Cover not available
Part of
Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXIX: Papers from the Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 2015
Edited by Hamid Ouali
[Studies in Arabic Linguistics 5] 2017
► pp. 33–54

Chapter 2
Prosodic domains of syllabification in Sudanese Arabic

| University of Toronto
This paper proposes a prosodic account of syncope and of epenthesis and consonant deletion, which function as strategies for repairing unsyllabified segments, in three dialects of Sudanese Arabic. The analysis identifies the precise prosodic domains of syllabification in these dialects and shows how these domains interact with the phenomena discussed. On the one hand, the dialects diverge significantly with respect to the prosodic levels at which unsyllabified segments are repaired; this divergence is shown to follow from the degree of restriction each dialect places on word-level syllabification. On the other hand, the dialects exhibit fairly similar patterns with respect to the phrasal domains of syncope; this similarity is shown to be a reflex of the degree of restriction on the phrasal domains of resyllabification.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Theoretical assumptions
    • 2.2Dialects of Sudanese Arabic
  • 3.Prosodic levels of repair of unsyllabified segments
    • 3.1Syllable types in the three dialects
    • 3.2Repairing unsyllabified consonants in the three dialects
      • 3.2.1Repairing unsyllabified segments in Hamar
      • 3.2.2Repairing unsyllabified segments in Shukriiya
      • 3.2.3Repairing unsyllabified segments in UCSA
    • 3.3Summary and conclusions
  • 4.Prosodic domains of syncope
    • 4.1The interaction between syncope and syllabification
    • 4.2RHS within the ι-Phrase in all three dialects
    • 4.3LHS within the ι-Phrase in Shukriiya and Hamar
    • 4.4LHS within the φ-Phrase in UCSA
    • 4.5Summary and conclusions
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sal.5.03ali
References (42)
References
Abu-Mansour, M. (2011). The phonology-syntax interface: Phrasal syncope in Makkan Arabic. In E. Broselow and H. Ouali (Eds.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXII-XXIII (pp. 35–56). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ali, A. -K. (2014). Syllabification and phrasing in three dialects of Sudanese Arabic. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Arvaniti, A. (2011). The representation of tone. In M. van Oostendorp, C. Ewen, E. Hume, and K. Rice (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology II (pp. 757–780). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Broselow, E. (1992). Parametric variation in Arabic dialect phonology. In E. Broselow, M. Eid, and J. McCarthy (Eds.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics IV (pp. 7–45). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dickins, J. (2007a). Sudanese Arabic: Phonematics and syllable structure. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
(2007b). Khartoum Arabic. In K. Versteegh, M. Eid, A. Elgibali, M. Woidich, and A. Zaboorski (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics II (pp. 559–571). Leidin: Brill.Google Scholar
Dresher, E. (1994). The prosodic basis of the Tiberian Hebrew system of accents. Language, 70, 1–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farwaneh, S. (1995). Directionality effects in Arabic dialect syllable structure. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utah.Google Scholar
(2009). Toward a typology of Arabic dialects: The role of final consonantality. Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies, 9, 82–109.Google Scholar
Ghini, M. (1993). ƒ-formation in Italian: A new proposal. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics. 12, 41–78.Google Scholar
Hale, K. and E. Selkirk. (1987). Government and tonal phrasing in Papago. Phonology Yearbook, 4, 151–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamid, A. M. (1984). A descriptive analysis of Sudanese Colloquial Arabic phonology. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1989). The prosodic hierarchy in meter. In P. Kiparsky and G. Youmans (eds.), Rhythm and meter (pp. 201–260). Orlando: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, B. and A. Lahiri. (1991). Bengali intonational phonology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 9, 47–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellmuth, S. (2007). The relationship between prosodic structure and pitch accent distribution: Evidence from Egyptian Arabic. The Linguistic Review, 24, 291–316 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Variable cues to phrasing: Finding edges in Egyptian Arabic. In T. Borowsky, S. Kawahara, T. Shinya, and M. Sugahara (eds.), Prosody Matters: Essays in Honor of Elizabeth Selkirk (pp. 237–279). Bristol, CT: Equinox Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Kahnemuyipour, A. (2003). Syntactic categories and Persian stress. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 333–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (2003). Syllables and moras in Arabic. In C. Féry and R. van de Vijver (eds.), The Syllable in Optimality Theory (pp. 147–182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(to appear). Paradigm effects and opacity. Stanford, CA: CSLI
Lewis, M., G. Simons, and C. Fennig (eds.) (2013). Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 17th edtion. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Retrieved from [URL]
Mustapha, A. (1982). Phonologie de l’arab soudanais: Phonématique et accentuation. Ph.D. Dissertation, Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. and I. Vogel. (1982). Prosodic domains of external sandhi rules. In H. van der Hulst and N. Smith (eds.), The Structure of Phonological Representations, vol. 1 (pp. 222–255). Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
. (1983). Prosodic structure above the word. In A. Cutler and D. R. Ladd (eds.), Prosody: Models and Measurements (pp. 123–140). Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Qasim, A. (1965). Some aspects of Sudanese Colloquial Arabic. Sudan Notes and Records, 46, 40–49.Google Scholar
(1974). Diraasaat fi l-‘aamiiya. Khartoum: Ad-Dar As-Suudaaniyya lil-Kutub.Google Scholar
(2002). Qaamuus al-lahja al-‘aamiiya fi s-Suudan, (3rd edition). Khartoum: Ad-Dar As-Suudaaniyya lil-Kutub.Google Scholar
Reichmuth, S. (1983). Der arabische Dialekt der S‡ukriyya im Ostsudan. New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Google Scholar
Revithiadou, A. (2011). The phonological word. In M. van Oostendorp, C. J. Ewen, E. Hume, and K. Rice (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology II (pp. 1204–1227). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1980). Prosodic domain in phonology: Sanskrit revisited. In M. Aronoff and M. -L. Kean (eds.), Juncture (pp. 107–129). Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
(1981a). Epenthesis and degenerate syllables in Cairene Arabic. In H. Borer and Y. Aoun (eds.) Theoretical Issues in the Grammar of Semitic Languages. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 3, 209–232. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1981b). On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. In T. Fretheim (ed.), Nordic Prosody II (pp. 111–140). Tondheim: TAPIR.Google Scholar
(1984). Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology, 3, 371–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). The prosodic structure of function words. In J. L. Morgan and K. Demuth (eds.), Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition (pp. 187–213). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2000). The interaction of constraints on prosodic phrasing. In M. Horne (ed.) Prosody: Theory and experiment (pp. 231–262). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). On clause and intonational phrase in Japanese: The syntactic grounding of prosodic constituent structure. Gengo Kenkyu: Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan, 136, 35–76.Google Scholar
(2011). The syntax-phonology interface. In J. Goldsmith, J. Riggle, and A. Yu (eds.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory (pp. 435–484). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. and T. Shen. (1990). Prosodic domains in Shanghai Chinese. In S. Inkelas and D. Zec (eds.) The phonology-syntax connection (pp. 313–337). Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, H. (1995). Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus and prominence. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
(1999). On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(2), 219–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watson, J. C. E. (2007). Syllabification patterns in Arabic dialects: long segments and mora sharing. Phonology, 24, 335–356. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Ali, Abdel-Khalig
2019. Post-lexical strata. In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXXI [Studies in Arabic Linguistics, 8], ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.