1887
Volume 43, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0176-4225
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9714

Abstract

Abstract

Many word forms from different classes in Central Pame (cent2145, Otomanguean) allow two synonymous forms, one containing a prefix with the vowel /a/ and another one with /u/ (e.g. ~ ‘(s)he feels’). I conduct historical corpus research and elicitation to throw light on the diachronic origin and contemporary profile of this unusual phenomenon. Evidence suggests that it started as a sound change /a/ > /u/ between bilabial consonants. However, paradigmatic pressures have largely dismantled the original distribution of allomorphy synchronically, generalizing free variation (i.e. overabundance). In addition, other phonological and morphosyntactic cues have emerged for the probabilistic prediction of these allomorphies. The case provides an extraordinary window into the cognitive underpinnings of sound change, allomorphy, and the paradigm in a highly-inflecting and understudied language.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dia.24033.her
2025-07-29
2026-04-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/dia.24033.her.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/dia.24033.her&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Abramson, Arthur S., Patrick W. Nye, Janette B. Henderson, and Charles W. Marshall
    1981 Vowel height and the perception of consonantal nasality. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America70(2). 329–339. 10.1121/1.386781
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.386781 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ackerman, Farrell, James P. Blevins, and Robert Malouf
    2009 Parts and wholes: Patterns of relatedness in complex morphological systems and why they matter. InJames P. Blevins and Juliette Blevins (eds.), Analogy in grammar: Form and acquisition, 54–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547548.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547548.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  3. Avelino, Heriberto
    2010 Acoustic and electroglottographic analyses of nonpathological, nonmodal phonation. Journal of Voice24(3). 270–280. 10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baerman, Matthew, & Greville G. Corbett
    2007 Linguistic typology: Morphology. Linguistic Typology11(1). 115–117. 10.1515/LINGTY.2007.010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY.2007.010 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baerman, Matthew, Enrique Palancar, & Timothy Feist
    2019 Inflectional class complexity in the Oto-Manguean languages. Amerindia411. 1–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bailey, Guy, Tom Wikle, Jan Tillery, & Lori Sand
    1991 The apparent time construct. Language Variation and Change3(3). 241–264. 10.1017/S0954394500000569
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000569 [Google Scholar]
  7. Becker-Kristal, Roy
    2010Acoustic typology of vowel inventories and Dispersion Theory: Insights from a large cross-linguistic corpus. Los Angeles: University of California PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Beddor, Patrice Speeter
    1983Phonological and phonetic effects of nasalization on vowel height. PhD Dissertation, University of Minnesota.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew
    1994 Inflection classes, gender, and the principle of contrast. Language40(4). 737–788. 10.2307/416326
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416326 [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen, Marilyn
    1997 Acoustic correlates of English and French nasalized vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America102(4). 2360–2370. 10.1121/1.419620
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.419620 [Google Scholar]
  11. Clark, Eve V., & Brian MacWhinney
    1987 The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. Mechanisms of language acquisition, 1–33. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dixon, R. M. W.
    2004The Jarawara language of southern Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199270675.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199270675.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dressler, Wolfgang U.
    2017 Naturalness and morphological change. InBrian D. Joseph, & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 461–471. Hoboken: Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Feist, Timothy, & Enrique L. Palancar
    2021 Paradigmatic restructuring and the diachrony of stem alternations in Chichimec. Language97(1). 1–41. 10.1353/lan.2021.0000
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2021.0000 [Google Scholar]
  15. Garrett, Andrew, & Keith Johnson
    2013 Phonetic bias in sound change. Origins of Sound Change: Approaches to Phonologization11. 51–97. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573745.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573745.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gibson, Lorna F.
    1950a Three Chichimeca texts. Unpublished manuscript. Available online athttps://www.sil.org/resources/archives/57422
  17. 1950b A pedagogical grammar of Central Pame. Unpublished manuscript. Available online athttps://www.sil.org/resources/archives/57479
  18. 1950c Verb paradigms in Pame. Unpublished manuscript. Available online athttps://www.sil.org/resources/archives/53023
  19. 1956 Pame (Otomi) phonemics and morphophonemics. International Journal of American Linguistics22(4). 242–265. 10.1086/464377
    https://doi.org/10.1086/464377 [Google Scholar]
  20. Gibson, Lorna, & Doris Bartholomew
    1979 Pame noun inflection. International Journal of American Linguistics45(4). 309–322. 10.1086/465613
    https://doi.org/10.1086/465613 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gibson, Lorna F., Donald Olson, & Anne Olson
    2016 Four Pame texts. Tlalocan4(2). 125–143. 10.19130/iifl.tlalocan.1963.316
    https://doi.org/10.19130/iifl.tlalocan.1963.316 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel, Martin Haspelmath, & Sebastian Bank
    2021 Glottolog 4.5. Available online athttps://glottolog.org
  23. Henrich, Joseph, Steven J. Heine, & Ara Norenzayan
    2010 Most people are not WEIRD. Nature466(7301). 29–29. 10.1038/466029a
    https://doi.org/10.1038/466029a [Google Scholar]
  24. Herce, Borja
    2021 Stem alternations in Kiranti and their implications for the morphology–phonology interface. Journal of Linguistics57(2). 321–363. 10.1017/S0022226720000341
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226720000341 [Google Scholar]
  25. 2022 Possessive inflection in Chichimec inalienable nouns: The morphological organization of a closed irregular class. Studies in Language46(4). 901–933. 10.1075/sl.21020.her
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.21020.her [Google Scholar]
  26. 2024 VeLePa: Central Pame verbal inflection in a quantitative perspective. Morphology1–39. 10.1007/s11525‑024‑09426‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-024-09426-x [Google Scholar]
  27. 2025 Central Pame verbal inflection: morphological classification across layers. Studies in Language. 10.1075/sl.24032.her
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.24032.her [Google Scholar]
  28. Herce, Borja, & Catalina Torres
    2023 Measuring variation in Central Pame vowels. InProceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 11011. 2289–2293. International Phonetic Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hillenbrand, James M., Michael J. Clark, & Terrance M. Nearey
    2001 Effects of consonant environment on vowel formant patterns. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America109(2). 748–763. 10.1121/1.1337959
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1337959 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hurch, Bernhard
    2022 Pame (central) de Santa María Acapulco, Santa Catarina, San Luis Potosí. InYolanda Lastra (ed.) Archivo de Lenguas Indígenas de México. México DF: El Colegio de México.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Leben, William Ronald
    1973Suprasegmental phonology. PhD dissertationMassachusetts Institute of Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Maiden, Martin
    2004 Morphological autonomy and diachrony. InYearbook of morphology20041, 137–175. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Malkiel, Yakov
    1960 Paradigmatic resistance to sound change: The Old Spanish preterite forms vide, vido against the background of the recession of primary-d. Language36(3). 281–346. 10.2307/410959
    https://doi.org/10.2307/410959 [Google Scholar]
  34. Miceli, Luisa, & Erich Round
    2022 Where have all the sound changes gone? Examining the scarcity of evidence for regular sound change in Australian languages. Linguistics Vanguard8(5). 509–518. 10.1515/lingvan‑2021‑0094
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0094 [Google Scholar]
  35. Mielke, Jeff
    2008The emergence of distinctive features. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199207916.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199207916.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Newberry, Mitchell G., Christopher A. Ahern, Robin Clark, & Joshua B. Plotkin
    2017 Detecting evolutionary forces in language change. Nature551(7679). 223–226. 10.1038/nature24455
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24455 [Google Scholar]
  37. Nichols, Johanna
    1996 The Comparative Method as heuristic. InDurie, Mark, & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The Comparative Method reviewed: Regularity and irregularity in language change, 39–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195066074.003.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195066074.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  38. Olson, Donald
    1955 Mode-aspect-person inflection in Pame. Unpublished manuscript. Available online atwww.language-archives.org/item/oai:sil.org:57423)
  39. Reali, Florencia, & Thomas L. Griffiths
    2010 Words as alleles: Connecting language evolution with Bayesian learners to models of genetic drift. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences277(1680). 429–436. 10.1098/rspb.2009.1513
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2009.1513 [Google Scholar]
  40. Round, Erich
    2023 Canonical phonology and criterial conflicts: Relating and resolving four dilemmas of phonological typology. Linguistic Typology27(2). 267–287. 10.1515/lingty‑2022‑0032
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2022-0032 [Google Scholar]
  41. Sims-Williams, Patrick
    2018 Mechanising historical phonology. Transactions of the Philological Society116(3). 555–573. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12138
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12138 [Google Scholar]
  42. Smith, Raoul N.
    1969 Automatic simulation of historical change. International Conference on Computational Linguistics COLING 1969. Available online athttps://aclanthology.org/C69-0901.pdf
  43. Stump, Gregory, & Raphael A. Finkel
    2013Morphological typology: From word to paradigm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139248860
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139248860 [Google Scholar]
  44. 2015 The complexity of inflectional systems. Linguistics Vanguard1(1). 101–117. 10.1515/lingvan‑2014‑1007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2014-1007 [Google Scholar]
  45. Sturtevant, Edgar H.
    1947An introduction to linguistic science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Thornton, Anna M.
    2012 Reduction and maintenance of overabundance. A case study on Italian verb paradigms. Word Structure5(2). 183–207. 10.3366/word.2012.0026
    https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2012.0026 [Google Scholar]
  47. Ventura, Rafael, Joshua B. Plotkin, & Gareth Roberts
    2022 Drift as a driver of language change: An artificial language experiment. Cognitive Science46(9). e13197. 10.1111/cogs.13197
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13197 [Google Scholar]
  48. Yip, Moira
    1988 The Obligatory Contour Principle and phonological rules: A loss of identity. Linguistic Inquiry19(1). 65–100.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.24033.her
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.24033.her
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): analogy; Central Pame; Otomanguean; overabundance; paradigm; sound change
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error