Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:19:50.367Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Floating yet grounded: Feature transmutation in Optimality Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Darin Flynn
Darin Flynn*
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstarct

It is argued that proxy relations between feature-defining and enhancing gestures in the phonetics can become phonologized. The article proposes Optimality-theoretic markedness constraints, which are grounded in phonetic enhancement and which can compel a delinked/unparsed/floating feature to be realized with another feature (or prosodic element), giving the impression of featural transmutation. Among the phonological phenomena revisited are incomplete neutralization, devoicing, vocalization, and debuccalization.

Résumé

Résumé

Cet article prône l'idée que les rapports de substitution, en phonétique, entre les gestes définitoires de traits et les gestes de consolidation peuvent se phonologiser. Sont proposées, dans le cadre de la Théorie de l'Optimalité, des contraintes sur la marque fondées sur la consolidation du contraste phonétique; celles-ci peuvent forcer la réalisation d'un trait flottant/délié/non analysé par un autre trait (ou élément prosodique), donnant ainsi l'impression d'une transmutation de traits. Parmi les phénomènes phonologiques revus selon cette optique figurent la neutralisation incomplète, le dévoisement, la vocalisation et la débuccalisation.

Keywords

phonology-phonetics relationshipdistinctive featuresOptimality Theoryphonologizationrapport phonologie/phonétiquetraits distinctsthéorie de l'optimalitéphonologisation
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 56 , Issue 3 , November 2011 , pp. 377 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 2011

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

Akinlabi, Akinbiyi. 2011. Featural affixes. In The Blackwell companion to phonology, ed. Oostendorp, Marc van, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth, and Rice, Keren, 1945-1971. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1994. Grounded phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 2002. Kinande vowel harmony: Domains, grounded conditions, and one-sided alignment. Phonology 19: 139–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azevedo, Milton Mariano. 1981. A contrastive phonology of Portuguese and English. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Bais, Maurizio. 1997. La lunghezza vocalica nella lettura di parole friulane e di non parole. Cefastu? 73: 7–29.Google Scholar
Baroni, Marco and Vanelli, Laura. 2000. The relationship between vowel length and consonantal voicing in Friulian. In Phonological theory and the dialects of Italy, ed. Repetti, Lori, 13—44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. Fraser. 1987. Consonant merger in Navajo: An underspecified analysis. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 17: 1–19.Google Scholar
Benus, Stefan and Gafos, Adamantios I.. 2007. Articulatory characteristics of Hungarian ‘transparent’ vowels. Journal of Phonetics 35: 271–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernhardt, Barbara H. and Stemberger, Joseph P.. 1998. Handbook of phonological development: From the perspective of constraint-based nonlinear phonology. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bird, Charles S. 1966. Aspects of Bambara syntax. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Bishop, Jason B. 2007. Incomplete neutralization in Eastern Andalusian Spanish: Perceptual consequences of durational differences involved in s-aspiration. Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 16: 1765–1768.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 2006. A theoretical synopsis of Evolutionary Phonology. Theoretical Linguistics 32: 117–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, Eugene. 1994. Theoretical aspects of Kashaya phonology and morphology. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) Publications.Google Scholar
Cairns, Charles E. and Raimy, Eric. 2009. Architecture and representations in phonology. In Contemporary views on architecture and representations in phonological theory, ed. Raimy, Eric and Cairns, Charles E., 1–16. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea. 2005. Markedness and economy in a derivational model of phonology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Clark, Mary Morris. 1990. The tonal system of lgbo. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G.N. 1985. The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2: 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G.N. 2009. The role of features in phonological inventories. In Contemporary views on architecture and representations in phonological theory, ed. Raimy, Eric and Cairns, Charles E., 19–68. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G.N. and Ford, Kevin C.. 1979. Kikuyu tone shift and its synchronic consequences. Linguistic Inquiry 10: 179–210.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail C. 2007. Phonetics in phonology and phonology in phonetics. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 16: 1–31.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail C. 2011. Features, segments, and the sources of phonological primitives. In Where do phonological features come from? Cognitive, physical and developmental bases of distinctive speech categories, ed. Clements, G. Nick and Ridouane, Rachid, 15–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Collischonn, Gisela. 2008. Variable aspects of Brazilian Portuguese phonology: The laterals in coda. In Contemporary phonology in Brazil, ed. Bisol, Leda and Brescancini, Cláudia Regina, 177–192. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Connell, Bruce. 2011. Downstep. In The Blackwell companion to phonology, ed. Oostendorp, Marc van, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth, and Rice, Keren, 824–847. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Crowhurst, Megan. 2001. Coda conditions and Um infixation in Toba Batak. Lingua 111:561–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Lacy, Paul. 2006. Markedness: Reduction and preservation in phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Lacy, Paul. 2009. Phonological evidence. In Phonological argumentation: Essays on evidence and motivation, ed. Parker, Steve, 43–78. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Denes, Peter B. 1955. Effect of duration on the perception of voicing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 27: 761–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, Randy L. 2008. Acoustic and auditory phonetics: The adaptive design of speech sound systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences 363: 965–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, Randy L. and Kluender, Keith R.. 1989a. On the objects of speech perception. Ecological Psychology 1: 121–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, Randy L. and Keith R., Kluender. 1989b. Reply to commentators. Ecological Psychology 1: 195–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, Randy L., Kluender, Keith R., and Walsh, Margaret A.. 1990. Some auditory bases of speech perception and production. In Advances in speech, hearing and language processing, ed. Ainsworth, William Anthony, 243–268. London: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Dinnsen, Daniel A. 1985. A re-examination of phonological neutralization. Journal of Linguistics 21: 265–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobrovolsky, Michael and Patricia A., Shaw. 1993. On the feature [spread glottis]. In 25th Anniversary of Linguistics at the University of Toronto. Toronto.Google Scholar
Fallon, Paul D. 2002. The synchronic and diachronic phonology ofejectives. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Feldman, David M. 1972. On utterance-final [I] and [u] in Portuguese. In Papers in linguistics and phonetics to the memory of Pierre Delattre, ed. Valdman, Albert, 129–142. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caroline, Féry. 2003. Final devoicing and the stratification of the lexicon in German. In The phonological spectrum, ed. Weijer, Jeroen van de, Heuven, Vincent van, and Hulst, Harry van der, 145–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fukazawa, Haruka and Kitahara, Mafuyu. 2001. Domain-relative faithfulness and the OCP: Rendaku revisited. In Issues in Japanese phonology and morphology, ed. Weijer, Jeroen Maarten van de and Nishihara, Tetsuo, 85–109. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerfen, Chip. 2001. A critical view of licensing by cue: The case of Andalusian Spanish. In Segmental phonology in Optimality Theory, ed. Lombardi, Linda, 183–205. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerfen, Chip. 2002. Andalusian codas. Probus 14: 247–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gick, Bryan, Campbell, Fiona, Oh, Sunyoung, and Tamburi-Watt, Linda. 2006. Toward universal in the gestural organization of syllables: A cross-linguistic study of liquids. Journal of Phonetics 34: 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldrick, Matthew. 2000. Turbid output representations and the unity of opacity. In Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society (NELS), vol. 30, ed. Hirotani, Masako, Coetzee, Andries, Hall, Nancy, and Kim, Ji-Yung, 231–246. Graduate Linguistic Student Association (GLSA), University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John A. 1973. Tonemic structure. Ms. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John A. 1976. Autosegmental Phonology. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).Google Scholar
Gomez-Imbert, Elsa and Kenstowicz, Michael. 2000. Barasana tone and accent. International Journal of American Linguistics (IJAL) 66: 419–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gow, W. Jr. 2002. Does English coronal place assimilation create lexical ambiguity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 28: 163–179.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2004. The phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gussmann, Edmund. 2002. Phonology: analysis and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, T.A. 2005. Paradigm uniformity effects in German phonology. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 17: 225–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1995. Feature geometry and feature spreading. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 1–46.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 2005. Palatalization/velar softening: What it is and what it tells us about the nature of language. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargus, Sharon. 1985. The lexical phonology of Sekani. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1986. Assimilation as spreading in Toba Batak. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 467–499.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1990. Diphthongisation and coindexing. Phonology 7: 31–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heiberg, Andrea. 1999. Features in Optimality Theory: A computational model. Doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Howe, Darin [Flynn]. 2000. Oowekyala segmental phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Howe, Darin [Flynn] and Pulleyblank, Douglas. 2004. Harmonic scales as faithfulness. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 49: 1—49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howren, Robert A. 1971. A formalization of the Athabaskan 'd-effect' International Journal of American Linguistics 37: 96–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2008. Enlarging the scope of phonologization. University of California Berkeley Phonology Lab Annual Report, 382–409.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2011. Tone: is it different? In The handbook of phonological theory, ed. Goldsmith, John, Riggle, Jason, and Yu, Alan, 197-239. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko. 1986. Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko, Mester, Armin, and Padgett, Jaye. 1995. Licensing and underspecification in Optimality Theory. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 571–613.Google Scholar
Iverson, Gregory K. and Salmons, Joseph. 2011. Final devoicing and final laryngeal neutralization. In The Blackwell companion to phonology, ed. Oostendorp, Marc van, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth, and Rice, Keren, 1622-1643. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wouter, Jansen. 2004. Laryngeal contrast and phonetic voicing: A laboratory phonology approach to English, Hungarian, and Dutch. Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Johnson, Wyn and Britain, David. 2007. L-vocalisation as a natural phenomenon: Explorations in sociophonology. Language Sciences 29: 294–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, Thomas M. 1975. The modern Southern Arabian languages. Afroasiatic Linguistics 1: 93–121.Google Scholar
Johnstone, Thomas M. 1977. Harsusi lexicon. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jurgec, Peter. 2010. Disjunctive lexical stratification. Linguistic Inquiry 41: 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kager, René. 1999. Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyser, Samuel J. and Stevens, Kenneth N.. 2006. Enhancement and overlap in the speech chain. Language 82: 33–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingston, John. 2007. The phonetics-phonology interface. In The Cambridge handbook of phonology, ed. Lacy, Paul de, 435–456. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kingston, John and Diehl, Randy L.. 1994. Phonetic knowledge. Language 70: 419–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingston, John and Diehl, Randy. 1995. Intermediate properties in the perception of distinctive feature values. In Phonology and phonetics: Papers in Laboratory Phonology IV, ed. Connell, Bruce and Arvaniti, Amalia, 7–27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1968. How abstract is phonology? Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 2003. Commentary: Some thoughts on syllables — an old-fashioned interlude. In Phonetic interpretation: Papers in Laboratory Phonology VI, ed. Local, John, Ogden, Richard, and Temple, Rosalind, 269–278. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter and Maddieson, Ian. 1996. The sounds of the world's languages. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1984. Phonology: An introduction to basic concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leben, William R. 1973. Suprasegmental phonology. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).Google Scholar
Levesque, Claire. 1992. Hachismo, or the behavior of /s/ in the Spanish of Seville. Honors thesis, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
Levi, Susannah V. 2008. Phonemic vs. derived glides. Lingua 118: 1956–1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindkoog, John N. and Brend, Ruth M.. 1962. Cayapa phonemics. In Studies in Ecuadorian Indian languages, ed. Elson, Benjamin F., 31–44. Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of Oklahoma.Google Scholar
Mateus, Maria, Mira, Helena, and Ernesto d’Pardal, Andrade. 2000. The phonology of Portuguese. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1988. Feature geometry and dependency: A review. Phonetica 43:84–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2002. A thematic guide to Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2007. Hidden generalizations: phonological opacity in Optimality Theory. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 2008. The gradual path to cluster simplification. Phonology 25:271–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, Joyce. 2003. The Navajo sound system. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, Ramona. 2004. Retraction in Montana Salish lateral consonants: An ultrasonic study. Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Miotti, Renzo. 2002. Friulian. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 32:237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, Bruce R. 1962. Correspondences in South Barbacoan Chibcha. In Studies in Ecuadorian Indian languages, ed. Elson, Benjamin F., 270–289. Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of Oklahoma.Google Scholar
Morelli, Frida. 1999. The phonotactics and phonology of obstruent clusters in Optimality Theory. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Moren, Bruce. 2001. Distinctiveness, coercion and sonority: A unified theory of weight. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Morris, Richard E. 2002. Coda obstruents and local constraint conjunction in north-central Peninsular Spanish. In Current Issues in Linguistic Theory: Selected papers from the XXIXth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, ed. Cresti, Diana, Satter, Teresafield, and Tortora, Christina, 207–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Myers, Scott. 1997a. OCP effects in Optimality Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15:847–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, Scott. 1997b. Expressing phonetic naturalness in phonology. In Derivations and constraints in phonology, ed. Roca, Iggy, 125–152. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Olson, Kenneth S. and Schultz, Paul H.. 2002. Can [sonorant] spread? Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics 46:1–7.Google Scholar
Oostendorp, Marc van. 2008. Incomplete devoicing in formal phonology. Lingua 118:1362–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padgett, Jaye. 2002. Feature classes in phonology. Language 78:81–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, Carole and Prunet, Jean-François. 1991. The special status of coronals: internal and external evidence. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Perkell, Joseph S., Matthies, Melanie L., and Zandipour, Majid. 1998. Motor equivalence in the production of/J/ (abstract). Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 103:3085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pineros, Carlos-Eduardo. 2001. Segment-to-syllable alignment and vocalization in Chilean Spanish. Lingua 111:163–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Port, Robert F. and Leary, Adam P.. 2005. Against formal phonology. Language 81:927–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, Alan and Smolensky, Paul. 2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1986. Tone in lexical phonology. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1996. Neutral vowels in Optimality Theory: A comparison of Yoruba and Wolof. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 41:295–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1997. Optimality theory and features. In Optimality Theory: An overview, ed. Archangeli, Diana and Langendoen, D. Terence, 59–101. Maiden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1998. Markedness-based feature-based faithfulness. Paper presented at the Southwest Optimality Theory Workshop (SWOT) Conference, Tucson, AZ.Google Scholar
Pulleyblank, Douglas. 2002. Harmony drivers: No disagreement allowed. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 28:249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Repetti, Lori. 1994. Degenerate syllables in Friulian. Linguistic Inquiry 25:186–193.Google Scholar
Revithiadou, Anthi. 2007. Colored turbid accents and Containment: A case study from lexical stress. In Freedom of analysis?, ed. Blaho, Sylvia, Bye, Patrik, and Kramer, Martin, 149–174. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1987. The function of structure preservation: Derived environments. Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society (NELS) 17, ed. McDonough, Joyce and Plunkett, Bernadette, 501–519. Graduate Linguistic Student Association (GLSA), University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1994. Laryngeal features in Athapaskan languages. Phonology 11:107–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringen, Catherine O. and Vago, Robert M.. 1998. Hungarian vowel harmony in Optimality Theory. Phonology 15:393–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roca, Iggy and Johnson, Wyn. 1999. A course in phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rosen, Eric. 2003. Systematic irregularity in Japanese rendaku: How the grammar mediates patterned lexical exceptions. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 48:1–37.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1938. Glottalized continuants in Navaho, Nootka, and Kwakiutl (with a note on Indo-European). Language 14:248–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Patricia A. 1991. Consonant harmony systems: The special status of coronal harmony. In Phonetics and phonology: The special status of coronals: Internal and external evidence, ed. Paradis, Carole and Prunet, Jean-François, 125–179. San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simeone-Senelle, Marie-Claude. 1997. The modern South Arabian languages. In The Semitic languages, ed. Hetzron, Robert, 378–423. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Speas, Margaret. 1984. Navajo prefixes and word structure typology. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 7:86–109.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1982. Greek prosodics and the nature of syllabification. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N., Keyser, Samuel J., and Kawasaki, Haruko. 1986. Toward a phonetic and phonological theory of redundant features. In Invariance and variability in speech processes, ed. Perkell, Joseph S. and Klatt, Dennis H., 426–449. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. 2005. Features in speech perception and lexical access. In The handbook of speech perception, ed. Pisoni, David B. and Remez, Robert E., 125–155. Maiden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. and Keyser, Samuel J.. 2010. Quantal theory, enhancement and overlap. Journal of Phonetics 38:10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Struijke, Caro. 2002. Existential faithfulness: A study of reduplicative TETU, feature movement and dissimilation. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 2002. Vietnamese and tonogenesis: Revising the model and the analysis. Diachronica 19:333–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanelli, Laura. 1979. L’allungamento delle vocali in Friulano. Cefastu? 55:66–76.Google Scholar
Vanelli, Laura. 2005. Le vocali lunghe del friulano. In Linguistica friulana, ed. Benincà, Paola and Vanelli, Laura, 159–198. Padua: Unipress.Google Scholar
Vaux, Bert. 1998. The laryngeal specifications of fricatives. Linguistic Inquiry 29:497–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaux, Bert. 2001. The Armenian dialect of Aslanbeg. Annual of Armenian Linguistics 21:31–64.Google Scholar
Warner, Natasha, Jongman, Allard, Sereno, Joan A., and Kemps, Rachel. 2004. Incomplete neutralization and other sub-phonemic durational differences in production and perception: Evidence from Dutch. Journal of Phonetics 32:251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Martha. 1984. The CV skeleton and mapping in Navajo verb phonology. Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society (NELS) 14, ed. Jones, Charles and Sells, Peter, 461–477. Graduate Linguistic Student Association (GLSA), University of Massachusetts, Amherst Google Scholar
Yamamoto, S. 1993. Alcuni ampliamenti dei casi dell’allungamento vocalico. In Per Giovan Battista Pellegrini: Scritti degli allieve padovani, ed. Vanelli, Laura and Zamboni, Alberto, 645–655. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 2001. Tonal features, tonal inventories and phonetic targets. University College London Working Papers in Linguistics 13:303–329.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 2003. Tone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 2005. Variability in feature affiliations through violable constraints: The case of [lateral]. In The internal organization of phonological segments, ed. Oostendorp, Marc van and Weijer, Jeroen van de, 63–92. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zoll, Cheryl C. 1998. Parsing below the segment in a constraint-based framework. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI).Google Scholar
Zsiga, Elizabeth C. 1994. Acoustic evidence for gestural overlap in consonant sequences. Journal of Phonetics 22:121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar