From: pbickers@tamaluit.phys.uidaho.edu (Paul Bickerstaff)
Subject: Re: Long Vowels: Macrons or Doubling (Was Re: Paakehaa ...)
Date: 27 May 93 21:23:25 GMT

In article <1993May25.222058.24925@govonca.gov.on.ca>,
renzland@govonca.gov.on.ca (Peter Renzland) writes:
> 
> Doubling is the oldest method of indicating vowel length.  It was used,
> naturally, by early Maaori writers.  

I would be very interested in any references you might have on this
aspect. The macron method is not a modern concoction. Early writing was
notoriously inconsistent. I have seen abominations such as Mowhi
(or something similar) for Maui.

>                                                     It can also be
considered "phonetically
> correct", inasmuch as the long vowels have evolved from elided intervening
> consonants, along the lines of: hawaiki -> hawai'i -> hawaii (The "'" in
> hawai'i is a glottal stop.)  (This example is a bit sloppy, but it'll do:-)
> 
This is certainly an assertion which you should substantiate with some
references. I have heard this before but it is always stated as if fact. Based
on my meagre knowledge I have my doubts. It sounds like the (European)
theory, widely touted in former times, that the Maori came from India 
on the basis that some legends mentioned a homeland called Irihia. 
(There's slightly more to it than this but not much and it gets worse so 
I won't elaborate.)

Hawai`i is definitely a "sloppy" example. I am not aware of any
Polynesian dialect in which the place is pronounced in the European
manner of Har-why-ee. In New Zealand we have Hawaiki, in Samoa
Savai`i, in Tonga Havai`i and in Hawaii its Hawai`i. In fact your example
illustrates the difficulty in making pronouncements on this sort of thing
because there is less difference in the spoken renditions than the above
spellings would indicate. For example in Hawaii the w is aspirated and
could just as well be rendered in English as a v, the actual sound being
intermediate between the two English sounds. 

I don't doubt that a few examples could be produced that conform to
your thesis but long vowel sounds are found throughout Polynesia
and don't seem to be more or less common where the glottal stop is
used (a *casual* observation of mine this). Your thesis seems to suggest
that the orginal language, whatever that was, had no long vowels
and if that were true one would surely expect to see some remnants
in some dialects.

Consider a possible counterexample. In M\=aori (for those familiar
with TeX; Maaori for those who are not, or don't like macrons) we 
have wahine (woman, i.e. singular) and w\=ahine (waahine) which 
is a plural version of what I would suggest is the same word. 
Compare this with the Samoan fafine as in
tuafafine (a man's sister) or tuaf\=afine (a man's sisters, pl.).
I see no evidence that these are derived from different words.
It seems clear in fact that the vowel is simply doubled (i.e. made
longer) to distinguish the plural and singular cases --- something
which incidentally is not normally done in Polynesian.
One also has in Samoan fa`afafine (literally, way of a woman
--- I hesitate to translate colloquially because the connotations
associated with men who act like this are different in the respective
cultures). If the long vowel had come from a glottal stop why do
we have a plethora of words such as fa`a with the glottal stop?
My *impression* is that long vowels are legitimate phonetic
sounds in their own right and do not derive from anything.
I would be keen to consult scholarly views to the contrary.

Incidentally, I have never encountered vowel doubling in written
Samoan and furthermore Samoans do tend to be casual in
including macrons, though they are there in all the "classy"
books. (A word of caution here; they are are also casual in writing
their glottal stops.) It would be wrong though to interpret this as 
displaying a lack of love for their language. They are in fact
fiercely protective of their language and culture --- both being 
taught in schools, and palagi children are not exempt! 

The difference here with the New Zealand M\=aori is that few now
are *fluent* in their own language. Even fewer P\=akeh\=a seem to
care (despite what some of us might like to think). Thus there is a 
real danger that the language will get butchered or even lost if
attention is not paid to the correct vowel sounds. 

(I can recall a schoolboy argument I had with a kid over the way 
I pronounced Taupo, Ta-u instead of as in the Greek tau --- he 
was convinced I was ignorant (and I was but... ) --- and on several 
occasions when I went to university in the South I had to repeat myself
because my rendition of M\=aori was sufficiently different from
their Mouw-ree that they didn't know what I was talking about!
The danger alluded to above is I think very real when the vast
majority of New Zealanders can't even pronounce M\=aori in
a reasonable approximation to the way M\=aori pronounce it.) 

It is my impression though that the vowel doubling movement is
primarily a political movement. I have nothing against vowel
doubling and many rational people would admit that when
you can't type a macron Maaori is better than the M\=aori
that I used above for effect. But if you're going to claim that
vowel doubling  has linguistic legitimacy for supremacy (other
than being pushed by a minority of linguists) then I think that 
there are enough scholarly types reading this forum that the 
evidence be given. I do not believe that unsubstantiated religious 
type claims (especially those that also belittle macron users and 
careless users) do anything to promote the language.

Paul Bickerstaff                 Internet: pbickers@tamaluit.phys.uidaho.edu
Physics Dept., Univ. of Idaho    Phone:    (208) 885 6809
Moscow ID 83843-2341, USA             FAX:      (208) 885 6173