlduleele vs. band«16ele ndiJR 1T,ee 1 e v s - bajameele rjdfobVHigjsiile vs. batrtiwigjsfile

(turn the other way) (open up for) (precede) (look straight in the eyes) (discuss an issue beforehand)

In these examples the depressor is the head of a HD (in the output of the A system) and the DIHTS phenomenon occurs. But of course if the next syllable is depressed, then DIHTS will not occur: (72)

(have a dead relative) (stop) (limp) (go beyond the marriageable age)

nditlbUJGGlwe vs. baWltiieelwe ndiyjnospfile vs. bayjngceeje ndUing«fi«le vs. bajfngxeeje

ndidwdeeiwe vs. badtfdeeiwe

In these examples the depressor is also the head of a HD, but it is immediately followed by another depressor, thus there is no DIHTS. Clearly, all the above data simply follow the well-established patterns of Chapter Two and require no additional discussion. Bisyllabic toneless verb stems are equally consistent with the constraint system established. (73)

ndibaliile sjphekiile ndihlabiile s.ilimiile

vs. vs. vs. vs.

babaliile, ajbaliile baphgkiile, ziph6kiile bahlabiile, aihlabiile baltmiile, zjlimiile

(count) (cook) (stab) (cultivate)

The H sponsored by the subject prefix appears on the antepenult, which is the stem-initial syllable. When the verb stem has an initial depressor, the stem initial syllable will be antepenult, and thus the head of a HD. The HD will then be extended (by virtue of the DIHTS phenomenon) from that syllable to include the first mora of the penult syllable. (74)

ndivaliile

bayaliile, xixalfile 119

(shut)

However, if the penult syllable is depressed, the HD cannot be extended. (75)

vs

sjyimtiule

-

bay.tmb.tjle. ziyjrohijle

(refuse s.o. s.t.)

Consider finally the case of a bisyllabic stem like /wisa/ (built on a monosyllabic verb root): (76)

vs.

ndiwisiile

bawisiile, sjwisiile

(drop)

These examples show that the fact that /wisa/ is an exception to *MonoHD has no bearing on the surface form of the perfect since it is Align Word R and not *MonoHD that forces a widescope domain here. Thefollowingtableau illustrates. (77) Incorporate | NonfinalHy 1 *MonoHD | AvoidProm 1 Align Word R Candidates bawisiile D l ^ ^ B ^ H MMfM~Sii ifSilHSitit itffilSilfefis I R i t S S l t S f l (bawisiile) *! tfffi*^ '••^^hW'-.ii f^is.ia^M^ (bawisii)Ie *! voibfc&l-' siile -Kbawi)siite wi sii lei (bajwisiile

n

The candidate (bajwisiile cannot receive a mark for *MonoHD, since /wisa/ is (like all stems bulk on monosyllabic roots) an exception to *MonoHD. However, since it fares badly on Align Word R in comparison with the optimal candidate, (ba.wi)siile, h is rejected. Monosyllabic toneless verb stems present a bit of evidence withrespectto a phenomenon noted earlier. (78)

ndjlwiile sjwiile

vs. vs.

balwiile, liwiile, bdwiile, xiwlile

ftlwfile

(fight) (fall)

Recall that we proposed earlier that stems derived from monosyllabic roots are exceptions to •MonoHD. An example like bdlwiile shows that the perfect stem built on a monosyllabic root is in fact exceptional with respect to *MonoHD. The following tableau illustrates: (79) Candidates bajwiile (bajwiile)

Incorporate Nonfinality I *MonoHD I AvoidProm I Align Word R *l

£*££ fe«V

•I

(bajwiil)le

»(bfl)lwiile

[*]

lwiile

When the subject prefix is depressed (e.g. &jlwlile) then the HD will extend away from the depressed syllable (to avoid having a depressed High tone). In this case it is not *MonoHD that Is driving a wide domain, but the ban on depressed H syllables in the B system. So far we have examined toneless verb stems of all syllabic lengths in the perfective, both with a toneless and a High subject prefix. All of the examples have been consonant-initial. Vowel-initial verbs are shown in (80). 120

(80)

ndabiile swixiile ndosiile

vs. bdbiile, jablile vs. Wrjziile, srtSnjttile vs. bdsiile, sQslile

(distribute) (do) (grill)

In these examples, the initial vowel of the stem is in antepenult position. Notice that the HD initiated by the first syllable does not extend to the penult (except by virtue of the DIHTS phenomenon), in violation of *MonoHD. The explanation for these data may have to do with the fact that the vowel on which the High tone appears is in fact not the sponsor of the High tone -the sponsoring vowel has deleted by virtue of standing in front of another voweL Perhaps •MonoHD is in fact satisfied because the single overt vowel in the output corresponds to two moras in the input. This analysis seems like it is on the right track, but we do not elaborate on it further here (though we should remind the reader that we discussed this same point earlier, suggesting that perhaps the vowel of the subject prefix is an unparsed element in the output and counts toward the satisfaction of *MonoHD). If the first stem syllable is part of a depressed syllable as in gablile, then the HD will extend over to the first mora of the following syllable as a result of DIHTS. When the verb stem is longer, the domain of the subject prefix will extend to the antepenult syllable: (81)

ndqluliile ndanelisiile ndalamanisiile

vs. boluliile vs. banelisiile vs. balamanisiile

(stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

No discussion is needed. Clearly, toneless verb stems in the perfect do not present any major complications for our analysis. The same is not true of High verb stems. Consider the following data. (82)

ndjboniile ndjsullile ndjlumille ndibekifle ndjbophiie

vs. bdbdnttle vs. bdsiilifle vs. bdlrimille vs. ba'be'kitle vs. brfbdphfile

(see) (wipe) (bite) (put) (tie)

Notice that in the 1 sg. subject forms the lexical H of the verb appears, as expected, on the second stem syllable (due to the fact that *MonoHD outranks Avoid Prominence). The third person subject forms are surprising. We find that the H that the subject sponsors is in fact pronounced on the subject prefix, and it "protects" the initial syllable of the verb stem. This protection occurs in both K and M. In the underlying representation of the 3 pL subject forms, there is a subject prefix that sponsors a High and it stands right next to the initial syllable of the verb stem, which also sponsors a High. This structure is entirely analogous to the case of the third person subject forms of High verb stems in the short form of the present tense. Thus we would expect the OCP (either No Adjacent Edges or No Adjacent Sponsors) to lead to "fusion" of the two sponsors into a single HD in the perfect just as in the short present But this does not occur. We get UMktUe, not *libeki11e.

121

We propose that the perfect verb stem is an exception to the OCP. From this exceptionality, and this exceptionality alone, the correct surface forms will be predicted by the constraint system we have developed. Let us see why this is so. The following tableau shows how the optimal HD structure for Hbtfktlle is predicted. (Violations that do not 'count' in the evaluation, due to the fact that the perfect stem is an exception to the OCP, are enclosed in brackets.) (83)

Because the perfect stem is an exception to the OCP (Le. a form cannot receive a violation mark by virtue of having a perfect stem participating in a structure where there are adjacent sponsors or, alternatively, adjacent edges), the constraint DomCor will demand an output with a non-fused structure (Le. each sponsor will be in a separate HD) rather than a fused structure (with both sponsors in a single domain). Thus the optimal HD structure will be (ID (bekii)le. Since both of the heads in this structure are non-depressed, the heads of the two HD are the same in both the output of the A system and the B system. Now let us consider the optimal Register Domain structure. Both K and M have two adjacent HD's in the output of the A system, and thus NARDE will force these HD's into a single RD. This RD stretches from the subject prefix through the penult of the verb (in the case of the data in (82)). We expect, of course, both of the heads of the HD's to be High-toned - i.e. the subject prefix and the penult vowel of the verb stem; Plateau outlaws HO in the same RD and thus forces the first stem vowel to be High-toned. Consequently, the correct surface form follows given an optimal output that lacks fusion. We look next at longer High-toned verb stems in the perfect: rjdjseb6rjjiiile ndjbulisiile rjdjbonlsiile rubonisfsiile noylkiile nonwablsiile nahlukanisiile

vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs.

ba*s6b£nzAile bdbiilfsiile bdbdnlsiile Ifbdnisfsitle loylkiile Idnwibtsiile lihliikfaisiile

(work) (greet) (show) (see clearly) (fear) (make happy) (disunite)

These data establish that Plateau will affect all of the non-heads in the verb stem, given that they are in the same RD as the subject prefix. Plateau operates in these cases due to the fact that we have two different HD's in the same RD and the head of each must be realized High. Plateau guarantees that all of the syllables in between the two heads will also be High. Perfective stems based on /VC/roots and /C/roots are illustrated in (85): 122

(85)

rjdjtyfile sjkhllle ndifille

vs. vs. vs.

biiryitle bdkhlfle Mfille

(eat) (draw water) (die)

njbille Ddakhille

vs. vs.

bibiile, zibiile Mkhitle, Sflkhiile

(steal) (build)

These data continue to show the same thing we saw above: the heads of both the subject prefix HD and the verb stem HD are realized with a High tone, indicating the absence of "fusion" (and hence the fact that the OCP is inoperative in this tense). No more discussion is required. When there is a depressor internal to the High verb stem, we have data like the following: (86)

ndjbuzWe vs. MbuzUIle (ask) or: ndibMile vs. MbiSsiile (when the verb is treated as an exception to *MonoHD in K1) ndithenfllfle

ndi galeae ndithenflisiile ndidiWIeele

vs. vs. vs. vs.

bJthengUiie ba'gaHe'e'le bifheng.is!file bsSdjb!6Ieele

(buy) (pour) (sell) (bury under ground)

The depressed syllable in the stem will initiate a RD (due to Depressed Syllable Alignment, the revised form of which bars a depressed syllable from being in a RD with material to its left). Stem syllables in front of the depressor, if they are in the same HD as the depressed syllable, will not be able to be grouped into any RD due to Cohesion (which demands that moras within the same HD be in the same RD -- which is impossible here without violating Depressed Syllable Alignment). Of course, the subject prefix, being in a separate HD (recall the lack of fusion in the perfect verb), will be included in its own RD. Thus in an example like Wtherjfljs'.iile, the syllable /the/ is not in a RD with the subject prefix /ba/ and thus will not be subject to Plateau. We turn our attention now to the case of a depressed third person subject prefix in front of a High verb stem in the perfect. We expect, of course, that the DIHTS phenomenon will occur (if the stem does not have an initial depressed syllable). And it does. (87)

jumemtlle aWkiile sjbdphiile SJbdniile ijlumille

(invite) (put) (tie) (sec) (bite)

' Recall that in K there are trisyllabic H verb stems that do not obey *MonoHD. These stems historically had a bimoralc vowel In their first syllable. There are also bisyuabic verb stems that are not subject to •MonoHD (the stem /buz/ is an example). These verb stems also historically had a bimoralc vowel in their first syllable.

123

But DIHTS in this context is somewhat different from the cases we examined earlier. In earlier cases of the DIHTS phenomenon, we found a critical difference between K and M. In those earlier examples, when K "shifted" a High onto a syllable x, if x was immediately followed by the head of a HD, there was downstep between x and the following head. But in M there was no downstep. Furthermore, when K "shifted" a High onto a syllable x, if x was immediately followed by the non-heads of a HD, those non-heads remained low in pitch. But in M those nonheads were affected by Plateau. (This summary of course omits the complications deriving from depressed syllables in the following HD.) In (87), however, we see that (a) the High of the subject prefix has shifted onto the first stem syllable and (b) there is no downstep ~ in either K or M - between the shifted H and the following H. This is a critical fact that must be explained We take up the discussion after surveying some additional facts. The next data set contains longer High verb stems: (88)

zjbtfnisiile SJs4Mnxiile zjbiilfsiile KJbdnlslsiile %jkMwdl61eene KJbdnaMHsiile

(show) (work) (greet) (see clearly) (reach each other) (nuke visible)

These examples show that when the H "shifts" away from the depressed subject prefix, not only is there no downstep between this H and a following H, all of the non-heads in the following HD are realized with a High tone. In other words, in both K and M there is "protection" (Plateau comes into play). The usual dialect difference does not occur. The data in (89) illustrate perfectives of monosyllabic High roots. (89)

ritylfle zjkhHIe affile

(eat) (draw water) (die)

In these examples the H of the subject prefix shifts onto, and coincides with a syllable that is already High (cf. WryiUe). The analysis of these data revolves critically around the HD-structure defined by the B system and the RD-structure that is optimal for this HD-structure. Let us consider first of all the example zjtyttle. The output of the A system would have two adjacent HD's — one containing the subject prefix and one containing the first syllable of the verb stem: (d)(ty[i)le. Now, the issue is this: how will the B system deal with the fact that the head of the first HD is depressed?. *(H, Depressed Syllable) requires the initial HD to extend to the second syllable. There are two possible output HD-stnictures that would satisfy *(H, Depressed Syllable). The first structure is one where the first HD overlaps the second: (zj(tyil))le. The second possibility is that there is a single HD: (zjty(l)le. To achieve the former output, *(H, Depressed Syllable) would outrank •Overlapping and HD-Falthfulness would be violated just enough to avoid a High depressed syllable. To achieve the second output, *Overlapping would be undominated and *(H, Depressed Syllable) would therefore force a more substantial alteration in HD-structure — the reduction of two HD's to one ("fusion"). Both of these proposed structures will achieve the correct phonetic form in this case. 124

Now let us consider examples like xjbdnfsfsiile. This example indicates that that there must be two HD's (which are in the same RD) and that Plateau requires the non-heads in the second HD to be High. Thus examples of this type are inconsistent with an analysis where *(H, Depressed Syllable) is satisfied by fusing the two HD's in the output of the A system into one HD in the output of the B system. These forms are consistent with an output in the B system where the domains overlap: ( 4 (bfl)nlsl)sllle. But there is also a non-overlapping structure that would give the right phonetic output: (dbpj(nisi)siile. In this structure, *(H, Depressed Syllable) is satisfied in the B system by preserving the number of HD's from the output of the A system but violating HD-Fahhfulness by locating the syllable /bo/ unfaithfully in the first domain rather than the second domain. There is some reason to reject (ztt>s)(nisi)siile as the correct HD-structure. If it were correct, then we would predict that while M would indeed have zjbdntsfsiile M t n e output (since the high ranking NARDE would locate the adjacent HD's in the same RD and Plateau would raise the non-heads in the second HD), K would not. In K, RD-Faithfulness would force the second HD into a different RD from the first HD. We would predict, incorrectly, zibdnisllsiile. The overlapped structure ( 4 (bpjnisi)siile, on the other hand, can be used to predict that K will not differ from M. The issue is this: what sort of RD structure is assigned to a HDstructure like ( 4 (bg)nisi)siile? If RD-stnicture is allowed to overlap ~ { ( 4 {(bg)}nisi)}siile we predict that for both K and M the output will be the same. NARDE is not violated (since there are no adjacent RD's, only overlapping ones!) and this overlapping structure violates RDFaithfulness minimally - i.e. only to the extent necessary to insure the inclusion of the head of the first HD into the first RD. Since NARDE is not at issue, there is no difference between K and M. Now, since the syllable /bo/ is High-toned by virtue of being the head of the first HD, and since it is located in the second RD as well as the first. Plateau will enforce the raising of the following nonhead syllable /ni/. The same result is obtained if, instead of overlapping RD-structure, one has a single RD: { ( 4 (bfi)nlsi)}sHle. Given this RD-structure, the syllable /bo/ is still High-toned by virtue of being the head of the first HD and is still in the same RD as the syllable /ni/ and thus Plateau will properly raise that syllable. We conclude therefore that whichever RD structure is taken to be optimal, an overlapping HD-structure will serve to predict that K and M will not differ in cases like (88) and (89). We should note that our explanation for why there is "protection" in jubdnlsisiile in K as well as M also explains why there is no downstep in gibdntlle in K. In this example, the overlapping HD-structure (ji flx5)nH)le results in either a single RD (or an overlapping RD) in which both /bo/ and /nii/ are In the same RD. Thus they cannot be separated by downstep. The examples in (87)-(89) did not include verb stems with a depressed syllable. (90) shows that when the stem has an initial depressed syllable, DIHTS will not occur. (90)

sidH.UIe

(eat)

?ibamt}!.ttle Zfzjmle'ele Slgal!«le &1zal!fsiile Xtdjbleleele

(Bo) (hide) (pour) (fill) (bury under ground) 125

It is not surprising that the DIHTS phenomenon cannot affect the prefix here: DIHTS never crosses a depressed syllable. However, these examples pose a difficulty for our analysis. In Chapter Two, we claimed that the high ranking of the following constraint: (91)

(...Depressed Syllable...)HD

prevents the B system from avoiding a depressed High syllable by enlarging a HD to include another depressed syllable. But consider an example like jjdJUlle. The input to the B system it (z|)(dll)le. Because every mora in an input HD must remain in the corresponding output HD, the optimal output must either be (4)(dU)le or (zi(di())le. Now both of these structures violates (91) twice, thus (91) does not choose between them. A more lowly ranked constraint, *(H, Depressed Syllable), will however incorrectly choose the overlapped structure as optimal since it yields a pronunciation that has just one violation of *(H, Depressed Syllable) whereas the candidate (zD(dH)le will yield a pronunciation that has two violations. We must either abandon (91) or modify it. We suggest the following revision: (92) the

If a depressed element is not in a HD; in the input, then its correspondent may not be

in

correspondent of HD| in the output. (92) prevents the B system from "expanding" an input HD to include a depressed syllable, whether or not that depressed syllable is in some other input HD. A depressed syllable that is outside a given HD in the input to the B system cannot be incorporated into that HD in the output of the B system It should be noted that (92) plays no role in the A system, since there are no HD's in the inputs to the A system. Let us look now at some cases where the High-toned verb stem has a depressed syllable in the second syllable of the stem As expected, the High tone of the subject prefix will be shifted off that depressed syllable (in order to satisfy '(Depressed Syllable, H)) onto the first stem syllable. But if the second stem syllable has a depressed onset, then Depressed Syllable Alignment will guarantee that there are two RD's. (93)

BtMngfflle Hthingjsllile

fl»tf (sell)

These examples require no discussion. Next consider what happens when the depressor is in the third syllable (but still internal totheHD): (94)

sjslbenzjsle'leene

(make work for each other)

We see that the High of the subject prefix shifts onto the first stem syllable (Le. the HD initiated by the subject prefix is expanded in the B system to avoid having a depressed syllable on a High tone). The HD-structure in the output of the B system is: ( 4 (s£)benzlse)leene. What RDstructure is assigned to this representation? Depressed Syllable Alignment requires that the syllable Ami/ initiate a RD. Cohesion (the requirement that the moras in a HD not be in different RD's) prevents the syllable /be/ from being in a RD. Now, Cohesion would also predict that the 126

initial mora of the stem should not be in a RD. However, this mora has become the head of a HD by virtue of the need (in the B system) to avoid a High depressed syllable. It appears to be the case that there is an undominated principle that a High-toned mora must be in a RD, regardless of any other consideration. Call this principle High Tone Inclusion. If High Tone Inclusion dominates Cohesion, then /se/ will be in a RD while the following /be/ will not be. Thus, even though the syllable /se/ is High-toned because it is the head of the HD initiated by the subject prefix, and even though /se/ is in the same HD as the syllable /be/. Plateau can not cause the raising of/be/ due to the fact that Plateau bars HO in the same RD, not in the same HD\ At this juncture we have completed our look at the perfective form of the verb in the absence of an object prefix. Now we consider the case where an object prefix is included. Toneless verb stems appear in (95). We begin as usual with object prefixes that are not depressed. tldiyilwiile ndiyiwisiile rjdjyipMkiile 0djy'hl4biile siyis6n.deele n.djkux61eele niwabalisiile rjdjyishukumisiile s.iyinamathelisiile njwdsiile njwoliiliile njwanelisiile ndibalamanisiile

vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs.

Myilwiile (fight) bdyiwlsiile (drop) ba-yiphekiile (cook) bdyihl&biile (stab) ba'ylsd'ndee.le (come near) MMxdleele (forgive) HwibaTisiile (narrate) biyishiiklumisiile (shake) b4yin&m4th6Iisiile (cement) llwdsiile (bake) llwdldliile (stretch) bdw£n£lisiile (satisfy) MlAmdnisiile (connect with)

Examination of these data reveals that the HD initiated by the object prefix is subject to Plateau when preceded by a High-toned subject prefix. The reason for this is clear. Recall that in the perfective, there is no fusion between a High subject prefix and a High verb stem In other words, the OCP is inapplicable in this morphological construction. Now we see that the OCP is also inapplicable when a High subject prefix precedes a High object prefix in the perfective. Thus we have two adjacent HD's that will (in both K and M) be in the same Register Domain. Consequently, Plateau will operate. What about toneless verb stems with a depressor consonant in the stem? When the verb stem has an initial depressor, or an internal depressor, we find data like the following: (96)

rjdjbagwbu'ngee.le (ldjwaju.kujee.le n.djbamarigale'ele ndjwasornbuluule

vs. MMg.ubliing.ee.le vs. Mwaju.kiujee.le vs. Mbdmangalle'ele vs. Mwa'som.buiiiule

(cover) (hurl) (sue) (solve)

We see that the High subject prefix will protect the object prefix, but the verb stem will not be protected. Our analysis predicts these facts. There are two adjacent sponsors •- the subject prefix and the object prefix. In the perfective, the OCP is suspended (between a subject prefix and an 127

object prefix as well as between a subject prefix and the verb stem)) and the result is that we have two adjacent HD's, one initiated by the subject prefix and one initiated by the object prefix. The first HD does not have a depressed head, thus it emerges the same in the output of the B system as in the output of the A system Now we must consider RD constraints. A depressed syllable in the stem will initiate a RD. Cohesion will prevent stem syllables in front of the depressed syllable from being incorporated into a RD. However, the object prefix will - in violation of Cohesion ~ be included into the preceding RD in order to satisfy HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). Once the object prefix is included in the preceding RD, it will be subject to Plateau and end up High. There is no difference between K and M since in these examples, HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) is doing its work in the A system, where it dominates Cohesion in both K and M. If the object prefix is depressed, this -• for the most part — has no particular effect when the subject prefix is toneless; the reason for this is obvious - the HD initiated by the object prefix does not have the object prefix as its head, so therefore the depressed nature of the object prefix has no bearing on the surface form. (97)

ndjziphe*iile ndixihlflmle Odiziwisiile s.izilwisiile sjzisdndeeje sjzixdleele ndjsishukumisiile ndjsinamathelisiile ndjjalamanlsiile Sisimangaleele

(cook) (stab) (drop) (make fight) (come near) (forgive) (shake) (cement) (connect with) (take to court)

The only exception to this observation is a monosyllabic stem: (98)

rjdjjalwlile

(fight)

where we see that the object prefix is in antepenult position and thus expected to be the head of the HD in the output of the A system (given mat bisyllabic stems based on monsyllabic roots are exceptions to *MonoHD). In this situation, the HD does extend to the Right in the output of the B system, in order to avoid the depressed antepenult syllable. When there is a third person (High-toned) subject prefix, then a depressed object prefix has the effect of imposing a new Register Domain: (99)

tHfeiphle-kiile bdzihllrfbiile Mzjwlfsiile ba*zjlw!fsiile brfgjlwtlile bizjsldndeele bdzjxldteele

(cook) (stab) (drop) (makew fight) (fight) (come near) (forgive) 128

bdzishukumtfsiile ba°zjnamathellisiile brfzakman.'isiile biamarjga.lle'ele

MajsombuliUuie Mawbitlngwle Wajukliyefile

(shake) (cement) (connect with) (take to court) (solve) (cover) (hurl)

Given that the subject prefix is in a different RD from the object prefix, Plateau cannot affect the object prefix nor any other non-head syllables in the HD initiated by the object prefix. We have not yet considered the case where the subject prefix is High-toned and depressed. When such a subject prefix is followed by a non-depressed object prefix we will get the DIHTS phenomenon. (100)

aiyisdndfieie xikiix61eele siyishukiimfsiile %jyin6mith61fsiile xjtala'mdnlsiile jubAlwtsiile iiyllwiile

(come near) (forgive) (shake) (cement) (connect with) (make fight) (fight)

We know that the subject prefix and the object prefix H-sponsors are not fused into a single High Domain in the perfective. Thus the subject prefix constitutes one HD and the objext prefix through the antepenult syllable is another HD in the output of the A system. However, since the head of the first HD is depressed, the B system will make it optimal for the HD initiated by the subject prefix to extend through the object prefix. But of course the object prefix is itself the initiator of a HD. This is another example where the DIHTS phenomenon leads to a violation of •Overlapping in the output of the B system And we see that, just as before, there is either a single RD (or alternatively an overlapping RD structure) which results in (a) the High on the object prefix "protecting" following non-heads and (b) the absence of downstep between the object prefix and a following head. But what about the case where there is a depressor in the verb stem? (101)

sibaman.galle'ele %jMgub!iingee.le »waj«k!iye«le siw4som.t)u'!tfule

(sue) (cover) (hurl) (solve)

In this type of example we again have adjacent HD's in the output of the A system. And again, the B system requires that the HD initiated by the subject prefix extend through the object prefix (to avoid a depressed head), creating overlapping HD's in the output of the B system However this time the HD initiated by the object prefix cannot be gathered, in its entirety, into the same RD as the HD initiated by the subject prefix due to the effect of the highly ranked Depressed Syllable Alignment, which requires that the depressed syllable not be in a RD with the element

129

to its left. Cohesion prevents stem syllables to the left of the depressor (which are in the same HD as the depressed syllable) to be incorporated into any RD whatsoever. However, the object prefix will be incorporated into a RD due to the fact that it is the head of a HD and all Hightoned moras must be in a RD. However, the object prefix cannot protect following nonheads because they are not in the same RD and thus Plateau can have no effect on them. If the subject prefix and the object prefix are both depressed, then of course the subject prefix will be High (since the DIHTS phenomenon will be blocked - Le. the B system will not extend the HD initiated by the subject prefix) and the head of the HD initiated by object prefix will be in a different RD and thus downstepped: (102) zJzis!<5ndeele

zSzixldleele gtzishukum.'fsiile fctzinamathel.'isiile jfzfilamanlisiile Xfzimangalle'ele Slzilwlisiile stidflubltfngeele Xlzisorntwl'u'ule ftlzUuklujefile

(come near) (forgive) (shake) (cement) (connect with) (sue) (make fight) (cover) (solve) (hurl)

We have so far examined the behavior of object prefixes in the perfect in conjunction with toneless verb stems. Let us turn now to High verb stems. Recall that we have argued that the OCP is inoperative in the perfective in the sense that the subject prefix H-sponsor is not fused into a single HD with a following object prefix H-sponsor nor with a following verb stem Hsponsor. In Chapter Two and in the present chapter we have argued that in the present tense, an object prefix H-sponsor and a verb stem H-sponsor are fused into a single HD. The data in (103) below demonstrate that this fusion must occur in the perfect just as in the present tense. (103) njwatylfle njwabeklile ndjyiboniile ndjyibophllle njwamemifle njwabulisiile njwabontsiile ndjkuseWtraeele njwabonisisiile nj wanyiny itheklsi ile njwebllle njwakhlfle njwoyfkiile njwonwabfsiile njwahlukanisitle

(eat) (place) (see) (tie) (invite) (greet) (show) (work for) (show clearly) (make slippery) (steal) (build) (fear) (make happy) (disunite) 130

Notice that there is a single High tone on the surface in these forms, even though there are two High-sponsors. If we assume that the object prefix High-sponsor and the verb stem High-sponsor are fused into a single HD, these pronunciations follow automatically (since given a single HD, one will only hear a High tone on the head of that domain). However, if we were to claim that there is no fusion, then we would expect that (a) the object prefix would surface as High (since it would be the head of one HD) and that (b) the object prefix H would protect non-heads in the following HD. Since the data in (103) are not in accordance with these predictions, we can safely conclude that there indeed has been fusion. The fact that the object prefix High-sponsor and the verb High-sponsor are fused even in the perfect form of the verb suggests that there is indeed a special kind of cohesion between the object prefix and the verb as compared to other morphological structures. The literature on Bantu tonology contains other data suggestive of this special relationship (for example, in Emakhuwa, where a High tone is assigned to the second mora of the verb stem in certain tenses, the object prefix is "counted" as part of the verb stem but no other prefix is). The data in (104) have a High subject prefix in front of an object prefix attached to a High verb stem. (104) bayityfile bayibdnille bstyibophifle llwiibdltsiile liwdbdnisiile ba'kusgbe'nggeje Hwdbdnlslsiile ltwdnytnyithgkisiile Hwe-bille Ifwifkhifle ltwdyfkhiile Ifwdnwibisiile Itwahlukanlsiile

(eat) (see) (tie) (greet) (show) (work) (see clearly) (make slippery) (steal) (build) (fear) (make happy) (disunite)

These data show that that the H subject prefix is not fused into a single HD with the following object prefix/verb stem (if there were fusion, there would be only one High tone heard - that on the head of the domain). The subject prefix must constitute a separate HD. It will be adjacent to the following (fused) HD, which starts with the object prefix and extends through the penult/antepenult syllable of the verb stem. Because there are adjacent HD's in the output of the A system, they will be organized into a single RD in both K and M. Plateau will raise the nonhead syllables in the second HD. The presence of a depressor consonant in the verb stem, if it is internal to the "fused" domain consisting of the object prefix and the verb stem, has important consequences when there is a High subject prefix. We see those consequences in (105) below. (105)

ndiyidlliie sjyithenflllle

odjyizjmMe ndibafundjsiile

vs. vs. vs. vs.

bayidHLile biyitheng!.Ule ba'yizjmle'e'Ie b£baTundis!iile

131

(eat)) (buy) (hide) (teach)

ndiwadjbe'leele ndjwaphambanisiile ndiwadubuli'le

vs. vs. vs.

biwfidjbleleele ba"wapharoban!Isiile MwSdubtilliile

(bury under ground) (turnover) (shoot)

The examples with a H subject prefix show that the object prefix is subject to Plateau; for this to happen, the object prefix must be in the same RD as the subject prefix, while the stem syllables are not. Our analysis predicts this. In an example such as biytthegj/itle. Depressed Syllable Alignment will not allow the syllable /nflU/ to be in a HD with the syllable to its left. Given that this is so, it will not be possible to incorporate stem syllables like /the/ into a HD due to Cohesion; the object prefix is incorporated into a preceding RD due to the fact that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) dominates Cohesion (in the A system of both dialects). Consider next the case where there is a depressed object prefix in front of a High verb stem. odiatyltle rjdjffldltile Odjabontfle rjdjabophifle

vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. ndizibuziiie vs. ndisithenfltlle vs. ndizis>m66ie vs. ndizisebenzGGle vs. odiitirundisine vs. ndizidtbeleele ridisiphambanisiile vs.

