Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-cbk24 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T14:37:05.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Phonetically Driven Account of Syllable Weight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Matthew Gordon
Matthew Gordon*
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
*
Department of Linguistics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 [mgordon@linguistics.ucsb.edu]
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The author proposes that syllable weight is driven by considerations of phonetic effectiveness and phonological simplicity, and that the phonetically best distinctions are those which divide syllables into groups that are phonetically most distinct from each other. Phonologically complex distinctions are those which exceed an upper threshold in the number of phonological predicates to which they refer. It is claimed that languages adopt weight distinctions that are phonetically most effective without being overly complex phonologically. Syllable weight thus reflects a compromise between phonetic and phonological factors. The proposed model of weight further suggests that phonological weight distinctions are ultimately predictable from other basic phonological properties, such as syllable structure.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 78 , Issue 1 , March 2002, pp. 51 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abaev, Vasilii Ivanovich. 1964. A grammatical sketch of Ossetic. Bloomington: Indiana University Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics.Google Scholar
Adisasmito-Smith, Niken, and Cohn, Abigail C. 1996. Phonetic correlates of primary and secondary stress in Indonesian: A preliminary study. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 11.1–16.Google Scholar
Allen, W. Sidney. 1973. Accent and rhythm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana, and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1994. Grounded phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baitschura, Uzbek. 1976. Instrumental phonetische Beiträge zur Untersuchung der Sprachmelodie und des Wortakzentes im Tscheremissischen. Etudes Finno-Ougriennes XIII. 109–22.Google Scholar
Barker, Muhammad Abd-al-Rahman. 1964. Klamath grammar. University of California Publications in Linguistics 32. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Winifred. 1993. Maori. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Beckman, Mary. 1986. Stress and non-stress accent. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 1993. A tonal analysis of Lithuanian nominal accent. Language 69.237–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1947. Kwakiutl grammar with a glossary of the suffixes, ed. by Yampolsky, Helene Boas and Harris, Zelig. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 37: 3.201–377.Google Scholar
Bondarko, L. V., Verbitskaya, L. P.; and Tscherbakova, L. P. 1973. Ob opredelenii mesta udareniya v slove. Izvestiya AN SSSR, Seriya OLYA 2.Google Scholar
Bosson, James E. 1964. Modern Mongolian. Uralic and Altaic Series 38. Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Broselow, Ellen, Chen, Susan; and Huffman, Marie. 1997. Syllable weight: Convergence of phonology and phonetics. Phonology 14.47–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Charles P. 1981. A grammar of the Telugu language. New Delhi: Asian Educational Services.Google Scholar
Cardona, George. 1965. A Gujarati reference grammar. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, George N., and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1983. CV phonology: A generative theory of the syllable. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Davies, H. J. 1980. Kobon phonology. Pacific Linguistics Series B, No. 68. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Davis, Stuart. 1988. Syllable onsets as factors in stress rules. Phonology 5.1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Lacy, Paul. 1997. Prosodic categorization. Ms. [Available on Rutgers Optimality Archive, ROA-236, http://roa.rutger.edu]Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1981. Wargamay. Handbook of Australian languages, vol. 2, ed. by Dixon, R. and Blake, B., 1–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everett, Daniel. 1988. On metrical constituent structure in Pirahã. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6.207–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everett, Daniel, and Everett, Keren. 1984. Syllable onsets and stress placement in Pirahä. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 3.105–16.Google Scholar
Flemming, Edward. 1995. Auditory features in phonology. Los Angeles: UCLA dissertation.Google Scholar
Foley, William A. 1991. The Yimas language of New Guinea. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Fry, D. B. 1955. Duration and intensity as physical correlates of linguistic stress. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 27.765–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gahl, Susanne. 1996. Syllable onsets as a factor in stress rules: The case of Mathimathi revisited. Phonology 13.329–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzales, A. 1970. Acoustic correlates of accent, rhythm, and intonation in Tagalog. Phonetica 22.11–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, Matthew. 1999a. Syllable weight: Phonetics, phonology, and typology. Los Angeles: UCLA dissertation.Google Scholar
Gordon, Matthew. 1999b. The intonational structure of Chickasaw. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences ed. by John Ohala, Yoko Hasegawa, Manjari Ohala, Daniel Granville, and Ashlee C. Bailey, 1993–96.Google Scholar
Hanson, Kristin, and Kiparsky, Paul. 1996. A parametric theory of poetic meter. Language 72.287–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1988. Metrics and phonological theory. Linguistics: The Cambridge survey, vol. 2, Linguistic theory: Extensions and implications, ed. by Newmeyer, F., 220–49. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1989. Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 20.253–306.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical stress theory: Principles and case studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1999. Phonetically-driven phonology: The role of optimality theory and inductive grounding. Proceedings of the 1996 Milwaukee Conference on Formalism and Functionalism in Linguistics, vol. 1, ed. by Darnell, M., Moravcsik, E., Noonan, M., Newmeyer, F., and Wheatley, K., 243–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Herrfurth, Hans. 1964. Lehrbuch des modernen Djawanisch. Leipzig: VEB Verlag.Google Scholar
Horne, Elinor Clark. 1974. Javanese-English dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hubbard, Kathleen. 1994. Duration in moraic theory. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley dissertation.Google Scholar
Hubbard, Kathleen. 1995. ‘Prenasalized consonants’ and syllable timing: Evidence from Runyambo and Luganda. Phonology 12.235–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1977. On the nature of linguistic stress. Studies in stress and accent, ed. by Hyman, Larry. Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 4.37–82.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1985. A theory of phonological weight. Publications in Language Sciences 19. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1992. Moraic mismatches in Bantu. Phonology 9.255–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itkonen, Erkki. 1955. Über die Betonungsverhältnisse in den finnisch-ugrischen Sprachen. Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 5.21–34.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1931. Die Betonung und ihre Rolle in der Word- und Syntagma-Phonologic Roman Jakobson, selected writings 1.117–36. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jassem, W., Morton, J.; and Steffen-Batóg, M. 1968. The perception of stress in synthetic speech-like stimuli by Polish listeners. Speech Analysis and Synthesis 1.289–308.Google Scholar
Jensen, John. 1977. Yapese reference grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Kager, René. 1990. Dutch schwa in moraic phonology. Chicago Linguistics Society 26, Parasession on the syllable in phonetics and phonology, 241–56.Google Scholar
Kelkar, Ashok R. 1968. Studies in Hindi-Urdu 1: Introduction and word phonology. Poona: Deccan College.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1972. Lithuanian phonology. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 2.1–85.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1997. Quality-sensitive stress. Rivista di Linguistic 9, 157–88. [Available on Rutgers Optimality Archive, ROA-33, http://roa.rutgers.edu]Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1994. Phonology in generative grammar. Blackwell: Oxford.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1968. Metrics and morphonemics in the Kalevala. Studies presented to Roman Jakobson by his students, ed. by Gribble, CE., 137–48. Cambridge, MA: Slavica Publishers.Google Scholar
Kodzasov, S., and Muravyova, I. 1978. Stress in the Alutor language. Estonian Papers in Phonetics, 47–48.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju, and Gwynn, J. P. L. 1985. A grammar of modern Telugu. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krueger, John Richard. 1961. Chuvash manual. Uralic and Altaic series 7. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Lehiste, Ilse. 1970. Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lehtonen, Jaakko. 1970. Aspects of quantity in standard Finnish. Jyväskylä: K.J. Gummerus Osakeyhtiön Kirjapaino.Google Scholar
Leskinen, Heikki, and Lehtonen, Jaakko. 1985. Zur wortphonologische Quantität in den Südostdialekten des Finnischen. Studia Fennica 28.49–83.Google Scholar
