Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-frvt8 Total loading time: 1.036 Render date: 2022-09-29T13:48:27.943Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

Analytic bias and phonological typology*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2008

Elliott Moreton
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Abstract

Two factors have been proposed as the main determinants of phonological typology: channel bias, phonetically systematic errors in transmission, and analytic bias, cognitive predispositions making learners more receptive to some patterns than others. Much of typology can be explained equally well by either factor, making them hard to distinguish empirically. This study presents evidence that analytic bias is strong enough to create typological asymmetries in a case where channel bias is controlled. I show that (i) phonological dependencies between the height of two vowels are typologically more common than dependencies between vowel height and consonant voicing, (ii) the phonetic precursors of the height-height and height-voice patterns are equally robust and (iii) in two experiments, English speakers learned a height-height pattern and a voice-voice pattern better than a height-voice pattern. I conclude that both factors contribute to typology, and discuss hypotheses about their interaction.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Altmann, Gabriel & Lehfeldt, Werner (1980). Einführung in die quantitative Phonologie. Bochum: Studienverlag Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. (1981). Why phonology isn't ‘natural’. LI 12. 493539.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana & Pulleyblank, Douglas (1994). Grounded phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Arensen, Jon (1982). Murle grammar. Juba, Sudan: University of Juba & Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Asher, R. E. (1985). Tamil. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R. & Gulikers, L. (1995a). The CELEX lexical database. Release 2. [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R. & Gulikers, L. (1995b). English linguistic guide. In Baayen et al. (1995a). File EUG_LET.PS.Google Scholar
Bach, Emmon & Harms, T. Robert (1972). How do languages get crazy rules? In Stockwell, Robert & Macaulay, Ronald(eds.) Linguistic change and generative theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 121.Google Scholar
Baković, Eric (2000). Harmony, dominance, and control. PhD dissertation, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Barnes, Jonathan (2002). Positional neutralization: a phonologization approach to typological patterns. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Beardsley, Amy Neel & Cullinan, Walter L. (1987). Speech sample type and children's segmental durations. JPh 15. 2938.Google Scholar
Beddor, Patrice Speeter & Krakow, Rena Arens (1999). Perception of coarticulatory nasalization by speakers of English and Thai: evidence for partial compensation. JASA 106. 28682887.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beddor, Patrice Speeter, Harnsberger, James D. & Lindemann, Stephanie (2002). Language-specific patterns of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation: acoustic structures and their perceptual correlates. JPh 30. 591627.Google Scholar
Beddor, Patrice Speeter, Krakow, Rena Arens & Stephanie, Lindemann (2001). Patterns of perceptual compensation and their phonological consequences. In Hume & Johnson (2001b). 5578.Google Scholar
Bender, M. L. (1974). Phoneme frequencies in Amharic. Journal of Ethiopian Studies 12. 1924.Google Scholar
Berent, Iris, Steriade, Donca, Lennertz, Tracy & Vaknin, Vered (2007). What we know about what we have never heard: evidence from perceptual illusions. Cognition 104. 591630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo (2006). Phonological change in Optimality Theory. In Brown, Keith (ed.) Encyclopedia of language and linguistics. 2nd edn. Vol. 9. Oxford: Elsevier. 497505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette (2004). Evolutionary Phonology: the emergence of sound patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette (2006). Reply to commentaries. Theoretical Linguistics 32. 245256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumenfeld, Lev (2006). Constraints on phonological interactions. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul (1998). Functional phonology: formalizing the interaction between articulatory and perceptual drives. PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul (2004). Review of Bruce Tesar & Paul Smolensky (2000). Learnability in Optimality Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Downloaded April 2004 from http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/paul/papers/TesarSmolenskyReview.pdf.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Hayes, Bruce (2001). Empirical tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm. LI 32. 4586.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David (2005). Praat: a system for doing phonetics by computer (version 4.3.02). Retrieved March 2005 from http://www.praat.org/.Google Scholar
Bogoras, Waldemar (1922). Chukchee. In Boas, Franz (ed.) Handbook of American Indian languages. Part 2. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. 631903.Google Scholar
Bole-Richard, Rémy (1983). Systématique phonologique et grammaticale d'un parler ewe: le gen-mina du sud-togo et sud-bénin. Paris: L'Harmattan.Google Scholar
Bonatti, Luca L., Peña, Marcela, Nespor, Marina & Mehler, Jacques (2005). Linguistic constraints on statistical computations: the role of consonants and vowels in continuous speech processing. Psychological Science 16. 451459.Google ScholarPubMed
Buckley, Eugene (2003). Children's unnatural phonology. BLS 29. 523534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. K. (1973). Canadian raising. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 18. 113135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, Kyle E., Onishi, Kristine H. & Fisher, Cynthia (2003). Infants learn phonotactic regularities from brief auditory experience. Cognition 87. B69B77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chambers, Kyle E., Onishi, Kristine H. & Cynthia, Fisher (2006). A vowel is a vowel: generalizing newly-learned phonotactic constraints to novel contexts. Ms, University of Rochester.Google Scholar
Chang, Steve S., Plauché, Madelaine C. & Ohala, John J. (2001). Markedness and consonant confusion asymmetries. In Hume & Johnson (2001b). 79101.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Halle, Morris (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Hume, Elizabeth V. (1995). The internal organization of speech sounds. In Goldsmith (1995). 245306.Google Scholar
Cole, Jennifer & Iskarous, Khalil (2001). Effects of vowel context on consonant place identification: implications for a theory of phonologization. In Hume & Johnson (2001b). 103122.Google Scholar
Creel, Sarah C., Elissa, L. Newport & Aslin, Richard N. (2004). Distant melodies: statistical learning of nonadjacent dependencies in tone sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30. 11191130.Google ScholarPubMed
Crowther, Court S. & Mann, Virginia A. (1992). Native language factors affecting use of vocalic cues to final consonant voicing in English. JASA 92. 711722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cutler, Anne, Weber, Andrea, Smits, Roel & Cooper, Nicole (2004). Patterns of English phoneme confusions by native and non-native listeners. JASA 116. 36683678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darcy, Isabelle, Ramus, Franck, Cristophe, Anne, Kinzler, Katherine & Dupoux, Emmanuel (in press). Phonological knowledge in compensation for native and non-native assimilation. In Kügler, Frank, Féry, Caroline & van de Vijver, Ruben (eds.) Variation and gradience in phonetics and phonology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Davidson, Lisa, Jusczyk, Peter & Smolensky, Paul (2004). The initial and final states: theoretical implications and experimental explorations of Richness of the Base. In Kager, René, Pater, Joe & Zonneveld, Wim (eds.) Constraints in phonological acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 321368.Google Scholar
Dawson, Willa (1980). Tibetan phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
de Jong, Kenneth & Zawaydeh, Bushra (2002). Comparing stress, lexical focus, and segmental focus: patterns of variation in Arabic vowel duration. JPh 30. 5375.Google Scholar
Dell, Gary S., Reed, Kristopher D., Adams, David R. & Meyer, Antje S. (2000). Speech errors, phonotactic constraints, and implicit learning: a study of the role of experience in language production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26. 13551367.Google ScholarPubMed
Dettweiler, Stephen H. (2000). Vowel harmony and neutral vowels in c'Lela. Journal of West African Languages 28:1. 318.Google Scholar
Dutoit, T., Pagel, V., Pierret, N., Bataille, F. & van der Vreken, O. (1996). The MBROLA project: towards a set of high quality speech synthesizers free of use for non commercial purposes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP). Vol. 3. 13931396. Available (March 2008) athttp://www.asel.udel.edu/icslp/cdrom/authindx.htm.Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen H. (1976). Sprache und Tradition der Kera (Tschad). Vol. 2: Lexikon/Lexique. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen H. (1979). Sprache und Tradition der Kera (Tschad). Vol. 3: Grammatik. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Egerod, Søren (1956). The Lungtu dialect: a descriptive and historical study of a South Chinese idiom. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Fischer-Jørgensen, Eli (1972). PTK et BDG français en position intervocalique accentuée. In Valdman, Albert (ed.) Papers in linguistics and phonetics to the memory of Pierre Delattre. The Hague: Mouton. 143200.Google Scholar
Frisch, Stefan A., Pierrehumbert, Janet B. & Broe, Michael B. (2004). Similarity avoidance and the OCP. NLLT 22. 179228.Google Scholar
Gakuru, Mucemi, Iraki, Frederick K., Tucker, Roger, Shalanova, Ksenia & Ngugi, Kamenda (no date). Design of speech data base for unit selection in Kiswahili TTS. Available (March 2008) from www.llsti.org/pubs/Kiswahili_Speech_Database.pdf.Google Scholar
Goldrick, Matthew (2004). Phonological features and phonotactic constraints in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language 51. 586603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, John (ed.) (1995). The handbook of phonological theory. Cambridge, Mass. & Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gordon, Matthew (2004). Syllable weight. In Hayes et al. (2004). 277312.Google Scholar
Gordon, G. Jr. (ed.) (2005). Ethnologue: languages of the world. 15th edn. Dallas: SIL International. http://www.ethnologue.com.Google Scholar
Haas, Mary (1946). A grammatical sketch of Tunica. In Osgood, Cornelius (ed.) Linguistic structures of Native America. New York: Viking Fund. 337366.Google Scholar
Hale, Mark & Reiss, Charles (2000). ‘Substance abuse’ and ‘dysfunctionalism’: current trends in phonology. LI 31. 157169.Google Scholar
Hallé, Pierre A., Segui, Juan, Frauenfelder, Uli & Meunier, Christine (1998). Processing of illegal consonant clusters: a case of perceptual assimilation? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 24. 592608.Google ScholarPubMed
Hansson, Gunnar Ólafur (2001). Theoretical and typological issues in consonant harmony. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Hansson, Gunnar Ólafur (2004). Long-distance voicing agreement: an evolutionary perspective. BLS 30. 130141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin (1999). Optimality and diachronic adaptation. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 18. 180205.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce, Kirchner, Robert & Steriade, Donca (eds.) (2004). Phonologically based phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce & Steriade, Donca (2004). Introduction: the phonetic bases of phonological markedness. In Hayes et al. (2004). 133.Google Scholar
Hetzron, Robert (1969). The verbal system of Southern Agaw. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Holt, Lori L. (2005). Temporally nonadjacent nonlinguistic sounds affect speech categorization. Psychological Science 16. 305312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hombert, Jean-Marie, Ohala, John J. & Ewan, William G. (1979). Phonetic explanations for the development of tones. Lg 55. 3758.Google Scholar
Hualde, José Ignacio (1989). Autosegmental and metrical spreading in the vowel-harmony systems of northwestern Spain. Linguistics 27. 773805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hualde, José Ignacio (1991). Basque phonology. London & New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth & Johnson, Keith (2001a). A model of the interplay of speech perception and phonology. In Hume & Johnson (2001b). 326.Google Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth & Johnson, Keith (eds.) (2001b). The role of speech perception in phonology. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (1976). Phonologization. In Juilland, Alphonse (ed.) Linguistic studies offered to Joseph Greenberg on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday. Vol. 2: Phonology. Saratoga: Anma Libri. 407418.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (1998). Positional prominence and the ‘prosodic trough’ in Yaka. Phonology 15. 4175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. (2001). The limits of phonetic determinism in phonology: *NC revisited. In Hume & Johnson (2001b). 141185.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William H. Jr. (1964). A grammar of the Washo language. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Kämpfe, Hans-Rainer & Volodin, Alexander P. (1995). Abriß der tschuktschischen Grammatik auf der Basis der Schriftsprache. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Kavitskaya, Darya (2002). Compensatory lengthening: phonetics, phonology, diachrony. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto (2005). Voicing and geminacy in Japanese: an acoustic and perceptual study. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 31. 87120.Google Scholar
Keane, Elinor (2001). Echo words in Tamil. PhD dissertation, Oxford University.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1995). The phonological basis of sound change. In Goldsmith (1995). 640670.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (2006). The amphichronic program vs. Evolutionary Phonology. Theoretical Linguistics 32. 217236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (2008). Universals constrain change; change results in typological generalizations. In Good, Jeff (ed.) Linguistic universals and language change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenig, Laura L. & Okalidou, Areti (2003). Stress effects on coarticulation in English and Greek. Poster presented at the 145th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Nashville.Google Scholar
Koo, Hahn & Cole, Jennifer (2006). On learnability and naturalness as constraints on phonological grammar. In Botinis, Antonis (ed.) Proceedings of ISCA Tutorial and Research Workshop on Experimental Linguistics. Athens: University of Athens. 174177.Google Scholar
Lampp, Claire & Reklis, Heidi (2004). Effects of coda voicing and aspiration on Hindi vowels. Poster presented at the 146th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, New York.Google Scholar
Lotto, Andrew J. & Lori, L. Holt (2006). Putting phonetic context effects into context: a commentary on Fowler (2006). Perception and Psychophysics 68. 178183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubker, James & Gay, Thomas (1982). Anticipatory labial coarticulation: experimental, biological, and linguistic variables. JASA 71. 437448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCarthy, John J. (1983). Phonological features and morphological structure. In Richardson, John, Marks, Mitchell & Chukerman, Amy (eds.) Papers from the parasession on the interplay of phonology, morphology, and syntax. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 135161.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1988). Feature geometry and dependency: a review. Phonetica 45. 84108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (2002). A thematic guide to Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Macmillan, Neil A. & Creelman, Douglas C. (1990). Detection theory: a user's guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manuel, Sharon Y. (1990). The role of contrast in limiting vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in different languages. JASA 88. 12861298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mintz, Toby & Walker, Rachel (2006). Infants' sensitivity to vowel harmony and its role in word segmentation. Paper presented at the 80th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott (2004). Realization of the English postvocalic [voice] contrast in F 1 and F 2. JPh 32. 133.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott (in press). Underphonologization and modularity bias. In Parker, Steven (ed.) Phonological argumentation. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott & Amano, Shigeaki (1999). Phonotactics in the perception of Japanese vowel length: evidence for long-distance dependencies. In Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, Budapest, 26792682.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott, Feng, Gary & Smith, Jennifer L. (in press). Syllabification, sonority, and perception: new evidence from a language game. CLS 41.Google Scholar
Moreton, Elliott & Thomas, Erik R. (2007). Origins of Canadian Raising in voiceless-coda effects: a case study in phonologization. In Cole, Jennifer & Hualde, José (eds.) Laboratory phonology 9. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 3764.Google Scholar
Myers, Scott (2002). Gaps in factorial typology: the case of voicing in consonant clusters. Ms, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Newport, Elissa L. & Aslin, Richard N. (2004). Learning at a distance: I. Statistical learning of non-adjacent dependencies. Cognitive Psychology 48. 127162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina & Marina, Tolskaya (2001). A grammar of Udihe. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J. (1990). The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation. In Kingston, John & Beckman, Mary (eds.) Papers in laboratory phonology I: between the grammar and physics of speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 258275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J. (1993). The phonetics of sound change. In Jones, Charles (ed.) Historical linguistics: problems and perspectives. London: Longman. 237278.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. (1994a). Hierarchies of environments for sound variation; plus implications for ‘neutral’ vowels in vowel harmony. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 27. 371382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J. (1994b). Towards a universal, phonetically-based theory of vowel harmony. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP 94). Vol. 2. Yokohama: Acoustical Society of Japan. 491494.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. (2005). Phonetic explanations for sound patterns: implications for grammars of competence. In Hardcastle, William & Beck, Janet (eds.) A figure of speech: a Festschrift for John Laver. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 2338.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. & Feder, Deborah (1994). Listeners' normalization of vowel quality is influenced by ‘restored’ consonantal context. Phonetica 51. 111118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onishi, Kristine H., Chambers, E. Kyle & Fisher, Cynthia (2002). Learning phonotactic constraints from brief auditory experience. Cognition 83. B13B23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palmer, F. R. (1959). The verb classes of Agau (Awiya). Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung 7. 270297.Google Scholar
Parkinson, Frederick B. (1996). The representation of vowel height in phonology. PhD dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Paster, Mary (2004). Vowel height harmony and blocking in Buchan Scots. Phonology 21. 359407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pater, Joe (2004). Austronesian nasal substitution and other N effects. In McCarthy, John (ed.) Optimality Theory in phonology: a reader. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell. 271289.Google Scholar
Pearce, Mary (2003). Vowel harmony in Kera (Chadic). MA dissertation, University College London.Google Scholar
Pearce, Mary (2005). Kera tone and voicing. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 17. 6182.Google Scholar
Pertz, D. L. & Bever, T. G. (1975). Sensitivity to phonological universals in children and adults. Lg 51. 149162.Google Scholar
Pitkin, Harvey (1984). Wintu grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Port, Robert F. (1981). Linguistic timing factors in combination. JASA 69. 262274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Port, Robert F. & Rotunno, Rosemarie (1979). Relation between voice-onset time and vowel duration. JASA 66. 654662.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul (1993). Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms, Rutgers University & University of Colorado, Boulder, Published 2004, Malden, Mass. & Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Przezdziecki, Marek (2005). Vowel harmony and coarticulation in three dialects of Yoruba: phonetics determining phonology. PhD dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Pycha, Anne, Nowak, Pawel, Shin, Eurie & Shosted, Ryan (2003). Phonological rule-learning and its implications for a theory of vowel harmony. WCCFL 22. 423435.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team (2005). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org.Google Scholar
Roodenrys, Steven & Hinton, Melinda (2002). Sublexical or lexical effects on serial recall of nonwords? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28. 2933.Google ScholarPubMed
Rose, Sharon & Walker, Rachel (2004). A typology of consonant agreement as correspondence. Lg 80. 475531.Google Scholar
Rousset, Isabelle (2004). Structures syllabiques et lexicales des langues du monde. PhD dissertation, Université Grenoble III.Google Scholar
Saffran, Jenny R. (2002). Constraints on statistical language learning. Journal of Memory and Language 47. 172196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saffran, Jenny R. (2003). Statistical language learning: mechanisms and constraints. Current Directions in Psychological Science 12. 110114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saffran, Jenny R. & Thiessen, Erik D. (2003). Pattern induction by infant language learners. Developmental Psychology 39. 484494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanders, Nathan (2003). Opacity and sound change in the Polish lexicon. PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Schane, Sanford A., Tranel, Bernard & Lane, Harlan (1974). On the psychological reality of a natural rule of syllable structure. Cognition 3. 351358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffman, Harold F. (1999). A reference grammar of spoken Tamil. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seiden, William (1960). Chamorro phonemes. Anthropological Linguistics 2:4. 635.Google Scholar
Seidl, Amanda & Buckley, Eugene (2005). On the learning of arbitrary phonological rules. Language Learning and Development 1. 289316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurd, B. (1968). Rank-frequency distribution for phonemes. Phonetica 18. 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sohn, Ho-Min (1971). A-raising in Woleaian. University of Hawaii Working Papers in Linguistics 3:8. 1535.Google Scholar
Sohn, Ho-Min (1975). Woleaian reference grammar. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Sohn, Hyang-Sook (1986). Toward an integrated theory of morphophonology: vowel harmony in Korean. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 16:2. 157184.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (2001a). The phonology of perceptibility effects: the P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. Ms, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca (2001b). Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: a perceptual account. In Hume & Johnson (2001b). 219250.Google Scholar
Storkel, Holly L., Armbrüster, Jonna & Hogan, Tiffany P. (2006). Differentiating phonotactic probability and neighborhood density in adult word learning. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 49. 11751192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suárez, Jorge A. (1983). La lengua tlapaneca de Malinaltepec. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Summers, W. van (1987). Effects of stress and final-consonant voicing on vowel production: articulatory and acoustic analysis. JASA 82. 847863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamaoka, Katuo & Makioka, Shogo (2004). Frequency of occurrence for units of phonemes, morae, and syllables appearing in a lexical corpus of a Japanese newspaper. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36. 531547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Conrad F. & Houghton, George (2005). Learning artificial phonotactic constraints: time course, durability, and relationship to natural constraints. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 31. 13981416.Google ScholarPubMed
Thomas, Erik R. (2000). Spectral differences in /ai/ offsets conditioned by voicing of the following consonant. JPh 28. 125.Google Scholar
Vagges, K., Ferrero, F. E., Magno-Caldognetto, E. & Lavagnoli, C. (1978). Some acoustic characteristics of Italian consonants. Journal of Italian Linguistics 3:1. 6985.Google Scholar
Vainio, Martti (1996). Phoneme frequencies in Finnish text and speech. In Iivonen, A. & Klippi, A. (eds.) Studies in logopedics and phonetics 5. Publications of the Department of Phonetics, University of Helsinki, Series B: Phonetics, Logopedics and Speech Communication. 181192.Google Scholar
Walker, Rachel (2005). Weak triggers in vowel harmony. NLLT 23. 917989.Google Scholar
Weismer, Gary (1979). Sensitivity of voice-onset-time (VOT) measures to certain segmental features in speech production. JPh 7. 197204.Google Scholar
Wilson, Colin (2003a). Experimental investigation of phonological naturalness. WCCFL 22. 533546.Google Scholar
Wilson, Colin (2003b). Analytic bias in artificial phonology learning: consonant harmony vs. random alternation. Handout from presentation at the Workshop on Markedness and the Lexicon, MIT.Google Scholar
Wilson, Colin (2006). Learning phonology with substantive bias: an experimental and computational study of velar palatalization. Cognitive Science 30. 945982.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiswall, Wendy J. (1991). Partial vowel harmonies as evidence for a Height node. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Wolf, Catherine G. (1978). Voicing cues in English final stops. JPh 6. 299309.Google Scholar
112
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Analytic bias and phonological typology*
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Analytic bias and phonological typology*
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Analytic bias and phonological typology*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *