Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T20:07:36.837Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Probing phonological structure in play language: Speaking backwards in Zenzontepec Chatino

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Eric W. Campbell
Eric W. Campbell*
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, South Hall 3432, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 USA
*
ecampbell@ucsb.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Play languages (also known as language games or ludlings) represent a special type of language use that is well known to shed useful light on linguistic structure. This paper explores a syllable transposition play language in Zenzontepec Chatino that provides evidence for the segmental inventory, syllable structure, the limits of the phonological word, the prosodic status of inflectional formatives, and the autonomy of tone, all of which aligns with independent phonological evidence in the language. While recent theoretical and cross-linguistic studies have questioned the nature, and even the validity, of constituents such as the phonological word, the syllable, and the onset, this study provides an example of a language with strongly manifested phonological constituents. Following the International Year of Indigenous Languages, the study also highlights the importance of in-depth analysis of less-studied languages for linguistic theory, typology, and language maintenance or reclamation for communities.

Keywords

phonological wordsyllablemorphologyplay languagetone

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Phonological Data and Analysis , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , 2020, pp. 1 - 21
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
Published by the Linguistic Society of America with permission of the authors under a CC BY 3.0 license.
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Eric W. Campbell.

Footnotes

*

Sincere thanks to Tranquilino Cavero Ramírez for the long collaboration and lively conversations that led to this study. The analysis presented here has benefitted from comments and questions from audiences at the 2013 Conference on the Indigenous Languages of Latin America VI in Austin, TX; the 2013 Taller de Morfología y Lexicografía in Oaxaca City; the 2014 Linguistic Society of America Winter Meeting in Minneapolis, MN; and the careful reviews of two anonymous PDA reviewers. Any and all remaining errors are mine and mine alone.

References

Alidou, Ousseina Dioula. 1997. A phonological study of language games in six languages of Niger. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University dissertation.Google Scholar
Antonio Ramos, Pafnuncio. 2015. La fonología y morfologia del zapoteco de San Pedro Mixtepec. Mexico City: Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social dissertation.Google Scholar
Arellanes Arellanes, Francisco. 2009. El sistema fonológico y las propiedades fonéticas del zapoteco de San Pablo Güilá. Descripción y análisis formal. Mexico City: El Colegio de México dissertation.Google Scholar
Avelino Becerra, Heriberto. 2004. Topics in Yalálag Zapotec, with particular reference to its phonetic structures. Los Angeles, CA: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Bagemihl, Bruce. 1989. The crossing constraint and ‘backwards languages’. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 7 (4). 481–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00205156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barlow, Jessica A. 2001. Individual differences in the production of initial consonant sequences in Pig Latin. Lingua 111. 667–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(00)00043-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beam de Azcona, Rosemary. 2004. A Coatlan-Loxicha Zapotec grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Zúñiga, Femando. 2017. The ‘word’ in polysynthetic languages: Phonological and syntactic challenges. In Fortescue, Michael, Mithun, Marianne & Evans, Nicholas (eds.), The Oxford handbook of polysynthesis. 158–185. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 1995. The syllable in phonological theory. In Goldsmith, John A. (ed.), The handbook of phonological theory. 206–244. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1911. Introduction to handbook of American Indian languages, Vol. 1. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 40. 1–83. Washington: Government Print Office.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1913. Notes on the Chatino language of Mexico. American Anthropologist, New Series 15. 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1913.15.l.02a00080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botne, Robert & Davis, Stuart. 2000. Language games, segment imposition, and the syllable. Studies in Language 24 (2). 319–344. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.24.2.04bot.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. 2011. Zenzontepec Chatino aspect morphology and Zapotecan verb classes. International Journal of American Linguistics 77 (2). 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1086/659216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. 2013a. The internal diversification and subgrouping of Chatino. International Journal of American Linguistics 79 (3). 395–420. https://doi.org/10.1086/670924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. 2013b. Documentation of Zenzontepec Chatino language and culture. The Endangered Languages Archive. London: SOAS.Google Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. 2014. Aspects of the phonology and morphology of Zenzontepec Chatino, a Zapotecan language of Oaxaca, Mexico. Austin, TX: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. 2016. Tone and inflection in Zenzontepec Chatino. In Palancar, Enrique L. & Léonard, Jean Léo (eds.), Tone and inflection: New facts under new perspectives. 141–162. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110452754-007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. 2017. Otomanguean historical linguistics: past, present and prospects for the future. Language & Linguistics Compass 11 (4), el2240. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. 2019. Layered complexity in Zenzontepec Chatino verbal inflectional classes. Amerindia 41. 39–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Eric W. To appear. Information structure and the syntax of Zenzontepec Chatino relative clauses. In Palancar, Enrique L., Zavala, Roberto & Chamoreau, Claudine (eds.), Relative clauses in Meso-american languages. (Submitted to Brill's Studies in the Indigenous Languages of the Americas.).Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle, Kaufman, Terrence & Smith Stark, Thomas C.. 1986. Meso-America as a linguistic area. Language 62. 530–570. https://doi.org/10.2307/415477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, George N. & Keyser, Samuel J.. 1983. CV phonology: A generative theory of the syllable. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Conklin, Harold C. 1956. Tagalog speech disguise. Language 32 (1). 136–139. https://doi.org/10.2307/410661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, Harold C. 1959. Linguistic play in its cultural context. Language 35 (4). 631–636. https://doi.org/10.2307/410602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cruz, Emiliana. 2011. Phonology, tone and the functions of tone in San Juan Quiahije Chatino. Austin, TX: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar
Cruz, Emiliana & Woodbury, Anthony C.. 2014. Collaboration in the context of teaching, scholarship, and language revitalization: Experience from the Chatino Language Documentation Project. Language Documentation & Conservation 8. 262–286.Google Scholar
Davis, Stuart. 1993. Language games: The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 1980–1985. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W. & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.. 2002. Word: A typological framework. In Dixon, R.M.W. & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (eds.), Word: S crosslinguistic typology. 1–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CB09780511486241.002.Google Scholar
England, Nora C. 1983. A grammar of Mam, a Mayan language. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, Fletcher, Janet & Ross, Belinda. 2008. Big words, small phrases: Mismatches between pause units and the polysynthetic word in Dalabon. Linguistics 46 (1). 89–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2008.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzgerald, Colleen M. 2017. Motivating the documentation of the verbal arts: Arguments from theory and practice. Language Documentation & Conservation 11. 114–132.Google Scholar
Foreman, John Olen. 2006. The morphosyntax of subjects in Macuiltianguis Zapotec. Los Angeles, CA: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Fudge, E. C. 1969. Syllables. Journal of Linguistics 5 (2). 253–286. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700002267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerfen, Henry James. 1996. Topics in the phonology and phonetics of Coatzospan Mixtec. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona dissertation.Google Scholar
Gil, David. 2002. Ludlings in Malayic languages: An introduction. In Bambang, Kaswanti Purwo (ed.), PELBBA 15: Pertemuan Linguistik Pusat Kajian Bahasa dan Budaya Atma Java. 125–180. Jakarta: Unika Atma Jaya.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John A. 1976. Autosegmental phonology. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.Google Scholar
Hall, T. Allan. 1999. The phonological word: A review. In Hall, T. Allan (ed.), Studies on the phonological word. 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2011. The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica 45(1). 31–80.10.1515/flin.2011.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haudricourt, André-Georges. 1954. De l'origine des tons du vietnamien. Journal asiatique 242. 69–82.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1989. Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 20(2). 253–306.Google Scholar
Henderson, John. 2002. The word in Eastem/Central Arrernte. In Dixon, R.M.W. & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (eds.), Word: A crosslinguistic typology. 100–124. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CB09780511486241.005.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Kristine A. 2015. The prosodic word. In Taylor, John R. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Word. 221–245. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hombert, Jean-Marie. 1973. Speaking backwards in Bakwiri. Studies in African Linguistics 4(3). 227–236.Google Scholar
Hombert, Jean-Marie. 1986. Word games: Some implications for analysis of tone and other phonological constructs. In Ohala, John J. & Jaeger, Jeri J. (eds.), Experimental phonology. 175–186. Orlando: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hombert, Jean-Marie, Ohala, John J. & Ewan, William G.. 1979. Phonetic explanations for the development of tones. Language 55 (1). 37–58. https://doi.org/10.2307/412518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, Joan B. 1972. The syllable in phonological theory. Language 48 (3). 525–549. https://doi.org/10.2307/412031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 1985. A theory of phonological weight. Dordrecht: Foris. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110854794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1988. Otomanguean tense/aspect/mood, voice, and nominalization markers. Unpublished monograph.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 2006. Oto-Mangean languages. In Brown, Keith (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, Vol. 9, 2nd ed. 118–124. Oxford: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/02286-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingston, John. 2011. Tonogenesis. In van Oostendorp, Marc, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth & Rice, Keren (eds.), Blackwell companion to phonology, Vol. 4. 2304–2334. Oxford: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0097.Google Scholar
Laycock, Don. 1972. Towards a typology of ludlings, or play languages. Linguistic Communications 6. 61–113.Google Scholar
Leben, William. 1973. Suprasegmental phonology. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, Natalie J. 1989. Verlan: Talking backwards in French. The French Review 63(2). 312–322.Google Scholar
Lipski, John M. 1995. Spanish hypocoristics: Towards a unified prosodic analysis. Hispanic Linguistics 6/7. 387–434.Google Scholar
Longacre, Robert E. 1957. Proto-Mixte can (Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics 5). Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
López Nicolás, Oscar. 2016. Estudios de la fonología y gramática del zapoteco de Zoochina. Mexico City: Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social dissertation.Google Scholar
Macaulay, Monica. 1996. A grammar of Chalcatongo Mixtec. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Macaulay, Monica & Salmons, Joseph C.. 1995. The phonology of glottalization in Mixtec. International Journal of American Linguistics 61 (1). 38–61. https://doi.org/10.1086/466244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, Justin Daniel. 2015. Aspects of phonology and morphology of Teotepec Eastern Chatino. Austin, TX: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar
Mechling, William H. 1912. The Indian linguistic stocks of Oaxaca, Mexico. American Anthropologist, New Series 14. 643–682. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1912.14.4.02a00080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Vogel, Irene. 1986. Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Odden, David. 1982. Tonal phenomena in Kishambaa. Studies in African Linguistics 13. 177–208.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet & Nair, Rami. Word games and syllable structure. Language & Speech 38(1). 77–114.10.1177/002383099503800104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pike, Kenneth L. 1948. Tone languages: A technique for determining the number and type of pitch contrasts in a language, with studies in tonemic substitution and fusion. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099503800104.Google Scholar
Pride, Kitty. 2004. Gramática chatina de la zona alta. In Kitty Pride & Leslie Pride, Diccionario chatino de la zona alta. 341–426. Mexico City: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Google Scholar
Rensch, Calvin Ross. 1976. Comparative Otomanguean phonology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Schiering, René, Bickel, Balthasar & Hildebrandt, Kristine A.. 2010. The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent. Journal of Linguistics 46. 657–709. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226710000216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherzer, Joel. 1970. Talking backwards in Cuna: The sociological reality of phonological descriptions. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 26 (4). 343–353. https://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.26.4.3629365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith Stark, Thomas C. 1994. Mesoamerican calques. In MacKay, Carolyn J. & Vázquez, Verónica (eds.), Investigaciones lingüísticas en Mesoamérica: Estudios sobre lenguas americanas Vol. 1. 15–50. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Smith Stark, Thomas C. 2002a. Pied-piping with inversion in information questions. Ms, prepared for the Festschrift for Terrence Kaufman.Google Scholar
Smith Stark, Thomas C. 2002b. Las clases verbales del zapoteco de Chichicapan. Proceedings o f the VI Encuentro Internacional de Lingüística en el Noroeste. 165–212. Hermosillo, MX: Editorial UniSon.Google Scholar
Stenzel, Kristine. 2007. Glottalization and other suprasegmental features in Wanano. International Journal of American Linguistics 73 (3). 331–366. https://doi.org/10.1086/521730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevick, Earl W. 1969. Tone in Bantu. International Journal of American Linguistics 35 (4). 330–341. https://doi.org/10.1086/465078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivant, J. Ryan. 2015. The phonology: and inflectional morphology of Chá?knyá, Tataltepec de Valdés Chatino, a Zapotecan language. Austin, TX: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar
Sullivant, J. Ryan. 2016. Reintroducing Teojomulco Chatino. International Journal of American Linguistics 82 (4). 393–423. https://doi.org/10.1086/688318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treiman, Rebecca. 1983. The structure of spoken syllables: Evidence from novel word games. Cognition 15. 49–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90033-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Treiman, Rebecca. 1989. The internal structure of syllables. In Carlson, Greg N. & Tanenhaus, Michael K. (eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing. 27–52. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2729-2_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Upson, B. W. & Longacre, Robert E.. 1965. Proto-Chatino phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 31 (4). 312–322. https://doi.org/10.1086/464861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaux, Bert. 2011. Language games. In Goldsmith, John, Yu, Alan & Riggle, Jason (eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, 2nd edn. 722–750. Oxford: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444343069.ch22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villard, Stéphanie. 2015. The phonology and morphology of Zacatepec Eastern Chatino. Austin, TX: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar