The typology of tone in San Marcos Zacatepec Eastern Chatino Australian National University Tone Workshop 13 December, 2011 Stéphanie Villard & Anthony C. Woodbury University of Texas at Austin 0. INTRODUCTION The point of this paper is to describe the tonal system of the Eastern Chatino of San Marcos Zacatepec (ISO ctz; hereafter ZAC, see Villard 2008) and argue that it shows a unique mix of typological features and is complex even among Chatino varieties (Campbell & Woodbury 2010). Data is from our ongoing field work beginning in 2005. These typological features include: • 13 DISTINCT LEXICAL TONE CLASSES composed from 5 linking and 2 floating tonal elements; • R-L ALIGNMENT of tonal elements to moras until either is used up; • TONELESS MORAS; • STRONG PHONETIC PERSISTENCE OF ELEMENTS requiring no tone deletion or change rules, but extensive filling of toneless moras by floating tones and spreading; • INFLECTIONAL FUNCTION: Verbal aspect, subject person/number, & inalienable possessor person/number are marked by tone (and often by tone alone); • INFLECTIONAL SPECIFICITY: Some tone classes are unique to certain inflections; • PROVENANCE SPECIFICITY: Spanish loans get special treatment, including a tone class unique to loans; • LIMITED TONAL PREFIXATION: Progressive aspect prefixation includes a prefixal mid tonal element, leading to internal sandhi alternations We compare this complexity to different tonal complexity in other Chatino varieties (Campbell & Woodbury 2010) and in Peñoles Mixtec (Hyman & Daly 2007). 1. SAN MARCOS ZACATEPEC EASTERN CHATINO (1) The Chatino languages: External and internal relationships (after Campbell 2011) • Otomanguean (Many subfamilies) o Zapotecan  Zapotec (Many varieties)  Chatino • Santa Cruz Zenzontepec Chatino [ISO 639-3 code czn] • Coastal Chatino o Tataltepec de Valdés Chatino [cta] o Eastern Chatino  San Marcos Zacatepec [ctz]  San Miguel Panixtlahuaca [ctp]  San Juan Quiahije [ctp]  Santiago Yaitepec [ctp]  Santa Lucía Teotepec [cya]  San Juan Lachao [cly]  (About 10 others) (The subgrouping among Eastern Chatino varieties implicit in the ISO 639-3 coding has never been supported by historical linguistic arguments: we therefore regard the relationship among varieties as flat until proven otherwise) (2) San Marcos Zacatepec • Population about 1000 (Mexican census, National Institute of Statistics and Geography, 2005), of whom only those over 40 years old are speakers of Zacatepec Eastern Chatino • Sole village where San Marcos Zacatepec Eastern Chatino is spoken • Village is an agencia policía of the Municipality of Santa Catarina Juquila, Juquila District, Oaxaca, Mexico; • Located 16º08’36” N, 97º21’10” W, at an altitude of 800m, along the crest of a ridge that descends toward the Pacific coast, 22 km directly to the south • Grow coffee, corn, fruit; work as migrant laborers nearby as well as in Mexican cities and the US _______________________ * We gratefully acknowledge support for our work through Endangered Language Documentation Programme grants MDP0153 and IGS0128 to the University of Texas at Austin, offered by the Hans Rausing Endangered Language Project at the School of Oriental and African Languages, University of London.

