Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T08:26:46.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diminutives and augmentatives in Mexican Spanish: a prosodic analysis*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Megan J. Crowhurst
Megan J. Crowhurst
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper argues for a prosodic constraint on the formation of diminutive and augmentative forms in Mexican Spanish. Specifically, the stem preceding diminutive (dim) and augmentative (aug) suffixes in this dialect must comprise an absolute minimum of two syllables. When a stem melody cannot satisfy the two-syllable minimum, an epenthetic vowel (V) [e] surfaces at the right edge of the stem (e.g. panesito ‘little bread’ ← pan). In the analysis proposed here, a disyllabic template f[σ σ] is mapped to stems from left to right as part of dim/aug-formation. Whether or not a consonant (C)/s/ surfaces before the suffix will be analysed as a consequence of syllabification in some cases (e.g. koronita/koronota← korona ‘crown’ vs.

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , August 1992 , pp. 221 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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

Abaglo, P. & Archangeli, D. (1989). Language-particular underspecification: Gengbe /e/ and Yoruba /i/. LI 20. 456–480.Google Scholar
Archangeli, D. (1984). Underspecification in Yawelmani phonology and morphology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Archangeli, D. (1988). Aspects of underspecification theory. Phonology 5. 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, D. (1991). Syllabification and prosodic templates in Yawelmani. NLLT 9. 231–283.Google Scholar
Archangeli, D. & Pulleyblank, D. (forthcoming). Grounded phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Contreras, H. (1977). Spanish epenthesis and stress. University of Washington Working Papers in Linguistics 3. 9–33.Google Scholar
Crowhurst, M. J. (1991). Minimality and foot structure in metrical phonology and prosodic morphology. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Harris, J. W. (1977). Remarks on diphthongization in Spanish. Lingua 41. 261–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J. W. (1980). Nonconcatenative morphology and Spanish plurals. Journal of Linguistic Research 1. 15–31.Google Scholar
Harris, J. W. (1983). Syllable structure and stress in Spanish. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, J. W. (1991). The exponence of gender in Spanish. LI 22. 27–62.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1989). Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology. LI 20. 253–306.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. (1985). A theory of phonological weight. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itô, J. (1986). Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Itô, J. (1989). A prosodic theory of epenthesis. NLLT 7. 217–259.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O. (1980). Spanish diminutives. In Nuessel, F. H. Jr., (ed.) Contemporary studies in Romance languages. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club. 142–158.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). Lexical morphology and phonology. In Yang, I.-S. (ed.) Linguistics in the morning calm. Seoul: Hanshin. 3–91.Google Scholar
Lemus, J. (ms). A lexical approach to epenthesis. University of Arizona, 1990.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1986). Prosodic morphology. Ms, University of Massachusetts, Amherst & Brandeis University. Forthcoming, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1990). Foot and word in prosodic morphology: the Arabic broken plural. NLLT 8. 209–284.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1991). Minimality. Paper presented at the Workshop on the Organization of Phonology: Features and Domains, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Peña, R. de la (1898). Gramática teórica y práctica de la lengua Castellana. Méjico: Officina TIP de la Secretaría de Fomento.Google Scholar
Poser, W. J. (1984). Hypocoristic formation in Japanese. WCCFL 3. 218–229.Google Scholar
Poser, W. J. (1990). Evidence for foot structure in Japanese. Lg 66. 78–105.Google Scholar
Real Academia Español (1931). Gramática de la lengua Española. Madrid: Espasa-Calpes.Google Scholar
Roca, I. (1988). Theoretical implications of Spanish word stress. LI 19. 393–423.Google Scholar
Saltarelli, M. (1970). Spanish plural formation: apocope or epenthesis? Lg 46. 89–96.Google Scholar
Spring, C. (1990). Implications of Axininca Campa for prosodic morphology and reduplication. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Spring, C. (1992). The velar glide in Axininca Campa. Phonology 9. 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar