the university of chicago the phonology and ... - SIL International

(3) Underlying forms of sample V1CV1 nouns in Mono
/ / ‘tooth’
/@ @ @/ @ ‘horn’
/CK( CK( CK(/ CK( ‘water’
/>A >A >A/ >A ‘liver’
/H H H/ H ‘thing’
/C C C/ C ‘hunger’
/= = =/ = ‘mouth’
/ / ‘sun’
A process of subminimal root augmentation (SRA) then inserts a vowel at the
beginning of the word. If the root vowel is [+low], then = is inserted. If the root vowel is
[–low], then the inserted vowel is . The rest of the forms in (2) can be derived by the
assimilation of the qualities of the root vowel to the inserted vowel, a process which I
refer to as leftward vowel spreading. In terms of distinctive features, the inserted vowel in
the second column of (2) acquires its value of the feature [high] from the root vowel.
Then, the inserted vowels in the third column acquire their values of the features [round]
and [back] from the root vowel (in addition to the feature [high]). Interestingly, there is
an implicational relationship here. The features [round] and [back] only assimilate if the
feature [high] has assimilated. As a result the forms *A A A A
‘tooth’ and *(CK( (CK( (CK( (CK( ‘water’ are
not attested. Thus, the forms in (2) can be derived from those in (3) via SRA and leftward
vowel spreading. This analysis accounts for the large number of V1CV1 nouns in Mono,
as well as the distributional gap in our inventory of nominal word shapes in (1).
A question which arises is whether subminimal root augmentation should be
thought of as simple vowel epenthesis or as reduplication. Most of the features of the
inserted vowel can be attributed to the optional process of leftward vowel spreading.
However, the agreement of the feature [low] in the inserted vowel with the root is
obligatory. In addition, this agreement ignores an intervening secondary articulation (e.g.
=M= =M= =M= =M= ‘work’), but as we will see in Chapter 7, secondary articulations normally do
participate in leftward vowel spreading. As a result, I suggest that the inserted vowel
80