Putting the Mathimathi stress rule in its proper perspective*

Abstract

Ever since it was first described the Mathimathi stress rule has evaded straightforward analysis in any framework of metrical phonology. The complicating factor is the supposed influence of coronal onsets on the placement of main stress. Several attempts to analyse the Mathimathi stress facts through onset‐weight or onset‐prominence have been made in the past. None of these are completely satisfactory since they defy the universal rule that onsets cannot feature in stress rules. In this article I show that any doubts about the characteristics of the Mathimathi stress pattern can be taken away by phonetic evidence. Furthermore, I take up an onset‐insensitive solution to the Mathimathi problem recently put forward by Gahl (1996) and try to reconcile it with the views generally held of stress in Aboriginal languages. A comparison with the stress patterns of the neighbouring languages in the proper linguistic setting sheds some light on the nature of the Mathimathi stress rule and how it came to be the way it is.