# Metathesis and unmetathesis in Amarasi

Owen Edwards

Studies in Diversity Linguistics 29

### Studies in Diversity Linguistics

### Editor: Martin Haspelmath

In this series:

# Metathesis and unmetathesis in Amarasi

Owen Edwards

Edwards, Owen. 2020. *Metathesis and unmetathesis in Amarasi* (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 29). Berlin: Language Science Press.

This title can be downloaded at: http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/228 © 2020, Owen Edwards Published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence (CC BY 4.0): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Indexed in EBSCO ISBN: 978-3-96110-222-8 (Digital) 978-3-96110-223-5 (Hardcover)

ISSN: 2363-5568 DOI:10.5281/zenodo.3700413 Source code available from www.github.com/langsci/228 Collaborative reading: paperhive.org/documents/remote?type=langsci&id=228

Cover and concept of design: Ulrike Harbort Typesetting: Owen Edwards Proofreading: Brett Reynolds, Christian Döhler, Cormac Anderson, Jeroen van de Weijer, Laura Arnold, Ludger Paschen, Sauvane Agnès, Sebastian Nordhoff, Steven Kaye, Tom Bossuyt Fonts: Linux Libertine, Libertinus Math, Arimo, DejaVu Sans Mono Typesetting software: XƎLATEX

Language Science Press xHain Grünberger Straße 16 10243 Berlin, Germany langsci-press.org

Storage and cataloguing done by FU Berlin

For Chuck and Om Roni who laid the groundwork in analysing Amarasi.

## **Preface**

This book is a revised version of my PhD Thesis, submitted August 2016 awarded July 2017. The analyses in this work remain broadly the same as those in my PhD thesis, but several areas have undergone substantial revision.

The most significant analytical revision is in the analysis of phonologically conditioned metathesis (Chapter 5). This revision is informed by a proper analysis of the prosodic structures of Amarasi including the Prosodic Word (§3.3). A proper understanding and description of Amarasi prosodic structures was mostly lacking in the earlier work.

Structurally, chapter 2 has been significantly reorganised on the basis of comments from the reviewers in order to clarify the distinction between the three types of metathesis I identify, as well as to avoid shoe-horning languages with multiple kinds of metathesis into a single category.

I have also included a more proper discussion of alternate analyses of the structure of Amarasi metathesis (§4.4), as well as syntactic metathesis (§6.8).

Since the submission of my PhD thesis much more data on other varieties of Meto has also become available. In addition to including such data where it is relevant, it has also informed my analysis of Amarasi in several important respects.Thus, for instance, vowel initial enclitics which were mostly represented as monosyllables in my earlier work are now properly represented as containing two vowels (§5.8).

Of particular prominence is the additional data on Ro'is Amarasi (the other major dialect of Amarasi) for which I only had limited preliminary data for my PhD thesis. I have included several sections discussing the Ro'is data as it has several important differences to that of Kotos Amarasi (e.g. §4.6.3, §7.11).

Finally, numerous errors have been corrected. These include typographical errors and minor errors in the actual data.

## **Acknowledgements**

Given that this work is a revision of my PhD thesis, I must also revise my acknowledgements. No names need be subtracted from the acknowledgements for my PhD thesis, but several must be added or re-emphasised.

First and foremost, and again, I would like to thank **Heronimus Bani** and **Charles Grimes**. My PhD work would have been a complete disaster without the groundwork laid by Roni and Chuck and subsequently this book would never have appeared. I look forward to continuing to to work with them in championing, in whatever small way I can, the languages and peoples of Timor.

Selain itu beta ju mau minta terima kasih buat semua orang Tunbaun dong dengan orang Buraen dong. Khususunya **Om Melo** dengan dia pung keluarga, dan **bapa Toni** dengan **mama Ketsia**; orang dong yang mengajar beta logat Ro'is.

Secondly, I would like to thank the examiners of my thesis: **Anthony Jukes**, **Daniel Kaufmann** and **Marian Klamer**. Their perceptive comments on the submitted version of this thesis led to many useful revisions of that work, some of which have taken until now to be fully implemented.

In particular, Daniel Kaufmann suggested the revised prosodic structure of hosts and enclitics which has made my analysis of phonological metathesis much clearer and more typologically plausible.

Marian Klamer provided me with the job during which I have had the freedom to produce this work. It is with gratitude that I say here that revision of my thesis for publication was supported by the VICI research project "Reconstructing the past through languages of the present: the Lesser Sunda Islands" funded by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, project number 277-70-012.

Thirdly, I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers who read the submitted version of this book. While it is often frustrating dealing with comments from reviewers, in my experience, they are nearly always on point and addressing them properly yields a better result. I hope these reviewers feel I have honoured the time they put into assessing this work by properly considering their insightful criticisms.

Fourthly, I would like to thank the editors of Language Science Press, **Martin Haspelmath** and **Sebastian Nordhoff** who have guided the manuscript to publi-

### Acknowledgements

cation, as well as the proofreaders who caught many of the typographical errors and style issues. Listed in reverse-alphabetical order:**Jeroen van de Weijer**, **Brett Reynolds**, **Ludger Paschen**, **Sebastian Nordhoff**, **Steven Kaye**, **Christian Döhler**, **Tom Bossuyt**, **Laura Arnold**, **Cormac Anderson**, and **Sauvane Agnès**. I would also like to thank **Philipp Conzett** and TROLLing (The Tromsø Repository of Language and Linguistics) where the recordings on which this book is based are hosted.

The deficiencies which undoubtedly remain in this work are entirely my own responsibility and none of the people mentioned in these acknowledgements are responsible for them.

Finally, from the moment I submitted my PhD thesis I have had the pleasure of getting to know **Kirsten Culhane**. I have enjoyed spending time with her and conversations with her have contributed to many different parts of this work. *Bi Kirsten, au 'neek ko msa'.*

*Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind.* (Isaiah 65:17a)

*Rarit In re' antuun On anbi 'toko prenat naan, na'uab am nak, "Amkius mirek-reko', natuin Au u'fe'u are' kanan saa'-saa'."* (Rasi Mnitas neu nai' Yohanis 21.5a)

## **Abbreviations and symbols**

### Abbreviations and symbols

## **1 Introduction**

### **1.1 Overview**

This book is about synchronic metathesis. One well known case of synchronic metathesis comes from Rotuman, in which many words have two forms, such as *pure* ~ *puer* 'rule, decide' (Churchward 1940: 14, discussed in more detail in §2.3.2). In this book I present new data from Amarasi, a language which also has synchronic metathesis. Observe the natural textual data in (1) below.

(1) Going to a party: 130902-1, 1.43

'Owen's handkerchief fell, it fell and was lost.'

The metathesis of Amarasi *mofu* ~ *mouf* 'fall' in (1) is formally almost identical to Rotuman metathesis in examples such as *pure* ~ *puer* 'rule, decide'. In each case the final CV sequence of a CVCV stem metathesises to VC, as illustrated in (2) below with the architecture of Autosegmental Phonology (Goldsmith 1976).

Synchronic metathesis in Amarasi is phonologically very similar to previously described cases in other languages. Furthermore, in certain environments the phonology alone determines whether the metathesised or unmetathesised form

### 1 Introduction

of a word will appear in Amarasi. However, phonology alone cannot predict that reversal of the position of the metathesised and unmetathesised words in (1) produces a sentence judged ungrammatical by native speakers, as shown in (3).

(3) \* *naiʔ* Mr. *Owen* Owen *ina* 3sg *ʔpiurʔ=ee* cloth=3det *n-mofu,* 3-fall *n-mouf* 3-fall *=ma* =and *na-mneuk.* 3-lose '(Owen's handkerchief fell, it fell and was lost.)' elicit. 22/02/16 p.19

The forms of synchronic metathesis in several languages have been well described. This has lead to much useful discussion about the kinds of phonological models which best handle metathesis, as found in works including Besnier (1987); van der Hulst & van Engelenhoven (1995); Hume (1998); Hume & Seo (2004); Hume (2004), and Heinz (2004), among others.

Despite this interest in the form of synchronic metathesis, there has been relatively little attention given to the functions of synchronic metathesis and the different environments in which an unmetathesised or metathesised form of a word is used. This work partially redresses this imbalance. I provide a detailed analysis of the functions and environments of synchronic metathesis in Amarasi. This includes one instance of phonologically conditioned metathesis and two different morphological uses of metathesis, neither of which can be reduced to a phonologically conditioned process.

I begin in Chapter 2 with a discussion of processes of synchronic metathesis in languages of the world. The focus in this chapter is on languages spoken in the same region as Amarasi, particularly languages with morphological metathesis. There are many similarities in both the form and use of metathesis in these languages. Chapter 2 allows me to position the Amarasi data within its geographic and typological context.

After a discussion of Amarasi phonology and phonotactics in Chapter 3, in Chapter 4 I provide a detailed investigation of the form of metathesis in Amarasi. Depending on the phonotactic structure of the stem to which it applies, metathesis is associated with a bewildering array of disparate phonological processes including vowel deletion, consonant deletion, consonant insertion, and multiple kinds of vowel assimilation. All these phonological processes can be derived from a single process of metathesis and one associated morphemically conditioned process by proposing that Amarasi has an obligatory CVCVC foot in which C-slots can be empty.

The structure of the words *fatu* 'stone', *kaut* 'papaya' and *ai* 'fire' under this analysis are given in (4) below. Evidence independent of metathesis for empty C-

### 1.1 Overview

slots in Amarasi is presented in (§3.3.7). Such evidence consists of five languageinternal phenomena as well as comparative data.

The presence of phonological processes in addition to metathesis leads me to label forms corresponding to unmetathesised forms as *U-forms* and those corresponding to metathesised forms as *M-forms*. 1

In Chapter 5 I analyse phonologically conditioned metathesis in Amarasi. Before vowel-initial enclitics, metathesis occurs to clearly mark a phonological boundary between a clitic host and vowel-initial enclitic. The final consonant of a clitic host is shared between the host and clitic. Metathesis creates a final consonant cluster which is resolved by the final consonant de-linking from the clitic host but remaining linked to the enclitic, thus creating a crisp edge between the host and enclitic.

In chapters 6 and 7 I provide detailed analyses of morphological metathesis in Amarasi. Amarasi has two morphological uses of metathesis: one taken by medial members of phrases (noun phrases or verb phrases) to mark the internal syntactic structure of the phrase and one taken by final members of phrases which marks discourse structures. These two morphological uses of metathesis occur in complementary environments: phrase medial and phrase final. As a result there is no competition between each morphological use of metathesis and no direct structural interaction between them. A single sentence may contain both types of morphological metathesis with the medial members of a particular phrase expressing the internal syntax of this phrase and the final member using metathesis to mark the discourse status of the phrase.

In Chapter 6 I provide a detailed analysis of Amarasi metathesis within the syntax. In the syntax metathesis is a morphological process taken by medial members of a phrase to signal attributive modification. Metathesis is a construct form which marks the presence of a dependent modifier of the same word class as the head, as illustrated in (5a) below. Metathesis alone distinguishes attributive phrases from phrases with a different syntactic structure, such as equa-

1The terms U-form and M-form can be taken as abbreviations for the form where *U* stands for *unmetathesised* and *M* for *metathesised*. They can also be taken as abbreviations for the functions of these forms, as in the syntax M-forms mark *modification* and in the discourse U-forms mark *unresolved* events or situations. The *U* in U-form can also be an abbreviation for the morphologically *underlying* form.

### 1 Introduction

tive clauses, illustrated in (5b) below. Within the syntax a metathesised form cannot occur at the end of a phrase and thus usually entails the presence of an unmetathesised form which syntactically completes it. Metathesised and unmetathesised forms comprise a parallel and complementary pair of morphological forms within the syntax.

In Chapter 7 I provide a detailed analysis of Amarasi metathesis within the discourse. In the discourse an unmetathesised phrase-final form marks an unresolved event or situation which requires another phrase or clause to achieve resolution. This is the use of metathesis illustrated in (1) above. A discourse-driven unmetathesised form cannot occur in isolation and typically requires a metathesised form to achieve resolution. Unmetathesised and metathesised forms comprise a complementary and parallel pair of morphological forms within the discourse.

I conclude in Chapter 8 with a unified analysis Amarasi metathesis. Metathesis in Amarasi is not merely a phonological epiphenomenon or exotic curiosity. Rather, metathesis is the key which unlocks the structure and genius of the Amarasi language. Metathesis also reflects fundamental Timorese notions of societal and cosmic organisation. Metathesis is one marker of identity in a region obsessed with marking multiple levels of identity between different groups.

The complementarity of metathesis and unmetathesis within the syntax and that within discourse – and also cross-cutting discourse and syntax – reflects the Timorese division of the world into a series of parallel and complementary pairs. More than simply being the key which unlocks the structure of the language, metathesis is a deep reflection of the structure of Amarasi society and culture.

This book also contains four appendices. Appendix A provides a sketch of affixal morphology in Amarasi. Appendix B discusses cases of morphological metathesis in languages outside of the greater Timor region. Appendix C provides four complete glossed Amarasi texts of different genres: one historical narrative, one myth, one conversation and one Ro'is Amarasi narrative. These three texts allow the reader to see how metathesis operates across a complete text. Appendix D provides information and metadata on the texts referred to throughout this book, as discussed further in §1.5 below.

### 1.2 Language background

### **1.2 Language background**

Amarasi is a variety of Meto. Meto, also known as Uab Meto, Dawan(ese), Timorese or Atoni,2 is a cluster of closely related Austronesian languages and dialects spoken on the western part of the island of Timor; both in the East Timorese enclave of Oecusse, as well as in the Indonesian province of Nusa Tenggara Timur. The location of the Meto cluster is shown in Figure 1.1 along with other languages of Timor. The identity and location of languages in Timor-Leste in Figure 1.1 is mainly based on Williams-van Klinken & Williams (2015).

Figure 1.1: Language groups of Timor

Meto speakers think of their speech as a single language and call it *(uab) metoʔ*, *(bahasa) timor* or occasionally *(bahasa) dawan*. Speakers also recognize more than a dozen named varieties of Meto. These varieties themselves have named dialects, with further differences found between different villages and hamlets of a single dialect. A map of self-identified Meto varieties is given in Figure 1.2.

2 In earlier works I referred to this language cluster as Uab Meto. In Amarasi *uab metoʔ* can be glossed as 'dry/indigenous speech'. However, not all Meto speaking areas use *uab* for 'speech'. Thus, in Amfo'an 'speech' is *aguab* while in some other areas, such as Timaus, it is *molok*. Use of *Meto* alone as the name of the language cluster thus covers more varieties in an emic manner. It also matches native use in which *metoʔ* alone can refer to the language. Such use is seen in phrases such as *iin nahiin metoʔ* 'S/he knows (how to speak) Meto'.

### 1 Introduction

Figure 1.2: Self-identified varieties of Meto

The borders of the self-identified varieties of Meto shown in Figure 1.2 match closely the borders of the pre-colonial political kingdoms of western Timor.3 The extent to which these boundaries follow linguistic differences is unknown. In reality, the Meto cluster is a complex language/dialect chain, and is comparable to more well known cases such as the German chain or the Romance chain. The nature and extent of variation among Meto varieties has not been fully studied. Phonological, lexical, semantic, and grammatical diversity is not insignificant and speakers frequently report difficulty communicating with speakers of other varieties. As a result, Meto speakers of different varieties often use a mixture of Meto and Indonesian/Kupang Malay in order to communicate.

### **1.2.1 Affiliation**

Within Austronesian, Meto belongs to the Malayo-Polynesian subgroup which includes all Austronesian languages outside of Taiwan. It would further belong to Central Malayo-Polynesian within Central-Eastern Malayo-Polynesian (Blust

3The main exceptions are Kusa-Manea, which was part of the Tetun speaking Wehali kingdom, as well as Timaus, Baumata, Kopas, and Ketun, which all appear to be the result of migrations from more northerly areas.

### 1.2 Language background

1981; 1993; 2009) but the extent to which these constitute valid linguistic subgroups is contested (Ross 1995; Adelaar 2005; Donohue & Grimes 2008).

Closer to home, the nearest genealogical relative of Meto is the Rote cluster spoken on the island of Rote just to the south-west of Timor. Based on shared sound changes, Rote-Meto can be placed in a Timor-Babar subgroup which contains the Austronesian languages of Timor and south-west Maluku (from Babar island to Wetar island), though excluding Mambae, Tokodede, Welaun, and Kemak which form a Central Timor subgroup (Edwards 2018c; 2019).

While Meto is demonstrably Austronesian, it has strong influence from at least one – probably more – pre-Austronesian languages of the region (Edwards 2016c; 2018a). This substrate is reflected at all levels of the language: lexicon, phonology, morphology, and syntax.

Typologically, Meto fits well in the Melanesian linguistic area with four to five of the six properties identified by Schapper (2015) as constituting this area. The only property of linguistic Melanesia which Meto unambiguously lacks is that of having complex numerals below ten. Apart from this Meto has genitive-noun order, absence of velar nasal /ŋ/, noun-numeral order and possessive classification, all of which are typical of linguistic Melanesia.

Another property of linguistic Melanesia is verb-negator order. Regarding this property, most varieties of Meto for which data is available have double negation with *ka=* occurring before the verb and *=fa* after the verb. However, Ro'is Amarasi has post-verbal *=maeʔ* while Amfo'an only has pre-verbal *ka=*.

While Meto fits well within linguistic Melanesia, it is, based on current understanding, only a peripheral member of linguistic Wallacea as identified by Schapper (2015). Schapper gives four properties of linguistic Wallacea: cognates of #muku 'banana', neuter gender, semantic alignment, and synchronic metathesis. Of these, Meto only has synchronic metathesis.

### **1.2.2 Amarasi**

Amarasi is spoken towards the south-west end of the Meto speech area. One salient feature which sets Amarasi apart from most other Meto varieties is the liquid /r/ instead of /l/; most Meto varieties have only a single liquid.4

Amarasi speakers identify three Amarasi dialects: Kotos, Ro'is, and Tais Nonof. Current data indicates that Tais Nonof is a label for the speech of those living along the coast of the Amarasi area, including those whose speech is most sim-

4Amabi also has /r/ instead of /l/ as does Kusa-Manea, though /l/ occurs in many Tetun loanwords in Kusa-Manea. Timaus has both /l/ and /r/ due to a \*ʤ > /r/ sound change.

### 1 Introduction

ilar to Kotos Amarasi and those whose speech is most similar to Ro'is Amarasi. Amarasi speakers also report that the Amabi variety of Meto is very similar to their own speech with minor lexical differences.

Differences between Kotos Amarasi and Ro'is Amarasi include different functors (grammatical morphemes), lexicon, phonotactics, as well as having undergone different sound changes. A number of functors in Ro'is and Kotos Amarasi are shown in Table 1.1 as a sample of the divergence between these two lects.

Table 1.1: Different Kotos and Ro'is functors

In fact, looking only at linguistic structures and shared sound changes, Kotos Amarasi is more closely related to other varieties of Meto than it is to Ro'is Amarasi. Nonetheless, speakers of Kotos and Ro'is self-identify their speech as more similar to one another than to other Meto varieties. They frequently interact together and both share a common history as members of the Amarasi kingdom. Thus, from a socio-historical perspective, Kotos and Ro'is can be considered "dialects" of a single language.5

Data from Kotos Amarasi forms the basis of this book. I present Ro'is Amarasi data at various points when it bears on the analysis of Kotos Amarasi and/or differs in important respects. My Kotos data comes mostly from the hamlet *(kampung)* Koro'oto, in the modern village *(desa)* Nekmese'. My Ro'is data comes from the hamlet of Suit in the village of Buraen, as well as the hamlets of Batuna and Ruanrete in the village of Tunbaun. The locations of these villages within the Amarasi speech area are shown in Figure 1.3.

5Kotos and Ro'is speakers perceive their speech as closer to one another based on salient commonalities not found in nearby varieties of Meto. Such commonalities include /r/ instead of /l/ and lexical items, such as *koʔu* 'big' instead of *ʔnaek*, or *n-kono* 'keep going' instead of *n-fini*.

### 1.2 Language background

Figure 1.3: Locations of Nekmese', Buraen, and Tunbaun

From 1968–1975 west Timor underwent an administrative restructure with the creation of the administrative units of districts (*kecamatan*) and villages (*desa*). In Amarasi 60 hamlets were amalgamated into 23 villages. In parts of Amarasi this amalgamation was also accompanied by the physical relocation of traditional hamlets in order to allow for a more efficient development of infrastructure and delivery of services.

Nekmese' – data from which forms the core of this work – was created by the amalgamation of four hamlets: Koro'oto, Fo'asa', Tuamese' and Naet. These hamlets still exist as *dusun* (the administrative level below *desa*) and form the basis of the parishes of the dominant Christian denomination in the village (the protestant GMIT church6 ) People also maintain their gardens and fields in the vicinity of the old hamlets.7

Despite the administrative and physical restructure of 1968–1975, the traditional hamlets of Nekmese' are alive and well as distinct social and linguistic units. A summary of the speech variety which is the focus of this work is given in (6) below. Unless explicitly labelled otherwise, all data is Kotos Amarasi from the hamlet of Koro'oto.

6GMIT is an acronym of *Gereja Masehi Injili di Timor*; for which the official translation is 'The Evangelical Protestant Church of Timor'. There are four GMIT parishes in Nekmese': one serving Koro'oto, one for Fo'asa' and Tuamese', and two for Naet.

7 Inhabitants of Koro'oto have moved the furthest, with *desa* Nekmese' being located close to the original locations of Fo'asa' and Tuamese'. The inhabitants of Naet have moved from their original location towards Nekmese', but Naet remains dislocated from the rest of Nekmese'. The inhabitants of Naet speak the Tais Nonof variety of Amarasi.

### 1 Introduction

	- b. Variety: *Amarasi*
	- c. Dialect: *Kotos*
	- d. Hamlet: *Koro'oto*

### **1.3 Previous work**

The earliest description of Meto known to me is Müller (1857), which contains a wordlist in what is probably a variety of Molo. After this, the next earliest work is Kleian (1894) which contain what appears to be an Amanuban wordlist, though forms from other varieties are also given.

There are also works by the Dutch linguist J. C. G. Jonker which contain data on Meto. This includes Jonker (1904: 270f) which is a one page glossed Amfo'an text with notes. Jonker (1906) discusses word-final consonants in a number of Austronesian languages including Meto. The Meto data in Jonker (1906) is mostly Amfo'an, though data on other varieties, including Amarasi, is also given. Much of Jonker's Meto data also occurs in etymological notes in Jonker (1908); an 805 page dictionary of the Termanu variety of the Rote cluster.

Capell (1944a) provides a wordlist in Meto "from Dutch sources". This appears to be based on Jonker's data and Jonker (1906) is the source for the discussion of final consonants in Capell (1944b: 29).

The first in depth treatment of Meto is that of the Dutch missionary Pieter Middelkoop. Middelkoop published a collection of Amarasi texts (Middelkoop 1939) which had been previously collected by Jonker, a collection of funeral chants (Middelkoop 1949), and a sketch grammar of Molo (Middelkoop 1950). The other work by Middelkoop is an unpublished 673-page draft dictionary of Molo, which was still in preparation before his death (Middelkoop 1972).8 Middelkoop's materials on Meto contain much valuable data. However, the transcription employed by Middelkoop is not phonemic and certain contrasts are under-represented.

There are also a number of papers on Meto by Hein Steinhauer, who worked on the Nilulat dialect of Miomafo. This includes a description of verb morphology (Steinhauer 1993) and a series of papers which provide an initial description of the form of metathesis within the noun phrase (Steinhauer 1996a,b; 2008).

Other works which I have been able to access on Meto include a Masters Thesis on Miomafo (Talul 1988), a grammar produced by the Indonesian Pusat Ba-

8Thanks goes to James Fox for giving me his copy of Middelkoop (1972).

### 1.4 Data for this work

hasa (Tarno et al. 1989),9 a description of quantification in Amanuban (Metboki & Bellamy 2014), an Optimality Theory account of the segmental phonology of Miomafo (Isu 2013), a description of consonant insertion in Nai'bais Amfo'an (Culhane 2018), and a discussion of serial verb constructions in Amarasi as being one source of similar constructions in Kupang Malay (Jacob & Grimes 2011).

### **1.4 Data for this work**

The core of the Amarasi data on which this work is based is a corpus of recorded texts totalling nearly nineteen hours of which about five hours has been processed. This includes a little more than three hours of transcribed, translated, and glossed Kotos texts, as well as just over two hours of transcribed and translated Ro'is texts. These texts are of a variety of genres and include narratives, folk-tales, conversations, and traditional poetry.

An index of the texts which comprise this corpus is given in Appendix D. These texts are archived with the Pacific And Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures (PARADISEC) and nearly all are freely downloadable.

My Kotos texts were collected in three field trips totalling seven months I made in 2013, 2014, and 2016 over the course of my PhD work. During these field trips I was hosted in Timor by Heronimus Bani (Roni), a native speaker of Amarasi, in the village of Nekmese'. These texts were recorded either by me or by Roni and then transcribed and translated by native speakers of Amarasi, either Roni or Yedida Ora (Oma). I then checked the initial transcriptions against the recording and glossed the text in Toolbox. All my Kotos Amarasi texts can be accessed from http://catalog.paradisec.org.au/collections/OE1.

During 2012 I was a participant in a two week language documentation workshop held in Kupang: *Preserving Knowledge through Recording and Writing Local Languages*. During this workshop a number of additional Kotos Amarasi texts were recorded and transcribed by Oma.

My Ro'is texts were collected during a field trip at the end of 2018 while undertaking an Australia Awards Endeavour Fellowship. During this trip I spent one week in Buraen with Toni Buraen and his family, followed by two weeks in Tunbaun with Melianus Obhetan and his family. I transcribed my Ro'is Amarasi texts and then checked them with native speakers. My Ro'is Amarasi texts can be downloaded from http://catalog.paradisec.org.au/collections/OE2.

9Thanks goes to Patrick McConvell for providing me with his copies of Talul (1988) and Tarno et al. (1989).

### 1 Introduction

In addition to this text corpus, I also conducted a number of elicitation sessions with Roni in 2016. This elicitation involved working through recorded texts with Roni and manipulating individual parts of sentences for grammaticality judgements. When a manipulated sentence was accepted as grammatical, I would then have Roni say it back to me. This often resulted in him rejecting a sentence he had originally accepted. Elicitation was also carried out with Oma on a number of occasions.

This data is supplemented by a translation of the New Testament and Genesis into Kotos Amarasi: Unit Bahasa & Budaya (2015). 10 This translation was carried out by native Amarasi speakers and is completely natural and idiomatic Amarasi as evidenced by the fact that it is full of grammatical constructions that differ from both Indonesian and Kupang Malay (used as front translation). Before publication this translation was checked with at least three different groups of native speakers comprising three or more speakers in each group (representing a good cross section of age, gender, and educational levels) for clarity and naturalness. The material was tested and further refined with each successive group, then followed by a smoothing read-through looking at naturalness and flow before publishing.

Data from this translation is presented when it contains good, clear exemplars of rare constructions. However, no part of my analysis rests solely on data found only in the Amarasi Bible translation. See Heider et al. (2011) and Dryer (2013: 2) for discussion of the use of Bible translations as sources of linguistic data.

A final source of Kotos Amarasi data is a series of primary school readers translated from Kupang Malay into Amarasi by Yedida Ora (Ora 2016a,b,c). These readers have also been checked and edited for naturalness and fluency.

In addition to all this Amarasi data, I also have also collected data on the following varieties of Meto, some of which appears at various points in this book: Timaus (half an hour of transcribed, translated, and glossed texts, as well as 1 hour 15 minutes untranscribed texts, lexicon of 685 headwords), Kusa-Manea (four hours of untranscribed texts, lexicon of 488 headwords), Amanuban (22 untranscribed texts, 8 wordlists), Ketun (3 untranscribed texts, 3 wordlists), Kopas (3 untranscribed texts, 5 wordlists), Fatule'u (2 wordlists), and Amfo'an (1 wordlist). I also have Baikeno data collected during the 2012 Kupang language documentation workshop, as well as data collected and provided by Charles Grimes. Unless otherwise cited, all Meto data in this book comes from these sources.

10This translation can be accessed online at www.e-alkitab.org or downloaded for free on Android devices from Google Playstore (search: Amarasi Bible).

1.5 Presentation of data and notational conventions

### **1.5 Presentation of data and notational conventions**

Data from Amarasi, or another variety of Meto, is transcribed phonemically and presented in italic font.11 Example sentences are given with up to two gloss lines. A typical example is given in (7) below.

The first line is the phonemic transcription with morpheme breaks indicated. Affixes are separated by the hyphen -. Enclitics are separated from their host by the equals sign =. Vowel initial enclitics which induce morphophonemic processes on their host (Chapter 5), are attached directly to the host, while other enclitics are offset. An example of each kind of enclitic can be seen in (7) with vowel initial *=esa* 'one' and consonant initial *=m* 'and'.

Word-initial epenthetic /a/ is separated by the vertical line |. The underscore \_ is used to separate two parts of a phrase with a non-compositional meaning or phrases where one element does not occur independently. An example of epenthesis occurs in *a|n-kobub* 'piled up' in (8) below, and an example of a noncompositional phrase is *paha\_ʔpinan* 'country\_below' = 'world' in (8).

Instances of Indonesian/Kupang Malay code-switching or unassimilated loans are transcribed in a sans-serif typeface. Thus, in example (7) the word *ahirɲa* 'in the end' is from Kupang Malay *ahirnya*. Phonetic strings which are pauses are indicated by a final *<hh>* and are usually unglossed. In example (7) *ahh* is a pause with the phonetic quality approximating [aːː], similarly *nehh* is a pause which sounds like [nɛːː]. False starts are not glossed and indicated by a final en-dash –. One example is the final *n–* in example (7) above. Commas indicate pauses and/or intonation breaks and full stops represent the end of an intonation unit. Capital letters are only used for proper names.

The second line gives the underlying form of morphemes before processes of metathesis, consonant insertion, and vowel assimilation occur. It also gives the

11There are only three non-phonemic aspects of my transcription. Firstly, foreign proper names are transcribed orthographically when they contain non-native phonemes the IPA representation of which is not identical to their orthographic, e.g. *Lince* [liɲʧe]. Secondly, /ɡw/ is transcribed *<g>* before rounded vowels (§<IP_ADDRESS>). Thirdly, /n/ → [ŋ] is transcribed *<ng>* when it occurs before /ɡw/ without an intervening morpheme break. These last two non-phonemic conventions can be seen in the word for 'teacher', which according to my analysis has the form /tunɡwuru/, but is transcribed as *tuŋguru*.

### 1 Introduction

underlying forms of enclitics which have multiple forms (§3.7.3). The third line gives the morpheme by morpheme gloss. When a morpheme is ambiguous between several values, these values are separated by a slash /. An example is the verbal agreement prefix *m-* '1px/2' which agrees with first person exclusive, second person singular, and second person plural. Glosses mostly follow the Leipzig Glossing Rules with a full list of glosses used in this book, including non-standard glosses, given beginning on page xiii.

Table 1.2: Glosses for U-forms and M-forms

Glosses indicating U-forms and M-forms are usually only given when potentially relevant to the discussion at hand. Glosses for U-forms and M-forms in different phonotactic environments are given in Table 1.2, with a number of examples given in (8)–(11) below. See Chapter 4 for more discussion of the distribution of each of these forms. Glosses for U-forms or M-forms are not given when a form does not distinguish between them.

### 1.5 Presentation of data and notational conventions

(11) *afi\_naa* afi\_naa yesterday *au* au 1sg *ʔ-tae* ʔ-tae ʔ-look.down *iin* ini 3sg *sura* surat paper\**m**ͨ *srainʔ=ii* sraniʔ=ii baptism\**m**̿=1det *=t* =te =sub 'Yesterday when I looked at her baptismal certificate,' 130821-1, 6.20

Gloss lines are followed by a free translation into English. Words not present in the Amarasi example but supplied in the free translation to increase its naturalness are enclosed in brackets (). Important para-linguistic information such as gestures are described in square brackets [] in the free translation. Occasionally a literal translation of part or all of the Amarasi example is given. Literal translations are enclosed in brackets and preceded by the abbreviation '*lit.*'.

The numeric code to the right of the free translation is a reference to which text the example comes from. These codes follow the format *yy-mm-dd-no., time in text*.Thus, the code 120715-4, 0.55 in example (7) above indicates that this example begins at about 55 seconds into the fourth recording made on the 15/07/2012.

Examples with the speaker icon have an accompanying sound file. These sound files can be downloaded from TROLLing (The Tromsø Repository of Language and Linguistics) at https://doi.org/10.18710/IORWF6 (Edwards 2020). These sound files are organised in the repository according to the chapter in which they occur with additional information on their specific location, such as example or table number, embedded in the file name. See the ReadMe in the TROLLing repository for a complete explanation.

In addition to examples from my text collection, three other kinds of examples occur. Firstly, data which was encountered during the course of my fieldwork but not recorded is indicated as *observation* usually with the date and page reference to my notebook; e.g. observation 09/10/14, p.113. Secondly, data which were collected during elicitation are marked as *elicit.* with the date and page reference to my notebook; e.g. elicit. 15/03/2016 p.47 Finally, data from the Amarasi Bible translation are referenced by book, chapter, and verse, e.g. John 3:16.

When longer examples from a single text are given, a short description usually precedes the text (followed by the unique code cross referencing the text). The data following this title is then labelled alphabetically. An example is given in (12) below. When an example involves more than one speaker, different speakers are indicated with Greek letters.

1 Introduction

> b. *a|n-moʔe* n-moʔe 3-make *=ma* =ma =and *n-pooʤ=ena* n-poi=ena 3-exit=incep *n-bi* n-bi 3-rl.loc *metoʔ.* metoʔ dry '(he) made and went out onto dry land.' 0.45

When data on languages other than Amarasi or Meto is cited, such data is transcribed in italics phonemically according to IPA conventions.12 Data from languages with a widely used standard orthography are usually transcribed orthographically followed by a phonemic IPA transcription, an example is English *mouse* /maʊs/.

### **1.6 Goals and the use of theory**

The main goal of this book is to present an accurate description of the forms and functions of metathesis in Amarasi (chapters 4–7). A secondary goal is to propose a clear analysis of the data. A third goal to situate the Amarasi data within its typological, geographical, and cultural context (Chapters 2 and 8)

Notably, it is *not* the main goal of this book to present the Amarasi data as an argument in favour of any particular theoretical model. While I make frequent use of representations and tools from different theoretical models, I do so mainly to illustrate clearly aspects of the Amarasi data in a helpful way and as explicit strategy to summarise certain generalisations.

Thus, in Chapters 4 and 5 I make use of Autosegmental theory as it helpfully illustrates the processes which occur in the derivation of M-forms from U-forms. Similarly, in describing M-forms before consonant clusters §4.6 I make use of Optimality Theory as the tableaux of this theory illustrate well the large number of potential outputs a particular string could generate. Likewise, in Chapter 6 I make use of X-bar theory to analyse the role of metathesis within the syntax.

In general, different theoretical models and the analyses these entail are deployed in this book in an expedient manner according to what seems most illuminating for the Amarasi data. The primary use of theory is to present a clear and simple analysis of Amarasi metathesis, not a theoretically consistent analysis. Thus, the observant reader will note, for instance, that in my account of phonologically conditioned metathesis in Chapter 5 I make frequent use of constraints developed within Optimality Theory without ever presenting an Optimality Theory tableau. While I find some Optimality Theory constraints helpful in under-

12For the sake of complete clarity, the palatal glide /j/ is always transcribed *<j>* while the palatal affricate /ʤ/ is always transcribed *<ʤ>*.

1.7 Terminology

standing the data, an actual account embedded within Optimality Theory clouds rather than illuminates the description.13

The main exception to this approach is in the analysis of the structure of metathesis in Chapter 4. In this chapter I explicitly formulate an analysis using an autosegmental model of phonology (Goldsmith 1976) and a rule-based model of process morphology (Matthews 1974; Anderson 1992). I do this because these models allow me to propose a unified analysis of the form of Amarasi metathesis.

However, my primary commitment is not to any particular theory, or any particular analysis, but to the Amarasi data itself. I would welcome criticism of the analyses proposed in this book so long as any alternate analyses remain faithful to the primary data upon which any analysis must be based. Similarly, I would welcome any dialogue with this book which attempts to provide a unified theoretical account of all of the data.

### **1.7 Terminology**

In this section I give definitions of potentially ambiguous linguistic terminology. The definitions given here should be taken only as a practical guide to understand how terms are used in this book and should *not* be taken as strong claims about the theoretical status of any of the elements defined.

As used in this book, a *word* is the minimal meaningful phonological string which can occur in isolation.14 A *morpheme* is "an indivisible stretch of phonetic (or phonological) material with a unitary meaning" (Anderson 1992: 49).15 A *root* is an underlying single morpheme without any affixes attached.

We can furthermore distinguish between *bound* and *free morphemes*. A free morpheme is a root which can occur as a word without any other morphemes attached. A typical example is *kaut* 'papaya'. A bound morpheme is a root which cannot occur as a word. Instead a bound morpheme must surface attached to another morpheme. A *clitic* is a morpheme which is phonologically bound to a clitic host, but has a separates syntactic status to the host. A typical example is

13This is not to say that Optimality Theory is wrong, or that it cannot or should not be used to analyse Amarasi metathesis. Instead, I merely do not find a full Optimality Theory account of this aspect of Amarasi metathesis a helpful aid.

14Two typical environments in which words occur in isolation are in response to a question or in collection of a wordlist. Likewise, pauses are not usually allowed in the middle of a word. If such a pause occurs, the speaker usually repeats the entire word from the beginning.

15In many morphological theories the morpheme does not play a central role, including Matthews (1974); Anderson (1992) and Stump (2001). While I am extremely sympathetic to such theories, the morpheme is still a useful analytic tool for much of the Amarasi data.

### 1 Introduction

the determiner *=ee*, which marks definiteness. While this determiner must occur attached to a host (e.g. *kaut=ee* 'the papaya') which is the head of a noun phrase, the enclitic itself is the head of a separate determiner phrase (§6.5.2). My definitions of all these terms when applied to Amarasi or Meto data are summarised in (13) below, with a number of examples also given.

	- a. Morpheme = indivisible phonetic stretch with unitary meaning *n-* 'third person verbal agreement', *kobub* 'pile up', *kaut* 'papaya', *=ee* '3det, third person determiner'
	- b. Word = minimal phonological string which can occur in isolation *n-kobub* 'piles up', *kaut* 'papaya', *kaut=ee* 'the papaya'
	- c. Bound morpheme = morpheme which cannot occur as an independent word
		- *n-* 'third person verbal agreement', *=ee* '3det'
	- d. Root = underlying single morpheme *√n-* 'third person verbal agreement', *√kobub* 'pile up', *kaut* 'papaya', *√=ee* 3det
	- e. Free morpheme = morpheme which is an eligible word *kaut* 'papaya', *teun* 'three'
	- f. Affix = bound morpheme with no separate syntactic status to its host *n-* 'third person verbal agreement', *-m* 1px/2gen 'first person exclusive or second person genitive'
	- g. Clitic = bound morpheme with different syntactic status to its host *=ee* '3det', *=ma* 'and', *=kau* '1sg.acc'
	- h. Stem = a word or root to which a bound morpheme attaches *n-kobub* 'piles up', *kaut=ee* 'the papaya'
	- i. Citation Form = usual form of a word given in wordlist style elicitation

I also make a distinction between two kinds of words and roots, *functors* and *lexical words/roots* (Zorc 1978; Grimes 1991: 85ff). Functors are morphemes which have grammatical uses, such as relativisers, demonstratives, topic markers, and pronominals, while lexical words/roots typically refer to events, states, properties, and things.

## **2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective**

### **2.1 Introduction**

In this chapter I discuss synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective. I begin in §2.2 with a categorisation of the different types of synchronic metathesis that are found in languages of the world. Aftre this I provide a survey of languages with synchronic metathesis in §2.3, focussing on those of greater Timor – the region where Meto is spoken. This is followed by a discussion of the origins of synchronic metathesis in §2.4, and a summary of the forms and functions of synchronic metathesis in §2.5 and §2.6 respectively.

Probably the most familiar kind of metathesis is historic metathesis in which a sequence of two sounds has swapped position at some point in the history of the language. One case of historic metathesis is found in Dutch in which rhoticvowel sequences metathesised before certain dental consonants (de Vaan 2017: 108). An example is Dutch *borst* /b**ɔr**st/ 'breast' which can be compared with German *brust* /b**rʊ**st/ or English *breast* /b**rɛ**st/ each of which preserves the older rhotic-vowel order.

Synchronic metathesis, on the other hand, is when at least some words in a language have alternate forms in certain situations which differ in the order of some of their segments in a regular and systematic way.Thus, in Rotuman (§2.3.2) the word for 'flower' is either *hosa* or *hoas* (Churchward 1940: 14).

One phenomenon excluded from my discussion in this chapter which could be considered metathesis is that of affixes which have both stem internal and stem external allomorphs. One example is found in Ulwa (Misumalpan, Nicaragua) in which the 3sg.gen affix *-ka/〈ka〉* attaches to the first iambic foot of the stem.1 This affix surfaces as a suffix when a word consists of only a single iambic foot and as an infix when the first iambic foot is followed by other syllables. Examples are given in (1) below.

1An iambic foot in Ulwa consists of a light syllable followed by a heavy syllable, two light syllables, or a single heavy syllable.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

This chapter provides the typological context for my description of metathesis in Amarasi. Because of this, I frequently provide forward references to later sections of this book in which Amarasi phenomena similar to those under discussion are provided.

### **2.2 Kinds of synchronic metathesis**

In this section I present a categorisation of processes of synchronic metathesis. I identify three kinds of metathesis: phonologically conditioned metathesis (§2.2.1), morphemically conditioned metathesis (§2.2.2), and morphological metathesis (§2.2.3). The categorisation into these three types of metathesis is intended to facilitate an understanding of different metathesis patterns and their systematicity. I discuss each type of synchronic metathesis and relate them to other, more familiar, phonological processes.

It is frequently the case that a unitary analysis of a single process of synchronic metathesis is not always possible. Such a process of metathesis may be phonologically conditioned in some environments, morphemically conditioned in others, and morphological in yet other situations. This, for instance, is the situation with Rotuman metathesis (§2.3.2). It is also the situation in Amarasi which has phonologically conditioned metathesis before vowel-initial enclitics (Chapter 5) and two process of morphological metathesis (Chapter 6 and 7).

One kind of synchronic metathesis which does not fit into any of these three categories is when metathesised and unmetathesised forms are in free variation. This situation is found in Kui (Trans-New-Guinea, Alor), in which the perfective affix *-i* optionally metathesises with a previous /n/ or /l/. Examples are given in (2) below. As currently described, this alternation is a case of free variation.

2.2 Kinds of synchronic metathesis

(2) Kui metathesis of perfective *-i* (Windschuttel & Shiohara 2017: 124f)

While this data bears some similarities to the Ulwa data discussed above the existence of alternations such as *aloni* and *aloin* 'write-perf' indicates that this is indeed a case of metathesis. That perfective *-i* is a suffix after stems without final /n/ or /l/ indicates that the infixal allomorph in examples such as those in (2) is a result of CV → VC metathesis.

### **2.2.1 Phonologically conditioned metathesis**

Phonologically conditioned metathesis is any process of metathesis which is an automatic result of a phonological environment. Amarasi has a process of phonological metathesis conditioned by vowel-initial enclitics (see Chapter 5).

Processes of phonologically conditioned metathesis are similar to other more familiar phonological processes such as final obstruent devoicing in German. In German a voiced obstruent is devoiced word finally, as can be seen from the data given in (3) below.

The standard (and simplest) analysis of this data is to propose that voiced obstruents are devoiced finally. A simple formal rule for German obstruent devoicing is given in (4) below.2

2German obstruent devoicing involves additional complexities. See (Wiese 1996: 200ff) and Brockhaus (1995) for discussion of the way such complexities have been resolved.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

(4) [+obstruent] → [-voice] /\_]σ (Wiese 1996: 201)

In German a phonological process (devoicing) affects a segment in a specific phonological environment. Similarly, in the case of phonologically conditioned metathesis a phonological process (metathesis) occurs in a specific phonological environment.

A simple example of phonological metathesis is provided by Faroese (Germanic, Faroe Islands). In Faroese the neuter form of adjectives is formed by adding the suffix *-t*. When this suffix is added to a stem which ends in /sk/, this cluster metathesises to /ks/. Examples are shown in (5) below. (Such metathesis is not written in Faroese.)

This Faroese metathesis is motivated by a phonological constraint against having a cluster of a fricative, plosive, and another plosive in that order. If such a cluster would occur, the fricative and plosive metathesise to prevent it surfacing, and thereby avoid violating the obligatory contour principle. Faroese metathesis of *fesk* /fɛ**sk**/ → *feskt* /fɛ**ks**t/ is illustrated in (6) below in which *F* = fricative and *P* = plosive. A similar metathesis involving fricatives and plosives is also found in Lithuanian. Hume & Seo (2004) provide a detailed analysis of metathesis in both Faroese and Lithuanian.

Sidamo (Cushitic, Ethiopia) also has phonologically conditioned metathesis. In Sidamo a cluster of an obstruent followed by a nasal is disallowed. If such a cluster is created by the addition of morphology, the obstruent-nasal sequence undergoes metathesis. Examples are given in (7) below, with the first person plural simple perfect suffix.

### 2.2 Kinds of synchronic metathesis

(7) Sidamo obstruent+nasal → nasal-obstruent (Kawachi 2007: 46)

Selaru (Austronesian, Maluku) exhibits glide-consonant metathesis. In Selaru, glide-consonant sequences are disallowed. The addition of a consonant-initial suffix thus triggers metathesis with any stem-final glide. Examples are shown in (8) below, with suffixes attached to glide-final stems. The glide-final stems can be contrasted with vowel-final stems in which no metathesis occurs. The glide-final forms, such as *hatw* 'rock' occur with a final glide phrase finally or in isolation.

(8) Selaru GC → CG (Coward & Coward 2000: 22)

In addition to occurring across affix or clitic boundaries, metathesis in Selaru also occurs across word boundaries. Three examples of glide-consonant metathesis across word boundaries are given in (9)–(11) below, in which the underlying (unmetathesised) forms of morphemes are given in the second line. These underlying forms surface without any metathesis in isolation or phrase finally.

(9) *hinam* hina-m**w** have-2sg.gen *hwahkje* **h**ahj-ke pig-def *desj* desj that 'That is your pork (food).'

2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Coward & Coward (2000) analyse this metathesis as a result of automatic glide spreading.They analyse glides as unassociated elements which spread rightwards to an adjacent C-slot. If there is no following C-slot, they attach to the C-slot to the left. Their analysis is shown in (12) below.

Similar examples of glide consonant metathesis are found in a number of languages of the south-eastern Maluku area. Such metathesis has been described for Fordata and Yamdena (Mills 1991: 250), Roma (§2.3.7), Luang (§2.3.5) and Leti (§2.3.6). See Figure 2.1 on page 27 for the locations of these languages.

### **2.2.2 Morphemically conditioned metathesis**

Morphemically conditioned metathesis refers to instances of metathesis which are triggered by the combination of morphemes, but not any new phonological environment created by this combination.

Morphemically conditioned metathesis can be compared to more familiar examples of morphemically conditioned processes, such as German umlaut in the formation of plural nouns. In German, umlaut involves the fronting of a back vowel. One environment which (often) triggers umlaut in German is addition of either of the plural suffixes *-e* /-ə/ or *-er* /-ər/. Examples of German nouns in which umlaut occurs before plural *-e* /-ə/ are given in (13) below.

### 2.2 Kinds of synchronic metathesis

### (13) German umlaut

It is not a universal feature of German phonology that back vowels are fronted before schwa. This can be seen with other suffixes, such as the plural *-en* /-ən/ which does not trigger umlaut. Two examples are *Dorn* /dɔrn/ 'thorn' → *Dornen* /dɔrnən/ and *Frau* /fraʊ/ 'woman' → *Frauen* /fraʊən/. Similarly, not all words undergo umlaut before plural *-e* /-ə/. Two examples are *Brot* /broːt/ 'bread' → *Brote* /broːtə/ 'breads' and *Tag* /taːk/ 'day' → *Tag* /taːɡə/ 'days'. Such data shows that the vowel of the suffix in examples such as (13) is not a plausible conditioning environment for triggering umlaut.

Such facts lead most analysts to view synchronic umlaut in German as a process separate from that of suffixation. This, for instance, is the approach taken by Wiese (1996: 181ff), who posits that certain lexical entries in German have a floating [+front] feature, the linking of which is triggered partly by morphological features. Wiese (1996) analyses German umlaut as a lexical phonological rule which is triggered in certain morphologically derived environments.

Under such an analysis, German umlaut is a phonological process just like final obstruent devoicing (§2.2.1 page 21). The difference between the two processes is that final obstruent devoicing is triggered by a phonological environment (word finally) while umlaut is triggered by a morphological environment (e.g. plural).

One case of morphemically conditioned metathesis is described by Buckley (2007) for Alsea (Penutian, Oregan). In Alsea certain suffixes trigger sonorantvowel metathesis while other suffixes do not. One suffix which triggers metathesis is the intransitive imperative suffix *-χ*, while the phonologically identical realis completive suffix *-χ* does not trigger metathesis. Examples are given in (14) below, in which (unmetathesised) stems with realis completive *-χ* are given on the left and metathesised stems with intransitive imperative *-χ* are given on the right.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

'are lying in bed' *ʦnús-χ ʦúns-χ* 'lie down!' 'is hiding' *pjáχ-χ pájχ-χ* 'hide!' 'is floating' *ʦpjút-χ ʦpújt-χ* 'float!' Unlike metathesis in Faroese, Sidamo, or Selaru discussed in §2.2.1, metathesis in Alsea cannot be derived from any new phonological environment created by the concatenation of morphemes – after all, the phonological properties of

the realis completive *-χ* suffix and intransitive imperative *-χ* are identical. Instead, like German umlaut which is triggered by certain suffixes but not by the phonological properties of those suffixes, metathesis in Alsea is morphemically conditioned. Alsea metathesis is discussed in more detail in §B.6.

### **2.2.3 Morphological metathesis**

Morphological metathesis is when metathesis is the only realisation of a morphological category. Morphological metathesis has been reported for about a dozen languages worldwide, of which about half are found in the greater Timor region, where Meto is also spoken. Cases of metathesis in this region are discussed in the next section.

It is important to reiterate here that a unitary analysis of synchronic metathesis is not always possible. Thus, the existence of morphological metathesis in a particular language does not mean that all cases of metathesis in that language should be analysed as morphological processes.

Similarly, a single morphological process (of metathesis of any other kind) in a single language can have different functions in different contexts. One example is the English the suffix *-(e)s* with allomorphs /-əz/, /-z/ and /-s/. This suffix is a plural marker on nouns and a third person agreement marker on verbs. This situation is found with morphological metathesis in several languages in which metathesis has different morphological functions in different contexts and/or with different word classes. This is the case for Rotuman (§<IP_ADDRESS>), Leti (§<IP_ADDRESS>), Mambae (§<IP_ADDRESS>), Helong (§<IP_ADDRESS>), and Amarasi (Chapter 6 and 7)

### **2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis**

In this section I provide a survey of languages with synchronic metathesis. This discussion is focussed on metathesis in languages of the greater Timor region

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

and/or Austronesian languages. A survey of morphological metathesis in languages beyond this scope is given in Appendix B.

Figure 2.1: Synchronic metathesis in greater Timor

A map of languages in the greater Timor region with synchronic metathesis is given in Figure 2.1, based on Schapper (2015: 135ff), a survey of the literature, and my own fieldwork. This map further marks languages in which metathesis is known to be morphological in at least some environments. *Other metathesis* in Figure 2.1 is used for languages with phonologically or morphemically conditioned metathesis, as well as for languages for which too little data is available to determine the nature of their metathesis.

There are at least five languages of the greater Timor region with morphological metathesis in at least some environments: Leti (§2.3.6), Roma (§2.3.7), Mambae (§2.3.8), Helong (§2.3.9) and the Meto cluster (of which Amarasi is a member). A further twenty or so languages have synchronic metathesis which is phonologically conditioned, morphemically conditioned or not yet unambiguously established as morphological.

I begin my discussion with Kwara'ae (§2.3.1) and Rotuman (§2.3.2), both of which are spoken in the Pacific and outside the greater Timor region. I then discuss cases of synchronic metathesis in the greater Timor region starting with the non-Austronesian languages Wersing (§2.3.3) and Bunak (§2.3.4). After this I discuss synchronic metathesis among Austronesian languages of the greater Timor region moving geographically closer to Meto with each language discussed.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Before proceeding with the discussion it is necessary to clarify two points. Firstly, in some cases I give isolated examples of metathesis of the type X → Y (e.g. Rotuman *hosa* → *hoas* 'flower' on page 36) or X + Z → YZ (e.g. Luang *ʔernu* + *la* → *ʔerunla* 'go down to' on page 50). In all such cases the form before the arrow is a form which surfaces in certain contexts. Thus, all putative examples of metathesis throughout this section are based on true surface alternations.3

Secondly, in such examples the form before the arrow is the presumed underlying form. The identification of underlying forms follows that of the sources, which in turn is usually based on phonological and morphological analysis. However, I do not usually repeat here the evidence for this analysis. Interested readers should consult the original sources. Again, in all cases the presumed underlying form is a form which surfaces in certain contexts, as discussed above.

### **2.3.1 Kwara'ae**

Metathesis in Kwara'ae has been described by Sohn (1980) and Heinz (2004; 2005). Blevins & Garrett (1998) also present previously unpublished data collected by Andrew Pawley and David Gegeo. Metathesis in Kwara'ae has been analysed as phonologically conditioned (§2.2.1) but it is not restricted to a subset of words with specific phonological properties. Instead nearly every word of the lexicon is affected by metathesis in Kwara'ae.

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Forms**

Metathesis in Kwara'ae is CV → VC metathesis. Examples are shown in (15) below. In the literature on Kwara'ae the unmetathesised form (U-form) is called the *citation form* and the metathesised form (M-form) is called the *normal form*. I refer to them with the more iconic terms *U-form* and *M-form*.

Depending on the length of the word, metathesis in Kwara'ae can occur multiple times. Two examples are given in (16) below. The difference in stress which is

3Readers who find a particular analysis involving metathesis unconvincing should consult the original sources for full discussion and justification.

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

seen in examples such as *da.ˈro.ʔa.ˌni.da* → *ˈdaor.ʔa.ˌni ̯ ɛd̯* 'to share them' is significant and is the phonological conditioning environment by which Heinz (2004) analyses Kwara'ae metathesis.

(16) Kwara'ae multiple metatheses: (Heinz 2004: 2)

Metathesis in Kwara'ae often triggers other phonological processes including glide formation, vowel deletion, and umlaut. The different phonological processes with which metathesis is associated are described in §<IP_ADDRESS>.1–§<IP_ADDRESS>.6 below.

Published descriptions of Kwara'ae report different details for some of these phonological processes. In part these differences may stem from researchers working with different speakers of different ages. However, another likely source of variation is that a single speaker can also use different M-forms depending on speech speed (Patrick Andrews p.c. February 2015).

