Cover not available
Part of
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
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.7.08jac
References (14)
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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Sympathy, comparative markedness, OT-CC and Latin syncope”. Probus 20:2.235–255. DOI logoGoogle 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 DOI logoGoogle 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).