Review of “Phonology and language use” by Joan Bybee (original) (raw)

The interface between morphology and phonology

2000

In this paper, a comment on Kaisse's article on the role of phonology in English word formation, a range of phenomena is discussed that confirm Kaisse's conclusion that "the relation between word formation and phonology is complex." The article deals with a number of types of interaction between morphology and phonology, in particular prosodic determinants of the shape of bound

On the Relationship Between Morphology and Phonology: Interactionism vs. Noninteractionism

ENGLISH LINGUISTICS, 1995

Since its introduction in 1982, Lexical Phonology has contributed to an increased understanding of language. The segmental phonology of several languages have been analyzed in this framework including Korean by Ahn (1985), Malayalam by Mohanan (1986), English by Borowsky (1986), Basque by Hualde (1988), and Japanese by Ishihara (1991). Pulleyblank (1986) applied Lexical Phonology to analyses of tone in African languages. Since 1982, the tenets of the theory such as level-ordered morphology and phonology have been challenged and the model itself has been modified to accommodate new findings. Volume 4 of Phonetics and Phonology edited by S. Hargus and E. M. Kaisse is an outcome of a workshop on Lexical Phonology held at the University of Washington in 1990. The book, consisting of three parts, contains sixteen articles. The articles in Part I deal with the relation between morphology and phonology. The papers contained in Part II discuss some basic tenets of the theory such as structure preservation, the derived environment condition, and the strict cycle condition. Finally, the articles in Part III discuss application of the theory to historical change. * I would like to thank Peter R. Petrucci for checking English and suggesting stylistic improvements. I am also grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions to an earlier draft of this article. All remaining errors are of course my own.

Introduction: the interface of morphology and phonology

Morphology, 2014

the conference "Morphology and its Interfaces" was held at the University of Lille 3. The conference addressed questions concerning morphology and its internal or external interfaces, from a diachronic or synchronic perspective. Its aim was to foster the study of interactions between morphology and other domains of linguistics. This special issue is devoted to the phonology-morphology interface, and presents five selected papers on this topic. There is little doubt that the relation between phonology and morphology is of great importance for the analysis of various phenomena. Several flectional and derivational phenomena directly involve both domains, for example reduplication and stem alternation. Other morphological phenomena need to have recourse to phonological constraints to be explained. Booij (2000) lists different sorts of interactions between word formation and phonology, such as the influence of morphological structure on the phonetic shape of complex words, and the role of phonological output conditions in making a choice between competing affixes. However, different from other types of interface such as the syntax-phonology interface (see Elordieta 2008 and Selkirk 2012, for overviews), the phonologymorphology interface received little attention from scholars these last decades, with

ON THE INTERACTION OF PHONOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY: A CHI-MWI:NI EXAMPLE

In the present note we discuss a problem in linguistic description located at the interface between morphology and morphophonemics. Some possible descriptions of the data eure presented, cind their relative merits briefly analyzed. The data appear to us to be sufficiently interesting to weirrant examination, even though at the present time the proper description of the data remains open to question.

Phonological templates and the lexicon

Lexis, 2024

The text only may be used under licence CC BY-SA 4.0. All other elements (illustrations, imported files) are "All rights reserved", unless otherwise stated. Semra Baturay-Meral I sincerely thank the editor and the anonymous reviewers for taking the time to review the manuscript and for providing constructive feedback to improve it.

Some consequences of Lexical Phonology

Phonology, 1985

Phonological theory in recent years can be said to have undergone a ‘modularisation’ in several respects. The formal theory is no longer expected to explain everything about phonology by itself: generalisations about phonological change which previously were used to motivate constraints on abstractness or opacity have turned out to make more sense as effects of real-time language acquisition and use. Secondly, phonological representations have become multi-tiered arrays, and much that seemed problematic about the application of rules has resolved itself in terms of properties of these arrays. Lastly, phonology itself is seen as applying both within the lexicon to the output of each morphological process, and to the output of the syntsactic component. The lexicon, moreover, may itself be organised into a hierarchy of levels, each constituting a quasi-autonomous morphological and phonological domain. In this paper I propose to investigate some consequences of this third kind of modula...

Lloret & Jiménez (2005): Morphology in Phonology : introduction

Catalan Journal of Linguistics 4: 9-16, 2005

This fourth volume of Catalan Journal of Linguistics is devoted to a topic discussed at length in the literature but which nevertheless remains a challenge for any view of phonology: the morphology-phonology interaction. The papers collected address two related issues, the role of morphological information in phonology and the role of phonological information in morphology. The first six articles (i.e. McCarthy, Wheeler, Downing, van Oostendorp, José and Auger, and Rice) deal with the former topic; the last three (i.e. Bertinetto and Jetchev, Pérez Saldanya and Vallès, and Viaplana), with the latter. Several papers (Wheeler, van Oostendorp, Rice, Bertinetto and Jetchev, Pérez Saldanya and Vallès, and Viaplana) further discuss the role and concept of paradigms, an old Neogrammarian notion to which renewed attention has been payed both from the phonological perspective (cf. work