Levin, Juliette. 1985. A metrical theory of syllabicity. Cambridge, MA.: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Levinsohn, Stephen H. 1976. The Inga language. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liljencrants, JoHAN, and Lindblom, Björn. 1972. Numerical simulation of vowel quality systems: The role of perceptual contrast. Language 48.839–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindblom, Björn. 1986. Phonetic universals in vowel systems. Experimental phonology, ed. by Ohala, J. and Jaeger, J., 13–44. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lytkin, V. I. 1961. Komi-Yaz'vinckii Dialekt. Moscow: Akademii Nauk.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 1993. Splitting the mora. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 83.9–18.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1979. Formal problems in Semitic phonology and morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Moore, Brian. 1989. An introduction to the psychology of hearing. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Munro, Pamela, and Willmond, Catherine. 1994. Chickasaw: An analytical dictionary. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Niang, Mamadou. 1995. Syllable ‘sonority’ hierarchy and Pulaar stress: A metrical approach. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 20.53–68.Google Scholar
Ohala, Manjari. 1977. Stress in Hindi. Studies in stress and accent, ed. by Hyman, Larry, 327–38. (Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 4.) Los Angeles: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Payne, J. 1990. Asheninca stress patterns. Amazonian linguistics, ed. by Payne, Doris, 185–212. Austin: University of Texas Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrunicheva, Z. N. 1960. Iazyk Telugu. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo Vostochnoi Literaturi.Google Scholar
Poppe, Nicholas. 1951. Khalka-Mongolische Grammatik, mit Bibliographie, Sprachproben und Glossar. Wiesbaden: F. Steiner.Google Scholar
Poppe, Nicholas. 1970. Mongolian language handbook. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Prentice, D. J. 1990. Malay (Indonesian and Malaysian). The world's major languages, ed. by Comrie, Bernard, 913–35. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
Reed, Irene, Miyaoka, Osahito, Jacobson, Steven, Afcan, Paschal, and Krauss, Michael. 1977. Yupik Eskimo grammar. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center.Google Scholar
Rigault, André. 1962. Rôle de la fréquence, de l'intensité et de la durée vocaliques dans la perception de l'accent en francais. Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Helsinki, 735–48.Google Scholar
Sadeniemi, Matti. 1949. Metriikkamme perusteet. Helsinki: SKST.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward, and Swadesh, Morris. 1960. Yana dictionary. University of California Publications in Linguistics 22. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shackle, C. 1976. The Siraiki language of central Pakistan: A reference grammar. London: University of London.Google Scholar
Sitapati, G. V. 1936. Accent in Telugu speech and verse. Indian Linguistics 6.201–11.Google Scholar
Sluijter, A. M. C., and van Heuven, V. J. 1996. Spectral balance as an acoustic correlate of linguistic stress. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 100.2471–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1991. Moras and other slots. Proceedings of the Formal Linguistics Society of Midamerica 1.254–80.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1999. Licensing laryngeal features. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, Papers in Phonology 3.25–146.Google Scholar
Stonham, John. 1990. Current issues in morphological theory. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. S. 1939/1958. Grundzüge der Phonologic Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Vance, Timothy. 1987. An introduction to Japanese phonology. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Walker, Rachel. 1995. Mongolian stress: Typological implications for nonfinality in unbounded systems. Phonology at Santa Cruz 4.85–102.Google Scholar
Warren, R. M. 1970. Elimination of biases in loudness judgments for pure tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 48.1397–1413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westbury, John, and Keating, Patricia. 1980. Central representation of vowel duration. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 67(1), S37 A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Stephen. 1986. Metrical structure in Wakashan phonology. Berkeley Linguistics Society 12.283–91.Google Scholar
Winstedt, Richard O. 1927. Malay grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wolff, Ekkehard. 1983. A grammar of the Lamang language. Glückstadt: Verlag J.J. Augustin.Google Scholar
Zec, Draga. 1988. Sonority constraints on prosodic structure. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar