Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/227262
Title:
Floating H (and L*) Tones in Ancient Greek
Author:
Golston, Chris
Editors:
Myers, James; Pérez, Patricia E.
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Publisher:
Department of Linguistics, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ)
Issue Date:
1990
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/227262
Abstract:
This paper looks at two recent approaches to accentuation in Ancient Greek, Steriade 1988 and Sauzet 1989. Both Steriade and Sauzet include treatments of enclitic accentuation in Ancient Greek which I will argue need to be revised. Steriade offers a metrical analysis that is consistent with most of the data but theoretically suspect. Sauzet 1989 offers a mixed metrical/autosegmental account that is theoretically more appealing but-fails to account for established generalizations about enclitic accentuation. I will adopt the general framework of Sauzet, which seems to be more in line with normal (non -enclitic) accentuation in Ancient Greek, but revise his analysis of enclitic accent. The result, I hope, will be a more insightful approach to enclitic accent than either Steriade's or Sauzet's. An added bonus of the present analysis is that it uses the same footing procedures that Allen (1973 ) has motivated independently for Ancient Greek primary and secondary stress- -this is true of neither Sauzet's nor Steriade's analyses.
Type:
Article
Language:
en_US
Keywords:
Grammar, comparative and general -- Phonology
Series/Report no.:
Arizona Phonology Conference Vol. 3; Phonology in the Old Pueblo; Coyote Papers

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorGolston, Chrisen_US
dc.contributor.editorMyers, Jamesen_US
dc.contributor.editorPérez, Patricia E.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-01T18:53:15Z-
dc.date.available2012-06-01T18:53:15Z-
dc.date.issued1990-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/227262-
dc.description.abstractThis paper looks at two recent approaches to accentuation in Ancient Greek, Steriade 1988 and Sauzet 1989. Both Steriade and Sauzet include treatments of enclitic accentuation in Ancient Greek which I will argue need to be revised. Steriade offers a metrical analysis that is consistent with most of the data but theoretically suspect. Sauzet 1989 offers a mixed metrical/autosegmental account that is theoretically more appealing but-fails to account for established generalizations about enclitic accentuation. I will adopt the general framework of Sauzet, which seems to be more in line with normal (non -enclitic) accentuation in Ancient Greek, but revise his analysis of enclitic accent. The result, I hope, will be a more insightful approach to enclitic accent than either Steriade's or Sauzet's. An added bonus of the present analysis is that it uses the same footing procedures that Allen (1973 ) has motivated independently for Ancient Greek primary and secondary stress- -this is true of neither Sauzet's nor Steriade's analyses.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherDepartment of Linguistics, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ)en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesArizona Phonology Conference Vol. 3en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPhonology in the Old Puebloen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCoyote Papersen_US
dc.subjectGrammar, comparative and general -- Phonologyen_US
dc.titleFloating H (and L*) Tones in Ancient Greeken_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of California, Los Angelesen_US
dc.identifier.oclc26728293-
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.