Tonal variation in Zambian Chinyanja varieties : an autosegmental analysis
The language varieties examined in this study are Zambian Chicewa, Chinsenga and Chingoni (abbreviated as Ce, Ns and Ng respectively throughout the thesis). The three varieties are here referred to collectively as Zambian Chinyanja. The question to be addressed is that of internal classification, to establish, how close or how different these varieties are. Particular emphasis is placed on their tonal relationships, which is a topic usually neglected in dialect studies. The model adopted for the study is that of Autosegmental Phonology originated in 1976 by Goldsmith and - with particular relevance for Bantu tonology - developed in Clements and Goldsmith (1984), a work which included contributions from a number of people working in this field. (For example: Hyman and Byarushengo, Kisseberth, Laughren, Massamba and Odden). It is found that Autosegmental Phonology has advantages over linear models of Phonology such as the traditional Generative Phonology generally so far adopted by dialectologists Such as Brown (1972), Newton (1972), and Van Vliet (1981). In contrast to linear models, Autosegmental Phonology treats tone separately from the segmental elements that bear it. This allows the model to handle tonal
Miti, Lazarus Musazitame
Tonal variation in Zambian Chinyanja varieties : an autosegmental analysis. The language varieties examined in this study are Zambian Chicewa, Chinsenga and Chingoni (abbreviated as Ce, Ns and Ng respectively throughout the thesis). The three varieties are here referred to collectively as Zambian Chinyanja. The question to be addressed is that of internal classification, to establish, how close or how different these varieties are. Particular emphasis is placed on their tonal relationships, which is a topic usually neglected in dialect studies. The model adopted for the study is that of Autosegmental Phonology originated in 1976 by Goldsmith and - with particular relevance for Bantu tonology - developed in Clements and Goldsmith (1984), a work which included contributions from a number of people working in this field. (For example: Hyman and Byarushengo, Kisseberth, Laughren, Massamba and Odden). It is found that Autosegmental Phonology has advantages over linear models of Phonology such as the traditional Generative Phonology generally so far adopted by dialectologists Such as Brown (1972), Newton (1972), and Van Vliet (1981). In contrast to linear models, Autosegmental Phonology treats tone separately from the segmental elements that bear it. This allows the model to handle tonal
tonal variation variety analysis language_variety examine study respectively throughout variety refer collectively question_address internal classification establish close different variety particular_emphasis_place tonal relationship topic usually neglect dialect study model adopt study phonology originate particular relevance bantu develop work include contribution number people work field example find phonology advantage linear model phonology traditional generative phonology generally far adopt brown newton contrast linear model phonology treat tone separately segmental element bear allows model handle tonal