Beyond the tree of texts: Building an empirical model of scribal variation through graph analysis of texts and stemmata

Stemmatology, or the reconstruction of the transmission history of texts, is a field that stands particularly to gain from digital methods. Many scholars already take stemmatic approaches that rely heavily on computational analysis of the collated text (e.g. Robinson and O’Hara 1996; Salemans 2000; Heikkilä 2005; Windram et al. 2008 among many others). Although there is great value in computationally assisted stemmatology, providing as it does a reproducible result and allowing access to the relevant methodological process in related fields such as evolutionary biology, computational stemmatics is not without its critics. The current state-of-the-art effectively forces scholars to choose between a preconceived judgment of the significance of textual differences (the Lachmannian or neo-Lachmannian approach, and the weighted phylogenetic approach) or to make no judgment at all (the unweighted phylogenetic approach). Some basis for judgment of the significance of variation is sorely needed for medieval text criticism in particular. By this, we mean that there is a need for a statistical empirical profile of the text-genealogical significance of the different sorts of variation in different sorts of medieval texts. The rules that apply to copies of Greek and Latin classics may not apply to copies of medieval Dutch story collections; the practices of copying authoritative texts such as the Bible will most likely have been different from the practices of copying the Lives of local saints and other commonly adapted texts. It is nevertheless imperative that we have a consistent, flexible, and analytically tractable model for capturing these phenomena of transmission. In this article, we present a computational model that captures most of the phenomena of text variation, and a method for analysis of one or more stemma hypotheses against the variation model. We apply this method to three ‘artificial traditions’ (i.e. texts copied under laboratory conditions by scholars to study the properties of text variation) and four genuine medieval traditions whose transmission history is known or deduced in varying degrees. Although our findings are necessarily limited by the small number of texts at our disposal, we demonstrate here some of the wide variety of calculations that can be made using our model. Certain of our results call sharply into question the utility of excluding ‘trivial’ variation such as orthographic and spelling changes from stemmatic analysis.

First thoughts on surface tonal patterns in Amawaka, a Panoan language of Peru and Brazil

Amawaka ([ɑmɨ̃ˈwɐkɑ]) is a highly endangered and underdocumented tonal language of the Headwaters (Fleck 2011) subgroup of the Panoan family in the Southwest Amazon Basin, spoken by approximately 200 people. Undocumented phonetic and phonological phenomena of Amawaka include its tonal structure, both in terms of surface realizations and the patterns underlying these realizations. Original audiovisual data from the author’s fieldwork in various Amawaka communities at the Peru-Brazil border will illuminate the as-yet obscure tonal systematicity of the language. Unlike other elements, monosyllabic bimoraic phonological nominal words with long vowels display variation in their surface realization. All the words with the open back unrounded /ɑ/, like /ˈkɑ̀:/ (patarashca, a traditional Amazonian dish), /ˈnɑ̀:/ “mestizo” etc. [with the exception of /ˈtɑ:/ “reed”, which surfaces with either a H or L tone] bear a low tone in isolation. This realization contrasts with all the encountered nominal monosyllables with vowels from the close and close-mid front and central spectrum /i, ɘ, ɨ, ɨ̃/, which clearly surface as high tone words in isolation, for example /ˈmɨ̃́:/ (a clay-lick for animals), /ˈwí:/ “Anopheles, spp. mosquito”. Monosyllables with close-mid back rounded /o/ have a less restrictive pitch that varies among speakers from low to high realizations, and sometimes even across the speech tokens from an individual speaker, e.g. /wó:/ or /wō:/ “hair”, /ɧō:/ or /ɧò:/ (a type of tarantula). Phrasal tonal phonology is more complex, when these three kinds of monosyllables appear in larger noun phrases. Some retain the same surface tones as their isolation form, while others seem to vary freely in their surface realization, e.g. /ˈtɘ́:.nɑ̀:/ or /ˈtɘ́:.nɑ́:/ ‘one mestizo’. Yet other monosyllables, e.g. /mɑ̀:/, exhibit a falling tone when preceded by a H syllable, suggesting probably latent tone sandhi phenomena, e.g /ˈtɘ́:.mɑ̂:/ (one clay-lick for parrots). In disyllabic, trisyllabic and quadrisyllabic nouns, tonal and stress patterns generally seem to be more consistent and tend to be retained both in isolation and in larger intonational phrases. Disyllabic nouns, for instance, surface as L-H or L-L when a glottal stop is in coda position. The association of L with a glottal stop is a feature that occurs in other Panoan languages as well, like Capanahua (Loos 1969), and more generally it is an areal feature, found in other parts of Amazonia (Hyman 2010). So, tone has significant interactions with the glottal stop and glottalization, which generally co-occurs with L. The data above suggest that the underlying tonal system of Amawaka is much more complex than the privative one-tone analysis (/H/ vs. Ø, i.e. lack of tone) that was proposed by Russell and Russell (1959). Evidence from field data suggests either an equipollent (Hyman 2010) two-tone opposition between /H/ and /L/, or a hybrid system, with both equipollent and privative features; that is, /H/ vs. /L/ vs. either Ø or /M/. This first systematic description of Amawaka tone, in conjunction with ongoing research, is poised to address broader questions concerning interrelationships between surface/underlying tone and other suprasegmental features, such as nasality, metrical stress, and intonation. References Fleck, David W. 2011. Panoan languages and linguistics. In Javier Ruedas and David W. Fleck (Eds.), Panoan Histories and Interethnic Identities, To appear. Hyman, Larry. 2010. Amazonia and the typology of tone systems. Presented at the conference Amazonicas III: The structure of the Amazonian languages. Bogotá. Loos, Eugene E. 1969. The phonology of Capanahua and its grammatical basis. Norman: SIL and U. Oklahoma. Russell, Robert & Dolores. 1959. Syntactotonemics in Amahuaca (Pano). Série Lingüistica Especial, 128-167. Publicaçoes do Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.

Towards an analysis of tonal patterns in Amawaka, a Panoan language of Peru and Brazil

Amawaka ([ɑmɨ̃ˈwɐkɑ]) is a highly endangered and underdocumented tonal language of the Headwaters (Fleck 2011) subgroup of the Panoan family in the Southwest Amazon Basin, spoken by approximately 200 people. Undocumented phonetic and phonological phenomena of Amawaka include its tonal structure, both in terms of surface realizations and the patterns underlying these realizations. Original audiovisual data from the author’s fieldwork in various Amawaka communities at the Peru-Brazil border will illuminate the as-yet obscure tonal systematicity of the language. Unlike other elements, monosyllabic bimoraic phonological nominal words with long vowels display variation in their surface realization. All the words with the open back unrounded /ɑ/, like /ˈkɑ̀:/ (a traditional Amazonian dish), /ˈnɑ̀:/ “mestizo” etc. [with the exception of /ˈtɑ:/ “reed”, which surfaces with either a H or L tone] bear a low tone in isolation. This realization contrasts with all the encountered nominal monosyllables with vowels from the close and close-mid front and central spectrum /i, ɘ, ɨ, ɨ̃/, which clearly surface as high tone words in isolation, for example /ˈmɨ̃́:/ (a clay-lick for animals), /ˈwí:/ “Anopheles, spp. mosquito”. Monosyllables with close-mid back rounded /o/ have a less restrictive pitch that varies among speakers from low to high realizations, and sometimes even across the speech tokens from an individual speaker, e.g. /wó:/ or /wō:/ “hair”, /ɧō:/ or /ɧò:/ (a type of tarantula). Phrasal tonal phonology is more complex, when these three kinds of monosyllables appear in larger noun phrases. Some retain the same surface tones as their isolation form, while others seem to vary freely in their surface realization, e.g. /ˈtɘ́:.nɑ̀:/ or /ˈtɘ́:.nɑ́:/ ‘one mestizo’. Yet other monosyllables, e.g. /mɑ̀:/, exhibit a falling tone when preceded by a H syllable, suggesting probably latent tone sandhi phenomena, e.g /ˈtɘ́:.mɑ̂:/ (one clay-lick for parrots). In disyllabic, trisyllabic and quadrisyllabic nouns, tonal and stress patterns generally seem to be more consistent and tend to be retained both in isolation and in larger intonational phrases. Disyllabic nouns, for instance, surface as L-H or L-L when a glottal stop is in coda position. The association of L with a glottal stop is a feature that occurs in other Panoan languages as well, like Capanahua (Loos 1969), and more generally it is an areal feature, found in other parts of Amazonia (Hyman 2010). So, tone has significant interactions with the glottal stop and glottalization, which generally co-occurs with L. The data above suggest that the underlying tonal system of Amawaka is much more complex than the privative one-tone analysis (/H/ vs. Ø, i.e. lack of tone) that was proposed by Russell and Russell (1959). Evidence from field data suggests either an equipollent (Hyman 2010) two-tone opposition between /H/ and /L/, or a hybrid system, with both equipollent and privative features; that is, /H/ vs. /L/ vs. either Ø or /M/. This first systematic description of Amawaka tone, in conjunction with ongoing research, is poised to address broader questions concerning interrelationships between surface/underlying tone and other suprasegmental features, such as nasality, metrical stress, and intonation. References Fleck, David W. 2011. Panoan languages and linguistics. In Javier Ruedas and David W. Fleck (Eds.), Panoan Histories and Interethnic Identities, To appear. Hyman, Larry. 2010. Amazonia and the typology of tone systems. Presented at the conference Amazonicas III: The structure of the Amazonian languages. Bogotá. Loos, Eugene E. 1969. The phonology of Capanahua and its grammatical basis. Norman: SIL and U. Oklahoma. Russell, Robert & Dolores. 1959. Syntactotonemics in Amahuaca (Pano). Série Lingüistica Especial, 128-167. Publicaçoes do Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.