Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T21:03:47.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On ich-Laut, ach-Laut and Structure Preservation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Talke Macfarland and
Janet Pierrehumbert
Talke Macfarland
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Janet Pierrehumbert
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Hall (1989) introduces a rule of Fricative Assimilation (FA) in German, which, he claims, poses a challenge to the principle of Structure Preservation in Lexical Phonology, as presented in Kiparsky (1985). This claim is based on the observation that FA is demonstrably lexical because it respects morpheme boundaries, but nonetheless introduces a nondistinctive feature, thus violating a marking condition. However, Hall has not appreciated the force of the analysis of Catalan in Kiparsky (1985), which suggests that assimilated sequences may show special behaviour with respect to marking conditions. In this paper we show first, based on arguments in Kiparsky (1985), Hayes (1986) and Itô (1988), that a general constraint on the interpretation of autosegmental formalism specifically rules out the application of the marking condition to the output of FA.

Information

Type
Squibs and replies
Information
Phonology , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , May 1991, pp. 171 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

REFERENCES

Bell-Berti, F. & Harris, K. S. (1982). Temporal patterns of coarticulation. JASA 71. 449–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloomfield, L. (1930). German ç and x. Le Maître Phonétique (3rd series) 20. 27–28.Google Scholar
Boyce, S., Krakow, R., Bell-Berti, F. & Gelfer, C. (1990). Converging sources of evidence for dissecting articulatory movements into core gestures. JPh 18. 173–188.Google Scholar
Clements, G. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2. 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, T. (1989). Lexical Phonology and the distribution of German [c] and [x]. Phonology 6. 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, B. (1984). The phonetics and phonology of Russian voicing assimilation. In Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. (eds.) Language sound structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 318–328.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1986). Inalterability in CV phonology. Lg 62. 321–351.Google Scholar
Itô, J. (1988). Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Keating, P. (1988). Underspecification in phonetics. Phonology 5. 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1985). Some consequences of Lexical Phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2. 85–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meinhold, G. & Stock, E. (1980). Phonologie der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut.Google Scholar
Öhman, S. E. G. (1966). Coarticulation in VCV utterances: spectrographic measurements. JASA 39. 151–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierrehumbert, J. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. PhD dissertation, MIT. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. & Beckman, M. (1988). Japanese tone structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sagey, E. (1986). The representation of features and relations in non-linear phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Sussman, H. M. & Westbury, J. R. (1981). The effects of antagonistic gestures on temporal and amplitude parameters of anticipatory labial coarticulation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 46. 16–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar