No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Are phonosyntactic rules necessary?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 February 2020
Extract
Selkirk (1986) proposes that rules of the phrasal phonology apply to a structure called P-structure that is derived from, but not isomorphic to, syntactic structure. While Selkirk claims that most rules of external sandhi fall into the category of P-structure rules, there are three rules that she suggests may still require direct reference to syntactic structure. These are Mende Consonant Mutation (Conteh et al. 1986), Kimatuumbi Vowel Shortening (Odden this volume), and ‘perhaps even rules like English wanna contraction’ (Selkirk 1986: 374). Selkirk says that these rules ‘appear to be sensitive to a richer array of syntactic conditions than would be expressible via the translation of syntax into P-structure’.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987
Footnotes
*
The authors are listed in alphabetical order; no priority of authorship is intended. We would like to thank Ellen Kaisse and Peter Avery for helpful comments.
References
Clements, G. N. (1978). Tone and syntax in Ewe. In Napoli, D. J. (ed.) Elements of tone, stress, and intonation. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. 21–99.Google Scholar
Conteh, P.Cowper, E. A. & Rice, K. (1986). The environment for consonant mutation in Mende. In Dimmendaal, G. J. (ed.) Current approaches to African linguistics. Vol. 3. Dordrecht: Foris. 107–116.Google Scholar
Cowper, E. A & Rice, K. (1986). The phonology of Mende consonant mutation. Paper presented at the 17th Annual Conference on African Linguistics.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. M (1985). Connected speech: the interaction of syntax and phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- 12
- Cited by