Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:21:17.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2022

John T. Jensen
John T. Jensen
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Lexical and Metrical Phonology of English
The Legacy of the Sound Pattern of English
 , pp. 366 - 374
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

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

American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (1969). Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. (1992). A-Morphous Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andronov, A. V. (2002). Materiali dlja Latyšsko-Russkogo Slovarja. Sankt-Peterburg.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana (1984). Underspecification in Yawelmani Phonology and Morphology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana & Suzuki, Keiichiro (1997). The Yokuts Challenge. In Derivations and Constraints in Phonology, ed. Roca, Iggy, 197–226. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark (1976). Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bailey, Charles-James N. (1973). The patterning of language variation. In Varieties of Present-Day English, ed. Bailey, Richard W. & Robinson, Jay L.. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bailey, Don C. (1962). Glossary of Japanese Neologisms. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Benua, Laura (1995). Identity effects in morphological truncation. In University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, ed. Beckman, Jill N., Dickey, Laura Walsh, & Urbanczyk, Suzanne, 77–136. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. (2012). The architecture of grammar and the division of labor in exponence. In The Morphology and Phonology of Exponence, ed. Trommer, Jochen, 8–83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bing, Janet (1979). Aspects of English Prosody. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst (Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1980).Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette (1995). The syllable in phonological theory. In The Handbook of Phonological Theory, ed. Goldsmith, John A., 206–244. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette (1997). Rules in optimality theory: two case studies. In Derivations and Constraints in Phonology, ed. Roca, Iggy, 227–260. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard (1933). Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard (1939). Menomini morphophonemics. Travaux du cercle linguistique de Prague 8, 105–115. Reprinted in Makkai (1972), 58–64.Google Scholar
Borowsky, Toni Jean (1986). Topics in the Lexical Phonology of English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Borowsky, Toni Jean (1989). Structure preservation and the syllable coda in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7: 145–166.Google Scholar
Brame, Michael (1974). The cycle in phonology: Stress in Palestinian, Maltese, and Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry 5: 39–60.Google Scholar
Brooks, Marie Zagorska (1965). On Polish affricates. Word 29: 207–210.Google Scholar
Burzio, Luigi (1994). Principles of English Stress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, Jack (1973). Canadian raising. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 18: 113–135.Google Scholar
Chao, Yuan Ren (1920). A system of tone letters. Le Maître Phonétique 45: 24–47.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam (1951). Morphophonemics of Modern Hebrew. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam (1964). Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Halle, Morris (1968). The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2: 225–252.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. & Hume, Elizabeth V. (1995). The internal organization of speech sounds. In The Handbook of Phonological Theory, ed. Goldsmith, John A., 245–306. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. & Keyser, Samuel Jay (1983). CV Phonology: a Generative Theory of the Syllable. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Collins Dictionary of the English Languge (1979). London: Collins.Google Scholar
Cowan, Nelson, Braine, Martin D. S., & Leavitt, Lewis A. (1985). The phonological and metaphonological representation of speech: evidence from fluent backward talkers. Journal of Memory and Language 24: 679–698.Google Scholar
Downing, Bruce Theodore (1970). Syntactic and Phonological Phrasing in English. PhD dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan (2016). Covert representations, contrast, and the acquisition of lexical accent. In Dimensions of Phonological Stress, ed. Heinz, Jeffrey, Goedemans, Rob, & van der Hulst, Harry, 231–262. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durand, Jacques (1990). Generative and Nonlinear Phonology. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph E. (1976). A Transformational Approach to English Syntax: Root, Structure Preserving, and Local Transformations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fabb, Nigel (1988). English suffixation is constrained only by selectional restrictions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6: 527–539.Google Scholar
Fidelholtz, James L. (1967). English vowel reduction. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Fidelholtz, James L. & Wayles Browne, E. (1971). Oy, oy, oy. In Towards Tomorrow’s Linguistics, ed. Shuy, Roger W. & Bailey, Charles-James N. 159–184. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Fudge, Eric C. (1967). The nature of phonological primes. Journal of Linguistics 3: 1–36. Reprinted in Makkai (1972), 500–521.Google Scholar
Furby, Christine E. (1974). Garawa Phonology. Pacific Linguistics, series A, No. 37, 1–11, Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Giegerich, Heinz J. (1992). English Phonology: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Giegerich, Heinz J. (1999). Lexical Strata in English: Morphological Causes, Phonological Effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goad, Heather (2012). sC clusters are (almost always) coda-initial. The Linguistic Review 29: 335–373.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John A. (1976). Autosegmental Phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John A. (1990). Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Green, Anthony D. (2004). Opacity in Tiberian Hebrew: Morphology not phonology. In Papers in Phonetics and Phonology, ZAS Papers in Linguistics 37, ed. Fuchs, S. & Hamann, S., 37–70. ROA 703-0105.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos & Jacobs, Heike (1998). Understanding Phonology. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hale, Mark & Reiss, Charles (2000). Phonology as cognition. In Phonological Knowledge: Conceptual and Empirical Issues, ed. Burton-Roberts, Noel, Carr, Philip, & Docherty, Gerard 161–184. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris (1959). The Sound Pattern of Russian. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris (1977). Tenseness, vowel shift, and the phonology of the back vowels in modern English. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 611–625.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris (1997). On stress and accent in Indo-European. Language 73: 275–313.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Idsardi, William J. (1997). R, hypercorrection, and the Elsewhere Condition. In Derivations and Constraints in Phonology, ed. Roca, Iggy, 331–348.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Mohanan, Karuvannur Puthanveetti (1985). Segmental phonology of modern English. Linguistic Inquiry 16: 57–116.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Stevens, Kenneth N. (1971). A note on laryngeal features. Quarterly Progress Reports 101: 198–213. Research Laboratory of Electronics, MIT.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Vergnaud, Jean-Roger (1987). An Essay on Stress. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hammond, Michael (1984). Constraining Metrical Theory: A Modular Theory of Rhythm and Destressing. PhD dissertation, UCLA. Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Hammond, Michael (1999). The Phonology of English: A Prosodic Optimality-Theoretic Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harris, James W. (1969). Spanish Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, James W. (1983). Syllable Structure and Stress in Spanish: A Nonlinear Analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, John (1994). English Sound Structure. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haugen, Einar (1956). The syllable in linguistic description. In For Roman Jakobson, ed. Halle, Morris, Lunt, Horace G., McLean, Hugh, & van Schooneveld, Cornelius H., 213–221. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1980). A Metrical Theory of Stress Rules. PhD dissertation, MIT. (Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1981).Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1982). Extrametricality and English stress. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 227–276.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1986). Inalterability in CV phonology. Language 62: 321–351.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1989a). Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 253–306.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1989b). The prosodic hierarchy in meter. In Phonetics and Phonology, Volume 1, Rhythm and Meter, ed. Kiparsky, Paul & Youmans, Gilbert, 201–260. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1995). Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (2004). Phonological acquisition in optimality theory: the early stages. In Constraints in Phonological Acquisition, ed. Kager, René, Pater, Joe, & Zonneveld, Wim, 158–203. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoard, James E. (1971). Aspiration, tenseness, and syllabication in English. Language 47: 133–140.Google Scholar
Hoard, James E. (1972). Naturalness conditions in phonology, with particular reference to English vowels. In Contributions to Generative Phonology, ed. Brame, Michael K., 123–154. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. (1942). A system of descriptive phonology. Language 18: 3–21. Reprinted in Makkai (1972), 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, Joan B. (1972). The syllable in phonological theory. Language 48: 525–540.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry (1985). A Theory of Phonological Weight. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Idsardi, William James (1992). The Computation of Prosody. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Idsardi, William James (2009). Calculating metrical structure. In Contemporary Views on Architecture and Representations in Phonology, ed. Raimy, Eric & Cairns, Charles E., 191–211. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingria, Robert (1980). Compensatory lengthening as a metrical phenomenon. Linguistic Inquiry 11: 465–495.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko (1986). Syllable Theory in Prosodic Phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko (1989). A prosodic theory of epenthesis. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7: 217–259.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray (1972). Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman & Halle, Morris (1956). Fundamentals of Language. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jensen, John T. (1990). Morphology: Word Structure in Generative Grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jensen, John T. (1993). English Phonology. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, John T. (2000). Against ambisyllabicity. Phonology 17: 187–235.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel (1966). The Pronunciation of English (fourth edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kager, René (1989). A Metrical Theory of Stress and Destressing in English and Dutch. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kager, René (1999). Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambrige University Press.Google Scholar
Kahn, Daniel (1976). Syllable-based Generalizations in English Phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT. Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Kahn, Daniel (1980). Syllable-structure specifications in phonological rules. In Juncture, ed. Aronoff, Mark & Kean, Mary-Louise. Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael (1994). Evidence for metrical constitency. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. Hale, Kenneth & Jay Keyser, Samuel, 257–273. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael & Kisseberth, Charles W. (1977). Topics in Phonological Theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael & Kisseberth, Charles W. (1979). Generative Phonology: Description and Theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1966). Über den deutschen Akzent. Studia Grammatica 7: 69–98.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1968). How abstract is phonology? In Explanation in Phonology, ed. Kiparsky, Paul (1971), 119–163. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1973). Abstractness, opacity, and global rules. In Three Dimensions of Linguistic Theory, ed. Fujimura, O., 57–86. Tokyo: TEC. Also in The Application and Ordering of Grammatical Rules, ed. Andreas Koutsoudas, 160–186. The Hague: Mouton,Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1979). Metrical structure assignment is cyclic. Linguistic Inquiry 10: 421–441.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1982). Lexical morphology and phonology. In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, ed. Yang, I. S., 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1983). Word formation and the lexicon. In Proceedings of the 1982 Mid-America Linguistics Conference, ed. Ingeman, Frances A.. University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1985). Some consequences of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2, 85–138.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1988). Phonological change. In Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, Volume 1, Linguistic Theory: Foundations, ed. Newmeyer, Fritz, 363–415. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1993). Blocking in nonderived environments. In Phonetics and Phonology, Volume 4, Studies in Lexical Phonology, ed. Hargus, Sharon and Kaisse, Ellen, 217–313. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (1995). The phonological basis of sound change. In Handbook of Phonological Theory, ed. Goldsmith, John A., 640–670. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul (2000). Opacity and cyclicity. The Linguistic Review 17: 351–365.Google Scholar
Kirchner, Robert (1996). Synchronic chain shifts in optimality theory. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 341–350.Google Scholar
Kisseberth, Charles W. (1970). On the functional unity of phonological rules. Linguistic Inquiry 1: 291–306.Google Scholar
Klavans, Judith L. (1982). Some Problems in a Theory of Clitics. PhD dissertation, University College, London. IULC.Google Scholar
Klavans, Judith L. (1985). The independence of syntax and phonology in cliticization. Language 61: 95–120.Google Scholar
Lazdiņa, Terēza Budiņa (1966). Teach Yourself Latvian. London: English Universities Press.Google Scholar
Leben, William (1973). Suprasegmental Phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Levin, Juliette (1985). A Metrical Theory of syllabicity. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Liberman, Mark & Prince, Alan S. (1977). On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 249–336.Google Scholar
Łubowicz, Anna (2002). Derived environment effects in Optimality Theory. Lingua 112: 243–280.Google Scholar
Makkai, Valerie Becker (ed.) (1972). Phonological Theory: Evolution and Current Practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Malécot, André (1960). Vowel nasality as a distinctive feature in American English. Language 36: 222–229.Google Scholar
Marchand, Hans (1969). The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation: A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach (second edition). München: C.H. Bech’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Mascaró, Joan (1967). Catalan Phonology and the Phonological Cycle. PhD dissertation, MIT. Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1981). A prosodic theory of nonconcatenative morphology. Linguistic Inquiry 12: 373–418.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1991). Synchronic rule inversion. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. Sutton, Laurel A., Johnson, Christopher & Shields, Ruth, 192–207. Berkleley, California: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1993). A case of surface constraint violation. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 38: 169–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1994). Remarks on phonological opacity in optimality theory. In Proceedings of the Second Colloquium on Afro-Asiatic Linguistics (1996), ed. Jacqueline Lecarme, Jean Lowenstamm, & Ur Shlonsky 215–243. The Hague: Academic Graphics. ROA-79.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (1999). Sympathy and phonological opacity. Phonology 16: 331–399.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. (2007). Hidden Generalizations: Phonological opacity in Optimality Theory. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan S. (1986). Prosodic Morphology. MS, University of Massachusetts, Amherst & Brandeis University. Published as Prosodic Morphology 1986, Technical Report #32, Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, 1996.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan S. (1990). Foot and word in prosodic morphology: the Arabic broken plural. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8: 208–283.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan S. (1993). Prosodic Morphology I: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction. RuCCS-TR-3.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan S. (1995). Faithfulness and reduplicative identity. In University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, ed. Beckman, Jill N., Dickey, Laura Walsh, & Urbanczyk, Suzanne, 249–384. Amherst, MA: GLSA. ROA 60.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. (1968). The Phonological Component of a Grammar of Japanese. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
McMahon, April (2000). Lexical Phonology and the History of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mielke, Jeff (2005). Ambivalence and ambiguity in laterals and nasals. Phonology 22: 169–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkova, Donka (2014). A Historical Phonology of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Miyamori, Asatarō (1932). An Anthology of Haiku, Ancient and Modern. Tokyo: Maruzen. Reprinted (1970), Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Mohanan, Karuvannur Puthanveetti (1986). The Theory of Lexical Phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Mohanan, Karuvannur Puthanveetti & Mohanan, Tara (1984). Lexical phonology of the consonant system in Malayalam. Linguistic Inquiry 15: 575–602.Google Scholar
Myers, Scott (1987). Vowel shortening in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5: 485–518.Google Scholar
Nanni, Debbie L. (1977). Stressing words in -Ative. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 752–763.Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Vogel, Irene (1986). Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Newton, Brian (1972). The Generative Interpretation of Dialect: A Study of Modern Greek Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Odden, David (2008). Ordering. In Rules, Constraints, and Phonological Phenomena, ed. Vaux, Bert & Nevins, Andrew, 61–120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Orkin, Mark M. (1997). Canajan, Eh? Toronto: Stoddart.Google Scholar
Osborn, Henry A. Jr (1966). Warao I: phonology and morphophonemics. International Journal of American Linguistics 32: 108–23.Google Scholar
Pater, Joe (1994). Against the underlying specification of an ‘exceptional’ English stress pattern. Toronto Woking Papers in Linguistics 13(1): 95–121.Google Scholar
Pater, Joe (2000). Nonuniformity in English secondary stress: the role of ranked and lexically specific constraints. Phonology 17: 237–274.Google Scholar
Pike, Kenneth L. (1947). Grammatical prerequisites to phonemic analysis. Word 3: 155–172. Reprinted in Makkai (1972), 153–165.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M. (1968). Aspects of Phonological Theory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan S. (1980). A metrical theory for Estonian quantity. Linguistic Inquiry 11: 511–562.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan S. (1983). Relating to the grid. Linguistic Inquiry 14: 19–100.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan S. & Smolensky, Paul (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Technical Report 2. Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
Pulgram, Ernst (1970). Syllable, Word, Nexus, Cursus. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas (1986). Tone in Lexical Phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey K. (1976). The Duke of York gambit. Journal of Linguistics 12: 83–102.Google Scholar
Rialland, Annie & Badjimé, Mamadon (1989). Réanalyse des tons du Bambara: Des tons du nom à l’organisation générale du système. Studies in African Linguistics 20: 1–28.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert (1972). A reanalysis of English word stress (part I). In Contributions to Generative Phonology, ed. Brame, Michael, 229–323. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy (1984). Segmental rules of English and cyclic phonology. Language 60: 21–54.Google Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy (1996). Shortening and ambisyllabicity in English. Phonology 13: 197–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy (2003). Duke-of-York derivations in Polish. Linguistic Inquiry 34: 601–629.Google Scholar
Rydzewski, Paweł (2018). Canadian Raising and Flapping in Derivational Optimality Theory. In Phonology, Fieldwork and Generalisations, ed. Czaplicki, Bartłomiej, Łukaszewicz, Beata, & Opalińska, Monika, 47–64. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sagey, Elizabeth Caroline (1986). The Representation of Features and Relations in Non-linear Phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Sainz, Susana (1988). A noncyclic analysis of English word stress. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 3: 1–82.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. (1978). On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. In Nordic Prosody II, ed. Fretheim, T., 111–140 (1981). Trondheim: TAPIR.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. (1980a). Prosodic domains in phonology: Sanskrit revisited. In Juncture, ed. Aronoff, Mark & Kean, Mary-Louise, 107–129. Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. (1980b). The role of prosodic categories in English word stress. Linguistic Inquiry 11: 563–605.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. (1982a). The Syntax of Words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. (1982b). The syllable. In The Structure of Phonological Representations (Part II), ed. van der Hulst, Harry & Smith, Norval, 337–383. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. (1984a). Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. (1984b). On the major class features and syllable theory. In Language Sound Structure, ed. Aronoff, Mark & Oehrle, Richard T., 107–136. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Siegel, Dorothy C. (1974). Topics in English Morphology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Stanley, Richard (1967). Redundancy rules in phonology. Language 43: 393–436.Google Scholar
Szpyra, Jolanta (1989). The Morphology-Phonology Interface: Cycles, Levels, and Words. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tauber, Abraham (1963). George Bernard Shaw on Language. New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar
Trager, George L. & Smith, Henry Lee, Jr (1951). An Outline of English Structure. American Council of Learned Societies, Washington, DC. Reprinted by Johnson Reprint Corporation, New York.Google Scholar
Tryon, Darrell T. (1970). An Introduction to Maranungku, Northern Australia (Pacific Linguistics Monographs, Series B, No. 15), Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Vaux, Bert (2008). Why the phonological component must be serial and rule-based. In Rules, Constraints, and Phonological Phenomena, ed. Vaux, Bert & Nevins, Andrew, 20–60. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Walker, John (1936). The Rhyming Dictionary, revised and enlarged by Lawrence H. Dawson. New York: R.P. Dutton.Google Scholar
Wang, William S.-Y. (1967). Phonological features of tone. International Journal of American Linguistics 33: 93–105.Google Scholar
Wells, J.C. (1982). Accents of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Withgott, Mary Margaret (1982). Segmental Evidence for Phonological Constituents. PhD dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Zec, Draga (1988). Sonority Constraints on Prosodic Structure. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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.

  • References
  • John T. Jensen, University of Ottawa
  • Book: The Lexical and Metrical Phonology of English
  • Online publication: 18 June 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108889131.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

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

  • References
  • John T. Jensen, University of Ottawa
  • Book: The Lexical and Metrical Phonology of English
  • Online publication: 18 June 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108889131.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

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

  • References
  • John T. Jensen, University of Ottawa
  • Book: The Lexical and Metrical Phonology of English
  • Online publication: 18 June 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108889131.010
Available formats
×