FOOTFORM Decomposed: Using primitive constraints in OT

Hayes (1995) makes an extensive study of metrical stress systems, within a unifying typological framework. The typology is based on earlier work by Hayes (1985) and McCarthy & Prince (1986); it is marked by several striking asymmetries between iambic and trochaic languages. Hayes makes the following claims: That all iambic languages are sensitive to syllable weight (quantity); in particular, they stress every heavy syllable (Prince’s (1990) “weight-to-stress” principle). By contrast, some trochaic languages are quantity-insensitive. That any iambic language may mix feet of the form (^ ́̂ ), (^—́), and (—́) within the same word. Trochaic languages divide into two separate types according to the foot shapes they allow, and neither type is a mirror image of the iambic case. (1) Iamb (^—́) or, if necessary, (^ ́̂ ) or (—́) Moraic Trochee ( ́̂ ^) or (—́) Syllabic Trochee (́ ), where each may be either — or ^ That iambic languages often lengthen stressed syllables in branching feet (iambic lengthening, or IL), turning (^ ́̂ ) into (^—́). Trochaic languages do not. That iambic languages always assign feet from left to right (LR): there are no clear cases of RL iambs. Trochaic languages may assign feet in either direction. Additional fact: For trochaic languages, LR footing is in complementary distribution with final-syllable extrametricality. (This is a striking gap in the languages that Hayes catalogs, though Hayes does not explicitly note it, and to my knowledge it has not been previously noticed; see x18.)