“Epenthetic vowels” in Nahuatl: Are they really epenthetic?
Mitsuya SASAKI
University of Tokyo, JSPS research fellow
Minpaku Linguistics Circle #4 November 22, 2013
1
Abstract
So-called “supportive” /i/’s in Nahuatl
– Can they be explained phonologically?
(i)CC- stems
– Deletion analysis can be explain the
complicated patterns of “supportive” /i/’s
more neatly than the epenthesis analysis
2
Preliminary remarks
3
Nahuatl: an overview
Southern Uto-Aztecan
1,500,000 speakers mainly in Mexico
Polysynthetic, head-marking
Productive noun incorporation
Simple phoneme inventory
No distinctive tone or stress (in most dialects)
4
“Nahuatl”
Nahuan languages/dialects
Today we will discuss Classical Nahuatl
The presenter is working on Puebla-Tlaxcala dialects, but there are not enough data yet
Nahuan
“General Aztec”
Occidental
Central
Nuclear
Classical Nahuatl
Tetelcingo
Puebla-Tlaxcala
Ixquihuacán
Tenango
Huasteca
Oriental Pipil
Pochutec (†)
5
Phoneme inventory of CN
4 vowels (long and short respectively)
– i e a o i: e: a: o:
15 consonants
– p t k kw ʔ m n s š ts č λ l y w
No distinctive stress or tone
– Stress falls on the second-to-last syllable
6
Phonotactics of CN
Syllable structure: (C)V(C)
– No *CC clusters word-initially or finally
– No *CCC cluster
Hiatus occurs frequently
7
Behavior of saltillo (/ʔ/)
/ʔ/ appears only in coda
– /iʔiyoʔ/ ‘powerful’ → /iʔ.i.yoʔ/
/ʔ/ shortens preceding long vowels
– /siwa:/ + /ʔ/ → /siwaʔ/ ‘women’ (*/siwa:ʔ/)
Written as accent marks on preceding vowels
– cihuâ /siwaʔ/ ‘women’ ; nènemi /neʔnemi/ ‘he walks’
8
“Epenthesis” in Nahuatl
9
Example: absolutive -λ ~ -λi
λe-λ ‘fire’
masa:-λ ‘deer’
šo:či-λ ‘flower’
oʔ-λi ‘road’
λa:n-λi ‘tooth’
te:lpo:č-λi ‘young man’
10
Cases of vowel deletion/epenthesis in CN
Subject person prefixes: /C/~/Ci/
3sg object person prefix: /k/~/ki/
Reflexive person prefixes: /C/~/Co/
Possessive person prefixes: /(V)C/~/(V)Co/
Absolutive-state suffix /λ/~/λi/
Possessive-state suffix /w/~/wi/
11
Cases of vowel deletion/epenthesis in CN
(i)CC- noun/verb stems: /iCC/~/CC/
Agent-nominal deriving suffix /k/~/ki/
Adjective ending /k/~/ki/
Verb-compounding suffix /t/~/ti/
Deletion of stem-final “ephemeral” /a/, /i/
-CC# noun stems: /CCi/~/CC/
… and still more
12
Examples of “i-epenthesis” in Nahuatl
First-person singular subject prefix n(i)-
– /n/ before a V: n- e:wa ‘I depart’
– /ni/ before a C: ni- nemi ‘I live’
Third-person singular object prefix k(i)-
(word-initially)
– /k/ before a V: k- a:na ‘he catches it’
– /ki/ before a C: ki- po:wa ‘he reads it’
13
Examples of “i-epenthesis” in Nahuatl
Combination of 1sgS n(i)- and 3sgO k(i)-:
– ni-k-a:na ‘I catch it’
– ni-k-po:wa ‘I read it’ *nikipo:wa
Combination of 2plS am- and 3sgO k(i)-:
– am-k-a:naʔ (> anka:naʔ) ‘you (pl.) catch it’
– am-ki-po:waʔ (> ankipo:waʔ) ‘you (pl.) read it’
14
Explanation of /i/~Ø
Epenthesis?
Deletion?
Lexical allomorphy?
15
“Epenthesis” analysis
The /i/’s in n(i)-, k(i)-, … might be
analyzed as epenthetic (supportive) vowels
(Andrews 1975, Tuggy 1981)
They break consonant clusters not
allowed in the Classical Nahuatl (C)V(C)
syllable structure: *#CC, *CCC
16
“Textbook case” for epenthesis
Egyptian Arabic: *CCC→CCiC (Itô 1989)
– /ʔultlu/ → /ʔultilu/ ‘I said to him’
– /katabtlu/ → /katabtilu/ ‘I wrote to him’
– /katabt dars/ → /kabtidars/ ‘you wrote a
lesson’
Purely phonological and/or metrical
17
Simple epenthesis analysis
#CC → #CiC
– *n-nemi ‘I live’ → ninemi
– *k-po:wa ‘he reads it’ → kipo:wa
– *n-k-a:na ‘I catch it’ → nika:na
CCC → CCiC
– am-k-po:waʔ ‘you (pl.) read it’ → ankipo:wa
18
Problems with the simple analysis
Past-tense o:= never intaracts with epenthesis
– o:=n-yaʔ ‘I went’ → o:niyaʔ
CCC → CiCC or CCiC?
– *n-k-po:wa ‘I read it’
→ nikpo:wa (CiCC)
– *am-k-po:wa ‘you (pl.) read it’
→ ankipo:wa (CCiC)
19
Syllabification
n k p o: w a
σ σ σ
i
p o: w a
σ σ σ
a m k i
σ
unlicensed
unlicensed
Output: nikpo:wa
Output: ankipo:wa
20
Tuggy’s generalization
Epenthesis occurs only at morpheme
boundaries
Ø → i /
# C_ + C C #
C _ + C # C #
(Tuggy 1981)
21
Explanation according to Tuggy
*n-k-po:wa ‘I read it’ → nikpo:wa
*am-k-po:wa ‘you (pl.) read it’ → ankipo:wa
Ø → i /
# C_ + C C #
C _ + C # C #
22
Problems with (i)CC- stems
23
Characteristic of (i)CC- stems
Most noun/verb stems beginning with
iCC- lose their initial /i/’s in certain
environments: iCC ~ CC
– “su i inicial se embebe” (Carochi 1645)
– “supportive vowel” (Andrews 1975)
24
Examples of (i)CC- stems
(i)ʔtoa: ‘to say’:
– iʔto:-lo ‘it is said’
– λa-ʔtoa ‘he says something’
(i)kši- ‘foot’:
– ikši-λ ‘foot’
– no-kši ‘my foot’
25
Puzzle #1: when does the /i/ appear?
26
Examples: (i)CC- verb
(i)lpia: ‘to tie’ – Ø-ilpi:-lo (3sgS-tie-INACT) ‘he is bound’
– ni-k-ilpia (or ni-ki-lpia?) (1sgS-3sgO-tie) ‘I bind him’
– ni-no-lpia (1sgS-REFL-tie) ‘I bind myself’
– ni-λa-lpia (1sgS-something-tie) ‘I tie something’ (*nitlailpia)
– ni-te:-ilpia (1sgS-someone-tie) ‘I bind someone’ (*nite:tta)
– Ø-te:-toska-ilpia (1sgS-3sgO-throat-tie) ‘it tightens someone’s throat’ (*te:toskalpia)
27
(i)CC- and preceding items
(i)CC- stems have the /i/ word-initially
(i)CC- stems lose the /i/ when preceded by: – Unspecified nonhuman object prefix λa-
– Reflexive prefix ne- etc.
(i)CC- stems have the /i/ when preceded by: – Incorporated nouns
– Unspecified human object prefix te:- etc.
Cf. Tuggy (1981, 1997)
28
Puzzle #1
Some prefixes (λa-, ne-, etc.) trigger
“i-drop” of the following iCC- stem
Other prefixes (te:-) and incorporated nouns
(toska- ‘throat’ etc.) do not trigger “i-drop”
The behavior of reflexive/possessive prefixes
n(o)- etc. will be discussed later
Cf. Tuggy (1981, 1997)
29
Verbal affixation template Type of morpheme Example i-drop
in iCC- Subject person prefix n(i)-, t(i)-, Ø-, etc. Object person prefix ne:č, mits, k(i)-, etc.
Directional prefix on-, wa:l- Reflexive prefix (I) no-, to-, mo-, (ne-) Partly
Unspecified human object prefix te:- ✕
Unspecified nonhuman object prefix
λa- ✓
Reflexive prefix (II) ne- ✓
INCORPORATED NOUN - ✕
STEM - TAM/plural suffix -k (past), etc.
30
Puzzle #2: (i)ʔC- stems and other (i)CC- stems behave differently
31
(i)CC- stems and reflexive/possessive prefixes
(i)ʔC- stems and other (i)CC- stems
behave differently when preceded by
reflexive/possessive pronominal prefixes
– (i)ʔC- stems: /i/ is retained
– other (i)CC- stems: /i/ drops
32
Reflexive / possessive prefixes
Singular Plural First person n(o)- t(o)-
Second person m(o)- m(o)- Third person m(o)- m(o)-
Singular Plural First person n(o)- t(o)-
Second person m(o)- am(o)- Third person i:- i:m-
Reflexive prefixes
Possessive prefixes
33
Reflexive/possessive prefixes with /o/: _C vs. _V
Reflexive prefixes n(o)-, t(o)-, m(o)-
– ni-no-λa:lia (1sgS-REFL-seat) ‘I sit down’
– ni-n-a:ltia (1sgS-REFL-bather) ‘I bathe myself’
Possessive prefixes n(o)-, m(o)-, etc.
– no-kal (1sgP-house) ‘my house’
– n-a:ška: (1sgP-belonging) ‘my belonging(s)’
34
Reflexive/possessive prefixes with /o/ and (i)CC- stems
Reflexive/possessive n(o)-, m(o)-, etc. lose
the /o/ before (non-supportive) vowels
Then, what happens if n(o)-, m(o)-, etc.
are followed by (i)CC- stems?
35
Reflexive/possessive prefixes with /o/ and (i)CC- stems
(i)ʔC- stems: /o/ disappears (usually)
– Ø-m-iʔtoa (3sgS-REFL-say) ‘it is said’
– n-iʔwi-w (1sgP-feather-POSS) ‘my feather’
Other (i)CC- stems: /o/ is retained
– Ø-mo-tta (3sgS-REFL-see) ‘he sees himself’
– no-kši (1sgP-foot) ‘my foot’
36
Third-person singular possessive prefix i:- and (i)CC- stems
(i)ʔC- stems – Probably i:-iʔC- forms were more common
– i:-iʔwi-yo: ‘its feather’ → <ihiviio>, <jhiviio>, <iiviio>, etc. in Florentine Codex
– i:-iʔti-k ‘inside it’ → <iitic>, <jitic>, <yitic>, etc. in Florentine Codex • However, <itic>, <ytic>, etc. are also commonly attested
Other (i)CC- stems – Both i:-CC- and i:-iCC- are attested, the former being more
common in Florentine Codex
– i:-čpoč ‘his daughter’ → <ichpuch>, <ichpoch>, etc.
– i:-kši (3sgP-foot) ‘his foot’ → <icxi>, <jxci>, etc; also <jicxi>, etc.
37
Puzzle #2
(i)ʔC- stems and other (i)CC- stems
behave differently when preceded by some
reflexive/possessive prefixes, although
they behave identically after other prefixes
38
Why?
In CN, /ʔ/ is the only consonant which
affects the preceding vowel
– /ʔ/ appears only in coda (i.e. in rhyme)
– /ʔ/ shortens the preceding vowel
However, after λa-, ne-, etc. /ʔ/ behaves
exactly like other consonants
39
Summary of puzzles #1 and #2
(i)CC- stems lose their /i/’s before: – λa- (unspecified nonhuman object)
– ne- (reflexive)
– etc.
Only (i)ʔC- stems, but not other (i)CC- stems, retain their /i/’s before: – Reflexive/possessive prefixes which end with /o/: no-, mo-, etc.
– (Commonly but not always) 3sgP i:-
No (i)CC- stems lose their /i/’s before: – te:- (unspecified human object)
– Incorporated nouns
40
Puzzle #3: reduplication
41
Reduplication in CN
CV:- reduplication – Pluralization of certain animate nouns
– Continuative of verbs; intensification
CVʔ- reduplication – Distributive of nouns
– Repetitive/distributive of verbs
CV- reduplication – Highly lexical, often appears in onomatopoeic verbs
42
CVʔ- reduplication
čo:ka ‘cry’
→ čoʔ-čo:ka ‘cry repeatedly’
kal-li ‘house’
→ kaʔ-kal-li ‘various houses’
a:wiya ‘be happy’
→ aʔ-a:wiya ‘take pleasure’
“Marked heavy syllable” (Haugen 2003, 2004)
43
Base of reduplication
Inflectional affixes and incorporated items
are not included in the base of
reduplication
– Ø-mo-pa:kka:-weʔ-wetsk-i:tia-ʔ
(3S-REFL-joyful-REDUP-laugh-CAUS-PL)
‘they smile joyfully’
44
Lexicality
Reduplication in CN is a lexical process
Unpredictable meanings:
– wetska ‘laugh’ → weʔ-wetska ‘smile’
– nemi ‘live’ → neʔ-nemi ‘walk’
– no:tsa ‘call’ → noʔ-no:tsa ‘chat with (s.o.)’
– a:wilia: ‘entertain’ → aʔ-a:wilia: ‘caress’
45
(i)CC- stems sometimes behave as /iCC-/
and other times as /CC-/
What happens when (i)CC- stems
undergo reduplication?
46
Reduplication of (i)CC- stems
Generally, the /i/ behaves as part of the
base of reduplication
– n-on-ičteki (1sgS-DIR-steal) ‘I go steal things’
→ n-on-iʔ-ičteki (distributive)
• cf. ni-no-čteki-lia ‘I steal; I become a thief’
47
Reduplication of (i)CC- stems
λa- (and probably ne-) + (i)CC- stem:
(i)ʔtoa ‘say’
→ λa-ʔtoa ‘he says something’
→ λaʔ-λaʔtoa ‘he speaks a lot’
48
Reduplication of (i)CC- stems
(i)CC- stems other than (i)ʔC-:
m(o)- (reflexive) + (i)lpia: ‘tie, bind’
→ molpia ‘he binds himself’
→ moʔolpia (*moʔmolpia, *moʔilpia, *miʔilpia)
49
Summary of (i)CC- Intrinsic V- (i)ʔC- Other (i)CC-
+ tla-, ne- tla-V- tla-CC- tla-CC- + m(o)-, etc. m-V- m-iCC- mo-CC-
+ m(o)-, etc. with CVʔ- reduplication m-Vʔ-V- m-iʔ-iCC- moʔoCC-
+ te:-, etc. te:-V- te:-iCC- te:-iCC-
50
The initial /i/ of (i)CC- sometimes behaves
like a non-epenthetic, intrinsic vowel
“Intrinsic”-like “Epenthetic”-like
It is almost impossible to give a
phonological explanation of initial /i/’s in
(i)CC- stems
51
Puzzle #4: cyclicity
52
Explaining reduplication
What is the base of reduplicaton?
– Usually, reduplication occurs stem-internally
– However, reduplication of such forms as
mo-lpia (> moʔolpia) involves (part of) an
inflectional prefix
53
Paradox of process ordering
Epenthesis/deletion of initial /i/ occurs before noun incorporation – λa:ka- ‘person’ + (i)tta ‘see’
→ λa:kaitta ‘respect’ (*λa:katta)
Allomorphy of m(o)- etc. realizes after incorporation
However, m(o)- etc. constitute the input of reduplication (cf. mo-lpia > moʔolpia)
54
Paradox of process ordering
(i)CC- epenthesis > incorporation
Incorporation > affixation of m(o)- etc.
affixation of m(o)- etc. > (i)CC- epenthesis
55
Paradox of process ordering
Reduplication
Incorporation Inflection
56
“i-drop” analysis: an alternative
The “epenthesis” analysis is intuitively
plausible, but has many formal problems
Most of these problems are limited to the
particular combination of items (e.g. (i)CC-
stems and a few prefixes)
57
i-drop as lexical processes
i-drop occurs in:
1. λa- + (i)CC stem
2. ne- + (i)CC stem
3. Reflexive/possessive prefixes n(o)- etc. +
non-saltillo (i)CC stem
4. The reduplicated forms of 3
58
Lexicality of i-drop after λa-
A few (i)CC- verb/noun stems allow
alternative forms such as:
– (i)ʔmati ‘prepare’ > λaiʔmati ~ λaʔmati
– (i)ʔλakoa: ‘damage’ > λaiʔλakoa: ~ λaʔλakoa:
59
Genuine i-epenthesis?