Matyllfle bdsidl'Itle bifabon'.ifle bizibophlHle b*zibuz!itle ba"zitherig!ifle Waiamlgele bizisebl^nseele bdsjfundisMile bdzidibl^leele bdziphambanlisiile

(eat) (eat) (see) (tie) (ask) (buy) (hide) (work for) (teach) (bury under ground) (turn over)

When the subject prefix is toneless, then nothing happens except the fusion of the object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor into a single HD. Only the head of that HD is pronounced on a High tone. If the subject prefix is High-toned, it will not be fused into a single HD with the following H-sponsors. Furthermore, the subject prefix HD will have to be in a separate RD from the macrostem (Le. object prefix plus verb stem) HD due to the presence of the depressed object prefix. Given that there are two RD's, the subject prefix High cannot protect following non-heads. We have not yet discussed the case of a depressed, High-toned subject prefix. When such a prefix is followed by a non-depressed object prefix, what happens is that the High of the subject prefix is shifted onto the object prefix. We cite the data and then review our analysis. siyldHUle giyibdnfile jgkdbu;!.UIe j!tyitheng!.U1e Siyiam!«]e

akusiWosccte SJbaTundisifile

(eat) (see) (ask) (buy) (hide) (work) (teach) 132

XJwfidibKleele z.jwdphamban!fsiile SJwidublu'liile

(bury under ground) (turn over) (shoot)

We see once again that the shifting of the High from the subject prefix to the object prefix sets up a situation where there (a) is no downstep between this High and a following High, and (b) a non-head in the verbal stem is "protected" (cf. zjkus£b6QzceJ^ provided there is no depressor to block protection (cf. ziyltherjgi.ltle). Consider the analysis of zjytbtSnltle. The HD-stmcture in the output of the A system is (zi)(ylbonii)le. The B system will produce an overlapping HD-structure: (zi (yi)bonll)le. This structure guarantees that the two HD-heads will both be realized with High tone. Furthermore, in both K and M there will be either a single (or an overlapping) RD structure that will permit Plateau to affect the non-head moras inside the verb stem and guarantee that there is no downstepping between the HD's. Of course, if there is a depressed syllable in the overlapping HD-structure, the high ranking Depressed Syllable Alignment will force the head of the first of the overlapping HD's to be in a separate RD from the head of the second HD. As a result, we do not find protection in an example like zjyitheog!.Ule. The syllable /ngj/ must initiate a RD and consequently /the/ cannot be in any RD due to the effect of Cohesion. If the subject prefix is depressed and the object prefix is depressed, then obviously the subject prefix High cannot shift and there is a new RD starting with the object prefix. No discussion is necessary. (108) illustrates. (108) zizidJlUie z,1zibuz!.UIe zisithengUlle z.lzizjmle'ele z,fziseb!£l»zeele Jitiafundjsliile zJzid.ible'leele zJiriphamtjanKsiile zjzjdu.btu'liile

(eat) (ask) (buy) (hide) (work) (teach) (bury under ground) (turn over) (shoot)

We have seen that all perfective forms show one essential characteristic: there is no fusion of the domain of a H-sponsor in a subject prefix with the domain of a H-sponsor in a following macrostem. This failure of the OCP to apply in these cases means that the output of the A system will have two adjacent HD's. When the subject prefix is High and depressed, and the macrostem starts with a non-depressed syllable, then output of the B system will yield an overlapping HD-structure. Both the A and the B systems thus set up a situation where we will find that in both K and M there will be a single Register Domain (or possibly an overlapping RD). When two HD-heads appear in a single RD (or overlapping RD), then we get outputs where there is no downstep between the heads and there is protection of non-heads. Of course, if there is a depressed syllable in the second HD, Depressed Syllable Alignment will guarantee that there are two RD's and that non-head stem syllables before the depressor will not be in any RD and thus will not be protected. The perfect stem provides critical supporting evidence for the analysis that we have developed of RD-structure and the "protection" phenomenon. 133

3.6. Two High-toned verb prefixes. In the remaining portion of this chapter we will explore two tenses containing a preflxal element that contributes a High tone to the representation: the /saV and the Aigfl/ tenses. There is of course a major difference between these two prefixes that is immediately obvious — the fonner is not depressed while the latter is. This of course affects their tonal pattern. 3.6.1. The tonology of the Isil tense. The prefix /si/ 'still' contributes a High tone to the phonological representation. This is most apparent in the case of toneless verb stems. We actually see the High tone realized on /si/ when this morpheme precedes a monosyllabic toneless stem: odjstfilwa 'I am still fighting*. The reason that the High tone surfaces here is, of course, the fact that Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) bars any widescope alignment of the domain. Before trisyllabic and longer toneless verb stems, the High appears on the antepenult (or penult, under the influence of a depressed antepenult) as expected. ndisabiliisa usaxoleela sjsahltimeela sjsaluoausa usaqdbuuka sjsaphtfphaama Qdjsashukumiisa ndjsanamatheliisa ndjsaneliisa ndisalamdniisa

nisdageeza

sjsadanlisa sjsaYUme'ela sisayutheela sisagfcuula

(narrate) (forgive) (add) (repair) (become alert) (be wakeful) (shake) (cement) (satisfy) (connect with) (add) (dance) (permit) (blow) (scrape)

No discussion is required. The facts are exactly like those discussed in connection with a Hightoned subject prefix in the long present and the perfect of a toneless verb stem. The behavior of /si/ does, however, have an immediately obvious peculiarity: its High does not shift onto a following penultimate syllable. ndjsibaala ndjsaViisa AJsdhlaala njsiyaala njsdxeela nistfovwla njsaliima

(count) (drop) (sit) (open) (say) (be sick) (cultivate) 134

We assume that /saV is an exception to *MonoHD. Given this assumption, the correct surface form will follow, as shown in the tableau below for rjdjsdbaala-

The juxtaposition of /saV with a vowel-initial verb stem yields data like (112): (112) ndjsddsa nd.js61uula rjdjsaneliisa Qdjsalaminiisa

(bake) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

The /saV coalesces with the initial vowel of the verb stem In the case of n.djsddsa, the HD cannot extend onto the final syllable due to Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD). In the case of rjdjsdluula, we do not expect die HD to extend rightwards since (a) /say is am exception to •MonoHD and (b) Avoid Prominence prevents Align Word R from inducing a HD to extend onto a penult syllable. In longer stems, the H will of course surface on the antepenult e.g. njsaniliisa and njsalamdniisa. The wide domain in these cases is driven by Align Word R. The evaluation of these forms is straightforward. So far we have restricted our attention to toneless verb stems preceded by a prefix that in the present and perfect tenses - is toneless. Consider now data involving subject prefixes which in other tenses are High-toned. usdilwa usdwiisa us&hlaala usibaala usdyaala usfihleeka basaxoieela basahl6meela basaldofltjsa basayujne'ela usadanlisa basdngeest basagVfeuula usashukiimiisa usanamath£liisa

(fight) (drop) (sit) (count) (close) (laugh) (forgive) (add) (repair) (permit) (dance) (add) (scrape) (shake) (cement) 135

basacumikiisa basamarjgalfiela basegvibUogeela basddsa basdluula usaneliisa usalamaniisa

(cause to be angry) (sue) (cover) (roast) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

These data involving a high subject prefix have essentially the same tonal shape as the data involving toneless subject prefixes. There is a phonetic difference however. The Initial toneless syllables in the earlier data are phonetically lower than the initial toneless syllables in these data (recall we indicate this difference by underscoring the vowel of a first or second person subject prefix). In Chapter Two, we suggested that this phonetic difference derives from domain structure. Specifically, a "raised" toneless syllable is a non-head in a HD, where the High has not been expressed due to the constraint *(H, non-head). A "low" toneless syllable is a syllable that is outside a domain. If this analysis is to be maintained, then in basachuktimiisa. the subject prefix must initiate a HD that ends at the syllable /ku/. How does this domain come about? If we assume that the third person prefixes in (113) have an underlying High tone, then we can account for these data by virtue of the ranking of the OCP over DomCor (H). This ranking would yield the fusion of the subject prefix H-sponsor and the object prefix H-sponsor into a single HD. In contrast, when the subject prefix is toneless, the subject prefix will not be in the HD that begins with /si/. There is important evidence supporting the view that the third person subject prefix is High-toned and fuses with the High-toned /si/. This evidence comes from the phrasal phonology. Consider the two examples in (114). (114) risdb Visdliima s i b us'.iliima

'Usaba is still cultivating' 'Saba, you are still cultivating'

(Pre-verbal vocatives would ordinarily be placed in a separate phonological, yielding stfba, \}stfliima- but the pronunciation cited above is a possible one.) Examination of these data shows that when the verb and the preceding word are fused together through the failure to parse the final vowel of the preceding word, there is "protection" in the third person case but not the second person case. This follows if the third person subject prefix is initial in a HD while the second person subject prefix is not inside any HD. In our analysis, syllables that are not in a HD cannot be in a RD. Thus in sa*b ys!dliima, there must be two RD's. When /saV precedes a H verb stem, we find the following tonal shapes: (U5) njsiatyla' or njsa^tya' i\\siaP.& ornjs4Sfa njse'ebla' or njse'6ba' njsdakhtd or njstfaJcha' njsasfrila nisaltirima

(eat) (die) (steal) (build) (wipe) (bite)

136

njsa'be'elca njsifth.&nga nisibvliizfl njstfyttka nisibuliisa njsa"b<5nitsa rjdjsftbtflMka njsa'fiSma'ana njs<5nw4biisa n.djs6bdnfsiisa njsdnyinyitheJciisa njsdhliikaniisa nisibtin&kaliisa

(place) (buy) (ask) (fear) (greet) (show) (run) (get) (make happy) (show clearly) (make slippery) (disunite) (make visible)

These data immediately pose a problem. Whereas there is reason to believe that a High-toned subject prefix and /si/ are fused into a single HD, the same cannot be true of si and a following High-toned verb stem. If there were fusion, we would have pronunciations like 'njsafumMn* In order to get njsa'fdmda'na /si/ must constitute one HD and /fumaa/ must constitute a second HD. With such adjacent HD's, we can derive a RD-structure where there is a single RD (and thus we will find the non-heads in the second HD affected by Plateau). /sa7 is like the perfective in not being subject to the OCP. But there is a difference. In the perfective, we found that there was no fusion between the subject prefix and either the object prefix or the verb stem. In the case of /si/, there is fusion between the subject prefix and /si/, but not between /si/ and what follows; Le. it is the sequence of /si/ and what follows that is exceptional to the OCP, not the sequence of /si/ and what precedes it. This example thus appears to be of some interest for the development of a theory of exceptional phonological behavior in OT, but we will not attempt to pursue the matter any further here since a full-fledged theory of exceptionality in OT is well beyond the scope of the present work. As we proceed, we will see that the main source of variability of patterning in Isixhosa has to do with whether the OCP forces fusion or does not force fusion. Given that /si/ is not fused with a High verb stem, we find a sequence of HD's that are adjacent and thus in the same RD. As a consequence, we find Plateau playing a role. Plateau explains why the non-head /fu/ in n.js4f\imrfdna's realized with a High tone. Since the head /si/ is necessarily High-toned (as a consequence of the high ranking of Express (H, heads)), the syllable /fu/ must also be High-toned, given that Plateau rules out *H0 in the same Register Domain. We have seen that njsdfiima'a'na has a single RD. The presence of a depressed syllable will require two RD's, and then we will find Plateau not applicbale. (116) njsrfgaw'.u'iila n.jsrfzjmte'ela nisdseng!££la njs4theng!,[fsa

(chop) (hide) (milk for) (sell)

137

Here the presence of a depressor at the beginning of the stem, or in the second position of the stem, means that the head of the verb stem HD will be in a separate RD from the HD consisting of /s«7. As a consequence. Plateau cannot affect the stem. One last point needs some discussion. In (115) we see that when Isil precedes a monosyllabic verb stem, some variation is possible: e.g. njsa'a'rya' or njstfatytA- Recall that we earlier encountered cases where two H-sponsors are adjacent and the second is in word-final position (e.g. the combination of H object prefix and a H monosyllabic verb stem, or the combination of a H subject prefix and a H monosyllabic verb stem in the short present tense). In both of those cases, the constraint Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) prevented the two H-sponsors from fusing into a single HD. The optimal output was one where the word-final H-sponsor was not parsed into a HD. In the present case, we know that fusion in any case is blocked when Isil precedes a H verb stem Violation of the OCP is permitted. Given that the OCP does not render adjacent HD's non-optimal, we expect the pronunciation njsifitya to be optimal. And it is indeed one of the possible pronunciations. We propose that the second pronunciation could be seen as reflecting the possibility that No Adjacent Edges can (optionally) be ranked above Syllable Alignment The evaluations in (117) and (118) illustrate how the two pronunciations would follow from different rankings of these two constraints.

(H7) Candidates ni(sfl)a(tyfl) nKsaaXtya)

No Adjacent Edges

Syllable Alignment 1

*

I

I*

(118) Candidates ni(sa)a(tya) ni(saa)(tyaj

Syllable Alignment

!*

No Adjacent Edges ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^p^»

•

But there is a question that this analysis raises. We have said that Isil must be an exception to the OCP in order for forms with adjacent HD's to occur rather than a fused HD. Throughout our discussion, we have been noting that "fusion" could be seen as a consequence of ranking one of the OCP constraints above DomCor (H). But we have indicated that the data have been indeterminate whether it Is the constraint No Adjacent Sponsors or the constraint No Adjacent Edges that is at work and must dominate the OCP. But if the above account of the variation between njsMtyft" and njslaty!* is to be explained as we have just explained it (variable ranking of Syllable Alignment and No Adjacent Edges), then it must be No Adjacent Sponsors to which Isil is an exception and which must outrank DomCor (H). Isil, in this hypothesis, would then not be an exception to No Adjacent Edges and thus it would be possible for No Adjacent Edges to eliminate a candidate from consideration (as in (117)). Notice that if /say is an exception to No Adjacent Sponsors and not an exception to No Adjacent Edges, then it is critical that No Adjacent Edges not have an opportunity to force the fusion of adjacent HD's in other words. No Adjacent Edges must be ranked below DomCor (H). We do not wish to claim that we have proven that it is No Adjacent Sponsors and not No Adjacent Edges that drives fusion. We have simply shown that the variation displayed by 138

monomoraic verb stems can be accounted for in a fairly simple way if we allow /saV lo be exceptional to No Adjacent Sponsors (which is ranked above DomCor (H)) but not to No Adjacent Edges (which is ranked below DomCor (H)). If we accept this solution to the observed variation, we appear to be still left with a problem. Recall that a High object prefix always fuses with a H verb stem, even a monosyllabic verb stem. Thus we get forms like njyaylltyaHowever, in such examples the H-sponsors are not adjacent since the second mora of the long vowel (which is not underlying but rather introduced by the phonology) serves to separate the two sponsors. It appears then that No Adjacent Sponsors is not violated, and thus if it is No Adjacent Sponsors that drives fusion, there should be no fusion in such cases. We suggest that the explanation for the fusion in examples like njyaylttya must reside in the formulation of No Adjacent Sponsors. We suggest that it is possible for constraints that bar adjacent entities to "ignore" epenthetic material. There are, of course, many cases in the literature of so-called "opacity", where epenthetic material does not "count" in determining the applicability of a principle of the phonology. The treatment of opacity in OT remains a thorny issue and we will not delve into the matter any further here. Our explanation of the variation in monosyllabic stems thus leads to the following constraint system (governing HD-structure and expression). We give here only the A system. (119) BAL, Syllable Alignment, "Overlapping, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD), Express (H, phrase-final mora) -- undominated Nonfinality (Word-final H) - dominated by Express (H, phrase-final mora) Express (H, head) - dominated by Nonfinality (Word-final H) Plateau - dominated by Express (H, head) *(H,nonhead) - dominated by Plateau, Express (H, head) No Adjacent Sponsors - dominated by "Overlapping Incorporate (H-sponsor) - dominated by Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) Nonfinality (HD)- dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) DomCor (H) -- dominated by No Adjacent Sponsors, Incorporate (H-sponsor), Nonfinality (HD) No Adjacent Edges —dominated by 'Overlapping, DomCor (H), Syllable Alignment (but: optionally dominated by No Adjacent Edges) Uniqueness - dominated by Incorporate (H-sponsor) •Structure — dominated by DomCor (H) and/or Incorporate (H-sponsor) *MonoHD - dominated by No Adjacent Edges, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) Avoid Prominence -- dominated by Syllable Alignment, *MonoHD Align Word R - dominated by 'Structure, Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD), Avoid Prominence BAR - dominated by Align Word R Express (H) - dominated by *MonoHD, Align Word R, *(H, non-head) We have not yet looked at High-toned verb stems with a High subject prefix in the /saV tense. (120) illustrates. (120) bas4aty!d or basa'a'tya' basdb£6ka basfiluiima basdth&nga

(eat) (put) (bite) (buy) 139

usdbdnlfsa usaftimdana basibdnlsiisa usinvinylthelciisa basdbdnalcdliisa base>b!d or base^ba basaakh'.a or basaikha bas6ytika us6nw£biisa usAhluMniisa

(show) (obtain) (see clearly) (make slippery) (make visible) (steal) (build) (fear) (make happy) (disunite)

It is clearfromthese data that the High of the subject prefix and of /saV are fused into a single HD, but that the High of /sflV does not fuse with the verb stem High. Instead we have two adjacent HD's which will be gathered into a single RD. The result is that we find Plateau raising non-heads - cf. usdftlmMnsWhen there is a depressor internal to the verb, then there will be two RD's and thus no protection: (121) basagawMiila basajjmle'Sla

(chop) (hide)

The pattern here should be very familiar by now and requires no comment. Replacing the subject prefix /ba/ with IjjJ has no effect on the tone pattern since the subject prefix is not a head (being fused with the Isil into a HD) and thus not affected by the B system. (122) sisaatya SJsaW6ka sisime'eTna XJsSboniisa SJsifdma'a'na Sisabdnisiisa etc.

(eat) (put) (invite) (show) (obtain) (see clearly)

We have examined both toneless and High verb stems in the /saV tense, but we have not yet considered the inclusion of an object prefix. As usual, we begin with toneless verb stems. The data below illustrates both a toneless and a High subject prefix. (123) ndjsayiflwa, usayiflwa sisayf wiisa, usiyiwiisa ijdjsayiWila, usiyfbfiaia njstfbihlMka. usaMhl«ka njsdylbddaga, usfytbddnga

(fight) (drop) (count) (laugh)

(thank) 140

njsctylbifliisa, basttytbtfliisa n.istfba'xoleela, us4bdx61eela n.isdyiliing.iisa, basiyfliinaiisa ndjsiylshukumiisa, usdylshukumiisa njsa"ytndmctth61iisa, ustfylndma'thlliisa ndjs6y<S<Ssa, bastlyddsa rjdjsfydluula, basdytiluula njscfbAneiiisa, usdyAneliisa njsa'ba'l&ma'niisa, bas£14ma'niisa

(narrate) (forgive) (repair) (shake) (cement) (bake) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

The High subject prefix fuses into a single HD with the /sa7, and *(H, non-head) prevents the subject prefix from being realized on a High tone (though it is somewhat raised in pitch relative to a toneless subject prefix, as pointed out earlier). The /saV protects the HD initiated by the object prefix (just as it protects the HD initiated by a H verb stem). This means that /saV and any following H-sponsor in the macrostem fail to respect the OCP and are organized into adjacent HD's. Given that the two HD's are adjacent in the output of the A system, in both K and M they will form a single RD, and thus Plateau will be in effect. The following tableau shows the evaluation: (124) Candidates ndisayjbaala ndi(sfl)(yjbaala) -*ndi(sa)(yjbaa)la ndi(sj)(yi)baala ndi(sflyjbaala) ndi(sa.yjbaa)la ndi(saypbaala

Nonfuiality NoAdj Sponsors (Po'vsvU)

Incorporate DomCor

*MonoHD

Avoid Prom

!U!l'L^UiUW4LU4^J

•I*

mmsMmmmMmm§mmwsmmmsm [*] [*] FS

Wi""i'

As usual, a single RD will not be possible when there is a depressed syllable inside the second of the adjacent HD's, since Depressed Syllable Alignment will not allow a depressed syllable to form a RD with the element to its left. As a consequence, the HD containing /saV will be in a separate RD from the head of the verb stem's HD. Of course, the object prefix will surface with a High tone since it will be gathered into the same RD as die /saV due to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). The following examples illustrate: (125) ndjsiyivla'a'la, us4yfy!$$la njsdba'YUmle'ela, us^bdyumte'ela i\jsiyig!\Jsu«l». usfiyig!\Jzu.ula njs6ba,mangaj!e'ela, basiba'mangfllle'ela njstfwrfsornb.villu'ula, basdwdsornbulliiula

141

(close) (permit) (scrape) (sue) (solve)

When the object prefix is depressed, the HD consisting of /saV will necessarily be in a separate RD from the object prefix (due to Depressed Syllable Alignment). Thus there will be downstepping between the HD consisting of /saV and the HD initiated by the object prefix, and there will be no protection of the non-heads in the latter HD. Since these are by now familiar facts, no further comment is necessary. (126) ndjsiziftlwa, us&ztfjlwa (fight) s,jsftsjw!lisa, usdjciwllisa (drop) ndjsdjablddla, usdsiblddla (count) ndjsdjaylddja, usiziyltftfla (close) njsdndjhlle'e'ka.usdndjhlle'e'ka (laugh) njsdzibldliisa, basdgjbldliisa (narrate) n,jsdrjdjx!dleela, basdrjdjxldleela (forgive) nisdzilUnaiisa, basisjl'drjflijsa (repair) n.isdgigfd.«uuja, basdzigfvfeuu.la (scrape) njsdndjy.\}ml6ela, basfindjyum!6ela (permit) njsdsimangajle'ela, basdjumangajle'ela (sue) fldjsdjashuklumiisa, ba&£jshuktrimiisa (shake) nisdgjnamathle'liisa, basd%jnamathI6liisa (cement) So far we have only examined the object prefix in connection with a toneless verb stem in the Is&J tense. High verb stems do not present any surprises. As usual, the object prefix Hsponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor are fused into a single HD. /sSJ fuses with a preceding High subject prefix, but not with the following macrostem. (127) njsdyiftya, basdytttya rtjsdyddkha, basdyddkha njsdbdbddna, usdylbddna rusdylldtima, basdylMuma njsdydyltka, basdydyltka njsdbdbiiliisa, usdbdbtiliisa njsdbdbdntfsa, usdbdWntfsa njsdylfdmddna, basdylftimddna ndjsiylbdnisiisa, basdylbtfnisiisa nisdyinyinyithdkiisa, us4ny1nyith6kiisa n.jsdbdnw&biisa, usdbdnwdbiisa i\jsdbdhliikdniisa, usdydhltikdniisa

(eat) (build) (see) (bite) (fear) (greet) (show) (obtain) (see clearly) (make slippery) (make happy) (disunite)

The HD that is formed by the fusion of the object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor will be structurally just like a HD that an object prefix forms when it is prefixed to a toneless verb stem. As a consequence, we do not expect any difference between OP+High verb stems and OP+tonetess verb stems after /saV. And we do not find any differences, as shown by a comparison of the data in (127) with the data in (123). The data in (127) reveal that the H-toned 142

/saV protects the non-heads if the HD initiated by the object prefix (which is of course the outcome of the fusion of the object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor into a single HD). When there is a depressed syllable (whether inside the verb stem proper or in the object prefix), we find data like (128) below. These data are entirely parallel to the case of toneless verb stems shown in (125) and (126). Specifically, the depressed syllable in the verb stem proper will guarantee that the stem syllables are not in the same RD as the /saV and thus there will be downstepping of the stem High and no protection of non-heads in the stem. An object prefix (if it is not depressed) will be gathered into the RD of the /say due to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) and be raised as a consequence of Plateau. If the object prefix is depressed, then it will not be able to group with the preceding RD and there will be downstepping between it and the /say and no protection of the nonheads in the HD that the object prefix initiates. These facts and their explanation are by now very familiar. (128) n,js«Mz!
(hate) (chop) (teach)

nisdMsundtyfaa. basdba'sundHMza. n.isa"&!.tltya, basizJJlJtya njsdzleeba, bas£zj££ba njsdndjblridna, usfizjb!<S<5na nJsdndUIddndS. us4ndjz!<5cjnda n.jsdzjthlle'nga, basa,zjth!<£rjga njsdzoyttlka, basdzoylttka rusdndibonlftsa, usindibonlftsa n,istfzjfum!8aina, basdzjfumta'ina njs8:jgga.w!iiula, basdzjgaw!iiilla nis^ndflnwlibiisa, usSrjdgnwIa'biisa njsdnda.hluk!£niisa, us&za.hlukia'niisa lldis4zjbon!fsiisa, basdzjbonfisiisa njsAzjnyinyithldkiisa, us6zjnyinyith!ekiisa

(push) (eat) (steal) (see) (hate) (buy) (fear) (show) (obtain) (chop) (make happy) (disunite) (see clearly) (make slippery)

There is no need to give extensive examples where there is a depressed High subject prefix followed by an object prefix followed by a High verb stem. A depressed High-toned subject prefix, just like a non-depressed High-toned subject prefix, will fuse into a single HD with the /si/. A High tone will be heard on the head of this domain in both cases. As a result, %is6ba'bd'ii1fsawiU thus be the same as usdbdbdn1fsa' n t o n e shape. (Of course, at the phrasal level, a difference would emerge, since /zj/ would have to initiate a RD while /u/ could be incorporated into a preceding RD as a consequence of No Adjacent Register Domain Edges or HD-mora Incorporation (prefix).) At this point, let us summarize what we have learned from an examination of /si/. First of all, /saV is an exception to *MonoHD. Second, while a subject prefix and /say obey the OCP constraint and fuse into a single HD, /say and a following High tone are unaffected by the OCP and are organized into two adjacent HD's. This occurrence of two adjacent HD's means that 143

there will be abundant evidence for the principles of RD-formation developed earlier and th effects of Plateau. Finally, a bit of evidence arose in support of the proposition that it is No Adjacent Sponsors that drives fusion in Isixhosa and not No Adjacent Edges - although thi evidence is not particularly robust 3.6.2. The/ngftV prefix. In the next section we explore the behavior of another High-toned prefix, lx\q&l 'may'. Thii element is High-toned, but since it has a depressed onset, the High tone will exhibit the DIHTS phenomenon whenever possible. Combining the potential marker /rjga/ with a toneless verb demonstrates that the potential must sponsor a High tone in UR. When the verb stem is monosyllabic, then /ngtf/'s High tone will surface directly on this syllable - due to the Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) constraint. (129) ndjngMlwa, banjKfolwa sing&ftsho, bangtftftsho sing&fwa, b a n g ^ w a

(fight) (declare) (fall)

Notice that there is no difference in pronunciation between forms with a subject prefix that is elsewhere toneless and a subject prefix that is elsewhere High-toned. We shall discuss this point below (where it is explained why we do not underscore subject prefixes like /si/ in this tense). Bisyllabic toneless verb stems reveal that the High tone shifts off the /n,gj/ onto the following syllable, where it appears as a Falling tone, when the conditions for the DIHTS phenomenon are satisfied (in other words, the High shifts off/ngd/ in barjgab<3oQga. —since the following syllable is not depressed, but does not shift in adingtfgcBBda." s i n c e t n e following syllable is depressed). In order for the DIHTS to affect /nga7, /ngfj/ must be the head of a HD in the output of the A system. But for it to be a HD head in the output of the A system, /n,g£/ must - like Isil — be an exception to *MonoHD. Otherwise, the HD that /ogaV initiates would have to be extended one syllable the right in the A system, resulting incorrectly in *ban,ga.lttma.

(130) bangalfima ndjngawiisa ndingapheeka ndjngacuula bangabdonga

ndjogMiUa ndjngddaada

adingftrcaada

(cultivate) (drop) (cook) (sing) (thank) (twist) (swim) (roast)

Look at trisyllabic and longer toneless verb stems next. (131) singahldmeela, bangahl6meela fldinOBPha'phaama, singa,phdphaama singaxdleela, bangaxdleela singaliinaiisa, bangaliinfliisa 144

(add) (be awakened) (forgive) (repair)

singsyumeela, bangayum^ela singadaniisa, bangada.n1isa singagiJ;jv»ula, bangagfouuja Odingeballseela, baogabadseela n.djogftkhohl4kaala, barjgakhohuikaala ndingftgubtfnge.ela, bangagubiingsela singamarigalfiela, bangamangateela siogakhohlakdleela, barjgakhohlakgleela sir»g»qonon6r(diisa,bangBqonon6ridtisa

(permit) (dance) (scrape) (narrate to) (be cruel) (cover) (sue) (be cruel to) (emphasize)

Given that /ngaV has an underlying High, we expect it to reassociate rightwards (in the case of longer verb stems) according to the principles of Chapter Two. Thus we expect to see it on the antepenult (or the penult, as a Falling tone, when affected by DIHTS). The data above in (131) show exactly the expected tonal shapes. Let us now turn to a point that so far we have glossed over. In the /rjgf(/ verb form, the subject prefix is always toneless on the surface, just as in the Is&l verb form. In the case of the /say tense we accounted for this fact in terms of a fusion of a High subject prefix into the same HD as the /saV. There is, however, a difference between /rjgfl/ and Is&l. In the Is&J tense one can observe a phonetic difference between first and second person (underlyingly toneless) subject prefixes and third person (underlyingly High) subject prefixes. The toneless subject prefixes are pronounced at a relatively lower pitch level than the High subject prefixes, though neither type ~ in our analysis - is considered to be High-toned on the surface. Furthermore, the difference between toneless and High subject prefixes in the /saV form is maintained at the phrasal level, where the High subject prefix may be affected by Plateau but the toneless subject prefix may not (cf. (114)). The /ngftV form is quite different There is no phonetic contrast between die first/second and third person subject prefixes. They are all pronounced relatively low. Because of the lack of contrast between, say, /si/ (elsewhere a toneless subject prefix) and PoaJ, elsewhere a High subject prefix, we have omitted the visual signal (underscoring of the vowel in /si/ but not the vowel in /ba/) used throughout the text for this contrast. This phonetic lack of contrast could be interpreted as simply a phonetic effect of the depressed onset in /ogfl/ and therefore Is not in itself suggestive of a major difference between /s£/ and /ng$/. However, the phrasal evidence shows that the subject prefix in the /ngftV tense is not subject to protection (i.e. it cannot be gathered into a preceding RO). For example, in an example like dsdb arjgajtima 'Usaba may cultivate', the syllabic coalescence of the nominal subject and the verb does not lead to a protection of the subject prefix: *usa"b a"rtgaj!ltma- The subject prefix is not affected by Plateau. The lack of protection here needs explanation. We propose that the third person subject prefixes are not High-toned in the /nga/ form, even if they are High-toned in other verbal forms. It should perhaps be noted that there are many Bantu languages where subject prefixes do not uniformly show the same tonal structure across all verb tenses. Further research, however, is merited to establish more firmly that the lack of protection is to be attributed to a toneless subject prefix. High verb stems in the /ngaV verbal form are examined next. Since there is no contrast between (otherwise) toneless and (otherwise) High verb subject prefixes in /ng{(/ forms, we do not systematically distinguish them in the following data sets. Consider bisyllabic verbs first

us

(132) rjdingabddna bangabddpha singasiiiila ndjogaphee'm.Qa. singath6en.ga. bangAbtl!\iVila singfaglftna bangjdJtttsa sing^tlKidnntra

(see) (tie) (wipe) (make fire) (buy) (thresh) (enter) (feed) (go)

When the stem begins with a depressed syllable (e.g. singgQgl&Sna), we see immediately that we are dealing with two underlying High tones -- one the High tone of /ngji/ and the other the lexical High of the verb stem. It is immediately obvious therefore that the OCP must not have driven the fusion of / n g j / and the verb stem into a single HD. In other words, we are dealing with the same situation encountered in the analysis of /saV: the sequence of /rjgjj/ and a High tone verb stem is an exception to the OCP (No Adjacent Sponsors). Assuming that this construction is an exception to the OCP, we can see how the correct surface forms in (132) are predicted by our analysis. Consider the case of sirjgQthtfe'n.ga; There are two adjacent HD's in this case: si (ngg) (thee)nga. We want the High tone of /n,ga/ to shift onto the following syllable even though that syllable would bear a High tone independently. We addressed this matter in the section on the perfect earlier in this chapter. We proposed the following analysis: in the B system, '(Depressed Syllable, H) is ranked above HD-Faithfulness and 'Overlapping, resulting in the overlapping of the /rjgd/ HD with the HD consisting of /thee/. Since /agA/ is not the head of a HD, it cannot be realized with a High tone (due to *(H, nonhead)). Consider next sin,gf(n,p/Mna. Here the B system cannot extend the domain of /ngtf/ to the right due to the constraint given in (92), which we repeat here: (92) If a depressed element is not in a HDi in the input, then its correspondent may not be in the correspondent of HD, in the output. (92) does not allow '(Depressed Syllable, H) to be satisfied by incorporating depressed material from outside the HD, whether it is depressed material that is unaffiliated or affiliated with some other HD. This constraint is designed to yield the blocking effect of depressor consonants with regard to the DTHTS phenomenon. (92) is, of course, a member of the exploded constraint family that guarantees HD-Faithfulness by requiring elements outside a particular HD in the input to be outside that domain in the output (92) outranks '(Depressed Syllable, H) while the more general version of the Faithfulness constraint is dominated by '(Depressed Syllable, H). Next look at monosyllabic High verbs (whether CV verb stems or VCV stems, which can be treated like CV stems): (133) ndjogtotylabangfafla" singUfib'a" or: ndjrjgi$4tya\ b a n g e d , s i n g ^ M

(eat) (die) (steal)

146

This is the same variation that we noted in the discussion of/saV above, where we interpreted the variation as reflecting variability in the relative ranking of Syllable Alignment and No Adjacent Edges. Recall that this analysis entailed that the version of the OCP that demands fusion of Highsponsors must be No Adjacent Sponsors and not No Adjacent Edges. Let us repeat the argument. If the /oo^/ tense is exceptional in that it fails to undergo fusion, then it must be exceptional to the OCP constraint that demands fusion. If No Adjacent Edges is responsible for the variation In (133), then /qgd/ must not be exceptional to No Adjacent Edges. Thus in order to account for the failure of fusion to occur in the /ng^/ tense, it must be No Adjacent Sponsors that drives fusion. Turning to trisyllabic and longer verb High verb stems, we see that the shifted H from Qgg appears on the on the first stem syllable and will (a) not be downstepped relative to a following High-toned head and (b) will protect a following non-head. (134) singaba'le'gka ndjngabdnitsa bangftfiimJa'na sii)gab6n£ka1iisa rjdjrjgaphtilrfphrilfsiisa

(run away) (show) (get) (make visible) (listen intensively)

We have already seen the reason for this from our discussion of the /saV verb form. The prefix /ngtf/ will form a HD with the following syllable in the output of the B system. But this syllable is actually part of the following HD as well - i.e. we have overlapping domains. The consequence is that there will either be a single RD or overlapping RD's (depending on the analysis chosen), but in either event the stem-initial syllable will be in the same RD as the following syllable. The first stem syllable, being the head of the HD initiated by /n,gj(/ must be realized with a High tone. The following syllable is in the same RD as the first stem syllable. If the second stem syllable is itself the head of a HD, as in the case of sirjggbale'gka 'hen there will be no downstep between it and the first stem syllable. If the second stem syllable is a nonhead in its HD, as in the case of siQggbdndkdliisa t n e n Plateau will require that it be raised in pitch since there is a preceding H tone in the same RD. Of course, when there is a depressor in stem-initial position, the Aigif will be a HD by itself (since the constraint in (92) will bar expansion of /ngft/'s HD. And Depressed Syllable Alignment will guarantee that /ngfl/'s HD will be in a separate RD from the stem HD. We thus will find downstep and a lack of protection of the stem HD non-heads. (135) singdgawlu'ula sing&abliSiila

(chop) (rejoice, be happy)

When there is a depressed syllable internal to the second HD, the domain of /n,g# will expand to include the first stem syllable, but that syllable will be in a separate RD from the following syllables, resulting in downstep and a lack of protection.. (136) ndjngasu'ndltftfza singase'ngl^la singase'benzej !<(ana

(push) (milk for) (work for each other) 147

Note that the syllable /be/ in siQgastfbetiggf dana is toneless, since it cannot be gathered into the preceding RD due to Cohesion and thus cannot be protected. The inclusion of an object prefix in the /ngtf/ tense will be the final topic of this chapter. But by now the patterns observed are very familiar and we shall only highlight the facts. Toneless verb stems are illustrated in (137) with non-depressed object prefixes. None of these stems have a depressed syllable in the HD initiated by the object prefix. (137) singayttlwa ndjngaylwiisa singayllltma bangaylcVhila singaWxdleela siflgaylhlomeela fldingayfbtfiisa singaylchrikiimiisa

fldingayttoiiseeia singaylqdn<5n<5ndijsa Odfaflftylshvimayeezft

(fight) (drop) (cultivate) (sing) (forgive) (add) (narrate) (touch) (narrate to) (emphasize) (preach to)

The shifting of the H from lifflU to the object prefix in siqggyttlwa results in an overlapping HD structure where the object prefix is the head of both of the overlapping domains. It will bear the only surface High tone. In sin,ga,yilt(ma> l^)en are again overlapping HD's due to the fact that Alfl<(/ i* depressed and depressed heads are avoided. The object prefix is the head of the HD which /(igaY initiates while the first stem syllable is the head of the HD initiated by the object prefix. Both of these heads will be realized with a High tone and there will be no downstep between them since the overlapping HD's are gathered into either a single RD or an overlapping RD structure (depending on the analysis). In sirjgsytqdndno'n.d.usa w e again have two overlapping HD's, and the heads of each realize a High tone. The non-heads between these two heads are all raised in pitch due to the fact that since all of the syllables in the overlapping HD's are in the same RD, Plateau will require the nonheads to be High in pitch.. In (138) we provide examples of toneless verb stems with a depressed syllable in the HD initiated by the object prefbc. (138) singayfyftftfla

singaylgfilddda singayicjanliisa singayiyumle'ela angayig Ifouula singaylgublungsela singaylcombullu'ula angayiphazamltisa angayfphengulliiula angayirnbambJdzeela

(close) (roast) (dance with) (permit) (scrape) (cover) (solve) (disturb) (investigate) (pat) 148

The HD initiated by /rjgff/ will expand, in the output of the B system, to include the object prefix. This guarantees that the object prefix will be realized with a H tone, since the object prefix will be the head of the domain. The depressed syllable in the stem triggers Depressed Syllable Alignment, with the result that the object prefix will be in a separate RD from the head of the HD that it initiates. Thus the High tone on the object prefix cannot protect the non-heads inside the verb stem proper. If the object prefix is itself depressed, then the HD of /ngj/ will not expand to include the object prefix. Furthermore, /ngtf/ will be in a different RDfromthe HD initiated by the object prefix; consequently there will be downstep between /n.g#/ and the following domain, and there will be no protection of non-heads in the following domain. (139) baogSIslHwa ndingfciwtfisa singtaillilma baogfoicliitila bangfcygcMda singflzjxldleela sirjgflzjhlldmeela singftiillvinflusa singflsichukldmiisa

singfcidaniiisa singftayumle'ela ang$zjgub!iirjgee.la singfciqononlondiisa ndingfoishumtayeeza. angfciphazamllisa arjgfcjphenguiliiula angfj£imt}amb!f(?;ee1a singfcilin.ga.n!lseela

(fight) (drop) (cultivate) (sing) (roast) (forgive) (add) (repair) (touch) (dance with) (permit) (cover) (emphasize) (preach to) (hinder, perplex) (investigate) (pat) (apportion to)

When an object prefix is combined with a High verb stem, we expect these two elements to fuse together. This is indeed what happens. We also expect the H of Aigfl/ to not fuse with the following HD. It does not. Rather, the HD constructed over /ngtf/ will extend to the object prefix, (if it is not depressed) causing an overlapping HD structure that resuhs in either a single RD (or overlapping RD's). We thus find no downstepping between the shifted High and a following High, and we do find non-heads being affected by Plateau. (140) ndingayiitya singayfbddna

singaylsmila singaytblfsa singayhhee'nga

(eat) (see) (wipe) (call) (buy) 149

ndjogaylbdnifsa siogayifiimtfftna singaylflnye^jHJ singsyfbtfnikiliisa singaylshlylselaana sirignylthele'keleela

(show) (get) (shorten) (make visible) (compete with) (think about)

When the stem begins with a depressed consonant, as in (141) below, the H shifts off the potential prefix /n,g4/ onto the object prefix. The object prefix is pronounced with a H tone since it is the head of the HD initiated by ^ga7. However, the head of the HD initiated by the object prefix is separatedfromthe object prefix by a depressor consonant. As a consequence, the object prefix will be in a separate RDfromthe head of the object prefix's HD. Thus there is downstep between the two HD's and there is no protection of non-heads in the second domain. (141)

singayis'ddnda. singayidjl.llsa singaytdjlMla sinflayigflwliiilla singayljamle'ela singaylzalisMkiisa sing»yiserig!
Qong for) (make eat) (pass by) (chop) (hide) (cause fulfillment) (milk for) (teach)

If the object prefix is depressed, then the H may not shift away from Aigfl/ due to the constraint in (92) which disallows a HD in the output of the A systemfromexpanding to include a depressed syllable. Furthermore, the /ngfl/ will be in a separate RDfromthe object prefix and will not be able to protect the non-heads in the HD-initiated by the object prefix. And, of course, there will be downstep between the two RD's. (143)

oding^ziiltya singfaiblddna singfcjWtftfla ndjnga*ibon!tisa singfcifinyl&za. singfcjbonaklaliisa singfoishiyiste'laana singfaigaw.'u'dla singfcjamteela singfcjsengltiftla singfoasftlisle'kiisa

(eat) (see) (thresh) (show) (shorten) (make visible) (compete with) (chop) (hide) (milk for) (cause fulfillment)

In this chapter we have shown how the analysis provided in Chapter Two -- involving both an A and a B system evaluating both High Domains and Register Domains ~ extends in a ISO

CHAPTER FOUR GRAMMATICAL TONE 4.0. Introduction. Up until this point our examination of Isixhosa tone has been restricted to verb tenses where the stem reflects only the lexical tone specification (either toneless or High). There are a variety of other tenses in Isixhosa, as well as in Bantu languages in general, where the stem reflects a grammatical tone (whether in addition to or in place of the lexical tone is a matter that we shall have to explore). The location of the grammatical tone is predictable, but predictable on the basis of the morphological structure. The location of the grammatical High tone does not reflect general phonological principles (there may, of course, be cases where phonological principles play some role in the determination of the location of the grammatical tone). In this chapter we will explore a substantial number of tenses in Isixhosa which have a grammatical High tone in their structure.' We shall see that given an input where the grammatical tone has been properly located, then the same general constraints as discussed in Chapters Two and Three will account for the surface tonal shapes of these tenses. Because the concerns of this book are centered on the general phonological constraints that govern the Isixhosa tone pattern, we do not discuss the principles that determine the location of the grammatical tones, rather, we simply assume inputs where the grammatical High tone has been properly located. Doubtless there is much of theoretical interest to be gained from developing an Optimally Theoretic account of the assignment of grammatical tones; but space limitations prevent us from attempting such a development here. Although we do not discuss how High tones come to be specified on particular vowels in the tenses under discussion, we must of course explore which vowel in each tense does in fact bear the grammatical High tone. Since we provide data here for a substantial range of verb forms, we have to some extent curtailed the exemplification (not always discussing every possible distribution of depressed syllables etc.). Furthermore, while the data examined here provide critical supporting evidence for the overall shape of our analysis of Isixhosa tone, there are certain areas where generalization simply fails. First, whether adjacent H-sponsors are fused into a single HD or are permitted to form separate HD's cannot be predicted on the basis of any general principles. We have chosen to taken the fused domain as the one that the constraint system predicts to be optimal, and do not try to develop a formal account of all the exceptional cases where fusion does not occur. Second, there is considerable variation in the behavior of monosyllabic verb stems bearing either a lexical or a grammatical High tone - this variation occurs across dialects and across constructions and also sometimes occurs within the same construction for a single speaker. We do not believe a really conclusive account of the behavior of these stems is possible without a much better understanding of the details of this variation. Thus our remarks here are often quite inconclusive. We have opted throughout this study to not sweep problematic data under the rug. The reader should not lose sight of the larger truth that forms the background to the various details of the verbal forms examined in this chapter once we have determined the location of the grammatical High tone, an impressive and diverse range of facts falls out from the tonological analysis that we constructed in Chapters Two and Three on the basis of verb tenses with only lexical tones. The tenses with grammatical High tones are strikingly supportive of the overall analysis. 1 We have omitted one major tense, the subjunctive, which has quite unique properties and does not seem to contribute significantly to as understanding of the overall pattern of Isixhosa lone.

151

4.1. Negative present The first tense we shall deal with will be labeled "negative present". Morphologically, this tense is initiated by a negative marker /a/ which is followed immediately by the subject prefix (the subject markers in the negative are generally the same as in other tenses, except that the Class 1 subject prefix is /ka/). The verb stem follows, with a final vowel l\l rather than the /a/ found in most affirmative tenses. For example, (1)

aridltlwl akaalwt aMSlwi

1 am not fighting' '(s)he is not fighting' 'they are not fighting*

Let us begin our examination of the tonal pattern of the negative present with trisyllabic and longer toneless stems that contain no depressor consonant.

(2)

anixolle*e*1i abicactltsi abtfmonle'eli abAhlawltfuli antfikellttli abinabul'utfli abdntywilisleeli anlnamatheltltsi

(forgive) (explain) (be jealous) (pay fine) (reach) (stretch body) (drown s.t.) (cement)

akdtyhuthutyhuthltiiia

(force one's way through)

There are clearly two High tones in the input of these items. One of these H tones is regularly realized on the subject prefix. The .other High tone is realized on the penultimate syllable. Where do these H tones originate, and how does their surface realization follow from an ODT analysis? The H that is realized on the SP could originate either there or on the negative marker that precedes (since one might assume, in that case, that *MonoHD is responsible for "spreading" it onto the subject prefix). We will give some evidence later that argues against the negative prefix being a H-sponsor. For now, we will proceed on the assumption that subject prefixes in the negative (all subject prefixes) are indeed H-sponsors. This is in fact a typical feature of a number of Bantu languages: while in certain tenses there may be a contrast between High-toned and toneless subject prefixes, in other tenses there is no contrast - all subject prefixes may be High-toned or all may be toneless. We will not here be concerned with this aspect of the morphology. Our main concern will be the High tone that surfaces on the penult in the examples in (2). This penult High tone is a reflection of what we have called grammatical tone. The verbs in (2) are lexically toneless, so there is no other possibility than to see this penult High tone as arising from the morphology (grammar). Given that this is a grammatical High tone, we still must determine where this High tone is located in the input to the phonology (the fact that it surfaces on the penult means little since we know that in Isixhosa phonological constraints may lead to a High tone being realized in a location distinct from its point of origin). Suppose, to begin with, that this grammatical High tone does originates where it surfaces — namely, on the penult syllable. One problem that such an analysis poses is that it does not 152

account, in any straightforward way, for the fact that the HD that is initiated by the subject prefix does not include the following stem-initial syllable In cases like antfikel!6eii. Recall that •MonoHD requires that a HD be bisyllabic. The HD of the subject prefix in antfikel!«li appears to violate *MonoHD on the assumption that the penult syllable is indeed the H-sponsor. Of course, we have seen that the elements Is&J and /(](#(/ are exceptions to *MonoHD (see Chapter Three), so perhaps it would be no particular disaster if we mark the subject prefix in negative forms as an exception as welL But the analysis that we propose below does not require invoking exceptionality. There is evidence against the proposition that the High tone in the negative is anchored on the penult vowel and in favor of the proposition that it is anchored on the second stem vowel. This evidence will come from the effects of Plateau and its "protection" of non-head elements in a HD. We will explore this evidence fully below. If it is the second stem vowel that is the Hsponsor in the negative present forms under discussion, then No Adjacent Edges, which dominates *MonoHD on independent grounds (see Chapter Two), would be sufficient to explain why the HD initiated by the subject prefix may not extend into the verb stem. To do so would lead to adjacent High Domains, which is non-optimal. The HD-structure a(n|)fi(k£lee)l( will be optimal rather than *a(n{fi)(k£lee)li. (We underline the proposed H-sponsors: the subject prefix and the second stem mora.) If we accept this analysis, then (for the toneless verbs currently under discussion) the only assumption we need to make to predict the correct surface form is that Avoid Prominence is inapplicable in this tense (as well as all other tenses to be considered in the remainder of this chapter where there is a grammatical High tone in the stem). Avoid Prominence thus appears to hold just in those tenses where no grammatical stem tones are present. Negative verb forms, since they contain a grammatical High tone, do not contribute a "mark" by virtue of violating Avoid Prominence. We illustrate in the tableau in (3) below how the constraint system already established for Isixhosa will predict the data in (2), on the assumption that the subject prefix and the second stem mora are High-sponsors and on the assumption that Avoid Prominence is without influence in tenses with grammatical tone. We include only examples that satisfy BAL, Incorporate (Hsponsor) and DomCor (H). Thus these constraints are excluded from the tableau (as well as candidates that violate these constraints). We also do not show the effects of the realization constraints, but do discuss these effects below. (3)

anlfikelie'e'li

Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) will guarantee that the domain initiated by the grammatical High tone does not extend onto the final syllable. No Adjacent Edges determines that the HD initiated by the subject prefix may not extend onto the first stem mora, even though this leads to a violation of *MonoHD. The fact that Avoid Prominence is not relevant in this tense means that Align Word R will hold sway and the domain will extend to the penult. The penult will be the

153

head of the second domain, and Express (H, heads of HD) and *(H, non-head) will guarantee that only the head of that domain realizes High tone. So far we have looked at trisyllabic and longer toneless verb sterns which do not contain a (non-final) depressed syllable. (4) illustrates cases where the stem has a depressed syllable. (4)

aba-son<|!<<<

(come nearer) (wait for) (disturb) (make clear) (protect, keep safe) (solve problem) (decorate) (go to meet) (dance) (return home) (permit) (scrape off)

These data show exactly the same tonal pattern as toneless verb stems without a depressed syllable: a High on the subject prefix and a High on the penult syllable. Let us review why this is so. According to our analysis, the subject prefix HD (at least when the subject prefix is not depressed; see below for the case where it is depressed) is not adjacent to the HD Initiated by the second stem mora. As a consequence, the two HD's will be in different RD's. There will thus be downstep between these two HD's and no protection of non-heads in the second HD. Now, if we introduce a depressor consonant into the verb stem, this will have no material effect; it guarantees that the head of the second HD will not be in the same RD as the head of the first HD - but this is true even when there is no depressor consonant in the stem Still limiting ourselves to trisyllabic and longer (lexically toneless) verb steins, consider next the case where the subject prefix is depressed and there is no depressed syllable in the stem. Consider first the data from K.

(5)

andjx6lt«li arjdjcactffsi andjmo'nltfeli andindblililli andjflkeltee'Ii andjntywilisle'e'li

(forgive) (explain) (be jealous) (stretch body) (reach) (drown s.t.)

These data show that the High tone of the subject prefix is subject to the DIHTS phenomenon. They also show that in K, when the H shifts onto the first stem syllable, there is a downstep between that High and the penult High. Furthermore, the shifted High does not "protect" any of the syllables in front of the penult. These data do not -- in the absence of the data from M discussed immediately below — indicate in any way that the grammatical High tone is located on the second stem vowel However, if the second stem vowel is the H-sponsor, these data from K would be entirely expected. Recall that in K, when DIHTS produces (in the B system) adjacent 154

HD's, they are not gathered into a single RD: NARDE is violated because RD-Faithfulness (i.e. faithfulness to the RD structure of the output of the A system) is more highly ranked. Since there are two RD's, there will be downstep between the two HD's and Plateau will be inoperative. However, M is a different story. If the second stem vowel does initiate a HD, then we predict that the DIHTS phenomenon on the subject prefix will create adjacent HD's which in M will be gathered into a single RD, since in M's speech NARDE dominates RD-Faithfulness. So in M we should find a single RD and thus no downstep and Plateau should be in operation. This is indeed the case. (6)

andjxdlgeli andjcAcfisi andjmo'nWli andjndbiluli and.ifikele'eli andjntywilisSe'li

(forgive) (explain) (be jealous) (stretch the body) (reach) (drown s.t.)

The contrast between the data in (5) from K and the data in (6) from M provides powerful evidence that the grammatical High tone is indeed located on the second stem mora: no other assumption will be able to explain the contrast between K and M. Specifically, if one assumed that the penultimate mora is the sponsor of the grammatical High tone, there would be no reason for the second stem syllable in arjdjflkele'eli to be raised in pitch. It would not be a non-head in a HD and thus would not be expected to be affected by Plateau. The fact that it is affected by Plateau in M shows unambiguously that the HD must start with the second stem mora and not the penult. We consider this evidence overwhelming and will not belabor the point more. Next let us consider the case where the subject prefix is depressed and there is a depressor in initial position in the verb stem. There is no difference between K and M in these forms, as expected. (7)

andJdanlifsi andjgQdIMki andJiikle'e'li andjrrit)ath!fisi ai)djguz!ftjli

(dance) (go home) (put or turn round on) (clothe s.o.) (scrape off)

In the case of a stem with an initial depressor, the shift from a depressed subject prefix cannot apply (Le. a HD in the output of the A system may not be expanded rightwards in the B system, due to the high ranking of the principle given as (92) in Chapter Three: if a depressed element is not in a HD; in the input, then its correspondent in output may not be in the corrrespondent of HD|. This constraint bars the initial syllable of the stem in (7) from being absorbed into the preceding HD. Since the HD's in (7) will not be adjacent in the output of the B system in either K or M, there will be no dialectal difference in the pronunciation of these items. The two HD's will be in different RD's and there will be downstep between these RD's. In the following data the subject prefix is depressed and there is a depressed syllable is in the second syllable of the verb stem. The DIHTS phenomenon does affect the subject prefix here, but in both K and M there is (a) downstep between the HD initiated by the subject prefix

15S

and the HD initiated by the grammatical High tone and there is (b) no protection of non-heads in the HD initiated by the grammatical High tone. (8)

and,iso"nd!«!i andjlta4l{{li arjdjma'ngalle'eli asisdmbullduli andildndQl!<56xi »ziydkojel!Hsi

(come nearer) (wait for) (take to court) (solve problem) (keep safe) (decorate)

When the stem has three syllables (e.g. arjdjsdn,(f 6610 there is a downstep between the first and second stem syllables. This is the consequence of the fact that Depressed Syllable Alignment guarantees that the HD initiated by the second stem syllable will be in a separate RD from the HD initiated by the subject prefix. Since Depressed Syllable Alignment outranks NARDE, M will not join the two HD's into a single RD. K, of course, would not in any case join adjacent HD's into a single RD if they arose in the B system (do to the ranking of RD-Faithfulness over NARDE in K). When the stem has four or more syllables (e.g. mdjmdngaf « l i . *Ziydko;efffsi), the facts are no different: the depressed second syllable must induce a RD separation between the head of the HD initiated by the subject prefix and the head of the HD initiated by the grammatical H in the verb stem. This means that not only will there be downstepping between the two RD's, there will also be no protection of non-heads in the HD-initiated by the grammatical High tone. This is particularly striking in an example like azjyclkojie/l'si where the syllable /ko/ is not raised in pitch even though immediately preceded by a High tone. The /ko/ is not in any RD due to the fact that Depressed Syllable Alignment prevents it from being grouped into a RD with the following depressed syllable and Cohesion prevents it from being incorporated into the preceding RD. (20) illustrates the evaluation of the RD structure for the example aay<5kojje-llsi in M (given that the HD-structure in the output of the B system is •(ztyo)(kozeM)sr). (20) Candidates a|(ziyo)H(ko)(zelii)}si a{(ziyoKko)(zelii))si ->a{(ziyo))(ko(zelii))si aKzivo)(kozelii)}si

Dep Syll Cohesion Alignment *i

HD-mora Incorporation

NARDE

&mm ».iii. ,3fr i

fed.

• 8 ——^4k«v4fc i.a i i i > .in rrtV

' 11

%5^

»!

The evaluation for K is not significantly different (since K differs from M just in the relative ranking of NARDE and RD-Faithfulness, an issue that is mute given that Depressed Syllable Alignment outranks NARDE in both dialects and renders the latter constraint irrelevant. We have so far examined only trisyllabic or longer toneless verb stems that start with a consonant We will delay examining vowel-initial verbs until we have looked at consonant-initial toneless verb stems of all lengths. In the case of bisyllabic toneless verb stems, there is no distinction between the /wisaAtype of toneless verb stem and the /lima/-type (recall that the

156

/wisa/ type are exceptions to *MonoHD whereas the /lima/ type are not). We discuss first the case where the subject prefix is not depressed. akdth<5(5bi akachia,&i akaxtiribi akM&ibi ab&bi&h akactitili akaph«ki

(bend) (comb) (mix) (stab) (count) (sing) (cook)

(Although we have transcribed a High tone on the subject prefix, we should note that when it stands in front of a non-depressed High syllable, it is actually not as high in pitch as the stem High tone. Nevertheless, it is clearly High in comparison with the case of the High-toned verb stems dealt with below, and it is higher than the preceding negative morpheme. We assume that the phonetic implementation component must be responsible for this lowering effect, but admit that we have no good explanation for why the phonetics should be as they are. In the data in (21), we find both the subject prefix and the penult syllable of the verb stem High in tone. This immediately suggests that we have a case where there are two HD's and the heads of both HD's are realized on a High tone a(ka)(hla)bi. If so, then we must have a situation where the OCP (specifically, No Adjacent Sponsors) is inoperative. We have of course already encountered other cases, in Chapter Three, where No Adjacent Sponsors does not drive fusion. The negative present must be added to the list of constructions where No Adjacent Sponsors is (exceptionally) violable. In order to propose a HD-structure like a(ka)(hla)bi, it is necessary to assume that in the case of a bisyllabic stem, it is the initial mora rather than the second mora that sponsors the grammatical High tone. It seems, then, that the principles that determine where the grammatical High tone is located avoid locating the grammatical High on the second mora of the stem if that mora is word-final. In other words, the determination of the location of the grammatical High tone is sensitive to the Nonfuiality constraint family. Since we are not dealing here with the issue of how grammatical High tones get assigned, we will have nothing more to say about this matter. Rather we will simply assume that in the case of bisyllabic toneless verb stems, the initial mora is the sponsor of the grammatical High tone. Given that we have the input structure /a-ka.-h|abi/, and given that the negative present is an exception to No Adjacent Sponsors, we will derive the HD-structure a(kg)(hla)bi, and the realization system will require both heads to be High-toned. Furthermore, in both K and M, NARDE - operating in the A system - will require these adjacent HD's to be in a single RD. Thus there will be no downstep between the two High tones. So far we have seen only bisyllabic verbs that do not have an initial depressed syllable. When the initial syllable is depressed, as in (22), (22)

akaytMli ayiy, Itftfzj akdyltftfrni akagltfuli akayltfflngj

(close) (leak) (agree) (be sick) (mix)

157

there is downstep between the two HD's. The downstep in this case is of course the consequence of the fact that Depressed Syllable Alignment requires that the HD initiated by the first stem syllable be in a separate Rdfromthe subject prefix. Since the HD's are in two separate RD's, there must be downstep between them. When the subject prefix has a depressed onset and a bisyllabic toneless verb follows, the H tone appears not on the subject prefix, but on the following syllable (if that syllable is not itself depressed). (23)

andjwttsi arjdjlllmi andjph«ki andjcuiili andjch&ta

(drop) (cultivate) (cook) (sing) (comb)

In these examples, we have the following HD structure in the output of the A system: a (ndi) (l|i) mi. The constraint *(H, Depressed Syllable) will require the first HD to extend itself to include the following syllable, creating an overlapping HD-structure: a(ndl (liD)mi. The only HD-head in this structure is the first stem syllable and it will therefore bear the only surface High tone. If the verb stem has an initial depressed syllable, the B system will not be able to expand the HD containing the subject prefix, due to the undominated constraint (given as (93) in Chapter Three) disallowing a depressed syllablefrombeing part of a HDj if it was not included in HD( in the input The subject prefix HD and the verb stem HD will be in adjacent HD's in the output of the B system, but they will not be allowed to be organized into a single RD due to the constraint Depressed Syllable Alignment There will be two adjacent RD's with downstep between them. (24)

andiyl^li andtvtMmi andlgltftfli •stvllltizi

(close) (agree) (be sick) (leak)

The tableau in (25) illustrates the evaluation of the RD-structure given that the HD-structure in the output of the B system is a(nd|)(vjiu)ini. •(25) Candidates Dep Syllable NARDE Alignment j* -*a{(ndiKvu.u))mi * a{(ndilH(vuu)}mi We complete our examination of toneless verb stems in the negative present by considering monosyllabic stems. The following pattern from K seems to represent a common pattern in Isixhosa. (26)

aktflwf aktfiwf akiasf

(fight) (fall) (take to)

158

But the following pattern in M is also found: (27)

antilwlf, abialwll, andljlwlt, aaijlwll akaawtl, abdawlt, andljwll, ajrijlwif The observant reader will recognize this variation ~ we have already noted its existence in Chapter Three in the context of the juxtaposition of /si/ and /nga7 with a monosyllabic root. There we suggested that the variation is connected to the case where there are two adjacent sponsors, the second of which is word-final, but the OCP is not in effect. Since the OCP (No Adjacent Sponsors) does induce a violation mark, the optimal output is one where there are two HD's. There are two possible surface forms due to variability in the ranking of No Adjacent Edges and Syllable Alignment. In order to tell this same story here, we must assume that in the case of a monosyllabic stem in the negative present, the only mora of the stem sponsors the grammatical High tone. In other words, the grammatical High must appear on one of the stem moras and in the monosyllabic stem case it appears on the only available mora. We should note that there is an alternative account of this variation that is available. The variation could be seen as revolving around the epenthetic mora introduced into the penult syllable. Suppose that No Adjacent Edges is actually ambiguous between the following two interpretations: (28)

No Adjacent Edges *W)0ij (i) Hi and Hj are input moras (ii) \l{ and |ij are moras, either input or output

The observed variation could then be seen as deriving from whether it is the first or the second version of (28) that dominates Syllable Alignment. Suppose that (28i) - but not (28ii) outranks Syllable Alignment. Given (28i). neither a(kaa)(lwj) nor a(k&)a(lwi) will violate No Adjacent Edges (since in the former case there is an epenthetic mora at the Right edge of the domain). Since the latter candidate violates Syllable Alignment and the former does not, the former candidate will be optimal. On the other hand, suppose that (28ii) - but not (28i) -outranks Syllable Alignment. (28ii) will reject a(kaa)('wi)< with the consequence that a(kg)a(lwi) will be optimal, even though it violates the more lowly ranked constraint Syllable Alignment. Under this interpretation, then, No Adjacent Edges would be a constraint family, where each of the two interpretations in (28) are members of the family. This alternative analysis of the variation is, we believe, a realistic possibility. As we noted earlier, there are many instances in the pre-OT literature where epenthetic elements do not "count" in satisfying the structural description of a rule. Such cases represented one class of socalled "opaque" rule ordering. In OT, this behavior of epenthetic material could conceivably be captured by postulating constraint families whose members differ with respect to whether only underlying material is relevant or all material. However, the treatment of opacity within OT remains a very thorny issue and it is by no means obvious whether a constraint family like (28) is theoretically desirable. We will therefore continue to assume that variability in the ranking of No Adjacent Edges and Syllable Alignment is at the heart of the variation observed. When a monosyllabic stem is preceded by a depressed subject, there is no shift of the High onto the final syllable, as seen in (29), since Nonfinality (HD) outranks *(H, Depressed Syllable) in both the A and the B systems.

159

(29)

andUlwforan.
(fight) (fall)

Given that No Adjacent Sponsors does not force the subject prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor into a single fused HD, DomCor (H) will force there to be two HD's in the optimal output There is variation in the optimal output depending on whether Syllable Alignment dominates No Adjacent Edges (resulting in the HD structure a(ndii)(lw[)) or No Adjacent Edges dominates Syllable Alignment (resulting in a(ndi)i(lwj)).Given the former HD-structure, the two HD's. will be forced into a single RD by virtue of NARDE and there will be no downstep between the two domain heads. In the latter case, there will be two different RD's and thus downstep will occur. We have so far only looked at consonant-initial toneless verb sterns in the negative present. Some examples of vowel-initial verb stems are given in (30): (30)

an6oslt (roast) ak£el!f (winnow) akeenS!.1 (do) [But we have also observed: ak££bf (distribute), akddsi (roast), akddnyt (suckle).] an61tiuli an&nelllfsf analamanftfsi

(stretch out) (satisfy) (connect with)

Notice that in these examples, the initial vowel of the verb stem contracts with the subject prefix syllable. This places the High-tone domain initiated by the subject prefix adjacent to the second stem voweL Now, we have suggested that the second stem vowel sponsors the grammatical High tone in the negative present. If we have inputs like /a-nj-alamanisi/, we would expect the following HD-structure: a(na)(lgmanli)si. This structure would result in the pronunciation *and]dma,nrtsi since we would expect the HD initiated by the subject prefix to protect the HD initiated by the second stem mora (since adjacent HD's would be located within a single RD and Plateau would bar a HO sequence). The correct pronunciation, however, is andlamanHfsi. We propose to account for the examples like andlamanHlsi in (30) by assuming that the sponsor of the grammatical High tone is not the second mora of /alamanisi/ but the third. Why should this be so? We have already provided the answer to this question. We proposed that the location of High tones in verb stems is in terms of the Prosodic Stem rather than the Morphological Stem, and that the requirement that Prosodic Stems align with syllables outranks the requirement that Prosodic Stems align with Morphological Stems. Our proposal, then, is that the prosodic stem in the case of andlamanlilsi is /lamaniisi/ and the grammatical High tone appears on the second mora of this stem. The initial mora of the verb stem cannot be included in the Prosodic Stem since to do so would leave the Prosodic Stem misaligned syllabically. (We assume that material not belonging to the stem cannot be incorporated into the Prosodic Stem, thereby excluding the possibility of/nalamaniisi/ being treated as the Prosodic Stem.) If the input of of antflamanHisi is /analama.niisi/, then the optimal HD-structure will be a(n<4>a)la(manii)si since No Adjacent Edges dominates *MonoHD, barring the expansion of

160

the subject prefix HD. These two nonadjacent HD's will be organized into two RD's; as a consequence there will be no protection of the non-heads in the second HD. Consider next an example like andhldft The Prosodic Stem will be /Iuli/. Now we now that in the case of Disyllabic stems, the grammatical High tone is not sponsored by the second stem mora since that mora is word-final; instead it is the first stem mora that is the sponsor. We will thus have the HD structure a(no) (lu,u)li. No Adjacent Edges will be violated in order that DomCor (H) can be satisfied. These adjacent HD's will be grouped into a single RD as a consequence of NARDE, the constraint barring adjacent RD's. Since the two HD-heads are in the same RD, there will be no downstep between them. Finally, consider examples like andosM (alternatively, anddsTj. Recall that when confronted with similar variation, we have proposed to account for the variation in terms of (a) the failure of No Adjacent Sponsors to force a HD where both sponsors are included in the same domain, and (b) variable ranking of No Adjacent Edges and Syllable Alignment. In order to appeal to this analysis in the present case, we must assume an input /a-nj-osj/. In other words, the grammatical H tone must be located on the final vowel. This is, of course, predicted since (a) the Prosodic Stem must be aligned with a syllable, thus forcing the initial vowel of the Morphological Stem to be omitted from the Prosodic Stem, and (b) if the Prosodic Stem contains a single mora, then the grammatical High tone must be located on that mora. Given the input /anj-osj/, the optimal domain structure will be a(n<j>oo)(si) (if Syllable Alignment dominates No Adjacent Edges) or a(no)o(si) (if No Adjacent Edges dominates Syllable Alignment). If the former HD-structure is optimal, both HD's will be gathered into a single RD due to NARDE and there will be no downstep between the High tones on the heads of the two HD's. If the latter HDstructure is optimal, NARDE will be irrelevant and therefore there will be two separate RD's and downstep between the heads of the two HD's. Let us now turn our attention to High verb stems in the negative present. The following data show that when the verb stem is lexically High (and trisyllabic or longer), just a single High tone surfaces, and that High tone is always on the penult syllable (the monosyllabic stem case is different and will be dealt with later). This pattern holds whether the subject prefix is depressed or not and whedier the stem contains a depressed syllable or not. (31)

arjdifum4£ni andjsebee'iKi asithenfltfsi aniboniisi anigawtitili akakhathajtfjgki akaphakameeli akangsabaUa'iu akapliamtjanfisi akasebengggli akabonakalifsi abasebenjjsela^ni andjphulaphuuli abafunflgke'eli

(get) (work) (sell) (show) (chop down) (be distressed) (stand above) (straddle, take long strides) (turn upside down) (work for) (make visible) (work together for) (listen) (make noise)

161

These forms are analogous to toneless verb stems in that they have a penult High tone. They differ from toneless verb stems in lacking any trace of the High from the subject prefix. Why is there this difference? We propose first that, in underlying representation, these verbs have their lexical H associated with the first stem mora. The toneless verb stems of course lack such a H tone. Second, we propose that these verb stems also have a grammatical High tone on the second mora. The input for anifuma'a'ni then, is /a-nj-fumani/. This input has three adjacent Highsponsors. We would expect adjacent H-sponsors inside a verb stem to be fused into a single HD due to No Adjacent Sponsors (recall that in the perfect, an object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor are fused into a single domain even though in general the perfect exceptionally fails to obey No Adjacent Sponsors). Thus we expect /fuZ and /maa/ to be part of the same HD. However, to obtain the correct surface forms, it is necessary that the subject prefix H-sponsor InU also be organized into that same HD. We must have the HD-structure a(nifu.maa)ni if we are to have a surface form where the only High tone is on th penult syllable. In order to obtain this result. No Adjacent Sponsors must be able to force a violation of DomCor (H) and thereby drive th subject prefix H-sponsor into the same domain as the verb stem's H-sponsors. The behavior of High verbs in the negative present is thus just like the behavior of High verbs in the short present: No Adjacent Edges drives fusion. The only problematic aspect of this is that we have seen that in the case of toneless verb stems in the negative present. No Adjacent Sponsors does not drive fusion. We suggested that these forms had to be exceptional to No Adjacent Sponsors so as to prevent fusion from occurring. We are thus faced with a complicated pattern of exceptionality: the grammatical High tone found in toneless verb stems in the negative present does not fuse with the subject prefix H-sponsor, but the lexical High tone on the first mora of the High verb stems does fuse. Since it is not clear whether there is an explanation for this pattern, we will not pursue the matter further here. We will simply assume that it is indeed No Adjacent Sponsors that drives the fusion of the three H-sponsors in a(nlfuma,a)nl into a single domain. Given that these sponsors are organized into a single domain, the only surface High tone will be located on the head of this domain - i.e. the penult syllable. Bisyllabic verb stems are entirely analogous. (32)

anib6dni, andjb<5<Sni anibtidphi, andjbtib'phi anibfcfrnbj, andjti&frnbj anibtitfzj, ar|djbriu*zj

(see) (tie) (go) (ask)

andjthWnfti. andjthSe'ng.i

(buy)

In these examples, it is again clear that the subject prefix H-sponsor fuses into a single HD with the verb stem H-sponsor. If the subject prefix were in a separate HD, then - when it is is not depressed - we would expect it to surface with a High tone. But *anlb<5dni is incorrect - it is the pronunciation that would be appropriate for a toneless verb stem (recall that the grammatical High tone of a lexically toneless verb stem falls to fuse with the subject prefix H-sponsor). While it is clear what the HD-structure of anib66ni is, it is not immediately obvious exactly how many High-sponsors there are. We know that the subject prefix sponsors a High tone. We know that the verb stems in (32) are lexically High and thus the first mora of the stem bears a lexical High tone. But what about the grammatical High that appears on the second mora of the stem when the verb is longer?

