Читать книгу Stress Variation in English - Alexander Tokar - Страница 8

With the exception of BergBerg’s (1999) study of stress differences between British and American English, none of the previous publications (on English stress) can be referred to as a systematic analysis of English words with stress doublets; the phenomenon of stress variation is only briefly touched upon in these publications as a side aspect of the more general issues pertaining to English stress.

For example, Chomsky & HalleChomsky & Halle (1968: 73) observe that in the word umbilicus, which is interchangeably pronounced /ʌmbɪˈlaɪkəs/ and /ʌmˈbɪlɪkəs/ (OED), “we have penultimate stress if the penultimate vowel is taken to be tensetense in the underlying representation, and antepenultimate stress if the penultimate vowel is taken to be laxlax.” (Note that Chomsky & Halle (1968: 73) do not speak of long vs. short vowels because “[i]n few cases in American English as a whole is time length, or durationduration, of vowels significant—that is, used to distinguish from each other words otherwise alike” (Kenyon & KnottKenyon & Knott 1953[1944]: xxvi). E.g., the phonetic contrast between the “long” /iː/ of meal and the “short” /ɪ/ of mill is in American English by and large a matter of vowel quality rather than of duration.) A problem with this explanation is, however, the above mentioned fact that apart from cases such as /ʌmbɪˈlaɪkəs/ vs. /ʌmˈbɪlɪkəs/, with stress being penultimate when the penult /ˈlaɪ/ is heavyheavy vs. antepenultimate when the penult /lɪ/ is lightlight (the LatinLatin Stress Rule is thus in both cases abided by), there are also cases such as /ˈɛkskwɪzɪt/ vs. /ɪkˈskwɪzɪt/, where stress differences do not correlate with segmental differences, i.e., stress in exquisite can be penultimate even when the vowel in the penult is phonetically realized as the short /ɪ/.

Another highly problematic explanation for the phenomenon of stress variation in English is CruttendenCruttenden’s (2008: 245) notion of rhythmic pressurerhythmic pressure. (Cruttenden (2008) is, however, the seventh edition of GimsonGimson’s Pronunciation of English. An earlier edition of the same book (Gimson 1970: 232) also mentions rhythmic pressures as one of the causes of stress variation in contemporary English.) What is meant by this is that “[i]n some words containing more than two syllables there appears to be a tendency to avoid a succession of weak syllablesweak syllables, especially if these have /ə/ or /ɪ/” (Cruttenden 2008: 245). For example, deficit is /ˈdɛfɪsɪt/ vs. /diˈfɪsɪt/ (Cruttenden 2008: 246), with the latter pronunciation representing in the view of the author a more rhythmic alternative to the former, i.e., the initially-stressed /ˈdɛfɪsɪt/ contains a sequence of two unstressed syllables both of which have the qualitatively reduced vowelreduced vowel /ɪ/. Notice, however, that the OD dictionary has 3,466 initially-stressed words in which the first syllable, bearing stress, is followed by two unstressed syllables that have /ə/ or /ɪ/ in the nucleusnucleus position. E.g., in both /ˈaldʒɪbrə/ (OD) and /ˈanɪm(ə)l/ (OD), the stressed antepenults /ˈal/ and /ˈa/ are followed by the unstressed penult–ult sequences /dʒɪbrə/ and /nɪm(ə)l/, which contain the vowels /ɪ/ and /ə/. Of the 3,466 antepenultimately-stressed trisyllables such as algebra and animal, only 58 (~1.67 %) are, according to the OD, also pronounced by contemporary English speakers with penultimate stress. E.g., in addition to the above mentioned /ˈpaprɪkə/ vs. /pəˈpriːkə/ of paprika (OD), also the adjective integral is interchangeably stressed /ˈɪntɪɡr(ə)l/ and /ɪnˈtɛɡr(ə)l/ (OD).

Observe now that apart from initially-stressed trisyllables such as algebra and animal, the OD also has 234 initially-stressed trisyllables such as, e.g., /ˈɔːtɑːki/ (OD). The unstressed penult–ult string in trisyllables such as autarky contains any long or short vowel with the exception of /ə/ or /ɪ/. Of the 234 initially-stressed trisyllables such as autarky, five (~2.14 %) are, according to the OD, also pronounced by contemporary English speakers with penultimate stress. E.g., in addition to the above mentioned /ˈnɛkrɒpsi/ vs. /nɛˈkrɒpsi/ of necropsy (OD), also autopsy is stressed both /ˈɔːtɒpsi/ and /ɔːˈtɒpsi/ (OD), conversely is interchangeably /ˈkɒnvəːsli/ and /kənˈvəːsli/ (OD), covertly is both /ˈkəʊvəːtli/ and /kəʊˈvəːtli/ (OD), and patchouli is /ˈpatʃʊli/ and /pəˈtʃuːli/ (OD). Since the difference of 58/3,466 vs. five/234 does not count as statistically significant—χ² (1) = 0.281, p = 0.5959—we can claim that trisyllables such as algebra and animal are in contemporary English not more frequently interchangeably pronounced with antepenultimate and penultimate stress than trisyllables such as autarky.

Notice also that among the examples provided by CruttendenCruttenden (2008: 246) to substantiate his claim that “[h]esitancy and variation of accentual pattern occurring at the present time are the result of rhythmic […] pressures […]” (Cruttenden 2008: 245) is also the word acumen, which, according to LDOCE, is /ˈækjəmən/ vs. /əˈkjuːmən/ (cf. the OED, where acumen is only /ˈakjᵿmən/ as far as the British variety is concerned). As one can see, when stress in acumen is antepenultimate, the unstressed vowels in the ult and the penult may undergo qualitative reduction, yielding thereby the rhythmically unfortunate pronunciation /ˈækjəmən/: This pronunciation contains a sequence of two weak syllablesweak syllables, both of which have schwas. Note, however, that according to the OED, “[p]ronunciation with stress on the first syllable was first noted in the mid 20th cent.”; the original pronunciation of acumen was the penultimately-stressed /əˈkjuːmɪn/, which etymologically is due to the LatinLatin acūmen, in which stress is penultimate because the vowel in the penultimate syllable is long. Proceeding from Cruttenden’s (2008: 245) notion of rhythmic pressurerhythmic pressure, the pronunciation /əˈkjuːmɪn/ should be seen as a more fortunate pronunciation of acumen with respect to rhythm (compared to pronunciations in which the stress is antepenultimate), but it has nonetheless been abandoned in British English in favor of the presumably less rhythmic antepenultimately-stressed pronunciation /ˈakjᵿmən/. Likewise, of 84 General American English speakers whose voices could be heard in YouTube videos containing the spoken occurrences of acumen, only four (~4.76 %) pronounced the word with a penultimate stress. Thus, we can say that not only in British but also in American English, the stress in acumen is close to becoming exclusively antepenultimate. It is fairly obvious, then, that if the variation between penultimate and antepenultimate stress in acumen did indeed have anything to do with rhythm in the sense of Cruttenden (2008: 245), we would now be observing a different tendency: More rhythmic pronunciations with stress on the middle syllable would be supplanting less rhythmic pronunciations with stress on the first syllable.

Interestingly, in stark contrast to CruttendenCruttenden (2008: 245), FriederichFriederich (1967: 25) notes that “[i]n dreisilbigen Wörtern die Mittelsilbe zu betonen, ist ein Rhythmus, der dem Engländer nicht sonderlich liegt,” i.e., placing stress upon the middle syllable in a trisyllabic word is a rhythm that an English speaker does not particularly like. To substantiate this claim, Friederich (1967: 25) refers to stress shifts such as /kəmˈpɛnseɪt/ → /ˈkɒmpənseɪt/ (OED), which were undergone by many -ate-ate-trisyllables. E.g., apart from compensate, also concentrate, confiscate, contemplate, demonstrate, illustrate, infiltrate, inundate, etc. were originally pronounced with penultimate stress but have over the course of time abandoned this stress pattern in favor of antepenultimate stress (OED). At the same time, however, some -ate-ate-trisyllables still prefer penultimate to antepenultimate stress. E.g., for demarcate, elongate, and impregnate, LDOCE gives only penultimately-stressed American English transcriptions /dɪˈmɑːrkeɪt/, /ɪˈlɒːŋɡeɪt/, and /ɪmˈpreɡneɪt/ (whereas in British English, these verbs are stressed /ˈdiː-/, /ˈiː-/, and /ˈɪm-/). More generally, Present-day English would have relatively few penultimately-stressed trisyllables if this stress pattern were indeed dispreferred by English speakers (in trisyllabic words). LDOCE has, however, (no less than) 2,479 penultimately-stressed trisyllables (vs. 4,979 antepenultimately-stressed ones). Penultimate stress in a trisyllabic English word is thus without a doubt not a marginal stress pattern.

Another aspect pertaining to rhythm is the English Rhythm RuleRhythm Rule. Because “adjacent stressed syllables make speech sound jerky” (KingdonKingdon 1949: 149) and because some English words vacillate between final and non-final stress, English is believed to have “a rule that shifts a stress leftward when a stronger stress follows,” resulting in alternations such as thirˈteen ~ ˈthirteen men (HayesHayes 1995: 18). It is acknowledged, though, that “the Rhythm Rule is optional, at least in certain contexts” (Hayes 1995: 18). For example, LangendoenLangendoen (1975: 207), who is a native speaker of English, reports that for him, final stress in Detroit in the combination Detroit Lions is as acceptable as initial stress; similarly, in the combination Marlene Deetz, final stress in the modifiermodifier Marlene is interchangeable with initial stress.

Halle & VergnaudHalle & Vergnaud (1987: 271, f. 29) also mention that

the word-internal application of the Rhythm RuleRhythm Rule […] is restricted to lexical compounds. This explains why retraction is (almost) obligatory in Marcel Proust, but almost impossible in Marcel left: the former is a lexical compound, whereas the latter is formed in the syntax. The optionality of stress retraction in Marcel’s book would then be attributed to the ambiguous nature of the construction: it can be analyzed either as a lexical compound or as a syntactic construction. In the former case retraction is obligatory; in the latter it is impossible. The difference is brought out more clearly by such examples as We know about Marcel’s book, but not yet about Mary’s. In this sentence Marcel’s book must be pronounced without retraction because the pronominal relation that holds between book and the empty noun following Mary’s forces the syntactic analysis of the collocation. (Halle & VergnaudHalle & Vergnaud 1987: 271, f. 29)

Sometimes it is also added that the English Rhythm RuleRhythm Rule “tends to apply in frequent words, e.g., ántìque bóok, and not in rare ones, e.g., àrcáne sort” (Kraska-Szlenk & ŻygisKraska-Szlenk & Żygis 2012: 327). Thus, of the finally-stressed modifiers antique and arcane, the former, which is more frequent than the latter, is likely to be initially-stressed as /ˈæntɪk/ (OED) rather than finally-stressed as /ænˈtiːk/ (OED) when the immediately following head word is either a monosyllable or an initially-stressed polysyllable; by contrast, in the less frequent arcane, stress is likely to stay final in a similar environment.

Unfortunately, statements such as these, which describe when the English Rhythm RuleRhythm Rule should apply and when it should not, are as a rule based not upon extensive corpus or experimental studies but upon authors’ own introspective judgments of how particular English words in which stress is normally final are supposed to be stressed when in an immediately following head word stress is initial. A fortunate exception is MompéanMompéan (2014), who has recently studied the stress variation exhibited by the English cardinal numeralscardinal numerals ending in -teen-teen and the corresponding ordinal numerals ending in -teenth-teenth. For this purpose the author has drawn a corpus of 1,263 newscasts from the BBC World Service Web site. These newscasts were recorded between 1999 and 2009 and feature mainly RP accents, i.e., British English speakers whose accent is Received Pronunciation. As the author reports:

The analysis of the corpus provides empirical evidence to suggest an informed answer to the research question of the present study, namely how variable stressvariable stress shift is in expressions involving teen numbers in a corpus of spoken RP speech. The analysis shows that out of the 343 potential cases of stress shift identified, 329 actually involved stress shift (95.9 %) whereas stress shift did not apply in the remaining 14 potential cases (4.1.%). This shows that stress shift is the rule, rather than the exception, in potential cases involving teen numbers as the first constituent of a compound or as the modifiermodifier of a head noun in a noun phrase. (MompéanMompéan 2014: 155)

Note, however, that these results do not automatically corroborate the reality of the rhythm rule in English. Thus, MompéanMompéan (2014: 156) also reports that in his corpus “head nouns often designate fractions of 100 such as per cent (14 cases) or multiples of ten such as hundred, thousand, million and billion (31 potential cases), with stress shift applying in all potential cases except six.” If the so-called English Rhythm RuleRhythm Rule is essentially nothing more than a stress clash avoidance strategy, why is stress also retracted in combinations such as thirteen per cent, in which a -teen-teen-numeral modifies a non-initially-stressed head? That is, since the pronunciation thirˈteen per ˈcent would not involve a stress clash, why is thirteen per cent nonetheless as a rule pronounced ˈthirteen per ˈcent? (A possible answer to this question is that also a one-syllable distance between two syllables bearing stress is not entirely unproblematic with regard to rhythm. Thus, “adjacent stresses are strongly avoided; stresses that are close but not adjacent are less strictly avoided; and at a certain distance (perhaps four syllables) the spacing becomes fully acceptable” (HayesHayes 1995: 372). E.g., retraction of stress in thirteen per cent occurs because in thirˈteen per ˈcent only one unstressed syllable would separate two stressed ones. A similar example, discussed by CruttendenCruttenden (2008: 296), is the alternation Westˈminster ~ ˈWestminster Abbey, where there is also no more than one unstressed syllable separating two syllables bearing stress. An interesting case is the finally-stressed modifiermodifier Barack, /bəˈrɑːk/ (Dictionary.com), which in the combination Barack Obama is often initially-stressed as /ˈbæræk/ (LDOCE) even though the stressed syllables in /bəˈrɑk oʊˈbɑmə/ (Dictionary.com) are, again, separated from each other by one unstressed one. Retraction of stress in the finally-stressed modifier /bəˈrɑːk/ occurs even though the penult /bə/ contains a schwaschwa and can thus be said to lack stress altogether, i.e., “a syllable of English is completely stressless if its vowel is schwa” (Hayes 1995: 12). The point here is that the Rhythm Rule should, according to Hayes (1995: 19), be “unable to retract stress onto a completely stressless syllable,” i.e., the finally-stressed /bəˈrɑːk/ is supposed to be the only stress pattern of Barack, even when it modifies Obama. The alternation Baˈrack ~ ˈBarack Obama thus challenges Hayes’ (1995: 19) assertion.)

Another interesting fact regarding the stress of the -teen-teen-cardinals is that “the pattern with primary stress on the first syllable is more common when counting” (MompéanMompéan 2014: 152). That is, when an English speaker counts from 13 to 19, she usually says ˈthirteen, ˈfourteen, ˈfifteen, ˈsixteen, ˈseventeen, ˈeighteen, ˈnineteen rather than ?thirˈteen, fourˈteen, fifˈteen, sixˈteen, sevenˈteen, eighˈteen, nineˈteen. Since both the former and the latter pronunciations have a one-syllable distance between the syllables bearing primary stress, we cannot say that the initially-stressed version ˈthirteen, ˈfourteen, ˈfifteen, ˈsixteen, ˈseventeen, ˈeighteen, ˈnineteen is from the point of view of rhythm better than the finally-stressed thirˈteen, fourˈteen, fifˈteen, sixˈteen, sevenˈteen, eighˈteen, nineˈteen.

Consider also compound dates involving the -teen-teen-cardinals. When these occur in the beginning of a compound date (for instance, 1821 or 1882), stress in them is almost exclusively penultimate/initial. For instance, in the YouTube videos containing the spoken occurrences of eighteen, this numeral was found to occur in the beginning of a compound date such as 1821 and 1882 87 times. Stress in eighteen was initial in each of these spoken occurrences. By contrast, in compound dates where the -teen-teen-cardinals occur in the end, there is considerable variation. For example, compound dates that end in eighteen (e.g., 1618) were found to occur in YouTube videos 27 times. With final stress eighteen was found to have been pronounced in such compound dates 19 times (~70.37 %), the initially-stressed ˈeighteen was by contrast attested only eight times: ~29.63 %. However, if we specifically consider the compound dates 1913, 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, and 1919, the results are different. These dates were found to occur in YouTube videos 367 times. With final stress, the components 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 occurring at the end of these dates were found to have been pronounced only 66 times (~17.98 %), whereas initially-stressed pronunciations could be heard by the author 301 times: ~82.02 %. Needless to repeat, the English Rhythm RuleRhythm Rule, for which alternations such as thirˈteen ~ ˈthirteen men are nothing more than a stress clash resolution strategy, cannot adequately account for the differences in the stress behavior that the numerals ending in -teen-teen exhibit in the beginning vs. the end of compound dates such as 1821 and 1918.

A less problematic explanation for why some English words have more than one stress pattern is emphasis. Emphatic stress shifts usually occur in prefixed words. Prefixes in English are generally stress-neutralstress-neutral (e.g., CruttendenCruttenden 2008: 241), 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 […]” (PoldaufPoldauf 1984: 24). For example, triangle is supposed to be pronounced /traɪˈæŋɡ(ə)l/ (OED), with the location of stress in it coinciding with the location of stress in the disyllabic base angle, in which stress is initial. However, since a triangle is a geometrical figure that has three angles, in contrast to, e.g., a rectangle, which contains four right angles, stress in triangle is also frequently placed upon the semantically important prefix tri-tri-: /ˈtraɪæŋɡ(ə)l/ (OED; cf. the more synchronically oriented OD, which gives for triangle only the prefix stress /ˈtrʌɪaŋɡ(ə)l/; likewise, in YouTube videos featuring more than 3,000 spoken occurrences of this prefixed derivative, the root stress /‑ˈæŋɡ(ə)l/ was heard by the author only once. The prefix stress /ˈtrʌɪ-/ can thus be said to have over the course of time become the word’s default stress pattern). A similar case is /ˈsʌbməriːn/ vs. /ˌsʌbməˈriːn/ of submarine (LDOCE), with the latter pronunciation preserving the stress of the disyllabic base marine: /məˈriːn/ (LDOCE) vs. the former pronunciation emphasizing via stress the prefix sub-sub-, which distinguishes submarine from other English marine-formations (cf. aquamarine, supermarine, transmarine, ultramarine, etc.); note also that especially the meaning of supermarine, “[t]hat is situated, takes place, or operates above or on the surface of the sea” (OED; boldface mine), is the spatial opposite of the meaning of submarine, “[t]hat exists or occurs under the surface of the sea” (OED; boldface mine).

An interesting example is defense vs. offense. In YouTube videos featuring the spoken occurrences of defense, prefix stress could be attested only in sports-related contexts, namely, when defense is used to refer to actions of a team in a game of sports (especially basketball or American football) when the team does not possess the ball (used in the game). Similarly, when offense is pronounced /ˈɔˌfɛns/ or /ˈɑˌfɛns/ (OED), it invariably refers to actions taken by the team while it possesses the ball. In other contexts, stress in both defense and offense stays final. Examples include self-defense, secretary or ministry of defense, defense forces, legal or criminal defense, defense attorney, defense mechanism, Ph.D. defense, in defense of, etc. Regarding sports, pronunciations with stress falling upon the ult were heard only in chess-related contexts (e.g., Alekhine’s Defense).

