Summary and implications for [ATR] markedness
173 that the perceptual motivation has some role to play. It is possible that perceptual and
theoretical motivations such as the OT analysis presented above have conspired together to cause the height-alternating prefixes.
5.5 Summary and implications for [ATR] markedness
This chapter has described vowel harmony in both nominal and verbal prefixes in §5.1 and §5.2, respectively, focusing especially on the prefixes which alternate from mid to
high. The acoustic analysis in §5.3 supports the claims made concerning both alternating and non-alternating prefixes. In §5.4 I suggest possible theoretical and perceptual
explanations for these patterns. An important issue addressed in several of these sections is the two interrelated questions concerning the underlying height of the prefix vowels
mid or high?, as well as the feature which triggers the height alternation [-ATR], [+ATR] or a height feature?. I have argued that the alternating prefixes must have mid
vowels underlyingly, which strongly suggests that [-ATR] is the trigger for prefix dissimilation.
To summarize the argument, despite the fact that there is no [-ATR] spreading to prefixes, there are two main pieces of evidence in favor of [-ATR] as the dominant value
the distribution restrictions against [-ATR] mid vowels in prefixes, as well as the evidence pointing toward the mid-vowel prefixes, not the high-vowel prefixes, as the
underlying forms. As mentioned above, the main indication of mid-vowel underlying forms is the occurrence of only mid vowels and not high vowels in prefixes which are not
adjacent to the stem, seen not only in the nominal augment but especially in verbal prefixes as well. This evidence of [-ATR] markedness is discussed further in Chapter 7
when looking at Ikoma’s vowel harmony as a whole and its implications for our
174 theoretical and typlogical understanding of vowel harmony. I make one final point here to
set the stage for that discussion. In a presentation by Casali and Leitch 2002, they make a connection between a
language’s dominant [ATR] value and the default value of prefixes which are outside of the harmonic domain. In particular, they focus on the Bantu C languages in which
[-ATR] is dominant. There is a correlation in Bantu C for affixes to surface as [+ATR] mid vowels in cases in which [-ATR] spreading does not apply. Therefore, [+ATR] is
default, and affixes only surface as [-ATR] mid vowels when the active value spreads. This resonates well with the patterns found in Ikoma in which [+ATR] is the default
value in prefixes. This is in line with the conclusion that [-ATR] is the active value in Ikoma prefix dissimilation, just as it is the active value in Bantu C.
Compare this to neighboring Zanaki, in which [+ATR] is clearly the dominant, marked value. In Zanaki, prefixes are underlyingly [-ATR], and they surface as such
unless they precede the [+ATR] vowels [i u]. The underlying prefix forms are, for example, [ m -] for Class 1 and [ k -] for Class 7. Just as [+ATR] is default in a [-ATR]
dominant system, in Zanaki we see that [-ATR] is default in a [+ATR] system. Therefore, just as we would not expect primarily underlyingly [+ATR] prefixes in a language with
[+ATR] dominance, we would also not expect [-ATR] prefixes to be the standard in a language with [-ATR] dominance. Therefore, if we concede that [-ATR] is dominant in
Ikoma at the very least in the process of prefix dissimilation, then it is in fact expected that Ikoma would have underlyingly [+ATR] mid-vowel prefixes, which is indeed the
case.
175 As a final point on this subject, see also the following quote from Beckman
1997:1 from her article on positional faithfulness and positional neutralization in Shona vowel harmony.
In languages which exhibit positional neutralisation of vowel contrasts, one or more vowels generally, the most marked members of the vowel inventory may
occur distinctively in only a small subset of the structural positions available in the language. Outside of these positions, the marked vowels may surface only if
they harmonise with a similar vowel in the privileged position.
Once again, we see that if [ ] are the most marked members of the vowel inventory, these are the vowels which we would expect to have a more restricted distribution to only
certain positions. Since they do not occur at all in prefixes, this is perhaps an indication that their status as being marked plays a major role in the nature of prefix alternations.
For these reasons, I argue that [-ATR] is the marked and dominant value in prefix dissimilation. This is an important point to understand, because there is also evidence
elsewhere in Ikoma in stems and suffixes that [+ATR] is the marked and dominant value. Though this is an unusual and complex markedness situation, we must allow for
this complexity in order to adequately account for the facts. See Chapter 7 for more discussion of this markedness quandary.
176