A few (i)CC- forms “drop” the initial /i/
before an compounded noun or te:-
– (i)kpal- ‘seat’ >
a:ka-kpal- ‘reed mat’; šo-kpal- ‘sole of foot’
Real i-epenthesis?
60
Explaining the form moʔolpia
ilpia: > mo-lpia > moʔolpia
– Reduplication rules are sensitive to the left
border of the stem
– The original VCC- structure is retained after
i-drop (and the prefixation of m(o)-)
• [STEM ilp…] → m[STEM o-lp …] → moʔ-[STEM o-lp …]
– This i-drop does not occur in (i)ʔC- stems
61
Reduplication rules
Reduplication Rule 1 (CV-stem):
[STEM C1V1 → [STEM C1V1 ʔ - C1V1
Reduplication Rule 2 (V-stem):
[STEM V1 → [STEM V1 ʔ - V1
62
Reduplication of moʔolpia
Vowel Incorporation Rule: V1[poss/refl] + [STEM iC1C2 → [STEM V1C1C2
m(o)- + [STEM ilpia] → m-[STEM olpia]
Reduplication Rule 2:
[STEM V1 → [STEM V1 ʔ V1
molpia → moʔolpia 63
V C C V C V
i m o
[STEM V
l p i a
Remaining problem
Why is Vowel Incorporation Rule limited
to reflexive/possessive prefixes
(n(o)-, m(o)-, etc.)?
64
“Reactive” vs. “inert” prefixes
Sbj. Obj. Dir. Refl. te:- λa- Refl. IN Stem TAM Pl.
n(i)- k(i)- on- n(o)- te:- λa- ne- -s -Ø ← “Reactive” → ← “Inert” →
Verbal affixation template of Classical Nahuatl
“Reactive” prefixes: morphosyntactic – Contain φ-features (except for the directional prefixes)
– Irrelevant in derivation (e.g. deverbal noun formation)
“Inert” prefixes: lexical(?) – Relevant in derivation
– Often lexicalized
65
Generalization of Vowel Incorporation Rule
It can be assumed that Vowel
Incorporation Rule applies to all “reactive”
prefixes, since they are the only “reactive”
prefixes which end with a vowel
vs. n-, k-, on-, etc.
(cf. Tuggy’s (1981) epenthesis rule)
66
Reduplication of moʔolpia (revised)
Vowel Incorporation Rule (revised):
V1[reactive] + [STEM iC1C2 → [STEM V1C1C2
m(o)- + [STEM ilpia] → m-[STEM olpia]
Reduplication Rule 2:
[STEM V1 → [STEM V1 ʔ V1
molpia → moʔolpia 67
Remaining problems
How to exclude (i)ʔC- stems from the
Vowel Incorporation Rule?
How to motivate these rules?
More formalization is needed
68
(i)CC- and i-drop analysis
The complicated patterns of the
presence/absence of initial /i/ in (i)CC-
stems can more neatly be explained by
deletion (i-drop) analysis
69
“From itta ‘see’ and with tla ‘something’,
ni-tla-tta ‘I see something’ [is formed],
because the initial i is absorbed into tla”
(Carochi 1645: f. 50r)
70
Perhaps Carochi was correct
o:=an-ne:č-mo-kne:li-liʔ-keʔ PRF=2PLS-1SGO-REFL-do.favor-APPL-PST.PLS
¡Muchísimas gracias!
71
References
Andrews, J Richard. 1975. Introduction to Classical Nahuatl. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Carochi, Horacio. 1645. Arte de la lengua mexicana con la declaración de los advervios della. Mexico: Juan Ruiz.
Haugen, Jason D. 2003. Morphology at the Interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Haugen, Jason D. 2004. Issues in Comparative Uto-Aztecan Syntax. Doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona.
Itô, Junko. 1989. A prosodic theory of epenthesis. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7: 217–259
Tuggy, David. 1981. Epenthesis of i in Classical and Tetelcingo Nahuatl. Texas Linguistic Forum 18:223–255.
Tuggy, David. 1997. Rule-governed allomorphy can be suppletive also. Workpapers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics 41.
72