The obvious explanation for this difference is that it is only ball games such as basketball or American football where we find such a prominent semantic opposition between defense (actions of a team without the ball) and offense (actions while possessing it). In stark contrast: A Ph.D. thesis can only be defended but not offended; there is no such thing as Ph.D. offense understood as the semantic opposite of Ph.D. defense. Similarly, there are secretaries of defense, but there are no secretaries of offense. As for the more difficult chess-example, there is no doubt that just like actions of a team in a game of basketball or American football, chess-players’ actions can also be classified into defensive and offensive actions. Note, however, that terms such as Alekhine’s Defense, Sicilian Defense, etc. denote instances of chess openings, which are usually classified into defenses and attacks (rather than offenses). Thus, there can only be Alekhine’s Defense vs. Alekhine’s Attack, but not *Alekhine’s Offense. Hence, also in the case of chess-opening names such as Alekhine’s Defense, the meaning of defense is not the opposite of the meaning of offense. Stress in defense in names such as Alekhine’s Defense, Sicilian Defense, etc. therefore also stays final. The stress patterns exhibited by the words defense and offense in different semantic environments thus corroborate FriederichFriederich’s (1967: 62) assertion that “[a]m häufigsten findet sich emphatische Betonung natürlich zum Ausdruck des Gegensatzes oder Kontrastes,” i.e., since emphaticemphatic stress usually serves the expression of opposition or contrast, initial stress in defense and offense occurs only in those environments where the meanings of these two -fense-fense-words do indeed semantically contrast with each other.

Emphatic stress shifts occur not only in words beginning with a prefix but also in words ending in a suffix. For example, in mortgagor–mortgagee it is the suffixes -or-or and -ee-ee that bring about a contrast between borrowers and lenders in a mortgage. Therefore, in addition to stressing, e.g., mortgagor /ˈmɔːɡᵻdʒə/ (OED; both British and American English), preserving the stress of the base noun ˈmortgage, this derivative can also be pronounced /ˌmɔːɡᵻˈdʒɔː/ (OED; British and American English), with the semantically and formally important suffix -or-or receiving stress. A similar case is registrar, which is stressed /‑ˈstrɑː/ vs. /ˈrɛ-/ in British English and only /ˈrɛ-/ in American English (OED). Given a contrast between registrars (those who keep registers) and registrees (those who register or are registered by others), the stress /‑ˈstrɑː/ seems to represent an emphaticemphatic alternative to the base stress /ˈrɛ-/. (Etymologically, final stress in the shorter English word registrar is due to antepenultimate stress in the longer LatinLatin word registrarius. Since, however, contemporary English speakers—who by and large do not have any command of Latin—no longer remember this historical etymology, the stress pattern of registrarius in the source language Latin should not be a factor determining the stress pattern of registrar in the source language English.) The same seems to be true of /ˈfiːtjʊərət/ vs. /fiːtjʊəˈrɛt/ of featurette (OED) as well as /brɪˈkɛt/ vs. /ˈbrɪkɪt/ of briquette (OED). Because diminutiveness and artificiality are important aspects of the meanings of featurette and briquette—“A short feature film or programme” (OD) and “A block or slab of artificial stone” (OED)—the suffix -ette-ette, which expresses these meanings in featurette and briquette, is on some occasions emphasized via stress.

Notice also that several English suffixes capable of attracting stress (on to themselves; hence “autostressedautostressed” in FudgeFudge’s (1984: 40) terminology) have a negative connotationnegative connotation (which is why—as, e.g., LutzLutz (2009: 290) observes—“[i]n Modern English, suffix-oriented accent is only rarely final”). This is especially true of the suffix -ese in formations such as academese, “[t]he language or writing style of academic scholarship, especially when considered dry or over-complicated” (OD; boldface mine) and Brooklynese, “[a]n uncultivated form of New York speech associated especially with the borough of Brooklyn” (OD; boldface mine). Similarly, “English nouns in which the suffix -ette-ette designates a feminine role or identity have been perceived by many people as implying inferiority or insignificance: bachelorette; drum majorette; farmerette; suffragette; usherette.” According to Dictionary.com, “[o]f these terms, only drum majorette—or sometimes just majorette—is still widely used.” Likewise:

Nouns in -ess-ess denoting occupation or profession are rapidly disappearing from American English. Airlines now refer to cabin personnel as flight attendants, not stewards and stewardesses. In the arts, authoress, editress, poetess, sculptress, and similar terms are either rejected or discouraged and almost always replaced by author, editor, poet, sculptor. Nouns in -ess-ess designating the holder of public office are hardly ever encountered in modern American usage. Women holding the office of ambassador, mayor, or governor are referred to by those titles rather than by the older, sex-marked ambassadress, mayoress, or governess. (Governess has developed a special sense in relation to childcare; this use is less common in the U.S. than in Britain.) Among other terms almost never used in modern American English are ancestress, directress, instructress, manageress, oratress, postmistress, and proprietress. […] Jewess and Negress are usually considered offensive today. (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/‑ess-ess, 30.03.2017)

Note also that “women are throughout history and across cultures defined by some kind of sexualization […]”, whereas “men have historically figured as non-gendered, non-sexualized, neutered subjects, those who have no sex (despite the attribution of sexual desire to men only) […]” (BaerBaer 2008: 351). Because of this fact, many terms that are used to refer to women “have sexual meanings. If women are referred to as ‘chicks’, […] it is not just a reference to animals, but it is also a reference to a sexualized image” (Baer 2008: 352). An -ess-ess-formation, which emphasizes that the person referred to is female, is thus a priori emphaticemphatic in nature. That is why, some of the -ess-ess-formations that have not, as of today, disappeared from the English language have an emphatic alternative to base stress. In contrast to, e.g., actress, which is stressed only /ˈaktrəs/ (OD), with the suffix -ess-ess acting as a stress-neutralstress-neutral suffix (CruttendenCruttenden 2008: 240), princess is, according to the OED, stressed /‑ˈsɛs/ vs. /ˈprɪn-/ in British English and /ˈprɪn-/ vs. /‑ˈsɛs/ in American English. (The YouTube data has revealed, however, that also in British English, the base stress /ˈprɪn-/ is more frequently used than the suffix stress /‑ˈsɛs/.)

Related to emphasis is what TorsuevTorsuev called (1960: 5, 6) the semantic factor of stress in the English language. This factor plays a role in, e.g., the stress variation /ˈju-ˈes-ˈeɪ/ vs. /ˈju-es-ˈeɪ/ of the alphabetismalphabetism USA (Torsuev 1960: 5, 6). The semantic factor of English stress manifests itself in the variant /ˈju-ˈes-ˈeɪ/. Since the abbreviated components U, S, and A all contribute to the meaning “USA,” primary stress in /ˈju-ˈes-ˈeɪ/ is placed upon each of the three syllables constituting the alphabetism USA. The alternative pronunciation /ˈju-es-ˈeɪ/ is, by contrast, a manifestation of the rhythmic factor. Since, as pointed out above, “adjacent stressed syllables make speech sound jerky” (KingdonKingdon 1949: 149), the middle syllable of the alphabetism USA is either completely destressed or its level of stress is demoted to secondary.

Noteworthy are also (low) frequency of usefrequency of use and polysyllabicitypolysyllabicity, which in contrast to emphasis, are, however, not immediate causes of stress variation but rather its prerequisites.

A comparison of the pronunciations of all 75,000 entries in WellsWells’s dictionary yields 932 stress-divergent words. This set is found to differ from the entire lexicon in three respects of which the first appears to be more important than the others. The average frequency of the words is lower and their average length is higher. Furthermore, proper nouns are overrepresented. Generally, main stress falls further to the left in British than in American English, with the latter variety accommodating stress more in the word edges than the former. (BergBerg 1999: 123)

With regard to polysyllabicitypolysyllabicity, BergBerg (1999: 127) observes that

while disyllabic items occur less often in the stress-divergent set than in the general set, the reverse is true of longer words. The comparison of disyllabic vs. longer words produces a statistically significant difference […]. This allows us to conclude that words with a stress difference are longer than those without. (BergBerg 1999: 127)

An explanation for the fact that words with stress doublets are more frequently found among “longer words” (i.e., words whose syllabic length is at least three) is that a disyllabic word cannot be derived from a variably-stressed monosyllabic base (in which there is only one syllable to place stress upon) whereas a word of three and more syllables can be derived from a variably-stressed disyllabic base. Thus, since the bases of disyllabic derivatives are as a rule monosyllables (active ← act + -ive-ive), stress in the former can only be placed upon the only syllable constituting the latter, i.e., e.g., in the disyllabic derivative active stress can only fall upon the only syllable constituting the monosyllabic base act. Stress in disyllabic derivatives such as active is thus almost exclusively initial in contemporary English. (With final stress, falling upon the suffix, a disyllabic derivative whose base is monosyllabic is pronounced only when the meaning inherent in the suffix has a strong emphaticemphatic potential, such as, e.g., the meaning “female sex” of the suffix -ess-ess of the above mentioned princess.)

As for trisyllabic derivatives, consider, for example, adeptness, adulthood, adversely, Nobelist, overtly, etc. Each of these derivatives is, according to the OED, interchangeably pronounced with penultimate and antepenultimate stress because also their disyllabic bases adept, adult, adverse, Nobel, overt, etc. are interchangeably pronounced with final and initial stress. (Note also that because, as pointed out above, /ˈædʌlt/ is the preferred stress pattern of adult in British English whereas American English speakers usually stress it /əˈdʌlt/, also adulthood is more frequently stressed /ˈædʌlthʊd/ in British English vs. /əˈdʌlthʊd/ in American English.) Similarly, among variably-stressed words whose syllabic length is at least four are many derivatives whose bases are variably-stressed trisyllables. For example, since the trisyllabic aberrant is /ˈæbərənt/ vs. /əˈbɛrənt/ and aberrance is /ˈæbərəns/ vs. /əˈbɛrəns/, the tetrasyllabic derivative aberrancy is /ˈæbərənsi/ vs. /əˈbɛrənsi/ (OED; only American English); since the trisyllabic consummate is /ˈkɒns(j)ᵿmət/ vs. /kənˈsʌmət/, the tetrasyllabic consummately is /ˈkɒns(j)ᵿmətli/ vs. /kənˈsʌmətli/ (OED); since the trisyllabic controvert is /ˈkɒntrəvɜːt/ vs. /kɒntrəˈvɜːrt/, the tetrasyllabic controvertist is /ˈkɒntrəvɜːtɪst/ vs. /kɒntrəˈvɜːtɪst/ (OED).

Aspirant is interchangeably /əˈspaɪərənt/ and /ˈæspərənt/ (LDOCE; both in British and American English), with the former pronunciation being derived from /əˈspaɪə/ of aspire (LDOCE) and the latter being due to /ˈæspəreɪt/ of aspirate (LDOCE). That there is a connection between the meanings of the verbs aspire and aspirate is best illustrated by the popular LatinLatin saying Dum spiro spero, which means “I hope as long as I breathe.” Similarly, from a semantic point of view it is not clear whether impactive, “[h]aving a strong effect or influence” (OD), should be regarded as a derivative from an ˈimpact, “[a] marked effect or influence” (OD), or from to imˈpact, “[h]ave a strong effect on someone or something” (OD). The longer derivative impactive is therefore interchangeably stressed /ˈɪmpæktɪv/ and /ɪmˈpæktɪv/ (OED). The morphological structure of advertisement that leads to the stress pattern /ədˈvəːtɪzm(ə)nt/ (which, according to the OED, is the only stress pattern in British English while American English speakers prefer the stress pattern /ˈædvərˌtaɪzm(ə)nt/) is advert + -ise-ise + -ment-ment, i.e., the etymon of the English word advertisement is, according to the OD, the Latin verb advertere, “turn towards.” Because the purpose of advertising is attracting other people’s attention (to what is being advertised), the semantic connection between the finally-stressed verb advert, whose original sense was “turn one’s attention to,” later “bring to someone’s attention” (OD), and the noun advertisement is still alive in Present-day English (which is corroborated by the fact that an advert occurs in British English as an informal shorteningshortening of advertisement). A natural alternative to pronouncing advertisement /ədˈvəːtɪzm(ə)nt/, preserving the stress of the disyllabic base /ədˈvəːt/ (OD), is to pronounce it with the stress of the semantically related trisyllabic verb advertise: /ˈadvətʌɪz/ (OD). Thus, the stress of advertisement is either the preserved final stress of to advert (British English) or the preserved antepenultimate stress of advertise (American English).

Cases such as these, when more than one word can synchronically be regarded as the base form are, again, much more typical of trisyllables and longer words (i.e., one of the few similar cases that involve a variably-stressed disyllable is solute, which means “[t]he minor component in a solution, dissolved in the solvent” (OD; boldface mine). In addition to counting as a back-derivative from solution, which leads to the stress pattern /sɒˈljuːt/ (OD), solute is, just like solvent, also initially-stressed as /ˈsɒljuːt/ (OD), with the location of stress being the monosyllabic base solve.)

To conclude, in contrast to BergBerg (1999: 127), who argues that “[l]ength thus appears to erode the integrity of a word’s stress pattern. In other words, it encourages variability in lexical-stress placement,” the present monograph argues that the fact that words with stress doublets are more frequently found among words whose syllabic length is at least three is a relatively insignificant, fairly accidental consequence of the impossibility of deriving disyllabic words from variably-stressed monosyllabic bases. Apart from this, however, there is no intrinsic connection between syllabic length and stress variation. Both disyllables and longer words are stressed variably by English speakers only when there are reasons (e.g., emphasis) for this.

As for (low) frequency of usefrequency of use, an obvious explanation, not requiring a detailed elaboration, is that “infrequency […] weakens the memory trace (or prevents it from growing strong in the first place) and thereby destabilizes the information to be remembered” (BergBerg 1999: 137). An example might be albumenize, which, according to the OED, is pronounced only /ælˈbjuməˌnaɪz/ in American English, but it can be pronounced either alˈbumenize or ˈalbumenize in British English. To find out whether stress in this verb in British English more frequently falls upon the first or the second syllable, the orthographic form albumenize was, together with the word-forms albumenizes, albumenized, and albumenizing, searched for on the YouTube Web site. Additionally, similar searches were performed with respect to the orthographic alternatives albumenise, albuminise, and albuminize, which, according to the OED, also occur in Present-day English. Unfortunately, however, neither the former nor the latter searches have returned any results, i.e., on the YouTube Web site there seem to be no videos in which the verb albumenize is pronounced by an English speaker at least one time. The non-existence of YouTube videos featuring the spoken occurrences of albumenize thus clearly points to the status of the verb under analysis as a low frequency verb. Given this finding, however, it is important to emphasize that the infrequency of the verb albumenize is not the cause of the stress variation in it. The cause is that the base form albumen is pronounced both /ˈælbjʊmɪn/ and /ælˈbjuːmɪn/ (LDOCE). The derived verb albumenize thus merely inherits this stress variation from its base. At the same time, however, it is clear that the infrequency of the verb under consideration contributes to the fact that neither the pronunciation alˈbumenize nor the pronunciation ˈalbumenize becomes the institutionalized pronunciation of albumenize, i.e., “infrequency […] weakens the memory trace (or prevents it from growing strong in the first place) and thereby destabilizes the information to be remembered” (Berg 1999: 137).

Do observe, however, that infrequency is not a conditio sine qua non of stress variation. To be stressed variably, an English word is not required to be a low frequency word. Thus of the variably-stressed English words discussed thus far, many are, according to LDOCE, high frequency words. E.g., address, adult, decade, princess, etc.

A more recent study that just like BergBerg’s (1999), exclusively deals with variably-stressed English words is HendersonHenderson (2010). The latter is, however, a small-scale study aimed at establishing the preferred stress patterns of the words complex, create, economic, individual, JapaneseJapanese, necessarily, and research, which are known to be stressed variably in Present-day English. What Henderson (2010) did was analyze how these variably-stressed words are pronounced by American English speakers whose voices can be heard in the videos available on the TED Web site (https://www.ted.com/talks, 10.06.2015); this Web site hosts transcribed conference talks dealing with “Technology, Entertainment and Design” (hence the abbreviationabbreviation TED). The findings of Henderson’s (2010) study are as follows: The adjectival lexeme complex was more frequently stressed ˈcomplex than comˈplex; create was only stressed creˈate and never ˈcreate; economic was more frequently stressed ecoˈnomic than ˈeconomic, individual was only stressed indiˈvidual and never ˈindividual, Japanese vacillated between Japaˈnese and ˈJapanese, but this variation did not always constitute a stress clash avoidance strategy, abiding by the English Rhythm RuleRhythm Rule (e.g., Japaˈnese ~ ˈJapanese ˈlanguage); necessarily was more frequently stressed necesˈsarily than ˈnecessarily; research was more frequently stressed ˈresearch than reˈsearch (Henderson 2010: 106–110). Needless to say, since only a handful of variably-stressed English words were object of Henderson’s (2010) study, the findings reported by her do not justify any meaningful generalizations regarding the phenomenon of stress variation in Present-day English.

To reiterate, several authors working on English stress have noticed that some English words have stress doublets, i.e., more than one stress pattern corresponding to one and the same meaning. However, of the publications cited above, only BergBerg (1999) can be regarded as a systematic study, i.e., the author has manually analyzed the stress patterns of all English words for which phonetic transcriptions are given in the 1990’s edition of Longman Pronouncing Dictionary (WellsWells 1990). Note, however, that Berg’s (1999) study is exclusively concerned with words that have different stress patterns in British vs. American English (e.g., combatant is, according to LDOCE, only /ˈkɒmbətənt/ in British English vs. only /kəmˈbætnt/ in American English). Similar studies focusing upon across-varietal stress differences are Peng & AnnPeng & Ann (2001), Van RooyVan Rooy (2002), Wiltshire & MoonWiltshire & Moon (2003), Simo BobdaSimo Bobda (2010), KrivokapićKrivokapić (2013), Altmann & KabakAltmann & Kabak (2015), and TanTan (2015). These articles deal with either stress location differences or phonetic properties of stress, which (among other things) make varieties such as Nigerian English, Singapore English, Tswana English, Indian English, and Cameroon English phonetically different from British and American English (the two major contemporary English reference accents). Recall, however, that some English words have different stress patterns within one and the same Present-day English variety (and, as observed above, sometimes even identical English speakers can be heard pronouncing one and the same English word with more than one stress pattern).

Recall also that the findings reported by BergBerg (1999) are based exclusively upon dictionary data: the 1990’s edition of Longman Pronouncing Dictionary. However, even renowned lexicographic resources such as Longman or the OED do not always include all actually occurring stress patterns. E.g., locate is, according to LDOCE, only /ləʊˈkeɪt/ in British English vs. only /ˈloʊkeɪt/ in American English. In disagreement with this, however, in the YouTube videos aCMA9LlbQH4 (25.05.2017) and qlIGv0CtqXs (25.05.2017), British English speakers can be heard pronouncing locate with initial stress; to be more precise, in the former video locate is ˈlocate in I am drawing a map of Britain, just so I can ˈlocate where I have been (00:02:14.160 --> 00:02:26.590), but the very same British English speaker stresses locate finally in I am just going to roughly loˈcate these sketches (00:02:36.200 --> 00:02:41.560). Similarly, in YouTube videos where locate is pronounced by American English speakers, the author could hear not only initially- but also finally-stressed pronunciations (with, however, the initially-stressed /ˈloʊkeɪt/ being the more frequently-used stress pattern). A fairly similar case is the above mentioned paprika. In both LDOCE and the OED, this word is said to vacillate between the pronunciations /ˈpæprɪkə/ and /pəˈpriːkə/ only in British English, whereas in American English, stress in paprika is exclusively penultimate: /pəˈpriːkə/. However, in YouTube videos in which paprika is pronounced by native English speakers, both British and American English speakers were heard to have stressed paprika pen-pen- and antepenultimately, with, however, the former stress pattern being more frequent than the latter both in British and American English.