Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Where phonology and phonetics intersect: the case of Hausa intonation
- 3 Metrical representation of pitch register
- 4 The status of register in intonation theory: comments on the papers by Ladd and by Inkelas and Leben
- 5 The timing of prenuclear high accents in English
- 6 Alignment and composition of tonal accents: comments on Silverman and Pierrehumberf's paper
- 7 Macro and micro F0 in the synthesis of intonation
- 8 The separation of prosodies: comments on Kohler's paper
- 9 Lengthenings and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency
- 10 On the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 11 Lengthenings and the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 12 From performance to phonology: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 13 The Delta programming language: an integrated approach to nonlinear phonology, phonetics, and speech synthesis
- 14 The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation
- 15 On the value of reductionism and formal explicitness in phonological models: comments on Ohala's paper
- 16 A response to Pierrehumbert's commentary
- 17 The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification
- 18 Demisyllables as sets of features: comments on Clements's paper
- 19 Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech
- 20 Toward a model of articulatory control: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 21 Gestures and autosegments: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 22 On dividing phonetics and phonology: comments on the papers by Clements and by Browman and Goldstein
- 23 Articulatory binding
- 24 The generality of articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 25 On articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 26 The window model of coarticulation: articulatory evidence
- 27 Some factors influencing the precision required for articulatory targets: comments on Keating's paper
- 28 Some regularities in speech are not consequences of formal rules: comments on Keating's paper
- Index of names
- Index of subjects
17 - The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 February 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Where phonology and phonetics intersect: the case of Hausa intonation
- 3 Metrical representation of pitch register
- 4 The status of register in intonation theory: comments on the papers by Ladd and by Inkelas and Leben
- 5 The timing of prenuclear high accents in English
- 6 Alignment and composition of tonal accents: comments on Silverman and Pierrehumberf's paper
- 7 Macro and micro F0 in the synthesis of intonation
- 8 The separation of prosodies: comments on Kohler's paper
- 9 Lengthenings and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency
- 10 On the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 11 Lengthenings and the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 12 From performance to phonology: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 13 The Delta programming language: an integrated approach to nonlinear phonology, phonetics, and speech synthesis
- 14 The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation
- 15 On the value of reductionism and formal explicitness in phonological models: comments on Ohala's paper
- 16 A response to Pierrehumbert's commentary
- 17 The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification
- 18 Demisyllables as sets of features: comments on Clements's paper
- 19 Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech
- 20 Toward a model of articulatory control: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 21 Gestures and autosegments: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 22 On dividing phonetics and phonology: comments on the papers by Clements and by Browman and Goldstein
- 23 Articulatory binding
- 24 The generality of articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 25 On articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 26 The window model of coarticulation: articulatory evidence
- 27 Some factors influencing the precision required for articulatory targets: comments on Keating's paper
- 28 Some regularities in speech are not consequences of formal rules: comments on Keating's paper
- Index of names
- Index of subjects
Summary
Introduction
One of the major concerns of laboratory phonology is that of determining the nature of the transition between discrete phonological structure (conventionally, “phonology”) and its expression in terms of nondiscrete physical or psychoacoustic parameters (conventionally, “phonetics”). A considerable amount of research has been devoted to determining where this transition lies, and to what extent the rule types and representational systems needed to characterize the two levels may differ (see Keating 1985 for an overview). For instance, it is an empirical question to what extent the assignment of phonetic parameters to strings of segments (phonemes, tones, etc.) depends upon increasingly rich representational structures of the sort provided by autosegmental and metrical phonology, or upon real-time realization rules – or indeed upon some combination of the two, as many are coming to believe. We are only beginning to assess the types of evidence that can decide questions of this sort, and a complete and fully adequate theory of the phonetics/phonology interface remains to be worked out. A new synthesis of the methodology of phonology and phonetics, integrating results from the physical, biological and cognitive sciences, is required if we are to make significant progress in this area.
The present study examines one question of traditional interest to both phoneticians and phonologists, with roots that go deep into modern linguistic theory. Many linguists have noted the existence of cross-linguistic preferences for certain types of syllable structures and syllable contacts. These have been the subject of descriptive studies and surveys such as that of Greenberg (1978), which have brought to light a number of generalizations suggesting that certain syllable types are less complex or less marked than others across languages.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Papers in Laboratory Phonology , pp. 283 - 333Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1990
- 443
- Cited by