Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T04:57:13.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Compound stress in a Norwegian variety of Esperanto

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

Jardar Eggesbø Abrahamsen
Jardar Eggesbø Abrahamsen*
Affiliation:
Department of Language and Literature, NTNU, 7491 Trondheim, Norway. [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

In Norway, there are between 10 and 15 bilingual or multilingual native speakers of Norwegian and Esperanto. This paper discusses some prosodic traits in the Esperanto spoken by one of them. The focus will be on compound stress. The speaker assigns primary stress to the penultimate syllable of words as in Standard Esperanto, including most compounds. Some of the Esperanto compounds, however, display first element primary stress, as in the Norwegian adstrate. In the current dataset, this is especially so for underived nouns. It is proposed that the Norwegian-like pattern is found in compound nouns that are formed spontaneously, while the Standard Esperanto pattern is found in lexicalised compounds, understood as prosodically simplex. For derived compounds in word classes other than nouns, the overall stress pattern is more like that of Standard Esperanto.

Keywords

compoundsnative EsperantoNorwegianOptimality Theoryphonologyprosody
Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 38 , Special Issue 2: Prosody in the Nordic Languages , October 2015 , pp. 245 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Nordic Association of Linguistics 2015 

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Benua, Laura. 1995. Identity effects in morphological truncation. In Beckman, Jill, Dickey, Laura Walsh & Urbanczyk, Suzanne (eds.), Papers in Optimality Theory (University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 18), 77–136. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association.Google Scholar
Benua, Laura. 1997. Transderivational Identity: Phonological Relations between Words. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [ROA# 259, http://roa.rutgers.edu, accessed 1 December 2014.]Google Scholar
Bergen, Benjamin K. 2001. Nativization processes in L1 Esperanto. Journal of Child Language 28 (3), 575–595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanke, Detlev 1985. Internationale Plansprachen. Eine Einführung. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2014. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [computer program], Version 5.4. http://www.praat.org/, retrieved 31 October 2014.Google Scholar
Christiansen, Hallfrid. [1976]. Norske dialekter. [Oslo]: Tanum-Norli.Google Scholar
Corsetti, Renato. 1996. A mother tongue spoken mainly by fathers. Language Problems & Language Planning 20 (3), 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corsetti, Renato. 2003. Reguligo de regula lingvo [Regularising a regular language]. La Brita Esperantisto 954, 23–27.Google Scholar
de Jonge, Daan Dirk & Spronck, Stef. 2005. Prosodische en lexicale markering van ja/neevragen in het Esperanto [Prosodic and lexical marking of yes/no questions in Esperanto]. BA paper (fieldwork report), University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
de Lacy, Paul. 2002. The interaction of tone and stress in Optimality Theory. Phonology 19, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dols Salas, Nicolau. 2009. Perspektivoj en fonologia kaj fonetika esplorado de Esperanto [Perspectives in phonological and phonetic research on Esperanto]. In Vergara, José Antonio (ed.), IKU 62. Internacia Kongresa Universitato. 62a sesio. Bjalistoko, Pollando 25 julio – 1 aŭgusto 2009 [IKU 62. International Congress University. 62nd session. Białystok, Poland, 25 July – 1 August 2009], 24–47. Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar
Dols Salas, Nicolau. 2014. Ĉu Esperanto malsamas? Malrigideco aŭ moderneco [Is Esperanto different? Flexibility or modernity]. Ms., University of Illes Balears.Google Scholar
Drachman, Gabriel & Malikouti-Drachman, Angeliki. 1999. Greek word accent. In van der Hulst (ed.), 897–945.Google Scholar
Falk, Hjalmar & Torp, Alf. 1991. Etymologisk ordbog over det danske og det norske sprog (Facsimile of the 1903–1906 edition). Oslo: Bjørn Ringstrøms antikvariat.Google Scholar
Fiedler, Sabine. 2012. The Esperanto denaskulo. Language Problems & Language Planning 36 (1), 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frid, Johan. 2001. Swedish word stress in Optimality Theory. Working Papers 48, 25–40. [Lund: Lund University, Department of Linguistics]Google Scholar
Giegerich, Heinz J. 1985. Metrical Phonology and Phonological Structure: German and English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gledhill, Christopher. 1998. The Grammar of Esperanto: A Corpus-based Description. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Golden, Bernard. 1991. Pli da sciigoj pri la familio Kövary/Kovary [More information about the Kövary/Kovary family]. Cirkulaĵo por esperantlingvaj paroj kaj familioj 13 (July 1991), 11.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko & Mester, Armin. 2012. Recursive prosodic phrasing in Japanese. In Borowsky, Toni, Kawahara, Shigeto, Shinya, Takihito & Sugahara, Mariko (eds.), Prosody Matters: Essays in Honor of Elisabeth Selkirk, 280–303. Sheffield & Bristol: Equinox.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko & Mester, Armin. 2013. Prosodic subcategories in Japanese. Lingua 123, 20–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kager, René. 1999. Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristoffersen, Gjert. 2000. The Phonology of Norwegian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1989. Grammatikalisierung und Lexikalisierung. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 1/1989, 11–19.Google Scholar
Lorentz, Ove. 1996. Length and correspondence in Scandinavian. Nordlyd 24, 111–128.Google Scholar
Myrberg, Sara & Riad, Tomas. 2013. The prosodic word in Swedish. In Asu, Eva Liina & Lippus, Pärtel (eds.), Nordic Prosody: Proceedings of the XIth Conference, Tartu 2012, 255–264. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Nichols, Eric, Morris, Dan, Basu, Sumit & Raphael, Christopher. 2009. Relationships between lyrics and melody in popular music. In Hirata, Keiji, Tzanetakis, George & Yoshii, Kazuyoshi (eds.), ISMIR 2009: Proceedings of the 10th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference, 471–476. International Society for Music Information Retrieval.Google Scholar
Øyehaug, Olbjørn. 1972. Ein studie i delar av lydverket hos eldre og yngre i Ørsta. Litt om korleis og kvifor det har vorte brigda. Cand.philol. thesis, University of Bergen.Google Scholar
Philippe, Benoît. 1991. Sprachwandel bei einer Plansprache am Beispiel des Esperanto. Konstanz: Hartung-Gorre Verlag.Google Scholar
Piron, Claude. 1989. A few notes on the evolution of Esperanto. In Schubert (ed.), 129–142.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul. 1993/2002. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Rutgers University & University of Colorado at Boulder. [Available as ROA# 537, last accessed at http://roa.rutgers.edu, 5 September 2011.]Google Scholar
Riad, Tomas. 2014. The Phonology of Swedish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rice, Curt. 2006. Norwegian stress and quantity: The implications of loanwords. Lingua 116, 1171–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, Klaus. 1989a. An unplanned development in planned languages: A study of word grammar. In Schubert (ed.), 249–274.Google Scholar
Schubert, Klaus (ed.). 1989b. Interlinguistics: Aspects of the Science of Planned Language. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skjekkeland, Martin. 2005. Dialektar i Noreg. Tradisjon og fornying. Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget.Google Scholar
Smith, Jennifer L. 2001. Lexical category and phonological contrast. In Kirchner, Robert, Pater, Joe & Wikely, Wolf (eds.), PETL 6: Proceedings of the Workshop on the Lexicon in Phonetics and Phonology, 61–72. Edmonton: University of Alberta. [ROA# 728, http://roa.rutgers.edu, accessed 1 December 2014.]Google Scholar
Stötzer, Ursula. 1975. Die Betonung zusammengesetzter Wörter, unter besonderer Berücksichtingung der Komposita mit fremden Konstituenten. Ph.D. dissertation, Humboldt-Universität, Berlin.Google Scholar
Traunmüller, Hartmut. 1997. La fonetiko de la lingvo Esperanto [The phonetics of the language Esperanto]. In Koutny, Ilona & Kovács, Márta (eds.), Struktura kaj socilingvistika esploro de Esperanto [Structural and sociolinguistic research on Esperanto], 27–42. Budapest: Steleto & Internacia Ligo de Esperantistaj Instruistoj.Google Scholar
van der Hulst, Harry (ed.). 1999. Word Prosodic Systems in the Languages of Europe. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
van Oostendorp, Marc. 1999. Syllable structure in Esperanto as an instantiation of universal phonology. Esperantologio/Esperantic Studies 1/1999, 52–80.Google Scholar
Vinje, Finn-Erik. 1989. Rent ut sagt. Råd og vink om taletydelighet, intonasjon, tempo, pausering, ordvalg og setningsbygning. Oslo: NKS-Forlaget.Google Scholar
Wells, John C. 1989. Lingvistikaj aspektoj de Esperanto [Linguistic aspects of Esperanto]. Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar
Wennergren, Bertilo. 2005. Plena Manlibro de Esperanta Gramatiko [Complete manual of Esperanto grammar]. El Cerrito, CA: Esperanto-Ligo por Norda Ameriko.Google Scholar
Wood, Richard. 1987. The development of standard phonology in Esperanto. In Goninaz, Michel Duc (ed.), Studoj pri la internacia lingvo. Etudes sur la langue internationale. Studies on International Language, 58–78. Gent: Association internationale pour le développement de la communication interculturelle (AIMAV).Google Scholar
Zamenhof, L. L. 1987. Fundamento de Esperanto [Foundation of Esperanto] (Facsimile of undated edition). Warsaw: Pola Esperanto-Asocio, Eldon-Kleriga Centro.Google Scholar
Zonneveld, Wim, Trommelen, Mieke, Jessen, Michael, Rice, Curtis, Bruce, Gösta & Árnason, Kristjan. 1999. Wordstress in West-Germanic and North-Germanic languages. In van der Hulst (ed.), 477–603.Google Scholar