-
Scat syllables and markedness theory*
Patricia A. ShawUniversity of British Columbia
There could be no more appropriate dedication to Jack:Th ou
Swell (scat solo)
Th ou swell 1927. Words by Lorenz Hart, Music by Richard
Rodgers.Scat solo by Betty Carter, transcribed by William R. Bauer
(2002a: 251).
A highly creative domain between the prosodies of human language
and the ri s of in rumental jazz is the dynamic vocal jazz idiom of
scat. Th e present analysis proceeds from the observation that,
despite the di inct ly individuali ic approaches to scatting by
renowned jazz ma ers such as Louis Arm rong, Betty Carter, and Chet
Baker, the inventory of the semantically empty syllables used in
scat is extremely limited in comparison to the rich range of
combinatorial possibilities that de ne well-formed syllables in
English. Th is paper explores the degree to which the form of scat
syllables in the performance repertoire of various arti s conforms
to po ulated universal markedness con raints on natural language
syllables. Signi cantly, markedness theory plausibly accounts for a
considerable range of the data. Nonetheless, certain sy ematic
deviations occur. It is proposed that the relative markedness of
such properties may be genre-dependent, funct ioning in scat to
enhance musical form or modality.
1. Introduction
Like the majority of human languages in the world, which evolved
and persist as strictly oral traditions, scat emerged in the realm
of musical genres as a vibrant, expressive, and exclusively oral
idiom. However, unlike human languages, scat does not build on a
consistent, conventionalized relationship between sound and
meaning. Its essence is creative, improvisational vocal tract
sound. Its syllables and sequences are evocative and emotive, but
not denotative. There is no standardized or systematic
interpretability to the musically parsed cadences of scat
syllables. For example, the title of Louis Armstrongs 1926 hit
Heebie Jeebies has a consistent interpretation, verifiable across
different speakers, as
Toronto Working Papers in Lingui ics 27: 145191Copyright 2008
Patricia Shaw
* I am deeply indebted to Mike Fitzgerald, Kate Hammett-Vaughn,
Ted Moore, Tyler Peterson, Suzanne Pittson, Fred Stride, and
particularly Bill Bauer and Alan Matheson for their generous
guidance. Special thanks to Walter Pedersen for his enthusiastic
assistance with transcription and in tracking recordings.
-
146
Patricia A. Shaw
refering to a kind of nervous energy or a scattered uneasy
feeling, the jitters. However, the sequence of syllables in the
scat line in (1) would elicit no coherent consensual meaning.
(1) Bars 57 of the scat solo by Louis Armstrong in Heebie
Jeebies (1926)WRB: | duw daw diy duw d | diy d d dow diy | dow di
dow duw duw | | duw daw diy duw d | diy d d dow diy | dow d dow duw
duw |
In a formal linguistic sense, then, scat syllables are
semantically empty.Nonetheless, of considerable linguistic interest
is their form. The present analysis
proceeds from the observation that, despite the distinctly
individualistic approaches to scatting by great vocal jazz masters,
the repertoire of the semantically empty syllables used in scat is
extremely limited in comparison to the rich range of combinatorial
possibilities that define well-formed syllables in English. For
example, two properties of the excerpt in (1) are immediately
noteworthy, and, as it turns out, are robustly characteristic of
scat vocables produced by a broad diversity of performers. First,
consider the onset and coda structure of the scat syllables in (1):
of the 15 syllables, all have a single consonant as onsetthere are
no clusters, no onsetless syllables, and none has even a single
consonant as coda. In other words, all are open CV or CVG
syllables, despite the fact that English words are built on an
inventory of combinatorial possibilities that readily sanctions
codas, and allows quite extensive complexity within both onset and
coda clusters, e.g. as [str...] and [...ks] in strengths [strks].
Secondly, not only do all the scat syllables in (1) have a
non-complex onset, but in fact they all have the same consonant [d]
as the syllable onset.
As a means of comparison, now consider in (2) the structure of
the syllables in another scat solo by Louis Armstrong from Hotter
Than That, recorded 3 years later (cited from Reeves 2001 by Bauer
2002b: 308). Just as in (1), all the syllables in (2) are canonical
open syllables: all have a single segment onset, none has a complex
onset, and none has a coda. However, in contrast to (1), there are
no [d]s. Rather, here all 16 syllables have [b] as their onset.
(2) Bars 4954 of the scat solo by Louis Armstrong in Hotter Than
That (1929)WRB: | boh b boh | ba b biy | b biy | bow b bow | b ba
biy | ba biy | | b b b | ba b biy | b biy | bow b bow | b ba biy |
ba biy |
An independent measure of what hasor has notconventionalized
semantic interpretability is reflected by which sequences of sounds
are accorded entry as words in standard English dictionaries.
Consistent with the particular example chosen here, heebie-jeebies
is listed as a word in the American Heritage dictionary: slang. A
feeling of uneasiness or nervousness; the jitters.. However, none
of the various potential spellings of the scat syllables (de, dee,
deh, di, dih, du, duh, doo, etc. ) are.
The transcription line labelled WRB is by Bauer 2002b: 308; the
transliteration beneath it follows the principles of phonemic
interpretation in Appendix 1.
The use of the terms onset and coda here does not entail the
attribution of category or constituency status within a formal
theory of prosodic structure. Rather, these are simply cover terms
to reference (i) as onset, the string (possibly null) of segments
between the left edge of a syllable and the Nucleus, and (ii) as
coda, the string (possibly null) of segments between the Nucleus
and the right edge of a syllable. The Nucleus is assumed to be an
independent category node, which in English dominates a short vowel
(V), long vowel (V), or diphthong (VG). C abbreviates consonant, V
vowel, G glide, syllable.
-
147
Scat syllables and markedness theory
In sum, two generalizations are strikingly evident from the data
in (1) and (2). First, of the 24 consonants available in the
English phonemic inventory, the only two used in these excerpts are
[b] and [d]. Secondly, the syllable structure is consistently open,
i.e. not closed by a coda consonant. To an extreme then, Louis
Armstrongs repertoire in these citations exemplifies the
fundamental premise of this research: scat draws on a very limited
subset of the sounds and of the syllabic groupings that are
regularly used in English.
However, how representative are these generalizations? Is the
favouring of [b] and [d] part of Satchmos own particular
idiosyncratic style, or is this genuinely something that is broadly
characteristic of scat? Whatyou are doubtless wanting to
interjectabout the [] in shoo be doo? And to what extent do other
scat singers use a more diversified and complex range of syllable
shapes? What about codas? After all, who put the bop in the bop
shoo bop shoo bop?
A diverse sampling of vocal scat is investigated here, ranging
from classic jazz icons like Louis Armstrong, Betty Carter, and
Chet Baker to pop music song-writers/recording artists like Johnny
Cymbal and Barry Mann, who in the early 60s wittily transported the
playful and unmistakably sexy edginess of scat directly into their
rocknroll lyrics. Across these artists, generations, and genres,
the basic introductory observations about scat are consistently
affirmed: the inventory of sounds used and their syllabic
organization constitute a significantly small subset of the full
diversity of available English options. The principal goal is to
identify just what generalizations about phonological form hold
within this body of scat data, and to explore various hypotheses
that might plausibly explain why the particular patterns that are
attested emerge in scat.
From the perspective of linguistic theory, the observations are
evaluated in the context of postulated universal constraints on
articulatory phonetics and phonological markedness. Interestingly,
a considerable range of the data is plausibly accounted for by
markedness theory. Equally interesting is the finding that certain
systematically attested scat properties run directly counter to
markedness expectations. The highly marked, yet robustly attested
status of these characteristics suggests that over-riding the body
of linguistic constraints on the scat phonological system are
competing constraints on scat as a musical performance genre,
constraints that function to enhance the melodic pitch contour, the
musical phrasing, the auditory interpretation, or the distinctive
trademarking of individual artistic style. What results from this
analysis is a unique perspective into the structural and
performative interface of two complex systems of human vocal
expressionmusic and languageeach subject to distinct sets of
constraints and conventions, sometimes convergent and sometimes
conflicting, but ultimately combining in the creative exuberance of
scat.
1.1. Purview
The analyses in 2 below are sequenced with respect to the
recording date chronology. Beginning with the seminal 1926 Heebie
Jeebies recording, the full context of the Louis Armstrong scat
solo from which the three-bar excerpt in (1) was drawn is explored
Barry Mann and Gerry Goffin did, in their 1961 hit single, Who Put
the Bomp?
-
148
Patricia A. Shaw
in 2.1. This is then compared to the phonological properties of
a 1929 rendition of Hotter Than That. In 2.2, the focus shifts to
Chet Baker (1955; 1989), an icon of consonantal minimalism. In
contrast, Betty Carters repertoire, representatively examined
(1955; 1979) in 2.3, introduces a considerably expanded consonantal
inventory. Through the subsequent decades, these two artistsChet
Baker and Betty Carterremained committed to the vocal jazz idiom of
scat despite a significant shift in the general publics musical
interests away from bebop. For each, a comparison of performances
recorded nearly a quarter century apart provides an interesting
measure of individual creative evolution, as well as of particular
consistencies despite dramatic shifts in the musical and cultural
backdrop of the latter half of the twentieth century.
Although the popularity of bebopthe jazz medium that had become
virtually synonymous with scathad significantly declined by the
60s, the vocabulary of scat itself surged into a different realm of
wide-spread prominence in that same period: the American Hit
Parade. As seen in 3.1 and 3.2, in major hits by recording artists
like Barry Mann (1961) and Johnny Cymbal (1963; re-recorded by
ShaNaNa in 1980), canonical scat syllables are directly imported
into lyrics like Who Put the Bomp in the Bomp bah Bomp bah Bomp?
Here scat is explicitly objectified, transported, and incorporated
into a different and evolving musical genre. Although bereft of its
improvisational core, this
embedded scat phenomenon carries forward the continuing
identification of scat as infectiously fun and irresistibly
seductive. Despite rife competition for cornering the sex appeal
market from a burgeoning and rapidly diversifying popular music
scene in America, it was scat (the bop, the dip, and the rama lama
ding dong) that made my baby fall in love with me, yeah!! By 1963,
Mr. Bass Mans baw b b baw b baw b baw baw had elevated him to being
the hidden King of RocknRoll ( Johnny Cymbal 1963), and scat had
clearly spread from bebop jazz to become established in the RnR
mainstream as eminently cool.
1.2. Methodology
Transcriptions of the body of scat data that informs the present
study are presented in Appendix 2. With a few notable exceptions,
particularly Bauer (2002a, b), there is a paucity of formal
documentation of scat, and the diverse original sources that have
been drawn on here differ considerably in transcription conventions
and rigour.
Bauers work constitutes an immensely detailed and valuable
resource: in the extensive Appendix (2002a: 245343) to his
outstanding contribution to the study of Betty Carters musical
genius, Bauer provides a full transcription in musical notation of
Carters melodic line, synchronized with the lyrics, for 15 tunes.
Of these, six incorporate scat vocables, phonologically transcribed
by Bauer in Trager-Smith notation. The two chosen for the analysis
in 2.3 allow a comparison across a 24-year time frame stretching
from 1955 to 1979. As well as Bauers Betty Carter material, the
present analysis also incorporates his transcription (2002b) of
Louis Armstrongs Heebie Jeebies and his
-
149
Scat syllables and markedness theory
citation of Reeves (2001) transcription of bars 4955 of Louis
Armstrongs Hotter Than That scat solo. Note, however, that the
Trager-Smith system adopted by Bauer has been transliterated here,
following the transcription conventions detailed in Appendix 1.
Two other helpful sources were Kernfelds (1995) transcription of
Armstrongs Hotter Than That and Bastians (Bastian and Alexander
1995) transcriptions of Chet Bakers scat solos. As both these
writers used different non-standardized representations (duh, day,
doe, etc.) that were ambiguously interpretable, these were
re-transcribed from audio files of the original recordings,
following the principles in Appendix 1. This re-transcription is
directly paired with the source transcriptions in Appendix 2.
For the other songs (3.1, 3.2), the transcriptions presented
here are novel. It is worth foregrounding the complexity and
relatively narrow focus of this task. Because the goal is to relate
the articulatory expression of these singers to the range of
phonological parameters that typologically characterize natural
language systems, many features of the sophisticated manipulations
of vocal tract sound are not represented in the relatively broad
transcription system adopted here. Further, individual perceptions
of the appropriate categorization of a constantly mutating cadence
of vocables into segmental values may differ, as discussed in
detail in Appendix 1. Given the paucity of literature on linguistic
properties of scat, this preliminary study will hopefully open the
door to further research into the nature of this interface.
2. The Phonological Properties of Scat
The analytical goal in this section is to examine the
phonological inventory of onsets and codas in the scat syllables of
the tunes documented in the database in Appendix 2, as well as to
determine general properties of syllable shape in the output. Some
challenges related to the fluidity of the medium or of individual
expression are raised in the discussion of particular performances
below. More general methodological issues pertaining to the
classification of syllabic form are presented in Appendix 1.
2.1. Louis Armstrong
Of Louis Armstrongs vast repertoire, an examination of two of
his recordings from the early heydey of jazz in the 1920s serves
here to establish a frame of reference both for Armstrongs own
style and for subsequent diachronic developments in scat. Reeves,
Scott. 2001. Creative Jazz Improvisation. 3d ed. Upper Saddle
River, J.J.: Prentice-Hall. This resource was not available to me,
and hence is cited only through Bauers (2002b) reference.
These were re-transcribed independently by myself and by a
research assistant with both musical and linguistic training. Where
there was variance in the transcriptions, either between us and/or
with cited sources (e.g. 2.2), I assume sole responsibility for the
interpretation adopted in this analysis.
Thus, the present focus is on consonantal patterns. For analysis
of vowel quality in scat syllable nuclei, the interested reader is
referred to Bauer (2002b), which presents detailed discussion of
vocalic timbre.
-
150
Patricia A. Shaw
2.1.1. Louis Armstrong, Heebie Jeebies (1926)
Even a cursory look at the first 4 non-lexical syllables ([e iyf
gf mf]) that lead into the scat solo of Heebie Jeebies (see
Appendix 2.1.1) suffices to identify them as unusual in comparison
with the syllabic patterns which follow. Therefore, the analysis
below focuses first on the subsequent 48 syllable tokens.
The chart in (3) summarizes the findings about simplex syllable
onsets. Consonants which are attested in onset position are in
white cells, along with their raw frequency count. Possible, but
unattested, onset consonants appear in shaded cells. Additional
information about onsetless syllables and cluster behaviour is on
the right.
(3) Onsets: p t k No Onset: /b = d = g Onset clusters: sk =
f s hv z m n
l = r = y wViewed against the full backdrop of the 24 consonants
which can function as syllable onsets in English, the fact that 20
(83.3) are not used at all (viz. the shaded grey cells) clearly
underscores the initial premise that scat is highly selective in
its segmental inventory. Of the four segments [d, b, l, r] that do
appear as onsets, [d] is the clear favourite, initiating 37 of the
48 syllables (77.1). As one might expect from the discussion in 1,
the runner-up is [b] and although it trails far behind with only
five appearances (10.4), its occurrence is nonetheless salient. The
liquids [l] and [r] make an early appearance in syllables 5 and 7
respectively of this set of 48, followed very shortly (beginning
with 3 of bar 4) by a running stream of 19 consecutive [d]-initial
syllables.
Markedly heralding the start of a new phrase in bar 8, an
initial [b] breaks the [d]-only alliteration, leading into an
alternating b-d-b-d-d sequence. Then, after this cascade of 22 [d]
onsets with only two [b] onsets having disrupted the auditory flow,
in bar 9 the only consonant cluster hits: [sk]. Its alliterative
sequencing (three in a row), its timing, and its composition all
contribute to its striking impact. Nothing has primed the listener
for an [sk] cluster. Although [sk] is not at all an uncommon
English onset, in the context of the segmental composition of Louis
Armstrongs scat sequence here, it is totally deviant: neither [s]
nor [k] occur anywhere else, either before or after, and it has
unique status as the only onset cluster. Frequency, then, is
significantnot only at the high end in terms of ascertaining what
segments might most commonly appear in scat vocalization, but also
at the low end in terms of observing what segments and/or
combinations are drawn on only very rarely, to powerful effect.
Although the vast majority of syllables in the Heebie Jeebies
solo are open (39/48 = 81), the identity and frequency of the
attested coda consonants is shown in the chart in (4). Of the 21
possibilities, only three appear, with [p] being the most common.
Note that there is no overlap at all in the identity of the
consonants that occur as onsets
As post-vocalic [w] and [y] appear only in diphthongs, they are
not counted as possible codas.
-
151
Scat syllables and markedness theory
[d, b, l, r, sk] and those that occur as codas [p, m, t]. This
is patently not an inherent characteristic of English (cf. words
like pad, tab, mask, etc.), but will be seen to be a common
characteristic, particularly of obstruents, in scat.
(4) Codas: p = t = k No Coda: /b d g Coda clusters: f s v z
m = n []l r (y) (w)
A final question is whether any particular syllabic forms, from
a wholistic perspective, are preferred. In this 48-syllable sample,
there are three favoured shapes: nine tokens of [d], eight each of
[diy] and [duw]. Aside from these, there is remarkably little
repetition of exactly the same phonological form in the residual 23
syllables. The frequency counts of the particular scat shapes are
given in the following table:
(5) Frequency/ Syllable form Frequency/ Syllable form (18.8) d
(4.2) dp, daw, b (16.7) diy, duw
(2.1)biy, bam, bp, duwt, dey, la, rp, p, skiyp skm, sk (6.2) d,
dow
Having established this body of generalizations about onsets
(3), codas (4), and over-all syllabic form (5), let us return to
formally consider the properties of the introductory four
syllables: [e iyf gf mf]. Clearly the initial impression that these
four syllables are unusual in the context of the entire scat
sequence is indeed validated. Three of the four are onsetless,
compared to only one of the 48 syllables that follow. The only
onset consonant, [g], is unique: this segment appears nowhere else
in the full scat database examined here. With respect to codas,
note that there are no coda clusters anywhere else in the work,
whereas this introductory sequence ends emphatically with an [mf]
cluster. Moreover, the last three of these four syllables reiterate
the coda [f]: not only are codas relatively infrequent in the rest
of the work (there are only nine codas in 48 syllables: 18.7), but
the particular segment [f] is unattested elsewhere as either a coda
or an onset. Louis Armstrongs choice of such unusual scat form in
this quadra-syllabic bridge functions dramatically to grab the
listeners attention as Armstrong moves from the preceding English
lyrics invoking everyone to cmon and do the Heebie Jeebies dance to
settle into the full-blown canonical scat syllables that
follow.
2.1.2. Louis Armstrong, Hotter Than That (1929)
The second Louis Armstrong tune analyzed here is the much longer
165 syllable scat solo from Hotter Than That (see Appendix 2.1.2),
from which the excerpt cited earlier
-
152
Patricia A. Shaw
in (2) was taken. Whereas bars 4954, as seen in (2), draw
exclusively on a sequence of [b]-initial syllables, a full count of
onsets throughout the solo shows that [d] (= 78) is in fact used
more frequently than [b] (= 57). [d] and [b] are by far the most
prevalent onset consonants, with [b] exceeding the next ranked
candidate [w] by a difference of 49.
(6) Onsets: d (), b (), w (), l (), r (), n (), m (), y (), h
(), t () No Onset: / Onset clusters: zw (), mw (), bw ()
Even in this work where the inventory of onsets stretches to 10
different segments, consistent patterns recur. For example, the
four onsets attested in Heebie Jeebies, viz. [d, b, l, r] are all
included within this larger set. Of the residual segments, all are
attestedthough with low frequencyin the other scat data
investigated here, except [t]. The occurrence of [t] as an onset is
unique not only in this song (in the second syllable of the
otherwise uniform [d]-initial syllables in line BK), but also in
the entire sample of scat repertoire studied here.
Moving to a consideration of the onset clusters attested in
Hotter Than That, we encounter an interesting trio: [zw] (time
2:02), followed in the same line by [mw] and shortly thereafter by
[bw]. Not only are none of these found elsewhere in the present
database, but none of these /Cw/ sequences is part of the standard
repertoire of English syllable onsets. Louis Armstrong here is
clearly deviating from the canonical constraints on English
well-formedness, and Native English listeners would, of course,
attend to such novelty immediately. The hypothesis to be advanced
here is that such cases illustrate a domain of tension between
linguistic form and musical expression, where enhancement of the
latter is achieved by violation of markedness constraints on the
former.
Consider next the coda inventory:(7) Codas: p (), t (), m (),
(), n (), l (), g () No Coda: / Coda clusters:
As was the case in Heebie Jeebies, most (76.4) of the syllables
in this tune too are open. Although there is somewhat greater
segmental diversity in the coda repertoire, it is still very
limited: only six of the 21 possible consonantal codas are
attested. There are no coda clusters. Interestingly, the three coda
segments ([p, t, m]) that appear in Heebie Jeebies constitute a
proper subset of the larger coda inventory here, with [p] again
being significantly more frequent (2.75 times more; 52.4 of coda
attestations) than its closest contender [t] (19.0). Three
syllables in this work are realized exclusively as a syllabic [].
Apart from these cases, [m] functions once as an onset (see (6))
and three times as a post-vocalic coda. Interestingly all instances
of [] follow a coda [w] or a [u] in the preceding syllable. The
shared labial gesture across this sequence is a kind of harmonic
pattern which recurs in various forms in other case studies
below.
Although [d] is attested as an onset segment 20 more times than
[b], when one looks at which full syllable shapes recur most
frequently, the two are pretty comparable:
For space reasons, for the rest of the discussion attested
consonants will not be contextualized within the full inventory of
English as in (3) and (4), but will simply be listed in rank order
of frequency.
-
153
Scat syllables and markedness theory
[ba] edges out [d] by a count of 16 to 15. [bi] in its variant
realizations (i.e. with length and/or homorganic glide) is tied
with [da] at twelve occurrences each, then the favoured [d] takes
over in the next most frequent syllables [di] and [du].
(8) Frequency/ Syllable form Frequency/ Syllable form (9.7) ba
(6.7) di ~ di ~ diy (9.1) d (4.8) du ~ du ~ duw (7.3) bi ~ bi ~
biy, da
Note that none of the most common syllables here have front/back
lax or front/back mid vowels.
2.2. Chet Baker
Among the major scat artists through the decades, Chet Baker is
renowned for the extreme minimalism of the consonant set that forms
the basis for his scat improvisations. A comparison of different
takes of the same tune, Everything Happens to Me, recorded more
than three decades apart (1955 compared with 1989), illustrates
remarkable consistency in the consonantal repertoire employed,
despite major differences in the melodic and rhythmic
structure.
Transcriptions of the eight-bar scat bridge in these two
versions are given in Appendix 2.2.1 and 2.2.2. Although Jim
Bastians transcriptions (labelled JB) and my own (labelled PAS)
differ in orthographic form, they are generally consistent in those
features relevant to the present focus. However, two domains of
difference merit comment.
One pertains to vowel quality: Chet Bakers vocalization is
extraordinarily mobile. The looseness and fluidity of movement in
Bakers vocalic articulation present significant challenges, such
that the transcribed values that I propose are at best an
approximation of a nuclear target range within the interconsonantal
domain. What emerges most reliably is a general pattern of lax
quality (primarily [ ]) and the predominant openness of syllabic
form.
The second notable difference between Bastians notation and mine
pertains to consonants. Whereas Bastian remarks on the fact that
Chets scat vocabulary made predominant use of syllables beginning
with the letter D (Bastian and Alexander 1995: 4), not all [d]s are
distinctly articulated with a full stop closure. In a number of
cases, what is phonetically realized is the corresponding fricative
[]. For example, the AIF wave file in (9) from the 1955 version
(time = [2:37.62.38.4]) shows a sequence of two syllables,
Whereas Bastians orthographic interpretation is English-like,
e.g. ee for [i], the transcription I offer follows the principles
in Appendix 1, with explicit representation of the more prominent
glides but otherwise just length on the tense vowels.
A discrepancy in bar 6 of the 1989 version is that JB documents
2 more syllables than I am able to discriminate. The present
analysis is based on my total count of 53 syllables vs. Bastians
55. However, the strength of the generalizations is statistically
robust, regardless of the difference in syllable count.
-
154
Patricia A. Shaw
the first with a clear [d] stop closure attack in comparison
with the lack of full closure [] in the onset of the second
syllable:
(9)
JB: d eh d eh PAS: d This tendency is much more prevalent in the
1955 version, where of the 42 D
onsets, 13 are realized as []. In the 1989 version, only one of
45 Ds is. It is entirely plausible that the phonological target in
cases like the second consonantal onset in (9) is indeed a /d/, as
consistently represented in Bastians transcriptions, but that its
lenition to the smooth, non-punctuated continuant [] may reflect
Chet Bakers airy, almost weightless, romantic crooner style,
disarmingly characterized as being sweet talked by the void
(Bastian and Alexander 1995: 4).
Invoking Sapirs (1933) psychological reality of the phoneme
argument, the hypothesis advanced here is that Bastians perceived D
is interpretable as a more abstract level of representation, i.e.
phonemic /d/, and that its sometimes lenited non-plosive phonetic
realization as [] is a phonologically non-distinctive, surface
level articulation. Consistent with this interpretation is the
broad-based generalization in 1 that [d] is part of the standard
scat repertoire; [] is not otherwise attested in any of the scat
pieces by other artists studied here. In the analyses that follow,
then, Bakers [] articulations are taken to be epiphenomenal and are
not independently represented in his scat inventory.
2.2.1. Chet Baker, Everything Happens to Me (1955)
The onset repertoire of the early (1955) version of Everything
Happens to Me reveals a highly skewed frequency distribution:
(10) Onsets: d (), y (), b (), h () No Onset: / Onset clusters:
Ambisyllabic [t] coda/onset: /
Similar to what was seen in Louis Armstrongs rendition of Heebie
Jeebies (2.1.1), where [d] initiates 37 of the 48 syllables (77),
here /d/ accounts for 77.8 (42/54) of the onsets. Concomitantly,
the relative infrequency of the residual segments raises questions
as to their distribution and functional load. The next most
frequent onset is [y]; it occurs only three times (3/54).
Interestingly, the distribution of these markedly less frequent
segments is often melodically significant. For example, both [h]
and [b]which occur only once each
The evaluation of No Onset status is challenged by Bakers
fluidity of articulation. Specifically, there are six cases in
Baker 1955 and three in Baker 1989 where a coda [t] precedes a
syllabic []: as the [t] is interpretable as an ambisyllabic
transition creating an onset for [], these are not counted as No
Onset.
-
155
Scat syllables and markedness theory
appear in particularly prominent prosodic positions. Each is
phrase-initial: the only occurrence of [h] introduces the second
major phrase in bar 3, and the sole instance of [b], in the up-take
into bar 7, initiates the final phrase of the scat bridge.
Summarized in (11), the coda inventory is even more minimal.(11)
Codas: t (), (), n () No Coda: / Coda clusters:
Combining the consonantal repertoires of (10) and (11), we see
that Bakers 1955 improvisation utilizes a mere six segments from
the full English set of 24 options: 25 of the available
inventory.
As observed in the previous works, here too there is a strong
preference for open syllables (39/54 = 72.2). However, in contrast
to Louis Armstrong, for whom [p] was the most frequent coda, Chet
Baker does not use [p] at all, in either of the two scat
performances examined here. Rather, his codas are exclusively
alveolar [t, n], with [t] beingthe more prevalent.
Somewhat parallel to the trans-syllabic gestural continuity of
the feature [labial] leading into [] in Louis Armstrongs Hotter
Than That, there is a consistent homorganic pattern observed in the
distribution of [] in Bakers scat. Specifically, all instances of
[] are immediately preceded by a homorganic coda [t]. Further, all
cases of coda [n] or [] are followed by a homorganic /d/ onset of
the subsequent syllable.
In terms of syllable shape, Chet Bakers preferred forms in this
1955 take are syllables where his near-ubiquitous /d/ combines with
a non-low, non-high lax vowel:
(12) Frequency/ Syllable form (35.2) d() ~ () (16.7) d() ~
()
2.2.2. Chet Baker, Everything Happens to Me (1989)
Although by no means identical in rhythmic, melodic, or
expressive form, the 1989 performance of this same song is
remarkably consistent in its consonantal inventory. The most
transparent difference in the onset repertoire is the fact that
[b], used only once in the 1955 version, is completely absent in
the 1989 take.
(13) Onsets: d (), y (), h () No Onset: / Onset clusters:
Ambisyllabic [t] coda/onset: /
As seen in (13), the prevalence of /d/ in the 1989 version
emerges as even more disproportionate, accounting for 85 (45/53) of
the onsets. Clearly, /d/ in and of itself constitutes the core of
Chet Bakers consonantal inventory. Again, where another segment is
used by Baker, it functions through its very uniqueness to
demarcate a prosodically
For example, a very rudimentary comparison shows the opening bar
in the 1955 version has 6 syllables moving from Ebm to A b+ towards
Db , whereas bar 1 in the 1989 recording has 10 syllables moduating
from Fm through Bb towards Eb . (Note: = major 7).
-
156
Patricia A. Shaw
prominent position. Thus, the sole occurrence of [h] introduces
what is arguably the most prosodically salient position: the very
first syllable of the first phrase of the scat bridge.
In the 1989 version, Bakers sparse and tightly restrictive
treatment of codas is remarkably consistent with his 1955
repertoire, though their particular distribution in the scat
melodic lines is entirely divergent.
(14) Codas: t (), (), n () No Coda: / Coda clusters:
As documented in (14), the same 2 segmental values are attested
as in Bakers 1955 coda chart in (11). Again, all three instances of
[] are introduced by a dual function coda/onset [t], and are
followed by a homorganic onset [d].
Given the fluid mobility of Chet Bakers vowel articulations, a
characterization of his favoured syllable shapes unequivocably
identifies an open syllable with a [d] onset but is much less
definitive in terms of vowel quality. Most generally, as in the
1955 version (see (12)), his articulation meanders around a mid lax
vowel, either schwa [] or a neutral position [], identified for
English as the characteristic articulatory setting for the onset of
speech (Chomsky and Halle 1967). However, on notes of longer
duration, his resonant crooning often ascends to a tenser high back
[u]. Based on the transcriptions in Appendix 2, there is
considerable consistency between the 1955 and 1969 versions in
terms of a frequency of use ranking:
(15) 1955 Frequency/ Syllable form 1969 Frequency/ Syllable form
(35.2) d (17) d (16.7) d each (13.2) d, du, d
However, as is evident from the lower frequency numbers and the
three-way tie for second place in the 1969 count, there are no
strongly identifiable constraints on his wide-ranging vocalic
diversity.
2.3. Betty Carter
Even as the repertoire of scat vocabulary expanded through the
creatively explosive bebop rush of the 1940s, [d] and [b] remained
particularly prominent. For example, although Betty Carter was a
major innovative force in extending the repertoire of jazz
vocables, Bauer notes that in Carters short scat solo in Babes
Blues (1958), of the nine consonants which are used as syllable
onsets, /b/ and /d/ together initiate more than half of the vocable
classes used in the solo (2002b: 312). Other Betty Carter songs
attest to this same generalization: in my count of the 197
syllables in her 36-bar scat solo rendition of Youre Driving Me
Crazy (1958; transcribed by Bauer 2002a: 252254), the most frequent
onset consonant is [d] (in 80 of the 197 syllables) and the next
most frequent is [b] (in 36 of the 197 syllables). Thus, although
Carter uses 10 different consonants as onsets in My commentary on
Betty Carter is deeply indebted to Bauers (2002a,b) insightful and
superbly documented interpretation of her life and work.
-
157
Scat syllables and markedness theory
this solo, the two segments [b] and [d] together comprise the
majority (58.9) of onset choices. In the following sections, we
look at two of her other tunes to broaden the base of comparison
further.
2.3.1. Betty Carter, Thou Swell (1955)
Recorded the same year (1955) as the early version of Chet
Bakers Everything Happens to Me that was considered in 2.2.1, Betty
Carters scat rendition of the original 1927 classic Thou Swell
draws on the following inventory of eight consonants as simplex
onsets (see Appendix 2.3.1).
(16) Onsets: d (), b (), l (), y (), w (), h (), r (), () Onset
clusters: ly (), dl (), sp () No Onset: /
Constituting a combined total of 75/114 (=65.8), the consonants
[d] and [b] are reaffirmed as incontestably at the core of
Cartersand everyone elsesstock of scat resources. Although less
frequently drawn on, the consonants [l, r, y, w, h] are all
familiar as staple scat segments that have been attested in the
work of Louis Armstrong and Chet Baker examined in the preceding
sections. The innovative element in (16) is Carters once-only
exploitation of [] (bar 13, coupled with the unique attestation of
[r] in the sequence [iy ra]). The use of [] is rare in Betty
Carters scat, although it figured prominently in the influential
repertoire of Sarah Vaughan and became a flagship marker of 1950s
doo wop motifs like shoo bee doo and sha na na. Despite the
collective recognition among jazz artists of certain segments being
standard communal property in the scat arsenal, other specific
sounds acquired the status of individual trademarks. Carter
reportedly admonished a young vocalist in 1978:
Why are you using scat syllables like shoo-bee-doo-bee? Those
belong to Sarah, and they belong to the fifties. (Berliner 1994:
254, 804, cited by Bauer 2002b: 314315) At the heart of
improvisional creativity in music, as in language, is the challenge
of innovation under the constraints of structural limitations,
critically the inventory of segments and restrictions on their
combination. Given the very small set of sounds that came to be
established as the conventional scat inventory in the works of the
early artists, to then have certain consonants among these evolve
into sound symbolic associations with a particular singer and/or
decade effectively heightens the challenge for new artists to
create an individualistic scat voice.
Onset clusters are generally quite rare in scat. Of the four
that occur in this work, only one [sp] conforms to standard
well-formedness constraints of English. The other two, [ly] and
[dl], draw on segments that are very common in the scat inventory
of onsets, but in bundling them into tauto-syllabic onset sequences
Carter pushes beyond the canonical bounds of regular English. Just
as [] became a Sarah Vaughan scat trademark, the [dl] onset is a
strong candidate for a Betty Carter signature: jumping ahead 27
years
It was from the vocals in the Silhouettes 1957 hit song Get a
Job that the 50s revival group, Sha Na Na, took its name.
What a Little Moonlight Can Do (1982) Whatever Happened to Love?
Verve/Polygram 835 6831; see transcription by Bauer (2002a:
310343).
-
158
Patricia A. Shaw
to her 1982 recording of What a Little Moonlight Can Do, this
same highly marked onset appears eleven times, most strikingly in a
sequence of six syllables in the climactic scat line of bars 189190
(WB line as transcribed by Bauer 2002a: 317; transliteration (2nd
line) as in Appendix 1):
(17) WB: | weh dlow dlow | dl dle dle | dlow dow | ... | w dlow
dlow | dl dle dl | dlow dow | ...
Carters usage of codas in Thou Swell is infrequent, as seen in
(18), and the observed patterns are familiar. She draws strictly on
the resonants [m, n, l]. Both of the syllabic segments are
alveolar, and follow a homorganic onset [d].
(18) Codas: m (), (), l (), () No Coda: / Coda clusters:
The syllable shapes which surface most frequently in this piece
are not at all surprising either:
(19) Frequency / Syllable form Frequency / Syllable form (13.2)
b (10.5) ba (12.3) duw (8.8) d
In sum, despite the creative uniqueness of how her scat artistry
uses them, Carters arsenal of tools as represented by this
acclaimed 1955 performance draws on a markedly standard
repertoire.
2.3.2. Betty Carter, Open the Door (1979)
Based on his intimate and broad-based musical insights into the
full body of Betty Carters relatively small recorded output, Bauer
(2002a: xi) contends that the defining features of Carters style
remained consistent even as her approach kept changing. From the
linguistic perspective of the present study, a comparative analysis
of the scat interludes in Carters 1979 version of Open the Door
(see Appendix 2.3.2), recorded 24 years later than the 1955 work
discussed above, reveals a tightly focussed phonological
repertoire. The five onset segments that appear in the 1979
version, documented in (20), are a subset of the eight that were
used in Thou Swell (see (16)).
(20) Onsets: d (), y (), w (), l (), h () Onset clusters: No
Onset: /
Notably absent from the attested onsets in (20) is [b]. However,
the ubiquitous scat onset [d] is not only present, but strongly
dominant, introducing 19 of the 27 syllables (= 70.4). The other
onset segments here, viz. [l, y, w, h], are all scat basics, not
just in Carters earlier work, but in that of other scat
vocalists.
Of particular interest in (21) is the total absence of
post-vocalic coda consonants.
-
159
Scat syllables and markedness theory
(21) Codas: (), () No Coda: / Coda clusters:
The only syllables that are not open CV or CVG structures are
the 3 cases where there is a syllabic nasal. A comparison of the
first three scat lines (cf. bars 9, 14, and 16, respectively, in
Appendix 2.3.2) reveals a striking and doubtless strategic
parallelism of form and function where these three syllabic nasals
occur. Specifically, each is in absolute phrase-initial position of
the first three scat lines, with each new cycle entailing some
minimal variation from the preceding one: labial [] in the first
phrase shifts place of articulation to alveolar [] in the second
phrase, which itself is repeated in the third line but
differentiated by the introduction of an [h] onset. Abstracting
away from rhythm, duration, and pitch, the segmental content of
these three lines is reproduced below:
(22) d dow ... duw duw duw ... h duw duw diy duw ...
What this short prosodic progression illustrates is that far
from scat being comprised of randomly articulated sequences of a
delimited set of nonsense syllables, the skill of a brilliant scat
artist like Betty Carter entails masterful structuring of content
and sequence: here, each nasal syllable introduces an iteration of
exclusively [d]-initial syllables, and each line builds substance
and momentum by adding one more syllable.
Finally, in determining which syllable shapes are most
prevalent, there are two that clearly emerge as most frequent:
(23) Frequency/ Syllable form (29.6) du(w) (25.9) dey
While [du(w)] figures prominently in the repertoire of her other
work (cf. (19)) and that of the other singers sampled here, [dey]
is less favoured, though not unattested (cf. (5)).
2.4. Syllable Structure Generalizations
Having documented specific aspects of syllable content and form
in two different works from each of three renowned jazz vocalists,
spanning the 63 years between 1926 and 1989, we are now in a
position to determine what generalizations, if any, hold across
this sample, despite each artists highly individualistic
musicianship and distinctly unique approach to the idiom. The
initial question posed in 1 was to what extent the delimitation of
onsets to [d] and [b], as exemplified by the brief excerpts in (1)
and (2), is representative of a broader database of scat. The onset
tabulations from each previous section (viz. (3), (6), (10), (13),
(16), (20)) are summarized in the table in (24) below. Note in (24)
that the frequencies of [d] and [b] are given both as a token count
and as a percentage value of the number
-
160
Patricia A. Shaw
of scat syllables in each piece. There are three particularly
interesting facts revealed by these results. First, none of the six
works studied hereincluding the full texts of each of the classic
performances from which (1) and (2) were drawnuses exclusively [d]
and/or [b] onsets. In every case, the vocalist has chosen some scat
syllables with other onset consonants, however minimal this
extended range may be. For example, in cases like Louis Armstrongs
1926 recording of Heebie Jeebies (2.1.1) and Chet Bakers 1989
version of Everything Happens to Me, there is only one occurrence
of each of two other onsets.
(24) Simplex Onsets: comparative usage by different scat
vocalists
d b y h l w r m n t2.1.1. Armstrong 1926 37 = 77.1 5 = 10.4
2.1.2. Armstrong 1929 78 = 47.3 57 = 34.5 2.2.1. Baker 1955 42 =
77.8 = 1.9 3 2.2.2. Baker 1989 45 = 84.9 2.3.1. Carter 1955 40 =
35.1 35 = 30.7 2.3.2. Carter 1979 19 = 70.4 Total syllables: 461
261 = 56.6 98 = 21.3
At the other end of the spectrum, Louis Armstrongs Hotter Than
That employs the greatest diversity: ten different consonants. A
further observation is that there are only nine consonants other
than [d] and [b] which comprise the full set of onsets that are
collectively utilized by these artists. Together, these latter two
facts affirm the initial premise of this research: of the full
complement of 24 consonants that can potentially function as
syllable onsets in English, scat draws on a very limited, and
largely recurrent, subset. The third conclusion that emerges from
(24) is that there is a consistent asymmetry in the relative
frequency of [d] over [b]. In two of the songs (2.2.2, 2.3.2),
there is no [b] at all; in a third (2.2.1), there is a single
attestation; in the remaining three, though the degree of imbalance
differs, the direction of difference is constant. In contrast to
the robust generalizations about simplex onsets, the usage patterns
with respect to complex onsets, as summarized in (25), do not at
all cohere.
(25) Complex Onsets: comparative usage by different scat
vocalistssk zw, mw, bw ly, sp, dl s with CmplxOns
2.1.1. Armstrong 1926 / 6.252.1.2. Armstrong 1929 , , /
1.82.2.1. Baker 1955 / ---2.2.2. Baker 1989 / ---2.3.1. Carter 1955
, , / 3.52.3.2. Carter 1979 / ---
/ 2.17
-
161
Scat syllables and markedness theory
Clusters appear in only three of the six pieces, with an
extremely low frequency count (averaging just over 2).
Significantly, there is no overlap at all in the specific clusters
used in each of the works, even by the same singer. Moreover, with
respect to the identity of segments involved in these clusters, it
is patently not the case that these sequences are compositionally
built from the simplex onset consonant inventory: [k], [p], [s],
and [z] in the clusters of (25) are not part of the repertoire of
(24). Most striking is that a majority (5/7) of the attested
clusters violate canonical English patterns: although all of the
individual segments involved are legitimate potential simplex
onsets, none of [zw], [mw], [bw], [ly], or [dl] conform to standard
well-formed sequences in English. Across these diverse
observations, there is in fact a consistent generalization, namely:
complex onsets are highly marked. In terms of frequency they are
rare, and in terms of content they are often exceptional. Consider
now the properties of codas, summarized in (26). Whereas the
excerpts in (1) and (2) in 1 were comprised exclusively of open
syllables, this generalization does not hold of any single work
considered in its entirety. Nonetheless, open syllables are
unequivocably dominant, ranging from 94 to 72 in individual works
and with the overall average being 82.65.
(26) Codas: comparative usage by different scat vocalists
p t n m l g s with no Coda2.1.1. Armstrong 1926 / 81.252.1.2.
Armstrong 1929 / 74.52.2.1. Baker 1955 / 72.22.2.2. Baker 1955 /
86.82.3.1. Carter 1955 / 93.92.3.2. Carter 1979 / 88.9Totals: /
82.0
Moreover, there were no complex codas. With respect to segmental
identity, of the 21 potential English coda consonants, only six
different segments appear. Compared with the inventory of scat
onsets in (24), it is interesting to note that there is overlap in
the resonant repertoire /m, n, l/, but complementarity in the
obstruent stops: onset /b, d/ vs. coda/p, t/. Once again, Louis
Armstrong is the king of segmental diversity in his Hotter Than
That rendition (2.2.1), which draws on seven different codas,
whereas the other artists employ a much more restricted range of
between two and four. Across the artists, the most favoured
segments are [t] and [n/], although Armstrongs clear personal
favourite is [p].
Finally, consider in (27) the generalizations that hold
regarding the overall form of scat syllables that are used by these
diverse singers. Only syllables which occurred at least three
times, and with greater than 7 frequency in each song are included
in the
Thus, the unique instances of onset /t/ and coda /g/, both in
Armstrongs Hotter Than That (2.1.2) appear anomalous: the /g/ in
terms of both place and voicing, and the /t/ in terms of
voicing.
-
162
Patricia A. Shaw
table below. Because the overall syllable count differed
considerably across the different selections, the most frequent
syllables for each artist are simply ranked, with 1 being the most
frequent. Ties are represented by the same number. The scale
descends for each artist, but may stop at either 2, 3, or 4
depending on the actual frequency values (as detailed in the
corresponding tables in each individual section above). Thus, for
example, for each of Chet Baker in 2.2.1 and Betty Carter in 2.3.2,
the very high frequency of two particular syllables results in no
others exceeding the criterion level.
(27) Syllables: comparative usage by different scat vocalists
(
-
163
Scat syllables and markedness theory
referenced in the English text, and in the second example (3.2),
more extensive scat lines alternate with English. These case
studies are of interest in two respects: first, for interrogating
the extent to which the segmental content and shape of these select
scat tokens conform to the generalizations established for the
classical scat vocables examined in the preceding vocal jazz tunes;
and secondly, for the insights that this phenomenon provides from a
historical perspective on the evolving diversification of the
cultural impact of scat. Despite bebop itself having shifted out of
the popular mainstream at that time, the fact that very young
creative songwriters chose to incorporate scat syllables into their
lyrics in the 1960s reflects its strong formative influence on
their own musical identities and its enduring legacy in the
broad-based musical culture of the era.
3.1. Barry Mann, Who Put the Bomp? (1961)
The infectiously popular music and words of this 1961 hit were
co-written by Barry Mann and Gerry Goffin, with Barry Mann as the
original recording artist. Because the lyrics here are not
improvised, but rather are composed in conformity with a tightly
structured, fixed melodic and rhythmic framework, the methodology
of previous sectionsnamely, a frequency count of attested segmental
tokens in a stream of spontaneously improvised scatis less
revealing than simply the inventory of segments and syllable shapes
that are drawn on. That is, what is particularly significant is
just which scat vocables are chosen for the lyrics, as this very
choice implies that these particular forms already (in 1961) had
significant currency in the general public domain as cool and
hip.
Archetypal and high-profile scat syllables here (see Appendix
3.1) include the [u] ~ [] attributed to Sarah Vaughan (2.3.1), the
[dp] that surfaces as early as Heebie Jeebies (see (5)), as well as
the [bap] that not only persists to this day as the name of the
genre, but that had become the basis of Betty Carters moniker:
Betty Bebop. The rhythmically alternating syllables [b] (line 2)
and [d] (line 8) are clearly canonical scat form, adhering to both
the preference for [b]/[d] onsets and No Coda (open syllable).
Although it was noted in every improvisational jazz sample
investigated earlier that open syllables were much more frequent
than closed syllables, a superficially inconsistent observation is
that the reverse is the case in Who Put the Bomp?. What this
illustrates, I would suggest, is the potential over-riding effect
of prosodic constraints when scripting lyrics to a fixed melodic
line and rhythmic beat. The lyrics for the lines with the scat
syllables [bam], [bap], [dp] are basically structured as follows,
with the CVC closed syllables out-numbering the open CV syllables
four to two. Each of the underlined syllables in (28) is directly
synchronized with a rhythmic beat.
(28) Who put the [CVC] in the [CVC] [CV] [CVC] [CV] [CVC] ?
Because closed CVC syllables are prosodically heavier, aligning
a closed syllable with a rhythmically strong position functions to
enhance the prominence of the beat.
Barry Mann and Gerry Goffin were 22 when their co-written
success Who Put the Bomp? was released, and teen idol Johnny Cymbal
was 18 when he wrote and recorded Mr. Bass Man.
This was Lionel Hamptons nickname for her, despite her expressed
dislike of it (Bauer 2002a: 45).
-
164
Patricia A. Shaw
Note that the initial who [huw], even though open, is also heavy
by virtue of the long/tense diphthong. Further enhancing the strong
rhythmic stability of these lines is the fact that the light open
scat syllables [b], [], and [d] are never aligned with the beat.
While this kind of prosodic alignment of heavy syllables with
positions of rhythmic prominence, and the complementary preference
for light syllables in weak rhythmic positions, most certainly
occurs in improvised scat as well, it would appear to be a
significantly less dominant factor, perhaps since rhythm itself is
also subject to improvisation.
Of further interest in the lyrics of this song is that there is
a category of forms that are neither standard English lexical items
nor syllables that conform to the characteristics of scat.
Concatenations of essentially semantically empty compounds that
rhyme or alliterate, such as rama lama, or that carry some
onomatopoetic value like ding dong, or that live on a hip fringe of
the English lexicon like boogity boogity were also drawn from the
pop music scene of the 50s, namely the Edsels major doo-wop hit
Rama Lama Ding Dong, originally released in 1958 on Dub Records and
re-released on Twin Records in 1961, and the Quincy Jones
composition Boogity Boogity, recorded on Milt Jacksons 1958 album
Plenty, Plenty Soul. Unlike scat, these sequences each pattern
basically as a lexicalized unit, without independent freedom of
realization of the constituent syllables. The form of all 3 of
these expressions is essentially reduplicative, with the nature of
any deviance from full identity falling directly within recognized
cross-linguistic patterns of reduplication (e.g. Moravcsik 1978,
McCarthy and Prince 1986, Hurch 2005). Finally, based on the
generalizations established in 2, some of the segmental content in
these examples falls markedly outside of that found in core scat,
viz. the [] codas in ding dong, and the [g] onset in boogity.
In sum, Who Put the Bomp? is highly syncretic in its explicit
references to many of the rapidly evolving musical influences of
the era. The lyrics integrate unmistakably identifiable scat
syllables from the classical vocal jazz tradition, with references
from the rhythm and blues progression into doo-wop, along with the
blues-based modern jazz sophistication of Quincy Jones and Milt
Jackson. What this tells us is that although the pure jazz scat
genre itself isnt charting in the mainstream at this point in time,
it remains a major foundational force in the broader musical scene.
Moreover, of all the diverse genres referenced in these lyrics, it
is a scat line that is attributed with ultimate success in the
conquest of love: When my baby heard bam b b bam b bam b bam bam,
every word went right into her heart...
3.2. Johnny Cymbal, as recorded by Sha Na Na, Mr. Bass Man
(1963)
The second example illustrating the continuing legacy of scat in
the pop scene of the early 60s is Johnny Cymbals signature song,
Mr. Bass Man. Sha Na Nas re-recording of it in Although the Edsels,
like the ill-fated car model they named themselves after, were
defunct as a group by the time their version of Rama Lama Ding Dong
rose to prominence on the national charts, the song itself attained
significantly greater longevity as the title song of Sha Na Nas
1980 album. Note too that in the historical context of the 50s Ding
Dong itself carried an established frame of reference from the
title and lyrics of Louis Armstrongs early 1930s hit, Im a Ding
Dong Daddy From Dumas (on The Best of Louis Armstrong and His
Orchestra: 1930-31. Classics B000001NJB).
-
165
Scat syllables and markedness theory
1980 stands both as a tribute to its enduring popularity and as
a major contribution to ensuring its continued exposure to
subsequent generations. The transcription in Appendix 3.2 is based
on the Sha Na Na version, and differentiates the scat lines that
are sung by Mr. Bass Man himself (abbreviated BM in Appendix 2)
from the fledgling attempts of the
Wanna-be guy (abbreviated W in Appendix 2) who sings, following
line 9, I wanna be a bass man too. Interestingly, this separation
reveals some fascinating differences.
As seen in (29), Mr. Bass Man himself uses exclusively [b]
onsets. In contrast, the majority of Wanna-bes onsets are [b], but
his inventory also includes a substantial number of [d]s and [y]s,
both of which accord with the standard scat onsets documented in
(24). Although [] is not included in (24), its absence is directly
attributable to the transcriptional principles outlined in Appendix
1, so the two attestations of [] here are not anomalous. The unique
occurrence of [s] at the beginning of line 5 is odd, given the
generalizations of (24), but may be explicable as perseverance of
the final sibilant of the immediately preceding word songs, across
the juncture from English lyrics to scat.
(29) a. Mr. Bass Mans scat lines (including back-up line and
joint BM/W lines): Onsets: b () Onset clusters: No Onset: / b.
Wanna-bes scat lines: Onsets: b (), d (), y (), (), s () Onset
clusters: No Onset: /
Not only is the greater diversity of segments in the novices
attempts of interest, so too is the distribution of these segments.
For example, in three lines (lines 5, 6, 17), Wanna-be switches in
mid-sequence from [d]-onsets to [b]-onsets (significantly, a switch
to the correct target), but never does he switch in the opposite
direction. All other lines are either exclusively [d] (lines 13,
14, 25, 26) or exclusively [b] (3, 7, 10, 12, 22, 24, 29).
There is also a marked discrepancy in coda patterns between Mr.
Bass Man and Wanna-be. Mr. Bass Man uses exclusively [m]/[] codas,
whereas Wanna-be models [m] most frequently, to be sure, but he
also draws on the 3 most favoured scat codas that were documented
in (26): [p, t, ]. Nonetheless, note that Wanna-bes very last solo
line achieves perfect canonical form as defined by Mr. Bass Man:
exclusively [b] onsets and exclusively [m] codas.
(30) a. Mr. Bass Mans scat lines (including back-up line and
joint BM/W lines): Codas: m (), () Coda clusters: No Coda: / b.
Wanna-bes scat lines: Codas: m (), t (), p (), () Coda clusters: No
Coda: /
Although Wanna-be uses a broader inventory of both onsets and
codas, these segments are significantly constrained in their
distribution, in that a consistent pattern of syllable-internal
consonant harmony obtains with respect to place of articulation in
closed syllables. That is, a labial [b] onset is followed by a
labial [m] or [p] coda, regardless of the vowel quality in the
nucleus, e.g.: bam, bum, bm, bom, bm, bp. Similarly, an
-
166
Patricia A. Shaw
alveolar [d] onset is closed by [] or [t]. Given that none of
the other onsets /y, , s/ occur in closed syllables, this
generalization regarding intra-syllabic consonant harmony holds
throughout the entire work.
4. Explanatory Hypotheses
The analyses of these several examples of scat show that, across
the diversity of musical styles and individual expressions, the
repertoire of sounds and syllable shapes is remarkably consistent
and extremely limited in comparison to the extensive range of
segments and combinatorial possibilities that are used in English,
let alone available within the articulatory range of the human
vocal apparatus. To address the question of what might account for
these patterns, three hypotheses are explored: that vocal scat is
essentially imitative of instrumental jazz (4.1); that the
repertoire of sounds in scat are constrained by phonological
markedness theory (4.2); and that scat production is subject to
independent constraints on musical form and vocal performance
(4.3).
Although each of these, among other cognitive and performative
factors, doubtless contributes to shaping the output of scat, the
argumentation to follow suggests that specific tenets of
phonological markedness theory interacting with the melodic
imperative for a voice line to carry pitch contribute substantially
to broadening our understanding of the attested patterns.
4.1. The Imitative Hypothesis
A number of theorists within the musical literature have
hypothesized that scat vocalization is essentially imitative of
jazz instrumental expression. For example, Robinson (2002: 515)
attributes the origin of scat to singers imitat[ing] the sounds of
jazz instrumentalists. Bauer (2002b: 303) cites Milton Stewart
(1987: 65, 68, 74) as showing that the vocables used by such
notable exponents of scat as Ella Fitzgerald and Sarah Vaughan
often mimic the tonguing, phrasing, and articulation of
instrumentalists. Stoloff (2003: 4) notes that Louis Armstrong,
like many other instru-vocalists who followed, unconsciously used
scat syllables that emanated from his trumpet style. The core
question in considering the Imitative Hypothesis is to what extent
such comparisons are based on essentially arbitrary associations,
as opposed to qualities of instrumental sound production that are
directly reproduced in the choice of consonants and vowels in a
scat syllable. That is, are there consistent, independently
verifiable articulatory correlations between an instrumental
rendition and a particular scat vocalization? Or, like the
arbitrariness of the sound-meaning correspondences in natural
language, is the seemingly imitative association based on
fundamentally arbitrary, conventionalized interpretations?
One type of case is illustrated by the fact that sometimes hand
gestures lent an explicit instrumental identity to the vocables.
Stoloff (2003: 5) points out that Ella, for example, often used
trombone-like hand motions while scatting du-wah type
syllables.
All 3 instances have the same vowel: [dt].
-
167
Scat syllables and markedness theory
The question here then is whether there is anything inherent in
the phonetic properties of the syllables du-wah [du wa] that is
uniquely representative of the production or perception of trombone
sound, or whether the explicitly iconic identification established
by Ellas hand gestures substantially contributes to creating a
conventionalized significance. Weighing against a one-to-one
interpretation of the Imitative Hypothesis is the fact, noted
earlier in (27), that [du(w)] is the second most frequent syllable
used by Louis Armstrong in Heebie Jeebies, Chet Baker in Everything
Happens to Me (1989), and Betty Carter in Thou Swell. In other
words, the documentation in 2 establishes that throughout the scat
repertoire, [du(w)] is simply an extremely common syllable. What
seems most plausible, then, is that a du-wah/trombone sound-meaning
connection evolved into a conventionalized relationship, with the
explicit interpretive overlay of hand gestures contributing
significantly to establishing this as a semi-lexicalized
associative correspondence.
A second type of case exemplifying the frequent interpretation
of scat as directly representative of instrumental effects is
illustrated by Robinsons (2002: 515) identification of the
following line from Louis Armstrongs Hotter Than That (1927, OK
8535) as one
which illustrates his clear imitation of a trumpet rip:(31) From
L. Armstrong Hotter Than That (1927); transcription J.B.
Robinson:
A basic question here is: How much of the interpretation of this
phrase being a trumpet rip follows from the initial monosyllabic
identity tag rip? First, the research documentation in 2
establishes that rip is not in the common inventory of scat
syllables. In fact, it is a unique attestation in the database of
461 scat syllables. Secondly, rip is a recognizable English word,
with a particularized semantic interpretation specifically within
the jazz lexicon. Thirdly, this word is positioned strategically at
the very beginning of the scat sequence that is interpreted by
Robinson as a trumpet rip. In terms of perceptual salience, initial
position is the locus of greatest prosodic prominence in the
phrasal domain. Moreover, note in (31) that rip bears the highest
pitch level and its rhythmic value (a quarter note) is twice the
value of each individual note in the sequence of eighth notes that
follows. Collectively these prosodic cues of position, pitch level,
and duration converge to focus the listeners attention on this
entry, which is realized not by a familiar scat syllable, but
rather by the lexically informative label that this is a rip.
Finally, a complementary question stemming from Robinsons
characterization of this sequence as a trumpet rip, is whether
there is anything in the choice of the particular scat
syllablesindependently of the lead signifier ripthat is uniquely
associated with a trumpet, as opposed to a sax, bass, or any other
instrument. Again the collective evidence in 2 establishes that the
specific syllables that follow rip in (31) are all unequivocably
canonical scat, used by a diversity of singers across a diversity
of melodies, chord progressions, tempos, and rhythms.
Nonetheless, the fact that it is Louis Armstrong himself, one of
the most virtuoso jazz trumpeters of all time, who is scatting in
(31) unquestionably establishes an association
-
168
Patricia A. Shaw
between his vocal and instrumental expression. Of course, a
particular musicians primary instrumental identity would not
preclude scat excursions into imitative or evocative effects of
other instrumentation. However, one might ask: given that Chet
Baker and Louis Armstrong are both jazz trumpeters and scat
vocalists, is there any significant parallelism between them in the
choice of scat repertoire? Comparison of their use of onsets in the
chart in (24) and of codas in (26) not only provides a distinct
profile for each, but also establishes no greater similarity
between them than between either one of them and Betty Carter, who
was not a trumpet player. In short, the research evidence here
argues that the specific choice of scat syllables for each of these
performers follows a canon of phonological constraints on scat
repertoire that are independent of trumpetor any otherinstrumental
realization. Most fundamentally, I would submit, it is the musical
individuality of each of these artists and their unique creative
mastery of the cognitive systems involved that transcends defined
conventions on the essential form of notes and syllables, and
systemic constraints on their patterning.
However, to explore the empirical bases of the Imitative
Hypothesis yet further, consider commentary such as that advanced
by Stewart (1987: 6566), who interprets Ella Fitzgeralds 1949
performance of Flying Home as follows:
Fitzgerald alternates the bilabial b and p plosives with the
lingua-alveolar d plosives. The b and p sounds are formed similarly
to the sounds of jazz wind instruments, which sound by the release
of built-up mouth air pressure onto the reed, while the d sound is
similar to the tonguing on jazz brass instruments.
On the basis of a phonological model of natural language sound
production, my hypotheses about the articulatory correlations
entailed in initiating and modifying air flow on reed and brass
wind instruments differ from Stewarts. Specifically, pitch-based
sound on a trumpet or any other brass instrument is produced by
bilabial constriction: labial is the primary articulator. As well,
tonguing effectsmost commonly coronal, but also dorsalfunction
significantly to modify the stream of sound in terms of attacks,
closures, trills, duration, phrasing, tonal quality, etc. Less
frequent, but certainly available within the repertory of
articulatory modifications, are uvular and laryngealization
effects. Consequently, under an articulatorily-based Imitative
Hypothesis, trumpet-denotative scat would liberally draw on a
inventory of both labial and coronal consonants, but could also
include other articulatory effects. In contrast, in producing the
primary sound on a reed instrument, like a sax or clarinet, the
players lips and upper teeth hold the mouthpiece: although lip
compression can modify pitch, tone, or timbre, labial is not a
primary articulator in the way that it is with brass instruments.
However, the range of tonguing effects and other articulatory
modifications would be similar. The Imitative Hypothesis
implication that follows from this comparison would be that sax- or
clarinet-imitative scat should have no [p]s or [b]s (contra
Stewarts interpretation above), whereas brass-imitative scat could.
Essential to testing such articulatory-modeling claims would be a
body of data where the intentionality of the scat singer is
unambiguous. As none of the references drawn on here provide
adequate documentation to explore these hypotheses more
definitively, they are left for future research.
-
169
Scat syllables and markedness theory
In summary, despite various approaches to the hypothesis that
scat vocalization is essentially imitative of jazz instrumental
expression, what has been shown is that there is in fact little
empirical evidence to sustain a non-arbitrary relationship in the
form of realization across the two modalities. Moreover, compared
with the huge range of distinct combinatorial possibilities in jazz
instrumentation, whether articulated by mouth, hand, valve, slide,
bow, or mallet, the exceedingly small set of segments in the core
repertoire of scat presents a striking contrast. What the Imitative
Hypothesis fundamentally fails to explain is why the rich diversity
of instrumental sound is not more extensively mirrored in scat. The
possible articulatory range of the human vocal apparatus far
exceeds what is found in human language systems, let alone in scat.
Moreover, even the much more limited range of segmental and
combinatory possibilities in the English phonological system
significantly exceeds what is found in scat. The fundamental
question then is what hypotheses might offer a more insightful and
constrained explanation for the small and remarkably consistent
inventory of segments and syllable shapes that characterize scat.
In the next section it is argued that phonological markedness
theory constitutes a productive basis of inquiry.
4.2. Markedness Theory
From a linguistic perspective, the framework of phonological
markedness theory embodies a number of hypotheses against which
these empirical generalizations about scat can be evaluated. It is
markedness theory that negotiates the interface of fundamental
questions regarding linguistic diversity vs. universality, seeking
to understand across the manifest differences of human languages
just what properties of language may be universally attested, what
properties may be correlated with or implicated by another
property, and what properties are rare or may in fact never be
attested. The basic premise to be evaluated in the context of
specific constraints identified in the discussion to follow is that
the phonological form and content of scat are relatively unmarked
along various diverse, independent measures of markedness.
4.2.1. Markedness Hypotheses about Syllabic Shape
Consider first syllabic form. Evidence from several diverse
domains of natural languagecross-linguistic studies of canonical
syllable structures, phonological epenthesis, cluster
simplification processes, language acquisition, prosodic
morphology, etc.independently identify CV syllables as the most
basic and the single universally attested syllable shape,
justifying the characterization of CV as the core syllable. In
accord with this empirical generalization, all of the diverse
approaches to markedness theory (cf. Jakobsen 1941/1968; Trubetzkoy
1939; Chomsky and Halle 1968; Greenberg 1966; Kaye and Lowenstamm
1984; Prince and Smolensky 1993; McCarthy and Prince 1994; de Lacy
2002 among others) converge on a recognition of open CV syllables
as the least marked syllable type. Within the framework of
Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky 1993, McCarthy and Prince
1995, Kager 1999, etc.), the relative markedness of an output
sequence is
-
170
Patricia A. Shaw
determined with respect to its violation of each of a ranked set
of universal constraints on phonological structure. Constraints
relevant to syllable shape properties are stated in (32), adapted
from Kager (1999: 93, 94, 97):
(32) a. Onset *[V A syllable must have an onset. b. NoCoda *C] A
syllable must not have a coda. c. *ComplexOnset *[CC Onsets are
simple. d. *ComplexCoda *CC] Codas are simple.
The optimization of CV results from the fact that this syllable
shape violates none of the constraints in (32).
The emergence of core CV syllables as ubiquitously preferred in
scat is therefore entirely in conformity with markedness
predictions about syllable shape. Different measures confirm their
special status, from the lead observation that the scat excerpts in
(1) and (2) contain exclusively core syllables to the accumulated
evidence in (27) that the 10 most frequently used syllable shapes
are all open CV syllables.
Although the survey of scat in 2 sustains the generalization
that the vast majority of scat syllables adhere to the simplex
onset plus no coda pattern, it also reveals that not one of the six
pieces analyzed here consists only of such syllables. Deviation
from this optimally unmarked canon falls into two categories:
4.2.2. violations of (32c)
*ComplexOnset, and 4.2.3, violations of (32b) NoCoda. Notably,
there are no syllables documented in the present database that
violate the *ComplexCoda constraint in (32d): all codas in the
tunes sampled here consist of a single consonant.
4.2.2. Complex Onsets
A very small set of syllables (an overall total of 2.17 of the
sample, as shown in (25)) have two consonants as opposed to one in
the onset. Such cases violate the constraint *ComplexOnset in
(32c), and fall into two subtypes, dependent on specific segmental
content.
First are the clusters [sk] and [sp]. What differentiates these
from the second subtype of *ComplexOnset violations is that [sk]
and [sp] are familiar, frequent, well-formed clusters of English.
Interestingly, however, they are not common in scat. Only Armstrong
(1926: bar 9-10 in 2.1.1) uses [sk], and it occurs only in the
alliterative sequence [skiyp skm sk]. Similarly, only Carter uses
[sp], and it occurs only once (1955: bar 17 in 2.3.1). Thus, not
only are these clusters marked cross-linguistically by virtue of
being structurally complex onsets, but they are also foregrounded
in terms of perceptual salience within the scat repetoire by virtue
of being so infrequent. A final observation is that outside of
their occurrence in these clusters, nowhere else in this scat
database do any of the individual segments [s], [k], or [p] occur
as simplex onsets. As a consequence, these sequences do not conform
to the basic generalization that complex margins in natural
language phonological systems are characteristically compositional.
That is, the well-formedness of an [sk] or an [sp] onset cluster in
English builds on the independent
As stated by Greenberg (1963: 263): If syllables containing
sequences of n consonants in a language are to be found..., then
sequences of n-1 consonants are also to be found in the
corresponding position (prevocalic or postvocalic).
-
171
Scat syllables and markedness theory
availability of each of [s], [k], and [p] as a simplex onset.
Thus, on yet another dimension of general properties of
phonological systems, these clusters are marked. In short, despite
their being entirely within the well-formedness constraints of
English, the rare injection of an [sp] or [sk] cluster into a
stream of the more limited consonantal playing field of scat
syllables will effectively cause them to stand out as highly
unusual.
In contrast, the second subtype of violations of the
*ComplexOnset constraint in (32c) consists of clusters that deviate
from standard English: [bw], [mw], and [zw] in Armstrong (1929:
2:02, 2:15 in 2.1.2), and [dl] and [ly] in Carter (1955: bar 6, 7,
16 in 2.3.1). Interestingly, although these segmental
concatenations are not well-formed English onsets, they differ from
the first subtype in that they are basically compositionalwithin
the scat repertoire of onset consonants. That is, with the
exception of [z], each of the components of these clustersviz. [b],
[d], [m], [l], [w], and [y]occurs as a simplex onset in the scat
database, as charted in (24). There are two other ways that this
second set of clusters differs from the [sk] and [sp] clusters.
First, they comprise exclusively voiced segments. The fact that the
segments in these clusters agree in voice conforms with Greenbergs
(1978: 252) markedness generalization that combinations which are
homogeneous in respect to voicing are favoured over those which are
heterogeneous. Secondly, drawing on the Sonority Hierarchy in
(33a), note that each of these onset sequences conforms to the
Sonority Sequencing Principle in (33b), in that there is an
increasing sonority cline between the first consonant and the
second.
(33) a. Sonority Hierarchy (< indicates less sonorant than)
Obstruent (O) < Nasal (N) < Liquid (L) < Glide (G) <
Vowel (V) b. Sonority Sequencing Principle: (Clements 1990: 285)
Between any member of a syllable and the syllable peak, only sounds
of
higher sonority rank are permitted. To summarize, although these
clusters are not part of the familiar English repertoire, there are
three general cross-linguistic markedness measures to which they
conform: they are compositional; they are homogeneously voiced; and
they obey the Sonority Sequencing Principle.
What sets this subset of onsets apart from standard English
clusters as well as from general cross-linguistic expectations is
their relatively marked status with respect to two other
constraints on segmental sequencing, both of which fall within the
broad purview of the Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP). First, the
systematic absence of Liquid-Glide sequences in English reflects a
general constraint on minimal sonority distance (34a). In standard
English, all Liquid-Glide onset clusters are prohibited:
*[ly-, *[lw-, *[ry-, *[rw-. In Betty Carters scat, however, [ly-
slips past the *[Liquid-Glide constraint. Secondly, militating
against various assimilatory forces within the grammar are certain
context-sensitive pressures to avoid homorganic place. In standard
English, there are no Labial (*LabLab) onset sequences: *[bw-,
*[mw-, *[pw-, *[fw-, *[vw-, but in Louis Armstrongs scat [bw- and
[mw- occur, these being the two that transition from a voiced
[-continuant] attack into the [w]. Similarly, with Betty Carter, it
is the voiced [-continuant] [d] that releases into a liquid [l]
that violates the prohibition in standard English against the
*CorCor sequences, *[dl- and *[tl-.
-
172
Patricia A. Shaw
(34) Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP): a. Minimal Sonority
Distance (cf. Vennemann 1988, Clements 1990, Zec 2007):
*[Liquid-Glide: *[ly- b. Avoidance of homorganicity in
consonant-resonant onset clusters: *LabLab: *[bw-, *[mw- *CorCor:
*[dl-
None of these constraints characterizes the other non-English
cluster, [zw], that Armstrong uses. On a cline of relative
markedness, *[zw- is not strongly deviant: it is not subject to
repair strategies in the pronunciation of proper names like Zwicky;
and its voiceless onset counterpart [sw], as in sweet, sway, swan,
swoon..., has well-established familiarity in the non-scat lexicon
of the romantic lyricists of this same era. Nonetheless, [zw] is
outside the boundaries of standard English phonotactics, and will
be recognized as such by the listener. The hypothesis developed in
4.3 below is that such violations of the phonological system are
not arbitrary: rather, they are strategic manipulations of the
dynamic constraints that conventionally delimit linguistic
structure, functioning to enhance a range of performative musical
effects.
To summarize thus far, the argumentation in this section
illustrates how phonological markedness theory provides an
insightful framework for characterizing why certain overwhelmingly
common patterns emerge in the scat syllables of different artists.
At the same time, the discussion reveals that this theoretical
approach also functions to identify what properties of the
empirical residue are not amenable to general linguistic
explanation. Based just on an examination of syllable onsets, the
fact that this residue is extremely narrow in scope and in
realization is itself an interesting finding. In the next section,
the relative markedness of coda realization is explored.
4.2.3. Coda Constraints
Although the vast majority of scat syllables in the repertoire
here do not have a coda, 17 do, as tabulated in (26). However, like
onsets, their realization is very restricted. Of the 21 possible
coda segments in English (see (4)), only six different segments
appear: there are multiple occurrences of [p, t, n, m, l] and a
single occurrence of [g]. As the transcribed value of this latter
segment (2.1.2, [1:56]) varies between [g] and [v]either one of
which would be a unique attestationit will not be incorporated into
the following discussion. In markedness terms, there are several
cross-linguistic generalizations that characterize the identity and
distribution of the five other segments.
Note among the obstruents that there are no fricatives or
affricates. There are only the two plain anterior stops [p] and [t]
which, in terms of frequency (see (26)), account for 59 (49/83) of
all attested codas. Given that these are the voiceless counterparts
of [b] and [d], which clearly emerge as the overwhelming segmental
favourites in onsets, a major question relates to why the value of
[voice] is in complementary distribution between onset and coda?
Markedness theory offers a straightforward account of the coda
behaviour, in that the preference for obstruents to be voiceless in
syllable-final position (alternatively, at the end of a word or
before another obstruent) is a widely
-
173
Scat syllables and markedness theory
attested cross-linguistic phenomenon. This contextual
neutralization underlies the OT formalization of the positional
markedness constraint in (35):
(35) *Voiced Coda (Kager 1999; cf. Steriade 1999, Gordon 2007,
Zec 2007) Obstruents must not be marked for [voice] in coda
position.
This constraint is unviolated in the entire scat corpus
documented here, and effectively captures the relevant
generalization: if a coda is an obstruent, then it must be
voiceless.
Not all the attested codas are obstruents, however. The residual
codas [m], [n], and [l] are all sonorants. On the basis of the
cross-linguistic observation that some languages, like Chinese,
allow only sonorants in coda position, Pepperkamp (2003) proposes
the markedness constraint in (36):
(36) *Obstruent Coda Codas cannot be obstruents.
The postulated constraint in (36) makes two predictions. First,
a phonological system could have only sonorant codas, as Pepperkamp
argues for Chinese. Secondly, a phonological system could not have
exclusively obstruent codas: that is, if it has obstruent codas,
then it also must have sonorant codas. This second type of system
is exactly what is documented for both tunes analyzed for each of
Louis Armstrong and Chet Baker (see (26)). Of particular interest,
however, is the fact that this is not what has emerged for either
of the Betty Carter recordings. As summarized in (26), her
inventory of codas is precisely the system characterized by the
first prediction: there are only sonorant codas. This is really
quite striking confirmation of the role of universal markedness
constraints in governing the strictly delimited inventory of
scat.
Moving to a consideration of place of articulation properties of
codas, we note that the limitation of the set of attested scat
codas {p, t, n, m, l} to Labials and Coronals is also
systematically derivable from general tenets of markedness theory.
Drawing on various observed asymmetries in inventories, epenthesis,
neutralization, etc., the markedness hierarchy in (37) identifies
Dorsal place as the most highly marked:
(37) Place Markedness Hierarchy (de Lacy 2007: 23) *Dorsal
*Labial *Coronal
Hence, the non-attestation of Dorsals and, concomitantly, the
preferred status of Coronals and Labials follow from this
markedness generalization.
Finally, it is important to consider not just the distinctive
properties of segments in a particular prosodic position, but also
aspects of their sequential relation to their neighbours. As a
dramatic example of harmonic assimilation, all nine instances of []
in Chet Bakers minimally contrastive articulatory flow are preceded
by homorganic [t] and followed by [d]. Thus, a single coronal
non-continuant gesture is sustained across the tri-segmental
sequence, modulated only by velic movement for the oral-nasal
contrast and laryngeal voicing. Even in the context of the much
more diverse articulatory repertoire in Louis Armstrongs Hotter
Than That, an examination of trans-syllabic properties in it
reveals that the place of articulation in the vast majority of the
42 codas is homorganic with the place of articulation of the
following onset. Specifically, all eight cases of coda [t]
-
174
Patricia A. Shaw
are followed by a [d] onset. Similarly both [n] codas precede
[d]. All three post-vocalic coda [m]s are also homorganic, in one
case to [b] and in the other two cases to [w]. All three tokens of
syllabic [] follow a comparable pattern, preceding onsets [w], [m],
and cluster [mw]. Aside from the unique instance of a [g], the only
coda segment that is ever independent of this assimilatory effect
is Louis Armstrongs favoured coda in these works, [p]. Still, the
majority of [p] codas (13/22 = 59.1) precede homorganic [b]. The
residual nineall of which occur before [d]are the only
non-homorganic codas in this entire scat set.
Again, these coda-onset assimilatory patterns constitute further
evidence of a remarkably consistent and delimited range of vocal
behaviours in scat that are systematically correlated with a
broadly motivated positional markedness constraint, the
Coda-Condition:
(38) Coda-Condition (It 1989; Kager 1999) A coda cannot have a
place feature different from the following onset.
Note that (38), which fosters adjacent labial-labial or
coronal-coronal articulations, is differentiated from (34b), which
militates against labial-labial or coronal-coronal sequences, by
virtue of prosodic context. The former applies across a coda-onset
sequence whereas the latter obtains between segments within a
complex onset.
What has been argued in this section is that all the defining
properties of scat codas in the current sample fall directly within
the explanatory framework of the independently movitated theory of
phonological markedness. They may be exclusively sono