In addition to the difference in metathesis, U-forms have the labiodental fricative [f] where M-forms have the voiceless glottal fricative [h] (Heinz 2004: 18).

**<IP_ADDRESS>.1 Glide formation** As can be seen from the examples in (15) and (16), when a vowel sequence surfaces in the M-form, the higher vowel is realised as a glide. If the vowels are of equal height, as in *ˈbo.re* → *ˈboer̯* 'although', the first vowel is realised as a glide. Sohn (1980: 319) likewise states that metathesised forms consist only of one syllable, though he does not give rules for which of the underlying vowels surfaces as a glide.

When a word ends in a vowel sequence, the M-form is derived from the U-form through glide formation alone. This is shown in (17) below:

(17) V1V2 → V̯ 1V2

**<IP_ADDRESS>.2 Vowel deletion** When a word ends in V1V2CV3#, and V2 and V3 are of the same quality, the first two vowels undergo glide formation and the final vowel is deleted. This is shown in (18) below.

29

(Heinz 2004: 13)

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

(18) V1αV2βCV3β → V̯

1αV2βC (Heinz 2004: 27-28)

**<IP_ADDRESS>.3 Vowel shift** The low central vowel /a/ has a different quality after metathesis when the preceding vowel is high. It is described as schwa [ə] by Sohn (1980: 315), while Heinz (2004: 23) describes it as varying between [ɛ] and [ə] after /i/ and as [ʌ] after /u/. Examples are given in (19) below.

(19) V[+hi]Ca → V̯əC: (Heinz 2004: 23) U-form M-form *a.ˈsi.la* → *ˈa.ˌsiɛl̯ ~ ˈa.ˌsiəl̯* 'sweet' *fa.ˈʔu.ta* → *ˈha.ˌʔuʌt̯* 'which, how, why'

Likewise, certain combinations of vowel "fuse" into a single vowel rather than a sequence of glide and vowel. Sohn (1980: 316) gives a rule in which /oi/ is realised as [øˑ], /oe/ as [œˑ], /ae/ as [æˑ] and /ai/ is realised as either [ɛi] or [ɛˑ]. This is similar to the processes of umlaut which have operated in the Germanic languages (§2.4.1).

$$\text{(20)}\quad \text{V}\_{\text{a}}\text{CV}\_{\text{\beta}} \longrightarrow \text{V}\_{\text{a}\text{\beta}}\text{C} \tag{\text{Sohr} 1980: 316}$$

Heinz (2004) does not report front rounded vowels, but he does report a similar process when the first vowel of the sequence is /a/. He states that "[…] there is some free variation: if V2 = [e], [i] or [u], sometimes the vowel combination can be realized as a single vowel." He only gives examples of /ae/ → [æˑ], /ai/ → [eˑ] and /au/ → [oˑ].

$$\begin{array}{cccc} \text{(21)} & \mathsf{V}\_{\alpha}\mathsf{C}\mathsf{V}\_{\beta} \longrightarrow \mathsf{V}\_{\alpha\beta}\mathsf{C} & & \text{(Heinz 2004: 24)}\\ & \text{U-form} & \text{M-form} & \\ & \text{'sa.te} & \longrightarrow & \mathsf{'se}\mathsf{t}\mathsf{:}\sim\mathsf{'aget} & \text{'chain, beard'}\\ & \mathsf{'ma.?t} & \longrightarrow & \mathsf{'me?}\mathsf{?}\sim\mathsf{'mai}\mathsf{?} & \text{'come'} \end{array}$$

*li.ˈma.ku* → *ˈli.ˌmoˑk* ~ *ˈli.mauk̯* 'my hand'

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

**<IP_ADDRESS>.4 Long vowels** When the penultimate and final vowel of the U-form are identical, Sohn (1980), Pawley and Gegeo (cited in Blevins & Garrett 1998) and Heinz (2004) all transcribe the vowel of the M-form as half-long, using the symbol [ˑ]. Other descriptions of Kwara'ae, such as, Simons (1977) and Tryon & Hackman (1983) do not transcribe such vowels as long.

However, as noted by Heinz (2004: 25), no author justifies the use of this halflong mark, with Heinz indicating that this is a point for further research. An instrumental phonetic study of Kwara'ae vowels would probably settle the matter.4 It is also possible that such vowels are long in some contexts and short in others, depending on variables such as phrasal stress and the rate of speech.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.5 Voiceless vowels** Optional voiceless vowels also occur after certain consonants in the U-form. Heinz (2004: 19) reports such vowels after the consonants [ʔ], [h], [l] and [s]. These vowels do not count as vowels for the purposes of stress assignment, with stress falling on the penultimate vowel, not counting final voiceless vowels. After word-final stops, voiceless vowels do not occur, though the final stop is often strongly aspirated.

(23) V1CV2 → V1V2C\*̊V2 (Heinz 2004: 19) U-form M-form *ˈma.ʔu* → *ˈmauʔ̯u̥* 'fear' *ˈʔa.fe* → *ˈʔaeh̯ e̥* 'wife' *ˈbu.su* → *ˈbuˑsu̥* 'to burst' *ˈro.do* → *ˈrɔˑdʰ* 'night' *ˈnau.ku ̯* → *ˈnaukʰ ̯* 'I'

Pawley and Gegeo (cited in Blevins & Garrett 1998) describe voiceless vowels in a wider variety of contexts than is described by Heinz (2004). According to

4 For Amarasi I carried out an instrumental study of vowel length in which I showed that there is a statistically significant difference in length between the penultimate vowel of a U-form with identical penultimate and final vowels and the final vowel of the M-form of such words. I analyse this difference in length as being due to the M-forms containing a sequence of two identical vowels. (see §<IP_ADDRESS>.3 and §<IP_ADDRESS>).

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Pawley and Gegeo, a final voiceless vowel is the usual realisation of words in the M-form. Such vowels only do not occur when there is a word-final nasal or if the resulting diphthong is a sequence of a high vowel followed by a non-high vowel.

(24) V1CV2 → V1V2CV̥2 (Pawley and Gegeo in Blevins & Garrett 1998: 530)

According to Heinz (2004: 20), the differences between his data and the data cited by Blevins & Garrett (1998) likely comes from working with speakers of different generations. Heinz states: *'*'[…] it's reasonable that her [Kwara'ae consultant's] speech pattern reflects another stage in the decline of the final vowel."

Table 2.1: Kwara'ae metathesis

**<IP_ADDRESS>.6 Summary** The processes with which metathesis in Kwara'ae is associated include glide formation, umlaut, and vowel deletion. The effects of deriving the M-form on the first and second vowels of the U-form in Kwara'ae are given in Table 2.1. This table is adapted from (Heinz 2004: 26) with qualities reported by Sohn (1980) included in brackets. The symbols used by Heinz for the high vowel glides: [u] and [i ̯ ], have been replaced with the symbols [w] and [j]. ̯

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Distribution of metathesis**

U-forms and M-forms in Kwara'ae belong to different speech registers. In everyday normal speech the M-form is used, while the U-form is used in traditional songs, for clarification (Heinz 2004: 3), and when calling out. Watson-Gegeo & Gegeo (1986: 19) report that calling out has three main uses in Kwara'ae discourse:

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

First, people call out for practical reasons in running a household, such as to locate a missing person or to bring a family member home for a meal. Secondly, a Kwara'ae man or woman working in the bush and hearing someone working nearby but out of sight will call out to seek identification of the other person. Thirdly, people call out from house to house, or as someone passes on the path, as a strictly social activity. They ask polite questions, or joke, tease, and engage in pleasant banter. (Watson-Gegeo & Gegeo 1986)

In addition to the use of unmetathesised forms, calling out is marked by a special intonation contour and certain emphatic particles. Two examples of Kwara'ae calling out are given in (25) below. Note also the extra length on the final syllable of the second form of 'father' in example (25a) as well as the particle *ku* in (25b). These two features are also distinctive of calling out.

The use of different forms in different speech registers is confirmed by Patrick Andrews (p.c. February 2015) who reports that (among other uses) the unmetathesised forms are used when making a point to a child or to emphasise words in a speech. He compares the use of the metathesised forms to that of English contractions, such as *couldn't* from *could not*, with the former being the everyday form and the latter being used in special circumstances. This difference in distribution suggests that different forms are used in different (discourse) pragmatic contexts.

Heinz (2004) proposes an analysis of Kwara'ae metathesis framed within Optimality Theory in which metathesis is conditioned by stress. Under this analysis, metathesis in Kwara'ae is a response to the need to make stressed syllables heavy, with a vowel-glide combination counting as a heavy syllable. This analysis is discussed in more detail in §<IP_ADDRESS>.

Given that different forms are used in different speech registers, an analysis of Kwara'ae metathesis as being driven by stress would predict that different registers have different stress rules. While it is likely that such a hypothesis would be borne out, to the best of my knowledge this has not yet been demonstrated.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Nearly every word in Kwara'ae is affected by metathesis. If it is the case that different speech registers have different stress patterns, which in turn drives the metathesis, Kwara'ae has (rampant) phonologically conditioned metathesis though the phonological conditions triggering metathesis are themselves driven by the discourse.

### **2.3.2 Rotuman**

Rotuman has perhaps the most famous case of morphological metathesis. Rotuman is an Austronesian Oceanic language spoken on Rotuma island in the Pacific Ocean located about 480 kilometres north of the main islands of Fiji. Metathesis occurs in multiple environments in Rotuman. In some cases metathesis is phonologically conditioned (§2.2.1), in some cases it is morphemically conditioned (§2.2.2), and in some cases it is morphological (§2.2.3).

Rotuman was first described by Churchward (1940) who provides a grammar and dictionary of the language. Churchward also published several Rotuman texts between 1937–39 in the journal *Oceania* which were reprinted in one volume as Churchward (1939). Both Besnier (1987) and Vamarasi (2002) also present descriptions of Rotuman based on their own fieldwork. Each of these descriptions differs in details. This may be partly because the authors worked with different speakers at different times and may also be partly because they use different terminology to describe the same phenomena.

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Forms**

Each word in Rotuman has two forms, which I call the U-form and M-form. The traditional names coined by Churchward (1940) are the *complete phase* for the U-form and the *incomplete phase* for the M-form. The U-form is historically more conservative than the M-form.

Churchward (1940) identifies four phonological processes which derive the M-form from the U-form. These processes are vowel deletion (a.k.a apocope, truncation, or subtraction), umlaut, metathesis, and vowel shortening. There are also words which do not have two distinct forms. Which process applies depends on the phonological shape of the U-form.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.1 Vowel shortening/diphthongisation** For words which end in a vowel sequence in which the vowels are non-identical, Churchward (1940: 85) describes the M-form as being formed by shortening the initial vowel of the sequence. Examples are given in (26) below.

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

(26) Rotuman VαVβ → V̆ αVβ (Churchward 1940: 85)

Vamarasi (2002) describes a process of diphthongisation in which the less sonorous vowel becomes a glide. This glide formation may be either a further development of Churchward's shortened vowels, or it may that a single phenomenon was perceived and described differently by each of these authors.

(27) Rotuman VαVβ → V̯αVβ ~ VαV̯β Vamarasi (2002: 4,7–9)

According to Besnier (1987: 210) the vowel sequences which diphthongise are those in which the second vowel is /a/ as well as sequences of a high vowel followed by /o/. Besnier also reports that /a/ is realised as [ɔ] after a glide derived from one of the high-front vowels.

(28) Rotuman VαVβ → V̯αVβ

(Besnier 1987: 210)

**<IP_ADDRESS>.2 Metathesis** When the U-form ends in VCV and the penultimate vowel is higher than the final vowel, the M-form is derived by final consonant-vowel metathesis. Examples are given in (29) below.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

(29) Rotuman V1CV2 → V1V2C (Churchward 1940: 14)

Both Vamarasi (2002) and Besnier (1987) report that after metathesis the penultimate vowel becomes a glide; /u/ and /o/ become [w] while /i/ and /e/ become [j]. Examples are given in (30) below.

(30) Rotuman V1CV2 → V̯ 1V2C (Vamarasi 2002: 3)

Besnier (1987: 208) reports that when the penultimate vowel is a high vowel, the final vowel becomes [ɔ] after metathesis. Otherwise, the final vowel retains its original quality. Examples are given in (31) below.

(31) Rotuman V1CV2 → V̯ 1V2C (Besnier 1987: 208) U-form M-form *tife* → *tjɔf* 'pearl shell' *piʧa* → *pjɔʧ* 'rat' *huŋe* → *hwɔŋ* 'to breathe' *puka* → *pwɔk* 'k.o. creeper' *hepa* → *hjap* 'broad' *loŋa* → *lwaŋ* 'towards the interior of the island'

It is not entirely clear whether the diphthongisation after metathesis reported by Besnier (1987) and Vamarasi (2002) is a recent development or whether it was also present while Churchward worked on Rotuman.

On the one hand, it is clear from the detailed account of Rotuman phonetics given by Churchward (1940: 64–84) that he was an excellent phonetician. Given his identification of shortened vowels in the derivation of M-forms (§<IP_ADDRESS>.1), it seems likely that if diphthongisation (or shortened vowels) were present after metathesis he would have reported it.

On the other hand, Churchward (1940: 86) states "the stress seems to be levelled out, so to speak, in the inc[omplete] phase. Thus: *fo*ra becomes *foar*, which

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

is pronounced almost, though perhaps not quite, as one syllable, the stress being evenly distributed […]" This statement perhaps indicates that diphthongisation was an optional feature of Rotuman metathesised forms in Churchward's day.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.3 Umlaut** When the penultimate vowel is a back vowel and the final vowel a front vowel, the M-form is derived via umlaut of the penultimate vowel so long as this vowel is not higher than the final vowel.

Churchward (1940: 79) reports that /u/ becomes [y], /o/ becomes [œ] when the final vowel is /e/, and that /o/ becomes [ø] when the final vowel is /i/.5 He also transcribes the outcome of umlauted /ɒ/ as *<ȧ>*, describing it as "[…] a little wider [lower] than *a* in 'cat' […] but differs from it in containing just a suggestion of the sound of *u* in 'cut' or 'but.'" I interpret Churchward's *<ȧ>* as a low front rounded vowel [ɶ].

Examples of Rotuman umlaut are given in (32) below, which also gives hypothetical intermediate forms showing the way such umlaut probably developed from metathesis. In Kwara'ae words containing some of the vowel combinations shown in (32) have M-forms which vary between displaying metathesis and umlaut (§<IP_ADDRESS>.3).

Vamarasi (2002) reports that /o/ becomes [ø] under umlaut, /u/ becomes [y] and /ɒ/ becomes the lower mid-front-rounded [œ]. Examples are given in (33)

5Churchward (1940) describes the vowel in the M-form of oCe# final words (e.g. *mose* → *mœs* 'sleep') as "[…] similar to the wider German *ö*, as in *gespött*, and to the sound of *eu* in the French *jeune*." He contrasts "normal *ö*" (which "[…] arises in place of normal *o* when a following *e* is elided") with so-called "narrow *ö*" (arising "[…] in place of narrow *o* when a following *i* is elided") which is described as "[…] similar to the narrower German *ö*, as in *schön*, and to the sound of *eu* in the French *peu*." I interpret "normal *ö*" as a mid-low front-rounded vowel [œ] and "narrow *ö*" as a mid-high front-rounded vowel [ø].

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Besnier's data agrees with Vamarasi on the outcome of /o/ and /u/, though he reports that /ɔ/ (equivalent to Churchward's and Vamarasi's /ɒ/) becomes either [ɛ] or [æ] in free variation in certain words. Examples are given in (34) below.

All authors agree that umlaut of /u/ or /o/ spreads leftwards to identical vowels. Examples are given in (35) below

**<IP_ADDRESS>.4 Apocope** In all situations not covered by diphthongisation, metathesis, or umlaut, the M-form is derived by deleting the final vowel of the U-form. This includes when each vowel is identical and when the penultimate vowel is lower than a final back vowel. Examples are shown in (36) below.

(36) Rotuman VCV → VC (Churchward 1940: 13)

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

The lack of overt metathesis in such examples is comparable to the Amarasi data in which words with a certain phonotactic shape form their M-form by surface vowel deletion and/or consonant deletion (Chapter 4).

**<IP_ADDRESS>.5 No change** Words ending in two identical vowels do not usually have distinct U-forms and M-forms according to Churchward (1940: 85), except before certain suffixes in which case the final vowel of U-form is lengthened. Examples are given in (37) below.

Besnier (1987) reports that when the sequence of two identical vowels is /aa/, the M-form is formed by deleting the final vowel. In other situations Besnier reports no difference in the two forms. Examples are given in (38) below.

(38) Rotuman /aa/ → /a/ (Besnier 1987: 212) U-form M-form *ʔaa* → *ʔa* 'bite' *ree* → *ree* 'do' *luu* → *luu* 'rope'

**<IP_ADDRESS>.6 Summary of forms** The ways in which the Rotuman M-form is derived from the U-form for CV# final words are shown in Table 2.2. In most cases the M-form is one syllable shorter than the U-form, the main exceptions being word-final sequences of identical vowels and Churchward's metathesised forms.

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Distribution of metathesis**

Three uses of M-forms can be identified in Rotuman: phonologically conditioned, morphemically conditioned, and morphological. Each is discussed in turn.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.1 Phonologically conditioned M-forms** Hale & Kissock (1998) show that, with two exceptions, the U-form is used before suffixes and enclitics which are monosyllabic or non-syllabic, while the M-form is used before polysyllabic suffixes and enclitics.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Table 2.2: Medial vowels of Rotuman U-forms and M-forms

An example of the U-form before a monosyllabic suffix is given in (39) and an example before a non-syllabic suffix is given in (40). An example of the M-form before a disyllabic affix is given in (41) and an example before a trisyllabic enclitic is given in (42). These examples are taken from Hale & Kissock (1998: 120f)

Similarly, each non-final word in the noun phrase occurs in the M-form. That is, the M-form is used when a noun is modified; it is used to mark the presence of a dependent modifier. This is also a function of metathesis in Leti (§2.3.6) and Amarasi (Chapter 6).

Compare the phrases in (43) and (44) below, from Churchward (1940: 14). Each phrase consists of the noun *famori* 'people' followed by the adjective *feʔeni* 'zealous'. In (43) the noun *famori* 'people' is in the U-form and the adjective has a predicative reading, as illustrated in (45). In (44) the noun *famør* 'people' is in

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

the M-form, and the adjective has an attributive meaning, as illustrated in (46). (The use of the M-form of the adjective in (43) and (45) is discussed in §<IP_ADDRESS>.3 below.)

The generalisation identified by Hale & Kissock (1998) is that the M-form is (mostly) used before polysyllabic modifiers, while the U-form is used elsewhere. This generalisation is the basis for the analysis of McCarthy (2000) under the frameworks of prosodic morphology and Optimality Theory. This analysis is discussed in more detail in §<IP_ADDRESS>.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.2 Morphemically conditioned M-forms** As acknowledged by Hale & Kissock (1998), there are two exceptions to their generalisation that the M-form occurs before polysyllabic suffixes, enclitics, and modifiers.

The first exception is the monosyllabic singular marker *-ta*. Before this article M-forms occur, despite the fact that this suffix is monosyllabic. An example of is given in (47) below.

The second exception is that M-forms of nouns are used without any affix or enclitic for plural indefinite, while the U-form is used for plural definite. Examples are given in (48) and (49) from Churchward (1940: 15)

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Hale & Kissock (1998: 121f) analyse these exceptions by positing zero affixes with moraic weight. Their analysis of the exceptional forms of *vaka/vak* 'canoe' is shown in (50) below.6

An analysis involving multiple null suffixes with moraic weight is not particularly convincing as an appropriate synchronic analysis of the Rotuman data. Instead, given that U-forms are normally used before monosyllabic suffixes, uses of the M-form before the singular suffix *-ta* is better analysed as morphemically conditioned and use of the M-forms to mark an indefinite plural is better analysed as a morphological use of M-forms.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.3 Morphological M-forms** In addition to phonologically conditioned M-forms before polysyllabic modifiers and morphemically conditioned M-forms before the singular suffix *-ta*, morphological M-forms also occur as the only phonological realisation of a semantic difference. A number of different morphological uses of M-forms can be identified in Rotuman.

Firstly, as mentioned above, U-forms and M-forms are used in noun phrases to mark definiteness. When the final word of the noun phrase is in the U-form it is definite plural, when the final word is in the M-form it is indefinite. Examples(48) and (49) above are repeated as (51) and (52) below to illustrate.

6 I cannot find a clear explanation in Hale & Kissock (1998) for why the noun *vaka* surfaces in the U-form when followed by the two suffixes ∅pl and ∅def. If I understand the analysis correctly, each null suffix should have moraic weight, with this combination of two suffixes being poly-moraic (polysyllabic) and thus triggering the M-form.

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

Secondly, verbs and predicative adjectives normally occur in the M-form. This has already been seen in (43) above, repeated as (53) below. This is due to "[…] the general rule that, except in certain circumstances, a verb – or an adjective used as a verb – is used in its incomplete phase [M-form]" (Churchward 1940: 15). This is similar to Amarasi in which the default form of verbs is the M-form (see §7.3).

(53) *famori* people\u *feʔen* zealous\**m** 'The people are zealous.'

One environment in which verbs and adjectives occur in the U-form is to mark "positiveness, finality or (in questions) the desire to be positive or certain" (Churchward 1940: 88). This function also occurs with a number of other word classes including locative pronouns, some temporal nouns, demonstratives, and interrogative pronouns. Two examples of Rotuman U-form questions with corresponding answers are given in (54) and (55) below.

Churchward (1940: 95) also gives the imperative *leume!* 'come\u' which is "freq[uently] used when one or more calls of *leum!* ['come\m'] fail to move the person summoned" as another example of this "positiveness" use.

The use of U-forms in Rotuman with verbs (and some other word classes) to mark "positiveness" is comparable the use of Amarasi U-forms on verbs (and some other word classes) to mark discourse structures. In Amarasi, such U-forms mark an unresolved state/event which requires another clause for resolution (Chapter 7). In particular, in both Rotuman and Amarasi, verbal U-forms are used in questions (§7.10).

Finally, Churchward (1940: 88) states that for verbs ending in a pronominal suffix, the U-form is used to mark the completive tense, though he does not give

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

examples. This use of verbal U-forms is similar to Helong (§<IP_ADDRESS>.2) in which U-forms mark the perfective aspect.

### **2.3.3 Wersing**

Wersing (Trans-New Guinea, Alor) has a process of synchronic consonant-vowel metathesis. Based on current data, Wersing appears to have phonologically conditioned metathesis, though there are indications that it may also have morphemically conditioned metathesis.

Schapper & Hendery (2014), describing the Pureman dialect, report that the final CV sequence of a stem metathesises to VC before either the realis suffix *-a* or the specific enclitic *=a*. Examples are shown in (56) and (57) below, in which the second line shows the underlying forms. In each example the corresponding unmetathesised forms *\*gə-tati-a* and *\*saku=a* are ungrammatical

Banamtuan (2018), describing the Kolana dialect, presents a greater range of data for Wersing metathesis. Based on Banamtuan's description, final CV → VC metathesis is obligatory for most stems of a certain shape before a morpheme beginning with a vowel. Banamtuan describes metathesis as only affecting words in which the penultimate and final vowels are identical or words in which the final vowel is a high vowel.

Thus, in (58) below the noun *bolu* 'trumpet shell' occurs unmetathesised before a consonant-initial verb while in (59) the same noun occurs metathesised before a vowel-initial verb.

Similarly, in (60) the third person pronoun *gadi* occurs unmetathesised before consonant-initial *wuiŋ* 'catch' but metathesised in (61) before the vowel-initial word *areiŋ* 'bury'.

2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

Unmetathesised forms do not occur before vowel-initial morphemes, as shown in (62a) below in which it is ungrammatical for unmetathesised *nadi* '1sg' to occur before the vowel-initial demonstrative *o-ba*. Instead, the metathesised form must be used as shown in (62b).

(62) a. \* *nadi* 1sg\**u** *o-ba* prox-dem *Wersiŋ* Wersing *ge-aniŋ* 3-person b. *naid* 1sg\**m** *o-ba* prox-dem *Wersiŋ* Wersing *ge-aniŋ* 3-person 'I am a Wersing person.'

Similarly, metathesised forms cannot usually be used before consonant-initial morphemes, as shown in (63a) in which it is ungrammatical for metathesised *naid* '1sg' to occur before the demonstrative *ba*. Instead, the unmetathesised form *nadi* must be used, as shown in (63b).

	- b. *nadi* 1sg\**u** *ba* dem *Wersiŋ* Wersing *ge-anin* 3-person *obo* this 'I am a Wersing person.'

Metathesis in Wersing apparently does not affect stems which end in /a/ with a different penultimate vowel. Thus, the 1sg pronoun *neta* and 1px pronoun *nita* are reported to only have a single (unmetathesised) form. However, words in which both the penultimate and final vowels are /a/ do have metathesised forms. Banamtuan (2018) gives the example of *kana* → *kaan* 'already, pfv'.

Metathesis in Wersing thus appears to be an automatic process which affects most CV# final words when they occur before another vowel. This is similar

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

to Amarasi metathesis before vowel-initial enclitics which can be analysed as a phonologically conditioned process (see Chapter 5).7

Finally, Banamtuan (2018) also shows that metathesis occurs in other environments in Wersing. Thus, the word *akumi* 'group' is obligatorily metathesised before the quantifiers *ba* and *tme* [təmɛ], as shown in (64) and (65) respectively.

Similarly, *lomu* → *loum* 'say' must occur metathesised before the demonstrative *ba* or the aspectual marker *kana* 'already, pfv', as shown in (66) and (67) below.

The basis for metathesis in examples such as (64)–(67) is not entirely clear. This may be a case of morphemically conditioned metathesis, though more data is needed on Wersing to determine this.

### **2.3.4 Bunak**

Bunak (Trans-New Guinea, Timor) has morphemically conditioned metathesis (§2.2.2) and morphological metathesis (§2.2.3). In Bunak the initial CV sequence of a CVVC stem metathesises when a prefix is added and the first vowel of the root is high, /i/ or /u/, and the second vowel is non-high, /e/, /a/ or /o/. While

7 If the distribution of metathesised and unmetathesised forms in Wersing is predictable and in complementary distribution, it would be impossible to determine which of the CV or VC final form of metathesising words is underlying.

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

stress is normally penultimate in Bunak, CV[+high]V[-high]C words have final stress (Antoinette Schapper p.c. September 2015). Such final stress remains after metathesis.

Examples of Bunak metathesis are given in (68) with the prefix *gV-* which marks third person animate possessors on nouns and third person animate objects or undergoers with verbs. Schapper (2009) notes that the eight stems in (68) are the only ones in her corpus which are both eligible to take prefixes and of the appropriate phonological structure to undergo metathesis. Before other consonant-initial stems, the unspecified vowel of the prefix *gV-* is a copy vowel.

Before vowel-initial stems the unspecified vowel of a prefix is deleted: e.g. *gV- + ˈiwal* 'pick' → *ˈgiwal* and *gV- + ˈube* 'block' → *ˈgube*. Such vowel deletion also takes place before the metathesising stems.

(68) Bunak metathesis (Schapper 2009: 67)

It does not seem possible to motivate the metathesis in Bunak on the basis of the new phonological context created by the addition of the prefix. Thus, I identify this as a case of morphemically metathesis (§2.2.2).

An alternate analysis of the Bunak data would be to posit that the shape VCVC for these stems is underlying, with metathesis of initial VC → CV when such stems are used in isolation. Schapper (2009) does discuss this possibility.

