Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T19:04:47.400Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On derived domains in sentence phonology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Elisabeth Selkirk
Elisabeth Selkirk*
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper deals with two distinct but inextricably connected sets of questions in the area of sentence phonology. The first concerns the organisation of sentence phonology and the nature of the phonological representation(s) of the sentence, and the second the relation between syntactic structure and phonological representation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Phonology , Volume 3 , May 1986 , pp. 371 - 405
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Allen, M. (1978). Morphological investigations. PhD dissertation, University of ConnecticutGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. E. (1983). Principles and parameters in prosodic phonology. Linguistics 21. 249–280.Google Scholar
Borowsky, T. (1986). Lexical Phonology and English phonology. Ms, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Chen, M. (1985). The syntax of phonology: Xiamen tone sandhi. Ms, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1978). Tone and syntax in Ewe. In Napoli, D. J. (ed.) Elements of stress, tone, and intonation. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. 21–99.Google Scholar
Conteh, P.Cowper, E. & Rice, K. (1986). The environment for consonant mutation in Mende. In Dimmendaal, G. J. (ed.) Current approaches to African linguistics. Dordrecht: Foris. 107–116.Google Scholar
Emonds, J. (1985). A unified theory of syntactic categories. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Fourakis, M. (1980). A phonetic study of sonorant–fricative clusters in two dialects of English. Research in Phonetics I. 167–200.Google Scholar
Goodman, M. (1967). Prosodic features of Bravanese, a Swahili dialect. Journal of African Languages 6. 278–284.Google Scholar
Halle, M. & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1978). Metrical structures in phonology. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1980). A metrical theory of stress rules. PhD dissertation, MIT. Reproduced by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1982). Extrametricality and English stress. LI 13. 227–276.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1984). The prosodic hierarchy in meter. Ms, UCLA.Google Scholar
Hulst, H. G. van der & Smith, N. S. H. (eds.) (1982). The structure of phonological representations. Vol. 2. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1977) X syntax: a study of phrase structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. M. (1985). Connected speech: the interaction of syntax and phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Keating, P. (1985). Universal phonetics and the organization of grammars. In Fromkin, V. (ed.) Phonetic linguistics: essays in honor of Peter Ladefoged. New York: Academic Press. 115–132.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, M. & Kisseberth, C. W. (1977). Topics in phonological theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). From Cyclic Phonology to Lexical Phonology. In van der Hulst & Smith (1982). 131–177.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1985). Some consequences of Lexical Phonology. Ph Y 2. 85–138.Google Scholar
Kisseberth, C. W. & Abasheikh, M. I. (1974). Vowel length in Chi Mwi:ni – a case study of the role of grammar in phonology. In Bruck, A.Fox, R. A. & LaGaly, M. W. (eds.) Papers from the Parasession on Natural Phonology. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 193–209.Google Scholar
Klavans, J. (1985). The independence of syntax and phonology in cliticization. Lg 61. 95–120.Google Scholar
Liberman, M. (1975). The intonational system of English. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Liberman, M. & Pierrehumbert, J. B. (1984). Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length. In Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. T. (eds.) Language sound structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 157–233.Google Scholar
Liberman, M. & Prince, A. (1977). On stress and linguistic rhythm. LI 8. 249–336.Google Scholar
Lobeck, A. & Kaisse, E. M. (1984). On the domain of locality conditions. In Cobler, M.MacKaye, S. & Wescoat, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford: Stanford University.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1968). The phonological component of a grammar of Japanese. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Miyara, S. (1980). Phonological phrase and phonological reduction. Papers in Japanese Linguistics 7. 79–121.Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. (1982). Lexical Phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1982). Prosodic domains of external sandhi rules. In van der Huist & Smith (1982). 225–256.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Odden, D. (1982). The phrasal phonology of Kimatuumbi. Ms, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. & Beckman, M. (1986). Japanese tone structure. Ms, Bell Laboratories.Google Scholar
Poser, W. (1984). The phonetics and phonology of tone and intonation in Japanese. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Prince, A. (1983). Relating to the grid. LI 14. 19–100.Google Scholar
Rotenberg, J. (1978). The syntax of phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1972). The phrase phonology of English and French. PhD dissertation, MIT. Published by Garland, New York.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1978). On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. In Fretheim, T. (ed.) Nordic prosody II. Trondheim: TAPIR.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1980a). Prosodic domains in phonology: Sanskrit revisited. In Aronoff, M. & Kean, M.-L. (eds.) Juncture. Saratoga: Anma Libri. 107–129.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1980b). The role of prosodic categories in English word stress. LI II. 563–605.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1983a). Rhythmic patterns in language. Paper presented at the Workshop on Rhythm in Language, Literature, and Music, ZIF, Bielefeld, 1974.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1983b). The syntax of rhythm and intonation in English. In Proceedings of the Parasession on the Interplay of Phonology, Morphology, and Syntax. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1984a). Phonology and syntax: the relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1984b). Juncture in sentence phonology as a rhythmic phenomenon. Paper presented at the 4th Internationale Phonologietagung, Eisenstadt.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1985). Intonation, stress, and meaning. In Niepokuj, M.Van Clay, M.Nikiforidou, V. & Feder, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. 491–504.Google Scholar
Siegel, D. (1974). Topics in English morphology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Stowell, T. (1981). Origins of phrase structure. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Vogel, I. (1984). On constraining prosodic rules. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.) Advances in nonlinear phonology. Dordrecht: Foris. 217–233.Google Scholar