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.
Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:arizona.edu/oai:arizona.openrepository.com:10150/227262 |
Date | January 1990 |
Creators | Golston, Chris |
Contributors | Myers, James, PĂ©rez, Patricia E., University of California, Los Angeles |
Publisher | Department of Linguistics, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) |
Source Sets | University of Arizona |
Language | en_US |
Detected Language | English |
Type | Article |
Relation | Arizona Phonology Conference Vol. 3, Phonology in the Old Pueblo, Coyote Papers |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds