Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T05:26:38.266Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Postlexical rules and the status of privative features*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Linda Lombardi
Linda Lombardi
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Recent work in distinctive features and feature geometry has presented strong evidence that certain features are privative: they have no negative values, so a sound is either marked [F] or else it is not. Evidence comes from possible types of sounds (for example, multiply articulated segments, in Sagey 1986) and from the fact that the negative values of these features are not referred to in phonological rules. Currently there is a nearly universal consensus that Place features are privative, and converging evidence from several authors (Mester & Itô 1989; Cho 1990; Lombardi 1991, 1995a) that [voice] is privative also.

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , May 1996 , pp. 1 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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

Anderson, John & Ewen, Colin (1987). Principles of dependency phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana (1984). Underspecification in Yawelmani phonology and morphology. PhD thesis, MIT. Published 1988, New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana (1988). Aspects of Underspecification theory. Phonology 5. 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana & Pulleyblank, Douglas (1989). Yoruba vowel harmony. LI 20. 173–217.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana & Pulleyblank, Douglas (1994). Grounded phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Basbøll, Hans (1972). Some conditioning phonological factors for the pronunciation of short vowels in Danish with special reference to syllabification. Annual Report of the Institute of Phonetics, University of Copenhagen 6. 185–210.Google Scholar
Basbøll, Hans (1974). The phonological syllable with special reference to Danish. Annual Report of the Institute of Phonetics, University of Copenhagen 8. 39–128.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette & Garrett, Andrew (1993). The evolution of Ponapeic Nasal Substitution. Oceanic Linguistics 32. 199–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert (1985). Coordination reduction in complex words: a case for prosodic phonology. In van der Hulst, H. G. & Smith, N. S. H. (eds.) Advances in nonlinear phonology. Dordrecht: Foris. 143–160.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert (1995). The phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert & Rubach, Jerzy (1987). Postcyclic versus postlexical rules in Lexical Phonology. LI 18. 1–44.Google Scholar
Borowsky, Toni (1986). Topics in the lexical phonology of English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Borowsky, Toni (1993). On the Word level. In Sharon, Hargus & Kaisse, Ellen M. (eds.) Studies in Lexical Phonology. San Diego: Academic Press. 199–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Lyle (1974). Phonological features: problems and proposals. Lg 50. 52–65.Google Scholar
Chambers, Jack (1973). Canadian raising. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 18. 113–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren (1968). A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cheng, C. (1973). Synchronic phonology of Mandarin Chinese. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, Young-Mee Yu (1990). Parameters of consonantal assimilation. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Cho, Young-Mee Yu (1991). On the universality of the coronal articulator. In Paradis & Prunet (1991). 159–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Halle, Morris (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1976). Palatalization: linking or assimilation? CLS 12. 96–109.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1987). Toward a substantive theory of feature specification. NELS 18. 79–93.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Hume, Elizabeth (1995). The internal organization of speech sounds. In John, Goldsmith (ed.) The handbook of phonological theory. Cambridge, Mass. & Oxford: Blackwell. 245–306.Google Scholar
Davidsen-Nielsen, N. & Ørum, H. (1978). The feature ‘gravity’ in Old English and Danish phonology. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 16. 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, J. (1977). Foundations of theoretical phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Freudenberg, A. & Freudenberg, M. (1974). Boiken phonemes. In Phonologies of four Papua New Guinea languages. Ukarumpa, Papua New Guinea: Summer Institute of Linguistics. 97–126.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John (1985). Vowel harmony in Khalkha Mongolian, Yaka, Finnish and Hungarian. Phonology Yearbook 2. 253–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, John (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goldstein, M. & Nornang, N. (1970). Modern spoken Tibetan. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Haddad, G. F. (1984). Epenthesis and sonority in Lebanese Arabic. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 14. 57–88.Google Scholar
Hall, Tracy Alan (1993). The phonology of German /R/. Phonology 10. 83–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, John (1987). Non-structure-preserving rules in Lexical Phonology. Lingua 73. 255–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulst, Harry Van Der (1988). The geometry of vocalic features. In van der Hulst, H. G. & Smith, N. S. H. (eds.) Features, segmental structure and harmony processes. Part 2. Dordrecht: Foris. 77–125.Google Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth (1990). Front vowels, palatal consonants and the rule of umlaut in Korean. NELS 20. 230–243.Google Scholar
Hunter, Georgia G. & Pike, Eunice V. (1969). The phonology and tone sandhi of Molinos Mixtec. Linguistics 47. 24–40.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry (1973). The feature [grave] in phonological theory. JPh 1. 329–337.Google Scholar
Ito, Junko (1986). Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Published, New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, Mester, Armin & Padgett, Jaye (1995). Licensing and underspecification in Optimality Theory. LI 26. 571–613.Google Scholar
Iverson, G. K. & Kim, K.-H. (1987). Underspecification and hierarchical feature representation in Korean consonantal phonology. CLS 23:2. 182–198.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R., Fant, C. G. M. & Halle, M. (1951). Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kaisse, Ellen & Hargus, Sharon (1994). When do linked structures evade Structure Preservation? In Richard, Wiese (ed.) Recent developments in Lexical Phonology. Düsseldorf: Heinrich-Heine-Universität. 185–204.Google Scholar
Kaisse, Ellen & Shaw, Patricia (1985). On the theory of Lexical Phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katamba, Francis (1979). How hierarchical and universal is consonant strength? Theoretical Linguistics 6. 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kawakami, S. (1977). Pitchi-guramu de Mita Nihongo no Akusento. Onsei no Kenkyuu 10. 115–129.Google Scholar
Kaye, J., Lowenstamm, J. & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1985). The internal structure of phonological elements: a theory of charm and government. Phonology Yearbook 2. 305–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, Patricia (1988). Underspecification in phonetics. Phonology 5. 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, Patricia (1991). Coronal places of articulation. In Paradis & Prunet (1991). 29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael (1994). Phonology in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1982). Lexical morphology and phonology. In Yang, I.-S. (ed.) Linguistics in the morning calm. Seoul: Hanshin. 3–91.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1985). Some consequences of Lexical Phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2. 85–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahiri, A. & Evers, V. (1991). Palatalization and coronality. In Paradis & Prunet (1991). 79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lass, R. (1976). English phonology and phonological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lass, R. & Anderson, J. M. (1975). Old English phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda (1991). Laryngeal features and laryngeal neutralization. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Published 1994, New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda (1995a). Laryngeal features and privativity. The Linguistic Review 12. 35–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lombardi, Linda (1995b). Laryngeal neutralization and syllable wellformedness. NLLT 13. 39–74.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda (1995c). Positional faithfulness and the phonology of voicing in Optimality Theory. Ms, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda (1995d). Dahl's law and privative [voice]. LI 26. 365–372.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan (1993a). Generalized alignment. Yearbook of Morphology. 79–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan (1993b). Prosodic Morphology I: constraint interaction and satisfaction. Ms, University of Massachusetts, Amherst & Rutgers University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Taub, Alison (1992). Review of Paradis & Prunet (1991). Phonology 9. 363–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLendon, Sally (1975). A grammar of Eastern Pomo. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
McWhorter, M. (1969). A generative phonology of Cakchiquel Maya. Master's thesis, Brigham Young University.Google Scholar
Mester, R. A. & Itô, J. (1989). Feature predictability and underspecification: palatal prosody in Japanese mimetics. Lg 65. 258–293.Google Scholar
Myers, Scott (1991). Structure preservation and the Strong Domain Hypothesis. LI 22. 379–385.Google Scholar
O'Grady, William, Dobrovolsky, Michael & Aronoff, Mark (1989). Contemporary linguistics: an introduction. New York: St Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Odden, David (1978). Further evidence for the feature [grave]. LI 9. 141–144.Google Scholar
Ohala, John (1981). The listener as a source of sound change. In Masek, C. S., Hendrick, R. A. & Miller, M. F. (eds.) Papers from the parasession on language and behavior. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 178–203.Google Scholar
Ohala, John (1986). Top-down processing in speech perception. In Perkell, J. S. & Klatt, D. H. (eds.) Invariance and variability in speech processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 386–397.Google Scholar
Paradis, C. & Prunet, J.-F. (eds.) (1991). The special status of coronals: internal and external evidence. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, F. W. (1970). Is Hausa really a Chadic language? Some problems of comparative phonology. African Language Studies 11. 271–288.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet (1990). Phonological and phonetic representation. JPh 18. 375–394.Google Scholar
Pinkerton, Sandra (1986). Quichean (Mayan) glottalized and nonglottalized stops: a phonetic study with implications for phonological universals. In Ohala, J. J. & Jaeger, J. J. (eds.) Experimental phonology. Orlando: Academic Press. 125–139.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul (1993). Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms, Rutgers University & University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas G. (1986). Underspecification and low vowel harmony in Okpe. Studies in African Linguistics 17. 119–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas G. (1988a). Underspecification, the feature hierarchy and Tiv vowels. Phonology 5. 299–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas G. (1988b). Vocalic underspecification in Yoruba. LI 19. 233–270.Google Scholar
Rehg, Kenneth L. (1984). Nasal substitution rules in Ponapean. In Bender, B. W. (ed.) Studies in Micronesian linguistics. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Australian National University. 317–337.Google Scholar
Rehg, Kenneth L. & Sohl, Damian G. (1981). Ponapean reference grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rischel, J. (1970). Consonant gradation: a problem in Danish phonology and morphology. In Benediktsson, H. (ed.) The Nordic languages and modern linguistics. Reykjavik: Vísindafélag Islendinga. 460–480.Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy (1993). The lexical phonology of Slovak. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagey, Elizabeth (1986). The representation of features and relations in non-linear phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Schein, Barry & Steriade, Donca (1986). On geminates. LI 17. 691–744.Google Scholar
Stewart, J. M. (1956). Notes on Baule phonology. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 18. 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vago, R. (1976). More evidence for the feature [grave]. LI 7. 671–674.Google Scholar
Vance, T. J. (1987). An introduction to Japanese phonology. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira (1982). Reduplication and CV skeleta in Chinese secret languages. LI 13. 637–661.Google Scholar