Feature-based models of sign language use distinctive features to describe the phonological structure of signs. We use near-minimal pairs and phonological phenomena like productivity and neutralisation in French Sign Language to show that the feature [web], which refers to the webbing part of the fingers, should be (re)introduced into the list of phonologically active features. In discussing potential cases of [web] in other sign languages and the impact on the shape of phonological inventories, we first offer an account of [web] in terms of a location feature in line with most traditional feature-geometry models. We then offer some speculations on why a more uniform characterisation of [web] and the features in the same subclass in terms of the orientation type results in more economical models.

In a recent squib Manaster Ramer attempts to show ‘that rules of versification may not be sensitive to representations deeper than phonemic (or the similar lexical and syntactico-phonological levels of Lexical Phonology)’ (1994: 321–322). Manaster Ramer includes some of my work on Early Irish alliteration (1988c), challenging my claim that explication of such alliteration requires orthometric (versificational) interfacing at an underlying level of phonological representation and claiming that my explication ‘involve[s] rules which were clearly invented by native grammarians and metricians and often violated in natural, as opposed to formal, verse, and which, even more to the point, make crucial reference, not to deep levels of phonology, but rather to the orthography’ (1994: 321). I will attempt to counter this statement in §2, though I am somewhat handicapped by the fact that Manaster Ramer does not actually give any evidence for his position. However, since his claim goes beyond Irish to challenge deep-level orthometric interfacing in any and all languages, in the rest of this reply I will appeal to non-Irish evidence in attempting to show the weakness of his position. In particular, I will briefly review some of my work in Hebrew metre (§ 3) and Turkish rhyme (§4) – work cited by Manaster Ramer in his references but not addressed in the body of his paper (Malone 1982, 1983, 1988b).

This paper argues that tone-driven epenthesis is possible in tonal languages. In Wamey, an epenthetic [ə] is inserted to host a high tone in two contexts: first, to host a tone which would otherwise be left floating due to a restriction on rising tones (/cv̀cⒽ/ maps to [cv̀cə́] due to a ban *[cv̌c]); and second, to host a tone which is introduced by word-level morphology but is restricted from associating across a stem boundary. These patterns cannot be attributed to syllable phonotactics, which freely allow all consonants in the coda position. We assemble the evidence for tone-driven epenthesis, focusing on the distribution of final [ə] in lexical stem structure and [ə]-alternating suffixes. A simple OT analysis derives [ə]-epenthesis, utilising common constraints (e.g. *Rise, OCP(H), etc.) together with constraints against associating tone across prosodic boundaries. In total, Wamey epenthesis exemplifies the cultivation of segmental environments for the purpose of realising pitch targets.

Determining where words begin and end can be a vexing task; one which requires knowledge of the phonological and morphosyntactic structure of a language. Studies on the phonological word is a compilation of articles which grew from a conference on the phonological word held in Berlin in 1997. There are nine papers, the first being a useful overview of the state of the art with respect to the phonological word. The remaining articles provide detailed studies from a diverse set of language families, including Salishan (Beck), Bantu (Downing), Indo-European (Booij, Hall, Raffelsiefen, Vigário), Algonquian (Russell), Siouan (Russell), as well as from Israeli Sign Language (Sandler). Each study provides detailed argumentation and makes more than a few points of interest regarding issues surrounding the phonological word. The volume provides many valuable contributions of interest to both theoretically and empirically inclined phonologists and morphologists.

A thorough coverage of each contribution would lead well beyond the scope of this review. Instead, following the overview, a central theoretical and empirical point from each article will be provided. This is followed by a brief discussion of some of the general and recurrent themes of the studies presented in the book.

Unlike existing analyses with lexical tone, metrical foot-based approaches to tonal accent in Franconian not only focus on an explicit analysis of the tonal contours, but are also equipped to account formally for morphological alternations and other predictable correlates. Examples are interactions of tonal accent with duration, vowel and consonant quality. The existence of such additional correlates is in line with a foot-based analysis, since it mirrors correlates of stress and foot structure found in Germanic languages and elsewhere.

In Optimality Theory (OT), a grammar is a language-particular ranking of universal constraints (Prince & Smolensky 1993).This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under grant SBR- 9420424. I am grateful for comments received from Juliette Blevins, Mike Hammond, Paul de Lacy, Ania Łubowicz, Alan Prince, Doug Pulleyblank, Iggy Roca, Nick Sherrard and Jen Smith. Of course, I alone am responsible for the contents of this review. There are two types of constraints: markedness constraints prohibit (or require) certain output configurations; and faithfulness constraints demand identity in input → output mappings. Phonological generalisations are expressed by the interaction, through ranking, of these constraints.

In classical generative phonology (CGP), a grammar is a language-particular ordering of rules (Chomsky & Halle 1968). Though the rules are also language- particular, they are constructed using universal abbreviatory devices subject to an evaluation metric. Phonological generalisations are expressed by the rules and their ordering.

This article responds to Pater (2018) by arguing for a view of phonology that captures the computational properties of phonological processes. Jardine's (2016) statement that tone is formally more complex than segmental phonology is not a claim, as Pater characterises it, but an empirical observation. This article outlines how phonological theories can incorporate such observations, and integrate them with considerations of phonological substance. The conclusion is that, while computational characterisations are not necessarily alternatives to Optimality Theory, it is extremely diffcult to capture the computational nature of phonological processes in Optimality Theory, due to the expressive power of global optimisation.

While attested phonological mappings appear to be regular, Optimality Theory is known to implement more complex functions. This squib contributes to the computational characterisation of Optimality Theory by constructing a grammar that implements a non-pushdown function. By using only simple, familiar constraints, the result suggests that a large proportion of optimality-theoretic grammars are more powerful than necessary as models of phonology.