Re: [tied] Re: Stød and rising tone

In Norwegian and Swedish tones mark semantic value and flectional
forms.

There are 2 standard tones distributed over two syllables with the
stress on the first syllable. falling-high( or rizing) and rizing(or
low)-high.

In Norwegian monosyllabic words only one tune is traditionally
present low(or rizing). In dayly speach monosyllabic words mostly
makes a unit with the next word, so that both tunes are realized
also here.

In fluent speach, the letter "e" (schwa) may drop out, but the
flectional forms are nevertheless made clear by the tune. In those
cases the next word will make a unit with the word having lost
the "e".

Example: "guttene (tune 2) har kommet" -the boys have came. Often
pronounced:

"gutn-ar (tune 2) kommet".

This is made distinct from:

"Gutten (tune 1) har kommet" - the boy have come, often
pronounced "gutn-ar (tune 1) kommet."

In dayly speach there are also often processes making disyllabic
wovels with falling-rizing or more seldome rizing-high tune.

Example: ja-yes, often produces ya:(falling) a(rizing) .
_______________

So then should I conclude that tones are not properties of individual words in Norwegian and Swedish, as I thought, but rather are properties of sentences and utterances, conveying grammatical or sentence-appropriate  semantic meaning?    I always wish to be correct about such things.

BTW, I can't seem to come up with any examples in English of intonation conveying grammatical meaning.  It always seems to express emotion:  attitude, credibility, irony, tragedy, disbelief, and other non-grammatical ideas.  And I think that most North Americans in everyday speech are quite monotonous most of the time, reserving intonation only to relate especially emotional events or opinions.   I've always wondered how emotion is expressed in tonal languages like Mandarin Chinese.

Andrew
--- In cybalist@... s.com, Andrew Jarrette <anjarrette@ ...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> tgpedersen <tgpedersen@ ...> wrote: --- In
cybalist@... s.com, "aquila_grande" <aquila_grande@ >
> wrote:
> >
> > In scandinavian monosyllabic words tend to be avoided. The most
> > standard word structure is disyllabic consisting of a root plus
an
> > ending. In a text, you will find many monosyllabic words, but in
> > dayly speach these are often transformed into disyllabic units
in
> > several ways. Maybe the stød began as a means of making
> > monocyllabic roots disyllabic by making the root wovel
disyllabic.
> >
> > In Norwegian, transforming monysyllabic units into disyllabic
> words
> > often results in a structure with tune 2 (falling-raising over
two
> > syllables)
> >
> > An example:
> >
> > Ja -yes, very often pronounced jaa (falling-rising over two
> > syllables)
> >
> > Another example.
> >
> > Standard: Gå ut (Go out) (1. word: Low stress high or high
stress
> > rising - 2. word: high stress rising)
> >
> > In dayly speach Gåut (high stress falling - low stress raising
> over
> > 2 syllables) This is a stress and tune pattern of a disyllabic
> word.
>
> The last one sometimes sounds to me like: low tone with
high "grace
> note" - high tone.
>
> Those monosyllabics were disyllabic in Runic. Since then final
> vowels were lost except /a/ which was kept in Swedish, became
schwa,
> written [e] in Danish, and was lost in Jysk.
> Disyllabics are pronounced with high note - low note in Jysk, low
> note - high note in Standard Danish.
> In continuous speech, Standard Danish drops final schwa too, with
> compensatory lengthening of the vowel in the preceding syllable.
> Eg. 'Du skal vent´ her' (usually so written) "you must wait here",
> pronounced /du ska ven:t heO?/. Cf imperative 'vent!' /ven?t/.
> The way I pronounce that infinitive is with a rising note (but
> /ven?t/ with a level note), which is perhaps from underlying
> /ve[low]n.[high] t/ <- /ven[low]t&[ high]/.
> In other words the tone pattern is kept unchanged, while the
> phonetic sequence is "stretched" and has its tail chopped off.
> With my limited intuition of Jysk, the infinitive /ven?t/ (vs.
> imperative /vent/) could be /ve[high]?n. [low]t/, with a similar
> pattern, but with a glottal stop inserted to keep the tones of
> the two morae from merging. In that case, Kortlandt can't use
> Vestjysk stød to prove anything about alleged presence of
> glottalics in PIE.
>
> BTW for those English-speakers who think this looks unreal:
> There is a similar tone pattern in my favorite Country artist
> Buck Owens' songs, to the degree that the tones of his dialect
> define the tones of the songs.
> Also: I noted that Goofy, of the early Disney cartoons has a
> similar tone pattern (Gosh!). Here's why: Buck Owens belongs
> to the Bakersfield (California) school of Country, and Goofy
> was most likely intended to be a caricature of a Bakersfield
> Okie (from Oklahoma), of 'Grapes of Wrath' fame. So that
> particular dialect is most likely Oklahoman (before that
> Appalachian? ). Further back than that I can't trace it.
> But I still think it's odd no one seems to be interested
> in tones in West Germanic dialects.
>
> Torsten
> ____________ _________
> Aren't tones in West Germanic dialects mostly related to
semantics and syntax (and emotional expression) rather than being
peculiarities of individual words? Besides, the tones of the North
Germanic dialects are much more pleasing to the ear, in my opinion.
> Andrew
>