What are the two affixes’ phonological shapes, and what does each one of them mean? (Just give the relevant gloss.)
Allomorphy and phonological rules in Ditidaht Ditidaht is a Wakashan language spoken traditionally at the southern end of Vancouver Island. Here are some words of the language, with their glosses. Every word has one root, and some of them also have one affix, although the meaning of that affix may be more like an entire phrase or sentence in English. Ditidaht gloss Ditidaht gloss
baʔas ‘house’ daqwuɫ ‘pub’
bakwuɫ ‘store’ tʃuʃʼas ‘tree’
biɫsaq ‘the salmon spear shaft’ baʔsa ‘it is a house’
tʃuʃʼsaq ‘the tree’ bakwɫaq ‘the store’
biɫis ‘salmon spear shaft’ daqwɫa ‘it is a pub’
ɫuʔaɫ ‘board’ ɫuʔɫa ‘it is a board’
baʔsaq ‘the house’ ɫuʔɫaq ‘the board’
In this data set: the affixes have only one allomorph, but the roots each have two allomorphs. Bearing that in mind:
Q1) What are the two affixes’ phonological shapes, and what does each one of them mean? (Just give the relevant gloss.)
Q2) Now with respect to the root: describe the difference between their two allomorphs, and in what phonological context you see each of them Your answer should be the same for all the roots – that is, describe the root allomorph shapes in a sufficiently general way that it describes all of them
Q3) Write a phonological rule that accounts for the alternation you see in the roots.
Q4) Now suppose that the syllable structure of Ditidaht is CV(C) (i.e. obligatory onset, optional coda.) With this in mind: do you think that the phonological rule you wrote in
Q3) could be driven by the language’s syllable structure? If so, what aspect of syllabification is the rule trying to repair? If not, why not? Use at least one concrete example from the data set to make your point.