This article 1 deals with variably stressed English words such as , which receive secondary stress on either the first or the second syllable: ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ . It is argued that cases such as this have morphological rather than phonological causes. That is, the stress pattern ˌ ˈ is due to the initially stressed disyllable ˈ , whereas ˌ ˈ is due to the penultimately stressed trisyllables ˈ , ˈ , ˈ . Another important factor is emphasis, which is the reason initial secondary stress often occurs in pairs of words such as - , which are formally different from each other only with regard to their initial monosyllabic strings -/ -. This article is concerned with polysyllabic English words that receive either initial or pen-initial secondary stress. For example, is either / əˌkadəˈmɪʃn/ or / ˌakədəˈmɪʃn/ ; is both / pɑːˌtɪsɨˈpeɪʃn/ and / ˌpɑːtɨsɨˈpeɪʃn/ ; vacillates between / ˌtəʊtalɨˈtɛːrɪən/ and / tə(ʊ)ˌtalɨˈtɛːrɪən/ ; etc. (Upton/ Kretzschmar 2017: 7, 972, 1392). Whereas primary stress variation - e.g., / ˈadʌlt/ vs. / əˈdʌlt/ , / əˈplɪkəbl/ vs. / ˈaplɨkəbl/ , / ˈpaprɨkə/ vs. / pəˈpriːkə/ , etc. (Upton/ Kretzschmar 2017: 18, 65, 966) - has been systematically analyzed by Tokar (2017) (and less systematically by, e.g., Mair 2006: 159-162 and Zumstein 2006), secondary stress variation has, to the best of my knowledge, thus far escaped a thorough investigation; that is, the existence of variably stressed words such as , , and is only acknowledged 1 I thank anonymous reviewers and Prof. Bernhard Kettemann, the editor of the journal, for commenting upon an earlier version of this article. All remaining deficiencies are my own. - 160 Alexander Tokar by authors such as, e.g., Gimson (1970: 233), Kiparsky (1979: 423), Hayes (1980: 298), Fudge (1984: 151), Halle and Vergnaud (1987: 243, 245-246), Wenszky (2004: 12), and Trevian (2015: 457-458), but these authors do not raise the question of why only particular secondarystressed English words have come to be associated with more than one secondary stress pattern. For example, is, just like , also interchangeably pronounced / anˌtɪsɨˈpeɪʃn/ and / ˌantɪsɨˈpeɪʃn/ (Upton/ Kretzschmar 2017: 57), but has only pen-initial secondary stress: / ɨˌmansɨˈpeɪʃn/ (Upton/ Kretzschmar 2017: 417). Likewise, as reported by Halle and Vergnaud (1987: 245), Kenyon and Knott‟s (1953[1944]: 223, 416) gives both initial and pen-initial secondary stress only for, e.g., , but not for the formally and semantically related word . Commenting upon this fact, Halle and Vergnaud (1987: 245) observe that “the absence of a second alternative for , , is more likely to be an oversight than a systematic gap to be accounted for in a phonological description of the language.” That is, because the so-called rule of Stress Enhancement (Halle/ Vergnaud 1987: 242-243, 250) in principle leaves a choice between placing secondary stress on either the first or the second syllable, there are no reasons that would preclude words such as , , and from being pronounced with either initial or pen-initial secondary stress. At the same time, however, “for words like the alternative with secondary stress on the first syllable seems to be excluded for everyone we have consulted” (Halle/ Vergnaud 1987: 250). The theoretically possible secondary stress pattern ˌ is thus either nonexistent or at least strongly dispreferred by contemporary English speakers. A related question is thus why, in the case of variably stressed English words, one secondary stress pattern becomes the preferred stress pattern. On the one hand, in the view of Kenyon and Knott (1953[1944]: xxv), “in actual speech, such alternative accentuations as ˌ ˈ or ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ or ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ or ˌ ˈ are very common and do not represent more and less desirable pronunciations.” On the other hand, there are words such as , which is both ˌ ˈ and ˌ ˈ according to Gimson (1970: 233), but Upton and Kretzschmar‟s (2017) (henceforth RDPCE), which claims to be “the most up-to-date record of the pronunciation of British and American English,” gives only the stress pattern ˌ ˈ . Similarly, in the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (henceforth LDOCE), is said to be only / tjuːˌbɜːkjəˈləʊsɪs/ in British English and only / tuːˌbɜːrkjəˈloʊsɪs/ in American English. Why do Present-day English speakers prefer the stress pattern ˌ ˈ to ˌ ˈ ? In the following, we will attempt to answer these questions using both dictionary transcriptions, such as the aforementioned / əˌkadəˈmɪʃn/ vs. 161 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English / ˌakədəˈmɪʃn/ , and YouTube videos in which words with secondary stress doublets in dictionary transcriptions were found to have been pronounced by native English speakers. In particular, pronouncing dictionaries, such as RDPCE, give us a general idea of which English words are likely to receive both initial and pen-initial secondary stress; additionally, with the help of dictionary transcriptions, we can relatively easily analyze the general distribution of secondary-stressed syllables in English words, that is, for example, whether words with initial secondary stress are more numerous in contemporary English than words with pen-initial secondary stress. What dictionary transcriptions cannot do, however, is tell us 1) which of the stress patterns is more frequently used by contemporary English speakers than an alternative stress pattern given in a dictionary, and 2) whether discourse context influences secondary stress assignment, that is, whether a particular secondary stress pattern is likely to be chosen in a particular environment. To answer these questions, we obviously need corpus data, i.e., recordings of native English speakers pronouncing particular variably stressed words in different environments. Just like Tokar (2017: Section 3.3), the present article uses YouTube, which is the largest freely available online database of spoken English (as well as of many other languages). Excerpts from YouTube videos illustrating particular claims (e.g., that American English prefers the stress pattern ˌ ˈ ) can be downloaded from https: / / tinyurl.com/ y9xxz9vw (28.05.2018). In Oxford Dictionaries, henceforth OD (http: / / www.oxforddictionaries. com/ , which as of 31.12.2015 consisted of 201,079 entries; “Oxford Dictionaries focuses on current language and practical usage”), there are 24,187 solidly spelled entries that contain 30,428 secondary-stressed transcriptions, that is, transcriptions in which the secondary stress symbol (ˌ) occurs at least one time. In 29,220 (~96.03%) of the secondarystressed transcriptions, the secondary stress symbol occurs only one time, and in 25,151 (~82.66%) secondary-stressed transcriptions, the secondary stress symbol occurs immediately after the transcription opening symbol (/ ). Thus, it can be stated that “secondary-stressed English words almost always have only one secondary-stressed syllable, which is as a rule their first syllable” (Tokar 2017: 126). Note, however, that in RDPCE, there are 61,574 lines on which the abbreviations and , which stand for American English and British English, are followed by secondary-stressed transcriptions, which contain the symbol (ˌ). These transcriptions fall into 39,121 (~63.53%) American and only 22,453 (~36.47%) British English transcriptions. (Secondary stress is thus quite obviously more typical of the American variety.) Of 162 Alexander Tokar the 22,453 British English transcriptions, 19,035 (~84.78%) exhibit initial secondary stress, while in the case of the 39,121 American English transcriptions, the same is true of only 17,520 (~44.78%) transcriptions: χ 2 (1) = 9,459, < 0.000001. The reason for this (statistically highly significant) difference is that American English often employs post-tonic secondary stress, which is virtually nonexistent in British English: 21,495/ 39,121 (= ~54.94%) vs. 2,089/ 22,453 (= ~9.3%), χ 2 (1) = 12,575, < 0.000001. (This difference is thus also statistically highly significant.) For example, is stressed / ˈtɛrəˌtɔri/ in American English vs. / ˈtɛrɨt(ə)ri/ in British English (RDPCE: 1364). Given stress differences such as / ˈtɛrəˌtɔri/ vs. / ˈtɛrɨt(ə)ri/ , American English is often referred to as a more conservative variety with regard to stress than British English. That is, the English word etymologically goes back to the Latin word territōrium (Dictionary.com); cf. the Modern Italian word , which is pronounced / ter.ri.ˈtɔ: .rio/ (PONS), or the German word , which is pronounced / tɛriˈto: riʊm/ (Kleiner et al. 2015: 832). The post-tonic secondary stress of the American English / ˈtɛrəˌtɔri/ is thus simply the etymological stress of the Latin territōrium. Indeed, in Crystal‟s (2016) , there are 4,600 non-identical lines on which the secondary stress symbol (ˌ) occurs at least one time. On 3,567 (~77.54%) lines, the secondary stress symbol (ˌ) occurs after the primary stress symbol (ˈ), which means that just like contemporary American English speakers, Early Modern English speakers also often placed secondary stress upon a post-tonic syllable. For example, was, according to Crystal (2016: 556), not only / ˈterɪtrəɪ/ but also / ˈterɪˌtɒrəɪ/ , with the post-tonic syllable / ˌtɒ/ receiving secondary stress. Of the 25,151 secondary-stressed transcriptions (in OD) in which the secondary stress symbol occurs initially, 15,503 (~61.64%) are transcriptions such as / ˌaləˈbamə/ , / ˌfɪləˈdɛlfɪə/ , or / ˌmɒntrɪˈɔːl/ , in which the primary stress symbol is preceded by a string that contains two vowels (with the symbols that are used in OD to represent diphthongs and triphthongs counting as one vowel. Notice, however, that a sequence of two vowels such as, e.g., / ɪə/ can denote both a diphthong and a hiatus. For example, is only / ˈɡlɔːrɪəs/ according to the OD dictionary, but as, for instance, Jones [1917: xxx] points out, the syllabic structure of this word vacillates between the trisyllabic / ˈɡlɔː-rɪ-əs/ , which contains a hiatus, and the disyllabic / ˈɡlɔː-rɪəs/ , which resolves the hiatus via diphthongization. Given this fact, it is possible that some of the 15,503 transcriptions such as / ˌaləˈbamə/ , / ˌfɪləˈdɛlfɪə/ , or / ˌmɒntrɪˈɔːl/ actually belong to words in which the fourth rather than the third syllable counting from the beginning of the word receives primary stress). Because in English, “[n]o word can begin with two unstressed syllables” (Fournier 2007: 222) and (not only in English, but in general) “adjacent stressed syllables make speech sound jerky” (Kingdon 1949: 163 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English 149), initial secondary stress usually occurs in an English word in which primary stress is post-pen-initial (i.e., falls upon the third syllable counting from the beginning of the word). Words in which the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress are usually represented by 1) penultimately stressed tetrasyllables ( ), 2) antepenultimately stressed pentasyllables ( ), and 3) finally stressed trisyllables ( ). In 2,867 (~11.4%) phonetic transcriptions in OD in which secondary stress occurs initially, the primary stress symbol is preceded by a string that contains only one vowel. In 1,082 (~37.74%) transcriptions, the secondary stress symbol is, however, surrounded by brackets - e.g., / (ˌ)ʌnˈɔːdn̩(ə)rəli/ - which means that the word in question can be pronounced either with or without initial secondary stress, that is, ˌ ˈ vs. ˈ . Cases such as this are almost exclusively represented by words whose first syllables are semantically transparent prefixes (e.g., of , of , of , etc.), which receive stress even when this results in a rhythmically unfortunate sequence of two stressed syllables. Normally, the stress borne by a semantically transparent prefix is secondary, but “[w]hen there is contrast or when the idea expressed by the prefix is given special prominence, the prefix bears the primary stress and the base a secondary stress […]” (Poldauf 1984: 24). Thus, in addition to being stressed ˌ ˈ or ˈ , which follows from the phonetic transcription / (ˌ)mɪsˈkrɛdɪt/ (OD), the prefixed derivative can also be stressed ˈ ˌ , with the prefix receiving primary stress. Likewise, we argue that is not only ˌ ˈ or ˈ , which follows from the phonetic transcription / (ˌ)ʌnˈtruː/ (RDPCE: 1476), but also ˈ ˌ . Stress clashes that involve a preceding secondary-stressed syllable and a following primary-stressed one are also characteristic of right-prominent compounds such as, e.g., : / ˌbluːˈtʌŋ/ (OD). As indicated in the previous section, what poses an intellectual challenge is English words in which the first three or more syllables with which they begin do not take primary stress. In a word such as , either the first or the second syllable can receive secondary stress, which is reflected in the stress variation / ˌpɑːtɨsɨˈpeɪʃn/ vs. / pɑːˌtɪsɨˈpeɪʃn/ (i.e., both of these stress patterns respect the principles of not beginning a word with two unstressed syllables and avoiding stress clashes). However, as observed above, the word , which exhibits a similar structure (i.e., a pentasyllable in which primary stress is post-post-peninitial), is stressed only / ɨˌmansɨˈpeɪʃn/ . What follows below is thus a discussion of why words such as can receive either initial or pen-initial secondary stress. It is hoped that this discussion will further our understanding of the general principles governing the incidence of secondary stress in words such as and , in which the first three or more syllables do not take primary stress. 164 Alexander Tokar . Contemporary English has (no less than) 494 solidly spelled variably stressed words such as ; that is, according to LDOCE, OD, or RDPCE, 1) the primary stress of these words, which always occurs upon one and the same syllable, is not initial, pen-initial, or post-pen-initial, and 2) their secondary stress is interchangeably initial and pen-initial. (These words are all given in the appendix.) Note that the 494 variably stressed words such as do not include variably stressed words such as - / dʒɪˌɒmᵻtrʌɪˈzeɪʃn/ vs. / ˌdʒɒmᵻtrʌɪˈzeɪʃn/ (OD) - in which a change in the place of secondary stress correlates with a change in the syllabic structure. That is, because hiatus, which means that a codaless syllable precedes an onsetless one, is “dispreferred cross-linguistically” (Chitoran/ Hualde 2007: 61), is stressed not only / dʒɪˌɒ-/ , preserving the stress of ˈ / ˈ , but also / ˌdʒɒ-/ , with the hiatus / ɪˌɒ/ of / dʒɪˌɒ-/ being resolved via deleting the preceding vowel / ɪ/ . Cases such as / dʒɪˌɒ-/ vs. / ˌdʒɒ-/ of are not genuine instances of secondary stress variation, which is especially obvious in the case of - / ˌbjɛləʊˈrʌʃə/ vs. / bɪˌɛləʊˈrʌʃə/ (RDPCE: 174) - with the former pronunciation resolving the hiatus / ɪˌɛ/ of the latter via replacing the preceding vowel / ɪ/ through the phonetically similar glide / j/ . That is, because the primary stress of / ˌbjɛləʊˈrʌʃə/ is post-pen-initial, its secondary stress can only be initial. According to RDPCE, in the case of 306 variably stressed words such as , initial and pen-initial secondary stress are interchangeably used by British English speakers, whereas in the case of American English, the corresponding number is (only) 52. Observe, however, that this finding is mainly due to the fact that for prefixed derivatives such as - / ˌdɪsɪmɨˈlarɨti/ vs. / dɨ(s)ˌsɪmɨˈlarɨti/ in British English (RDPCE: 373) - the dictionary gives American English transcriptions such as / ˌdɪ(s)ˌsɪməˈlɛrədi/ , with both the first and the second syllable being marked as bearing secondary stress. Compare this to Kenyon and Knott (1953[1944]: 131), who give the American English pronunciations / dɪˌsɪməˈlærəti/ and / ˌdɪssɪməˈlærəti/ . Indeed, because in transcriptions such as / ˌdɪ(s)ˌsɪməˈlɛrədi/ , one secondary-stressed syllable occurs immediately after another secondary-stressed syllable, which is unfortunate from the point of view of rhythm, it is safe to assume that just like British English speakers, American English speakers also, at least on some occasions, pronounce words such as with either only initial or only pen-initial secondary stress. 165 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English As suggested in Section 2, contemporary English also has words in which a particular (usually, post-tonic) syllable either receives or does not receive secondary stress. Typically, stress patterns such as the above mentioned / ˈtɛrəˌtɔri/ are used in American English, whereas British English prefers stress patterns such as / ˈtɛrɨt(ə)ri/ . In some cases, however, the choice between pronunciations such as / ˈtɛrəˌtɔri/ and / ˈtɛrɨt(ə)ri/ is semantically conditioned. For example, is stressed / ˈnɒmɪnətɪv/ when it expresses the meaning “the nominative case,” but it is stressed / ˈnɒmɪˌneɪtɪv/ when the intended meaning is “[o]f or appointed by nomination as distinct from election” (OD; boldface mine). (The semantic link between and , which results in the pronunciation / ˈnɒmɪˌneɪtɪv/ , is thus obviously stronger in the latter than in the former case.) A slightly different case is / ˌɒnəmeɪsɪˈɒlədʒi/ in British English vs. / ˌɔnəˌmeɪziˈɑlədʒi/ in American English (RDPCE: 930), where the difference concerns the number of (pre-tonic) secondary-stressed syllables in the same word. The point here is that is “another name for ” (Dictionary.com; italics mine). Given this fact, we naturally obtain the stress pattern ˌ ˌ ˈ , which preserves the stresses of the formally and semantically related word ˌ ˈ , in which the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. (Note also that etymologically, is “from Greek „term‟ + - ” [OD]. The string -ˌ ˈ , in which secondary stress is initial because primary stress is post-pen-initial, does not occur in English as a separate word, but it does occur as a righthand part of the word , one of whose stress patterns is, according to OD, / anˌtɒnəˈmeɪzɪə/ .) At the same time, however, as pointed out in Section 2, in a secondary-stressed word of contemporary British English, there is as a rule only one secondary-stressed syllable, which is usually the wordinitial syllable. Thus we obtain the British English pronunciation ˌ ˈ , with only the first syllable in the word receiving secondary stress. Note that in the view of van der Hulst (2014: 32) - who does not distinguish between British and American English - the third syllable in a word such as should be regarded as a syllable bearing tertiary rather than secondary stress. This claim is especially obvious in the case of , which, just like , is stressed / ˌɒnəmatəˈpiːə/ in British English vs. / ˌɑnəˌmædəˈpiə/ in American English (RDPCE: 930). The back-derivative from - the word - is stressed / ˈɒnəmətəʊp/ (OD), with the first syllable of being promoted to the primary-stressed syllable and the third syllable being completely destressed, i.e., “a syllable of English is com- 166 Alexander Tokar pletely stressless if its vowel is schwa” (Hayes 1995: 12). The first syllable in thus bears a stronger stress than the third syllable. Finally, observe that in some English words in which the third syllable takes primary stress, secondary stress occurs not only initially but also pen-initially. For example, is stressed either / ˌkɒnɛkˈtɪvɨti/ or / kəˌnɛkˈtɪvɨti/ (RDPCE: 267), with the secondary stress of the latter being the preserved stress of the base verb . According to Pater (2000: 254), “a light syllable is never stressed when it is the final number of bisyllabic or trisyllabic pretonic string.” Thus, because “stress preservation on light syllables is blocked in the environment of a following primary stress” (Pater 2000: 237), e.g., cannot be stressed * ˌ ˈ , preserving the stress of / fəˈnɛtɪk/ (RDPCE: 1003), whereas can be stressed / əˌkuːˈstɪʃn/ (RDPCE: 11), preserving the stress of / əˈkuːstɪk/ (RDPCE: 11). What distinguishes these two - -derivatives is that in the base , stress occurs upon the light penult / ˈnɛ/ , whereas in the base , it occurs upon the heavy penult / ˈkuː/ . Note, however, that even when the base is stressed upon a heavy syllable, a derived form such as and does not always exhibit pen-initial secondary stress. For example, in contrast to , for which RDPCE (329) gives the American English transcriptions / ˌdɛfərˈmeɪʃ(ə)n/ vs. / ˌdiˌfɔrˈmeɪʃ(ə)n/ , with the nucleus of the second syllable being either a schwa or an unreduced vowel, is only / ˌɪnfəˈmeɪʃn/ in British English and only / ˌɪnfərˈmeɪʃ(ə)n/ in American English (RDPCE: 672), with the second syllable always containing a reduced vowel and thus not bearing any degree of stress. What this means is that the stress of the base , which falls upon the heavy ult / ˈfɔːm/ , is not preserved in the derivative . Given words such as , we can repeat Pater‟s (2000: 258) claim that in general, the constraint “IDENT-STRESS [i.e., stress preservation] must be subordinated to *CLASH-HEAD [i.e., stress clash avoidance].” Stress patterns such as the aforementioned / kəˌnɛkˈtɪvɨti/ , / əˌkuːˈstɪʃn/ , / ˌdiˌfɔrˈmeɪʃ(ə)n/ , etc. should thus be seen as idiosyncratic deviations from the principle of avoiding stress clashes. According to Fudge (1984: 31; author‟s italics), “[i]f there is a syllable two syllables back from main stress, it takes secondary stress. [...] If there is a syllable two syllables back from main stress, the third syllable back from main stress takes secondary stress.” For example, is stressed / ɨnˌsʌɪklə(ʊ)ˈpiːdɪə/ (RDPCE: 425) because the syllable / ˌsʌɪ/ , which contains a diphthong in the nucleus position, is strong or heavy, whereas is stressed / ˌfɑːməkəˈpiːə/ (RDPCE: 1000) because the syllable / mə/ , which ends in a short vowel, is weak or light. In a similar way, Bermúdez-Otero and McMahon (2006: 397) observe 167 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English that “in a pretonic sequence of light syllables, secondary stress is assigned by building trochees from left to right […]. In words with three pretonic light syllables, this results in a characteristic dactylic sequence […] (àbra)ca(dábra)” (It is fairly obvious that with these claims, especially Fudge (1984: 31) merely repeats the Latin Stress Rule, which, in the view of many authors (e.g., Hayes 1995: 181), is also responsible for the distribution of primary stress in English words of three and more syllables: Stress is penultimate when the penult is heavy and antepenultimate when the penult is light.) In stark contrast to these claims, e.g., Pater (2000: 241) observes that “[t]he standard analysis of English is that main stress is subject to a quantity-sensitivity parameter or rule, and that the parameter is turned off for secondary stress placement.” Indeed, in the case of, e.g., - / ˌfantazməˈɡɔːrɪə/ vs. / fanˌtazməˈɡɔːrɪə/ (RDPCE: 1000) - the change in the location of secondary stress does not correlate with any segmental differences (i.e., the pre-tonic strings / ˌfantazmə-/ and / fanˌtazmə-/ differ from each other only with regard to the location of the secondary stress symbol). Similarly, in the case of / vɪˌtɛlə(ʊ)ˈdʒɛnɪn/ vs. / ˌvɪt(ə)ləʊˈdʒɛnɪn/ (OD), both the stressed syllable / ˌtɛ/ of / vɪˌtɛlə(ʊ)-/ , which contains a full vowel, and the unstressed syllable / t(ə)/ of / ˌvɪt(ə)ləʊ-/ , which contains a qualitatively reduced vowel, count phonologically as light syllables. When is stressed / ˌhjuːmanɨˈtɛːrɪən/ (RDPCE: 626), the secondary-stressed syllable / ˌhjuː/ contains a long vowel and counts therefore as a heavy syllable. The unstressed syllable / hjʊ/ of the peninitially stressed alternative / hjʊˌmanɨˈtɛːrɪən/ (RDPCE: 626) ends, however, in a short vowel and counts therefore as a light syllable. At the same time, however, the light syllable / ma/ , which does not receive stress in the initially stressed pronunciation / ˌhjuːmanɨ-/ , is the stressed syllable of the pen-initially stressed alternative / hjʊˌmanɨ-/ , which is not in accordance with the Latin Stress Rule. A similar case is , which is interchangeably stressed / nɪˌɒntəˈlɒdʒɪk/ and / ˌniːɒntəˈlɒdʒɪk/ (OD), with the segmentally identical heavy syllable / ɒn/ occurring in both the peninitially stressed pronunciation / nɪˌɒntə-/ and the initially stressed alternative / ˌniːɒntə-/ . An interesting case is / ˌapətɛmnəˈfɪlɪə/ vs. / əˌpɒtᵻmnəˈfɪlɪə/ (OD). What distinguishes the variably stressed word from the (majority of the) variably stressed words discussed thus far is that in the former, the primary-stressed syllable is preceded by a string of four syllables. In the pre-tonic string / əˌpɒtᵻmnə-/ , the antepenultimate syllable receives stress even though the following penult / tᵻm/ , which ends in a consonant, is a heavy syllable. As for the pronunciation / ˌapətɛmnə-/ , where the preantepenultimate syllable receives stress, recall that in accordance with the Latin Stress Rule, stress can only be penultimate when the penult is heavy or antepenultimate when the penult is light. Of the 1,960 secondary-stressed transcriptions in OD in which the lefthand string that pre- 168 Alexander Tokar cedes the primary stress symbol contains four vowels (i.e., words such as ˈ ), 1,098 (~56.02%) are transcriptions such as / ˌapətɛmnəˈfɪlɪə/ , in which the secondary stress symbol occurs initially, violating the Latin Stress Rule. (It is fairly obvious that the stress variation / ˌapətɛmnəˈfɪlɪə/ vs. / əˌpɒtᵻmnəˈfɪlɪə/ has only morphological causes. The former stress pattern is in accordance with the segmentation of into the combining form -, which means “away” - i.e., the meaning of is “[a] disorder characterized by the desire for amputation of a healthy part of the body, especially a limb” (OD) - and the tetrasyllabic base -ˌ ˈ , in which the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. In accordance with the principles of not beginning a word with two unstressed syllables and avoiding stress clashes, is supposed to be stressed ˌ ˌ ˈ , with secondary stress being both initial and post-pen-initial, but, as explained in 3.2, a stress pattern such as ˌ ˌ ˈ (especially in British English) often corresponds to a stress pattern such as ˌ ˈ , with secondary stress being exclusively initial. The alternative pronunciation / əˌpɒtᵻmnəˈfɪlɪə/ is, by contrast, due to the influence of such pen-initially stressed -words as ˈ and ˈ .) Given these facts, we argue that the words ˌ ˈ and ˌ ˈ , discussed by Fudge (1984: 31), have different secondary stress patterns not because of the Latin Stress Rule but because of the influence of the similar words ˈ , ˈ vs. ˈ , ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ , etc. As for ˌ ˈ , a much more intuitive explanation for this secondary stress pattern is the morphological segmentation of into the simplex form and the complex (i.e., prefixed) form - . What supports this morphological analysis is the line break abra|ca¦dabra (OD), where “[a] bar(„|‟) indicates a preferred or primary division point, at which a word can be divided under almost any circumstances,” whereas “[a] broken bar indicates a secondary division point, at which a word is best divided only if absolutely necessary” (http: / / tinyurl.com/ h46ys8d, 27.03.2016). According to Hammond (2006: 413), “[m]orphology plays a role in that hyphens are preferentially placed at […] morpheme boundaries, e.g. […] is better hyphenated as - , rather than - .” Thus, because the preferred division of is abra-cadabra, we are justified in claiming that the secondary stress of / ˌabrəkəˈdabrə/ (RDPCE: 4) is simply the initial primary stress of the morphologically simple disyllabic component -. Consider, however, the verb , for which RDPCE (1123) gives the British English transcription / ˈrɛɡjᵿlərʌɪz/ and the American English transcription / ˈrɛɡjələˌraɪz/ , where the ult is said to bear secondary stress. For the derived noun , the dictionary (1123) gives the British English pronunciation / ˌrɛɡjᵿlərʌɪˈzeɪʃn/ and the American English pronunciations / ˌrɛɡjələˌraɪˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ vs. / ˌrɛɡjələrəˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ , with the 169 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English latter pronunciation resolving the stress clash / ˌraɪˈzeɪ/ via destressing the secondary-stressed syllable / ˌraɪ/ . What distinguishes the verb from the above mentioned noun , which also contains a post-tonic secondary-stressed syllable (in American English), is that the post-tonic secondary stress of / ˈrɛɡjələˌraɪz/ is not the etymological stress of a corresponding word in the source language Latin; that is, - -words in English are etymologically either suffixed derivatives, such as ( + - ), or modifications of penultimately stressed Latin -izāre-words, such as organizāre (Dictionary.com). Because neither the former nor the latter etymology can account for the post-tonic secondary stress in / ˈɔrɡəˌnaɪz/ (RDPCE: 936), / ˈrɛɡjələˌraɪz/ , etc., we argue that the ults / ˌnaɪz/ , / ˌraɪz/ , etc. receive secondary stress only because these syllables are heavy, i.e., the nucleus of these syllables is a diphthong. Consider now the noun , for which RDPCE (399) gives the American English transcriptions / daɪnəˌmaɪˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ vs. / daɪˌnæməˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ . Since an English word does not begin with two unstressed syllables and since the vowel of the second syllable in / daɪnəˌmaɪˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ is a schwa, we argue that the alternative stress pattern of is / ˌdaɪnəˌmaɪˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ , with both the first and the third syllable receiving secondary stress. What is interesting about the stress variation / ˌdaɪnəˌmaɪ-/ vs. / daɪˌnæmə-/ is that pen-initial secondary stress occurs in only when its third syllable is phonetically realized as / mə/ rather than / maɪ/ . A similar case is , for which RDPCE (832) gives the American English transcriptions / məˌtɛmsəˈkoʊsəs/ and / ˌmɛdəmˌsaɪˈkoʊsəs/ . For to be pronounced with peninitial secondary stress, its third syllable must end in a schwa rather than in the diphthong / aɪ/ , which leads to the initially stressed pronunciation / ˌmɛdəmˌsaɪˈkoʊsəs/ . A similar example involving British English is , which is interchangeably stressed / ˌiːkwɨlʌɪˈbreɪʃn/ and / iːˌkwɪlɨˈbreɪʃn/ (RDPCE: 440), with the nucleus of the third syllable being a diphthong vs. a qualitatively reduced vowel. To reiterate: In cases such as ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ , the choice between initial and pen-initial secondary stress does not have much, if anything, to do with the Latin Stress Rule. That is, the penultimate syllable of a pre-tonic string may receive stress even when it is not heavy (e.g., / hjʊˌmanᵻ-/ of ) and the antepenultimate syllable may receive stress even when the penult is not light (e.g., / ˌniːɒntə-/ of ). At the same time, however, when the third syllable of a pretonic string, such as -, is heavy, initial stress is from the point of view of rhythm better than pen-initial stress. Another highly controversial claim is that in Present-day English, “[s]econdary stress falls on alternate syllables to the left” (van der Hulst 170 Alexander Tokar 2010: 445); e.g., “ , where the secondary stresses fall on evennumbered syllables from the end, [vs.] , in which they fall on odd-numbered syllables from the end” (Hayes 1982: 244). Contemporary English is thus a language with what Hayes (2009: 277) calls “alternating secondary stress,” which means that “every other syllable [going from right to left] is stressed.” A related claim is that “[v]ariation in the accentual patterns of particular words occurs as the result of rhythmic and analogical pressures” (Cruttenden 2014: 252). The former means that “[i]n some words containing more than two syllables there appears to be a tendency to avoid a succession of weak syllables, especially if these have / ə/ or / ɪ/ ” (Gimson 1970: 232; Cruttenden 2014: 252). For example, the stress pattern / mɪˌfɪstəˈfiːlɪən/ (OD) might appear to be a more rhythmic alternative to / ˌmɛfɪstəˈfiːlɪən/ (OD), where the first syllable, bearing secondary stress, is followed by the unstressed sequence / fɪstə/ , which contains the qualitatively reduced vowels / ɪ/ and / ə/ . Unfortunately, support for alternating secondary stress comes mainly from diachronic rather than synchronic facts. For instance, if the English word retained the stress of the Latin vocābuˈlārium (Dictionary.com), the former would be stressed ˌ ˈ , with the second syllable receiving secondary stress in accordance with the alternating stress principle. The Latin stress pattern is still in part preserved in the American English pronunciation / vəˈkɑbjəˌlɛri/ (RDPCE: 1507), where the penult contains a full vowel and is marked as bearing secondary stress. In the British English pronunciation / və(ʊ)ˈkabjᵿləri/ (RDPCE: 1507), the nucleus of the penultimate syllable is, however, a schwa, which means that this syllable does not bear any degree of stress. In summary, instead of ˌ ˈ , contemporary English uses the stress pattern ˈ (ˌ) , with (what was supposed to be) secondary stress being promoted to primary stress and (what was supposed to be) primary stress being demoted to secondary stress in American English vs. completely destressed in British English. Similarly, the stress pattern ˈ can be regarded as the promoted secondary stress of ˌ ˈ , which is how this last name would be stressed if it retained the stress of the source language Armenian. At the same time, however, of the 6,126 secondary-stressed transcriptions in OD in which the pre-tonic string contains three vowels (i.e., words such as ˈ ), 4,464 (~72.87%) are transcriptions such as / ˌmɛfɪstəˈfiːlɪən/ , in which the secondary stress symbol occurs initially. The alternating stress principle does not, then, apply to the majority of (contemporary) English words such as , in which the fourth syllable takes primary stress (i.e., in accordance with this principle, a word such as is supposed to be stressed / mɪˌfɪstəˈfiːlɪən/ , with its second syllable receiving alternating secondary stress). 171 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English Note also that in addition to being primary-stressed as / -ˈfiːlɪən/ , also has the stress pattern / ˌmɛfɪstɒfɪˈliːən/ (OD), where the first syllable, bearing secondary stress, is separated from the primarystressed penult by a sequence of three unstressed syllables. RDPCE (826) gives, however, the American English transcription / ˌmɛfəˌstɑfəˈliən/ , where the two secondary-stressed syllables preserve the stresses of the base noun - / ˌmɛfəˈstɑfəliz/ - in which the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. As reported in the previous section, especially in British English stress patterns such as ˌ ˈ are the norm (~56%) rather than the exception: That is, when primary stress is post-post-post-pen-initial, secondary stress is very often exclusively initial, even though in accordance with the alternating stress principle, it is supposed to be both initial and post-pen-initial. Observe also that when is pronounced / ˌrɛɡjələrəˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ rather than / ˌrɛɡjələˌraɪˈzeɪʃ(ə)n/ , the unstressed sequence / ɡjələrə/ contains three schwas. Given sequences such as this, it is doubtful that “a succession of weak syllables, especially if these have / ə/ or / ɪ/ ” (Gimson 1970: 232; Cruttenden 2014: 252), is avoided by English speakers. Consider also the above mentioned ˌ ˌ ˈ , where the secondary stresses are said to fall on even-numbered syllables counting from the end of the word. The likeliest explanation for this stress pattern is, however, the influence of the formally (and, to some extent, also semantically) related words ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ , and ˌ ˈ , in which secondary stress is initial because primary stress is post-pen-initial. Similarly, the stress pattern ˌ ˌ ˈ , discussed by Hayes (1982: 244), is a usual case of stress preservation rather than of rhythmic alternations: The related word is stressed / ˌhaməˈmiːlɪs/ (RDPCE: 583), with the first syllable receiving secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. Indeed, when the first three (or more) syllables with which an English word begins do not take primary stress, the answer to the question of whether secondary stress will occur initially or pen-initially has as a rule nothing to do with rhythm but instead crucially depends upon the word‟s morphological structure. For example, because and are stressed / ˈtəʊtl/ and / tə(ʊ)ˈtalɨti/ (RDPCE: 1392), the formally and semantically related is stressed both / ˌtəʊtalɨˈtɛːrɪən/ and / tə(ʊ)ˌtalɨˈtɛːrɪən/ . (Because the third syllable of the pre-tonic string is light, the stress pattern / ˌtəʊtalɨ-/ is from the point of view of rhythm not better than / tə(ʊ)ˌtalɨ-/ .) Similarly, because the shortening of the base ˌ ˈ is the penultimately stressed trisyllable - / meˈfisto/ (Kleiner et al. 2015: 595) - the derivative is interchangeably stressed / ˌmɛfɪstəˈfiːlɪən/ and / mɪˌfɪstəˈfiːlɪən/ (i.e., these stress patterns also have only morphological causes). 172 Alexander Tokar Having established that syllable weight and rhythmic alternations do not play an important role in English secondary stress, we now proceed to a more systematic discussion of why some English words vacillate between initial and pen-initial secondary stress. Additionally, this section is concerned with the question of why one of these secondary stress patterns is (as a rule) more frequently used by contemporary English speakers. The preferred stress pattern is 1) the more frequently heard stress pattern in YouTube videos - e.g., of 94 native (predominantly American) English speakers who were found to have pronounced the word , 91 (~96.81%) used the initially stressed variant ˌ ˈ - and 2) prototypically, also the only or the first stress pattern given in at least one dictionary (e.g., LDOCE gives for only the initially stressed American English transcription / ˌækədəˈmɪʃən/ ). The latter is necessary because in contrast to obvious cases such as , e.g., the word was found to have been pronounced by only seven native English speakers, who all (100%) used the pen-initially stressed pronunciation ˌ ˈ . It is doubtful that this fact alone would fully justify the claim that the word under consideration prefers pen-initial secondary stress. Note, however, that also in OD, is / əˌsiːtə(ʊ)ˈbaktə/ vs. / ˌasɪtə(ʊ)ˈbaktə/ , with the former transcription being placed in the dictionary before the latter. This fact intensifies the impression of pen-initial secondary stress being the preferred stress pattern of . (What intensifies this impression is the fact that just like the -word , also the -word was exclusively stressed ˌ rather than ˌ -.) Consider, however, , which is / ˌhɛpətəʊˈmɛɡl ̩ i/ in British English and / ˌhɛpədoʊˈmɛɡəli/ vs. / həˌpædəˈmɛɡəli/ in American English (RDPCE: 601), but of nine American English speakers who were found to have pronounced in YouTube videos, everybody (100%) used the pen-initially stressed pronunciation ˌ ˈ (which is placed in RDPCE after ˌ ˈ ). In cases such as this, actual native speakers using a particular stress pattern (more frequently than an alternative stress pattern given in a dictionary) are trusted more than a lexicographer‟s intuition; that is, this article regards pen-initial secondary stress as the preferred secondary stress pattern of . In a number of cases, the addition of a semantically transparent prefix, which, as pointed out in Section 2, normally receives secondary stress, results in a rhythmically unfortunate sequence of two stressed syllables. For example, because the base form is stressed 173 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English / ˌtransfəˈmeɪʃn/ (RDPCE: 1399) - i.e., the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress - the derived form is supposed to be stressed ? ˌ ˌ ˈ , with one secondary-stressed syllable occurring immediately after another secondary-stressed syllable. The actual stress pattern of is, however, either / ˌriːtransfəˈmeɪʃn/ or / riˌtransfəˈmeɪʃn/ (OD), with either the first or the second syllable receiving secondary stress. In cases such as / ˌriːtransfəˈmeɪʃn/ vs. / riˌtransfəˈmeɪʃn/ , the preferred stress pattern is as a rule initial (i.e., prefix) stress. Indeed, the first syllable in is supposed to receive stress because it is a semantically transparent prefix, which modifies the base in an important way, whereas the second syllable is supposed to be stressed only because it is the first syllable of the tetrasyllabic word , in which primary stress occurs post-pen-initially. The former cause of stress is undeniably much more important than the latter. In particular, when emphasis must be laid upon the fact that the thing referred to is a retransformation, the word is likely to be stressed / ˌriːtransfəˈmeɪʃn/ or perhaps even / ˈriːtransfəˌmeɪʃn/ , with the prefix receiving a stronger stress than the base. Cf. , for which RDPCE (1112) gives the American English transcription / ˈˌriˌkəmbəˈneɪʃ(ə)n/ . The symbol (ˈˌ) means that the first syllable in bears either primary or secondary stress. Note, however, that apart from variably stressed prefixed formations such as , there are also variably stressed words such as - / ˌdʌɪklɔːrəʊˈ-/ vs. / dʌɪˌklɔːrəʊˈ-/ (OD) - in which modifies the base , in which, however, modifies the base . The answer to the question of whether is stressed ˌ or ˌ thus seems to depend upon whether the former or the latter modification counts for an English speaker as a more important contribution to the meaning of ; that is, in contrast to variably stressed words such as , there are no semantic reasons to prefer the stress pattern ˌ to ˌ -. Consider also and , both of which vacillate between initial and pen-initial secondary stress; e.g., / ˌdiːsɛləˈreɪʃn/ vs. / dɨˌsɛləˈreɪʃn/ (RDPCE: 323). It is not a coincidence that instances of secondary stress variation can often be found among pairs of words such as and , and , and , etc., which express opposite meanings. That is, on the one hand, e.g., is formally and semantically related to the peninitially stressed words , , , etc. In this way, we obtain the pronunciation / anˌtaɡəˈnɪstɪk/ (RDPCE: 55), with the second syllable receiving secondary stress. On the other hand, because 1) contrasts semantically with , and 2) what makes formally different from is its initial monosyllabic string -, there is also the initially stressed alternative pronunciation 174 Alexander Tokar / ˌantaɡəˈnɪstɪk/ (RDPCE: 55). (By contrast, there does not seem to exist a (strong) semantic connection between the words , , , and . Hence, as mentioned above, English speakers are reluctant to pronounce with initial secondary stress. Note also that in RDPCE, no other word apart from contains the righthand string - . The of thus does not have any emphatic potential and is therefore not stressed, i.e., the stress pattern ˌ ˈ does not exist in Present-day English.) Notice also that according to Becker (2012: 76), in Present-day German, there is a law that prohibits words in close context from receiving stress upon identical syllables (“ein Gesetz, wonach Wörter mit identischer Akzentsilbe in nahem Zusammenhang umakzentuiert werden.” Note that refers here not only to a location of the stressed syllable relative to a word boundary but also to segmental identity). Thus, a German speaker may not say ; it has to be , with the original secondary stress being promoted to primary stress. Since English and German are related languages and since also in the English language, the word is (especially in environments such as ) stressed / ˈɛvəluːʃ(ə)n/ (OD), with its original secondary stress - ˌ ˈ - being promoted to primary stress, we predict that in words such as and , initial stress will be especially characteristic of environments such as , in which these words occur in close proximity. That is, for instance, in contrast to the stress pattern ˈ ˈ , which is a better alternative to ˌ ˈ ˌ ˈ , where the primary stresses fall upon the segmentally identical syllables / ɡeɪ/ , the stress pattern ˈ ˈ , where the stresses fall upon the segmentally identical syllables / sɛ/ , is not a better alternative to ˌ ˈ ˌ ˈ , where the stresses fall upon the segmentally identical syllables / sɛ/ and / reɪ/ . What solves the problem of the identical syllables in receiving stress is then the initially stressed pronunciation ˈ ˈ , where the stressed syllables are the segmentally non-identical strings and -, which make these two - -words formally different from each other. (Note also that in addition to being stressed ˈ ˈ , this combination is also often stressed ˈ ˈ , with initial stress occurring only in the semantically more transparent word (i.e., the of is similar to the fully transparent prefix of formations such as ). The stress pattern ˈ ˈ is, however, also in accordance with the principle of not placing stress upon segmentally identical syllables.) 175 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English Because is both / ᵻˈθɛrᵻfʌɪ/ and / ˈɛθərᵻfʌɪ/ (OD), is both / ɪˌθɛrᵻfᵻˈkeɪʃn/ and / ˌɛθərᵻfᵻˈkeɪʃn/ (OD); because is both / hʌɪˈdrɒdʒəneɪt/ and / ˈhʌɪdrədʒəneɪt/ (OD), is both / hʌɪˌdrɒdʒəˈneɪʃ(ə)n/ and / ˌhʌɪdrədʒəˈneɪʃ(ə)n/ (OD); because is both / ˈprəʊɡrəməbl/ and / prə(ʊ)ˈɡraməbl/ (RDPCE: 1063), is both / ˌprəʊɡrəməˈbɪlɨti/ and / prə(ʊ)ˌɡraməˈbɪlɨti/ (RDPCE: 1063); because is both / ˈtrɪpn̩əsəʊm/ and / trɨˈpanəsəʊm/ (RDPCE: 1415), is both / ˌtrɪpn̩ə(ʊ)səˈmʌɪəsɪs/ and / trɨˌpanə(ʊ)səˈmʌɪəsɪs/ (RDPCE: 1415); etc. In cases such as these, the preferred secondary stress pattern of the derived form is as a rule the preferred primary stress pattern of the base form. For example, is more frequently stressed / hʌɪˌdrɒdʒəˈneɪʃ(ə)n/ because is more frequently stressed / hʌɪˈdrɒdʒəneɪt/ . Cf. , for which RDPCE (412) gives only the initially stressed transcription / ˌɒksɨdʒɨˈneɪʃn/ . For the related verb , the dictionary gives both / ˈɒksɨdʒɨneɪt/ and / ɒkˈsɪdʒəneɪt/ , but as reported by Tokar (2017: 8), Of 69 native English speakers who were found to have pronounced in YouTube videos, everybody (100%) used initial stress in this verb, i.e., / ˈɒk-/ , but of 14 native English speakers who were found to have pronounced the verb , 10 (~71.43%) used the antepenultimately-stressed version / haɪˈdrɒ-/ . In agreement with these findings, the OD gives for only the initially-stressed transcription / ˈɒksɪdʒəneɪt/ , whereas in the case of the transcription / haɪˈdrɒdʒəneɪt/ is placed before the transcription / ˈhʌɪdrədʒəneɪt/ . Thus, because is more frequently / hʌɪˈdrɒdʒəneɪt/ than / ˈhʌɪdrədʒəneɪt/ whereas is, by contrast, more frequently / ˈɒksɨdʒɨneɪt/ than / ɒkˈsɪdʒəneɪt/ , prefers the pen-initially stressed pronunciation / hʌɪˌdrɒdʒəˈneɪʃ(ə)n/ whereas the initially stressed / ˌɒksɨdʒɨˈneɪʃn/ is the preferred secondary stress pattern of . Apart from the initially stressed disyllable - / ˈfantaz(ə)m/ (OD) - there is also the penultimately stressed trisyllable - / fanˈtazmə/ (OD) - which means the same thing as . Additionally, there are the words and , which are stressed / fanˈtazm(ə)l/ and / fanˈtazmɪk/ (OD). That is why, -words such as and are interchangeably stressed ˌ and ˌ -. On the one hand, because there is the initially stressed disyllable - / ˈfəʊniːm/ (OD) - o ne way of stressing is 176 Alexander Tokar / ˌfəʊnᵻməˈtɒlədʒi/ (OD). At the same time, however, because there is the penultimately stressed trisyllable - / fə(ʊ)ˈniːmɪk/ (OD) - is also stressed / fəʊˌniːməˈtɒlədʒi/ (OD). On the one hand, because there are the words , which is stressed / pʌɪˈθaɡərəs/ (OD), and , one of whose stress patterns is / pʌɪˈθaɡ(ə)rɪk/ (OD), one stress pattern of is / pʌɪˌθaɡəˈrɪʃn/ (OD). At the same time, however, because in addition to being stressed / pʌɪˈθaɡ(ə)rɪk/ , is also stressed / ˌpʌɪθəˈɡɒrɪk/ (OD) - i.e., the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress - there is also the initially stressed alternative pronunciation / ˌpʌɪθaɡəˈrɪʃn/ (OD). On the one hand, because there are the words ˈ and ˌ ˈ , is stressed / ˌrɛsp(ᵻ)rəˈbɪlᵻti/ (OD), with the first syllable receiving secondary stress. At the same time, however, because there is the word , which is pronounced / rɪˈspʌɪə/ (OD), is also associated with the pen-initially stressed pronunciation / rᵻˌspʌɪərəˈbɪlᵻti/ (OD). Cases similar to these are particularly numerous among - -nouns, such as, e.g., ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ , which, according to Kenyon and Knott (1953[1944]: 75), represent two different lexemes: ˌ ˈ meaning “certifying” vs. ˌ ˈ meaning “certificating”; ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˌ ˈ (cf. ˈ and ˌ ˈ ); ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ (cf. ˈ and ˈ ); ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ (cf. ˈ and ˌ ˈ ); ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ (cf. ˈ and ˈ ); ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ (cf. ˈ and ); ˌ ˈ vs. ˌ ˈ (cf. ˈ and ˌ ˈ ); etc. Further similar examples can be found among morphologically complex words whose lefthand component is a combining form. The usual variability scenario involves a lefthand combining form such as, for instance, of , which on the one hand, is formally and semantically related to an initially stressed word, such as , while on the other hand, it is formally and semantically related to a penultimately stressed - -word, such as . In this way, we obtain stress patterns such as / ˌɔːɡənəʊˈmɛtl/ vs. / ɔːˌɡanəʊˈmɛtl/ (OD). A slightly different case is / ˌdʒiːəmᵻˈtrɪsᵻti/ vs. / dʒɪˌɒmᵻˈtrɪsᵻti/ (OD). From ˈ , derives pen-initial secondary stress, whereas the initially stressed alternative is due to ˌ ˈ , in which secondary stress is initial because primary stress is post-pen-initial. Similarly, the meaning of the combining form of, e.g., is described in OD as “[r]epresenting , , or ” (italics mine). From the finally stressed and the antepenultimately stressed , derives the stress pattern / ɪˈmjuːnəʊ/ (OD), whereas the initially stressed alternative / ˈɪmjʊnəʊ/ (OD) is due to 177 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English ˌ ˈ , in which the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. From ˈ , derives the stress pattern / njuːˌmɪzməˈtɒlədʒi/ (OD), whereas the initially stressed / ˌnjuːmɪzməˈtɒlədʒi/ (OD) is due to ˌ ˈ , in which the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. From the penultimately stressed - -word , the combining form of, e.g., derives the stress pattern / njuːˌmatə(ʊ)-/ (OD), whereas the alternative / ˌnjuːmətə(ʊ)-/ (OD) is due to the words ˌ ˈ and ˌ ˈ , in which secondary stress is regularly initial because primary stress is post-pen-initial. is pronounced both / ᵻˌkʌɪnə(ʊ)ˈdəːml/ and / ˌɛkɪnə(ʊ)ˈdəːml/ (OD) because on the one hand, there is the word , which is pronounced / ɪˈkʌɪnəs/ (OD), while on the other hand, there is the word , which is pronounced / ˌɛkɪˈneɪsɪə/ (OD). As for stress preferences, we observe that variably stressed words discussed in this part of Section 3.5 fall into two categories: 1) words such as , whose preferred stress pattern is (due to a number of semantic and/ or morphological reasons) either initial or pen-initial secondary stress, and 2) words such as , which prefer pen-initial secondary stress. Regarding the first category, we note that the choice between initial and pen-initial secondary stress is often a matter of semantics. For example, is in American English mainly used to express the meaning “[a]n academic or intellectual” (OD; boldface mine). The preferred stress pattern of in American English is therefore, as pointed out above, / ˌækədəˈmɪʃən/ , which preserves the secondary stress of ˌ ˈ . In British English, by contrast, is mainly associated with the sense “[a] member of an academy” (OD; boldface mine), which is why it is usually stressed / əˌkadəˈmɪʃ(ə)n/ , preserving the stress of ˈ . A different case is , which from a semantic point of view is supposed to be stressed / ˌɪntɛlɨˈdʒɛnsɪə/ (RDPCE: 685), preserving the secondary stress of ˌ ˈ ; that is, according to WordNet, a lexical database for English (Miller 1995), the meaning of is “an educated and intellectual elite” (boldface mine). From a formal point of view, however, it is much easier to derive from (which should be suffixed by means of - ) than from . The more frequently used stress pattern of is therefore / ɪnˌtɛlɨˈdʒɛnsɪə/ (RDPCE: 685), which preserves the stress of ˈ . (Cf. Dabouis 2016: 2, who observes that the “base is the closest form attested in the English vocabulary […]. This means that, even though the base and its corresponding derivative are usually connected semantically, it may not be the case (e.g. → ).” Thus, since 178 Alexander Tokar is formally closer to than it is to , the former word has more chances of counting as the base of than the latter word.) The same is true of , which is formally and semantically related to the verb , which in turn is, however, formally and semantically related to the noun (i.e., = to take in something). Thus, we can say that from a semantic point of view, the stress pattern / pɑːˌtɪsɨˈpeɪʃn/ , which was found to be the more frequently used stress pattern in YouTube videos, is not better than / ˌpɑːtɨsɨˈpeɪʃn/ . At the same time, however, because (from a synchronic point of view) many English - -nouns can be seen as derivatives from - -verbs (cf., e.g., and , and , and , etc.), the morphological analysis + makes more sense than + - . Likewise, because the morphological analysis + - makes more sense than + - , the more frequently used stress pattern of is / tə(ʊ)ˌtalɨˈtɛːrɪən/ . An English word in which initial secondary stress is from a morphological point of view better than pen-initial stress is , which was pronounced ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ , and ˌ ˈ (which preserves the stress pattern of the base ˌ ˈ in its entirety) by two different native speakers, whereas one speaker was heard to have used the stress pattern ˌ ˈ . Although means the same thing as - i.e., the former is simply a shorter alternative to the latter - the morphological derivation of from makes more sense than from (which is reflected in the fact that sometimes, preserves not only the secondary but also the primary stress of ). Recall also the above mentioned fact that is according to Gimson (1970: 233) both ˌ ˈ and ˌ ˈ , but the more upto-date LDOCE, OD, and RDPCE give only the pen-initially stressed pronunciation ˌ ˈ (which is also the more frequently used stress pattern in YouTube videos; the initially stressed pronunciation ˌ ˈ is, however, still used by some English speakers). The reason for this seems to be the fact that the word is (in Present-day English) often abbreviated to (  , the bacterium which is the cause of ). Alphabetisms such as are usually pronounced with final stress - / ti: ˈbi: / - because in the underlying phrases, stronger stress falls upon the rightmost primary-stressed syllable. That is, as, for instance, Hayes (1995: 368) observes, “[a] common but not invariant pattern across languages is for syntactic phrases to receive final prominence.” Thus, it appears that instead of deriving from the initially stressed disyllable - / ˈtjuːbəkl/ (RDPCE: 1416) - contemporary English speakers derive it from the finally stressed disyllable / ti: ˈbi: / , which naturally leads to the stress pattern / tjʊˌbəːkjʊˈləʊsɪs/ 179 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English (OD). (Note also that of the derivational relatives of , only the word has initial stress. By contrast, in addition to the finally stressed alphabetism , there are also the pen-initially stressed words - / t(j)ᵿˈbəːkjᵿlə(r)/ (RDPCE: 1416) - , , and . This fact also contributes to the stress pattern ˌ ˈ .) As for formations such as , observe that apart from “names of classes of organic compounds containing a particular element or group” (OD; boldface mine), the combining form is also used to relate to bodily organs (e.g., ). It seems, then, that from a semantic point of view, the stress pattern / ɔːˌɡanə(ʊ)-/ should be the preferred stress pattern of formations such as , , , etc., whereas formations such as are supposed to prefer the stress pattern / ˌɔːɡ(ə)nə(ʊ)-/ , preserving the stress of the initially stressed disyllabic base . Notice, however, that of 18 native speakers who were found to have pronounced , 13 (~72.22%) used the pen-initially stressed pronunciation ˌ ˈ (while the words , , and were exclusively pronounced ˌ -). Thus, it can be stated that even when the meaning of an -word, such as , encourages the use of the stress pattern / ˌɔːɡ(ə)nə(ʊ)-/ , the combining form is as a rule stressed / ɔːˌɡanə(ʊ)-/ . A very similar case is - / ˌspəːmətə(ʊ)ˈdʒɛnɪsɪs/ vs. / spəˌmatə(ʊ)ˈdʒɛnɪsɪs/ (OD) - which, just like , is also more frequently stressed / spəˌmatə(ʊ)-/ than / ˌspəːmətə(ʊ)-/ even though, from the perspective of both semantics and morphology, it is much easier to derive from than from , i.e., is the genesis of . According to Tokar (2017: 149-150), the preponderance of stress patterns such as / ɔːˌɡanə(ʊ)-/ and / spəˌmatə(ʊ)-/ is due to what he calls the vowel effect. Whereas trisyllables that end orthographically in (e.g., ) are almost exclusively (~89%) pronounced in Present-day English with antepenultimate stress - which is as a rule the promoted etymological secondary stress; for instance, if the English word retained the stress of the Latin word energīa (Dictionary.com), it would be stressed ˌ ˈ , with the first syllable receiving secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. Cf. the Italian word , which is stressed / e.ner.ˈdʒi: .a/ (PONS), or the German word , which is stressed / enɛrˈgi: / (Kleiner et al. 2015: 342) - trisyllabic English words that end orthographically in / / (e.g., , , ) prefer penultimate stress: Of the 2,479 penultimately stressed trisyllables in LDOCE, 348 (~14.04%) are words such as , , or , which end orthographically in / / . By contrast, of the 4,979 antepenultimately stressed trisyllables, only 172 (~3.45%) are words such as , , or , which end orthographically in / / . This difference is statistically highly significant: χ 2 (1) = 286, < 0.000001. 180 Alexander Tokar The reason for this is that words such as , , were mainly borrowed into English from Italian and Spanish, where 1) stress is predominantly penultimate, and 2) in stark contrast to Present-day English, words often end orthographically in / / : “The penultimate stress pattern of Spanish has a very high type frequency, occurring with about 95% of nouns and adjectives that end in vowels ( , , )” (Bybee 2001: 11). Similarly, as reported by Tokar (2017: 108, 123), “[o]f the 25,925 syllabified Italian transcriptions in PONS‟ Italian - English dictionary, 20,714 (~79.9%) exhibit penultimate stress” and “[o]f the 24,961 solidly-spelled Italian words in [the same dictionary], 15,163 (~60.75%) end orthographically in / / .” (Needless to say, also such unusual pronunciations as / fɪˈnɑːli/ (LDOCE) must be attributed to the influence of the source language Italian, where, in contrast to Present-day English, the word-final (i.e., ) has a phonetic realization.) That the Italian/ Spanish Stress Rule is productive in Present-day English is especially obvious in the case of feminine Slavic - -surnames ( , , , , etc.), which are as a rule mispronounced by English speakers as / ˈ-əʊvə/ : That is, for instance, / pavˈləʊvə/ rather than / ˈpavləvə/ , which is the stress pattern of the source language Russian, where the feminine derived form ˈ preserves the stress of the masculine base ˈ (Tokar 2017: 149). Because among English - -words is the Italian word - / ˌkasəˈnəʊvə/ (RDPCE: 195) - it is not surprising that has over the course of time abandoned its original (i.e., etymological) stress pattern / ˈpavləvə/ and is nowadays exclusively stressed / pavˈləʊvə/ (Tokar 2017: 149-150). Similarly, we argue that because penultimate stress is in general the preferred stress pattern of trisyllables that end orthographically in / / , combining forms such as and -, which end orthographically in , are predestined to be stressed / ɔːˌɡanə(ʊ)-/ and / spəˌmatə(ʊ)-/ rather than / ˌɔːɡ(ə)nə(ʊ)-/ and / ˌspəːmətə(ʊ)-/ . (Notice, however, that the combining form of formations such as is never stressed ˌ -, even though, just like the combining forms and -, it also ends orthographically in . What distinguishes the combining form from the combining forms and is that unlike the latter, the former lacks a pen-initially stressed (formally and semantically) related word, such as and . At the same time, however, there are numerous -formations such as ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ , ˌ ˈ , etc., in which the first syllable receives secondary stress because the third syllable takes primary stress. Therefore, also in formations such as , the combining form -, which ends orthographically in , is stressed upon its first rather than its second syllable. The orthographic ending is thus apparently not a sufficient condition for a combining form such as and to receive penultimate stress.) 181 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English In addition to being stressed / ʌɪˌdɪəˈlɪstɪk/ and / səˌriəˈlɪstɪk/ , preserving the stress of ˈ and ˈ , the derived adjectives and are also stressed / ˌʌɪdɪəˈlɪstɪk/ and / ˌsəriəˈlɪstɪk/ (RDPCE: 639, 1331). On the one hand, it can be argued that these stress patterns are due to the words ˌ ˈ and ˌ ˈ , in which the first syllables receive secondary stress because the third syllables take primary stress. On the other hand, if the syllabification of the pre-tonic strings / ʌɪdɪə-/ and / səriə-/ is / ʌɪ-dɪə-/ and / sə-riə-/ rather than / ʌɪ-dɪ-ə-/ and / sə-ri-ə-/ (i.e., if the hiatus / ɪ-ə/ is resolved via diphthongization), the adjectives under consideration can only be stressed / ˌʌɪdɪəˈlɪstɪk/ and / ˌsəriəˈlɪstɪk/ , with secondary stress being regularly initial because primary stress is post-peninitial. Note also that in YouTube videos containing the spoken occurrences of , there is only the initially stressed pronunciation / ˌalvɪəˈpalətl/ (OD), which runs counter to the aforementioned tendency of pronouncing combining forms such as with penultimate stress, i.e., / alˌvɪə(ʊ)-/ (OD). This finding strongly suggests that the syllabification of the pre-tonic string / alvɪə-/ is / al-vɪə-/ rather than / al-vɪ-ə-/ ; i.e., the secondary stress of / ˌalvɪəˈpalətl/ is initial because its primary stress is post-pen-initial. In contrast to the secondary stress patterns discussed thus far, the secondary stress patterns / bəˌpuːtəˈtswɑːnə/ and / ˌbɒpuːtətˈswɑːnə/ of (RDPCE: 149) do not seem to have a morphological motivation. The same is true of , which is stressed both / ˌtɛɡʊsɨˈɡalpə/ and / tɨˌɡuːsɨˈɡalpə/ (RDPCE: 1356), and (the oft-mentioned word) , which vacillates between / ˌtʌɪkɒndəˈrəʊɡə/ and / tʌɪˌkɒndəˈrəʊɡə/ (RDPCE: 1378). In cases such as , , and , where morphology (and/ or semantics) cannot decide in favor of a particular stress pattern, the choice between initial and pen-initial secondary stress seems to be idiosyncratic (i.e., these secondary stress patterns are both in accordance with the principles of not beginning a word with two unstressed syllables and avoiding stress clashes). On the one hand, because the primary stress of , , and is penultimate in accordance with the Italian/ Spanish Stress Rule - i.e., these words end orthographically in - also the pre-tonic strings -, -, and -, which end orthographically in / / , can in accordance with the same principle receive penultimate stress. (Cf. the above mentioned ˌ ˈ , where the morphologically simple component and the morphologically complex (i.e., prefixed) component 182 Alexander Tokar - , both of which end orthographically in , receive penultimate stress.) On the other hand, because in Present-day English, “secondary stress shows all characteristics of the Germanic system: preservation of the relationship with the deriving form whenever possible; otherwise demarcative stress on the beginning of the word” (Fournier 2007: 235), also the first syllables of , , and , with which these words begin, can receive (demarcative) secondary stress. To reiterate, in cases such as , , and , an English speaker has good reasons to use either initial or peninitial secondary stress. Although the focus of this article is on pre-tonic secondary stress variation, we also briefly discuss words that (in American English) have more than one post-tonic secondary stress pattern. For example, is only / ˈkandɨdətʃə/ in British English, but American English speakers vacillate between / ˈkæn(d)əˌdeɪtʃər/ and / ˈkæn(d)ədəˌtʃʊ(ə)r/ (RDPCE: 184), with either the penult or the ult receiving secondary stress. Similarly, for , RDPCE (481) gives the British English transcription / ˈfɛd(ə)rətɪv/ and the American English transcriptions / ˈfɛdəˌreɪdɪv/ vs. / ˈfɛdərəˌtɪv/ . From an etymological point of view, words such as and are supposed to have a sequence of two stressed syllables. That is, on the one hand, a trisyllabic English - -word such as is etymologically due to a penultimately stressed tetrasyllabic Latin -ātusword such as candidātus (Dictionary.com). In this way, we obtain the stress patterns / ˈkandɨdeɪt/ or / ˈkandɨdət/ in British English vs. / ˈkæn(d)əˌdeɪt/ in American English (RDPCE: 184), with 1) what was supposed to be secondary stress - ˌ ˈ - being promoted to primary stress, and 2) what was supposed to be primary stress being demoted to secondary stress in American English vs. destressed in British English. At the same time, however, because English - and - -words etymologically go back to penultimately stressed Latin -ūraand -īv -words - cf. Modern Italian , which is stressed / kan.di.da.ˈtu: .ra/ (PONS), or German , which is stressed / fødəraˈti: f/ (Kleiner et al. 2015: 374) - the ults of the English words and are also supposed to be stressed, i.e., ? ˈ ˌ ˌ and ? ˈ ˌ ˌ , with one secondary-stressed syllable occurring immediately after another secondary-stressed syllable, which is unfortunate from the point of view of rhythm. The stress patterns of the English words and are therefore ˈ ˌ vs. ˈ ˌ and ˈ ˌ vs. ˈ ˌ , with post-tonic secondary stress being interchangeably penultimate and final. 183 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English As for stress preferences, it seems that the stress pattern / -ˌtɪv/ is relatively rarely used by contemporary American English speakers. That is, in RDPCE, apart from the word , only the words and are also stressed / ˈfæktəˌtɪv/ and / ˈfjudʒəˌtɪv/ (472, 523), with the secondary stress / -ˌtɪv/ being the etymological stress of the Latin words factitīvus and fugitīvus (Dictionary.com). In stark contrast: The stress pattern / -ˌeɪdɪv/ is, according to RDPCE, exhibited by 186 - -words, such as, e.g., , , , , , etc. As for - -words, note that eight tetrasyllabic - -words in RDPCE - , , , , , , , and - exhibit the secondary stress pattern / -ˌtʃʊ(ə)r/ , while only five - , , , , and - are stressed / -ˌeɪtʃər/ (i.e., apart from , also and vacillate between the stress patterns / -ˌtʃʊ(ə)r/ and / -ˌeɪtʃər/ ). That - -words are considerably more frequently stressed / -ˌeɪdɪv/ than / -ˌtɪv/ is a consequence of the fact that unlike the latter, the former stress pattern (often) has a synchronic motivation. That is, as observed in 3.2, the - -word is stressed / ˈnɒmɪˌneɪtɪv/ when it expresses the meaning “appointed by nomination.” Similarly, because there is a connection between the meanings “imitative” and “imitation” - i.e., according to WordNet, the meaning of is “marked by or given to imitation” (boldface mine) - contemporary English speakers still have good reasons to use the stress pattern / ˈɪməˌteɪdɪv/ (RDPCE: 644). (Note that for , LDOCE gives the phonetic transcription / ˌɪmɪˈteɪʃən ◄ / , which contains the stress shift symbol ( ◄ ). What this means is that the stress pattern / ˈɪməˌteɪdɪv/ can be directly obtained from the stress pattern / ˈɪmɪˌteɪʃən/ , which is one of the stress patterns of .) Similarly, in the case of and , the synchronic motivation for the stress pattern / -ˌeɪtʃər/ is the suffixation analysis / + - . (As for and , the justification for penultimate secondary stress is the words and .) The word cannot, by contrast, be analyzed as a suffixed derivative, whose base is the (non-existent) - -word * . The same applies to and , which from a purely semantic point of view are hardly segmentable into the bases and and the suffix - . (Note also that and have an unstressed vowel in the ult: / ˈlɪdərət/ and / ˈtɛmp(ə)rət/ (RDPCE: 769, 1359). Accordingly, even if the suffixation analyses + - and + - made sense from a semantic point of view, the words and would still not be stressed ? / ˈlɪdəˌreɪtʃər/ and ? / ˈtɛmpəˌreɪtʃər/ .) Finally, observe that “a word-final syllable must have more consonants to be counted as heavy, since word-final consonants are often extrametrical” (Hayes 1995: 59). The rhyme structure VC is therefore word-finally equivalent to the rhyme structure V and counts therefore as 184 Alexander Tokar light rather than heavy. Because heavy syllables are more likely to attract secondary stress than light ones, an English speaker is more likely to use a finally stressed pronunciation such as / ˈkæn(d)ədəˌtʃʊər/ , where the rhyme of the ult exhibits the structure VVC, than a finally stressed pronunciation such as / ˈfɛdərəˌtɪv/ , where the rhyme of the ult exhibits the structure VC. The secondary stress pattern / -ˌtɪv/ is thus virtually nonexistent in Present-day English, whereas the secondary stress pattern / -ˌtʃʊ(ə)r/ , which does not have a synchronic morphological motivation, is the majority pattern among tetrasyllabic English - -words. The main finding of this article is that secondary stress variation has morphological (rather than phonological) causes. Prototypically, one and the same English word has more than one secondary stress pattern because it is formally and semantically related to more than one differently stressed word. For instance, , which is related to both ˈ and ˈ , is stressed both / ˌjuːtɪlɨˈtɛːrɪən/ and / juːˌtɪlɨˈtɛːrɪən/ (RDPCE: 1483). The pen-initially stressed pronunciation ˌ ˈ is, however, (especially in American English) more frequently used than the initially stressed alternative ˌ ˈ because from a morphological point of view, it is much more intuitive to derive from than from . Other important factors that were found to be responsible for secondary stress preferences include semantics (e.g., ˌ ˈ meaning “an academic” vs. ˌ ˈ meaning “a member of an academy”) and especially the orthographic ending , which is the reason combining forms such as and are usually stressed / ɔːˌɡanə(ʊ)-/ and / spəˌmatə(ʊ)-/ rather than / ˌɔːɡ(ə)nə(ʊ)-/ and / ˌspəːmətə(ʊ)-/ . An important question that, however, requires additional investigation is the extent to which secondary stress assignment depends upon discourse context. That is, as observed in 3.5.1, when words such as and occur in close proximity, at least one of these words receives initial stress: ˈ ˈ or ˈ ˈ , which is because the initial monosyllabic strings and are what makes the semantically opposite words and formally different from each other. What precisely is, however, meant here by the term “close proximity”? By how many words can and be separated from each other to count as being in close proximity? Are there any syntactic restrictions? That is, do and need to belong to the same phrase, clause, or sentence? Compare also the combinations and (or ). The nature of the semantic connection between the words and 185 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English is less obvious than it is between the antonyms and , which is why it comes as no surprise that the YouTube platform does not contain a single video in which the combination is uttered by at least one native English speaker. Given this fact, it can be conjectured that the stress pattern ˈ ˈ is far less likely than the initially stressed pronunciation ˈ ˈ ; that is, the initial monosyllabic strings -/ of / have a weaker emphatic potential than the initial monosyllabic strings -/ of / . To find out whether this is indeed the case, we need informants (i.e., native English speakers) who will be asked to read aloud combinations such as vs. . It will then be seen whether the stress pattern ˈ ˈ is indeed more likely than ˈ ˈ . An interesting question is also whether contemporary English is similar to German in that “the probability of a secondary stress on the second syllable increases when the word is uttered after a stressed syllable: ˈ ˌ ˈ ? ” (Hanna 2013: 123, f. 8). The present article is inclined to answer this question with a “no.” That is, for instance, when expresses the meaning “an academic,” it is stressed ˌ ˈ even in combinations such as , in which pen-initial secondary stress would from the point of view of rhythm be better than initial stress. Likewise, the of combinations such as is never stressed ? ˌ ˈ even though this stress pattern would also from the point of view of rhythm be better than (the actually occurring) ˌ ˈ . To be fully justified in claiming that what Hanna (2013) reports with regard to German is not true of English, we need a more extensive corpus study of how words such as meaning “an academic” and are stressed in environments such as and , in which stress clash avoidance should increase the probability of pen-initial secondary stress. Becker, Thomas (2012). . Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo/ McMahon, April (2006). “English Phonology and Morphology”. In: Bas Aarts/ April McMahon (Eds.). . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 382-410. Bybee, Joan (2001). . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chitoran, Ioana/ José Ignacio Hualde (2007). “From Hiatus to Diphthong: The Evolution of Vowel Sequences in Romance”. 24/ 1. 37-75. 186 Alexander Tokar Cruttenden, Alan (2014). Gimson’s Pronunciation of English. Eighth Edition. Abingdon/ New York: Routledge. Crystal, David (2016). . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dabouis, Quentin (2016). “Is the Adjectival Suffix - a Strong Suffix? ”. 21. http: / / anglophonia.revues.org/ 754. (Accessed 2 June 2018). , http: / / www.dictionary.com/ . (Accessed 7 February 2017). Fournier, Jean-Michel (2007). “From a Latin Syllable-Driven Stress System to a Romance Versus Germanic Morphology-Driven Dynamics: In Honour of Lionel Guierre”. 29/ 2-3. 218-236. Fudge, Erik C. (1984). . London: George Alien and Unwin (Publishers) Ltd. Gimson, Alfred C. (1970). . Second edition. London: Edward Arnold. Halle, Morris/ Jean-Roger Vergnaud (1987). . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Hammond, Michael (2006). “Prosodic Phonology”. In: Bas Aarts/ April McMahon (Eds.). . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 411-432. Hanna, Patrizia Noel Aziz (2013). “Language Processing and the Evolution of Rhythmic Patterns: Asymmetries in Binary Stress Systems”. 24/ 1. 115-134. Hayes, Bruce (1980). . Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ph.D. Dissertation. Hayes, Bruce (1982). “Extrametricality and English Stress”. 13/ 2. 227-276. Hayes, Bruce (1995). . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Hayes, Bruce (2009). . Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. Jones, Daniel (1917). “Explanations”. In: Daniel Jones (1974[1967]). Everyman’s . Thirteenth edition (Ed. Alfred C. Gimson). London: J.M. Dent and Sons LTD. xxii-xliv. Kenyon, John S./ Thomas A. Knott (1953[1944]). . Springfield, Mass.: G. and C. Merriam Company, Publishers. Kingdon, Roger (1949). “The Teaching of English Stress”. III/ 6. 146- 152. Kiparsky, Paul (1979). “Metrical Structure Assignment is Cyclic”. 10/ 3. 421-441. Kleiner, Stefan/ Ralf Knöbl/ Max Mangold (2015). - . Siebte komplett überarbeitete und aktualisierte Auflage. Berlin: Dudenverlag. [n.d.]. http: / / www.ldoce online.com/ . (Accessed 9 November 2016). Mair, Christian (2006). . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mille r, George A. (1995) . “WordNet: A Lexical Database for English”. 38/ 11. 39-41. [n.d.]. http: / / www.oxforddictionaries.com/ . (Accessed 31 December 2015). Pater, Joe (2000). “Non-Uniformity in English Secondary Stress: The Role of Ranked and Lexically Specific Constraints”. 17/ 2. 237-274. 187 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English Poldauf, Ivan (1984). . Oxford: Pergamon Press. [n.d.]. http: / / de.pons.com/ . (Accessed 27 February 2017). Tokar, Alexander (2017). . Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto. Trevian, Ives (2015). . Bern: Peter Lang. Upton, Clive/ William A. Kretzschmar (2017). . Second edition. Abingdon/ New York: Routledge. van der Hulst, Harry (2010). “Word Accent Systems in the Languages of Europe”. In: Harry van der Hulst/ Rob Goedemans/ Ellen van Zanten (Eds.). . Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 429-507. van der Hulst, Harry (2014). “The Study of Word Accent and Stress: Past, Present, and Future”. In: Harry van der Hulst (Ed.). . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3-55. Wenszky, Nóra (2004). . Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. YouTube [n.d.] http: / / www.youtube.com/ . (Accessed 3 March 2018). Zumstein, Franck (2006). “The Contribution of Computer-Searchable Diachronic Corpora to the Study of Word Stress Variation”. In: Roberta Facchinetti/ Matti Rissanen (Eds.). . Bern: Peter Lang. 171-196. According to LDOCE, OD, or RDPCE, the following words are pronounced with either initial or pen-initial secondary stress. acatalectic acataleptic acatallactic acategorical acetobacter acetocarmine acetogenic acetonitrile achondroplasia achondroplasic achondroplastic achromaticity acidophilic acotyledon acotyledonous adiabaticity Ahasuerus albuminiparous allotriomorphic alveolarisation alveolarization alveopalatal amortization anaerobiosis anaerobiotic anastomoses anastomosis anisomorphic anisotropic anisotropically antagonistic antagonistically anticipation antipathetic antipathetical antipathetically antipodean Antonioni antonomasia apotemnophilia applicability arboricultural arboriculturist aristocratic aristocratically Aristotelian arithmetician arrivederci asexuality authoritarian authoritarianism 188 Alexander Tokar azeotropic azidothymidine balletomania Bophuthatswana carcinogenic carcinogenicity cerebrospinal cerebrovascular chionodoxa chromatophoric coccidiosis cohabitation cohabitee communalisation communalistic communalistically concatenation conspiratorial conspiratorialism conspiratorialist conspiratorially corynebacteria corynebacterium cyanobacteria cyanobacterium deactivation deattribution decalcification decapitation decarbonisation deceleration decentralisation declassification decolonisation decolorisation decommunisation decommunization deconsecration decreolization decriminalisation de-escalation defenestration defibrillation defoliation deforestation degranulation dehumanisation deionisation delocalisation demagnetisation demilitarisation demineralisation demobilisation demonetisation demystification denationalisation denaturalisation denaturation denazification denitrification denuclearisation deontological depersonalisation depolarisation depolymerisation depressurisation dermatoglyphic dermatoglyphically desalinisation desensitisation desexualisation despicability destabilisation de-stalinisation desulfurisation detoxication detoxification detribalisation devaluation devitalisation devitrification dichloromethane dicotyledonous disapprobation disapprobative discoloration disconsolation disforestation disinclination disinfestation disinformation dissatisfaction dissatisfactory dissimilarity echinodermal Echinodermata economisation electronification electronographic encephalitic encephalitis equilibration etherification excogitation foraminiferan foraminiferous gametogenesis gametophytic gelatinisation geometricity gerontological Gigantopithecus halogenation hematozoon hendecasyllable hepatomegaly hepatopancreas hepatotoxic hepatotoxin Hispaniola historiographal historiographer historiographership historiography historiology historiometry historionomer historiosophy homologation humanitarian humanitarianism humanitarianize humiliation hydrogenation iconoclastic 189 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English iconoclastically icosahedral icosahedron idealisation idealistic idealistical idealistically immunoassay immunochemistry immunocompetent immunocompromised immunodeficiency immunodeficient immunodiagnostic immunodiagnostics immunodiffusion immunofluorescence immunogenesis immunogenic immunoglobulin immunohistochemical immunohistochemistry immunomodulation immunomodulator immunoprecipitation immunoproliferative immunoprophylactic immunoprophylaxis immunoreactive immunoreactivity immunostimulant immunostimulation immunostimulatory immunosuppress immunosuppressant immunosuppression immunosuppressive immunosuppressor immunosurveillance immunotherapy impartiality imperatorial imperishability impermeability imponderability impossibility impracticability impracticality improvisation improvisational improvisatorial inactivation inalterability inamorata inamorato inapplicability inapprehensible inaudibility incapability incomparability incomprehensibility incomprehensible incomprehensibleness incomprehension inconsequential inconsequentiality inconsequentially inconsequentialness incontrovertibility incontrovertible incontrovertibly incorrigibility incuriosity indisposition inefficacious inefficaciously inefficaciousness inexplicability inextricability infallibility infeasibility infinitival infinitivally inhospitality inquisitorial inquisitorially insensitivity inseparability insolubility intelligentsia intercalation interpellation invincibility inviolability invisibility invulnerability iodination Iphigenia irreconcilability irreconcilable irreconcilably irrefutability irresolution irreverential maintainability makunouchi Mephistophelean Mephistophelian mesaticephalic mesaticephaly mesatipellic mesenteritis metempsychosis metempsychosist methaemoglobin methanotrophic micellization miscalculation miscalibration miscegenation miscegenationist miscegenetic miscoloration miscomprehension multimerization municipality myrmecophobic nematodiriasis Nematodirus nematogenic neontologic 190 Alexander Tokar nephritogenic neuroglioblastoma Nicomachean nicotiana nitrogenation nitrogenization nocardiosis numismatology Oedipodean organochloride organochlorine organogenesis organogenetic organogenic organographical organoleptic organoleptically organological organometal organometallic organophosphate organophosphorous organophosphorus organotherapy organotypic ornithorhynchus oscillometric palatoglossal palatoglossus palatomaxillary palatopharyngeal palatopharyngeus parthenogenic parthenogenically participation participational participatory pathognomonic peptidomimetic phantasmagoria phantasmagorial phantasmagorian phantasmagoric phantasmagorical phantasmagorically phantasmagorist phantasmological phonematology plantaginaceous Pneumatomachian poikilothermal poikilothermia poikilothermic polarographic pollicitation polygonization polygonometry polymerisation pontificalia pontification predestination prefabrication prefiguration premedication premeditation preoccupation primordiality prioritisation procaryotic procatalectic progenitorial programmability Propliopithecus prosopopoeia pyramidoidal Pythagorean Pythagoreanism Pythagorician rachitogenic reaffirmation reallocation reanimation recombination redecoration rededication re-education referability reflexibility reforestation refutability regeneration regurgitation rehabitation rejuvenesce rejuvenescence rejuvenescent renaturation reoccupation reorganisation reorganizational reorganizationist reorientation repacification repagination repatriation replegiation repopulation requisitorial resettability respirability retransformation reunification reutilisation revification revitalisation revivication revivification revocability rhinocerotic salutatorian selaginella Shakespeareana somatogenic somatotonic spermatogenesis spermatogonia spermatogonium spermatozoa spermatozoal spermatozoan spermatozoic spermatozoid spermatozoon stomatogastric suburbicarian 191 Secondary Stress Variation in Contemporary English surrealistic taramasalata Tegucigalpa teratogenic Ticonderoga totalitarian totalitarianism transferability transfiguration transliteration transmissibility transmogrification transmutability transportability triangulation trichloroethane Tripolitania Tripolitanian trypanosomiasis ungovernability unsalability unshakability unshockability unshrinkability unsinkability unsociability unsolvability unstoppability unsuitability untenability unthinkability untouchability unworkability ureteritis utilitarian utilitarianism Uzbekistan vitellogenin volatilisation volatilization zapateado e