1

(3) Research history • Summer Institute of Linguistics o Pride & Pride 2004: By far the most comprehensive published dictionary of a Chatino language, focused on the Panixtlahuaca variety of Eastern Chatino, but with a few (non-tone marked) Zacatepec cognates given in the entries • Chatino Language Documentation Project o June, 2005: Short visit by Emiliana Cruz, Hilaria Cruz, and Tony Woodbury to collect vocabulary and texts, with follow-up work with Gelacia Cruz Hernández in San Juan Quiahije; follow-up visit in July by Hilaria Cruz and Megan Crowhurst; initial phonological and tone analysis in H. Cruz & Woodbury 2006. o June, 2006: Short visit by Villard, E. & H. Cruz, Woodbury, and others to present an orthography; Villard remained for longer field stay, working especially with Margarita González Hernández, Isabel Cortés Aragón, Josefina Hernández Rosete, Rutila López González and Josefina Ramirez López o 2007-2011: Extensive field work by Villard (about 6 weeks per year), with ELDP funding, aimed at grammatical analysis and text collection/analysis, reported inter alia in a grammatical sketch (Villard 2008b), and papers on tone sandhi (2008a) and segmental aspect morphology (2010). Villard’s doctoral dissertation will be a grammar of Zacatepec Chatino. o 2007-2011: Short yearly field trips by Woodbury aimed at text collection, speaker training, and tone analysis, working mainly with Margarita González Hernández (4) Segmental phonemic system1 a. Consonants

b. Vowels

m p

n nʸ i u į t tʸ k kʷ ʔ e o ę ǫ tˢ č a ą s x j l lʸ y w r 1 Departures from IPA: č = [tʃ]; x =[ʃ]; y = [j]; j = [h]; r = [ɾ], ogonek (˛) marks nasal vowels; superscript ʸ marks laminal(-postalveolar) consonants (for which IPA uses a subscript box [̻ ]); ą = [ɒ̃] ; o, ǫ lower to [ɔ], [ɔ̃] before /ʔ/. (5) Syllable and simple stem canon (N)[C(C)V.]0C(C)V(:)(ʔ) (N = nasal consonant{m, n})

Monosyllabic (many) Disyllabic (many) Trisyllabic (fewer)

Monomoraic (few) pỉ ‘turkey’ nkwā´‘was’ kā˛ʔ’that’ ---

Dimoraic (many) keē´ ‘flower’ ntsįì˛´ ‘guayaba’ kyàả ‘tomorrow’ kyaja ‘tortilla’ jaʔwà´ ‘banana’ jnyǎkè ‘your head’ --

Trimoraic (fewer) -kwityēēʔ ‘ant’ ntulaà´ ‘peach’ tukwęě˛ ‘road’ mansànā´ ‘apple’ xuněʔè˛ ‘scorpion’ kunāʔᲒwoman’

2. THE TONE ANALYSIS (6) Tonal elements Element Notation L M H R (=LH) R↑ (=LH↑)

à ā á ǎ ả

Mora-linked realization

Floating realization on empty moras

Mora is low, level

Low; cancels spreading

Mora is mid, level

--

Mora is high, level

--

Mora rises from low to mid-high Mora rises from low to super-high, sometimes falsetto

Rise through domain

2

Super-rise through domain

(7) Lexical tone class-defining tone sequences • There are 13 lexical tone classes, each defined by a sequence of tones. The sequence formula is: o ((T)T)](T(T)) • In the formula, T is a tonal element; elements left of the stem-edge (]) are linked; elements right of the stemedge are floating tones that affect adjacent toneless moras in the next word. M and H do not occur as floating tones. • We take these sequences to be FORMATIVES in morphophonology, ‘spelled’ with tonal elements and associated in lexical entries to the formatives spelled with segmental phonemes. • Table 1a lists the sequences and indicates their prevalence in different parts of the lexicon. Th (8) Table 1a lists the sequences and indicates their prevalence in different parts of the lexicon. Table 1b gives an example of each. Obeserve that: • Classes (1-8) are MAJOR CLASSES that include major open-ended classes of stems; while (9-13) are MINOR CLASSES, typically with significant restrictions that (as will be shown) are due to historical tone combinations • WORD CLASS SPECIFICITY: The same sequence tone (2a-b; 12a-b) may have variants for different parts of speech; simple number stems are restricted to two tones (1, 2a); • INFLECTIONAL SPECIFICITY: Some tone classes are unique to certain inflections, e.g., (9)-(10) only marks 1s and 2s person-inflected stems; (12a) only marks verb stems with certain aspects; • PROVENANCE SPECIFICITY: Only three tone classes mark Spanish names; another class (8) marks nearly all Spanish nouns Table 1a. Tone sequence marked classes, and their prevalence in the lexicon Class Sequence Native Spn Loan Aspect-marked V stems Pers-mkd N/V ((T)T)] (T(T)) Nouns Names N’s Adj/Adv Num COMPL PROG POT 2sg 1sg 1 ] lots lots 1-10 lots lots lots 2a L] RL lots >10 some lots 2b L] R lots lots few 3 M] R lots lots lots lots few lots 4 R] lots lots lots lots some few 5 L-R↑] cute lots some few few lots lots lots animals 6 M-M] lots lots lots some few lots some 7 M-H] lots lots lots lots few lots lots 8 L-M] R↑ lots 9 M] lots 10 L-R] L lots 11 R-L] few some lots lots lots 12a R↑-L] RL lots lots few 12b R↑-L] R two 13 R↑-M] R one three Table 1b. Lexical examples for each sequence Class Sequence Gloss Word 1 ] ate nkayako 2a L] RL will.spray kusanèˇ` 2b L] R banana jaʔẁaˇ 3 M] R burned nkukatīnˇ 4 R] cried nkayunǎ 5 L-R↑] orders ntijìnyản 6 M-M] will.kill nkayūjwī 7 M-H] ordered nkajīnyán R↑ 8 L-M] apple mansànā’ 9 M] will.spray.1s kusanē 10 L-R] L will.spray.2s kusàně` 11 R-L] scorpion xuněʔèn 12a R↑-L] RL mixed nkwixtyảàʔˇ` 12b R↑-L] R tomato nkwỉxìˇ 13 R↑-M] R now nỉīˇ

3

(9) Principles of tone sequence realization. The following principles account for the realization of the tones: • ONE-TO-ONE LEFT-TO-RIGHT LINKING. The tone sequence before ‘]’ links, one-to-one, to moras in the stem • SPREADING. The pitch of H(↑)-final linked tones {H, R, R↑} is maintained (with slight decay) over unlinked moras until the next linked tone is encountered • FLOATING TONE REALIZATION. If they precede a sequence of one or more unlinked moras in subsequence words, floating tones are realized at the end of a following domain of unlinked moras (Details explored below) • OTHERWISE, all leftover tonal elements are unrealized (10) Demonstration of tone sequence realization. Table 3 shows: • 32 target nouns, representing 10 of the 13 tone sequence classes • For each target noun, audio samples and a transcription of the tone, mora by mora: o In isolation context (column marked (a)) o In a carrier phrase (column (b)) as follows: tityokwả ____ kula ‘twelve old ____’s’ | | L R↑](5) ] (1: toneless) twelve ___ old o A transcription (column (c)) of the effects of SPREADING or FLOATING TONE REALIZATION from the target noun to the two toneless syllables of kula ‘old’ • In transcriptions, pitch for each mora is marked with symbols {L,M,H} augmented by ‘%’ = edge linked, ↑ = upstepped, ↗ = interpolates] • Original, linked tones in columns (a) and (b) are bolded • For each class, different syllable and mora shapes are shown to illustrate the LINKING rule Table 3: Sequene realization (a) (b) (c) Class Sequence Item Gloss Word Phonetic tone per mora Phonetic tone of following Isolation After R↑ dimoraic toneless word 1 ] 1 spouse kʷilʸoʔo [L-L-L] [H↑-H↑-H↑] [H↑-H↑] 2 tortilla kyaja [L-L] [H↑-H↑] [H↑-H↑] 3 bean ndaa [L-L] [H↑-H↑] [H↑-H↑] 4 person* neʔ [L] [H↑] [H↑-H↑] R [↗H%] 2b L] 5 banana jaʔwàˇ [L-L] [H↑-L] s [↗H%] 6 guava nt įì˛ˇ [L-L] [H↑-L] [↗H%] 7 turtle nkò˛ˇ [L] [L] R [↗H%] 3 M] 8 flour kitāˇ [L-M] [H↑-M] [↗H%] 9 flower keēˇ [L-M] [H↑-M] [↗H%] 10 was* nkʷāˇ [M] [M] R↑ 8 L-M] 11 cross kurùsī’ [L-L-M] [H↑-L-M] [↗↑H%] 12 apple mansànā’ [L-L-M] [H↑-L-M] [↗↑H%] 13 mule mùlʸā’ [L-M] [L-M] [↗↑H%] 14 clock* wrā’ [M] [M] [↗↑H%] 4 R] 15 chepil kitǎ [L-R] [H↑-R] [H-H] 16 thing nǎ [R] [R] [H-H] 5 L-R↑] 17 weevil kʷisàả [L-L-R↑] [H↑-L-R↑] [H↑-H↑] 18 cat mìštʸỏ˛ [L-R↑] [L-R↑] [H↑-H↑] 19 turkey pỉ [R↑] [R↑] [H↑-H↑] 6 M-M] 20 ant kʷitʸēēʔ [L-M-M] [H↑-M-M] [L-L] 21 hen kʷītō [M-M] [M-M] [L-L] 22 tuber kōō˛ [M-M] [M-M] [L-L] 23 that* kā˛ʔ [M] [M] [L-L] 7 M-H] 24 woman* kunāʔᲠ[L-M-H] [H↑-M-H] [H-H] 25 mosquito jnʸāté˛ [M-H] [M-H] [H-H] 26 coconut nkāᲠ[M-H] [M-H] [H-H] 27 elder* xúʔ [H] [H] [H-H] 11 R-L] 28 scorpion šuněʔè˛ [L-R-L] [H↑-R-L] [L-L] 29 hole tuyǒò [L-R-L] [H↑-R-L] [L-L] 30 grapefruit stǎnò [R-L] [R-L] [L-L] R [↗H%] 12b R↑-L] 31 tomato nkwỉšìˇ [R↑-L] [R↑-L] [↗H%] 32 dove sỉtʸò˛ˇ [R↑-L] [R↑-L]

4

(10) Some observations • MAJOR CLASS SEQUENCES ASSOCIATE WITH STEMS REGARDLESS OF MORA LENGTH. Even (relatively rare) monomoraic stems show all major class sequences. (Compare Zenzontepec Chatino with only {L, H} elements, six dimoraic patterns (X-X, X-L, L-H, H-H, H-L, H-X) but just three monomoraic patterns (X, L, H).) • LINKED TONE PERSISTENCE: Linked tones are persistent and undergo few alternations. • NULL HYPOTHESIS: What you see is what you get: five linking tonal element types and three floating tonal element types: an inelegantly large number, but transparently faithful to the facts o Are there phonological or morphophonological alternations that support an ‘improvement’ on the null hypothesis, showing some tonal elements, or some sequences, to be derived from others? Not many, but… 3. PHONOLOGICAL ALTERNATIONS (11) R vs. RL floating tone

1a No verb

1b R floating t. verb

1c RL floating t. verb

A: Toneless (1) object kyaja _] (1) [L-L] tortilla

B: L]H (2b) object jaʔwàˇ L]R (2b) [L-L] banana

C: L M]H (8) object mansànā’ LM]R (8) [L-L-L] apple

yoo M]R (3)

yoo M]R (3)

jaʔwàˇ L]R (2b)

yoo M]R (3)

mansànā’ LM]R (8)

[L-M] ground

kyaja _] (1) [↗H%] tortilla

[L-M] ground

[R-L↓] banana

[L-M] ground

[M-M-M] apple

koo L]RL (2a) [L-L] will grind

kyaja _] (1) [R-L] tortilla

koo L]RL (2a) [L-L] will grind

jaʔwàˇ L]R (2b) [M-M] banana

koo L]RL (2a) [L-L] will grind

mansànā’ LM]R (8) [M-M-M] apple

2a No verb

2b R floating t. verb

2c RL floating t. verb

ntulaàˇ L]R (2b) [L-L-L] peach yoo M]R (3) [L-M] ground

ntulaàˇ L]R (2b) [↗-R-L↓] peach

koo M]RL (2a) [L-L] will grind

ntulaàˇ L]R (2b) [M-M-M] peach

(12) What’s happening? • In column A, with toneless object: o Floating R produces a rise to the end of the word o Floating RL produces a rise to the penultimate mora, followed by a (normal) low on the final mora • In column B, with L]H (2b) object: o Floating R produces a rise up to the linked L, which lowers to a super-low (see 2b for a trimoraic case) o Floating RL produces a flat M that spreads over the entire word (see (2c) for a trimoraic case) • In column C, with LM]H object: o Both R and RL produce the same flat M that spreads over the entire word (13) However, none of these suggestive interactions occur when linked R(L)L(M) (or any other) sequences occur, e.g.: nkayatǎ˛ kàlō’ ‘(s/he) swallowed soup’ R] (4) LM]R [L-L-R] [L-M] swallowed soup

5

(14) Tentative conclusion • It seems simplest just to stipulate that in certain circumstances, the sequences represented with floating R or RL transform a linked L to a spreading M References Campbell, Eric W. To appear. The internal diversification and subgrouping of Chatino (Otomanguean). IJAL. Campbell, Eric W. & Anthony C. Woodbury. 2010. The comparative tonology of Chatino: A prolegomenon. Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, Annual Meeting, at LSA, Baltimore, MD. Handout. Cruz, Emiliana, and Anthony C. Woodbury. 2006. El sandhi de los tonos en el Chatino de Quiahije. In Las memorias del Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica-II. Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America, http://sites.google.com/site/lenguachatino/recursos-academicos/CHAT-ProtoTones_Handout-V_20100113ewc_acw.pdf Cruz, Emiliana. 2011. Phonology, tone, and the functions of tone in San Juan Quiahije Chatino. UT Doctoral Dissertation. Cruz, Hilaria & Anthony C. Woodbury. 2006. La fonología y tonología comparativa del Chatino: un informe de campo en Zacatepec. In Las memorias del Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica-II. Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America. http://www.ailla.utexas.org/site/cilla2/HCruz_Woodbury_CILLA2_chatino.pdf Cruz, Hilaria, and Anthony C. Woodbury. 2006. La fonología y tonología comparativa del Chatino: un informe de campo en Zacatepec. In Las memorias del Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica-II. Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America, http://www.ailla.utexas.org/site/cilla2_toc.html. Pride, Kitty, and Leslie Pride. 2004. Diccionario Chatino de la Zona Alta: Panixtlahuaca, Oaxaca y otros pueblos. Serie de vocabularios y diccionarios indígenas “Mariano Silva y Aceves” del Instituto Lingüístico de Verano, A.C., México, Número 47. Villard, Stéphanie. 2008a. Grammatical Sketch of Zacatepec Chatino. Master's Thesis. University of Texas at Austin. http://sites.google.com/site/lenguachatino/recursos-academicos/Villard2009-ZacatepecSketch.pdf Villard, Stephanie. 2008b. Los tonos del chatino de San Marcos Zacatepec. In Las memorias del Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica-III. Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America, http://www.ailla.utexas.org/site/cilla3/Villard_CILLA_III.pdf Villard, Stéphanie. 2010. Zacatepec Chatino verb classification and aspect morphology. In Las memorias del Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica-IV. Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America. http://www.ailla.utexas.org/site/cilla4/Villard_CILLA_IV.pdf

6