162

The surface form does not require the assumption that there is a grammatical H present at alL The lexical H on the initial mora of the verb stem is sufficient to account for the pronunciation. But it is reasonable to ask where one expects the grammatical High to be located. Recall that in the case of bisyllabic toneless verb stems, the grammatical H avoids the final syllable and is located on the first stem syllable. In the High-toned verb case, the only question is whether the presence of a lexical High tone on the first stem syllable would prevent locating the grammatical High tone (vacuously) on that syllable. If it does not, then nothing more needs to be said about examples like anibddni. But suppose that the grammatical High tone were forced to locate itself on the final syllable due to the presence of the lexical H on the first syllable. We would then have an input structure /anjbo_ni/. Would such an input yield the correct surface form? The answer is yes. While at first glance it might appear that we should expect a HD-structure a(n|bgoni) rather than a(nib£o)ni, we have argued earlier that *(Nonfinality, polysyllabic HD dominates Incorporate (H-sponsor). This means that a(niboo)nj will be preferred over a(njbopni). What all this shows is that it does not matter whether we assume an input /anjbo.ni/ or /anibonj/, we will get the same output. Thus it does not matter whether we assume that the grammatical H is vacuously located on the first stem syllable or non-vacuously on the second. We will assume that the grammatical H is vacuously on the first mora since there is no overt evidence for its presence on the last syllable. Nothing hinges on this assumption. Let us now look at monosyllabic High verb stems. (33)

aniftyi, axtftyi [K], aniityll, aaUtyli [M]

(eat)

Given that there is only one syllable in the stem, it is clear that the lexical High and the grammatical H have no possibility of being distinct: there is only syllable available for both of them. We thus have the input structure /a-ni-tyj/. We have seen that High verb stems in the negative present are subject to the OCP; consequently, the output candidate *a(nji)(tyi) is nonoptimal (the inconect pronunciation *anlltyl resulting from this domain structure is a possible pronunciation for a monosyllabic toneless verb stem). We also expect Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) to exclude the incorporation of the final sponsor into a HD, as in *a(niityl). The optimal candidate will be a(nii)tyi (yielding the pronunciation anfttyi). While this does represent the pronunciation in K, there is the alternative form aniityll found in M that needs to be explained. Why is this pronunciation available? In order to account for anlityM, we need an optimal output with two HD's. To achieve this, we must somehow prevent No Adjacent Sponsors from coming into play and demanding a violation of DomCor (H-sponsor). We have seen that No Adjacent Sponsors is inoperable in the case of toneless verb stems in the negative present. We could perhaps say that it is optionally inoperative in the case of monosyllabic High verb stems as well. The consequence would be an even more complicated pattern of exceptionality in the negative present. Alternatively, one might propose that No Adjacent Sponsors is actually a family of constraints: one version bars the structure UJ)(UJ when the two moras are adjacent either in the input (more precisely, their corrrespondents are adjacent in the input) or in the output; the second version bars the structure only when the two moras sponsoring a H tone are adjacent in the output. The first version would mean that No Adjacent Sponsors is in effect even if an epenthetic vowel separates the two sponsors in the output; the second version means that the presence of an epenthetic vowel would render No Adjacent Sponsors inapplicable. (Recall that we raised earlier the possibility that OT might try to get at so-called "opacity" by making distinctions between whether a constraint is

163

satisfied by the input or the output) We could then propose that in M there is variability as to which of the members of this family dominates DomCor (H). If it is the member that requires the sponsors to be adjacent in the output, then that constraint will not be violated by a HD-structure like either a(nj)l(tyi) or a(nii)(tyi). Thus either of these HD-structures would be preferable to •(nI')tji- Now, we have seen that in M, No Adjacent Edges dominates Syllable Alignment. This ranking prefers a(n[)l(tyi) over a(nll)(tyl). We thus correctly predict the output anlitty-'t in M. We have now examined the negative present form of High verb stems that are consonantinitiaL Vowel-initial verb stems do not require any new development of the analysis. A vowelinitial verb stem that is trisyllabic or longer transparently shows the expected pattern ~ i.e. a High on the penult syllable only. (34)

anoyliki anonwabilsi anahlukanitsi

(fear) (make happy) (disunite)

The Prosodic Stem in the case of vowel-initial verb stems omits the initial vowel: /yiki/, /nwabisi/, and /hlukanisi/. The initial mora will sponsor the lexical High tone. In the case of /yiki/, the grammatical H tone would also be located (vacuously) on the first stem mora. In the longer examples it would be located on the second stem mora. We thus have the inputs /yiki/, /nwabisi/, and /hlakfinisi/- These stems will behave exactly like their consonant-initial counterparts. The stem High-sponsors, as well as the preceding subject prefix H-sponsor, will fuse into a single HD and only the head of that HD will be realized on a High tone. When there is a VCV stem, we would expect behavior comparable to monosyllabic CV stems - since the Prosodic Stem will in fact consist just of the CV portion of the Morphological Stem. And this is exactly what we find. (35)

andttva [K] or akeeylfj [M] aniiba [K] or aniiblf [M] anWkhi [K] or an4akh!i [M]

(hear) (steal) (build)

The behavior of both toneless and High verb stems in the negative present has been presented in full; next we need to explore the behavior of the object prefix in the negative present. We begin with the inclusion of an object prefix in the negative present of a toneless verb stem. The subject prefix in the following examples is not depressed, nor is the object prefix. The stems are trisyllabic or longer. (36)

abakuxolMe'li [K], abtfktixolie'eli [M] akabalim!«li [K], akabalim!«li [M] aniwashukumlftsi [K], aniwdshukumlffsi [M] abayinamathellfisi [K], abaylnamathelliisi [M] akayichukumliisi [K], akdytchukumtifsi [M] akayinonel!&li [K], akayfnonel!6e'li [M]

(forgive) (cultivate for) (shake) (cement) (touch) (look after s.t with care)

We see that the object prefix has a High tone (which cannot extend onto the first stem syllable, due to the No Adjacent Edges constraint) and the second stem mora has a High tone as well (which surfaces on the penultimate syllable). What must be explained is the absence of the High 164

on the subject prefix in the case of K but its presence in the case of M, since we know the subject prefix sponsors a High tone. It seems clear that the subject prefix High and the object prefix High sponsors are fused into a single domain by virtue of No Adjacent Sponsor in K (but not M). The object prefix and the sponsor of the grammatical High (the second stem mora) are not fused into a single domain in either dialect. We have seen that in both dialects No Adjacent Sponsors does not operate between a subject prefix and the grammatical High of the toneless verb stems. Consequently, we must view the applicability of the OCP in K's dialect as a special phenomenon. It should by now be obvious to the reader that the issue of the applicability of No Adjacent Sponsors is a matter of considerable complexity in the negative present We have not been able to discover any deep explanation for when No Adjacent Sponsors permits a violation of DomCor (H) to occur and when it does not. The Isixhosa data suggests that it is possible for a phonological constraint like No Adjacent Sponsors to become intertwined in the morphology and in keeping paradigms (e.g. toneless versus High verb stems in the negative present) separate. Much of the variation in Isixhosa has its source in whether or not No Adjacent Sponsors is enforced or not. In K, when the subject prefix H-sponsor and the object prefix H-sponsor fuse into a single HD, we expect that the initial syllable of this domain will not realize H (since *(H, nonheads) dominates Express (H)). This is what we find: abakdxol!<61i. In M, however, since the two H-sponsors are organized into separate HD's, we expect the heads of these two HD's to be realized on a High tone. This is what we find: abdkdxol^lli- These adjacent HD's will be organized into a single RD (since NARDE disallows adjacent RD's) and there will be no downstep between the High tone of the subject prefix and the High tone of the object prefix. The presence of a depressor consonant in the verb stem does not alter the basic pattern in K or M since the verb stem is in any case in a separate RD from the object prefix. (37)

abayisond'&li [K], ab&yisondlggli [M] abakiilindt^li [K], ab4kdlind!«li [M] abab&mangftlle'lU [K], aWb4mangal!£eli akaylfluzfMli [K], akayfguzlvllili [M]

(approach) (wait for) (sue) (scrape off)

The case of vowel-initial (trisyllabic or longer) toneless verb stems is illustrated in (38):: (38)

aniwinelliisi [K], aniw4nel!iisi [M] aniw£laman!ffsi [K], aniw4laman!iisi [M]

(satisfy) (connect with)

In these examples we see that once again the initial vowel must be excluded from the Prosodic Stem (due to the requirement that the Prosodic Stem be aligned with a syllable), which forces the third vowel of the Morphological Stem to be the anchor of the grammatical High tone. It is for this reason that there is no protection of the syllables /lama/ in aniwalamanlllsi. If the grammatical H were located on the second vowel of the Morphological Stem, we would expect adjacent HD's, which in turn would mean a single RD and thus Plateau should raise the second stem mora. Since this is not what we find (Le. aniwdlamanHtsi is correct and not aniwa'ltfma'ntfsO, we have unambiguous evidence that the Prosodic Stem ignores the first vowel. So far we have considered trisyllabic or longer toneless stems with an object prefix; bisyllabic toneless stems require some further discussion. 165

(39)

akayilffmi [K], akdyiliimi [M] abaylwltsi [K], abiylwilsi [M] akawuxiitibi [K], akiwuxilubi [M] aniwdb&ali [K], anfwdb&fli [M] akabdhl&ki [M], akdbihleeJci [M] akaylbddnaj [Kl. akayiWdpfli [M]

(cultivate) (drop) (mix up things) (count) (laugh) ( thank )

These data are of considerable interest. Once again we see that while the subject prefix H- and the object prefix H-sponsors are fused into a single domain in K (which is why no H surfaces on the subject prefix), the same is not true of the object prefix High and the verb stem High. We know that no fusion has occurred since if it had, there would only be a single High tone on the head of the fused domain: *abawuxddbi. We have argued throughout that in the negative present of toneless verbs, there is no fusion of the subject prefix H-sponsor and the sponsor of the grammatical High tone. Now we see that in addition there is no fusion of the object prefix High and the grammatical High tone. One possible interpretation of these facts is that In the negative present there is no fusion between any prefixal High tone and the grammatical High tone in the verb stem. Since there is no fusion, a High surfaces on both die object prefix and the verb stem. These two High tones are in the same RD, however, so there will be no downstep between them. If the bisyllabic stem has a depressed initial syllable, the High of the object prefix and the High of the verb stem will be in separate RD's (due to Depressed Syllable Alignment) and thus downstep will occur. (40)

akaylyltftili [K], ak&yiyliiti [M] akaylyl^ofli [K], akaylylfftooj [M] akaylgcmWi [K], akaytgc.ltf(Jdj [M]

(close) (mix) (roast)

Trisyllabic vowel-initial verb stems will parallel the bisyllabic consonant-initial stems in behavior due to the alignment of the Prosodic Stem with the syllable: aniwtSliiillt [K]/ anlwdlddli[M] (stretch). No discussion is required. Next consider monosyllabic toneless stems. (41)

akayiilwt [K] or akaylilwH [Ml

(fight)

The OCP (No Adjacent Sponsors) does not affect the conjunction of an object prefix and the verb stem in the case of toneless verbs ~ cf. akayllllmi [K], akayllftmi [M]; consequently, given the input /a-kg-yi-lwj/, we expect the object prefix to be in one domain and the verb stem in another. (41) shows that this is correct. The two different outcomes in (41) has been analyzed in terms of a difference in constraint ranking between K and M: in K, Syllable Alignment outranks No Adjacent Edges, while in M, No Adjacent Edges outranks Syllable Alignment. /VCV/ stems, due to the alignment of the Prosodic Stem with a syllable, act as though they are /CV/ stems and display the same variation: (42)

aniwdosli [M], aniw6o"si [K]

(bake)

166

Just as in (41), there is no fusion of the object prefix H sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor, leading to the observed variation. No additional discussion should be necessary. So far we have illustrated the attachment of non-depressed object prefixes to toneless verb stems. Some examples with depressed object prefixes follow.

(43)

abaaxdlle'lli [K], ab4zjx!6'l«li [M] akazjhldmle'eli [K], ak^jhlldm^li [M] akandjlimle'e'li [K], akSndjllfmegli [M] abazjnimatheliffst, abAzjnttma'thelfisi [M]

(forgive) (add) (cultivate for) (cement)

In both K and M, the object prefix will be the head of a HD in the output of the A system. But since it is depressed, in the output of the B system that domain will be extended through the next syllable in order to avoid a depressed High-toned syllable. In K this situation does not trigger the fusion of syllables into a single Register Domain (since RD-Faithfulness outranks No Adjacent Register Domain Edges (NARDE)). Consequently, we find downstep between the two High tones in the above examples. In M, however, where NARDE dominates RD-Faithfulness, the two HD's will be fused into the same RD. As a consequence, we will find no downstep in an example like aba'zjx.'dle'fili and protection of non-heads in an example like aba'z.jn!a'mdtri61ffs> Consider next bisyllabic stems: (44)

akazjltimi [K], akSzJUfmi [M] akazjhle^ki [K], akaahlle'e'ki [M] abazjbddngj [K], aMzjblddngj [M] abazjwlisi [K], abijjwlllsi [M]

(cultivate) (laugh) (thank) (drop)

In these examples, in the output of the A system we have the HD structure: a(ka,zj)Oii)mi in K and a(kaj(4)(lil)mi in M. The B system forces the HD containing the object prefix to overlap the HD in the stem (so as to avoid a depressed High-toned syllable): a(ka.4Gi) m ' ' n K ana ' a(kaj)(40ii))mi in M. Since the object prefix is always in a non-head position, and since it is always in a separate RD from the preceding syllable (having an initial depressor, it must initiate a new RD), it will not be realized with a High tone. Finally, consider monosyllabic stems: (45)

aka s ttlwl[K]orak4z!Iilwl[M]

(fight)

Recall that that there is no fusion of the object prefix and the verb stem in the negative present based on a toneless monosyllabic verb stem. This means that both High tones will surface. The presence of a depressed object prefix does not alter this fact. We have proposed to explain the variation in tone shape in (43) by a difference in ranking between Syllable Alignment and No Adjacent Edges. We have only looked at depressed object prefixes in conjunction with toneless verb stems that do not have a depressor in a relevant position (i.e. one that can affect the tonal shape of the output). We turn now to examples with depressors. Consider (46), where the verb stem is bisyllabic and starts with a depressor consonant:

167

(46)

akazfvXJgli [K], akizUvhtfli [M] akatfgcKKJdj [K], akaz!.tgc.l(Mdj [M]

(close) (roast)

In this case, the initial depressed syllable in the stem will stand at the left edge of a RD due to Depressed Syllable Alignment, and thus the prefix H and the verb stem H will be in separate RD's. Downstep will occur. In an example like (47), (47)

akadyum!<;eli[K],ak4z!.tYUm!«li[M]

(permit)

the input to the A system is /a-ka-zi-vumeji/. In both K and M, the object prefix will be a HDhead in the output of the A system. However, the following depressed syllable means that this HD will not be enlarged in the B system. Consequently, the object prefix's HD and the verb stem's HD will not be adjacent and will be in separate RD's in both dialects. Hence there will be downstep between the prefix H and the stem H. If the stem has a depressor consonant in second position in trisyllabic or longer verb stems, as in (48), (48)

abazis<Snd!
(come nearer) (wait for) (take to court) (search out)

we see that the High will "shift" from the object prefix to the first stem syllable. This creates, in the output of the B system, a HD that is adjacent to the HD that starts with the second syllable of the verb stem In M this could lead to the two HD's being in die same RD (due to the fact that NARDE dominates RD-Faithfulness), but not in the present case -- the depressed consonant in the second stem syllable guarantees that a RD begins at that juncture. Thus the prefix H and the stem H will be in separate RD's and there will be downstep between the two (and a non-head in the stem HD will not be protected). In (49) we have an example where the depressed syllable is further removed from the beginning of the stem: (49)

akaz.jqdnonondi.tfsi [K], ak6z.iqldnonondt.Usi

(emphasize)

We note that the object prefix H "shifts" to the first stem syllable (Le. the B system forces the domain of the object prefix to extend to the right in order to avoid a depressed High-toned syllable). This extension of the object prefix HD creates adjacent HD's in the output of the B system (due to the presence of the grammatical High tone on the second stem mora in the negative present). In K, where RD-Faithfulness dominates NARDE, we expect the adjacent HD's to be in separate RD's and thus downstep/lack of protection is expected. And this is what we find. But what about M7 Do we expect the syllables /nono/ to be protected? No. Protection does not occur due to the depressed syllable n,d.u that follows. This depressed syllable must be at the left edge of a RD, and if it is, then the preceding stem syllables will be prevented from being taken into a RD by virtue of the constraint Cohesion (which demands that moras in the same HD be in the same RD). This point was discussed extensively in Chapter Three. 168

We should mention that in the speech of K there is another pattern found when a depressed object prefix occurs. (50)

ak£%il!iimi abd&jwlffsi ab6%ix!tfubi BkajavMTifli akdzjyMli abijjsh.'ukuinlfisi akdx».tgi«j!ViVSli akSaiph!ingul!iIuli

(cultivate) (drop) (mix) (close) (mix) (shake) (scrape) (search out)

K refers to her variety of Isixhosa as "Isihlubi", and this alternative pattern possibly may have something to do with the Hlubi origins of her language. A possible description of these forms is that whereas "fusion" generally affects the sequence of subject prefix and object prefix, fusion may fail to happen when the object prefix is depressed. This goes against the general facts of Isixhosa, where depression has no affect on fusion. We shall not pursue the study of this alternative pattern (pending further research into whether a distinct Hlubi speech variety is still spoken and whether, if such a pattern exists, K's speech is representative of its influence). We have not mentioned the case where the subject prefix is depressed. (SI) provides a variety of examples. (SI)

anditohl«ki [K,M] andjyiliimi [K,M] andibilxoHe'eii [K,M]

(laugh) (cultivate) (forgive) (approach) (take to court) (cement) (shake)

andjytsondKaii [K,M] andjbdmanga.lle'eli [K,M] andjyfnamathelMfsi [K,M] andiyfshukum'.tisi [K,M] andjsjliimi [K], andizi!lifini [M] andiahle<5ki [K], ar,djfflr.l!(Seki [M] andJZibo'd'nai [K], andfoiblo'o'nflj [M]

(cultivate) (laugh) (thank) (close)

andisiyiMi [K], andfxiy!«ii IM] andizixdlle-eli [K], andiax!61<<eli [M] atidisinimatheHlisi [K], andf%in!£ma'th6Hfsi [M] andisishukumlitsi [K], andisishtiikumiisi [M] aodizisdndl^^li [K], andteis!(5nd!^li [M] andixirmingalle'e'li [K], andfamla'ngalle'e'li [M]

(forgive) (cement) (shake) (approach) (take to court)

Since the subject prefix and the object prefix (in the negative present) fuse in K, a depressed subject prefix does not behave differently from a non-depressed subject prefix (since, in any case, it is not the head of a HD in the output of the A system and will not be affected by *(H, 169

Depressed Syllable)). Thus agdjba'hle'e'ki does not differ from akabdhle* In M, the subject prefix and the object prefix do not fuse into a single HD in the output of the A system. However, when the subject prefix is depressed, the HD initiated by it will be forced to overlap the HD of the object prefix (as long as that object prefix is not itself depressed) in order to avoid a violation of *(H, Depressed Syllable). M's pronunciation of an,djbdhl6£kidoes not differ from K's since the overlapping HD's results in a single RD in both dialects. When the object prefix is depressed, K and M will be different in two ways. First, in M the subject prefix will be High-toned (since its H cannot shift away) while in K the subject prefix will continue to be toneless (since the subject prefix is fused into the same domain as the object prefix, regardless of whether it is depressed or not). Second, in both K and M, the High of the object prefix will shift (if possible) onto the first vowel of the verb stem. But in K the shifted H will not be in the same RD with the verb stem High, while in M the shifted H and the verb stem H are in the same RD. Thus we have the contrast between arjdjgixo'ftfe'li [K] and and.fzjxldle'dli [M]. (Recall that we have recorded another pattern as well in K — reflecting perhaps her Hlubi background -- when the object prefix is depressed; this pattern still occurs when the subject prefix is also depressed, as shown by the examples: arjdjzjwittsi, andjzjxidtibi. etc.) We turn now to object prefixes in conjunction with High verb stems in the negative present Recall that in the case of the negative present of High verbs without an object prefix, there is fusion between the subject prefix and the verb stem (we analyzed this by claiming that both the first and second mora of the verb stem are H-sponsors, thus giving a total of three successive H-sponsors). Examination of the data in (52) shows that fusion still occurs when an object prefix is included. This is of course not surprising: the object prefix is a H-sponsor, meaning that there are four successive H-sponsors. akaylftyi [K] or akayiityll [M] akayibddphi aniwamMmi arjdjkubddni, abakubddni andjkubiitizi, akakubdusj

(eat) (tie) (invite) (see) (ask) (buy) (sell) (greet) (show) (work for) (make slippery) (steal) (build) (fear) (make happy) (disunite)

andjyith&nai< abayith6e"ngi aridiyirtienfllisi, abayithengUsi andjkubuliisi, akakubuliisi akayibonlfsi, aniwabonlfsi andjkusebenj^li, abakusebenj&li aniwanyinyithekilsi aniwlebit [M] or aniw&bi [K] aniwiakhli [M] or aniwfi&khi [K] aniwoyifki aniwonwabilsi aniwahlukaniisi

Notice that we have included both depressed and non-depressed subject prefixes, since this distinction has no bearing on the tonal pattern. The first point to make about the data in (52) is that there is no difference between K and M. This establishes immediately that while in the case of a toneless verb stem, there is no fusion 170

in M of a subject High-sponsor and an object High-sponsor, no such dialectal variation exists when the stem is lexically High. "Fusion" occurs in both dialects. We do not here attempt to provide a formal OT account of the pattern of fusion of a subject prefix H and an object prefix H into a single domain. We simply assume that the case of toneless verb stems represents an irregularity to the general principle that adjacent H-sponsors are joined into a single domain. Assuming then that adjacent H-sponsors will be fused into a single domain, an input such as /a-ni-ws-nyinyithekisi/ (where the subject prefix sponsors a H, the object prefix sponsors a H, the first mora of the stem sponsors a lexical H, and the second mora of the stem sponsors a grammatical H) must yield the domain structure a(nlwanyinyithekii)si. Since there is only one HD, there will just be a single H tone on the surface, heard on the head of the domain. The only complexity in (52) arises in the monosyllabic stem case (akaytityi [K] but akaylityii [M]), where we find variant pronunciations. Since this variation exists even without an object prefix present, there is no need to repeat our earlier discussion of the analysis of this phenomenon. We should note, however, that this variation has not been observed in all cases where an object prefix precedes a monosyllabic H verb stem. For example, we did not record it in the long form of the present tense discussed in Chapter Two. However, as we remarked earlier, the distribution of tonal shapes in connection with monosyllabic stems displays a complexity that is far from understood. At present we can do nothing but provide alternative constraint interactions that yield the observed forms, without predicting when each alternative will in fact be employed. The presence of depressor consonants has no effect on the fusion of H-sponsors into a single domain in the output of the A system. The data in (53), where the object prefix is depressed, confirms this point: akazlttyi [K], akaality.'i [M] akajsjbddphi abarnlibo'o'ni, arjdisjbo'o'ni andjabitoja, akaiibtitfa andisithie'nfli. abajuth«n.Bi artdixitheriaUsi, abasuthenflUsi akarjdjbulfisi, aodjjjjbulifsi

(eat) (tie) (see) (ask) (buy) (seU) (greet) (work for)

andjaseberurtteli, abaziseben.jsggli

The surface forms in (53) are the same as in (52). (Recall, though, that K has a "Hlubi" alternative pronunciation of the type aka'sjchlda'gj (comb) where fusion of a subject prefix and an object prefix in the present tense is apparently blocked by a depressor consonant - contrast akaylchadjrj) We have now provided a complete account of the negative present tense of both toneless and High-toned verbs, both with and without an object prefix included, and taking into account the possibility of depressed syllables appearing in a variety of locations in the word. We conclude our discussion of the negative present tense with the observation that the phrasal evidence supports the contention that the initial syllable of the negative verb is not the source of the High tone that appears on the subject prefix in an example like aba'd.anHlsi. For example, in (54) (54)

abintw abta'danilfsi 'the people are not dancing' 171

there is no protection of the negative morpheme. But if /a/ were the H-sponsor and initiated a HO, we would expect •aba'ntwtfba'da.nHIsidue to the fact that /a/ is a prefix and thus should be incorporated into a preceding RD due to the constraint HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). And if it is incorporated into a preceding RD, it would be realized with a High tone due to Plateau. We conclude that /a/ is not a H-sponsor since it does behave like a sponsor in the phrasal phonology. 4J . The negative of the /saV tense. In this section we examine another negative tense, this one involving the inclusion of the prefix /sa7 'still' (see Chapter Three) between the subject prefix and the negative verb stem. As usual, we look at toneless verb stems first. Trisyllabic and longer stems are illustrated in (55): (55)

anisdballilsi anisaxolle'e'li aj)disdhlom!6e'li andisa'lungi.Usi anisd(jan!ifsi anis4gu^[\jvjli Bndjsa'xu.mlWIi anisashukumlKsi anisinamathelllisi anisinelittsi anisalamanlifsi

(narrate) (forgive) (add to) (repair) (dance) (scrape off) (permit) (shake) (cement) (satisfy) (connect with)

The tonal shape of the verb stem is the same as in the simple negative present. We therefore assume that there is also a grammatical High tone here arid that it behaves exactly parallel to the simple negative present. Thus when the stem is trisyllabic or longer, the grammatical High tone will be on the second stem mora. We will furthermore assume that the subject prefix in (55) also sponsors a High tone, as well as /saV. These assumptions are simply based on the fact that the subject prefix does sponsor a High in the simple negative present and /sa7 does sponsor a High in its non-negative incarnation. Given these assumptions, then we must assume that the OCP constraint (No Adjacent Sponsors) drives the fusion of these two sponsors into a single HD. As a consequence, only the head of this HD - /saV - realizes the High tone on the surface. This fused HD cannot be extended further to the right due to the principle No Adjacent Edges: the HD initiated by the grammatical H on the second stem mora bars the inclusion of the first stem mora into the preceding HD. When the toneless verb stem is shorter, however, the first mora of the stem does bear a grammatical High tone (see our earlier discussion of the simple negative present) thus we have a different situation. (56)

anisaalwlf (M] oranistflwl [K] anisfjosit [M] or anisddsi [K] anisiwtisi anisdba'a'li

(fight) (roast) (drop) (count) 172

anis£hl££ki andjsibddnfli anisdluuli

(laugh) (thank) (stretch)

Recall that in Chapter Three we determined that /saV does not fuse with a following stem Hsponsor. The data in (56) show that while the subject prefix H-sponsor in the negative does fuse with /si/, /sa7 once again does not fuse with the following verb stem H-sponsor even though they are adjacent. If fusion had occurred, the input /a-nj-sa-baji/ would have been organized into the domain structure *a(n[sa.bt}a)li, with a resulting pronunciation *anisabda'li. Instead, we find the domain structure a(nisaj(ba,a)li, with the resulting pronunciation anisdbddli. Notice that there is no difference between K and M since in both dialects there are adjacent HD's in the output of the A system which must be organized into a single Register Domain in the A system (due to the constraint NARDE operating there). Both / s i / and the following syllable will be pronounced with a High tone (since they both head their own domain) and there will be no downstep between them (since they are in the same RD). When the verb stem is bisyllabic but has an initial depressed consonant, there will be two RD's (due to Depressed Syllable Alignment) and thus downstep: (57)

anisiyltfjli andjsagcJdtfdj

(close) (roast)

The monosyllabic stem examples in (56), anis£alw!t/ anisda'lwb are entirely parallel to the forms found when the /si/ is not present: anttlwV anlilwit. We have been assuming that this alternation is explained in terms of variable ranking between Syllable Alignment and No Adjacent Edges. No additional discussion is warranted here. When we locate /si/ in front of the negative form of a High verb stem, we see that once again no fusion occurs between it and the verb stem. Consider the following examples: (58)

anisibddni and_isdstiuli arjdjsaliiu'mi andisiibutfzi andisdyliki

(see) (wipe) (bite) (ask) (fear)

In (58), the subject prefix H-sponsor and /si/ are fused into a single HD. If they were both fused into the same HD as the verb stem, we would have pronunciations like *anisab<5<5ni. Since this is not the observed pronunciation, we know that /s&V resists fusion, resulting in the domain structure a(njsaj(boo)nl. The two adjacent HD's will be in the same RD in both K and M due to the effects of NARDE in the A system. Thus there will be no downstep between the two High tones. If the verb stem has an initial depressor, then Depressed Syllable Alignment will guarantee that the verb stem begins a new RD and thus there wilt be downstep between the prefix and the stem. (59) makes this point.

173

(59)

andjsa-bMnibj andjsa'bblVUJla andjsa*s!<«in.dj

(go) (thresh wheat) (hate)

Trisyllabic and longer verb stems are shown in (60): (60)

anisdbtfllfsi asisaiinyMzj andjstffuma'ani andjsa'bdle'lki anisAbtfnlsffsi anisanylnyithlkflsi andjs(Snw6bffsi andisdhltikanifsi

(greet) (shorten) (get) (run) (see clearly) (make slippery) (make happy) (disunite)

Here we see again that the Is&J does not fuse into a single HD with the verb stem, and as a consequence the two adjacent HD's are in a single RD. As a consequence, the Isi/ element is a source of protection of a following non-head (in both K and M) -- e.g. the syllable /fu/ in BQdjstffuma,aniBnd t h e syllables /nyinyithe/ in anis£nytnyHhtfktlsi SUTface w i t h a H i 8 n tone due to the effect of Plateau. If the verb stem starts with a depressed syllable, then the two HD's will not be able to be in a single RD due to the constraint Depressed Syllable Alignment and there will be no protection arising out of the effects of Plateau. (61)

asisdggwliiiili andjsa'zinilMli

(chop) (hide)

Similarly, if the verb stem has a depressor in the second syllable of the verb stem, it will initiate a RD and bar protection of a preceding syllable. (62)

anisasengtggli asisasun<J!<jfci

(milk for) (push)

The last case we need to consider is a monosyllabic High verb stem (whether CV or VCV, where the initial vowel is not considered part of the Prosodic Stem): (63)

anisaatyli [M] or anisiityl [K] andjse'ebtl [M] or andjse'elrf [K] andjstfakhli [M] or andjsilakht [K]

Since /saV does not ordinarily fuse with a following High-sponsor into a single domain, we expect no fusion when it abuts a monosyllable. The variation observed here is of course the same variation that we have found in other cases: a(n{sa.a)(tyi) results when Syllable Alignment is

174

more highly ranked than No Adjacent Edges; a(njsaja(tyi) arises when No Adjacent Edges dominates Syllable Alignment. The inclusion of an object prefix in the /si/ negative is shown in (64) for toneless verb stems that are trisyllabic or longer. The input structures here have four High-tone sponsors: the subject prefix, /si/, the object prefix, and the second stem mora (which bears a grammatical High tone). (64)

anis£yfba1!Usi anisibixolleeli anisdyfhlomle'eli anisa'ba'lungi.lfsi anisdyigu.zjri.fj1i anisdba'Yumie'eli anisdy1shukum!ifsi anisAyfnamathellifsi anisibdnellftsi anis&balaman'.ltsi

(narrate) (forgive) (add to) (repair) (scrape off) (permit) (shake) (cement) (satisfy) (connect with)

We see that while the subject prefix and /saV fuse together into a single HD (due to the OCP constraint, No Adjacent Sponsors), /saV and the object prefix do not fuse together (if they did, we would have *anisayibal'.ilsi). We have already seen that Is&l does not fuse with a High verb stem either, so the failure of fusion to occur here is to be expected. The object prefix is treated in exactly parallel fashion to the verb stem proper. The resulting domain structure is a(njsg)(yi)shu(k]imii)si, which results in the pronunciation anisdylshukumtfsi Consider next the case where the verb stem is bisyllabic. (65)

anisdyiwtlsi anisayfba'&ti anisiba'hlge'ki anisdyillimi anisdydkhSli

(drop) (count) (laugh) (cultivate) (stretch)

We have seen earlier that the object prefix does not fuse with a toneless bisyllabic verb stem in the negative even though the first vowel of that stem sponsors the grammatical High tone. Thus in (65) we have a case of three successive HD's with three successive heads that all realize High tone. Being in the same RD, there is no downstep between any of these High tones. If the stem starts with a depressor, then the story is a bit more complex. (66)

anisiyiyjjj&li anisayfgcJdfldj

(close) (roast)

We still have clear evidence of three High tones and therefore three HD's. The important point is that while the first two HD's will be gathered together into a single RD due to NARDE (and thus not be separated by downstep), the depressor consonant ensures (due to Depressed Syllable 175

Alignment) that the third HD will constitute a separate RD (therefore its High tone will be separated from the preceding High tones by downstep). The tableau in (67) shows the evaluation. The constraint High Tone Inclusion Is one that we have not needed to refer to often and have not been listing in the constraint set since we regard it as an inviolable constraint: any High-toned syllable must be included in a Register Domain. [We do not actually include tone marking of candidates in the tableau, but all heads of domains are necessarily going to be High-toned.] (67)

HD-structure: a (njsg) (yl) (vaa) li

Candidates

Depressed Syll Align

al(nisa)(yD(vaa}H a{(nisfl))(yi){(vaa))H a{(nisii)H(yD){(vaa)}li a{(nisa)(yDH(vaa))li

*l

High Tone NARDE Inclusion IllliilllifSl

• • • • • SiiSiiSss

•1

**i *

Finally, consider monosyllabic stems, which pose a problem. (68)

anisaylflwi antsayddsi

(fight) (roast)

These pronunciations reflect a situation where /saV continues to fail to fuse with the object prefix. We have seen earlier that an object prefix H-sponsor foltowed by a toneless (monosyllabic or bisyllabic) verb stem bearing a grammatical High on the first mora does not fuse into a single HD. In a number of other parallel cases, we observed variation between a High-High output and a Fall-High output (which wc attributed to variable ranking of Syllable Alignment and No Adjacent Edges). The data in (68) do not conform, however, to either of the forms that we would expect: "anisdytllwt or *anis£y1ilw!f. Furthermore, we have observed no variation for these forms, across the two dialects examined or within a single dialect. However, Claughton (1983) cites for the Rharhabe dialect anisdwa'dlwi but anisdwddst We conclude that no very conclusive analysis is possible without knowing a great deal more about what variations are possible for each subcase where two adjacent sponsors occur word-finally. Thus we will not undertake a formal explanation of the data in (68). Let us turn our attention now to depressed object prefixes in the /saV negative form of toneless verb stems. We have seen that /saV does not fuse with the object prefix H in front of a (lexically) toneless verb stem This being the case, when the object prefix is depressed, we expect to find that the object prefix H-sponsor is in a separate RD from the subject prefix Hsponsor. Furthermore, we have seen that an object prefix H does not fuse with an adjacent grammatical H-sponsor in the verb stem. However, if the object prefix is depressed, we would expect its High tone to "shift" onto the verb stem. Let us now look at various examples to see whether these expectations are in fact confirmed. (69) illustrates the monosyllabic stem case. (69)

anisiz!.Ulwi anis&zt(j<jsi

(fight) (roast)

176

The downstep between /saV and the object prefix confirms the fact that (a) there is no fusion between these two High-sponsors and (b) the depressed syllable forces the two HD-heads into separate RD's. The object prefix High tone can not "shift" since the following syllable is wordfinaL In (70), we give bisyllabic verb stems. (70)

anis3«w!lisi anisi&iblda'li anisdndjhl!e'6ki anisfi&jllftma anisdjglliiiili

(drop) (count) (laugh) (cultivate) (stretch)

Again we find that the object prefix initiates a RD, requiring downstep between /si/ and the following High tone. However, now the High of the object prefix can shift off onto the following syllable. We have accounted for this shift in terms of *(H, Depressed Syllable) driving a violation of 'Overlapping in the B system, resulting in the domain structure: a(nisfl)(zj(baa))ll, with the consequent pronunciation anis4zib!£a']i. Of course, if the bisyllabic verb stem has an initial depressor, no shift off the object prefix is possible, as shown in (71). (71)

anisand.Uy!.tftrit}a anisa'jsl.fyitfAli

(refuse) (close)

Consider next trisyllabic or longer verb stems. (72)

anisa%jb!iil!ffsi [K], anisa%jb!ilfisa [M] anisaodixlolle'eli, [K], anisandjxldleeli [M] anisa S ihI!<5m!«li [K], anisajyhlMme'eli [M] anisSsjsh!iikum!ttsi [K], anis^sjshlukumllsi [M] anisdan!a'mathel!flsi [K], anis4sjn!4ina'th61iisi [M]

(narrate) (forgive) (add) (shake) (cement)

In these data, we sec that the extension (in the output of the B system) of the HD from the object prefix onto the first stem syllable creates adjacent HD's. In M, this means that the two HD's will be in the same RD (since NARDE dominates RD-Faithfulness). There will be no downstep between the two High tones. In K, where RD-Faithfulness dominates NARDE, there are two RD's and thus downstep between the two High tones. When the verb stem starts with a depressor, as in (73), then there can be no shift of the H away from the object prefix. The fused HD containing /si/ will be in a separate RD from the object prefix (since the depressed object prefix must initiate a RD), and the object prefix HD will be in a separate RD from the verb (since the initial syllable of the verb initiates a RD). We thus have three separate High tones with downstep between each pair. (73)

anisaj!jyuth!<54li anisirid!.ly\rm!e^li anisSndanleliisi

(blow) (permit) (satisfy)

177

If the second stem syllable has a depressed onset (and the first does not), then shift of the H away from the object prefix will occur. But the depressor at the beginning of the second stem syllable will require that syllable to be in a separate RD from die object prefix H. As a result we will have the High tone on /saV in a separate RD from the HD initiated by the object prefix, and the latter HD (which will be extended over to the first stem syllable) will be in a separate RD from the HD initiated by the grammatical High tone. The result is three High tones on the surface, each separated by downstep. (74)

anis4rjd.il!\Ing!.Usi abasa'zjmldn.gftlie'tfli

(repair) (take to court)

We consider now the inclusion of an object prefix with a High, rather than a toneless, verb stem. The prefix /saV continues to fail to fuse with the object prefix H. This sets up a situation where the High-toned Is&l can protect all of die non-heads in the HD initiated by the object prefix H. This protection occurs because while the Is&l and the object prefix cannot fuse, the object prefix and the verb stem H-sponsors Qexical and grammatical) all do fuse into a single HD. We thus have two adjacent HD's, and these two domains will be joined into a single RD (both in K and In M). There will be no downstep between the High of Is&l and the High of the verb stem. The data in (75) illustrate.

anistytltyi andjsiyMkhi anisdbdme'emi anisfyfltiiimi anisiytth66noj andisdytyifki andisAbdclbftsi asisSyifiimiini anisayfbdnislist anisayinylnylthlkifsf andjsa'yahluMnilsi

(eat) (build) (invite) (bite) (buy) (fear) (advise) (get) (see clearly) (make slippery) (disunite)

The above pattern of protection breaks down when the verb stem has a depressed syllable (in other than the final syllable). The depressed syllable will have to initiate a RD according to Depressed Syllable Alignment. Given that it initiates a RD, syllables to the left in the stem will not be able to be organized into a RD due to Cohesion (which bars moras in the same HD from being located in two different RD's). However, the object prefix will be incorporated into the preceding RD due to the fact that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) dominates Cohesion in the A system in both K and M. (76)

anisiba'zKWndi anisiba'seng!££li anisrfba'sundttftiz.j anisdyfgaw.'ihili

(hate) (milk for) (push) (chop)

178

The tableau in (77) shows the evaluation: (77)

a(njsa)(yigawu.u) li

Candidates

Depressed Syllable Alignment

HD-mora (prefix)

a{(nisa)(yigawu.u))li a{ (nisfl)} (yi {ga wuu)) li -*a ((nisa)(yi} (gawau)} li

!*

111

Incorp Cohesion

_

!*

*

If the object prefix is depressed, then it will necessary for it to stand in a different RD from the /saV and consequently the High of /say will not be able to protect following non-heads, as (78) shows. enisigl.tftyi andjsiz!.Ubi anisdrjdjmle'e'mi anis£fldjb!rid'ni anisindibliiVixi andistf^qyliiki anis4nd.ij!(i
(eat) (steal) (invite) (see) (ask) (fear) (hate) (show) (get) (see clearly) (make slippery) (make happy) (disunite) (chop) (milk for) (push)

No discussion should be required. It is also not necessary to give forms where the subject prefix is depressed — the subject prefix always fuses into a single HD with the object prefix, and thus a depressed subject prefix can never be the head of a HD and thus can never have any specific effect on the shape of the output. 4.3. The negative potential. The negative potential construction involves the negative prefix /a/ followed by the subject prefix followed by the potential element /ogg/ (the location of/rjgtf/ is thus identical to that of the /sa7 discussed in the preceding section). We assume that the tonal shape of this negative form is (setting aside the matter of /ngg/) the same as in the previous two negative forms - i.e. the subject prefix sponsors a H tone and there is a grammatical H which is located on the second stem mora if the verb in trisyllabic or longer, and on the first stem mora otherwise.

179

The prefix /n.g£/ (which is obviously related to the /ng£/ discussed in Chapter Three) clearly sponsors a High tone, but this High never shifts onto a following syllable. In this respect it contrasts with the related prefix /ngfi/, where the DIHTS phenomenon does occur. Claughton (1983) transcribes the /rjg£/ with a Falling tone, which also might be taken as indicating that there is some degree of lengthening of the voweL However, in the speech of our consultants we did not observe any clear length in this element (except when it occurs in penultimate position, where lengthening is generally observed) and we did not note any clear Falling quality to this element. Indeed, the phonological pattern that we describe below is clearly suggestive that there is no true Falling tone on this element We should note, however, that we are not in a position to claim that the facts described here are universally valid across all varieties of Isixhosa. Indeed, the fact that the High does not shift from /ngg/ is certainly suggestive that there is something about this element that distinguishes it from /ngft/. Perhaps /ngeY represents (historically) a coalescence of /n.gj/ plus a following vowel, where that following vowel was the recipient of the High tone that shifted away from /ngg/ due to the DIHTS phenomenon. Whatever the historical explanation may be, we will leave open the synchronic analysis of the failure of DIHTS to affect this element. In our discussion, we will simply assume that /ngg/ does not, for whatever reason, permit/force an expansion of the HD rightward in the B system. Let us turn now to the data. The negative potential forms of trisyllabic or longer toneless verb stems are listed in (79). (79)

aninggballtlsi abang£cac!ifst abang£lurig!.ttsi abangiSYumle'e'Ii aninggguzltitfli antrigtishukumidsi abarjg£chukum iff si abanggmangal.'e'e'li &bang£qononond!.t(si

(narrate) (explain) (repair) (permit) (scrape) (shake) (touch) (sue) (emphasize)

In order to explain the data in (79), we must assume that the subject prefix H-sponsor and the /ngfe/ H-sponsor are fused into a single HD. This will account for why the subject prefix is not realized as High on the surface. The fusion of the subject prefix and Aigg/ is of course entirely parallel to the fusion of the subject prefix and /si/. The retention of the H tone on /ng£/ has already been noted. The appearance of a High tone on the penult follows from the presence of a grammatical High tone on the second mora of these stems. No further discussion is required. When the verb stem is bisyllabic, the grammatical High tone is of course located on the first stem mora, which means that /ngf,/ is adjacent to another sponsor. No fusion occurs, however, just as no fusion occurs in the case of /saY. We thus have two adjacent HD's that will be located in a single RD (as long as the stem does not begin with a depressor consonant): the consequence is two High tones in a row with no downstep between them. (80)

anifiggbda'H akangghle'eici

(count) (laugh) 180

aningtfwiisi anirjgMMli

(drop) (close)

If the stem begins with a depressor, as in aning£y!tfgli. then Depressed Syllable Alignment will locate the stem HD in a separate RD from the Aifl^/ and we will have downstep between the two surface High tones. Monosyllabic stems require a bit more discussion (as usual). (81)

aninggelwli

(fight)

If we assume that ng<j is indeed just like /rjgd/ in structure, then we would predict that their behavior should be parallel. But we have already seen they are not in fact entirely parallel, /ngft/ shifts its H away, / n g # never does. Now we find another difference: whereas with /ngfl/ there is variation between rjdjng&aMwa' and n.dingd&lwia', in the case of Aigg/ we only find aning£cjwtf. Since we have noted that there is much variation in Isixhosa with respect to the tonal patterns evidenced by monosyllabic stems, the lack of observed variation (in the dialects discussed here) in an example like (81) may not be ultimately significant. However, we should note that - if across Isixhosa dialects there is no variation in the Aig£/ form of monosyllabic stems - perhaps this lack of variability reflects something about the proper analysis of/ngg/. For example, as suggested earlier, perhaps Aig£/ has a bimoraic source /nga+V/. We have treated the alternation between fldjnga'dlwa' and n.djn.gga.lw'a' as being explained in terms of a difference in ranking between No Adjacent Edges and Syllable Alignment. But we also suggested that one might interpret the variation as being due to the fact that No Adjacent Edges makes reference either to underlying moras or to all moras (see (28) above). Thus in the case of rjdjngda'lwa' the adjacent domains would be permitted since the second mora of the long vowel is epenthetic and not underlying. QdJoggglWd' on t n e other hand, would show that if No Adjacent Edges refers to all moras, then Syllable Alignment will be violated in order to satisfy No Adjacent Edges. If we follow this latter analysis, then in the case of aninggejwll, the assumption that/ng^/ is underlyingly bimoraic would mean that the alternative *anin.g<61wt will be unavailable - there is no version of No Adjacent Edges that it would not violate. We feel that this line of analysis is promising, but we do not consider the available evidence to be conclusive (given the extensive variation that monosyllabic stems exhibit and the possibility that other dialects might exhibit variation in cases like (81)). Therefore the matter must be left open for more research. Let us turn now to High verb stems in the /(ig£/ tense. (82)

abangfotyli aning£b<S<5ni aningeMuiimi aning6b(5n1fsi aninge'fuma^ni abanggbdndkdlifsi abang^phtfla'phuult

(eat) (see) (bite) (show) (get) (make visible) (listen to)

181

The High verb stems in every case have a lexical H-sponsor on the first stem mora. In addition, when the stem is trisyllabic or longer, these stems will have a grammatical H on the second stem mora (which will fuse into a single HD with the lexical H). We have already seen that /n,fl£/ does not fuse into the same HD as a following H-sponsor. So what we expect, and what we find, is a HD structure like a(ba,ngg)(bona,kalil)si, with the resulting pronunciation being abaaggbo'na'ka'lltst There are two adjacent HD's which must, in both K and M, be located in a single RD due to the effects of NARDE in the A system. Consequently, Plateau will determine that the nonheads in the second HD must be realized on a High tone. Notice that these data are inconsistent with the idea that /rjfl<5/ has Falling tone. If it did, we would not expect it to trigger the protection phenomena! Notice that the monosyllabic stem case shows a single form (cf. the cases involving /saV, where variation exists: anisaatyit or anisMtyD- The absence of a form like an,g<j<}tyl may (if consistent across dialects) be taken as supporting the idea that /ng<{/ is underlyingly bimoraic, as suggested above in connection with the toneless monosyllabic stems. If the High verb stem has an initial depressed syllable, as in (83), (83)

abang<$z»
(hate) (chop)

that depressed syllable must introduce a new RD. Thus /ng£/ and the verb stem will be in separate RD's. There will necessarily be downstep and no protection of non-heads in the stem If the verb stem has a depressor in second stem position or later, as in (84), (84)

abanggthengl.tisi (sell) abanggsebenjl^li (work for) abarjg£fuadisltf6)i (teach for) the stem-internal depressed syllable will initiate an RD (due to Depressed Syllable Alignment). The preceding stem syllable will be unable to affiliate with an RD due to the Cohesion constraint that prohibits moras in the same HD from being in different RD's. The surface form will have a high tone just on the heads of the two HD's. Turning to the inclusion of object prefixes in the negative potential, we begin with toneless verb stems. Consider longer verb stems first. (85)

abang£ba'lim!e'6li aningffylhlomle'e'Ii abariggwa'chukumtlisi aning<5yinoneI!6e1i abariffiwSluogl.Usi abang^ba'yujle'e'li abaoggba'mBngalle'e'li abar)g^wiqononond!,lisi

(cultivate for) (add) (touch) (look after with much care) (repair) (open for) (sue) (emphasize)

In each of these examples, there is clear evidence that while the subject prefix H-sponsor fuses with /ng(5/, there is no fusion between /ngg/ and the object prefix H-sponsor. Of course, this is not surprising since /ng£/ does not fuse with any following H-sponsor. Given all of this, we 182

expect both /ng£/ and the object prefix to realize High tone, as well as the penultimate syllable in the verb stem (since they are all HD-heads). Given the HD-structure a(bang£)(wg)chu(kji>mU) si, we expect two RD's and no protection of/ku/ (since it is not preceded by H in the same RD). The data conform to these expectations. (86) shows shorter toneless verb stems: (86)

abangtfyillwi abanggytba'dli abang
(fight) (count) (close)

The input, in the case of a monosyllabic stem, is /a-ba.-ngs-yi-lwi/. Throughout this study, we have seen that there are three different fates that may befall a H-sponsor in the penult syllable that precedes a word-final H-sponsor. The one fate that seems to never occur is that the two Hsponsors are fused into a single HD. This is barred because Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) dominates the OCP constraint No Adjacent Sponsors. What may happen is: (a) the stem Hsponsor fails to get incorporated into a HD (resulting in a HL tone sequence), or (b) each sponsor is organized into a separate HD. In the latter case, there are two possible output shapes: HighHigh or Fall-High (depending on the ranking of No Adjacent Edges and Syllable Alignment). We have seen that there is considerable variation in Isixhosa as to which output obtains. When there is no object prefix, the optimal form for a monosyllabic lexically toneless verb stem in the Al0<
(fight) (count) (close) (cultivate for) (add) (repair) (permit) (touch) 183

abang&jinla'ngajte'eii abang^siql6nonoodUlsi

(take to court) (emphasize)

Examination of the data in (87) shows that the High of the depressed object prefix may shift. The effect of this shift has already been examined in detail; there is nothing new about the patterns in the data in (87) and we leave it as an exercise for the reader to go through the analysis of each item. In (88) we show object prefixes combined with High verb stems: (88)

abanjtfyiityi aningfiylbddni aning(!yib<5nllsi abangtfba'phuldphtiiili

(eat) (see) (show) (listen)

The subject prefix H and /ntf£/ fuse into a single HD, while the object prefix H, the lexical H of the verb stem, and the grammatical H tone (if there is one) all fuse into a single HD, except in the monosyllabic stem case (which behaves parallel to the monosyllabic lexically toneless verb stem). The data in (88) show that ^ g £ / protects all of the non-heads in the following fused domain. Protection occurs here because there is a single RD initiated by/ngif. In (89), (89)

abarig
(hate) (sell) (chop) (work for)

the presence of a depressed syllable separates the representation into two RD's. HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) will locate the object prefix into a RD with /(ig<j/ and thus Plateau will affect the object prefix (but not stem syllables to the left of the depressor). When there is a depressed object prefix, this depression will require the object prefix to be at the Left edge of a RD. As a consequence, the non-heads to the Right of the object prefix cannot be affected by Plateau: (90)

abang<|jj!.Utyi sninggziblo'dni abangfoizltftfridj abangtfzjbonfffsi abanggzjtherjgl.Usi "banthlagawldilli abanggzjphulaphltitili abangfojsebenzt^li

(eat) (see) (hate) (show) (sell) (chop) (listen) (work for)

No additional discussion is required.

184

4.4. Negative past. The negative past involves affixing /arjga/ to the verb stem. All forms having /anga/ attached to them must (obviously) have at least two syllables. Some examples: (91)

anilwa,4n.ga an6sd&nga aniballa'a'nga anlbalis!4£rjga. anishukutnis!4£flga.

(fight) (roast) (count) (narrate) (shake)

The prefixal morphology is the same as in the negative present: thus we observe a High tone surfacing on the subject prefix in (91). The verb stem also has a grammatical High tone that is located exactly as in the negative present. Specifically, the grammatical High tone is generally located on the second stem mora and surfaces on the penult (since Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is enforced). In an example like antlwda'n.ga. the grammatical H is located on the first mora of the bisyllabic stem. There is no fusion between the subject prefix H-sponsor and the stem Hsponsor, resulting in High tones on both the subject prefix and the penult syllable. When the subject prefix is depressed, then the H will "shift" onto the following syllable (if possible). We only give a few examples2: (92)

andjlwa'anga (cf. anilwdfinga) aodiMMioga and.iba'Ks£a'nga andishriktfmfsddrtga.

andiliinaisi^nga atldimSngftlellMnga and.fdanisliia'nga.

(fight) (count) (narrate) (shake) (repair) (take to court) (dance)

As expected, the shift leads to (a) an overlapped HD in an.djlwa'a'n.ga (b) a single RD, with resulting lack of downstep in an.djba'lda'n.gfr a m J ( c ) a single RD and protection of non-heads in a 09jshtiktimts4a'nga ^ u s u a ' > a depressed syllable will prevent the formation of a single RD, as in andjm4ngalel!4a'riga; Look at High verb stems next. We find that there is "fusion" between the subject prefix and the verb stem, as well as between the lexical High of the verb stem and the grammatical High tone. As a consequence, we hear only one High tone, which is located on the penult. (93)

anityaanga anibdfinga anibek£dn.ga anibonis&irjga anigawulSinga anibonisis£6n,ga.

(eat) (steal) (put) (show) (chop) (see clearly)

1

In this section, we will not exemplify dialectal differences that have already been explored fully. Rather, we will cite just examples from M's dialect.

I8S

The inclusion of an object prefix yields familiar patterns. Consider first the toneless verb stems. Both the subject prefix and the object prefix surface High-toned (recall, from the negative present, that this is true just in M's dialect - K exhibits fusion in this case).3 We regard this as a case where "fusion" of the subject prefix and the object prefix into a single HD is barred. The object prefix H-sponsor Is generally not adjacent to the verb stem's grammatical High and thus no fusion is expected. (94)

anlwdwisltfaaga anlwdballdinga aniwdbalisliinga. anVwashukumisIfia'n.ga, am'wa'namathelisltfa'n.ga,

(drop) (count) (narrate) (shake) (cement)

Of course, the grammatical High tone is located on the first stem syllable when the suffixation of /angfl/ yields a bisyllabic stem, as in: antwalwda'n.ga (fight) and anlwdsa'aqga (roast). Here the object prefix H-sponsor is adjacent to the stem H-sponsor. The observed pronunciations are fully consistent with the claim that there is no fusion in this context (though if one wished to claim that fusion did occur, one could still explain the appearance of a High tone on the object prefix even though It would be a non-head, given fusion - by appeal to Plateau). When the object prefix is depressed, its High will "shift" onto the stem initial syllable if possible: (95) akdzjbla'lfsfia'nga (narrate) abAzjchl<Sktimts£6n,ga. (touch) abaaph.'a'za.misia'a'nga (disturb) akajsjqidnonondjsia'a'nga, (emphasize) but: akaj'.lyumelldSnga (permit) The data above reflect the consequences of this tonal shift in M (Le. the effects of Plateau except where a depressed syllable yields an RD-structure that prevents Plateau from affecting non-heads in the verb stem's HD). When the subject prefix is depressed, its HD will - as a result of the B system - overlap the HD of the object prefix (provided the object prefix is not depressed), resulting in the object prefix and not the subject prefix being a head. The result will be a toneless subject prefix. (96)

andjba"xoIel!ainga and.iylcacis!44fl0a andjzixid'le'lia'n.ga arjdjjiichltikiiinlsia'n.ga,

(forgive) (explain) (forgive) (touch)

Next let us consider object prefixes in conjunction with High verb stems in the negative past. We see here that the subject prefix and the object prefix and the stem High tones all "fuse": 9

Juat aa in the negative present, the subject prefix is phonetically higher than the preceding negative marker, but not as high as the object prefix. We have not attempted a phonological account of why the subject prefix is not fully high. 186

(97)

aniwatyafirjga. aniwamem£an.ga aniwabulis&drjga, aniwabonisisianga

(eat) (invite) (greet) (see clearly)

Since "fusion" affects these structures, the presence of a depressed subject prefix or a depressed object prefix has no affect on the tone pattern: an.djwatyaa'riga abazjtya'a'rig&; andi?lityaa'n,ga etc. Similarly, the presence of a depressed syllable in the verb stem makes no difference: ababasebenz,ola4n,ga BQdJwafheagjsa'a'rjga. and abasutiQ'n.fU show that fusion occurs regardless of depression. In conclusion, we can see that the negative past simply follows from the analysis already developed on the basis of the negative present. The negative infinitive, discussed in the next section, adds a new element to the analysis. 4.5. Negative infinitive. The negative infinitive consists of the preprefix /u/, which sponsors a High tone underlyingly, followed by the prefix /ku/, which in turn is followed immediately by the negative prefix /riga/ The verb stem, with the final vowel /i/, is located immediately after /nga/. The negative infinitive form of the verb exhibits a tone pattern that is quite different from the negative tone pattern discussed above. We cannot actually make sense out of the negative infinitive form unless we consider both the Intonational Phrase-final form and the Intonational Phrase-medial forms in parallel. We begin as usual with toneless verb stems. (98)

ukiingaxolleeli ukiingahlom!6eli ukiingalungl.ljsi ukdngayumteeli ukdngadanllisi ukungagi«!\juji ukiirjgachukumliisi ukiingaqononond.l.Usi

(forgive) (add) (repair) (permit) (dance) (scrape) (touch) (emphasize)

ukiingahlomelM kaJcuuhllg ukUngagiK«l!i kakuuhlle ukdngachukumisH kakuuhlle' ukiingaqononondjslf kakuuhlle ukiingaxolelli mmntliu ukdngahlomellti nt!d

(add well) (scrape well) (touch well) (emphasize well) (forgive anyone) (add anything)

Before we examine the stem tone, notice that there is a surface High tone on the prefix /ku/. (Recall from our discussion of the positive form of the infinitive in Chapter Three that the preprefix IvJ is the underlying anchor of the High tone, not the prefix /ku/). *MonoHD will 187

account for why the HD initiated by the preprefix must extend onto the prefix /ku/. The only factor that could block *MonoHD would be if No Adjacent Edges were violated. However, /noa/ is toneless; thus it will not prevent the HD from extending onto /ku/. However, there is one question that needs to be addressed: do we expect the High tone of the preprefix to extend even further to the Right! For example, assuming that the grammatical High tone in the negative stem is not located on the first stem syllable, should the HD initiated by the preprefix extend onto /008/7 Recall our discussion in Chapter Two of the constraint Align Word R, the constraint that is responsible for HD's trying to align all the way to the Right of the word. We noted that there are two different versions of this constraint that could be responsible for the extension of HD's to the right. We repeat these two versions here: (99) AUON (Word. R: HD, R) (100) AUON (HD, R; Word, R) The first of these constraints requires only that the Right edge of a Word be aligned with the R edge of a HD (a formulation such as this also requires 'Structure to be ranked above it, so that HD's are not introduced just in order to satisfy this constraint). The second requires that every HD aligns with the R edge of the Word - in other words, every HD goes as far to the Right as possible (e.g. consistent with 'Overlapping and No Adjacent Edges, etc.). If (99) is correct, then we don't expect the HD initiated by the /u/ to extend beyond two syllables, since the stem HD will serve to satisfy (99). On the other hand, if (100) is correct, then we would expect the HD initiated by /u/ to extend as far to the Right as possible. The data in (98), where the HD does not extend onto /nga/, suggest that (99) must be the correct form of Align Word R. We should point out, however, that the issue is not entirely straightforward; for example, the subjunctive form of the verb - omitted from discussion here due to space limitations - might be taken as providing evidence in favor of (100). On the other hand, nominal tonology- also not dealt with here ~ might be taken as supporting (99). We leave this matter for further research. Now let us turn to the matter of the grammatical High tone. The verb stems in (98) show a Falling tone on the penultimate syllable in IP-final position, but High tone on the final vowel in IP-medial position. Up until this point, we have only seen Falling tones in cases where the DIHTS phenomenon placed a High tone on the penult syllable. However, the Falling tone in (98) is entirely independent of DIHTS. We shall postpone deriving the IP-final form with the Falling tone until later, and concentrate instead on what the IP-medial form tells us. We will assume that the grammatical High in the negative infinitive is located on the second stem mora, just as it is in all the other negative tenses. The surface word-final High tone suggests that the HD initiated by the grammatical H must extend to the very end of the word. In other words, we must have a domain structure like (uku)ngachu(kjjniisi)... in the IP-medial case. This domain structure requires, however, that Nonflnality (polysyllabic HD) not be enforced in the negative infinitive. (Recall that Avoid Prominence is not enforced in any of the tenses with a stem grammatical H tone.) Thus Align Word R will demand the extension of the HD all the way to the end of the word since there is nothing to prevent this wide domain. The correct surface form results from (uku)ngachu(ku.mlsi)... since only the heads of the two HD's would be expected to surface with a High tone. Let us consider next bisyllabic (consonant-initial) toneless verb stems.

188

(101) uktingaliimlf ukiingahleekM

(cultivate) (laugh)

ukdng»gc88dU

(«>ast)

ukiingayaalll ukiingalimlf k£kuuhll6

(close) (cultivate well)

Notice that here a final High tone appears in both IP-final and IP-medial position. These data would suggest that the grammatical High tone links to the final syllable when the verb is bisyllabic (unlike the negative present, where the grammatical High links to the first stem syllable). If we adopt this analysis, then the motivation for why the grammatical H is able to be located on the final vowel could reside in the fact that all nonfinality effects are absent in the negative infinitive (including the one that is at work in determining the location of the grammatical High tone).. However, there is a complication. Those verb stems that are exceptions to *MonoHD show a Falling tone on the penult syllable in IP-final position and a final High tone in IP-medial position: (102) uktirtgftwtftsi ukiingalwliisi ukiirigahllfisi ukiSngawisli k&kuuhlt6

(drop) (make fight) (lower) (to drop well)

The fact that verb stems exceptional to *MonoHD show this behavior suggests that somehow •MonoHD is involved in the contrasting behavior of /limi/ and /wisi/ in the negative infinitive. But it is not all clear how *MonoHD could play a role since the IP-medial form demonstrates the HD does extend to the final syllable (and it is Align Word R in any case that drives a wide domain here regardless of whether ""MonoHD is enforced). To account for the Falling tones in (102) in the same way that we account for the Falling tones in (98) above, it will be necessary to assume that the grammatical High tone in uktlQgaViisi is located on the first stem syllable. We will develop the details of the analysis below. There is no synchronically-motivated way to explain why /limi/ has the grammatical High on the last syllable while /wisi/ has it on the first syllable. We suspect that the historical origin of the contrast may reside in verb stems like /wisi/ originally having had a bimoraic initial syllable (compare Chimwiini, which retains prato-Bantu vowel length, where bisyllabic verbs derived from "monosyllabic" roots regularly have a long initial syllable (Kisseberth, p.c.)). If so, then the observed pattern may have been due to the parallel trimoraic structure of/cacisi/, /xobli/, /wiisi/ as compared to the bimoraic structure of /limi/. We will simply assume, then, that while ordinary bisyllabic stems have the grammatical High tone located on the final syllable, the bisyllabic stems derived from "monosyllabic" stems have the grammatical H located on the first stem vowel (for synchronically inexplicable reasons). The situation is a bit more complex. Vowel-initial verb stems that are trisyllabic might be expected to have bisyllabic Prosodic Stems (due to the effects of alignment of the Prosodic Stem with the syllable). If so, they would be expected to parallel bisyllabic consonant-initial verb stems, but they do not regularly do so:

189

(103) uku^gojiduli (possible, but fess preferred: ukriaggluulli) ukiirjgadJta'Bli (possible, but less preferred: uktingandJftalH)

(stretch) (make bad)

It seems then that in the negative infinitive, the Prosodic Stem prefers to align with the Morphological Stem (meaning that a VCVCV stem will be treated as trisyllabic) rather than with the syllable (in which case a VCVCV stem will be treated as bisyllabic). We do not have an explanation for this fact Monosyllabic stems would be expected to have the grammatical H located on their only syllable, and this is what we find (both in IP-final and IP-medial position). (104) ukilngaalwtf ukiingalwli k£kuuhl!e' ukiingechl! ukiingefinslt uktingaangU uktfngQQsli

(fight) (fight well) (go down) (do) (kiss) (roast)

Notice in (104) that vowel-initial bisyllabic verb stems (whose Prosodic Stems are actually monosyllabic if alignment with the syllable dominates alignment with the Morphological Stem) behave in analogous fashion to CV stems like /lwi/ and never like CVCV stems. In our analysis, they uniformly prefer the Prosodic Stem to be aligned with a syllable rather than the Morphological Stem. There Is one point about the IP-medial data cited at various points above that requires mention. Notice that we find word-final High tones in IP-medial position. Recall from Chapter Three, however, that word-final High tones delete in medial position in the short form of the present tense. The problem here has to do with the construction of phonological phrases in Isixhosa (see Jokweni 1995 for extensive discussion). Word-final High tones delete only when they are medial in the phonological phrase. Negative verbs are always at the end of a phonological phrase (just as in Chimwiini (Kisseberth, p.c.)), but are of course not always IPfinaL While the placement of the grammatical High in the negative infinitive has the complexities noted above, given that placement we can predict the surface forms in IP-medial position without difficulty. The remaining challenge is to account for the Falling tone in the IPfinal form of trisyllabic and longer verbs, as well as in bisyllabic verbs derived from "monosyllabic" roots. At first glance, one might think that the Falling tone is directly connected to the fact that it appears on a lengthened voweL This is the basis, for example, of Khumalo's (1988) account of similar data in Isizulu. We can, however, prove that the Falling tone is not connected to the length but rather to the IP-final position. The evidence for this claim derives from Jokweni's (199S) study of phrasal phonology in Isixhosa. He shows that lengthening is not restricted to IP-final position. When a word that has the alternation ...FH/...0H (as the negative infinitive has) is in a lengthening position that is not IP-final, then the ...OH pattern occurs. One such environment is illustrated in (105): (105) amantombajtfana dyabdlmfca 'the girls are leaving' andjbonfinga mantornbflza.ana' ecdweeni 'I did not see any girls'

190

On the basis of Jokweni's evidence, we conclude that the Fall is directly connected to IPfinal position and not to length. It is not, however, clear exactly how we should use IP-finality to derive the correct results. We can sketch two lines of attack. One line of attack is to use IPfinality to constrict the HD so as to extend only onto the first mora of the penult syllable. The second line of attack is to use IP-finality to somehow influence how High tone surfaces in an IPfinal polysyllabic stem. We begin with the first line of attack. Let us assume that besides a Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) which refers to the word, there is also another version that refers to the Intonational Phrase. We shall identify these two constraints as W-Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) and IP-Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD). In general, IP-Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) has little work to do. The word-level constraint bars the creation of polysyllabic word-final HD's. Thus it is only in a tense like the negative infinitive, where W-Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is inoperative that we can actually see an effect from IP-Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD). But still this does not give us an explanation for why (y.ku)ngaxo(l£)ell should be optimal rather than (u.ku)ngaxo(lee)U since both of these avoid an IP-final polysyllabic HD1 In other words, there has to be more to the story than just an IP-Nonfinality effect. A constraint that would make the correct choice between (uku)ngaxo(le)eli and (jiku)ngaxo(l£e)li is: *O")HDO]D> - essentially our Avoid Prominence constraint (as originally formulated), only restricted to the Intonational Phrase. The problem, of course, is that we have seen that Syllable Alignment must dominate such a constraint - e.g. fldjyabdd'na not *tldiyab<5ona. If so, why not here as well? The only solution we can find to this dilemma would involve the notion of output-output constraints. The analysis would goes as follows. Suppose that *0)HD<J]IP outranks Syllable Alignment. Furthermore, suppose that IPNonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is undominated. These rankings will ensure that (u.ku)ngaxo(l£)ell will be optimal since it lacks a HD aligned with the Right edge of either a final or a penult syllable. Now, why then is *n.djyab<3ona not optimal? This could be due to the existence of an output-output Faithfulness constraint such as: (106) If the IP-medial form of a word has a penult syllable aligned with the Right edge of a HD, then the corresponding IP-final form must also. We must restrict this output-output Faithfulness to penult syllables since we do not want to have the medial form (u.ku)ngaxo(le|i) influence in any way the corresponding IP-final pronunciation. If (106) dominates Syllable *C?)HDO]IP. then Qdjyabtftfna will be more optimal than the incorrect *n,djyab<5ona smce the latter violates the most highly ranked constraint, (106), while the former violates the more lowly ranked constraint *C)HD<7]IP- Notice that in this analysis, Qdjbdna... (the IP-medial form) does not violate *<X)HDO]IP since this constraint affects only IPfinal verbs.4 For this reason, this medial form will be able to impose - through (106) - its shape on the IP-final form. While this approach seems to yield the correct output, it does so at some cost: we believe that output-output constraints would generally have the character of an IP-final form requiring an IP-medial form to be identical to it (rather than vice versa). If this turns out to be a correct view of how output-output Faithfulness generally works, then (106) is ill-conceived. Of course, there 4

Recall lhal in K's dialect, the shirt form of the present tense shows Avoid Prominence effects even though not in IP-final position. Perhaps this indicates that in K there is some variability as to whether Avoid Prominence refers to IP or just the word. However, since the short form of the present tense does not have a bimoraic penult vowel, ranking Avoid Prominence over Syllable Alignment will not have any unwanted effects.

191

is also the complication posed by the fact that die IP-final and the IP-medial forms are not in fact morphologically identical: the former has the element /ya/ which the latter lacks. There are sufficient question marks about the above output-output analysis to warrant consideration of a second line of attack on the problem posed by ukrirjggxolie'eli. The second approach Is to assume that indeed the domain structure in IP-final position is the same as in IP-medial position: (ulcu)ngaxo(leeli) and that the problem revolves around the expression of High tone. This approach has one immediate advantage: there are no other High Domains of this shape other than ones that we want to be realized with a penultimate Falling tone in IP-final position. So our problem is only one of finding constraints that have some hope of being universally motivated. We suggest that the key ingredient to the phenomenon might be a constraint against (...H)]n>. If we invoke such a constraint, and make no other assumptions, then we would in fact derive the incorrect surface form 'ukilrjgftxoleeli ~ Le. we would fail to realize the High tone on the HD-head and all the non-heads would be prevented from being High due to the constraint *(H, non-head). What we need to derive is an optimal output where a H cannot be realized on the final mora, but *(H, non-head) is minimally violated. The only cases so far where *(H, nonhead) has been violated is as a consequence of Plateau. We need to find some other way to force a violation of *(H, non-head). We propose (very tentatively) that Express (H, head) should (a) be ranked above *(H, non-head) and (b) be regarded as a gradient constraint. In other words, if *(...H)]n> is undominated and prevents full satisfaction of Express (H, head), then the minimal violation of Express (H, head) will be optimal even if it means that a violation of *(H, non-head) occurs. We assume that the minimal violation would be the closest mora in the HD. At first glance, this doesn't look like it would help since 'ukdn.gaxolee'li is also bad. But *ukilrjgaxolee1i c o n t a u l s a Rising tone on a bimoraic syllable, not a tonal shape allowed in the language.9 Thus we can simply postulate that there is a constraint against OH over two moras and rank it above Express (H, head) as well. This means that the optimal output (minimally violating Express (H, head)) will be the desired ukUngsxoKeli The constraint *(.. ,H)]n> is simply a member of the Nonfinality family of constraints and thus seems to us entirely reasonable, as in the constraint against Rising tones. The only somewhat unexpected claim in this analysis is that Express (H, head) is a gradient constraint. However, there is a critical problem with the idea that Express (H, head) is a gradient constraint that dominates *(H, non-head). While negative infinitive forms alternate between (...OH) in IPmedial position and (...FO) in IP-final position, there are other forms (nominate, affirmative verb tenses- see below) which appear as (...00) in IP-medial position and (...FO) in IP-final position. These forms have (..00) due to the principle that disallows word-final H tone to be expressed in medial positions in the phonological phrase. Recall that we observed earlier that negative forms are treated as being at the end of a phonological phrase and thus escape the loss of a final High tone. The problem, then, is this: if Express (H, head) is gradient and outranks *(H, non-head), why doesn't a High tone surface on the penult syllable in phrase-medial position rather than (.. .00)7 The appearance of a High tone on a mora other than the HD-head seems to be limited to IP-final position. The idea of "exploding" constraints will, of course, permit us to wriggle out of the problem. We say that it is only Express (H, IP-final head) that outranks *(H, non-head) and

3 It Is die case thai Rising pitch occurs on a short mora (hot is (a) High-toned and (b) has a depressed onset. Bui this does not detractfromdie ill-farmedness of die structure under discussion.

192

not the general constraint Express (H.head). But this added complication makes one wonder whether this approach is indeed on target We have developed two quite different analyses of the Falling tone in the negative infinitive. We do not find the evidence for either compelling and thus do not consider the matter in any way closed. For convenience, we will assume the second analysis, where there is a HD aligned with the Right edge of an IP, and the expression system is responsible for the appearance of a penult Falling tone. Up until this point, we have only examined toneless verb stems in the negative infinitive. Let us look now at High verb stems. Consider trisyllabic or longer stems first. (107) uktingafiny!e>sj uktingafum!fiani uktingasenglfoli ukiingagawltiuli ukdngagawulii ka'kuuhlle'

(shorten) (get) (milk for) (chop) (chop well)

These data are indistinguishable from toneless verb stems of the same length. We propose that the lexical H is on the first stem mora and the grammatical H is located on the second stem mora (just as in the case of the other negative tenses). The OCP constraints lead to "fusion". The inapplicability of Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) means that the HD will extend through the final syllable. The Falling tone will emerge in IP-final position in the same way as it does in the toneless verb case. Bisyllabic stems are shown in (108): (108) ukiingathteenfli ukiingaslduli ukiingadJUisi ukringgy.'iisi uloSrjgasulIf kSkuuhlle'

(buy) (wipe) (feed) (defeat) (wipe well)

These data are of course quite distinct from the toneless bisyllabic verbs. The reason is clear. There is a lexical High tone on the first mora of the stem. If there is also a grammatical High tone on the final mora (as we have assumed is true for toneless verb stems), we would expect that the two H-sponsors would fuse into a single HD. The result will be the domain structure (uJ(ii)nga(bopni). But even if we assumed that the grammatical High tone fails to locate to the final vowel, we would still expect the HD initiated by the lexical High tone on the first mora to extend through the second syllable (since Nonflnality (polysyllabic HD) is inoperative in this tense). Given the domain structure (uku)nga(bopni), w e expect a penult Falling tone in IP-final position and that is what we find. Monosyllabic stems surface with a High tone (there is only one place for the grammatical H tone to be located, and that is the same mora that bears the lexical H tone): (109) uktlngaatyli ukiingaabM ukungaakhli

(eat) (steal) (build)

uktingaty!! kalcuuhlle'

193

(eat well)

Notice VCV stems are treated identical to CV roots. There is no variant available where the Prosodic Stem is aligned with the Morphological Stem rather than the syllable. The inclusion of an object prefix provides nothing new in the case of toneless verb stems. The object prefix is of course High-toned, and the HD that it initiates does not extend onto the following syllable (due to No Adjacent Edges): (110) uktingaytlliim.'f ukiingay!fy.a.al!l ukilngablitxolle'eli ukdngaylihlomteeli ukdngayHgusliJuli ukiingay!lchukum!1isi ukifngay!fqononondj.tjsi

(cultivate) (close) (forgive) (add) (scrape) (touch) (emphasize)

When the verb stem is monosyllabic, we have evidence that the object prefix and the verb stem do "fuse" into a single domain that includes the final syllable: (111) ukiSngaylilwi ukdngayilwf kakuuhl!4

(fight) (fight well)

Thus while the OCP generally does not control the interaction of the object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor in negative forms of toneless verb stems, here it does. Given that there is fusion, and given that Nonfinality (polysyllabic) is inoperative in the negative infinitive, we end up with the domain structure (jjku)nga(yi(Iwi). The result will be a Falling tone when the word is IP-final and a final H tone in IP-medial positioa When the verb stem is /VCV/, we find a similar pattern to (111) due to the fact that alignment of the Prosodic Stem with the syllable gives a monosyllabic Prosodic Stem in the case of a VCV Morphological Stem: ukdrjga.y'o'osi (roast), No discussion is required. When the object prefix is depressed and the stem does not have a depressed initial syllable, we find the H "shifted" away from the object prefix onto the first stem syllable. (112) uktingazjlliimlf ukringaftjxiolltfeli [K], ukringajixldMeli [M] ukdngazjhltdmie'eli [K] ukdngasibMHisi [M] ukiingflSQnwIa'blisi [M] ukdngatich!ukum!iisi [K], ukringajuchiVikumfisi [M] ukiingasiq!(5nonoi)(Jl.tisi [K] ukiSnga&bla'lfse'eli [M]

(cultivate) (forgive) (add) (narrate) (make happy) (touch) (emphasize) (narrate to)

In the case of a bisyllabic stem like /liimj/, the shift is onto the lengthened, toneless penult syllable, which produces a Falling tone. When the stem is trisyllabic, we find that there is downstep in K between the shifted High and the Falling tone on the penult while in M there is no downstep. When the stem is quadrisyllabic (or longer), the shift of the High onto the first stem syllable does not result in "protection" in K but does in M. This difference between K and M has 194

been analyzed extensively in terms of whether NARDE dominates RD-Faithfulness (as in M), or whether RD-Faithfulness dominates NARDE (as in K). The only point that needs to be made is that the data in (112) above provides clear cut evidence that we were correct in assuming that the grammatical H tone is on the second stem mora in the negative infinitive, just as in other negative forms. If the verb stem begins with a depressed syllable, the H of the object prefix cannot shift: (113) ukiingaz!jg«?!tfwli (scrape) ukringazjtvumle'eli (permit) If the verb stem has an internal depressed syllable, the object prefix H can shift onto the initial vowel of the verb stem, but in both K and M there will there be a RD break between that High tone and the head of the stem HD - thus both dialects will show downstep between the two heads and no protection of nonheads in the second HD: (114) uktfngaz.iphla'zamliisi ukiingaz.iq!6nonond!.lisi

(disturb) (emphasize)

We have up to this point largely ignored the toneless verb stems with an object prefix included. It preferred to use the form with an object prefix only in these verbal forms with a complement following, our following:

issue of the IP-medial pronunciation of is important to note that our consultants IP-final position. When requested to use consultants gave pronunciations like the

(115) ukdogsyilwll kfikuuhHg (cf. ukun,gay!iilwi) ukiingazilllmlt kSkuuhlle [K], ukiingaziMml kdkuuhllfi [M] (cf. ukurjgflzilllimi) ukdngaylfguzul'l kfikuuhlle" (cf. uktirjgay!fgu.z!tiuli) ukilngay!iqononond.is!i k6kuuhl!e' (ukringayllqononondj.ijsi) ukUngazjqdnonondjsit kdkuuhlM (cf. ukunga.zjqldnononfm.jsi

(fight well) (cultivate well) (scrape well) (emphasize well) (emphasize well)

While these data are a bit artificial, they do reflect the fact that if the forms with an object arc used in IP-medial position, then a final H tone appears and not a penult Fall. The example ukilggazjltimM kdkuuhlle [K] but ukdngazjlMmi kdkuuhlM [M] is particularly interesting. In the IP-final form, ukdQga^jflimll, the shift of the H from the object prefix did not create adjacent HD's in either K or M. The domain structure for this item is (uku)nga(zili)i(rn1). In neither K nor M will there be any violation of NARDE when these HD's are located each in its own Register Domain. But in medial position, there is no length on the penultimate syllable. The HD structure will thus be (uku)nga(zili)(mi). In M, this structure will trigger a single RD including both of the last two HD's (since NARDE dominates RD-Faithfulness). As a consequence, there is no downstepping in uktingazjlifmf kikuuhl!e\ In K, however, where RDFaithfulness is more important than NARDE, faithfulness to the RD-structure of the output of the A system will require two adjacent RD's in the output of the B system Thus there will be downstep: ukrin,ga.zj{im!l ka"kuuhl!e\ High verb stems with an object prefix are our next topic. Here we find a rather startling new situation. We have not yet encountered a case where the H of the object prefix and the

195

lexical H of the verb stem fail to "fuse". But this is just what will explain the negative infinitive forms below: (116) ukilngaylfbdoni ukiingayllbe'eki uktingabidyiisi

(see) (place) (defeat)

Were fusion in effect we would expect *uktiqgQyitfdoni. To obtain the correct form, we must say that in this morphological structure the sequence of an object prefix H and a verb stem High is an exception to the OCP constraint No Adjacent Sponsors. However, fusion does affect the lexical High-sponsor and the grammatical High-sponsor in the verb stem. We shall sec later that this failure to get fusion of the object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor is idiosyncratic to the negative infinitive; specifically, it is not a general aspect of all tenses where HD's extend through the last syllable of the word. If "fusion'' does not occur, then we should see the effects of Plateau when the verb stem is longer. This is exactly the case: (117) ukringaytfbdnlisi ukiingayltbdnislisi ukiiogayllfiimfiani ukiingab!£16m4n1isi

(show) (see clearly) (get) (connect with)

The HD structure will be (jiku) nga (yj) (boniisi). Since we have two adjacent HD's (and no disrupting depressed syllables), in both K and M there will be a single RD. Plateau will affect the nonheads in the verb stem. If the verb stem has an initial depressor or an internal depressor, then we will have two RD's in both K and M and there will be no Plateau effect. (118) uk\Sngay!igalteeli ukdngayllthengUjsi ukdngayltsebenglXisi

(pour) (sell) (use)

The object prefix in the negative infinitive constitutes a HD in the output of the A system (due to the failure of fusion to group the object prefix H with the verb stem H). When the object prefix is depressed, the B system will demand that this HD extend onto the initial syllable of the stem (creating an overlapping domain structure) if that stem does not have an initial depressor. This means that the first stem syllable will be the head of a HD: (jiku)nga(zj (bg)nakalii)si. The H tone on the verb stem's initial syllable will serve to protect non-heads in the verb stem's HD, unless a subsequent depressed syllable invokes a new RD. (119) shift:

shift and protection: shift and no protection:

ukungasithleengi ukiinga%js!tfuli ukdngszifuma'ani ukdnga^jbdndkilf isi uktinga%jth!6ng!.tisi ukdngsxisle'benzl.usi 196

(buy) (wipe) (get) (make visible) (sell) (make work)

no shift:

ukiingajfoldcindi uktfrjgazltgalie'eli

(hate) (pour)

The negative infinitive of a H monosyllabic stem, with an object prefix attached, surfaces with a penult Fall: ukdrjgayHityi (a depressed object prefix makes no difference: ukdggg2?,ljty0- In other words, its tonal shape is not different from the toneless monosyllabic verbs. We noted that in the case of bisyllabic and longer H verb stems, it is necessary to block fusion of the object prefix in the negative infinitive. But in the monosyllabic case we need to allow fusion (the normal case) to occur. This, combined with the fact that Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is inoperative in the negative present, will produce a word-final bisyllabic HD that will yield a Falling tone on the penult of the verb when it is IP-final (and a OH partem when the verb is medial: ukilQggyityH— )• As matters stand at present, the exceptional behavior of the object prefix in the negative infinitive based on bisyllabic or longer H verb stems is mysterious. 4.6. ka-negative. In this section we complete our survey of negative tenses. The construction we examine here has the prefix /ka/ located after the subject prefix; otherwise it is similar to the negative present in terms of morphological structure. It can be glossed as "hasn't yet". In this tense we find a tone pattern in the stem that is the same as in the negative infinitive. However, as we will see below, the tone pattern of the object prefix in conjunction with High verb stems is not the same as in the negative infinitive (at least in the speech of our consultants). Toneless verb stems, as shown in (120), are identical to their negative infinitive shape: (120) ab£kaxol!6eli abdkafikelle'eli anikacornbulitfuli anikadanliisi anikago.dlViu.ki akdkaqononondj.lisi anikayokojjej liisi akikapheeklf ak£kaya.aj!f abikawiiisi anikaalwli

(forgive) (reach) (become untied) (dance) (go home) (emphasize) (decorate with many colors) (cook) (close) (drop) (fight)

From an analytical point of view, then, the major new aspect of these data is the fact that H tone (which we have argued is contributed by the subject prefix in the negative tenses) is unable to extend onto the following /ka/ (which itself does not appear to contribute any H tone to the representation). One can imagine various approaches to this problem. Perhaps the simplest analysis is to propose that the subject prefix in the negative is an exception to *MonoHD (Lc. does not trigger a mark if it is in violation of *MonoHD). This is possible because in no construction have we found it necessary for "MonoHD to induce the HD initiated by the subject prefix to expand on the basis of needing to satisfy *MonoHD. The subject prefix H has fused with a following H-sponsor, but this fusion is of course not triggered by *MonoHD. Of course, if we adopt this line of analysis, then we do not need to appeal to the grammatical High on the

197

second stem mora to explain the failure of the subject HD in aba*xoltf£li to expand rightwards. We have other evidence (the protection facts) to argue for the grammatical High being on the second stem more; thus our analysis of the location of the grammatical High tone is not dependent on using this tone to explicate the apparent violation of *MonoHD in aba'xolle'liWhen the subject prefix is depressed, the H will shift onto the /ka/ syllable. Let us examine the consequences of this shift. When the stem is monosyllabic, the /ka/ is lengthened and is realized with a Falling tone. (121) andjkaalwll, azjkaalwlt

(fight)

In medial position, this Falling tone will be replaced by a level High. In M, there will not be downstep between the penult and the final High tones, while in K there will be: (122) andjktfwi...[M].ar,djklilwli...[K]

(fight)

When the depressed subject prefix precedes a (regular) trisyllabic toneless verb stem, then the shift onto /ka/ does not produce any abutting domains. (123) andjk*baal!t andjkdpheekll andjkayaalli

(count) (cook) (close)

However, in the /wisaZ-type stem, there will be abutting HD's in the output of the B system, but with the usual difference in RD structure between M and K: (124) azjkiwfisi [M], a%ik£w!fisi [K] andjkdhlfisi [M], andjkdhl!fisi [K]

(drop) (lower)

In the case of trisyllabic or longer stems, the shift away from the depressed subject prefix will not yield adjacent domains and thus there will be two distinct RD's in both K and M. (125) andjk4xol!e'eli, azjk4xol!e*eli andjkaTikelleeli, azjkafikelteeli andjkfcornb.ultu'uli, az.jkdsom|)u1!iiuli andjkdqononondj.ljsi andjkddanllisi, azjkd<]an!1isi Bndjka"flQd!(juki, azjkigqdltfuki andjkajikle'elt, azjkajjkleeli

(forgive) (reach) (solve) (emphasize) (dance) (go home) (turn aside)

Before moving onto High-toned verb stems in the /ka/-negative, we should just note that the phras-medial pronunciation shows that the penult Falling tone represents a case where the HD extends to the end of the word: andjka'xoIelH baanthuHigh-toned verb stems in the /ka/-negative show the same tonal pattern as in the negative infinitive. 198

(126) anikabldoni anlkablriuzj asikafhlgengj ab&katheng!fisi akdkaseblierjzj abdkasebeozlgeji abAkagalle'eli akfikaatyll

(see) (ask) (buy) (sell) (work) (work for) (pour) (eat)

When the subject prefix is depressed, we expect the H to shift onto /ka/. This will lead to the usual difference between M and K (associated with the difference in RD-structure resulting from how NARDE and RD-Faithfulness are ranked). No discussion is required. (127) andjkSbd'ophi [M], andikSbldophi [K] a&jkdbuuzj [M], azjkabltiuzj [K] andjkatheen,fli [M], andjMthleengj [K] andjkiise'Weriz.i [M], and.ik4seb!6ensi [K] andjkibdntisi [M], andjkflbonliisi [K] andikigalle'eli asjkdthengi.tisi aodikSsebensItfeJi

(tie) (ask) (buy) (work) (show) (pour) (sell) (work for)

When the verb stem is monosyllabic, the shift onto /ka/ wilt not lead to adjacent domains in either K or M when the verb is IP-finaL However, when this verb is medial and the epenthetic mora is not present, we will find the usual difference between M and K: (128) andjkaatyli arjdjkdtyi nyaama [M], andjkityii nyaama [K]

(eat) (eat meat)

The inclusion of an object prefix with a toneless verb stem in this tense parallels the data from the negative infinitive. (129) akakayliliimll abdkakltixolle'eli akdkaw.'&hukumliisi abdkay!1qononond!i.isi aMkay!iguz!VJuJi akikayltilwi (cf. in medial position: akSkayilwli...) akikayte'engj

(cultivate) (forgive) (shake) (emphasize) (shake) (fight) (do)

For the most part, the object prefix H-sponsor and the verb stem H-sponsor are not adjacent and therefore do not fuse into a single domain. In the case of CV stems, however, this fusion occurs, resulting in the domain structure a(kg) ka (yii Iwi).

199

A depressed object prefix will shift its H onto the following syllable (if it can), setting up the usual differences between K and M. (130) aba*Bzjx!dl!eeli[K],aba*azjx!dhieli[M] ak£kazjsh!u*kuml1isi [K], akdkajishliikumlisi [M]

(forgive) (shake)

In (131), where the verb stem is bisyllabic, there is no difference in IP-final position between K and M, but the difierence appears in medial position: (131) akdka%jl!fim!l[K,M] akiikazilltmi... [M], alcfikazilMm!!... [K] In IP-final position, the epenthetic mora in akdkagjglimit means that the HD initiated by the object prefix and the HD initiated by the grammatical H in the stem will be in different RD's. But in medial position, the HD's will be adjacent in the output of the B system, but the two dialects will locate them into different RD-structures (as we have observed repeatedly). When the stem has an initial depressor or an internal depressor, the heads of the object prefix HD and the verb stem HD will be in separate RD's (due to Depressed Syllable Alignment) and there will be no difference between K and M. (132) abAkazjsldndlgeJi aMkajcIlguzltfuli ak4kaziq!<5nonond!.lisi

(come near) (scrape) (emphasize)

Consider briefly the case where there is a depressed subject prefix: (133) aadjkAknxolleeli [M], andikak!dxol!eeli [K] arjdjMzjxldle'eli [M], andikisjxldlleeli [K] arjdjkay!fson.<|!
(forgive) (come near) (scrape) (shake) (emphasize) (cultivate) (fight)

We see that when the subject prefix High is shifted onto /ka/, there is a difference between K and M. Specifically, there is downstep between the two High tones in K but not M. When the object prefix is depressed, its High tone also shifts - with the usual differences in K and M deriving from the RD-stnicture constraints. It should not be necessary to go through the examples. 200

Turning to H verb stems, we find that our consultants subject the object prefix and the verb stem to the usual fusion — unlike in the negative infinitive. Some example: (134) akfikayliityi (eat) ak£kabab!doni (see) akikawathilengj (buy) akdkawafum!4ani (get) (show) akdkawabonltisi (pour) ak£kawagal!e*eli akakawasebenxlfSfili (work for) akdkabaphulaph liiul i (listen) akikasibonllisi (show) (buy) ak«kazith!deng.i akdkagjsebenj^eli (work for) When die subject prefix is depressed and shifts its High onto /ka/, we find that in M there will be a single RD and thus Plateau effects; in K, there will be separate RD's: (135) andjkawa'fiimdani [M], andjk£wafum!2ani [K] (get) andjkiw6b6'n1isi [M], andjkawabonliisi [K] (show) andjkdw6th£engj [M], andjkdwathle'eng.i [K] (buy) Of course, if there is a depressed object prefix or a depressed syllable internal to the verb stem, Plateau effects will not be observed in M anywhere except on a (non-depressed) object prefix: (136) andjk6wa'seben&[6eli [M], andjkawasebenz!6eli [K] andjkawa'galteeli [M], andjkiwaga.lie'eli [K] andjkdjafum!4ani

(work for) (pour) (get)

So far in this chapter we have surveyed the various negative tenses, where in each case we argued that there is a grammatical High tone anchored to the second stem mora when the verb stem is trisyllabic or longer. Monosyllabic stems consistently located this grammatical High tone on their only syllable. Only bisyllabic presented complications. In the next chapter, we will see that there are affirmative tenses that also show a grammatical High tone. 4.7. The short form of (he perfect. In Chapter Three we examined the tonotogy of the long form of the perfect, where (a) the stem revealed only lexical tone and (b) the verb stem ended in /il/ followed by the final vowel /e/. The short form of the perfect is used when there is a complement following the verb. The /il-e/ of the long form is contracted to /ee/ in the short form. This /ee/ always exhibits a Falling tone on the surface, even in the case of toneless verb stems with a toneless subject prefix. The syllable in front of this /ee/ is not lengthened. We will assume that, from a phonological point of view, /ee/ is actually two separate syllables. Recall that in medial position in the phrase we do not find overt lengthening of the penult (stressed) vowel. In the short form of the present tense (see Chapter Three) we did observe some variation in terms of whether the penult syllable is treated phonologicalfy as 201

"prominent" or not (in the absence of overt phonetic lengthening). It should be remarked that in the speech of our consultants the /ee/ is not realized with much length nor with a very noticeable fall in pitch. We nevertheless assume that phonologically the representation /e\e/ is appropriate. One possible approach (which we shall argue against) to the analysis of/e.e/ might be to assume that its initial mora sponsors a High tone in the input to the phonology. Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) would then prevent the HD initiated by the initial mora of /e.e/ from extending through the second mora. Below we consider some data involving toneless verb stems that pose a problem for this treatment of /e.e/. We cite examples with both a toneless subject prefix and a High subject prefix (with non-depressed and depressed onsets). Initially we confine ourselves to trisyllabic and longer verb stems: (137) njbalisee..., Hbalisltfe..., zjbilisle'e... [KJ, zjbAHse'e... [M] ndjcacisee..., bicasislee..., zjcicislee... [K], zjcdcise'e... [M] njshukumista..., Ifshukumis!£e..., z.jshukumis'e'e... [K] zjshukdmfse'e... [M] njnamathelis6e...» linamathelis!6e..., zjmtmatheIisl6e...[K] zjn4mithelIse'e...[M] njdanisee..., Mdanisle'e..., zjdanisle'e... njqononorjdjs6e..., baqononondtstee..., z.iq<5nonond.is!6e... WJoJulee..., bolul.'ee..., zoliillee... [K], zoliilee... [M] nanelise'e..., bfnelislee..., zanglisle'e... [K], zanelfsee... [Ml nalamanisee..., 16Iamanis!ee..., zajdmanis!£e... [K] zaltfmdntsee... [M]

(narrate) (explain) (shake) (cement) (dance) (emphasize) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

Notice first of all that when the subject prefix is toneless, there is no High tone on the surface other than the one that appears on the first mora of /e.e/. When the subject prefix is High-toned and not depressed, we see that the HD it initiates does not extend through the first syllable of the verb stem, even when that syllable is not followed immediately by /e.e/. The failure of the HD to extend contradicts *MonoHD. *MonoHD would predict •lishdkumis-'e'e. However, we can easily explain this violation of *MonoHD if we assume that the verb stem has a HD that is initiated by the second mora of the stem. By assuming that the stem has a grammatical High tone located exactly as in the negative tenses, we can use the constraint No Adjacent Edges to prevent the HD initiated by the subject prefix from satisfying *MonoHD. We claim then that the short form of the perfect has a grammatical High tone whereas the long form does not It is worth noting that this same pattern obtains in the Sotho language family (see, for example, Mmusi 1992 for a discussion of the Setswana facts), but in Sotho languages the grammatical High tone surfaces transparently on the second stem mora in the case of toneless verb stems. Our proposal is that Isixhosa has exactly the same basic facts as Sotho, except that the existence of Align Word R in Isixhosa obscures the facts on the surface.6 Now let us consider the HD initiated by the grammatical High on the second stem mora. It will extend through the penult syllable (Le. the first syllable of /e.e/), but will not extend through the final syllable (due to the effect of Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD). When the subject ' In as yet unpublished research on (he Nguni language Siswali, Cassimjee and Kisseberth hove come to the same conclusion regarding die location of (he grammatical High tone in die short form of the perfect. 202

prefix is toneless or is High-toned but with a non-depressed onset, the non-heads in the verb stem HD will be pronounced without a High tone due to the constraint *(H, non-head). Examples in (137) provide critical evidence that the second stem mora must be the sponsor of a High tone and thus the initiator of a HD. The evidence comes from the case where a High-toned subject prefix has a depressed onset (in M's dialect). The subject prefix in this situation constitutes a HD in the output of the A system, but the B system will demand that this HD be enlarged (provided that the verb stem does not start with a depressed syllable). This will set up the expected pattern of difference between K and M that we have seen repeatedly. In M, this "shifted" High induces the formation of a single Register Domain if possible (in order to avoid a violation of NARDE). The result is that the shifted High will "protect" following nonheads: gjshilkilnilse'e— In K, on the other hand, RD-Faithfiilness leads to a violation of NARDE. We thus do not get protection: sishdkumisJe'e... Of course, if a depressor consonant forces the formation of separate RD's, then both K and M will have the same pronunciation: jiq<5nonondjs!<e.... No further discussion should be required. We consider this evidence to be conclusive: the short perfect has a grammatical H located on the second stem mora. Turning to toneless verbs that ore bisyllabic (in the present tense form): (138) njwise'e..., liwis!e"e.., awis!6e... [Kit ziwise'e... [M] njbaMe..., llbaltee..., zibtfllee... [K], jjbaMCe... [M] (|dj1ime>..., Mlimttfe..., %jlfmt<e... [K], allme'e... [M] ndjculee..., b£cul!£e..., zictille'e... [K], xjciile'e... [M]

(drop) (count) (cultivate) (sing)

The affixation of /e.e/ yields a trisyllabic stem The initial mora of the verb stem is clearly not the sponsor of a High tone - witness an example like ba'limie'e... The second mora of the stem (the initial element in /e.e/) not only sponsors the grammatical High tone, but it is also the surface bearer of the High tone (since the HD cannot extend onto the final syllable). We see the expected difference between K and M with respect to depressed High subject prefixes. The shifted High in M leads to a single RD and thus there is no downstep: jybale'e..-, while in K there are two RD's and thus downstep: giba'lie'e-.. When the stem is "monosyllabic", whether CV or VCV, we find that the grammatical High tone is docked to the first mora in the stem This, of course, is the same pattern as observed in the negative present. (139) njlwe'e..., Iilw£e..., ailwe'e... ndgs6e..., b6s£e..., jose'e... fldirazfo-, begz!<5fi..., sftisifc...

(fight) (roast) (do)

Since the first stem mora sponsors a High tone, we have a case where, given a High subject prefix, two sponsors abut each other. The OCP does not force these two H-anchors into a single HD -- we have seen that the OCP does not affect other cases where a subject prefix H-sponsor is adjacent to a grammatical H-sponsor. Given that the OCP does not affect the structure, we get High tones on the heads of both the subject prefix domain and the stem domain: If lw4e.. There will be no downstep between these two High tones in either K or M since in both cases NARDE, operating in the A system, will drive a single RD: the HD's are adjacent as a consequence of the A system. Of course, if there is a depressed consonant between the two High tones, there will be 203

separate RD's in both K and M, since depressed syllables must initiate a RD: btfn,g!
(close) (agree to) (repair)

The toneless subject prefix forms do not provide any complications. When there is a High toned subject prefix that is not depressed, it will simply surface High and of course have no effect on the following stem tone pattern. When there is a depressed H subject prefix, the High will not shift from the subject prefix when the stem starts with a depressed syllable: jtfyalle'e... When the stem does not start with a depressed syllable, the High will shift off the subject prefix, as in Zildrjgis!e°e-. This shifted H will be separated from the grammatical H by downstep due to the internal depressed syllable in the stem. All of this is very familiar territory. Let us now turn to the High verb stems in the short form of the perfect: njtye'e..., lityee... njmemge..., limemfie... nithengih;..., batheng
(eat) (invite) (buy) (greet) (work) (see clearly) (make slippery) (build) (fear) (make happy)

On the surface, these data are fairly baffling in comparison with the toneless verb stems discussed above. When there is a toneless subject prefix, then the High-toned verb stems look entirely the same as the toneless verb stems. But a difference appears when there is a High-toned subject prefix. Whereas that prefix is High-toned in conjunction with a toneless verb stem, it is toneless in conjunction with a High verb stem. Can this mysterious behavior be explained? Our analysis provides a basis for understanding the above behavior. Recall that we have claimed that there is a grammatical High tone in the short perfect and that it is located on the second stem mora in the case of toneless verb stems. We assume that it is similarly located in the case of lexically High verb stems; however, these stems also have their lexical High tone on the first stem mora. Given that we have High tones on both the first and the second mora of the stem, the OCP predicts that both of these High-anchors will be fused into a single domain. The tone partem in (141) can be understood on this basis, provided we allow the OCP to also require that the subject prefix H-sponsor fuse into a single domain with the verb stem High-sponsors. Recall that in the long form of the perfect, the subject prefix is an exception to the OCP - this is what distinguishes the long perfect from the short form of the present tense. We now see that the short perfect parallels the short present in being subject to the OCP. The sometimes contradictory 204

behavior of the long and short perfect stem has at least been reduced to a matter of whether the OCP is obeyed or not. Our discussion of the negative tenses earlier in this chapter has shown that indeed this variability is at the heart of much of the complexity of the Isixhosa tonal system. We cannot "predktH the pattern of variability, but we have made sense out of what lies behind the variable surface shapes. The data in (141) are now straightforward. Since the OCP induces a fusion of adjacent Hsponsors into a single HD, each example in (141) will have only one HD and thus there will only be one High tone (located on the head of this HD). The data in (141) do not contain any depressed syllables. Since all of the High-sponsors are fused into a single HD, depressors will not disturb the surface pitch pattern. The data in (142) confirm this. (142) mzgndffe..., basQrjdge..., ziirandta... njgawul6e..., bagawul6e..., zjggwulle... nithenflisfie..., bathengjsee..., zithengjsee... n,jseben;e16e...,basebenseltfe..., zjsebenselSe...

(hate) (chop) (sell) (workfor)

The surface tone pattern is the same whether the stem is bisyllabic and starts with a depressor, or trisyllabic and has either an initial or medial depressor, etc. When we look at the inclusion of an object prefix in the short perfect we find that there is the same discrepancy between toneless and High verb stems with respect to the OCP. Consider first stems based on toneless verbs that are bisyllabic or longer: (143) njwdwisle'e..., liwdwisle'e... n.iyilimle'e..., liyilimie'e... njyfcacisle'e..., HyicacislSe... n,jw((shukumis!6e..., liwlshukumislle... njwa'namathelisle'e..., Itwdnamathelis!6e... njwosSe..., Hwos!6e... njwdluliee.... lfwdlul!6e... m/wdnelisiee..., liwdnetis'.ee.... njwa'lamanisle'e..., liwilamanisiee...

(drop) (cultivate) (explain) (shake) (cement) (roast) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect with)

In these examples, the HD initiated by object prefix and HD initiated by the grammatical High tone on the second mora of the verb stem are not adjacent (due to the fact that *MonoHD is dominated by No Adjacent Edges). There is clear evidence that the subject prefix and the object prefix are not fused, since we find that both of them appear High toned (if they were fused into a single domain, only the head of the domain would be realized on a High tone). Thus we know that the subject prefix H fuses neither with the grammatical H in a toneless verb stem nor with an object prefix H. In (144) we illustrate a monosyllabic toneless verb stem with an object prefix:: (144) njyilwtfe..., sjyilwe'e..., Wyflwie... (fight) Notice that there is no fusion anywhere: each High-sponsor is located in a domain and expresses High tone. There is no downstep between High tones since these adjacent RD's will be wrapped into a single RD in the A system in both K and M.

205

So far we have completely ignored the issue of depressed syllables. We cite some relevant examples in (145): (145) njylyallee..., Mylyajlee..., aylyallee... njzjyal!<e..., Mzltyajtee..., zjzlfVftHe'e..

(shut)

njylyumelle'e..., bayiyujnel !&..., zjylyumeliee... (permit) njzjyumelle'e..., MzlfyumelSee..., zMtywmellee... n.iyflungjslee..., biytlungjslee..., zjy{lung.is!£e.. (repair). niiiltlOflislee..., bflzjllu'n.flisle'e..., zjzjlltfrifljsle'e... There is not anything unexpected here. There is no fusion of a High subject prefix and an object prefix — thus both are realized as High-toned in an example like Myfygjltfe... If the subject prefix Is depressed, however, and followed by a non-depressed object prefix, then the DIHTS phenomenon will lead to overlapping HD's in the output of the B system and only the head of both these overlapping domains will realize the High tone: zjyfyaj.'ee... If the object prefix is depressed, h will shift onto the stem if it can - shifting will be blocked when the verb has an initial depressed syllable (cf. Mz!Jyal!<e...) but not otherwise (cf. bdzjl!ringjs)ee...). In either case, the object prefix's H will be separatedfromthe subject prefix's H by downstep (due to the fact that depressor in the object prefix cannot form a RD with the element to its left). Look now at the High verb stems with an object prefix incorporated. (146) njwatyle..., liwatyee... njyisulee..., bayisulee... njwamemee..., liwamemee... njwabulisee..., liwabulisee... njwabonisise>..., liwabonisisle... njwanyinyithekisee..., liwanyinyithekisee... njwakhee..., liwakhec... njwoyikee..., liwoyikee... njwonwabisee..., liwonwabisee...

(eat) (wipe) (cultivate) (greet) (see clearly) (make slippery) (build) (fear) (make happy)

The fact that there is a single High tone on the surface shows unequivocally that a High subject prefix fuses with the fused domain of the object prefix and the verb stem. We have a single HD and thus a surface H on the head of that domain. It does not matter if the verb stem has a depressed syllable, or if the object prefix is depressed, or if the subject prefix is depressed. Fusion is invariable. A few examples: (147) njyiJMndge..., bayizondjie..., zjyizondge... njzJZQndfc..., baz.jzp.ndge..., sizjzgndge... njyiga.wulee..., bayiggwulee..., zjyigawulee... njzjgawutee..., bazjgawulee..., zjzjgawul6e... 206

(hate)

(chop)

HJyitherjflisfie..., bayitherjg.js6e..., ziyitherjgise'e... nisitherjaistfe..., baz.itheno.is6e..., z.izjther)flis«e...

(sell)

In this section, we have argued that the short perfect has the same stem grammatical High tone (on the second mora) as the negative tenses. In the next section we encounter a case where there is a grammatical High tone located on the subject prefix and not on the verb stem. 4.8. Participial. In this section we examine the tonal pattern of the participial form of the verb. The structure of the participial can be summarized as follows: SPp+Stem, where SPP is segmentally identical to the general subject prefixes except in the case of CL 1 (where in the participial we have /el rather than /W). Tonally, SPP is always High-toned in input forms. When the verb stem is toneless, the High of the subject prefix surfaces according to the same pattern as the subject prefix H in the present tense. We demonstrate this point by quickly surveying verb stems of different syllabic lengths. If the verb stem is monosyllabic, it is augmented by the syllable /si/ in the participial. The H of the subject prefix ends up associated with this syllable - the effect of *MonoHD. Nonflnality (polysyllabic HD) will bar the domain from extending onto the final syllable. Since the domain is always larger than the subject prefix, whether the subject prefix is depressed or not is immaterial. (148) nisiilwa, esitlwa esilwa, rjdislfwa sis&nza, ndjsWnza. us&nga. rjdjsWnga

(fight) (fall) (do) (kiss)

These data demonstrate that the subject prefixes like /u/ 2 sg., /ni/ 2. pi. and /si/ 1 pi., which in other tenses are toneless, are High-toned in the participial. It is not uncommon in Bantu languages to find tenses where prefixes are uniformly High or uniformly toneless. The small group of bisyllabic verb stems which are exceptions to *MonoHD continue to be exceptions in the participial: (149) Iwiisa, ndiwlisa e"hlaala, rjdjhldala eliliisa, ndinltisa

(drop) (sit) (let go down)

Since the monosyllabic HD in an example like (ejwiisa does not violate *MonoHD (due to the exceptionality of the verb stem), Avoid Prominence will prefer (£)wiisa to *(ewii)sa. The fact that the subject prefix constitutes a HD in the output of the A system means that, in the B system, a depressed subject prefix will trigger the extension of the HD onto the next mora: (ndihli)isa. We thus have a contrast between ghllisa and rj
207

(150) ectiula*. ndjciitila" ehleekd, rjdjhlWkA ebddnga, ndibddrjga. ephSeM, ndiph«kd ehlMrnJja, ndihlMmta ex\|tima\ udiviivSmae y ^ l i . ndiY^IS

(sing) (laugh) (thank) (cook) (wash) (agree) (close)

When the stem is trisyllabic or longer, the H of the subject prefix will associate with the antepenult syllable (unless the antepenult is depressed, in which case the H will shift away if possible). Again, there will be no difference in tone depending on whether the subject prefix is depressed or not (151) ex6leela, ndixdleela eldrjgijsa. ndjliingiisa efikeleela, ndjfikeleela eshukumiisa, ndishukiimiisa ephethuph&huula, rjdiphethuphlthuula edanlisa, ndidanlisa ebarobcleela ephehluzejtisa beqononondisiana betyhuthutyhuthuzjsaana emarjgaleela, ndimangaleela egdduuka, rtdigdduuka nis66sa esdluula, rjdisdluula esaneliisa, ndisanlliisa esalamaniisa, ndisalamaniisa

(forgive) (correct) (reach) (shake) (turn upside down) (dance) (hold fast to) (cause to search about for s.t.) (instruct one another very explicitly) (cause one another to force way through) (take to court) (return home) (bake) (stretch) (satisfy) (connect)

There is nothing about the preceding data set that distinguishes it from the long present tense when a High subject prefix precedes a toneless verb stem. The preceding data involving toneless verb stems are entirely regular. What is interesting is that the participial may be used in conjunction with the particle Istl (which occurs as /sel/ in front of the /e/ (CL 1 subject prefix). When protected by the High-toned Istl, we find many cases where the non-heads in the HD initiated by the SPp are all realized High as the result of Plateau. In the case of bisyllabic verb stems. Plateau affects just the subject prefix. (152) se lectiiila se tehlttka se lepheSka

(sing) (laugh) (cook)

208

When the element /seV precedes a bisyllabic verb that is an exception to *MonoHD, then the subject prefix is itself the head of a HD and there is no non-head that could be affected by Plateau. (153) s61lwiisa s£ Ighliisa

(drop) (let go down)

When the verb stem has an initial depressed syllable, we find that this syllable must initiate a RD, but the subject prefix must be in the same RD as the preceding High syllable (due to HDmora Incorporation (prefix)) and will thus be raised as a result of Plateau.. (154) s6\6y'.Wn

(close)

Turning to trisyllabic stems, we see that again the subject prefix will be protected: (155) s6 I61tfn,fliisa si llxdleela

(repair) (forgive)

If the verb stem has an initial depressed syllable, then Depressed Syllable Alignment will require the stem to be in a different RD from the subject prefix, but HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) will require that the subject prefix be in the same RD as the /si/. Thus Plateau will affect the subject prefix. (156) s6 le'dantiisa s& lejjkl^ela

(dance) (put or turn round on)

If the verb stem is quadrisyllable or longer, then we will find both the subject prefix and the following non-head syllables affected by Plateau: (157) s« s6 si s6

Wflk61eela le'thyiithiityhdthuuza. llthyiithtityhtithtigijsa le'qdndno'ndi.isa

(reach) (force one's way through) (cause to force way through) (instruct very explicitly)

However, when these long stems have a depressed syllable that is internal to the HD initiated by the subject prefix, the roles of Depressed Syllable Alignment, Cohesion, and HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) are all illustrated. (158) s6 s6 s6 si s£ s6 s€

llsombulKSula lgbam.bglie'ela le'mangalie'ela 16yokogf;l!fisa Wqononon.djsla'ana l£hlun.$j!tfseela le"g!(j<Juuka

(solve problem) (hold fast to) (sue) (decorate) (instruct one another very explicitly) (shake the head) (go home) 209

s6 le'yumle'ela s4 le"danttisa

(permit) (dance)

We have now seen the "protection" offered by /se7 due to its being in the same RD with one or more of the following syllables. If the participial subject prefix itself has a depressed onset, then it blocks the protection effect of /seV since it may not be joined with a preceding element into a RD. As a result, the only High tone realized is on the head of the HD initiated by the subject prefix. (159) se si s£ s6 s6 s6 s6 s6 si

udjs'.iilwa n.djclu'ula ndjyJMla n.djwlfisa rjdjxldleela ndil^rifliisa n.djdan!iisa rjdjfikKleela ndjsomtiulMula

(fight) (sing) (close) (drop) (forgive) (repair) (dance) (reach) (solve problem)

It is clear that all participial forms based of toneless verb stems fall out automatically from our analysis of Isixhosa, provided we assume a grammatical High tone on the subject prefix. In this section we explore the participial form of High verb stems. If the participial has a grammatical H on the subject prefix, and if High verb stems sponsor a H on their initial mora, then in the forms now under discussion we would expect adjacent High-sponsors in the input to the phonology. We begin our discussion with bisyllabic High verbs. In the speech of M, we find a Falling tone on the first stem syllable. (160) etheenga, ndjtheenfla. esilula, ndjsuula ezfonrJa, ndjjKtanda edttisa, ndjdllisa

(buy) (wipe) (hate) (feed)

In the speech of K, however, we find a level H on the first stem syllable: (161) ebddna (see) esuula (wipe) ebudza. (ask) eztftoidft (hate) Since the subject prefix in each case is toneless on the surface, it is clear that the OCP (=No Adjacent Sponsors) must lead to fusion of the subject prefix H and the stem H into a single HD. That assumption will predict that only one High tone will be heard and it will be heard on the head of the HD, Le. the stem syllable. What remains is to understand why there is a falling tone in M's speech but a level High tone in K's speech. We suggest that the difference between K and M is that in K, Nonfmality (polysyllabic HD) is operative, while in M it is not operative. If 210

Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is in effect, then the fused HD (which includes the subject prefix and the verb stem) will stop at the penultimate syllable: (£bgo)na. If Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is not in effect, then the fused HD will include the final syllable of the word: (eboona). The latter structure will yield a Falling tone for the same reason as the negative infinitives discussed above. Actually, the situation is not that simple. When the participial forms in (160) and (161) are in medial position, then there is in fact no difference between K and M: (162) ethenga... ebdna.... estSla...

(buy) (see) (wipe).

In other words, K and M both behave as though Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is in effect (when the verb is medial) and thus the last syllable of the verb is not in the domain. We do not have an explanation for why M has this variation with respect to whether Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) holds or not. When we look at trisyllabic or longer High verb stems, we find that Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) regularly holds in M as well as K: efiny&za. ndjfinyeejja. efumdtfna, rjdjfumfi&na ephuliphuula ephernttel^ela nibonlsiisa ninyinyithlkiisa esebenjeeja, ndjsebeoSGela eshumiyeeza, ndishumiyeejja ebonakfiliisa, ndjbonakiliisa nisoyilka nisonwibiisa

(shorten) (get) (listen) (influence) (see clearly) (make slippery) (work for) (preach) (be visible) (fear) (make happy)

In these data (which are identical for both K and M), we see that the subject prefix (grammatical) H and the verb stem (lexical) H fuse into a single HD, that extends rightward subject to the limits of Nonfinality and Avoid Prominence. Finally, we need to consider monosyllabic High verb stems. (164) nisiitya nisliba nisaakha

(eat) (steal) (build)

In (164) we see that the epenthetic material /si/ is inserted in front of monosyllabic stems. The vowel of/si / is lengthened and surfaces with a Falling tone. If the underlying representation is /nisitya/ we would expect the surface form •nlsiityla'. This is incorrect. We propose that the /si/ is counted as part of the stem and that the lexical High tone is sponsored by /si/, yielding /nisitya/. We can explain the surface form if we allow the constraint Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) to be inoperative. We get a single HD that extends to the end of the word (in violation of 211

Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD)). It is interesting however to note that in medial position, Nonfuiality (polysyllabic HD) is respected. In other words, these data parallel the bisyllabic stem data in M. (165) nis'itya... nistba... nisikha...

(eat) (steal) (build)

There is immediate evidence from H verbs that the participial subject marker must be High-toned, even though it fails to surface with a High tone in the above data. This evidence is provided when the subject marker is "protected" by the clement /seV. In the absence of any depressed syllables, we see that all of the non-heads in the fused domain initiated by the subject prefix will be realized as High due to the effects of Plateau: (166) se s« se s6 s6 si

llbdona [M], s6 tebddna [K] Igsiiula [M], s6 lesVhila [K] Mbduza [M], s€ Mbtidza [K] le'flnyee'za leTiima'a'na le'stbe'nzexla

(see) (wipe) (ask) (shorten) (get) (work for)

If the verb stem has an initial depressed syllable, then that syllable will not be joined into a RD with the preceding syllable. As a consequence, Plateau cannot affect any non-head after the depressed syllable. However, the preceding subject prefix will still be affected by Plateau due to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix), which requires a prefix (if possible) to group with a preceding RD. (167) se le-z!dgnd.a. [M], s€ hSzlddnda [K] si le'zjmle'eia s616gawhlcHa si \(<&\b'.6\eela

(hate) (hide) (chop) (cover a hole with earth)

If there is a depressed syllable internal to the verb stem, then of course it will induce a new RD. The effect is that none of the preceding stem syllables will be in a RD (due to Cohesion) — while a preceding subject prefix will be in the preceding RD due to the fact that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) outranks Cohesion. (168) s6 le'senglli'la se Kthengl.Usa

(milk for) (sell)

If the subject prefix is itself depressed, then it will initiate a new RD and thus there will be no chance for HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) to place the subject prefix in the same RD as the preceding element.

212

(169) se s6 se s6 se sd

ndjbldona [M], s6 ndjbddna [K] ndjsIUula [M], s6 ndjsliidla [K] ndjfiny!£6za. ndisimle'ela ndjsenglggla ndjsebtenzeela

(see) (wipe) (shorten) (hide) (milk for) (work for)

The inclusion of an object prefix in the participial will be explored next. We begin as usual with toneless verb stems. The object prefix is High-toned, but there is no "fusion" of the (participial-induced) subject prefix High and the object prefix High. Clearly the OCP is not in effect in this context. If the subject prefix is depressed, then its HD will be extended in the B system. (170) eylilwa, ndiyillwa lylwiisa, ndiyiwiisa 6y1ph6gka, nd.iyiphee'ka 6b£xi51eela, ndjb£x61eela gylc&iisa, rjdjyicficiisa e"yiliingiisa. ndiyiliingusa gyichriktimiisa, Qdiyichukumiisa

(fight) (drop) (cook) (forgive) (explain) (repair) (touch)

The striking thing here is that we see that because there is no fusion of the participial subject prefix H and the object prefix H, all of the non-heads in the HD initiated by the object prefix Mil be realized on a High tone due to Plateau. There is no difference between K and M: in examples like e'ylchu'kdrniisa. the adjacent HD's are organized into a single RD in the A system; in examples like n,djytchilkUmiisa tnere a r e no adjacent HD's, but rather overlapping HD's and consequently a single (or overlapping) RD. Of course, the presence of a depressed syllable - which induces a new RD — can disrupt this pattern. If the verb stem begins with a depressed syllable, then the verb stem non-heads (if any) will be unprotected - but the object prefix will be affected by Plateau since HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) locates it in a preceding RD: (171) e'yigStf.zuula.ndjylgltf.zuula eyiyumle'ela, n4iylyu,m!6ela 6yiy!<((Jla, ndiyly.'Mla

(scrape) (permit) (close)

If there is a depressed syllable internal to the stem domain, then it will initiate a new RD and preceding syllables in the stem will not be in a RD (due to the high ranking Cohesion). However, the object prefix will be affected by Plateau due to the fact that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) outranks Cohesion.. (172) 6biphaza.m!lisa 6bdmangaJ!e'ela

(disturb) (sue)

213

When the object prefix is depressed, then the subject prefix and the object prefix Highs will be in different RD's and there will be no Plateau effects whatsoever.

e-?Ul!wa IzjHtfma 6zjwltisa e"zjy!j(a1a e'zjxldleela


(fight) (cultivate) (drop) (close) (forgive) (scrape) (agree to) (repair) (sue)

All of these patterns of course simply confirm generalizations we are by now familiar with. When the subject prefix is depressed and the object prefix is not, then the B system will lead to the subject prefix HD overlapping the object prefix HD. The object prefix will be a head and will realize High tone, as will the head of the HD initiated by the object prefix: udjytcdciisa- If the object prefix is depressed, then of course the High tone remains on the subject prefix: n,djzJY\im!<ela. Turning now to the conjunction of an object prefix with a High verb stem, we see that the grammatical H of the subject prefix does not "fuse" with the fused domain containing the object prefix and the verb stem H sponsor. (174) IMbrfona [M] e'yltheenga. [M] e'bdbo'nltsa tfyiffnyMza. e'yifiimdina tfylbdnalclUiisa

(see) (buy) (show) (shorten) (get) (make visible)

As a consequence, we see that Plateau affects all of the non-heads in the following fused domain. If there is a depressed syllable anywhere in that fused object prefix-stem domain, then it will initiate a new RD and this will alter the "protection" pattern. If the stem has an initial depressed syllable, then all of the non-heads (if any) to the right will not be affected by Plateau but the object prefix will (since it is subject to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix)). (175) eyizlfanda [M] tyigawliiula

(hate) (chop)

If there is a depressed syllable internal to the verb stem, then not only will the non-heads after it to be unaffected by Plateau, but so will stem non-heads before it: (176) e"watheng!.Usa

(sell)

214

The reason that the stem syllables in front of the depressor are not subject to Plateau is that they are not in any RD due to the high ranking Cohesion constraint that disallows moras in the same HD from being allocated to different RD's. The object prefix on the other hand will be incorporated into a preceding RD due to the fact that HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) outranks Cohesion. If the object prefix is depressed, then of course it will initiate a RD and thus the subject prefix cannot, by means of Plateau, affect any non-head in the object prefix-stem domain. (177) ezjbidona [M], ezjb!d<5na [K]

^su'dtinda [M] e'zjbonlHsa e"zitheng!.Usa tfagawIiitSla

(see) (hate) (show) (sell) (chop)

If die subject prefix is depressed, then the B system will induce (if possible) the overlapping of the HD initiated by the subject prefix with the object prefix HD. The head of this HD will realize a H tone, and it will protect following non-heads in the overlapped HD. (178) ndjb£b<5ona [M]

ndiylheenua [M] rjdjbfibdntlsa ndiy1fuma'4na ndjytbdna1c41iisa

(see) (buy) (show) (get) (make visible)

If the verb stem has a depressed syllable, then the object prefix will be realized as High (being the head of the HD initiated by the depressed subject prefix) but there will be no protection inside the verb stem and the head of the verb stem domain will be downstepped.: (179)

ndiyizifonfiii [M] nd.iylgaw!iiula TjdiyfthGngUJsa

(hate) (chop) (sell)

If the object prefix is depressed, then the B system cannot extend the depressed subject prefix's domain. The subject prefix will be in a separate RD from the object prefix. Consequently, there can be no protection of the non-heads in the fused object prefix-verb stem domain and there will be downstep between the subject prefix H and the following H. (180) ndjzjbldona [M]

ndizizifonda. [M] ndjzjbonlilsa ndlzjthengl.Usa

ndUigswidiiia

(see) (hate) (show) (sell) (chop)

Examination of the participial has shown then that there is a grammatical High tone that anchors on the subject prefix. Given that fact, the complex pattern of behavior observed is just 215

what is predicted by our analysis (except for the usual complexities as to when the OCT is enforced and when it is not - for which there is no generalization possible). 4.9. Participial of (he/saV tense. In this section we examine the consequence of locating the High-toned element /saV after the High-toned participial subject prefix. We begin with toneless verb stems. The data in (181) show these two elements fusing into a single HD, with the expected surfacing of a High tone on /si/. But the verb stem shows an unexpected tone pattern. nisttlw* [K], besaalwtrf [M] nisdbaalla' besAhleekla' n.djs4y»Rl!a' besdlwfisa besficacliisa bcs&lungl.lisa nisfehukumliisa nis&namatheUiisa besiojbisilela besfiqononondl.tjsa nisddsa" [K], bes6os!a" [M] bes61tiu1a

(fight) (count) (laugh) (close) (cause to fight) (explain) (correct) (shake) (cement) (throw) (explain explicitly) (roast) (stretch)

Notice that the lexically toneless verb stems in (181) show a tonal pattern that is just the sort of tone pattern in the stem as we observed above in the negative infinitive and the /ka/ negative. Thus we must assume that there is a grammatical High in the verb stem that anchors according to the same pattern as in those negative tenses. In most cases, this grammatical H will be on a mora that is non-adjacent to the High-toned /si/. Thus there is no OCT violation. But in some cases there is an issue concerning the OCT. Consider the monosyllabic stems. We find a difference here between K and M: nisitlwi [K], besialwid [M], This difference is one that we have observed before in other contexts. First of all, in neither dialect is there fusion of the adjacent Hsponsors (fusion would yield a polysyllabic word-final HD that would surface with a FO pattern in IP-final position).. Second, it is clear that both H-sponsors are parsed into domains (in other words, since Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is inoperative in the participial, it cannot lead to a failure to incorporate the word-final H-sponsor). From these two observations, we can determine that the OCT (No Adjacent Sponsors) is not in effect. The difference in the two pronunciations is whether No Adjacent Edges outranks Syllable Alignment (see discussion above of the variation between njs((aty!oluula/. Fusion of the subject prefix Hsponsor and /saV would yield a HD structure (beso). Clearly, this structure is not fused with the verb stem One does not necessarily have to attribute the failure of fusion here to the inoperativeness of Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) since in (beso)(luula) the conditions are 216

not literally satisfied — that is, we do not have the structure uj (ft. While this example does not require the OCP to be inoperative, it is at least consistent with it being inoperative. We turn now to lexically High verb stems. (182) nisdbdona nis4z!(farjd.a besiftima'ana besdgawliiula besithengliisa besiphdkAmlisa besasebenzl&la bes£phamb,an !iisa besaatyla' [M], b e s « t y 4 [K]

(see) (hate) (get) (chop) (sell) (lift up) (work for) (turn upside down) (eat)

There are a number of observations to be made about these data. First of all, it is clear that while the grammatical H on the subject prefix fuses with /si/, /si/ does not fuse with the verb stem. Second, the HD initiated by the lexical H on the first stem mora must extend to the very end of the word (i.e. Nonfinaltty (polysyllabic HD) is not in effect). Third, the data are consistent with there being a grammatical High tone in the verb stem, in addition to the lexical H tone on the first mora, since they would in any case fuse into a single HD. Since the toneless verb stems parallel the negative infinitive and /ka/-negative in terms of tonal structure, there is no reason not to assume that the High verb stems do as well. Thus we assume the presence of a grammatical H lone as well as the lexical H tone. Examination of (182) establishes that /si/ protects following non-heads that are in the same RD. For example, in besdphdkimfisa, the HD structure is (b£Sfl)(phakamiisa). This representation will be organized into a single RD and thus the non-heads /pha/ and /ka/ will both be realized with a High tone. Of course, a depressed syllable in the stem domain will induce two RD's and block Plateau-effects; thus in besaseben.z!(e.la, the /nz/ will mean that a RD will start at this point, and the preceding syllables will not be able to be incorporated into a RD due to the constraint Cohesion. The monosyllabic verb case shows the same variation noted earlier between the ranking of No Adjacent Edges and Syllable Alignment. The inclusion of an object prefix with a toneless verb stem shows clearly that /si/ does not fuse with an object prefix: (183)

nisibdhleekla nisayiboong!j besdyiyaalla' besiyiwlisa

(laugh) (thank) (close) (drop)

bes4ba'xol!6ela bes£yilurig!.ljsa bes4ylphaza.m!1isa bes&yljukujiggla besayiilwld [M]

(forget) (repair) (disturb) (hurl) (fight) 217

If there were fusion, IsSJ and the object prefix would be in a single HD and only the object prefix will be HD-heads and both will surface with a High tone. In general, there is no possibility for the object prefix and the verb stem domain to fuse, since the object prefix and the grammatical H are separated by a mora. Fusion could, however, occur when the object prefix is adjacent to a stem like /wiisa/ (in this special case the grammatical H is located on the first mora of the stem) and when it is adjacent to steins like /lwa/. In the former case we cannot tell for certain whether fusion occurs or not If there were no fusion, we would expect both the object prefix and the first mora of /wiisa/ to be High-toned. This is what we find: besdyiwtisa. On the other hand, if fusion does take place and we include fyi/ and /wiisa/ in the same domain, we would still expect the preceding /saV to protect the non-head following. Thus regardless of whether there is fusion or not, we would get the same result In the case of monosyllabic stems like /Iwa/, if there were fusion we would not expect to have a form such as bestfytilwitf: two domains are needed in order to get No Adjacent Edges to lead to a violation of Syllable Alignment. We thus conclude that the OCP does not force a fusion of the object prefix and a monosyllabic verb stem. If the object prefix is depressed, then of course we expect its depressor to separate the prefix /say Into a separate RD from what follows. Furthermore, we expect that the High on the object prefix will "shift" onto the following syllable (if possible). (184) nisandjhlleeklanis4ajb!<5ong!{( besa'sUy.afdta' besftzjwlfisa besindixloleela [M], besandjxtdlliiela [K] besfisilliSng'iisa besijriph!4samliisa besdjsHJvikujIdRla

(laugh) (thank) (close) (drop) (forgive) (repair) (disturb) (hurl)

We have discussed at several points the interaction between a depressed High object prefix and a following toneless verb stem with a grammatical High tone. No discussion of these patterns should be necessary here. Suffice it to say that we see all the expected facts - e.g. the shifted High may lead to a single RD in M (cf. besdn.djx!<51<ela) but not in K (cf. besdndixidlMela). The inclusion of an object prefix with a High-toned verb stem is shown in (185): (185) besdyiitya besdylbdona nisAyibtfuza nisdylthtenga. bes§yi«l(JQndB besdytftfmdana besdy1theng!.ljsa bes4y1gaw!iiula besiyisebenjl^fila

(eat) (see) (ask) (buy) (hate) (get) (sell) (chop) (work:

218

The object prefix has a H, as does the first stem mora, as does the second (since there is a grammatical H tone in addition to the lexical H tone). All of these H-sponsors are fused into a single domain. An example such as besaytfilma'ana shows that the domain (b£S&) does not fuse with the verb stem domain. Rather, /saV serves to protect the following non-heads in the fused domain in the verb stem Of course, if there is a depressed syllable in the stem domain, we will only get protection of the object prefix: besdyiseben^&lB- All of these facts are by now so well-attested that no additional discussion is required. The only example that needs comment is besdylitya- To account for this form, we need the object prefix H and the verb stem to fuse into a single bisyllabic domain - in contrast to the case where the object prefix is in front of a lexically toneless monosyllabic verb (which however bears a grammatical High): besa'yfilwia'. If the object prefix is depressed, then the following material is in a separate RD from/saV. However, since the object prefix and the lexical H and the grammatical H all fuse into a single domain that extends to the end of the word, there is no effect that the depressor has in the B system. besdgl.tjtya besa£Jb!6ona nisdrithle'enga bes££iz!d.Q.n.da bes4j;itheng!.lisa bes4siga.w!iiula besijusebengte'ela

(eat) (see) (buy) (hate) (sell) (chop) (work for)

4.10. Participial perfect. In this section we examine the tonal behavior of another participial form, the participial perfect. Consider toneless verbs first. Mlwfile Wwisiile Wballiile WvaJMile Wbalisllile be'djnisffile beMunflisltile be'mangalle'ele tekhamandlgeje bdslile bdluWile bdnelislfile

(fight) (drop) (count) (close) (narrate) (dance) (repair) (take to court) (handcuff) (roast) (stretch) (satisfy)

A number of points are immediately clear. As is the general case in participial verb forms, the subject prefix sponsors a grammatical High tone. There is a also grammatical High tone in the verb stem. This grammatical High tone yields a Falling tone on the penult in most cases - thus we can guess (on the basis of verbal forms already discussed) that it is located on the second 219

stem mora and that the verb stem is not subject to Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD).Examples like Wlwiile and btfsfile show that (a) the grammatical H must be on the first mora of the stem and (b) fusion does not take place between the subject prefix H and the verb stem H (if fusion did occur, the subject prefix would not surface with a High tone). The example tewtstile is somewhat surprising: the grammatical H tone must be located on the first mora of the stem even though generally grammatical H tones link to the second stem mora when a stem has three moras in the input (cf. be'balilile). Recall our earlier discussion of the behavior of/wisa/ type stems in the negative Infinitive and /ka/-negative where we suggested that perhaps the source of the exceptional behavior may reside diachronically in a lengthened vowel: /wiisa/. This historical explanation would extend to an example like Wwtsiile- The remaining data in (187) are not problematic: the subject prefix H and the grammatical H yield two nonadjacent HD's and thus we hear High tone only on the heads of the two domains. If the subject prefix is depressed, then its High will "shift" if possible. (188) ndjlwlile ndjwlsiile rjdjbaifile [M], ndjbitllfile [K]

ndtxaiitiie ndjbiltstile [M], ndjbidislfile [K] ndtdunisllile

ndiiiiriaisiiile ndjkhdhlfSWele [M], ndikh6hlak!e'e1e [K] ndimangajle'ele ndlkmtmand!<SeJe

(fight) (drop) (count) (close) (narrate) (dance) (repair) (be cruel) (take to court) (handcuff)

The results of this shift are the usual ones. In M, the shift will set up the possibility for the nonheads in the verb domain to be protected, and there will be no downstep between the shifted H and the following H. In K, the shift does not lead to a single RD and thus there is no protection and downstep does occur. Turning to High-toned verb stems in the participial perfect: (189) betyiile bememiile beboniile befumaniile befinyezljle besim^ele besuoduatile bebonisisiile bephakamisiile beqaqarnbjslile niblile bonwabisiile

(eat) (invite) (see) (get) (shorten) (hide) (push) (see clearly) (lift up) (make ache) (steal) (make happy) 220

A number of points are clear from (189). The grammatical H on the subject prefix fuses with the verb stem HD. While there is no direct evidence that there is a grammatical H tone in these examples, they are consistent with the assumption that there is one (in trisyllabic or longer cases) and that it fuses with the lexical H of the stem. Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is not enforced, thus the HD extends through the word (yielding a Falling tone in IP-final position). Since fusion affects all the H-sponsors in (189), there will be a single HD in the output and only the head will realize H tone. Since there is fusion in the case of High verb stems, there is no difference in the tone pattern when the subject prefix is depressed: rjdjtylile, fldjbonisfile, etc. Let's look at an object prefix in the participial perfect. Toneless verb stems are given in (190). (190) beYilwfile Wyilimltile Wylyaltiile blylwisttile Wyigiwlvlule blyicacisliile be"yishukumis!iile

(fight) (cultivate) (close) (drop) (scrape) (explain) (shake)

These data show that the subject prefix H and the object prefix High do not fuse into a single domain. The object prefix is generally not in a position where it could fuse with the verb stem. In the one case where it is (e.g. bdyllwtile) one cannot tell whether fusion has occurred or not since the same surface form would result in either case (due to the effects of Plateau). It is worth remarking that in the example Wylwisllile we have an example where /wisa/ behaves exactly like ordinary bisyllabk stems such as /lima/. This contrasts with the data without an OP, where /wisa/ behaved as though the grammatical High has docked onto its initial vowel. Consider the case where the object prefix is depressed. (191) be-gjlwtfile Wzjllimlile [M], Wzjl!im!iile [K] WztfyaWile Wzjwllsiile [M], b£zjw!fs!ii1e [K] Wz!J[fluzl\ju.le Wzjclacisiile [M], b6zjc!acis!iile [K] WzjshliikiSmisiile [M], b6zjsh!ukumis!iile [K]

(fight) (cultivate) (close) (drop) (scrape) (explain) (shake)

These data show again the lack of fusion between the subject prefix and the object prefix. The H will try to shift from the depressed subject if it can. blzjc^cfsfite represents a case where shift can occur, b6j!Jgu^\J\jle represents a case where shift cannot occur. There are the usual differences between K and M connected to this shift. This is shown by the contrast between Mzjshiiikdmtslile [M] and btfzjshMkumisliile [K]. These differences require no discussion. When the subject prefix is depressed, the B system will extend its HD so that it overlaps with the object prefix's HD. A H tone will be heard on the head of these overlapped HD's:

221

(192) ndjyllimlfile n,djw£cacis!iile ndjw&wisliile ndjwfilwlile

(cultivate) (explain) (drop) (fight)

If the subject prefix and the object prefix are both depressed, the subject prefix H cannot shift. (193) ndtailwliile [M] ndjallfmtile [M], ndjjalltm!file [K] ndJjjfiyaHfilerM] ndJawllsiile [M], rjdJawllsKile [M] ndjajcla'cfsiile [M], ndjgjcdcisltile [K] ndjashhlktimfslile [M], ndJzjshliSkumislfile [K]

(fight) (cultivate) (close) (drop) (explain) (shake)

While the subject prefix H does not shift in (193), the object prefix H will, as long as the verb stem does not start with a depressed syllable. (194) shows an object prefix with a High verb stem in the participial perfect: (194) Wyityfile Wylbdntile btyfbonfslile Wyifumdnfile MylphAkimtslile WyldJIlile be'w6theng!.[ile MwithengUstile Mwa'djbelle'ele

(eat) (see) (show) (get) (lift up) (eat) (buy) (sell) (bury underground)

Once again we see that there is no fusion of the subject prefix High-sponsor and the following object prefix H-sponsor (despite the fact that a subject prefix H does fuse with a following H verb stem). We can assume that the object prefix H-sponsor and the lexical H-sponsor and the grammatical H-sponsor are all fused into a single domain that extends to the end of the word. The subject prefix High will then "protect" the non-heads in that fused domain - thus we will get examples like be'yipha'kdmlsfile with a whole series of High-toned syllables. If the verb stem has an initial depressor, then the non-heads in the verb cannot be protected, but the object prefix will be affected by Plateau due to HD-mora Incorporation (prefix). Thus we will get the object prefix High, as in be'wa'djbel.'e'ele. If there is a depressed syllable internal to the verb stem, none of the syllables in the stem will be protected (because of Cohesion), though the object prefix will be (since HD-mora Incorporation (prefix) dominates Cohesion): Wwdtheng!,ljle. If the object prefix is depressed, the subject prefix will be in a separate RD from what follows. No protection can occur. (195) Mzityliile Wzibonllile

(eat) (see) 222

bdzjbonislfile blzifumaniiile bdzjphakamislile M%ither|gI.Ule be'zjtheng.js.'iile

(show) (get) (lift up) (buy) (sell)

If the subject prefix is depressed, then its High will shift onto the following syllable (if possible). This shifted High will induce protection of following non-heads as long as there is no depressed syllable to cause bifurcation of the RD structure. (196) shift and protection: shift and no protection: no shift:

(idiyibdnfile ndiylbdnis'iile ndiyithengis.'iile ndiy1dtbel!(5ele ndfajbonlfile ndkibonisliile

(see) (show) (sell) (bury) (see) (show)

The perfect participial has a "short" form used in medial position: Wlimle'e... (cultivate), be"cacis!e>... (explain), befumande... (get), beseberjggltfe•• (work for), etc. These forms do not, however, provide anything new and we forego discussion. 4.11. Imperative The imperative form of the verb is another affirmative tense that exhibits a grammatical High tone. The imperative form consists of the verb stem, ending in the final vowel /a/. Roots that are CV obligatorily prefix the syllable /yi/. Vowel-initial roots prefix /y/, though some speakers may omit this /y/. Obviously, this /y/ can be viewed as basically /yi/ with vowel-coalescence affecting it and a following vowel As usual, we begin our examination with the toneless verb class. Trisyllabic and longer stems exhibit a High tone on the penult syllable in the surface form. This penultimate H tone is level and not Falling. (197) daniisa

gusMla xol£6la lunflUsa caciisa caciseela qononondifsa

(dance) (scrape) (forgive) (repair) (explain) (explain to) (emphasize)

Since these verbs are lexically toneless, it is immediately clear that there is a grammatical H tone in the imperative. As usual, this High tone surfaces towards the right end of the word - and, as usual, there is evidence that the location of this grammatical H must be the second stem mora. Since there is a level High on the penult, and not a Falling tone, we can deduce that Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is operative in this tense. Avoid Prominence must not be relevant — indeed it is not relevant in any tense where there is a stem grammatical High. 223

Bisyllabic stems surface with a final High tone: (198) loold boorjga" hlaabi yaali

(sharpen) (thank) (pierce) (close)

We see here that die Imperative contrasts with the finite negative forms in that the grammatical High is located on the second stem mora even when that mora is word-finaL (Recall that /CVCV/ stems in the negative infinitive also exhibit a final High.) The bisyllabic stems derived from "monosyllabic" roots are exceptional in this respect (just as they are in the negative infinitive) and show a stem-initial High tone. (199) Iwflsa wffsa htilsa Rtlsa

(make fight) (drop) (lower) (bring)

As we suggested earlier, this patterning may reflect a historical stage where these stems were trimoraic. We regard them synchronkally as exceptional, but forego any attempt at a fonnal treatment of the exceptionality (since we have set aside entirely the formal problem of accounting for how grammatical tones are located on the appropriate mora by the morphology). Monosyllabic stems are assigned an element /yi. in the imperative. The grammatical High associates to the verb stem — yiilwi The interpretation of this is not immediately clear. It could be that the /yi/ is counting as part of the stem, and the grammatical tone is showing the same pattern as in (198). But it is also possible that the /yi/ is not counted as part of the stem, and in that case the grammatical High is located on the only mora available in the stem. We will see below that the High verb stems support the second interpretation. (200) yiilwi yiiwd yiiya' yiij«( yiiroW

(fight) (fall) (goto) (come) (dig)

Vowel-initial verb stems of the shape /VCV/ surface with a final High tone: yoosi (toast) and yeerijtf (do). These surface forms would follow from either aligning the Prosodk Stem with a syllable or with the Morphological Stem. Trisyllabic V-initial words do not seem to be ever treated as bisyllabic (ie. show alignment of the Prosodic Stem with a syllable rather than the Morphological Stem). Thus we find yoliiuia (stretch) and yOQggggg (add) but not 'yoluula* or *yonge£{$ (Interestingly, this parallels the behavior of these stems in the negative infinitive.) Turning to High stems in the imperative, we see little superficial difference between them and toneless verb stems. The only point of difference is the bisyllabic stem case.

224

(201) fumtfna zjme^la bonisilsa shumayle'ga. camagtftjsha

daodaidiika fundfikWIa

dlUsa b(5<5na biliija yiityfi

(get) (hide) (see clearly) (proclaim) (propitiate the ancestors) (call aloud) (make noise) (feed) (see) (ask) (eat)

We continue to adopt the view that in this, as in other cases where there is a grammatical High tone. High verb stems have both a lexical and a grammatical High tone. The lexical High tone is located on the first stem mora. The grammatical H is located on the second stem mora (at least in the case of trisyllabic or longer verb stems). These two H-sponsors fuse into a single HD that extends through the penult syllable. Only the head of this HD surfaces with a H tone: camagtfijsha The surface form yiitya" shows clearly that the /yi/ is not part of the stem - specifically, it does not bear the lexical High tone. Aya/ is the only available syllable for both the lexical and the grammatical H tone. In the bisyllabic stem cases - e.g. siliita -- the lexical H is on the first stem mora. If we assume that in the bisyllabic case the grammatical H is located on the first mora (and is thus indistinguishable from the lexical H), then the observed pronunciation follows automatically. If, however, we assume that the grammatical H is on the second stem mora -/syja/ - then we would need to appeal to the fact that No Adjacent Sponsors will disallow two adjacent domains and Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) will disallow a fused domain; consequently, the optimal output will be one where the final mora is not incorporated into a HD. Let us now look at the case where an object prefix is introduced into the imperative. There are some surprising aspects to such constructions. We begin with longer toneless stems. yjca"c!iise [K], yjcdcfise [M] (explain) yjhldmleele [K], yjhldme'ele [M] (add) yjbalfise [M] (narrate) ba.caclse'ele [M] (explain to) yjhla'm.buHuule (rinse) (scrape) ylBUZltfule Myumle'ele (agree with) (repair) y.iidng!.lise bakhohiakalfiele [M] (be cruel to) bachtilcumtise [M] (touch) biigubunglfjele (cover them) baq6nonond!.iise (emphasize to) bakh4man<j!<$ele (handcuff) bapha^amtlise (disturb)

225

The first point to make is that the stem now has a Falling tone — in contrast to the forms without an object prefix, where the stem has a level High on the penultimate. We assume thai the difference is simply whether Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is operative or not. When there is no object prefix, it is operative; when there is an object prefix, it is not. The second point to make about the data in (202) is much more surprising. The object prefix behaves as though it is depressed. Specifically, the High tone of the object shifts onto the following mora if possible. We are clearly dealing with the DIHTS phenomenon. Let us call this "imposed" depression. The phenomenon is one found elswewhere in Nguni. There is some discussion of the phenomenon in Rycroft (1980b), and unpublished work by Cassimjee and Kisseberth on Siswati has verified Rycroft's observations. In the data in (202), we find the expected difference between K and M that results from the DIHTS phenomenon. When the High shifts In M, it creates adjacent HD's that are grouped into a single RD (if no depressed syllable is present). This leads to Plateau-effects and no downstep. In K, these adjacent HD's are not grouped into a single RD (due to the ranking of RD-Fahhfulness above NARDE) and thus there are no Plateau-effects and there is downstep. yjcdclise illustrates the case in M, while yjcAcMise illustrates the corresponding form in K. Of course, the difference between the two dialects disappears when a depressed syllable forces separate RD's, as in ba.q<5nonondltise. Incidentally, the facts in M show that we were correct in assuming that the grammatical High is located on the second mora of the imperative (even though it surfaces on the penult). It is only if die grammatical H is located on the second stem mora that there will be adjacent HD's in an example like baclidkdmlise [M]. Thus it is only this assumption that permits us to explain why the syllable /ku/ is High in bnchUkdmiise [M]. Let us now look at Disyllabic toneless verbs. (203) y.\\6o\\6,z\l6oV.6 v/flhlaable" Xixdubte*

yhwma't yjyaalle-

(sharpen) (stab) (mix)

(mix) (close)

Again, we see the DIHTS phenomenon being triggered by the object prefix. But in this case, if the shift occurs, it is onto a long vowel and the result is a Falling tone (as discussed in detail in Chapter Two). When the bisyllabic verb is of the /wisa/ type, the HD of the object prefix and the HD of the verb stem are fused into a single HD. (204) yjwiise yjhlf ise

(drop) (lower it)

We should note that in the one form we have of this type that starts with a depressed syllable, we actually recorded two forms: yjfctise (bring it) and yjjyjse. The first form suggests that it might be possible to fuse the object prefix H and the verb stem H due to the OCP. The second pronunciation, yJgUjse, is one where there is no fusion and the shifting of a High away from a depressed syllable is blocked by a following depressed syllable. Monosyllabic stems are illustrated in (205):

226

(205) y.ijlwe' yeenzl yQQse

(fight) (do) (roast)

The striking aspect of these data is that it is clear that the object prefix is not toneless due to its High having shifted away by the DIHTS phenomenon. Highs do not "shift" onto word-final vowels. Thus the object prefix must be toneless via fusion. But if the entire word consists of a single domain, we would actually expect an IP-final output with a Falling tone on the long (penult) syllable. It is of some interest that there are speakers who indeed have just this expected pronunciation: y.lilwe and yfonjo- It' s n o t c I c a r w n y forms like those in (203) should exist, but there is no doubt that they are marginal relative to the entire system. Turning to H verb stems with an object prefix, we see that there is "fusion" of the object prefix and the lexical H of the verb and of the grammatical High tone. The object prefix surfaces toneless not due to the DIHTS, but due to the fact that it is in a non-head position. (206) yjsdule badtlise babduse. yjbdone yjmtise baYtfuse yiitye" yjfumfiane yjameltise yjboniise yjbonisfise

(wipe) (feed) (ask) (see) (stop) (wake up) (eat) (get) (hide s.t.) (show) (see clearly)

(some speakers would use y.tjtye)

A few comments about the phrase-medial pronunciation of the imperative is in order. Verbs with a final H tone in the imperative do not realize that H tone in medial position (recall the discussion in Chapter Three of the short present tense form). For example, loots' 'sharpen' but lola kikuuhlie* 'sharpen well!'; ye.en.zg 'do!' but yfinzc we"e"dwa 'do it alone!' Verbs with a penultimate Falling tone also surface toneless in medial position: shukumtisa 'shake!' but shukumisa kdkuuhf 6 'shake well!'; yibonislise 'show it!' but yjbonisise aoddntu 'show it to people!' The Falling tone in phrase-final position represents the case where a HD stretches to the end of the word. Special principles associated with phrase-final position yield the Falling tone in that environment. (See the discussion earlier in this chapter, which was admittedly very tentative.) But in medial position, we expect only a High on the final voweL However, the evidence from lola kikuuhlie' is that final Highs are not realized. Thus we also expect the final mora of the verb stem domain to not be realized with a High in examples like shukumisa kikuuhKt When there is an object prefix, the final H of the verb stem will not be realized, but the H contributed by the object prefix will appear (shifted to the right due to DIHTS):

227

(207) yjldle k!tfkuuhl!6 yjMlise k!«cuuhl!< Xlguzule kt£kuuhl!e> yJYaoge kfa'kuuhlle' yjxdbe kldkuuhlte' bacmlkumise k!4kuuhl!6 bggubungeje kitfkuuhlle' ba.q6nonondjse k!dkuuhl!6

'sharpen it welll' 'narrate it welll' 'scrape it welll' 'mix it welll' 'mix it well!' 'touch it well!' 'cover them well!' 'emphasize them welll'

4.12. Plural imperative There is a plural form of the imperative which involves adding an enclitic element /ni/ at the end of the verbal form. (208) shows toneless verb stems in the plural imperative. (208) yiw&ni wisddni balMni yaWfai balisdtfni df|nis£dni gwnjIMni shukumisAdni

'(pi) fall!' '(pL) drop!' '(pL) count!' '(pL) closer '(pi.) narrate!' '(pi) dance!' '(pL) scrape!' '(pL) shake!'

Clearly, the same grammatical H tone is present and Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) is enforced. There are no complexities that require discussion. High verb stems are also unproblematic - highs fuse into a single domain that does not include the final syllable. A High tone is heard only on the head of the fused domain. (209) yityMni bomtitni fumdini seben^Sni phakamis&ni bonisisiini shumayeja'flni camagush&ni (ja.ndaluka'iini fundekelfia'ni

'(pL) eat!' '(pi.) seel' '(pL)getl' '(pi.) work!' '(pL)liftup!' '(pL) see clearly!' '(pi) preach!' '(pL) propitiate the elders!' '(pL) call aloud!' '(pi) make noise!'

The object prefix in the plural imperative has imposed depressed, just like in the singular imperative. As a consequence, the "shifted" High on the first stem syllable will (in M but not K) protect the non-heads in the following domain and there will be no downstep between the shifted H and the verb stem H. A depressor consonant in the stem will, of course, force two RD's and thus prevent protection and result in downstep. Some examples with toneless verb stems. 228

(210) wabAKe'ni [M] wawls«ni [M] y.jba*ifs&ni [M] washtiktim1s66ni [M] wanAmithglisleni [M] bffyu.mel!e'6ni bath6nfljs!dfini bfiqdnonondjsitfni

(count) (drop) (narrate) (shake) (cement) (permit) (sell) (emphasize)

High verb stems with an object prefix in the plural (211) wa,tyWni wgbon66ni wa.fuman£gni yjbonis&ni

(eat) (see) (get) (show) (chop) (work for) (lift up)

y.igawuletoi wasebenjele'e'ni wa.phakamisge'ni

There is simply fusion between the object prefix H-sponsor and the lexical H-sponsor in the verb stem and the grammatical H-sponsor in the verb stem No discussion is needed. 4.13. Remote past tense. In this section we shall examine another affirmative verb tense which involves a grammatical High tone. We refer to this tense as the "remote past". The remote past involves the placement of the element /aV between the subject prefix and the verb stem. (This element is fully long when in the penult syllable. In pre-penult positions, this element has, ideally speaking, some length. In actual speech the length may be difficult to perceive. This element also has a Falling tone. As we will see, there is an environment where this Falling tone may disappear.) As usual, toneless verbs serve as our initial object of investigation. Monosyllabic verb stems have a H on their only syllable. The tense marker /£/ is fully long in this case due to the usual penultimate lengthening. (212) n4alw!i y6an!a* biatshld

ndiembifi rjdflangla: n<5os!a"

(fight) (rain) (declare) (dig) (kiss) (roast)

BisyUabic toneless stems show a tone p (213) bSlooIia* bSbaalld

(sharpen) (count) 229

Myaalli bAgnulltf

(close) (be sick)

The interesting exception to this pattern is of course the derived bisyllablic verbs like /wisa/ and vowel-initial trisyllabic verb stems, which show a penult Falling tone: (214)

ndftwtfisa bShl'.lisa sllwltisa ndl.'tfula adflllihika bdthtriusa

(drop) (lower) (cause to fight) (stretch) (plait) (frighten)

Trisyllabic and longer verbs have a penult Falling ti (215)

nftbalflisa bflhlomteela

ndftiungiiisa wfiguzltfula bfidantlisa b&shukumllisa nddflibiste'ela bSchulcumllisa bfldungudl&la bAcomtmlldula nftnelltisa nfUatnanliisa b&qononondl.tjsa nflnamathelHisa bfldubadubteeka bSkhohlakalleela bfiflg.jbezejle'ela

(narrate) (add) (repair) (scrape) (dance) (shake) (ride) (touch) (wander about) (become untied) (satisfy) (connect with) (emphasize) (cement) (be troubled in spirit) (be cruel for) (finish for)

It is clear from these data that there is a grammatical High tone in the stem and that it patterns in the same way as the negative infinitive discussed earlier in this chapter. When there is a single stem syllable, the H is located on the only vowel available. A bisyllabic stem generally shows the grammatical H on the final syllable (the /wisa/-type is exceptional). Otherwise, the grammatical H is on the second stem mora. Nonfinality (polysyllabic HD) does not operate in this tense, hence the HD extends through the final mora of the word. No discussion is necessary. Let us look now at High verb stems in the remote past. Trisyllabic or longer stems show a Falling tone on the penult:

230

(216) MbulMala bfisebltenga. b&fum liana bflgajle'ela bfitheogf.tisa ndnwabiiisa n9hlukan!iisa bflphulaphltiula bficamag!tfusha bfidandalWiika bSdjbel!6ela bfibonakalliisa bSpharobukelldana bfishiyiseltaana

(kill) (work) (get) (pour) (sell) (make happy) (disunite) (listen) (propitiate the ancestors) (call aloud) (bury underground) (make visible) (visit one another while passing) (compete in running)

These data suggest that the lexical H and the grammatical H (assuming that there is one present) are fused into a single HD that extends to the end of the word, yielding a penult Falling tone in IP-final position. A blsyllabic High verb stem surfaces with a Falling tone on the penult in the remote past: (217) b&b!6eka b£ml£ema bSbliiuza. bfiyHfaka

(place) (invite) (ask) (wake up)

Monosyllabic verbs surface with a High on (218) naatyla Mafia s«adj!* ndaakhlii b£eb!4 Monti

ndfcyi* ndaakhla

(eat) (die) (eat) (draw water) (steal) (spoil s.o.) (hear) (build)

Trisyllabic vowel-initial verbs could be interpreted as aligning the Prosodic Stem either with the Morphological Stem or the syllable: the same pronunciation would be predicted: (219) bSl!a"atha bdlliiusa ndfiyliisa b6nwa!4aba

(point at) (herd) (defeat) (be happy)

231

The patterns observed above are not distinct from the partem of any lexically High verb stem in a tense with a grammatical High docked on the second stem mora. No discussion is required. Let us now look at the inclusion of an object prefix in the remote past of a toneless verb stem In the speech of M the Falling tone of the tense marker is simplified to High in front of a non-depressed High-toned object prefix. The result is that the initial syllable and the object prefix are in the same RD and not separated by downstep. (220) nawtfalwa ndwdbaalta' wtfylyaalld nfiwd wiisa nlwtfballtisa bdMlimle'ela

(fight) (count) (close) (drop) (narrate) (cultivate for) (scrape) wa>1fll«!
Note that the object prefix's HD and the grammatical H tone's HD are generally non-adjacent and thus in two different RD's: Wbdcacis-'Sela. However, in niwdalwa the Falling tone on the penult indicates that the object prefix and the monosyllabic verb stem are fused into a single HD. In the case of ndwtfwlisa, the object prefix H-sponsor and the H-sponsor located on the initial mora of /wiisa/ also fuse into a single HD that stretches to the end of the word. The initial syllable of the word has a H tone which will predict the non head in the following HD, When the object prefix is depressed, the remote past tense marker retains its Falling tone: (221) bfizil!6ol!d wlz!.(y.aa1!a' bizihlidmigela [K] wfind.iMmle'ela [K] wfizlJgiK.'iJuJa wfisichlJkumiiisa [K] bSzjclacfseela [M]

(sharpen) (close) (add) (cultivate for) (scrape) (touch) (explain to)

Notice that the H of the object prefix "shifts" onto the following vowel if it can. The consequences of this shift are of course different for M than for K. Turning to High verb stems with an object prefix, we find that again the Fall is eliminated from the /a7 and, more interestingly, the HI that results is then able to protect non-heads in the 232

fused domain that consists of the object prefix and the verb stem ~ cf. niwa'nylnyithe'kti: below. niwdatya n&wtfmfema wdyibdona MwaTiimiana n£wa*bdn1isa brfwAthengllisa ba'wigajle'ela nAwdbdnislisa n6w4nytnyith6kiisa ba'bSsebenjjle'ela

(eat) (invite) (see) (get) (show) (sell) (pour) (see clearly) (make slippery) (work for them)

These data simply confirm that the object prefix H and the lexical H of the verb stem and the grammatical High are all fused into a single domain. The Falling tone however seems to be retained before depressed object prefixes. In any case, the presence of a depressed object means that the verb domain and the preceding /&/ will be in different RD's. As a consequence, there can be no Plateau-effects. (223) wfijjbMona b£zifum!£ana bSsjsebeniflfola bfigjphakamllisa

(see) (get) (work for) (lift up)

4.14. Conclusion. The tonal facts of Isixhosa are intricate, to say the least. We have abundantly exemplified these facts, both in connection with tenses having lexical tones (in Chapters Two and Three) and in connection with tenses having grammatical tones (in the present chapter). A theory of tone in general and Bantu tone in particular (such Optimal Domains Theory, as sketched in Chapter One) must, if it is to have any value, provide some understanding of intricate systems such as Isixhosa. We have demonstrated that much of the Isixhosa system is reducible, in Optimal Domains Theory, to the interaction of a small set of well-motivated universal constraints. The behavior of the depressor consonants in Isixhosa yields by far the most perplexing surface patterns and offers the greatest challenge to the OT paradigm of parallel evaluation of output candidates. The "last word" has doubtless not been said with respect to the tonology of depression. We believe that we have clearly identified the problem that Depressor-Induced High Tone Shift poses for OT, and we have developed one solution to the problem involving two constraint systems and a limited degree of "serialism" in the evaluation of output candidates. We have also attempted to relate the effects of depressors on the tonal pattem to the formation of Register Domains, and to explicate the striking differences in the effect that the Plateau constraint has in the two dialects analyzed here to a difference in constraint ranking in the B system. This analysis relies critically, however, on the distinction between two constraint systems and further motivates the limited serialism that has been invoked. Much more work is required on the universal constraints governing what we have here referred to as Register Domains. The proposals we have made here are largely prompted by the Isixhosa data. However, 233

the facts of Isixhosa, being so complex, offer a good test case for any ultimate proposal about what those constraints must be. In our view, Optimal Domains Theory has provided a basis for uncovering the universal principles that anderlie a very complex surface pattern. The major source of unpredictability in the system revolves around whether or not the OCP (=No Adjacent Sponsors) forces adjacent Hsponsors to fuse into a single HD. Once it is determined whether fusion occurs or not, almost everything else follows automatically from the location of the H-sponsors in a word. The major areas of (sometimes idiosyncratic) variability are monosyllabic verb stems and vowel-initial verb stems (if they are bisyllabic or trisyllabic). Polysyllabic consonant-initial verb stems are always very regular, except for /wisa/-stems and some stems whose behavior reflects a diachronic bimoraic vowel (e.g. the contrast between n,djyabontlsa arK ' fldiyaMIiisa in K). This book provides a very full account of Isixhosa verbal tonology and thus represents a useful test case for Optimal Domains Theory. We believe that ODT has passed the test. But in any case, we hope that this study will stimulate further research into Bantu tone in general and Ngoni tone in particular - research that is based on identifying the universal constraints that determine language-specific patterns of tonal alternation.

234

References Benua, L. 1995. Identity effects in morphological truncation. In: J. Beckman, S. Urbanczyk, and L. Walsh, eds., University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory. Amherst: Graduate Linguistic Association. Cassimjee, F. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1998. Optimal Domains Theory and Bantu lonology: A case study from Isixhosa and Shingazklja. In: L. Hyman and C. Kisseberth, eds., Theoretical aspects of Bantu tone. Stanford: CSLI. Cheng, C.-C. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1979. Ikorovere (Makua) tonology (part 1), Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 9:1, 31-63. Cheng, C.-C. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1980. Ikorovere (Makua) tonology (part 1), Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 9:1, 31-63. Cheng, C.-C. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1981. Ikorovere (Makua) tonology (part 3), Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 11.1. 1981. Clark, M. 1988. An accentual analysis of the Zulu noun. In: H. van der Hulst and N. Smith, eds., Autosegmental studies on pitch accent, pp. 51-80. Dordrecht: Foris. Claughton, J.S. 1983. The tones ofXhosa inflections. (Communication No. 13.) Grahamstown: Department of African Languages, Rhodes University. Cole, J. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1995a. An Optimal Domains theory of vowel harmony. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Mid America, pp. 101-114. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois. Cole, J. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1995b. Nasal harmony in Optimal Domains Theory. In Proceedings of the Western Conference on Linguistics, voL 7:44-58. California State University Department of Linguistics, Fresno. Cole, J. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1995c. Paradoxical strength conditions in harmony systems. In J. Beckman (ed.), Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Conference of the North-Eastern Linguistic Society, pp. 17-31. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Cole, J. and C.W. Kisseberth. 1997. Restricting multi-level constraint evaluation: opaque rule interaction in Yawelmani vowel harmony. In K. Suzuki and D. Elzinga (eds.). Proceedings of the Arizona Phonology Conference, pp. 18-38. Davey, A.S. 1973. The mood and tenses of the verb in Xhosa. M.A. dissertation. Pretoria: University of South Africa. Downing, L. 1990. Problems in Jita tonology. Ph.D. dissertation. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois. Downing, L. 1995. On the prosodic misalignment of onsetless syllables. Ms., University of Pennsylvania. Jokweni, M.W. 1995. Aspects of Isixhosa phrasal phonology. Ph.D. dissertation. UrbanaChampaign: University of Illinois. Kanerva, J. 1990. Focus and phrasing in Chiche^a phonology. New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc. Kaun, A. 1995. The typology of rounding harmony: an Optimality Theoretic approach. Ph.D. dissertation. Los Angeles: UCLA. Kenstowicz, M. 1996. Base-identity and uniform exponence: alternatives to cyclicity. In J. Durand & B. Laks (ed.), Current trends in phonology: models and methods. Salford, Manchester: European Studies Research Institute, pp. 363-393.

235

Khumak), J.S.M. 1981. Zulu tonology. M.A. dissertation. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand. [Reprinted as Zulu tonology, Part 1. African Studies (1981) 40.53-130 and Zulu tonology, Part 2. African Studies (1982) 41.3-125.] Khumak), J.S.M. 1987. An autosegmental account of Zulu phonology. Ph.D. dissertation. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand, Kisseberth, C.W. 1992. Metrical structure in Zigula tonology. In D. Gowlett (ed.), African linguistic contributions, pp. 227-259. Via Afrika: Pretoria. Kisseberth, CW. 1994. On domains. In J. Cole & C.W. Kisseberth (eds.). Perspectives in phonology, pp. 133-166. Kraska, 1.1995. The phonology cf stress in Polish. Ph.D. dissertation. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois. Lanham, L.W. 1958. The tonemes of Xhosa. African Studies 17.65-81. Lanham, L.W. 1960. The comparative phonology ofNguni. Ph.D. dissertation. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand. Lanham, L.W. 1963. The tonemes of Xhosa: a restatement. Studies in Linguistics 17.35-58. Louw, J.A. 1968. The intonation of the sentence and its constituent parts in Xhosa and Tsonga. Pretoria: University of South Africa. Louw, J.A. 1969. The tone sequences of the potential form in Zulu and Xhosa. In: Ethnological and linguistic studies in honour ofNJ. van Warmelo: essays contributed on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday, 28 January 1969, pp. 123-32. (Ethnological publication no. 52.) Pretoria: Department of Bantu Administration and Development Louw, J.A. 1971. The tonal paradigm of the verb in Xhosa. In: Veronica Six et at., eds., Afrikanische Sprachen undKulturen - Ein Querschnitt, pp. 102-113. Hamburg: Deutsche: Institut fUr Afrika-Forschung. McCarthy, J. and A. Prince. 1993a. Prosodic morphology I: constraint interaction and satisfaction. TR-3. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science. McCarthy, J. and A. Prince. 1993b. Generalized alignment. In: G.E. Booij and J. van Marie, eds., Yearbook of Morphology 1993,79-153. Dordrecht: Kluwer. McCarthy, J. and A. Prince. 1995. Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In: J. Beckman, S. Urbanczyk, and L. Walsh, eds.. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, 249-384. Amherst: Graduate Linguistic Association. Mmusi, S. 1992. Obligatory Contour Principle effects and violations: the case ofSetswana verbal tone. Ph.D. dissertation. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois. PahL H.W. 1977. The distribution and functional roles of certain significant tones and tonal sequences in Xhosa. I. The falling tone. Limi 5.18-35. PahL, H.W. 1978. The distribution and functional roles of certain significant tones and tonal sequences in Xhosa. II. The terminal HH tone sequence, the LH sequence and the reversal of tones. Limi 6.53-65. Prince, A. and P. Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms., Rutgers University and University of Colorado, Boulder. Rycroft, D. 1963. Tone in Zulu nouns. African Language Studies 4.43-68. Rycroft, D. 1980a. Nguni tonal typology and common Bantu. African Language Studies 17.3376. Rycroft, D. 1980b. The 'depression' feature in Nguni languages and its interaction with tone. (Communication No. 8.) Grahamstown: Department of African Languages, Rhodes University. Rycroft, David. 1983. Tone patterns in Zimbabwean Ndebele. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 46.77 -135. 236

Westphal, E.O.J. 1951. The tones of verb stems in Xhosa. African Studies 10.107-112. Westphal, E.O.J., M. Notshweleka and S.M. Tindleni. 1967. Tonal profiles of Xhosa nominals and verbo-nomlnals. (Communications Gram the School of African Studies. New series No. 32.) Cape Town: University of Cape Town.

237