The 1incl/2 prefix consists only of an unspecified vowel *V-*. Given the rule whereby the final vowel of a prefix is deleted before vowel-initial (and metathesising stems), this means that metathesis is the only phonological signal of 1incl/2 agreement for metathesising stems. Thus, metathesis in Bunak can be identified as a morphological device to mark 1incl/2 agreement. The paradigms of two consonant-initial stems, two vowel-initial stems and two metathesising stems are given in Table 2.3 below to show the different allomorphs of the agreement

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

prefixes. I follow Schapper (2009) in representing the deleted 1incl/2 affix as a zero prefix in Table 2.3

Table 2.3: Bunak prefixation (Schapper 2009: 66,340)

With the loss of the vowel of the 1incl/2 prefix, the morphemically conditioned metathesis in Bunak has developed a morphological function. In this respect its development is similar to that of Germanic umlaut (§2.4.1) in which an original conditioning environment was lost. The Bunak data shows one pathway in which morphological metathesis can develop. Other pathways are discussed in §2.4.2 below.

### **2.3.5 Luang**

Luang (Austronesian, Maluku) has synchronic metathesis which is analysed as being phonologically conditioned by Taber & Taber (2015). Metathesis in Luang is one of several processes which occur to join adjacent morphemes into a single rhythm unit; that is, a phrase with only one stressed syllable. A combination of a word and affix always join into a single rhythm unit, while two conjoined words contrast with two words which form separate rhythm units:

However, there is contrast in Luang between separate words being joined into one rhythm segment and being left apart. Known information and mainline event information, especially at peak points of the story, are said so rapidly that many words join into one rhythm segment. When information is new to the hearer or if it is brought into prominence the words are said more slowly, and therefore do not join into one rhythm segment, but remain separate units. (Taber & Taber 2015: 24)

While Taber & Taber (2015) analyse Luang metathesis as being conditioned by speech speed and/or stress placement, these phonological environments are dis-

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

course driven. Metathesis in Luang is thus functionally comparable to discoursedriven metathesis in Amarasi (Chapter 7), though in Amarasi such metathesis is a direct marker of a discourse structure rather than being conditioned by an intermediate phonological structure.

There is a complex set of phonological rules (one of which is metathesis) which operate to join two morphemes together in Luang. Which process operates depends on the phonological shape of the two morphemes, as well as their respective word classes. In the simplest case, the final vowel of the first word is deleted. Such reduction is often followed by assimilation of certain consonants; see Taber & Taber (2015: 25) for details. Examples are shown in (69) below.

### (69) Luang vowel deletion8

(Taber & Taber 2015: 25)

When the first word ends in a high vowel and the second words begins with #CV where the first vowel is not high, the final high vowel of the first word spreads. After spreading the final vowel of a VCV# final word is deleted, resulting in metathesis similar to the process in Selaru described on page 23 above. When the high back vowel /u/ spreads over a coronal consonant (except /r/) it assimilates and becomes a palatal glide [j]. Examples of Luang high vowel spreading are given in (70) below.9

(70) Luang high vowel spreading (Taber & Taber 2015: 24)

When a CCV# final noun is joined into a single rhythm segment with a morpheme which is consonant initial, the final vowel of the noun is deleted followed

8An alternate analysis of the data in (69) would be to posit epenthesis of /a/ after phrase-final consonants. This is the analysis taken by Steven (1991) for similar data in Roma (§2.3.7)

9 I follow Taber & Taber (2015) in representing glides which are a realisation of vowels after high vowel spreading as superscript in the phonetic transcription.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

by epenthesis of the vowel /a/ to break up the newly created consonant cluster. Examples are shown in (71) below.

However, when the first word ends in CCV# and is a verb, metathesis of the final CV sequence occurs. Taber & Taber (2015) state that it is unclear why verbs have a different behaviour from nouns. It is, however, regionally common for nouns and verbs to have different behaviour regarding metathesis. This is found in Mambae (§2.3.8) as well as Amarasi. Examples of Luang verbal metathesis are shown in (72) below.

(72) Luang metathesis (verbs only) (Taber & Taber 2015: 26)

To summarise: in Luang metathesis is one of several processes which operate when two morphemes (including words) form a single phrase for the purposes of stress assignment. It is therefore possible to analyse metathesis as being conditioned by the placement of stress.10

There is also no apparent phonological reason why metathesis affects verbs but not nouns in Luang. While Luang metathesis is phonologically conditioned, it is not clearly phonologically motivated. Metathesis in Luang may be transitioning from phonologically conditioned metathesis to morphemically conditioned or morphological metathesis. Indeed, Leti which is culturally considered a Luangic dialect has developed morphological metathesis (§2.3.6).

10An alternate analysis would be to propose that words are joined into a single word/phrase by the various phonological processes (including metathesis), and then stress is assigned as appropriate.

2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

### **2.3.6 Leti**

Leti is an Austronesian language of Indonesia spoken on an island with the same name off the eastern-most tip of the island of Timor (see Figure 2.1). It is closely related to Luang (§2.2.1), which has phonologically conditioned metathesis. Leti metathesis has been described by van Engelenhoven (1994;1996; 2004) and formal analyses of it have been proposed by van der Hulst & van Engelenhoven (1995), as well as Hume (1998).

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Forms**

In Leti each word has a least two forms; a vowel-final U-form and an M-form which is often consonant final. A single Leti U-form does not necessarily correspond to a single M-form. Rather, the phonological shape of both the form in question and the following morpheme must be taken into account when determining the shape of the M-form. For instance, the Leti U-form *iina* 'fish' can have either of the M-forms *iin* or *ian*, depending on the phonological shape of the following morpheme. In this respect, Leti is similar to Amarasi in which a single U-form can have up to three different M-forms in different environments (see Chapter 4).

Four different phonological processes operate in Leti to derive each different form: glide formation, internal metathesis, external metathesis, and apocope. Each of these processes is described with reference to the phonological shape of the U-form of the first word. There are four possible shapes for Leti U-forms:

**<IP_ADDRESS>.1 No change** When the second word begins with a consonant cluster, the first word does not undergo any phonological processes and appears in the vowel-final U-form.

*ruuni* + *tniɛi* → *ruuni tniɛi* 'dugong + guts'

51

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

**<IP_ADDRESS>.2 Glide formation** When the first word ends with a high vowel and the second word begins with a non-high vowel /e/, /ɛ/, /a/, /ɔ/ or /o/, the final vowel of the first word is realised as a glide. Examples are given in (74).

This is an automatic phonetic process, as glides do not contrast phonemically with high vowels in Leti. A high vowel is automatically realised as a glide when it occurs before a stressed non-high vowel (van Engelenhoven 2004: 59).

**<IP_ADDRESS>.3 Internal metathesis** If the second word begins with a CV sequence, or a sequence of a high vowel followed by a vowel (phonetically a glide followed by a vowel; as discussed in §<IP_ADDRESS>.2 above), and the U-form of the first word ends in CCV#, then the M-form of the first word corresponds to the U-form via metathesis of the final CV sequence.

There is a process of consonant assimilation which operates in Leti which provides evidence that the underlying form of CCV final U-forms is the M-form. A penultimate /d/ or /l/ in the M-form assimilates to a final /n/ in the U-form. Likewise, a penultimate /d/ in the M-form assimilates to a U-form final /l/. Examples are given in (76) below.

(76) Consonant assimilation (van Engelenhoven 2004: 74)

Given a U-form such as *ɛnna* 'pineapple', it is impossible to predict whether the M-form will be *\*ɛnan* or *ɛdan*. Likewise, given the U-form *βulla* either the

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

correct M-form *βulan* or the incorrect form *\*βudal* can be derived. This provides evidence that the M-form in such examples is morphologically underlying with the U-form being formed by final VC → CV metathesis.

Another kind of internal metathesis occurs when the antepenultimate and penultimate vowels of the first word are identical; a VαVαCVβ final word. In the M-form the final consonant and vowel metathesise and the penultimate vowel is deleted. Like the process of VC → CV metathesis shown in (75) above, this only occurs when the second word begins with CV. Examples are given in (77) below.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.4 External metathesis** When the first word ends in a vowel sequence or VCV# and the second word begins with #CV with a non-high initial vowel, metathesis occurs across the word boundary. According to the regular phonetic rule of glide formation, the final V of the first word becomes a glide. This process is similar to phonological metathesis of glides in Selaru (§2.2.1).

**<IP_ADDRESS>.5 Apocope** Apocope (a.k.a truncation or vowel deletion) occurs in three environments in Leti. Firstly, apocope occurs when the first segment of the second word is a high vowel (but not a glide), no matter the shape of the first word. Examples are shown in (79) below:

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

(79) V → ∅ /\_V[+hi] (van Engelenhoven 2004: 91)

Secondly apocope takes place when the first word ends in VCV# or VV# (but not VVCV), and the second word begins with a high vowel, as seen in (79) above, or a consonant (including glides) followed by a high vowel, as shown in (80).

(80) V → ∅ /\_(C)V[+hi], /\_ V̯V (van Engelenhoven 2004: 91) U-form M-form *srui* + *ruri* → *sru ruri* 'garfish + bone' *lau* + *uata ̯* → *la uata ̯* 'civet + head' *niki* + *uata ̯* → *nik uata ̯* 'bat + head' *asu* + *ruri* → *as ruri* 'dog + bone'

Thirdly, apocope takes place when the first word ends in VV or VCV with a non-high final vowel and the first vowel of the second word is also a non-high vowel. This is shown in (81) below.

(81) Apocope: V[-high] → ∅ /\_(C)V[-high] (van Engelenhoven 2004: 91)

**<IP_ADDRESS>.6 Summary** The different processes which operate in Leti to derive the M-form from the U-form are summarised in Table 2.4. This table is followed by Table 2.5 which shows instantiated examples of each of these processes. Metathesis in Leti is only one of several phonological processes which operate in the language to derive M-forms.

Which form is the underlying form is not consistent in Leti. In some cases the U-form must be posited as underlying as the quality of the final vowel cannot be recovered after apocope, while in other cases the M-form must be posited as underlying as the quality of the penultimate consonant cannot be recovered after metathesis. This is different to the Amarasi data, in which the U-form must be posited as underlying in all circumstances.

apocope, metathesis, ext. metathesis, glide formation

Table 2.5: Leti instantiated U-forms and M-forms

apocope, metathesis, ext. metathesis, glide formation

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Functions**

The M-form of words occur in Leti in two main environments: when the word is non-final in the noun phrase and when it is indefinite. Note that the enclitic *=e* in many of the following examples replaces a final /a/ of the word to which

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

it attaches. This enclitic is a kind of definiteness marker (for a more detailed discussion of this enclitic see van Engelenhoven (2004: 159–61)). Words which do not end in /a/ do not occur with this enclitic.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.1 Attributive modification** All non-final words in the noun phrase occur in the M-form. This function also occurs in Rotuman (§<IP_ADDRESS>.1) and Amarasi (Chapter 6). In (82) below, the noun *asu* is in the U-form and the adjective is predicative, as shown in the tree in (84). In (83) below, the noun is in the M-form, and the adjective is attributive, as shown in the tree in (85).

Any non-final word of the noun phrase, including adjectives and adverbs, also occur in the M-form. This is shown in example (86) below in which a noun, adjective, and adverb all occur in the M-form when the final word of the noun phrase is a demonstrative.

However, nouns followed by a numeral do not occur in the M-form, as shown in (87). This is similar to Amarasi in which (cardinal) numerals do not induce M-forms on nouns (§6.5.1).

2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

(87) *aslualaβna* asu la~laβ**na** dog\m red~big\**u** *βɔrue* βɔrua=e two=def

'The two big dogs.' (van Engelenhoven 2004: 176)

**<IP_ADDRESS>.2 Indefinite** The second function of the M-form in Leti is to mark words as indefinite. Like Rotuman, it is the metathesised form of words which is indefinite and the unmetathesised form which is definite.

This is shown by the contrast between examples (88) and (89) below. In (88), the noun *iina* 'fish' is definite, and thus occurs in the U-form. In (89), however, it is indefinite and occurs in the M-form.

Verbs also occur in the M-form when they are "indefinite". Such "indefinite" verbs have a semantics indicating that the action specified by the verb was not properly carried out, translated by van Engelenhoven with the phrase 'kind of'. This use seems comparable to the imperfective aspect.

An example of such an "indefinite" verb can be seen with the verb *rɔɔna* 'eat' in example (90) below, which has undergone apocope. This example contrasts with the "definite" verb in example (88) above. When both verb and noun are indefinite, both occur in the M-form, as shown in (91).

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Metathesis, as one of the processes by which the M-form is derived, has two functions in Leti: it marks following nominal modifiers as attributive and it is employed to mark words as indefinite. Of these functions, the first also occurs in Amarasi.

### **2.3.7 Roma**

Roma, or Romang, is an Austronesian language spoken on an island of the same name to the north-east of Timor (see Figure 2.1). It is closely related to both Leti and Luang. Roma has been described by Steven (1991), who focusses on the phonology of the language.

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Forms**

Roma has three different processes of metathesis. Two of these metathesis processes are phonologically conditioned and one is morphological. Firstly, Roma has a process of phonologically conditioned metathesis in which a high vowel or glide metathesises with a following consonant. This process is similar to the processes in Selaru (§2.2.1) and Luang (§2.2.1). Examples are given in (92) below.

### (92) Phonological glide metathesis: (Steven 1991: 63f)

Secondly, /h/ obligatorily metathesises with a preceding consonant in Roma. One example is *am-* 'pl.excl + *hapa* 'plant' → *ahmapa* 'we (excl.) plant' (Steven 1991: 69).

Thirdly, Roma has a process of final VC → CV morphological metathesis. This process is similar to the same process described for Leti. This process only affects consonant-final nouns in Roma. Examples are given in (93) below.

### (93) VC → CV metathesis Steven (1991: 64ff)

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

Evidence that the consonant-final forms are underlying comes from processes of consonant assimilation which occur after metathesis. These processes include devoicing of medial /d/ and assimilation of final /l/ and /r/. (These processes of consonant assimilation are similar to those described for Leti on page page 52.) Examples of Roma consonant assimilation are given in (94) below.

(94) Consonant assimilation Steven (1991: 31,65)

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Functions**

Only nouns undergo metathesis in Roma. Verbs occur with a single consonantfinal form. For nouns, metathesis has two main functions. Firstly, subjects undergo metathesis while objects occur unmetathesised. Metathesis is thus a subject marker or marker of nominative case. Compare examples (95) and (96) below.

In (95) the noun *hiwit* is an object and thus occurs unmetathesised. The final vowel found after this object is an epenthetic vowel which occurs after all phrasefinal consonants (Steven 1991: 69f). In (96) the same noun is the subject and thus occurs metathesised.

'There wasn't any machetes.' (Steven 1991: 67)

Secondly, nouns occur metathesised in isolation (including the citation form) but unmetathesised when an attributive modifier follows. Metathesis thus signals that the noun is unmodified; a kind of anti-construct form. Steven (1991) gives the examples in (97) below.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

However, if a genitive pronoun or the locative marker *la* precedes the noun it obligatorily occurs in the unmetathesised form even if a modifier follows. Steven (1991) gives the examples in (98) below.

(98) Metathesis after locative or possessive pronouns: (Steven 1991: 67) *aniku* + *horaran* + *ehi* → *aniku horarna ehi* 'these clothes of mine' *la* + *krahan* + *popotna* → *la krahna popotna* 'at the large house'

Similarly, before the enclitics *=ei* def and *=ida* indef nouns obligatorily occur metathesised. Final high vowels then become glides and final /a/ is deleted. Glide formation and deletion of /a/ are both regular process in Roma which occur whenever a vowel-initial enclitic or suffix attaches to a host which ends in a vowel (Steven 1991: 78f). Examples are given in (99) below.

In Roma metathesis marks the subject of a verb phrase as well as signalling that a noun is unmodified. Metathesis is also obligatory when a noun occurs after possessive pronouns, locative *la* or before vowel-initial enclitics.

There are two similarities between metathesis in Roma and Amarasi. Firstly, metathesis interacts with attributive modifiers. In Roma metathesis signals lack of an attributive modifier while in Amarasi metathesis signals the presence of an attributive modifier. Secondly, in both Roma and Amarasi metathesis is obligatory before vowel-initial enclitics.

### **2.3.8 Mambae**

Mambae is an Austronesian language/dialect cluster spoken in Timor-Leste (East Timor), from the north coast around Dili all the way to the south coast (see Figure

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

2.1). On the basis of lexical comparison, Fogaça (2017) identifies three main varieties of Mambae: Northwest Mambae, Central Mambae, and South Mambae. The forms and functions of metathesis vary between different varieties of Mambae.

In this section I focus on South Mambae from the village (*suco*) of Letefoho; the variety which is the focus of the descriptions in Grimes et al. (2014) and Fogaça (2017). I offer some initial observations on metathesis in other varieties in §<IP_ADDRESS> based on the comparative data in Fogaça (2017).

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Forms**

Metathesis in South Mambae is final CV → VC metathesis. Only words ending in CV have distinct U-forms and M-forms. Examples of metathesis in South Mambae are given in (100) below.

(100) South Mambae metathesis (Fogaça 2017: 122)

Metathesis is associated with two other phonological processes. The first is assimilation of final /a/ to the quality of the previous vowel after metathesis. This is shown in (101) below, which also gives reconstructed Proto-Malayo-Polynesian (PMP) forms for comparison. U-forms which are not (yet) attested are indicated with an asterisk. Such assimilation also occurs in Amarasi.

(101) South Mambae VαCa → VαVαC (Fogaça 2017: 122)

Assimilation of final /a/ only occurs after metathesis and /a/ freely occurs as the second member of a vowel sequence in VVC# final words. Two examples are *kiak* 'poor' and *hean* 'rowing'.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Secondly, word-final /i/ usually lowers to /e/ after metathesis when the penultimate vowel is /a/. Examples are given in (102) below. Where the U-form is not (yet) known to occur, this is indicated with an asterisk.

(102) South Mambae aCi → aeC

Again, lowering of /i/ → /e/ in South Mambae is restricted to M-forms. The vowel /i/ freely occurs as the second member of a vowel sequence in VVC# final roots, such as *araik* 'lower, humble', *tais* 'no, not' and *sabai* ~ *sabait* 'cloud'.11

The processes of vowel assimilation which occur after metathesis in Mambae show that the M-form is derived from the U-form and not visa versa. While in all cases the M-form can be predicted with knowledge of the U-form, the reverse is not true. Thus, given an M-form such as *hiin* 'woman' we can generate both the correct U-form *hina* and incorrect *\*hini*. Similarly, given the M-form *tael* 'rope' both correct *tali* and incorrect *\*tale* are possible U-forms

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Functions**

Metathesis has three main functions in South Mambae: derivation, phrase formation, and possession. Each of these functions is discussed in turn. All these functions are examples of morphological metathesis (§2.2.3).

Formally, the M-form is derived from the U-form. However, the M-form appears to be the default semantic form with the U-form having specific functions. Thus, for instance, most words are cited in the M-form and many words have only been attested in the M-form.

**<IP_ADDRESS>.1 Derivation** Metathesis is also used in derivation in Mambae. One productive derivational use is noun/verb derivation. Examples are given in (103) below. If the M-form is the basic semantic form as suggested above, this would be a process of nominalisation.

11The sequence /ai/ is often realised [əi] with the first vowel centralised (Grimes et al. 2014: 6).

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

That the loanword *kuidadu* 'care, caution' (from Portuguese *cuidado*) also has a verbal and nominal form derived by metathesis is evidence that this is a productive process in South Mambae.

In addition to such verb/noun pairs, there are a number of U-form/M-form pairs which are semantically and/or historically related but for which the M-form is not a verb. Examples include *lima* 'hand, arm' *liim* 'five', *tona* 'year, age, birthday' *toon* 'year', and *muna* 'long ago, previously' *muun* 'before'.

Examples of uses of the U-form and M-form of *mate* ~ *maet* 'die, be dead; death' are given in (104) below, an excerpt from a narrative about the war for independence in Timor-Leste. The U-forms appear to be used in a more active (process) sense while the M-forms are used in a more stative (result) sense. This text was collected during a 2012 language documentation workshop (see §1.4).

(104) South Mambae narrative:

'(It was the) same in the jungle (they) also died.'

d. *maa* come *rende* surrender *telo* finish *met* also *mate* die\**u** '(They) came and surrendered and also died.'

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

**<IP_ADDRESS>.2 Phrase formation** Metathesis in South Mambae plays a role in compounding and other phrase formation processes. The first element of a phrase tends to occur in the M-form and the final element in the U-form. Examples of unmetathesised words phrase finally are given in (105) below. All these words are metathesised in the citation form.

It is not a strict rule that phrase-final elements are always in the U-form. Thus, in addition to *taes hina* 'north coast' and *taes mane* 'south coast', we also find *taat hiin* 'grandmother' and *taat maen* 'grandfather'. The degree of lexicalisation may play a role, with lexicalised phrases occurring with M-form initial elements and U-form final elements.

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

**<IP_ADDRESS>.3 Direct possession** Metathesis also plays a role in possessive constructions. South Mambae has two different possessive constructions: indirect possession and direct possession. Indirect possession is expressed with the possessive particle *ni*. The order is either possessor-*ni*-possessum, as in (106), or possessumpossessor-*ni*, as in (107).

Direct possession is expressed by the possessor occurring before a U-form possessum. Compare the examples in (108)–(111) below. In (108) the noun *mane* 'male, man, husband' is not possessed and occurs in the M-form while in (109) the same noun is possessed and thus occurs in the U-form. Similarly, in (110) *uma* 'house' occurs unpossessed and in the M-form while in (111) it occurs possessed and in the U-form.

(111) *au* 1sg *laa* go *au* 1sg *uma* house\**u** 'I'm going to my house.' (Fogaça 2017: 146f)

Use of the U-form for the possessum in direct possessive constructions is similar to the use of U-forms in phrase formation. In both constructions the U-form is used as the second element of the phrase.

One possible reason for this similarity is that the phrases with final U-forms are (or were) originally possessive constructions. This approach is hinted at by

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

Fogaça (2017: 147) who identifies one function of direct possession as expressing a part-whole relation, as in *haeh sisa* 'pig meat' = 'pork' and *ai tia* 'tree skin' = 'bark'.

Fogaça (2017: 146) reports that direct possession in Northwest Mambae and Central Mambae is expressed with the suffix *-n* on the possessum, examples of which occur in the citation form of several body parts and kin terms in Fogaça's appended wordlists. Examples from Northwest Mambae (Railaco sub-district) include *gugu-n* 'mouth', *lima-n* 'arm', and *ina-n* 'mother'.

Given that CVC# final words do not have M-forms in Mambae, the use of U-forms in direct possession in South Mambae appears to have arisen from the possessum originally taking the suffix *-n*, thus being consonant final and ineligible to undergo metathesis. After loss of the suffix the only signal of possession was the U-form.

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Other varieties of Mambae**

Fogaça (2017) also presents some survey data from other varieties of Mambae on the basis of which it is possible to make some preliminary observations on differences in metathesis among varieties of Mambae.

The citation forms of a number of common nouns from seven different varieties of Mambae are given in Table 2.6 for comparison. These forms are taken from the comparative wordlists in Fogaça (2017), with phonetically long vowels retranscribed as double according to their phonemic structure and the putative nominal suffix *-a* separated by a hyphen.12

Table 2.6 shows that a suffix *-a* frequently occurs on common nouns in Central Mambae and Northwest Mambae. This suffix is not synchronically attested in South Mambae. Before this suffix CV# final words obligatorily undergo metathesis (Fogaça 2017: 126).13 A similar pattern occurs in Amarasi in which metathesis is obligatory before vowel-initial enclitics (Chapter 5).14

The data in Table 2.6 also show a number of differences in the forms of metathesis between different varieties of Mambae. The main differences are in the kinds of vowel assimilation which occur. This ranges from no assimilation (apart from final /a/) in Laulara to complete assimilation of nearly all vowels in Hatu-Udo, as

12Although the difference between the mid-high vowels [e] [o] and mid-low [ɛ] [ɔ] is known not to be phonemic in South Mambae, I have maintained Fogaça's distinction between these vowels in Table 2.6 as their status in other varieties is not known.

13When the suffix *-a* occurs on VV# final words, no change occurs. An example is *ai-a* 'tree'.

14One vowel-initial enclitic in Amarasi is the nominal determiner *=aa*, which may well be cognate with the Mambae nominal suffix *-a*.

### 2.3 Survey of languages with synchronic metathesis

Table 2.6: Common Nouns in Different Mambae Varieties†

† Mambae Varieties are: South Mambae from Letefoho and Betano villages (Same sub-district) and Hatu-Udo sub-district, Central Mambae from the sub-districts of Laulara, Ailei Vila, Hatu-Builico and Liquidoe, and Northwest Mambae from the sub-districts of Railaco, Hatulia, and Barzatete. PMP reconstructions are from Blust & Trussel (ongoing). Proto-Mambae reconstructions are my own.

well as varieties part way between these two such as Letefoho in which all vowels usually undergo complete assimilation, apart from /i/ which lowers to /e/ after /a/.15 Another kind of vowel assimilation is height assimilation, seen in Hatu-Builico and Liquidoe in which penultimate mid vowels (optionally) raise to high before another high vowel after metathesis, such as in \*n**e**ru → *niur-a* 'knife'. Finally, Northwest Mambae has monophthongisation of the vowel sequence \*ai created by metathesis. One example of is \*hahi > *haih-a* > *heh-a* 'pig'.16

15Table 2.6 only shows assimilation of high vowels. Assimilation of mid vowels also occurs, as seen in Hatu-Udo *mane* → *maan* 'man, male' and *lelo* → *leel* 'sun'.

16More data will probably show that the best analysis of Northwest Mambae *heh-a* 'pig' and *ep-a* 'fire' is actually *heeh-a* and *eep-a* with an underlying sequence of two identical vowels. This is also likely for other apparent disyllables ending in /a/, such as Northwest Mambae [uta] 'louse' or [noa] 'coconut'. The behaviour of other forms such as *tali* → *tail-a* 'rope' and *ai* → *ai-a* 'tree' which unambiguously undergo metathesis and/or preserve the original vowel sequence, as well as data from other varieties with the forms *utun*, *uut* 'louse' and *noo* 'coconut', strongly indicates that such forms are underlying *uut-a* and *noo-a* respectively.

### 2 Synchronic metathesis from a cross-linguistic perspective

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Summary**

There are many similarities between metathesis in Mambae and Amarasi. Of all the cases of metathesis discussed in this chapter, Mambae metathesis has the most similarities to Amarasi metathesis. Firstly, in both Mambae and Amarasi final /a/ also assimilates to the quality of the previous vowel after metathesis.

Secondly, in both Mambae and Amarasi metathesis interacts with the formation of nominal phrases. In Mambae non-final members of a nominal phrase tend to occur metathesised and final members tend to occur unmetathesised. In Amarasi this is not a tendency but a rule of the grammar. Amarasi metathesised nominals are a construct form used before attributive modifiers, and unmetathesised nominals are used phrase finally (Chapter 6).

Thirdly, in both Mambae and Amarasi U-forms are associated with nouns and M-forms with verbs. In Mambae this can be seen in derivationally related pairs such as *moir* 'live' and *mori* 'life'. In Amarasi the default form of nominals is the U-form and the default form of verbs the M-form (§7.3).

Finally, metathesis in Northwest and Central Mambae is obligatory before the nominal suffix *-a*. Similarly, in Amarasi metathesis is obligatory before vowelinitial enclitics.

The only feature of Mambae metathesis which does not have a close parallel in Amarasi is the use of U-form nouns in direct possession in South Mambae. However, as discussed in §<IP_ADDRESS>.3 this feature, may be a recent development arising from loss of earlier genitive *-n*.

### **2.3.9 Helong**