Chapter 26Accent in Compounds and under Affixation and Cliticization

26.1 Accent in complex forms

A complex Ainu form may preserve the accent of one component or receive an accent based on the syllable structure of the whole. Both patterns occur in the accentual varieties described here. Their distribution depends on the construction and sometimes on the particular word Nakagawa (2024: 52–54); Shiraishi (2022: §§5.1–5.2).

The usual first-or-second-syllable rule provides the background. A closed initial syllable ordinarily bears the accent, while an open initial syllable is ordinarily followed by an accented second syllable. This chapter concerns the ways morphology interacts with that pattern. The regional limits of the rule are described in Chapter 23 (The Pitch-Accent Placement Rule and the Accented/Accentless Dialect Split).

26.2 First-element priority in compounds

Compounds often retain the accent of their first member. Nakagawa gives kamúy “god” plus nomí “pray to” as kamúynomi “pray to the gods.” A monosyllabic first member can also bear the resulting accent: ni “tree” plus tek “hand” gives nítek “branch” Nakagawa (2024: 54).

Shiraishi describes a broader first-element tendency in compounds and close syntactic combinations. In the account he reports from Tamura, the second member's accent becomes secondary and can disappear Shiraishi (2022: §5.2). Accent on the first member does not mean that only one syllable has high pitch: Nakagawa explicitly allows the later syllables of kamúynomi to remain high Nakagawa (2024: 49).

26.3 Exceptions to first-element priority

A frequent alternative appears when a consonant-final first component combines with a vowel-initial second component. Shiraishi gives cep-étu “fish nose” and nay-étok “source of a stream,” with accent on the second syllable of the whole form Shiraishi (2022: §5.2, example 25). The consonant before the boundary becomes the onset of that syllable.

Shiraishi reports an earlier explanation in terms of lexicalization: some combinations come to behave like simple words. Satō gives a structural account using resyllabification and rhythmic feet, illustrated by aw-ósma “go inside” Shiraishi (2022: §5.2); Satō (2022: §2). These are attributed analyses of the accent pattern. Nakagawa explicitly treats compound accent as a tendency with word-specific exceptions Nakagawa (2024: 54).

26.4 Derivational prefixes

Nakagawa describes the prefixed derivative as a domain for the usual accent rule. Adding a prefix can therefore alter the position of accent within the original stem Nakagawa (2024: 53).

26.5 Accent with person markers

Person prefixes fall into different accentual classes in the southern descriptions. The distinction concerns how they affect the following stem, separately from which participant they identify Nakagawa (2024: 52–53); Bugaeva (2012: 472–473).

26.6 Suffixes and the limits of accent retention

Shibatani gives nú-pa “hear, with a plural object” beside nú-re “make someone hear,” both retaining stem accent Shibatani (1990: §2.3, example 1). These forms support the tendency for suffixes to leave accent unchanged, also stated by Nakagawa Nakagawa (2024: 53).

Possessive forms involve their own stem shapes and suffixes. Their complete formation must be distinguished from the addition of a final optional extension. The patterns are described in Chapter 45 (Affiliative Suffix Patterns); the general suffix tendency here leaves room for the lexical and morphological exceptions discussed above.

26.7 Accent as evidence for word structure

Bugaeva uses the difference between shifting and nonshifting person prefixes as part of her argument for distinct affix and clitic statuses Bugaeva (2012: 472–473). Satō's account of incorporation uses rhythmic feet and resyllabification to explain accentual unity in complex words Satō (2022: §2). These are analyses built on the accent patterns; the broader category questions are treated in Chapter 62 (Person Marking and Argument Roles) and Chapter 88 (Object Noun Incorporation).

Accent and consonant sandhi can extend over different domains. Shiraishi documents sandhi across words and, for /r/, across sentence boundaries in his Saru sample Shiraishi (2022: §6.2). A boundary relevant to compound accent is therefore not automatically a boundary for every phonological process.