[tied] Re: Stød and rising tone

In Norwegian and Swedish tunes are properties with a fonemic
significanse in individual words. They define the meaning of the
stem and they also define flexional forms together with the endings.
They also play a role in derivation.

However these tones are realized over two syllables, not one.
(Except that monosyllabic words in isolation have tune 1) In fluent
speach, a schwa-sound may drop out. Then the tune is necessary to
mark the gramaticcal form clearly. Since the tunes are ralized over
two cyllables, the next unstressed word will loose its independence
and make a unit with the first word.


An examples of a fletional paradigms with endings and tones

gutt (1) - boy


gutt 1 - boy / gutt(e)n 1 - the boy / gutt(e)r 2 - boys / gutt(e)n
(e) 2 -

skål 1 - plate / skåla 1 - the plate / skål(e)r 2 - the plates /
skål(e)n(e) 2

Any schwa-sound may drop out in fluent speach, but absolutely not
allways



--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Jarrette <anjarrette@...>
wrote:

>
>
>
> aquila_grande <aquila_grande@...> wrote: 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@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Jarrette <anjarrette@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > tgpedersen <tgpedersen@> wrote: --- In
> cybalist@yahoogroups.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
> >
>