Article published in:
Romance Linguistics 2012: Selected papers from the 42nd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Cedar City, Utah, 20-22 April 2012
Edited by Jason Smith and Tabea Ihsane
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 7] 2015
► pp. 119–132

Harmonic serialism and syncope and stress shift in Latin

This paper discusses two Latin stress shift cases that are problematic for a metrically-conditioned syncope analysis using Harmonic Serialism. The first case receives a straightforward account by replacing the constraints Max-Pr (no stress removal) and Dep-Pr (no stress assignment) by the constraints Max-Ft (no foot removal) and Dep-Ft (no foot assignment). Inscriptive and textual evidence shows that the second case, hitherto dated as Pre-Classical Latin, occurs in Classical and Late Latin as well. Syncope and shift in this case cannot be analyzed as metrically-conditioned and will be analyzed as stress doublets, thereby rendering, like opaque syncope, stress opaque already in Classical Latin.
Published online: 28 August 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.7.08jac
References
Allen, W. Sidney
1973 Accent and Rhythm. Prosodic Features of Latin and Greek: A Study in Theory and Reconstruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bullock, Barbara
2001 “Double prosody and stress shift in Proto-Romance”. Probus 13.173–192. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Corssen, Wilhelm
1870 Uber Aussprache, Vokalismus und Betonung der lateinischen Sprache. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, Eduard
1928 Iktus und Akzent im lateinischen Sprechvers. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Haike
2002 “Why preantepenultimate stress in Latin requires an OT-account”. Development in Prosodic Systems ed. by Paula Fikkert & Haike Jacobs, 395–418. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2006 “Proto-Romance stress shift revisited”. New Perspectives on Romance Linguistics ed. by Jean-Pierre Montreuil, 141–154. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “Sympathy, comparative markedness, OT-CC and Latin syncope”. Probus 20:2.235–255. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keil, Heinrich
1857–1880 Grammatici latini. Vol. 1–7. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Lindsay, Wallace
1894 [1963] The Latin language. New York/London: Hafner.Google Scholar
1922 Early Latin Verse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John
2007 Hidden Generalizations. Phonological Opacity in OT. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
2008 “The serial interaction of stress and syncope”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26. 499–546 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sen, Ranjan
2010 “Synchrony, Diachrony and Early Latin Feet”. Paper presented at the LAGB Meeting, Leeds.
Thierfelder, Andreas
1928 ‘Iktierungen des Typus facilius’ in Eduard Fraenkel (1928).