Arabic is a quantity-sensitive language that can differentiate between syllables in terms of their weight. CVC and CVV are heavy syllables since they have two moras (bimoraic), whereas CV is light because it assigns one mora (monomoraic).
(2.26) a. Light b. Heavy
McCarthy (1979b) proposed that the weight of the CVC syllable depends on its position in a given word. This is demonstrated by the fact that CVC syllable is heavy in non- final positions and light in final position due to the fact that the final CVC is unstressed and the last consonant of this syllable is deemed extrametrical; i.e. it is not moraic. For instance, Hung asserts that the CVC syllable in all modern Arabic dialects is heavy in non-final position only. Alber (2005) and Al-Jarrah (2011) agree that stress in quantity- sensitive languages is received by heavy syllables, but the CVC syllable in the final position fails to attract stress since the last consonant is weightless by being assigned as extrametrical as shown in (2.27):
(2.27)
/ˈka.ta<b>/ ‘he wrote’ /ka.ˈtab.na/ ‘we wrote’
/ˈʤa.ma<ʕ>/ ‘he gathered’ /ʤa.ˈmaʕ.na/ ‘we gathered’
The examples in (2.27) show that the final CVC syllables in /ˈka.tab/ and /ˈʤa.maʕ/ fail to attract stress and their last consonant is treated as extrametrical (weightless). However, non-final CVC syllables are considered to be heavy and they attract stress in /ka.ˈtab.na/ and /ʤa.ˈmaʕ.na/.
43
Liberman and Prince (1977) and Hayes (1979) initially proposed the notion of extrametricality in metrical theory. Then, this notion was subsequently developed in the works of Hayes (1981, 1995), Itô (1986), and Roca (1992), among others. Hayes (1995:57) states that extrametricality “designates a particular prosodic constituent as invisible for purposes of rule application”. The following restrictions are proposed by Hayes (1981, 1995) in order to control extrametricality:
(2.28) Restrictions on extrametricality (Hayes 1995:57-8):
a. Constituency Only constituents (segments, syllables, foot, phonological
word, affix) may be marked as extrametrical.
b. Peripherality A constituent may be extrametrical only if it is at a designated
edge (left or right) of its domain.
c. Edge Markedness The unmarked edge for extrametricality is the right edge.
d. Nonexhaustivity An extrametricality rule is blocked if it would render the entire
domain of stress rules extrametrical.
The angled brackets < > are usually used to mark the extrametrical element. For example, the last consonant in the word rasam ‘he drew’ is assigned extrametrical as shown in (2.29).
(2.29)
The assignment of the mora through weight-by-position is supposed to take place after consonant extrametricality as long as syllabification is achieved with reference to the algorithm in (2.30) (Clements 1990:299; Watson 2002:63):
44
(2.30)
a. Consonant extrametricality : C> ⟨C⟩/______ ]word. b. Associate moraic segments to a syllable node.
c. Given P (an unsyllabified segment) preceding Q (a syllabified segment), adjoin P to the syllable containing Q if P has a lower sonority rank than Q (iterative).
d. Given Q (a syllabified segment) followed by R (an unsyllabified segment), assign a mora to R (weight-by-position) [if R has a lower sonority rank than Q (iterative)].
e. Adjoin moraic R to the syllable containing Q (iterative).
This algorithm can be exemplified in the syllabification of the word maʕmal ‘lab’in NA as shown in (2.31):
(2.31)
a. final consonant extrametricality b. Association of moraic segments to a syllable node
c . Association of onset to syllable node d. Assignment of mora through Weight-by-Position
45
e. adjunction of Weight-by-Position f. incorporation of extrametrical consonant into preceding syllable
mora to syllable node
Heavy and light syllables were previously distinguished based on the number of moras they have. Heavy syllables have two moras and light syllables have one mora. However, the term ‘superheavy syllable’ is appropriate for canonical-shaped syllables /CVVC/ and /CVCC/ according to studies on some Arabic dialects (Broselow 1992, Al-Mohanna 1998, Watson 2002; 2007, Kiparsky 2003, Rakhieh 2009, Al-Jarrah 2011). The initial and final positions of these syllables violate the ban on trimoraic syllables which therefore motivates scholars to propose different approaches that can account for them. For instance, Hayes (1995:106-7), Kager (1995b:376), Kenstowicz (1994:246), and Kiparsky (2003) treat the final C in superheavy syllables as extrasyllabic since it falls
outside the syllable domain.18
(2.32)
Aoun (1979) and Selkirk (1981) state that an extrasyllabic consonant is directly linked to a degenerate syllable, as shown in (2.33):
18 Watson (2002) notes that extrasyllabic consonants block extrametricality due to the failure of achieving the Peripherality condition with reference to San’ani Arabic.
46
(2.33) a. CVCC b. CVVC
Unlike the idea of a degenerate syllable, Broselow (1992) and Watson (2007) assume that the final C in the CVVC syllable shares its mora with the previous vowel. As a result, this syllable conforms to the ban on trimoraic syllables.
(2.34)
However, Farwaneh (1995: 66-70) and McCarthy (2007:147-8) agree that the final consonants in the CVCC syllable can be linked to one mora via mora sharing if they obey sonority sequencing as shown in (2.35):
(2.35)
According to the different approaches to superheavy rhymes CVVC and CVCC, in NA, mora sharing is utilized to affiliate the last consonant in the non-final CVVC syllable to the syllable node in order to avoid a semisyllable; i.e., the last consonant shares a mora with the second member of a long vowel in a CVVC syllable. Mora sharing is used when dealing with a CVCC syllable where the last consonant cluster is assigned as a geminate; hence, the members of a geminate are directly linked to one mora. However, in NA, the last consonant in final CVVC and CVCC is deemed a degenerate syllable (extrasyllabic). These observations will be discussed in subsections (4.7.2) and (5.3.3).
To conclude, the idea behind the arguments above is that superheavy syllables violate the ban on trimoraic syllables. Interestingly, there is another behaviour where the final
47
C in non-final /CVVC/ and /CVCC/ is assigned a semisyllable which consequently motivates vowel epenthesis in some modern Arabic dialects. This behaviour will be discussed in the next subsection.