(L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

[sangi39]

Is the onio- in the word "oniomania" cognate with the English word "own"?

Digging through Wiktionary suggests not. "Own" goes back to *h₂eyḱ- while the "onos" in "onio-" goes back to PIE *wósn̥ (from the root *wes-)

[Khemehekis]

Digging through Wiktionary suggests not. "Own" goes back to *h₂eyḱ- while the "onos" in "onio-" goes back to PIE *wósn̥ (from the root *wes-)

Oh, all right. I wondered. Seems like a false cognate!

[Nel Fie]

Are there any differences or patterns as to how tonal languages place tones in relationship to the speaker's natural "rest" pitch?

I've been told by a speaker that Mandarin uses the voice's rest pitch for the lowest parts in its tones (amongst much other useful information). But do all tonal languages do it that way? Or are there tonal languages that use the speaker's rest pitch for a mid tone - going beneath it for a low tone, for example?

[Creyeditor]

I think this question can be formulated in term of markedness. Is the low tone always the unmarked tone? The answer is: no, in some languages the mid tone is unmarked.

[eldin raigmore]

I think this question can be formulated in term of markedness. Is the low tone always the unmarked tone? The answer is: no, in some languages the mid tone is unmarked.

But, do languages with only two tones, namely a low level tone and a high level tone, always make the low one the unmarked one?
I’m pretty sure the overwhelming majority do, but I could be wrong about nearly anything.

[Nel Fie]

I think this question can be formulated in term of markedness. Is the low tone always the unmarked tone? The answer is: no, in some languages the mid tone is unmarked.

Good point. It would certainly make sense, thank you.

[Creyeditor]

Right, so I think googling[ "unmarked high" tone phonetics] might give you examples of languages that have been argued to have an unmarked high tone.

[Salmoneus]

Right, so I think googling[ "unmarked high" tone phonetics] might give you examples of languages that have been argued to have an unmarked high tone.

I haven't googled this, but I know there are even languages in which stress is marked by a lower tone, so I'd have thought it almost certain that regular low tone is sometimes considered marked.

[Nel Fie]

Right, so I think googling[ "unmarked high" tone phonetics] might give you examples of languages that have been argued to have an unmarked high tone.

I haven't googled this, but I know there are even languages in which stress is marked by a lower tone, so I'd have thought it almost certain that regular low tone is sometimes considered marked.

First off all, apologies for my last reply, it ended up a bit nonsensical due to me getting a few wires crossed in the process of writing it.

That said, I searched and found what seems like a good paper on the topic: Markedness and the Phonological Typology of Two-Height Tone Systems, by Larry M. Hyman

It certainly confirms that in a two-tone system either tone can be marked, although marking of the high tone seems more common. Beyond that, I'm out of my depth in terms of theory here, and it'll probably take a while and a few rereadings to fully digest and understand the paper itself. However, based on what I can gather, it seems that markedness and production of tone are not inherently tied, so the initial question might be back to square one.

But, do languages with only two tones, namely a low level tone and a high level tone, always make the low one the unmarked one?
I’m pretty sure the overwhelming majority do, but I could be wrong about nearly anything.

As per my understanding of Creyeditor, Salmoneus and the paper linked above, either tone can be marked in a two tone system. It seems almost by necessity in some cases (unless I'm completely misunderstanding the terminology) as Hyman writes of languages with a low tone and a neutral tone. In such a case, I'd assume only the low tone could be marked - and I think Hyman makes that very point in the conclusion?