Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T11:14:50.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonological Features: Problems and Proposals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Lyle Campbell
Lyle Campbell*
Affiliation:
University of Missouri, Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Inadequacies in the Sound pattern of English feature system, in the realm of unattained natural classes and unaccommodated contrasts, are shown; and alternative solutions to these problems are considered. One involves added features; the other involves the notational innovation of the ‘complex symbol’.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , March 1974 , pp. 52 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 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

Ariste, Paul. 1968. A grammar of the Votic language. (Uralic and Altaic series, 68.) Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Lilias E. 1964. The phonetic structure of Somali. Ridgewood, N.J.: Gregg Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, William H. 1969. Pre-Germanic/p/for Indo-European/kw/. Lg. 45.243–7.Google Scholar
Bloch, Bernard. 1950. Studies in colloquial Japanese, IV: phonemics. Lg. 26.86–125.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1917. El dialecto mexicano de Pochutla, Oaxaca. UAL 1. 9–44.Google Scholar
Bright, William. 1972. The enunciative vowel. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 1. 26–55.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1971. Historical linguistics and Quichean linguistic prehistory. UCLA dissertation.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. 1964. Another look at Siouan and Iroquoian. American Anthropologist 66. 852–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Contreras, Heles. 1969. Simplicity, descriptive adequacy, and binary features. Lg. 45.1–8.Google Scholar
DeArmond, R. C 1966. ‘Palatal’ and ‘palatalized’ redefined. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 11. 109–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fromkin, Victoria A. 1970. The concept of ‘naturalness’ in a universal phonetic theory. Glossa 4. 29–45.Google Scholar
Haas, Mary R. 1947. Development of Proto-Muskogean *kw. IJAL 13. 135–7.Google Scholar
Haas, Mary R. 1969. The prehistory of language. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Lauri. 1961. The structure and development of the Finnish language. (Uralic and Altaic series, 3.) Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Hammarberg, Robert. 1971. Onsets and offsets. Papers from the 7th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, 428–36.Google Scholar
Harris, Zellig. 1957. Co-occurrence and transformation in linguistic structure. Lg. 33.283–340.Google Scholar
Hasler, Juan A. 1958. La posición dialectológia del Pipil como parte del Nahua del este. América Indígena 18. 333–9.Google Scholar
Hoard, James. 1967. On the foundations of phonological theory. University of Washington dissertation.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Carl. 1963. A grammar of the Margi language. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hoijer, Harry. 1945. Navaho phonology. (University of New Mexico publications in anthropology, 1.) Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1970. The role of borrowing in the justification of phonological grammars. Studies in African Linguistics 1. 1–48.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R., Fant, G.; and Halle, M. 1951. Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1964. A phonetic study of West African languages. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1970. The phonetic framework of generative phonology. Working Papers in Phonetics, UCLA, 14. 25–33.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1971. Preliminaries to linguistic phonetics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1971. Boundaries as obstruents: Old English voicing assimilation and universal strength hierarchies. Journal of Linguistics 7. 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, Robert. 1961. The phonology of Modern Turkish. (Uralic and Altaic series, 6.) Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Longacre, Robert. 1967. Systematic comparison and reconstruction. (Handbook of Middle American Indians, 5. 117–59) Austin: University of Texas Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCawley, James, MS. On the role of notation in generative phonology. Chicago.Google Scholar
McWhorter, Michael. 1969. A generative phonology of Cakchiquel Maya. Brigham Young University master's thesis.Google Scholar
Nandris, Octave. 1963. Phonétique historique du roumain. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Navarro, Tomás. 1948. Manual de pronunciación española. 4th ed. New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
Newman, Stanley. 1967. Classical Nahuatl. Handbook of Middle American Indians, 5:179–99. Austin: University of Texas Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, Gary. 1969. Comparative Quechua phonology and grammar, IV: the evolution of Quechua A. Working Papers in Linguistics, University of Hawaii, 1:9.149–204.Google Scholar
Polomé, Edgar C. 1967. Swahili language handbook. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul P. 1968. Aspects of phonological theory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Posti, Lauri. 1942. Grundzüge der livische Lautgeschichte. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 85.) Helsinki.Google Scholar
Rosén, Haiim B. 1962. A textbook of Israeli Hebrew. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sapir, E., and Swadesh, M. 1939. Nootka texts. Philadelphia: LSA.Google Scholar
Schane, Sanford A. 1971. The phoneme revisited. Lg. 47.503–21.Google Scholar
Skousen, Royal. 1972. Evidence in phonology, MS, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. 1939. Aus meiner phonologischen Kartothek. TCLP 8. 22–6.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. 1969. Principles of phonology. Translated by C. Baltaxe. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Voegelin, C. F., Voegelin, F. M.; and Hale, Kenneth. 1962. Typological and comparative grammar of Uto-Aztecan: I (phonology). (UAL memoir 17.) Baltimore.Google Scholar
Wang, William S-Y. 1968. Vowel features, paired variables, and the English vowel shift. Lg. 44.695–708.Google Scholar
Wares, Alan C. 1968. A comparative study of Yuman consonantism. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiik, Kalevi. 1967. Suomen kielen morfofonemiikkaa. (Phonetics department of the University of Turku, publication 5.) Turku, Finland.Google Scholar
Zimmer, Karl E. 1969. Psychological correlates of some Turkish morpheme structure conditions. Lg. 45.309–21.Google Scholar