Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T14:23:14.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Concreteness in Generative Phonology

Review products

Concreteness in generative phonology: Evidence from French. By BernardTranel. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1981. Pp. xiv, 324. $29.50.
An introduction to Old French morphophonology. By Douglas C.Walker. (Studia phonetica, 19.) Ottawa: Didier, 1981. Pp. xiv, 125.
Generative phonology: A case-study from French. By NigelLove. (Lingvisticae investigationes: Supplementa, Studies in French & general linguistics, 4.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins, 1981. Pp. viii, 241.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Jurgen Klausenburger
Jurgen Klausenburger*
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract 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.'

Information

Type
Review Article
Information
Language , Volume 59 , Issue 3 , September 1983 , pp. 608 - 626
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 by Linguistic Society of America

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, Stephen R. 1982. The analysis of French shwa: Or, how to get something for nothing. Lg. 58.534–73.Google Scholar
For another version of the role of the syllable in liaison and h-aspiré, see Clements & Keyser (1981:72–88).Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, Robert. 1981. Comments on Dresher. The logical problem of language acquisition, ed. by Baker, C. L. & McCarthy, John J., 211–17. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bruck, Anthony, et al. 1974 (eds.) Papers from the Parasession on Natural Phonology. Chicago: CLS.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, and Pardo, Elly. 1981. On lexical and morphological conditioning of alternations: A nonce-probe experiment with Spanish verbs. Linguistics n.s. 19.937–68.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Churma, Donald G. 1977. On choosing between linguistic analyses: A reply to Klausenburger. Lingua 42.131–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, George N., and Keyser, Samuel J. 1981. A three-tiered theory of the syllable. (Harvard studies in phonology, Occasional paper 19.) Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Dell, François. 1970. Les règles phonologiques tardives et la morphologie dérivationnelle du français. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Dell, François. 1973. Les règles et les sons: Introduction à la phonologie générative. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
Dell, François. 1980. Generative phonology and French phonology. Trans. by Catherine Cullen. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Dell, François. 1981. On the learnability of optional phonological rules. LI 12.31–7.Google Scholar
Dell, François, and Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1978. On a morphologically governed vowel alternation in French. Recent transformational studies in European languages, ed. by Keyser, Samuel J., 1–51. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dinnsen, Daniel. 1979 (ed.) Current approaches to phonological theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. E. 1981a. Abstractness and explanation in phonology. Explanation in linguistics, ed. by Hornstein, Norbert & Lightfoot, David, 76–115. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. E. 1981b. On the learnability of abstract phonology. The logical problem of language acquisition, ed. by Baker, C. L. & McCarthy, John J., 188–210. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gussmann, Edmund. 1980. Studies in abstract phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan. 1976. An introduction to natural generative phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hudson, Grover. 1975. Suppletion in the representation of alternations. UCLA dissertation.Google Scholar
Klausenburger, Jurgen. 1974. Rule inversion, opacity, conspiracies: French liaison and elision. Lingua 34.167–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klausenburger, Jurgen. 1977. Deletion vs. epenthesis: Intra- vs. interparadigmatic arguments in linguistics. Lingua 42.153–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klausenburger, Jurgen. 1978. French linking phenomena: A natural generative analysis. Lg. 54.21–40.Google Scholar
Klausenburger, Jurgen. 1979. Morphologization: Studies in Latin and Romance morphophonology. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klausenburger, Jurgen 1981a. Liaison in Canadian French revisited. Lingvisticae Investigationes 5.405–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klausenburger, Jurgen. 1981b. Romance phonological studies in the 70's. Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Symposium on Romance Linguistics, ed. by Contreras, Heles & Klausenburger, J., 197–213. Seattle: University of Washington.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1980. On explaining language change. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Long, Mark. 1978. Discussion of Klausenburger's paper. Studies in French Linguistics 1.21–6.Google Scholar
Love, Nigel. 1977. The generative phonological analysis of non-vocalic alternations in Modern French. Oxford dissertation.Google Scholar
Love, Nigel, and Harris, Roy. 1974. A note on French nasal vowels. Linguistics 126.63–8.Google Scholar
Morin, Yves-Charles. 1980. Morphologisation de l'épenthèse en ancien français. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 25.204–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morin, Yves-Charles, and Kaye, Jonathan. 1982. The syntactic bases for French liaison. Journal of Linguistics 18.291–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, Rebecca. 1971. Review of Schane 1968. RPh. 24.625–33.Google Scholar
Pulgram, Ernst. 1971. Review of Language and mind, by Chomsky, Noam. Modern Language Journal 55.474–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schane, Sanford. 1968. French phonology and morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schane, Sanford. 1973. The treatment of phonological exceptions: The evidence from French. Issues in linguistics: Papers in honor of Henry and Renée Kahane, ed. by Kachru, Braj B. et al., 822–35. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Schane, Sanford. 1974. There is no French truncation rule. Linguistic studies in Romance languages, ed. by Campbell, R. J. et al., 89–99. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Schane, Sanford. 1978. Deletion vs. epenthesis: A pseudo-controversy. Studies in French Linguistics 1.71–8.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1972. The phrase phonology of English and French. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1974. French liaison and the X notation. LI 5.573–90.Google Scholar
Tranel, Bernard. 1974. The phonology of nasal vowels in Modern French. San Diego: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Tranel, Bernard. 1976a. A note on final consonant deletion in Modern French. Lingua 39.53–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tranel, Bernard. 1976b. A generative treatment of the prefix in- of Modern French. Lg. 52.345–69.Google Scholar
Tranel, Bernard. 1982. Review of Dell 1980. Lg. 58.907–15.Google Scholar
Walker, Douglas. 1971. Old French phonology and morphology. San Diego: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Walker, Douglas. 1982. Review of Dell 1980. Journal of Linguistics 18.206–9.Google Scholar