Abler, W. L. (1989). On the particulate principle of self-diversifying systems. Journal of Social and Biological Systems, 12, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Abramson, M. & Goldinger, S. D. (1997). What the reader’s eye tells the mind’s ear: silent reading activates inner speech. Perception and Psychophysics, 59, 1059–1068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Adam, G. & Bat-El, O. (2009). When do universal preferences emerge in language development? The acquisition of Hebrew stress. Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Language and Linguistics, 1, 255–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adriaans, F. & Kager, R. (2010). Adding generalization to statistical learning: the induction of phonotactics from continuous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 311–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Albright, A. (2007). Natural classes are not enough: biased generalization in novel onset clusters. Manuscript, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Albright, A. (2009). Feature-based generalisation as a source of gradient acceptability. Phonology, 26, 9–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alcock, K. J., Passingham, R. E., Watkins, K. E. & Vargha-Khadem, F. (2000). Oral dyspraxia in inherited speech and language impairment and acquired dysphasia. Brain and Language, 75, 17–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Allen, G. D. (1983). Some suprasegmental contours in French two-year-old children’s speech. Phonetica: International Journal of Speech Science, 40, 269–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, J. S. & Miller, J. L. (2004). Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 3171–3183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Alonzo, A. & Taft, M. (2002). Sonority constraints on onset-rime cohesion: evidence from native and bilingual Filipino readers of English. Brain and Language, 81, 368–383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Anderson, M. (2010). Neural re-use as a fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andrews, S. (1982). Phonological recoding: is the regularity effect consistent?Memory and Cognition, 10, 565–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anttila, A. (1997). Deriving variation from grammar. In Hinskens, F., van Hout, R. & Wetzels, L. (eds.), Variation, Change and Phonological Theory (pp. 35–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arnold, K. & Zuberbuhler, K. (2006). Language evolution: semantic combinations in primate calls. Nature, 441, 303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ashby, J. (2010). Phonology is fundamental in skilled reading: evidence from ERPs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 95–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ashby, J. & Martin, A. E. (2008). Prosodic phonological representations early in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 224–236.Google ScholarPubMed

Ashby, J. & Rayner, K. (2004). Representing syllable information during silent reading: evidence from eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 391–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ashby, J., Sanders, L. D. & Kingston, J. (2009). Skilled readers begin processing sub-phonemic features by 80 ms during visual word recognition: evidence from ERPs. Biological Psychology, 80, 84–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working Memory. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarPubMed

Balaban, E. (1988a). Bird song syntax: learned intraspecific variation is meaningful. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 85, 3657–3660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Balaban, E. (1988b). Cultural and genetic variation in Swamp Sparrows (Melospiza georgiana): II. Behavioral salience of geographic song variants. Behaviour, 105, 292–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balaban, E. (2006). Cognitive developmental biology: history, process and fortune’s wheel. Cognition, 101, 298–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Barlow, J. A. (2001). The structure of /s/-sequences: evidence from a disordered system. Jounal of Child Language, 28, 291–324.Google Scholar

Barlow, J. A. (2005). Sonority effects in the production of consonant clusters by Spanish-speaking children. In Eddington, D. (ed.), Selected Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Languages (pp. 1–14). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar

Barner, D., Wood, J., Hauser, M. & Carey, S. (2008). Evidence for a non-linguistic distinction between singular and plural sets in rhesus monkeys. Cognition, 107, 603–622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baron, J. & Strawson, C. (1976). Use of orthographic and word-specific knowledge in reading words aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 386–393.Google Scholar

Barrett, H. C. & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113, 628–647.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bat-El, O. (1994). Stem modification and cluster transfer in modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 12, 571–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bat-El, O. (2003). The fate of the consonantal root and the binyan in Optimality Theory. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes, 32, 31–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bat-El, O. (2004). Parsing forms with identical consonants: Hebrew reduplication. In Ravid, D. & Shyldkrot, H. B. Z. (eds.), Perspectives on Language and Language Development (pp. 25–34). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Bat-El, O. (2006). Consonant identity and consonant copy: the segmental and prosodic structure of Hebrew reduplication. Linguistic Inquiry, 37, 179–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Becker, M., Ketrez, N. & Nevins, A. (2011). The surfeit of the stimulus: analytic biases filter lexical statistics in Turkish laryngeal alternations. Language, 87, 84–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Becker, M., Nevins, A. & Levine, J. (2011). Asymmetries in generalizing alternations to and from initial syllables. Manuscript, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, UCL, Harvard.

Benasich, A. A. & Tallal, P. (2002). Infant discrimination of rapid auditory cues predicts later language impairment. Behavioural Brain Research, 136, 31–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Benasich, A. A., Choudhury, N., Friedman, J. T., Realpe-Bonilla, T., Chojnowska, C. & Gou, Z. (2006). The infant as a prelinguistic model for language learning impairments: predicting from event-related potentials to behavior. Neuropsychologia, 44, 396–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berent, I. (1997). Phonological priming in the lexical decision task: regularity effects are not necessary evidence for assembly. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1727–1742.Google Scholar

Berent, I. (2008). Are phonological representations of printed and spoken language isomorphic? Evidence from the restrictions on unattested onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1288–1304.Google ScholarPubMed

Berent, I. & Frost, R. (1997). The inhibition of polygraphic consonants in spelling Hebrew: evidence for a recurrent assembly of spelling and phonology in visual word recognition. In Perfetti, C., Fayol, M. & Rieben, L. (eds.), Learning to Spell: Research, Theory, and Practice across Languages (pp. 195–219). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Berent, I. & Lennertz, T. (2010). Universal constraints on the sound structure of language: phonological or acoustic?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 212–223.Google ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Lennertz, T. & Rosselli, M. (2012). Universal phonological restrictions and language-specific repairs: evidence from Spanish. The Mental Lexicon, 13.2.Google Scholar

Berent, I. & Marom, M. (2005). The skeletal structure of printed words: evidence from the Stroop task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 328–338.Google ScholarPubMed

Berent, I. & Perfetti, C. A. (1995). A rose is a REEZ: the two cycles model of phonology assembly in reading English. Psychological Review, 102, 146–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berent, I. & Shimron, J. (1997). The representation of Hebrew words: Evidence from the Obligatory Contour Principle. Cognition, 64, 39–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I. & Shimron, J. (2003). Co-occurrence restrictions on identical consonants in the Hebrew lexicon: are they due to similarity?Journal of Linguistics, 39, 31–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berent, I., Everett, D. L. & Shimron, J. (2001a). Do phonological representations specify variables? Evidence from the obligatory contour principle. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 1–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Shimron, J. & Vaknin, V. (2001b). Phonological constraints on reading: evidence from the Obligatory Contour Principle. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 644–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berent, I., Marcus, G. F., Shimron, J. & Gafos, A. I. (2002). The scope of linguistic generalizations: evidence from Hebrew word formation. Cognition, 83, 113–139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Vaknin, V. & Shimron, J. (2004). Does a theory of language need a grammar? Evidence from Hebrew root structure. Brain and Language, 90, 170–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berent, I., Tzelgov, J. & Bibi, U. (2006). The autonomous computation of morphophonological structure in reading: evidence from the Stroop task. The Mental Lexicon, 1–2, 201–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berent, I., Steriade, D., Lennertz, T. & Vaknin, V. (2007a). What we know about what we have never heard: evidence from perceptual illusions. Cognition, 104, 591–630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Vaknin, V. & Marcus, G. (2007b). Roots, stems, and the universality of lexical representations: evidence from Hebrew. Cognition, 104, 254–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Lennertz, T., Jun, J., Moreno, M. A. & Smolensky, P. (2008). Language universals in human brains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 5321–5325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Lennertz, T., Smolensky, P. & Vaknin-Nusbaum, V. (2009). Listeners’ knowledge of phonological universals: evidence from nasal clusters. Phonology 26, 75–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Balaban, E., Lennertz, T. & Vaknin-Nusbaum, V. (2010). Phonological universals constrain the processing of nonspeech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 418–435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Harder, K. & Lennertz, T. (2011a). Phonological universals in early childhood: evidence from sonority restrictions. Language Acquisition, 18, 281–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Lennertz, T. & Smolensky, P. (2011b). Markedness and misperception: it’s a two-way street. In Cairns, C. E. & Raimy, E. (eds.), Handbook of the Syllable (pp. 373–394), Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar

Berent, I., Lennertz, T. & Balaban, E. (2012a). Language universals and misidentification: a two way street. Language and Speech, 1–20.Google ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Wilson, C., Marcus, G. & Bemis, D. (2012b). On the role of variables in phonology: remarks on Hayes and Wilson. Linguistic Inquiry, 43, 97–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berent, I., Dupuis, A., & Brentari, D. (forthcoming a). Amodal aspects of linguistic design. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Berent, I., Lennertz, T. & Rosselli, M. (forthcoming b). Universal phonological restrictions and language-specific repairs: evidence from Spanish. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Berent, I., Vaknin-Nusbaum, V., Balaban, E., & Galaburda, A. M. (2012). Dyslexia impairs speech recognition but can spare phonological competence. PLOS One, 7(9), e44875..CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Berkley, D. M. (2000). Gradient obligatory contour principle effects. Ph.D. thesis, Northwestern University, Dept. of Linguistics.

Bernhardt, B. H. & Stemberger, J. (1998). Handbook of Phonological Development. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Bernhardt, B. H. & Stemberger, J. (2007). Phonological impairment in children and adults. In de Lacy, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology (pp. 575–593). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berry, L. (1998). Alignment and Adjacency in Optimality Theory: Evidence from Walpiri and Arrernte. University of Sydney.Google Scholar

Bertoncini, J. & Mehler, J. (1981). Syllables as units in infant speech perception. Infant Behavior and Development, 4, 247–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berwick, R. C., Okanoya, K., Beckers, G. J. L. & Bolhuis, J. J. (2011). Songs to syntax: the linguistics of birdsong. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 113–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bidelman, G. M., Gandour, J. T. & Krishnan, A. (2009). Cross-domain effects of music and language experience on the representation of pitch in the human auditory brainstem. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 425–434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bishop, D. V. (2006). What causes specific language impairment in children?Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 15, 217–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bishop, D. V. (2007). Using mismatch negativity to study central auditory processing in developmental language and literacy impairments: where are we, and where should we be going?Psychological Bulletin, 133, 651–672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bishop, D. V. (2009). Genes, cognition, and communication: insights from neurodevelopmental disorders. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1156, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bishop, D. V. & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Developmental dyslexia and specific language impairment: same or different?Psychological Bulletin, 130, 858–886.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Blevins, J. (2004). Evolutionary Phonology. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blevins, J. (2006). A theoretical synopsis of evolutionary phonologyTheoretical Linguistics, 32, 117–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blevins, J. (2008). Consonant epenthesis: natural and unnatural histories. In Good, J. (ed.), Linguistic Universals and Language Change (pp. 79–107). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bloom, P. (2004). Descartes’ Baby: How the Science of Child Development Explains What Makes Us Human. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Bloom, P. (2010). How do morals change?Nature, 464, 490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Blumstein, S. E. (1973). A Phonological Investigation of Aphasic Speech. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Blumstein, S. E. (1995). The neurobiology of the sound structure of language. In Gazzaniga, M. (ed.), The Cognitive Neurosciences. (pp. 915–929). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Blust, R. (2004). *t to k: an Austronesian sound change revisited. Oceanic Linguistics, 43, 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boatman, D. (2004). Cortical bases of speech perception: evidence from functional lesion studies. Cognition, 92, 47–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Boersma, P. & Hamann, S. (2008). The evolution of auditory dispersion in bidirectional constraint grammar. Phonology, 25, 217–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bolger, D. J., Perfetti, C. A. & Schneider, W. (2005). Cross-cultural effect on the brain revisited: universal structures plus writing system variation. Human Brain Mapping, 25, 92–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bonatti, L. L., Peña, M., Nespor, M. & Mehler, J. (2005). Linguistic constraints on statistical computations: the role of consonants and vowels in continuous speech processing. Psychological Science, 16, 451–459.Google ScholarPubMed

Bongard, S. & Nieder, A. (2010). Basic mathematical rules are encoded by primate prefrontal cortex neurons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 2277–2282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bonte, M. L., Poelmans, H. & Blomert, L. (2007). Deviant neurophysiological responses to phonological regularities in speech in dyslexic children. Neuropsychologia, 45, 1427–1437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bortolini, U. & Leonard, L. B. (2000). Phonology and children with specific language impairment: status of structural constraints in two languages. Journal of Communication Disorders, 33, 131–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bowling, D. L., Gill, K., Choi, J. D., Prinz, J. & Purves, D. (2010). Major and minor music compared to excited and subdued speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127, 491–503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Breen, G. & Pensalfini, R. (2001). A language with no syllable onsets. Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brentari, D. (1998). A Prosodic Model of Sign Language Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Brentari, D., Coppola, M., Mazzoni, L. & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gestures, signers and homesigners. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 30, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bromberger, S. & Halle, M. (1989). Why phonology is different. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 51–70.Google Scholar

Broselow, E. & Finer, D. (1991). Parameter setting in second language phonology and syntax. Second Language Research, 7, 35–59.Google Scholar

Broselow, E., Chen, S.-I. & Wang, C. (1998). The emergence of the unmarked in second language phonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Broselow, E. & Xu, Z. (2004). Differential difficulty in the acquisition of second language phonology. International Journal of English Studies, 4, 135–163.Google Scholar

Buchanan, L. & Besner, D. (1993). Reading aloud: evidence for the use of a whole word nonsemantic pathway. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buchsbaum, B. R., Olsen, R. K., Koch, P. F., Kohn, P., Kippenhan, J. S. & Berman, K. F. (2005). Reading, hearing, and the planum temporale. Neuroimage, 24, 444–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Buchwald, A. B. (2009). Minimizing and optimizing structure in phonology: evidence from aphasia. Lingua, 119, 1380–1395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buchwald, A. B., Rapp, B. & Stone, M. (2007). Insertion of discrete phonological units: an articulatory and acoustic investigation of aphasic speech. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, 910–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burbridge, T. J., Wang, Y., Volz, A. J., Peschansky, V. J., Lisann, L., Galaburda, A. M., et al. (2008). Postnatal analysis of the effect of embryonic knockdown and overexpression of candidate dyslexia susceptibility gene homolog Dcdc2 in the rat. Neuroscience, 152, 723–733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Burns, E. M. & Ward, W. D. (1978). Categorical perception – phenomenon or epiphenomenon: evidence from experiments in the perception of melodic musical intervals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 63, 456–468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bybee, J. & McClelland, J. L. (2005). Alternatives to the combinatorial paradigm of linguistic theory based on domain general principles of human cognition. Linguistic Review, 22, 381–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, J. L. (2008). Linguistic universals and language change. In Good, J. (ed.), Linguistic Universals and Language Change (pp. 108–121). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Byrne, B., Delaland, C., Fielding-Barnsley, R., Quain, P., Samuelsson, S., Hoien, T., Corle, R., DeFries, J. C., Wadsworth, S., Willcutt, E. & Olson, R. K. (2002). Longitudinal twin study of early reading development in three countries: Preliminary results. Annals of Dyslexia, 52, 49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cantlon, J. F. & Brannon, E. M. (2006). Shared system for ordering small and large numbers in monkeys and humans. Psychological Science, 17, 401–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Caramazza, A., Chialant, D., Capasso, R. & Miceli, G. (2000). Separable processing of consonants and vowels. Nature, 403, 428–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Carey, S. (2009). The Origin of Concepts. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carey, S. & Spelke, E. (1996). Science and core knowledge. Philosophy of Science, 63, 515–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carreiras, M., Alvarez, C. J. & de Vega, M. (1993). Syllable frequency and visual word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 766–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carreiras, M., Ferrand, L., Grainger, J. & Perea, M. (2005). Sequential effects of phonological priming in visual word recognition. Psychological Science: A Journal of the American Psychological Society / APS 16(8), 585–589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Carreiras, M., Perea, M., Vergara, M. & Pollatsek, A. (2009). The time course of orthography and phonology: ERP correlates of masked priming effects in Spanish. Psychophysiology, 46, 1113–1122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chater, N., Reali, F. & Christiansen, M. H. (2009). Restrictions on biological adaptation in language evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 1015–1020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chen, H.-C., Yamauchi, T., Tamaoka, K. & Vaid, J. (2007). Homophonic and semantic priming of Japanese Kanji words: a time course study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 64–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chen, S., Swartz, K. B. & Terrace, H. S. (1997). Knowledge of the ordinal position of list items in rhesus monkeys. Psychological Science, 8, 80–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chetail, F. & Mathey, S. (2009). Syllabic priming in lexical decision and naming tasks: the syllable congruency effect re-examined in French. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 63(1), 40–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chinese Character Dictionary. Retrieved May, 21, 2010, from .

Cholin, J. (2011). Do syllables exist? Psycholinguistic evidence of the retrieval of syllabic units in speech production. In Cairns, C. E. & Raimy, E. (eds.), Handbook of the Syllable (pp. 225–248). Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. Gravenhage: Mouton.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1972). Language and Mind (Enl. edn.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1976). Approaching reading through invented spelling, Paper presented at the Conference on Theory and Practice of Beginning Reading. University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (2002). On the Nature of Language. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Choudhury, N., Leppanen, P. H. T., Leevers, H. J. & Benasich, A. A. (2007). Infant information processing and family history of specific language impairment: converging evidence for RAP deficits from two paradigms. Developmental Science, 10, 213–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Christiansen, M. H., Reali, F. & Chater, N. (2011). Biological adaptations for functional features of language in the face of cultural evolution. Human Biology, 83, 247–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Clements, G. N. (1990). The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Kingston, J. & Beckman, M. (eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology (Vol. I: Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech, pp. 282–333). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Clements, G. N. (2005). The role of features in phonological inventories. In Raimy, E. & Cairns, C. (eds.), Contemporary Views on Architecture and Representations in Phonological Theory (pp. 19–68). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Clements, G. N. & Keyser, S. J. (1983). CV Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Coetzee, A. (2008). Grammaticality and ungrammaticality in phonology. Language, 84, 218–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coetzee, A. (2011). Syllables in speech perception: evidence from perceptual epenthesis. In Cairns, C. & Raimy, E. (eds.), Handbook of the Syllable (pp. 295–325). Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar

Coetzee, A., W. & Pater, J. (2008). Weighted constraints and gradient restrictions on place co-occurrence in Muna and Arabic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 26, 289–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coetzee, A. W. and Pretorius, R. (2010). Phonetically grounded phonology and sound change: the case of Tswana labial plosives. Journal of Phonetics, 38(3), 404–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cole, J. (2009). Emergent feature structures: harmony systems in exemplar models of phonology. Language Sciences, 31, 144–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Colé, P., Magnan, A. & Grainger, J. (1999). Syllable-sized units in visual word recognition: evidence from skilled and beginning readers of French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20(4), 507–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coleman, J. & Pierrehumbert, J. (1997). Stochastic phonological grammars and acceptability. In Coleman, J. (ed.), Third Meeting of the ACL Special Interest Group in Computational Phonology: Proceedings of the Workshop (pp. 49–56). East Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar

Conrad, M., Carreiras, M., Tamm, S. & Jacobs, A. M. (2009). Syllables and bigrams: orthographic redundancy and syllabic units affect visual word recognition at different processing levels. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 461–479.Google ScholarPubMed

Corballis, M. C. (2009). Do rats learn rules?Animal Behaviour, 78, e1–e2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corina, D. P., McBurney, S. L., Dodrill, C., Hinshaw, K., Brinkley, J. & Ojemann, G. (1999). Functional roles of Broca’s area and SMG: evidence from cortical stimulation mapping in a deaf signer. Neuroimage, 10, 570–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corina, D. P. & Knapp, H. (2006). Sign language processing and the mirror neuron system. Cortex, 42, 529–539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (1994). Origins of domain specificity: the evolution of functional organization. In Hirschfeld, L. A. & Gelman, S. A. (eds.), Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture (pp. 85–116). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Costa, A. & Sebastian-Gallés, N. (1998). Abstract structure in language production: evidence from Spanish. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 886–903.Google Scholar

Cotelli, M., Abutalebi, J., Zorzi, M. & Cappa, S. F. (2003). Vowels in the buffer: a case study of acquired dysgraphia with selective vowel substitutions. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 99–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Crain, S. & Nakayama, M. (1987). Structure dependence in grammar formation. Language, 63, 522–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crain, S., Gualmini, A., & Pietroski, P. (2005). Brass tacks in linguistic theory: innate grammatical principles. In Carruthers, P., Laurence, S. & Stich, S. (eds.), The Innate Mind: Structure and Contents (pp. 175–197). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crockford, C. & Boesch, C. (2005). Call combinations in wild chimpanzees. Behaviour, 142, 397–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crockford, C., Herbinger, I., Vigilant, L. & Boesch, C. (2004). Wild chimpanzees produce group-specific calls: a case for vocal learning?Ethology, 110, 221–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cubelli, R. (1991). A selective deficit for writing vowels in acquired dysgraphia. Nature, 353, 258–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cynx, J. (1990). Experimental determination of a unit of song production in the Zebra Finch (Taeniopygia guttata). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 104, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Daland, R., Hayes, B., Garellek, M., White, J., Davis, A. & Norrmann, I. (2011). Explaining sonority projection effects. Phonology, 28, 197–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davidson, L. (2000). Experimentally uncovering hidden strata in English phonology. In Gleitman, L. and Joshi, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1023). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Davidson, L. (2006a). Schwa elision in fast speech: segmental deletion or gestural overlap?Phonetica, 63, 79–112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Davidson, L. (2006b). Phonotactics and articulatory coordination interact in phonology: evidence from nonnative production. Cognitive Science, 30, 837–862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Davidson, L., Jusczyk, P., Smolensky, P., Kager, R., Pater, J. & Zonneveld, W. (2004). The initial and final states: theoretical implications and experimental explorations of richness of the base. In Smolensky, Paul & Legendre, Geraldine (eds.), Constraints in Phonological Acquisition (pp. 321–368). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Davidson, L., Jusczyk, P. & Smolensky, P. (2006). Optimality in language acquisition I: the initial and final state of the phonological grammar. In Smolensky, P. & Legendre, G. (eds.), The Harmonic Mind: From Neural Computation to Optimality-Theoretic Grammar (pp. 231–278). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dawkins, R. (1987). The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar

de Lacy, P. (2004). Markedness conflation in Optimality Theory. Phonology, 21, 145–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Lacy, P. (2006). Markedness: Reduction and Preservation in Phonology. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Lacy, P. (2007). The interaction of tone, sonority, and prosodic structure. In de Lacy, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology (pp. 281–307). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Lacy, P. & Kingston, J. (2006). Synchronic explanation. Unpublished manuscript, Rutgers University and the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Dediu, D. (2011). A Bayesian phylogenetic approach to estimating the stability of linguistic features and the genetic biasing of tone. Proceedings. Biological Sciences / The Royal Society, 278, 474–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dediu, D. & Ladd, D. R. (2007). Linguistic tone is related to the population frequency of the adaptive haplogroups of two brain size genes, ASPM and Microcephalin. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 10944–10949.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

DeFrancis, J. (1989). Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar

Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading and the Brain: The Science and Evolution of a Human Invention. New York: Viking.Google Scholar

Dehaene, S. & Cohen, L. (2011). The unique role of the visual word form area in reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 254–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dehaene, S., Pegado, F., Braga, L. W., Ventura, P., Nunes Filho, G., Jobert, A., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Kolinsky, R., Morais, J. & Cohen, L. (2010). How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language. Science (New York, N.Y.), 330(6009), 1359–1364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Dupoux, E. & Gout, A. (2000). Electrophysiological correlates of phonological processing: a cross-linguistic study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 635–647.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dell, F. & Elmedlaoui, M. (1985). Syllabic consonants and syllabification in Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, 7, 105–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Demuth, K. (1995). Markedness and the development of prosodic structure. In Beckman, J. (ed.), Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistic Society 25 (pp. 13–25). Amherst, MA: GLSA, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar

Demuth, K. (2011). The acquisition of phonology. In Goldsmith, J., Riggle, J. & Yu, A. (eds.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory (2nd edn., pp. 571–595). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Demuth, K. & McCullough, E. (2009). The longitudinal development of clusters in French. Journal of Child Language, 36, 425–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Desai, R., Liebenthal, E., Waldron, E. & Binder, J. R. (2008). Left posterior temporal regions are sensitive to auditory categorization. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1174–1188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Deutsch, D., Henthorn, T., Marvin, E. & Xu, H. (2006). Absolute pitch among American and Chinese conservatory students: prevalence differences, and evidence for a speech-related critical period. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 719–722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Doignon, N. & Zagar, D. (2005). Illusory conjunctions in French: the nature of sublexical units in visual word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 443–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Domahs, U., Kehrein, W., Knaus, J., Wiese, R. & Schlesewsky, M. (2009). Event-related potentials reflecting the processing of phonological constraint violations. Language and Speech, 52, 415–435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dooling, R. J., Best, C. T. & Brown, S. D. (1995). Discrimination of synthetic full-formant and sinewave/ra-la/continua by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) and Zebra Finches (Taeniopygia guttata). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 1839–1846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dupoux, E., Kakehi, K., Hirose, Y., Pallier, C. & Mehler, J. (1999). Epenthetic vowels in Japanese: a perceptual illusion?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1568–1578.Google Scholar

Dupoux, E., Parlato, E., Frota, S., Hirose, Y. & Peperkamp, S. (2011). Where do illusory vowels come from?Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dyer, F. C. & Seeley, T. D. (1991). Dance dialects and foraging range in three Asian honey bee species. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 28, 227–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dyer, F. C. & Dickinson, J. A. (1994). Development of sun compensation by honeybees: how partially experienced bees estimate the sun’s course. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 91, 4471–4474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Eimas, P. & Seidenberg, M. (1997). Do infants learn grammar with algebra or statistics?Science, 284, 433.Google Scholar

Eimas, P. D., Siqueland, E. R., Jusczyk, P. & Vigorito, J. (1971). Speech perception in infants. Science, 171, 303–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Elman, J. (1993). Learning and development in neural networks: the importance of starting small. Cognition, 48, 71–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Emlen, S. T. (1975). The stellar-orientation system of a migratory bird. Scientific American, 233, 102–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Emlen, S. T. (1976). Magnetic direction finding: evidence for its use in migratory indigo buntings. Science, 193, 505–508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Emmorey, K. (2002). Language, Cognition, and the Brain: Insights from Sign Language Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Enard, W., Przeworski, M., Fisher, S. E., Lai, C. S., Wiebe, V., Kitano, T., et al. (2002). Molecular evolution of FOXP2, a gene involved in speech and language. Nature, 418, 869–872.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Endress, A. D., Cahill, D., Block, S., Watumull, J. & Hauser, M. D. (2009). Evidence of an evolutionary precursor to human language affixation in a non-human primate. Biological Letters, 5, 749–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, N. & Levinson, S. (2009). The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 429–492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Everett, D. L. (2008). Don’t Sleep, There Are Snakes: Life and Language in the Amazonian Jungle. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

Fehér, O., Wang, H., Saar, S., Mitra, P. P. & Tchernichovski, O. (2009). De novo establishment of wild-type song culture in the Zebra Finch. Nature, 459, 564–568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Feigenson, L., Carey, S. & Hauser, M. (2002). The representations underlying infants’ choice of more: object files versus analog magnitudes. Psychological Science, 13, 150–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ferrand, L. & Grainger, J. (1992). Phonology and orthography in visual word recognition: evidence from masked non-word priming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 45, 353–372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fikkert, P. (2007). Acquiring phonology. In de Lacy, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology (pp. 536–554). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fikkert, P. & Levelt, C. (2008). How does place fall into place? The lexicon and emergent constraints in children’s developing phonological grammar. In Avery, P., Dresher, B. E. & Rice, K. (eds.), Contrast in Phonology: Theory, Perception, Acquisition (pp. 231–268). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Finley, S. & Badecker, W. (2008). Analytic biases for vowel harmony languages, West Coast Conference of Formal Linguistics. UCLA.Google Scholar

Finley, S. & Badecker, W. (2009). Artificial language learning and feature-based generalization. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 423–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Finley, S. & Badecker, W. (2010). Linguistic and non-linguistic influences on learning biases for vowel harmony. In O. S. & Catrambone, R. (eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 706–711). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

Fischer, J. & Hammerschmidt, K. (2011) Ultrasonic vocalizations in mouse models for speech and socio-cognitive disorders: insights into the evolution of vocal communication. Genes, Brain, Behavior, 10, 17–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fisher, S. & Marcus, G. (2006). The eloquent ape: genes, brains and the evolution of language. Nature Reviews, 7, 9–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fisher, S. E. & Scharff, C. (2009). FOXP2 as a molecular window into speech and language. Trends in Genetics, 25, 166–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fitch, W. T. (2010). The Evolution of Language. Leiden: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fitch, W. T. & Fritz, J. B. (2006). Rhesus macaques spontaneously perceive formants in conspecific vocalizations. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 2132–2141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fitch, W. T. & Hauser, M. D. (2004). Computational constraints on syntactic processing in a nonhuman primate. Science, 303, 377–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fitch, W. T., Hauser, M. D. & Chomsky, N. (2005). The evolution of the language faculty: clarifications and implications. Cognition, 97, 179–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fleishhacker, H. (2001). Onset Transfer in Reduplication. Los Angeles: UCLA.Google Scholar

Flemming, E. (2001). Scalar and categorical phenomena in a unified model of phonetics and phonology. Phonology, 18, 7–44.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. (1983). The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. (1975). The Language of Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. & Piattelli-Palmarini, M. (2010). What Darwin Got WrongNew York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. & Pylyshyn, Z. (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: a critical analysis. Cognition, 28, 3–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Fowler, C., Treiman, R. & Gross, J. (1993). The structure of English syllables and polysyllables. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 115–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franz, M. & Goller, F. (2002). Respiratory units of motor production and song imitation in the Zebra Finch. Journal of Neurobiology, 51, 129–141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

French, C. A., Groszer, M., Preece, C., Coupe, A. M., Rajewsky, K. & Fisher, S. E. (2007). Generation of mice with a conditional Foxp2 null allele. Genesis, 45, 440–446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Friederici, A., D. & Wessels, J. M. (1993). Phonotactic knowledge of word boundaries and its use in infant speech perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 54, 287–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Friedrich, M. & Friederici, A. D. (2005). Phonotactic knowledge and lexical-semantic processing in one-year-olds: brain responses to words and nonsense words in picture contexts. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1785–1802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Frisch, S. A. & Zawaydeh, B. A. (2001). The psychological reality of OCP-place in Arabic. Language, 77, 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frisch, S. A., Pierrehumbert, J. B. & Broe, M. B. (2004). Similarity avoidance and the OCP. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 22, 197–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frost, R., Ahissar, M., Gotesman, R. & Tayeb, S. (2003). Are phonological effects fragile? The effect of luminance and exposure duration on form priming and phonological priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 346–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gafos, A., I. (1999). The Articulatory Basis of Locality in Phonology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar

Galaburda, A. M., Sherman, G. F., Rosen, G. D., Aboitiz, F. & Geschwind, N. (1985). Developmental dyslexia: four consecutive patients with cortical anomalies. Annals of Neurology, 18, 222–233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Galaburda, A. M., LoTurco, J., Ramus, F., Fitch, R. H. & Rosen, G. D. (2006). From genes to behavior in developmental dyslexia. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 1213–1217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gallistel, C. R. (1990). The Organization of Learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gallistel, C. R. (2007). Learning organs (L’apprentissage de matières distinctes exige des organes distincts). In Franck, J. B. J. (ed.), Cahier n° 88: Noam Chomsky (pp. 181–187). Paris: L’Herne.Google Scholar

Gallistel, C. R. & King, A. P. (2009). Memory and the Computational Brain: Why Cognitive Science Will Transform Neuroscience. Chichester; Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gallon, N., Harris, J. & van der Lely, H. (2007). Non-word repetition: an investigation of phonological complexity in children with Grammatical SLI. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 21, 435–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gardner, R. A. & Gardner, B. T. (1969). Teaching sign language to a chimpanzee. Science (New York, NY), 165, 664–672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gaskell, M. G. & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1998). Mechanisms of phonological inference in speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 380–396.Google ScholarPubMed

Gaskell, M., Hare, M. & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1995). A connectionist model of phonological representation in speech perception. Cognitive Science, 19, 407–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gathercole, S. E. & Baddeley, A. D. (1990). Phonological memory deficits in language disordered children: is there a causal connection?Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 336–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gentner, T. Q. (2008). Temporal scales of auditory objects underlying birdsong vocal recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 124, 1350–1359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gentner, T. Q. & Hulse, S. H. (2000). Perceptual classification based on the component structure of song in European starlings. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107, 3369–3381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gentner, T. Q., Fenn, K. M., Margoliash, D. & Nusbaum, H. C. (2006). Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature, 440, 1204–1207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gerken, L. (1994). A metrical template account of children’s weak syllable omissions from multisyllabic words. Journal of Child Language, 21, 565–584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gervain, J., Macagno, F., Cogoi, S., Peña, M. & Mehler, J. (2008). The neonate brain detects speech structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 14222–14227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gervain, J., Berent, I. & Werker, J. (2012). Binding at birth: newborns detect identity relations and sequential position in speech. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24, 564–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gervain, J., Berent, I., Dupoux, E. & Werker, J. F. (forthcoming). Distinct networks for music and speech perception in the newborn brain.

Gibson, E. & Fedorenko, E. (2010). Weak quantitative standards in linguistics research. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 233–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gierut, J. A. (1999). Syllable onsets: clusters and adjuncts in acquisition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 42, 708–726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gill, K. Z. & Purves, D. (2009). A biological rationale for musical scales. PLoS One, 4, e8144–e8144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Giurfa, M., Zhang, S., Jenett, A., Menzel, R. & Srinivasan, M. V. (2001). The concepts of “sameness” and “difference” in an insect. Nature, 410, 930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Glushko, R. (1979). The organization and activation of orthographic knowledge in reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 674–691.Google Scholar

Gnanadesikan, A. (2004). Markedness and faithfulness constraints in child phonology. In Kager, R., Pater, J. & Zonneveld, W. (eds.), Constraints in Phonological Acquisition (pp. 73–108). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Goad, H. & Rose, Y. (2004). Input elaboration, head faithfulness, and evidence for representation in the acquisition of left-edge clusters in West Germanic. In Kager, R., Pater, J. & Zonneveld, W. (eds.), Constraints in Phonological Acquisition (pp. 109–157). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Goldin-Meadow, S. & Mylander, C. (1983). Gestural communication in deaf children: noneffect of parental input on language development. Science, 221, 372–374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goldin-Meadow, S. & Mylander, C. (1998). Spontaneous sign systems created by deaf children in two cultures. Nature, 391, 279–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goldinger, S. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105, 251–279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goldrick, M. & Rapp, B. (2007). Lexical and post-lexical phonological representations in spoken production. Cognition, 102, 219–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goldsmith, J. (2002) Probabilistic models of grammar: phonology as information minimization. Phonological Studies, 5, 21–46.Google Scholar

Gordon, P. (1985). Level ordering in lexical development. Cognition, 21, 73–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gordon, P. (2004). Numerical cognition without words: evidence from Amazonia. Science, 306, 496–499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gough, P. M., Nobre, A. C. & Devlin, J. T. (2005). Dissociating linguistic processes in the left inferior frontal cortex with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 8010–8016.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gould, S. J. & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Containing Papers of a Biological Character, 205, 581–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gouskova, M. (2001). Falling sonority onsets, loanwords, and syllable contact. CLS, 37, 175–185.Google Scholar

Gow, D. W. J. (2001). Assimilation and anticipation in continuous spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 133–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gow, D. W. J. & Segawa, J. A. (2009). Articulatory mediation of speech perception: a causal analysis of multi-modal imaging data. Cognition, 110, 222–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Graves, W. W., Grabowski, T. J., Mehta, S. & Gupta, P. (2008). The left posterior superior temporal gyrus participates specifically in accessing lexical phonology. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1698–1710.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Greenberg, J. H. (1966). Language Universals, with Special Reference to Feature Hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. H. (1978). Some generalizations concerning initial and final consonant clusters. In Greenberg, J. H., Ferguson, C. A. & Moravcsik, E. A. (eds.), Universals of Human Language (Vol. II, pp. 243–279). Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Guion, S. G. (1996). Velar palatalization: coarticulation, perception, and sound change. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.

Guion, S. G. (1998). The role of perception in the sound change of velar palatalization. Phonetica, 55, 18–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Guo, T., Peng, D. & Liu, Y. (2005). The role of phonological activation in the visual semantic retrieval of Chinese characters. Cognition, 98, B21–B34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Haesler, S., Wada, K., Nshdejan, A., Morrisey, E. E., Lints, T., Jarvis, E. D., et al. (2004). FoxP2 expression in avian vocal learners and non-learners. Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 3164–3175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Haesler, S., Rochefort, C., Georgi, B., Licznerski, P., Osten, P. & Scharff, C. (2007). Incomplete and inaccurate vocal imitation after knockdown of FoxP2 in songbird basal ganglia nucleus Area X. PLoS Biol, 5(12), e321. .CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hale, M. & Reiss, C. (2008). The Phonological Enterprise. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Halle, M. (1971). The Sound Pattern of Russian: A Linguistic and Acoustical Investigation. The Hauge, Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hallé, P. A., Segui, J., Frauenfelder, U. & Meunier, C. (1998). The processing of illegal consonant clusters: a case of perceptual assimilation?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 592–608.Google ScholarPubMed

Hallé, P. A., Dominguez, A., Cuetos, F. & Segui, J. (2008). Phonological mediation in visual masked priming: evidence from phonotactic repair. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 177–192.Google ScholarPubMed

Hamlin, J. K., Wynn, K. & Bloom, P. (2007). Social evaluation by preverbal infants. Nature, 450, 557–559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hamlin, J. K., Wynn, K. & Bloom, P. (2010). Three-month-olds show a negativity bias in their social evaluations. Developmental Science, 13, 923–929.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Harm, M. W. & Seidenberg, M. S. (1999). Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: insights from connectionist models. Psychological Review, 106, 491–528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Haugeland, J. (1985). Artificial Intelligence: The Very Idea. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hauser, M. D. (1996). The Evolution of Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hauser, M. D. & Glynn, D. (2009). Can free-ranging rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) extract artificially created rules comprised of natural vocalizations?Journal of Comparative Psychology, 123, 161–167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hauser, M. D. & Konishi, M. (1999). The Design of Animal Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hauser, M. D. & Spelke, E. (2004). Evolutionary and developmental foundations of human knowledge. In Gazzaniga, M. S. (ed.), The Cognitive Neurosciences (3rd edn., pp. 853–864). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hauser, M. D., Newport, E. L. & Aslin, R. N. (2001). Segmentation of the speech stream in a non-human primate: statistical learning in cotton-top tamarins. Cognition, 78, B53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N. & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?Science, 298, 1569–1579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Havy, M. l. & Nazzi, T. (2009). Better processing of consonantal over vocalic information in word learning at 16 months of age. Infancy, 14, 439–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayes, B. P. (1980). A metrical theory of stress rules. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Hayes, B. P. (1999). Phonetically driven phonology: the role of Optimality Theory and inductive grounding. In Danell, E. A. M., Newmeyer, F., Noonan, M. & Wheatley, K. W. (eds.), Formalism and Functionalism in Linguistics (Vol. I, pp. 243–285). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayes, B. P. (2009). Introductory Phonology. Malden, MA; Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hayes, B. P. (forthcoming). Interpreting sonority – projection experiments: the role of phonotactic modeling. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong.

Hayes, B. & Steriade, D. (2004). A review of perceptual cues and cue robustness. In Hayes, B., Kirchner, R. M. & Steriade, D. (eds.), Phonetically Based Phonology (pp. 1–33). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayes, B. & Wilson, C. (2008). A maximum entropy model of phonotactics and phonotactic learning. Linguistic Inquiry 39, 379–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayes, B., Kirchner, R. M. & Steriade, D. (eds.). (2004). Phonetically Based Phonology. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Hengeveld, K. (2006). Linguistic typology. In Mairal, R. & Gil, J. (eds.), Linguistic Universals (pp. 46–66). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickok, G. & Poeppel, D. (2007). The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8, 393–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hillenbrand, J. (1983). Perceptual organization of speech sounds by infants. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 26, 268–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hockett, C. F. (1960). The origin of speech. Scientific American, 203, 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hooper, J. B. (1976). An Introduction to Natural Generative Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Humboldt, W. (1997). Essays on Language. Frankfurt am Main; New York: P. Lang.Google Scholar

Hurst, J. A., Baraitser, M., Auger, E., Graham, F. & Norell, S. (1990). An extended family with a dominantly inherited speech disorder. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 32, 352–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hyman, L. (1985). A Theory of Phonological Weight. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Hyman, L. (2001). On the limits of phonetic determinism in phonology: *NC revisited. In Hume, B. & Johnson, K. (eds.), The Role of Speech Perception Phenomena in Phonology (pp. 141–185). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Hyman, L. (2008). Universals in phonology. The Linguistic Review, 25, 83–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hyman, L. (2011). Does Gokana really have no syllables? Or: what’s so great about being universal?Phonology, 28, 55–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Immelmann, K. (1969). Song development in the Zebra Finch and other estrildid finches. In Hinde, R. A. (ed.), Bird Vocalizations (pp. 61–74). London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Israel, A. & Sandler, W. (2009). Phonological category resolution: a study of handshapes in younger and older sign languages. In Caldas, A. Castro & Mineiro, A. (eds.), Cadernos de Saúde (Vol. II, Special issue Línguas Gestuais, UCP, pp. 13–28). Lisbon: UCP.Google Scholar

Iverson, J., R. & Patel, A. D. (2008). Perception of rhythmic grouping depends on auditory experience. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 124, 2263–2271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jackendoff, R. & Lerdahl, F. (2006). The capacity for music: what is it, and what’s special about it. Cognition, 100, 33–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacquemot, C., Pallier, C., LeBihan, D., Dehaene, S. & Dupoux, E. (2003). Phonological grammar shapes the auditory cortex: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Neuroscience, 22/23, 9541–9546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jakobson, R. (1941). Kindersprache, Aphasie und allgemeine Lautgesetze [Child language, aphasia and phonological universals]. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. (1962). Selected Writings 1: Phonological Studies (Vol. I). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. (1968). Child Language Aphasia and Phonological Universals. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jared, D. (2002). Spelling-sound consistency and regularity effects in word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 723–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jared, D. & Seidenberg, M. S. (1991). Does word identification proceed from spelling to sound to meaning?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 358–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jared, D., McRae, K. & Seidenberg, M. (1990). The basis of consistency effect in word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 687–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jeffries, K., Fritz, J. & Braun, A. (2003). Words in melody: an H(2)15O PET study of brain activation during singing and speaking. Neuroreport, 14, 749–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jun, J. (2004). Place assimilation. In Hayes, B., Kirchner, R. & Steriade, D. (eds.), Phonetically Based Phonology (pp. 58–86). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jusczyk, P. W., Friederici, A. D., Wessels, J., Svenkerud, V. Y. & Jusczyk, A. M. (1993). Infants’ sensitivity to the sound patterns of native language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 402–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jusczyk, P. W., Luce, P. A. & Luce, C. J. (1994). Infants’ sensitivity to phonotactic patterns in the native language. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 630–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jusczyk, P. W., Smolensky, P. & Allocco, T. (2002). How English-learning infants respond to markedness and faithfulness constraints. Language Acquisition, 10, 31–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kager, R. & Pater, J. (2012). Phonotactics as phonology: knowledge of a complex constraint in Dutch. Phonology, 29, 81–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kaminski, J., Call, J. & Fischer, J. (2004). Word learning in a domestic dog: evidence for “fast mapping.”Science, 304, 1682–1683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kang, K.-S. (2003). The status of onglides in Korean: evidence from speech errors. Studies in Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology, 9, 1–15.Google Scholar

Kavitskaya, D. & Babyonyshev, M. (2011). The role of syllable structure: the case of Russian-speaking children with SLI. In Cairns, C. E. & Raimy, E. (eds.), Handbook of the Syllable (pp. 353–369). Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar

Kavitskaya, D., Babyonyshev, M., Walls, T. & Grigorenko, E. (2011). Investigating the effects of syllable complexity in Russian-speaking children with SLI. Journal of Child Language, FirstView, 1–20.Google ScholarPubMed

Kawahara, S., Ono, H. & Sudo, K. (2006). Consonant co-occurrence restrictions in Yamato Japanese. In Vance, T. & Jones, K. (eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics (Vol. XIV, pp. 27–38). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Kawasaki-Fukumori, H. (1992). An acoustical basis for universal phonotactic constraints. Language and Speech, 35, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Keating, P. A. (1984). Phonetic and phonological representation of stop consonant voicing. Language, 60, 286–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keating, P. A. (1985). Universal phonetics and the organization of grammars. In Fromkin, V. (ed.), Phonetic Linguistics: Essays in Honor of Peter Ladefoged (pp. 115–132). Orlando, FL: Academic.Google Scholar

Keating, P. A. (1988). The phonology-phonetics interface. In Newmeyer, F. (ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey (Vol. I, pp. 281–302). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Keil, F. C. (1986). The acquisition of natural kind and artifact term. In Demopoulos, W. & Marras, A. (eds.), Language Learning and Concept Acquisition (pp. 133–153). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Keller, T. A., Carpenter, P. A. & Just, M. A. (2003). Brain imaging of tongue-twister sentence comprehension: twisting the tongue and the brain. Brain and Language, 84, 189–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kennison, S. M., Sieck, J. P. & Briesch, K. A. (2003). Evidence for a late-occurring effect of phoneme repetition during silent reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 297–312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kenstowicz, M. (1994). Phonology in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Kim, J. W. & Kim, H. (1991). The characters of Korean glides. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 21, 113–125.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, P. (1979). Metrical structure assignment is cyclic. Linguistic Inquiry, 10, 421–442.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, P. (2008). Universals constrain change; change results in typological generalizations. In Good, J. (ed.), Language Universals and Language Change (pp. 23–53). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kirchner, R. (2000). Geminate inalterability and lenition. Language, 76, 509–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirk, C. (2008). Substitution errors in the production of word-initial and word-final consonant clusters. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 51, 35–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kirk, C. & Demuth, K. (2005). Asymmetries in the acquisition of word-initial and word-final consonant clusters. Journal of Child Language, 32, 709–734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kirkham, N. Z., Slemmer, J. A. & Johnson, S. P. (2002). Visual statistical learning in infancy: evidence for a domain general learning mechanism. Cognition, 83, B35–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kisilevsky, B. S., Hains, S. M. J., Brown, C. A., Lee, C. T., Cowperthwaite, B., Stutzman, S. S. et al. (2009). Fetal sensitivity to properties of maternal speech and language. Infant Behavior and Development, 32, 59–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kluender, K. R., Lotto, A. J., Holt, L. L. & Bloedel, S. L. (1998). Role of experience for language-specific functional mappings of vowel sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104(6), 3568–3582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Knobel, M. & Caramazza, A. (2007). Evaluating computational models in cognitive neuropsychology: the case from the consonant/vowel distinction. Brain and Language, 100, 95–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Koelsch, S. (2006). Significance of Broca’s area and ventral premotor cortex for music-syntactic processing. Cortex: A Journal Devoted To The Study of the Nervous System And Behavior, 42, 518–520.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Koelsch, S., Gunter, T., Cramon, D., Zysset, S., Lohmann, G. & Friederici, A. (2002). Bach speaks: a cortical “language-network” serves the processing of music. Neuroimage, 17, 956–966.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kuhl, P. K. (1991). Human adults and human infants show a “perceptual magnet effect” for the prototypes of speech categories, monkeys do not. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 93–107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kuhl, P. K. & Miller, J. D. (1975). Speech perception by the chinchilla: voiced-voiceless distinction in alveolar plosive consonants. Science, 190, 69–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kuhl, P. K. & Padden, D. M. (1983). Enhanced discriminability at the phonetic boundaries for the place feature in macaques. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 73, 1003–1010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kuhl, P. K., Williams, K. A., Lacerda, F., Stevens, K. N. & Lindblom, B. (1992). Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science, 255, 606–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kusumoto, K. & Moreton, E. (1997). Native language determines parsing of nonlinguistic rhythmic stimuli. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102, 3204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lachlan, R. F., Verhagen, L., Peters, S. & ten Cate, C. (2010). Are there species-universal categories in bird song phonology and syntax? A comparative study of chaffinches (Fringilla coelebs), Zebra Finches (Taenopygia guttata), and Swamp Sparrows (Melospiza georgiana). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 124, 92–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ladefoged, P. (1975). A Course in Phonetics (2nd edn.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar

Laganaro, M. & Alario, F. X. (2006). On the locus of the syllable frequency effect in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 178–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lai, C. S., Fisher, S. E., Hurst, J. A., Vargha-Khadem, F. & Monaco, A. P. (2001). A forkhead-domain gene is mutated in a severe speech and language disorder. Nature, 413, 519–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar

Lennertz, T. & Berent, I. (2011). People’s knowledge of phonological universals: evidence from fricatives and stops. Unpublished manuscript.

Leppänen, P. H., Richardson, U., Pihko, E., Eklund, K. M., Guttorm, T. K., Aro, M., et al. (2002). Brain responses to changes in speech sound durations differ between infants with and without familial risk for dyslexia. Developmental Neuropsychology, 22, 407–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lerdahl, F. & Jackendoff, R. (1983). A Generative Theory of Tonal Music. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Levelt, C. C. (2009). An experimental approach to coda-omissions in early child language. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston, MA.

Levelt, C. C., Schiller, N. O. & Levelt, W. J. (1999). A developmental grammar for syllable structure in the production of child language. Brain and Language, 68, 291–299.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Levitt, A., Healy, A. F. & Fendrich, D. W. (1991). Syllable-internal structure and the sonority hierarchy: differential evidence from lexical decision, naming, and reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 20, 337–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lewkowicz, D. J. & Berent, I. (2009). Sequence learning in 4-month-old infants: do infants represent ordinal information?Child Development, 80, 1811–1823.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Liberman, A. M. & Mattingly, I. G. (1989). A specialization for speech perception. Science, 243, 489–494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Liberman, A. M., Harris, K. S., Kinney, J. A. & Lane, H. (1961). The discrimination of relative onset-time of the components of certain speech and nonspeech patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 379–388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P. & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74, 431–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Liberman, I. Y. (1973). Segmentation of the spoken word and reading acquisition. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 23, 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Liberman, I. Y. (1989). Phonology and beginning reading revisited. In von Euler, C. (ed.), Wenner-Gren International Symposium Series: Brain and Reading (pp. 207–220). Hampshire, UK: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Liddell, S. K. & Johnson, R. E. (1989). American sign language: the phonological base. Sign Language Studies, 64, 195–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lidz, J., Waxman, S. & Freedman, J. (2003). What infants know about syntax but couldn’t have learned: experimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months. Cognition, 89, B65–B73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Liebenthal, E., Binder, J. R., Piorkowski, R. L. & Remez, R. E. (2003). Short-term reorganization of auditory analysis induced by phonetic experience. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 549–558.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Liebenthal, E., Binder, J. R., Spitzer, S. M., Possing, E. T. & Medler, D. A. (2005). Neural substrates of phonemic perception. Cerebral Cortex, 15, 1621–1631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lieberman, P. (2006). Toward an Evolutionary Biology of Language. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Liegeois, F., Baldeweg, T., Connelly, A., Gadian, D. G., Mishkin, M. & Vargha-Khadem, F. (2003). Language fMRI abnormalities associated with FOXP2 gene mutation. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 1230–1237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lindblom, B. (1998). Systemic constraints and adaptive changes in the formation of sound structure. In Hurford, J. R., Studdert-Kennedy, M. & Knight, C. (eds.), Approaches to the Evolution of Language: Social and Cognitive Bases (pp. 242–263). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lisker, L. & Abramson, A. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: acoustical measurements. Word, 20, 384–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Liu, L., Deng, X., Peng, D., Cao, F., Ding, G., Jin, Z., et al. (2009). Modality- and task-specific brain regions involved in Chinese lexical processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 1473–1487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lombardi, L. (1999). Positional faithfulness and voicing assimilation in optimality theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 17, 267–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lotto, A. J., Kluender, K. R. & Holt, L. L. (1997). Perceptual compensation for coarticulation by Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102, 1134–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lowe, C. B., Kellis, M., Siepel, A., Raney, B. J., Clamp, M., Salama, S. R., et al. (2011). Three periods of regulatory innovation during vertebrate evolution. Science, 333, 1019–1024.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lukaszewicz, B. (2007). Reduction in syllable onsets in the acquisition of Polish: deletion, coalescence, metathesis and gemination. Journal of Child Language, 34, 53–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lukatela, G., Eaton, T. & Turvey, M. T. (2001). Does visual word identification involve a sub-phonemic level?Cognition, 78, B41–B52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lukatela, G., Eaton, T., Sabadini, L. & Turvey, M. T. (2004). Vowel duration affects visual word identification: evidence that the mediating phonology is phonetically informed. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 151–162.Google ScholarPubMed