Cahill, Michael2024-03-192024-03-192019-10-28https://africarxiv.ubuntunet.net/handle/1/900https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3520575https://africarxiv.ubuntunet.net/handle/1/900https://doi.org/10.60763/africarxiv/853https://doi.org/10.60763/africarxiv/853https://doi.org/10.60763/africarxiv/853Marking of tone in African orthographies has historically been a challenge, not only for linguistic and analytical reasons, but also because most designers of these orthographies have been educated in non-tonal languages. After a review of lexical vs. grammatical tone, this paper examines various strategies that have been used for marking both lexical and grammatical tone in several East and West African languages, as well as cases in which tone is not marked. The question of the desired phonological depth of an orthography is discussed, especially when applied to tonal processes. Many phonologists do not apply theory more recent than Chomsky and Halle & Chomsky (1968) to orthographies. However, the more recent bifurcation of rules into lexical and postlexical provides a psycholinguistically supported phonological level at which tone marking can be based: the output of the lexical level. Experimental evidence supports this lexical level as more readable than either a phonemic or a deep level. A tonal typology of languages also guides what types of languages more predictably would need lexical tone marking. Recommendations for orthographical implementation are given in the conclusion.African languagesToneorthographies