Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:23:23.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Géométrie des restrictions de cooccurrence de traits en sémitique et en berbère: synchronie et diachronie

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Mohamed Elmedlaoui
Mohamed Elmedlaoui*
Affiliation:
Université Mohamed 1er, Maroc
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The main goal of this article is to provide a more global approach to the question of cooccurrence restrictions which hold among classes of segments in Hamito-Semitic languages. It is demonstrated that the Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP) combined with the directionality conventions is not sufficient to predict all of the observed cooccurrence restrictions found in the Classical Arabic verb root and that it is necessary to postulate two other constraints that interact with the OCP. By establishing a parallel between the facts observed in Classical Arabic and the labial dissimilations in two other Hamito-Semitic languages, Akkadian and Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber, it is argued that, at the Proto-Hamito-Semitic stage, the OCP hierarchically dominated the Multiple Association Constraint operative at the level of articulator nodes, but that this hierarchy is no longer synchronically manifested in languages like Arabic and Hebrew. The existence of a constraint that imposes a minimal sonority distance on rising sonority contours is also postulated to account for an asymmetry indicating a tendency to prefer certain sequences of segments over the reverse order.

Résumé

Résumé

Le but principal de cet article est de reformuler aussi globalement que possible la problématique des restrictions de cooccurrence des classes de segments que l’on observe dans les langues chamito-sémitiques. Il est démontré que la combinaison du Principe du Contour Obligatoire (PCO) et des conventions de directionnalité ne suffit pas pour prédire tous les aspects observables des restrictions de cooccurrence dans la racine verbale de l’arabe classique et qu’il est nécessaire de postuler l’existence de deux autres contraintes qui interagissent avec le PCO. En faisant le parallèle entre les faits observables en arabe classique et les dissimilations de labialité que présentent deux autres langues chamito-sémitiques, l’akkadien et le parler chleuh d’Imdlawn, il est argumenté qu’au stade Proto-Chamito-Sémitique, le PCO dominait hiérarchiquement une autre contrainte: l’Interdiction d’Association Multiple, observée sur les paliers des noeuds d’articulateurs, mais que ce rapport de contraintes ne tient plus synchroniquement dans des langues comme l’arabe ou l’hébreu. L’existence d’une contrainte qui impose une distance minimale de sonorité au contour croissant de sonorité est également postulée afin d’expliquer une asymétrie qui dénote une tendance à préférer certaines suites de segments aux suites d’ordre inverse.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 39 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1995

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.)

References

Références

Al-Astaraabaaðiy Annahwiy, Radiyyu Ddiyn († 1296). šarh šaafiyat Ibnilhaažib. Beyrouth: Daar Al-kutub Al-ʕilmiya (non daté).Google Scholar
Al-Suyuuṭii, zalaalu Ddiyn († 1505). Al-Muzhim fiy culuumi Ilughati wa anwwaa ihaa. Daar ɂihyaaɂ Al-kutub Al-ʕarabiyat (non daté).Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diane et Pulleyblank, Douglas. 1986. The Content and Structure of Phonological Representations. Ms., University of Arizona/University of Southern California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Bagemihl, Bruce. 1990. Syllable Structure in Bella Coola. In Proceedings of NELS 20, sous la dir. Carter, de Juli, Déchaine, Rose-Marie, Philip, Bill, et Sherer, Tim, 16–30. Graduate Linguistic Student Association, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Bagemihl, Bruce. 1991. Syllable Structure in Bella Coola. Linguistic Inquiry 22:589–646.Google Scholar
Bakalla, Mohamed. 1983. The Treatment of Nasal Elements by Early Arab and Muslim Phoneticians. In History of Linguistic Science, série III, vol. 28, sous la dir. de Cornelis, H.M. et al., 49–59. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bohas, Georges. 1990. A Diachronic Effect of the OCR Linguistic Inquiry 21:298–301.Google Scholar
Bohas, Georges. 1991. OCP et la persistence des représentations sous-jacentes. Ms., Université de Paris VIII.Google Scholar
Bolozky, Samuel. 1982. Strategies of Modern Hebrew Verb Formation. Hebrew Annual Review 6:69–79.Google Scholar
Bolozky, Samuel. 1986. Semantic Productivity and Word Frequency in Modern Hebrew Verb Formation. Hebrew Studies 27:38–46.Google Scholar
Borowsky, Toni J. 1986. Topics in The Lexical Phonology of English. Thèse de doctorat, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Brame, Michael. 1970. Arabic Phonology. Thèse de doctorat, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Brown, Francis, Driver, S.R. et Briggs, Charles A.. 1951. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press (réimpression).Google Scholar
Cairns, Charles E., et Feinstein, Mark H.. 1982. Markedness and the Theory of Syllable Structure. Linguistic Inquiry 13:193–225.Google Scholar
Cantineau, Jean. 1946. Esquisse d’une phonologie de l’arabe classique. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris 126:93–140.Google Scholar
Cantineau, Jean. 1960. Cours de phonétique arabe. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Carnie, Andrew. 1994. Whence Sonority? Evidence from Epenthesis in Modern Irish. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21:81–108.Google Scholar
Chaker, Salem. 1981. Les racines berbères trilitères à 3ème radicale alternante. Groupe linguistique d’études chamito-sémitiques (GLECS) 18-23:293–303.Google Scholar
Chaker, Salem. 1990. Les bases de l’apparentement chamito-sémitique du berbère: un faisceau d’indices convergents. Études et Documents Berbères 7:28–57.Google Scholar
Chomsky, William. 1957. Hebrew: The Eternal Language. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. 1985. The Geometry of Phonological Features. Phonology Yearbook 2:225–252.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. 1987. Phonological Feature Representation and the Description of Intrusive Stops. Chicago Linguistic Society 23:29–50.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. 1988. The Sonority Cycle and Syllable Organization. Ms., Cornell University.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. 1990. The Role of Sonority Cycle in Core Syllabification. In Papers in Laboratory Phonology, vol. I: Between the Grammar and the Physics of Speech, sous la dir. Kingston, de John et Beckman, Mary E., 283–333. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clements, G.N. 1991. Place of Articulation in Consonants and Vowels: A Unified Theory. In Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 5, 77–123. Phonetics Laboratory, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Cohen, David. 1968. Les langues chamito-sémitiques. Le langage. Paris: NRF-Gallimard. Encyclopédie de la Pléiade.Google Scholar
Cohen, David. 1970. Dictionnaire des racines sémitiques ou attestées dans les langues sémitiques, tomes I—II. La Haye: Mouton. [1970-1976.]Google Scholar
Cohen, David. 1972. Problèmes de linguistique chamito-sémitique. Revue des études islamiques 40:43–68.Google Scholar
Cohen, David. 1975. Rapport sur les conférences de sémitique comparé de l’année scolaire 1973–1974 (Lexicographie comparée du sémitique). In Annuaire 1974–1975, 265–275. Paris: École Pratique des Hautes Etudes.Google Scholar
Cohen, David. 1988. Le chamito-sémitique. In Les langues dans le monde ancien et moderne, vol. III: Langues chamito-sémitiques, sous la dir. Cohen, de David, 9–30. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Cohen, Marcel. 1969. Essai comparatif sur le vocabulaire et la phonétique du chamito-sémitique. Paris: Champion. [1947.]Google Scholar
Dell, François. 1985. Les règles et les sons. 2ème édition. Paris: Hermann. [1973.]Google Scholar
Dell, François. 1991. Assimilations Supralaryngales dans deux parlers de la Chine méridionelle. Ms., Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Paris.Google Scholar
Dell, François et Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1985. Syllabic Consonants and Syllabification in Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 7:105–130.Google Scholar
Dell, François et Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1988. Syllabic Consonants in Berber: Some New Evidence. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 10:1–17.Google Scholar
Dell, François et Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1992. Quantitative Transfer in the Nonconcatenative Morphology of Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber. Journal of Afroasiatic Languages 3:89–125.Google Scholar
Diakonoff, I.M. 1988. Afrasian Languages. Réédition revisée. Moscou: Nauka. [1965, entitled Semito-Hamitic Languages.]Google Scholar
Diakonoff, I.M. 1970. Problems in Root Structure in Proto-Semitic. AO 38.Google Scholar
Dozy, R. 1881. Supplément aux Dictionnaires Arabes. Leyden.Google Scholar
Durand, Olivier. 1991. Précédents chamito-sémitiques en Hébreu: Étude d’histoire linguistique. Studi semitici, nuova serie 8. Roma: Università degli studi “La sapienza” (Dipartimento di studi orientali).Google Scholar
Durand, Olivier. 1993. Qu’est-ce qu’une langue berbère? Hypothèse diachronique. Rendiconti, série IX, vol. IV, fascicolo 1:91–109. Atti della accademia nazionale dei lincei. Anno cccxc-1993, Classe di scienze morali, stroriche e philologiche, Roma.Google Scholar
Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1985. Le parler berbère chleuh d’Imdlawn: Segments et syllabation. Doctorat de 3ème cycle, Université de Paris VIII à Saint Denis.Google Scholar
Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1990. Mabaadiɂu al-muqaaranati l-ħaamiyati l-saamiyati, ʕalaa dawɂi mafhuumi l-fasaaɂili l-sawtiyati l-tabiiʕiyati. Revue de la faculté des lettres (Oujda) 1:53–95.Google Scholar
Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1991. Binyatu l-kalimati fii lluγaati l-ħaamiyati l-saamiyati: baʕdu l-quyuudi lʕaruudiyati wa l-funuluužiyati. Diraasaat 5:92–114. [Faculté des Lettres, Agadir.]Google Scholar
Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1992. Aspects des représentations phonologiques dans certaines langues chamito-sémitiques. Thèse de Doctorat d’État, Université Mohamed V, Rabat.Google Scholar
Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1993. Gemination and Spirantization in Hebrew, Berber and Tigrinya: A Fortis-Lenis Module Analysis. Linguistica Communicatio 5:121–176.Google Scholar
Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1994. Extension de la racine en chamito-sémitique. Texte d’une conférence présenté à la réunion du Groupe linguistique d’études chamito-sémitiques (GLECS) Juin 1991, E.P.H.E., Paris. [Paru dans Linguistique Africaine 12:93–118.]Google Scholar
Galand, Lionel. 1983. Berbère et traits sémitiques communs. Groupe linguistique d’études chamito-sémitiques (GLECS) 18-23:463–478.Google Scholar
Galand, Lionel. 1988. Le berbère. In Les langues dans le monde ancien et moderne, vol. III: Les langues chamito-sémitiques, 207–242. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Galand Pernet, Paulette. 1984. Sur quelques bases radicales et champs morphosémantiques en berbère. In Current Progress in Afro-Asiatic Linguistics, sous la dir. Bynon, de James, 293–303. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Garbini, Giovanni. 1974. La position du sémitique dans le chamito-sémitique. In Actes du premier congrès international de linguistique sémitique et chamito-sémitique, sous la dir. Caquot, d’André et Cohen, David, 21–26. La Haye: Mouton.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John, et Larson, Gary. 1990. Local Modeling and Syllabification. In Papers from the 26th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, vol. 2: The Parasession on the Syllable in Phonetics and Phonology, sous la dir. Ziolkowski, de Michael, Noske, Manuela et Deaton, Karen D, 129–141 Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1950. The Patterning of Root Morphemes in Semitic. Word 6:162–181 Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1958. The Labial Consonants of Proto-Afro-Asiatic. Word 14:295–302 Google Scholar
Guerssel, Mohamed. 1985. The Role of Sonority in Berber Syllabification. Awal 1:81–110 Google Scholar
Haddad, Gh. F. 1984. Epenthesis and Sonority in Lebanese Arabic. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 14:57–88 Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1983. On Distinctive Features and Their Articulatory Implementation. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1:91–105.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1988. On the Immanent Form of Phonemes. In The Making of Cognitive Science, sous la dir. Hirst, de William. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1989. The Intrinsic Structure of Speech Sounds. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1991. Des connaissances linguistiques. Texte d’une conférence présenté à l’occasion de la remise du Prix de l’UAP; Palais des Congrès, Paris, septembre 1991.Google Scholar
Harris, James. 1983. Syllable Structure and Stress in Spanish: A Non-Linear Analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, James. 1987. Santisima, la Nauyaca. Notes on Syllable Structure in Spanish. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Harris, James. 1990. Segmental Complexity and Phonological Government. Phonology 7:255–300 Google Scholar
Hoberman, Robert. 1988. Local and Long-Distance Spreading in Semitic Morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6:541–549 Google Scholar
Hulst, Harry van der. 1984. Syllable Structure and Stress in Dutch. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Ibn-Jinnii, Abu-lfath (†1002). 1954. Sirr Sinaa ʕat Al-ɂiʕraab, tome I. Égypte: Imprimerie Mustapha Al-Baabii Al-Halabii Bi-Misr.Google Scholar
Jebbour, Abdelkrim. 1985. La labio-vélarisation en berbère—dialecte tachelhit—(parler de Tiznit). Mémoire de CEUS, Faculté des Lettres, Rabat.Google Scholar
Kingston, John et Mary Beckman, réds. 1990. Papers in Laboratory Phonology, vol. I: Between the Grammar and the Physics of Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1979. Metrical Structure Assignment is Cyclic in English. Linguistic Inquiry 10:421–441 Google Scholar
Kisseberth, Charles. 1970. On the Functional Unity of Phonological Rules. Linguistic Inquiry 1:291–306 Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1975. A Course in Phonetics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Lane, Edward William. 1863. An Arabic-English Lexicon. Londres.Google Scholar
Lasri, Ahmed. 1991. Aspects de la phonologie non-linéaire du parler berbère chleuh de Tidli. Thèse pour le nouveau doctorat, Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris Ill.Google Scholar
Levin, Juliette. 1985. A Metrical Theory of Syllabicity. Thèse de doctorat, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Lowenstamm, Jean. 1981. On the Maximal Cluster Approach to Syllable Structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12:575–604 Google Scholar
Masson, Michel. 1991. Étude d’un parallélisme sémantique: “tresser”/“être fort”. Ms. [À paraître dans Semitica XL.]Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1979. Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology. Thèse de doctorat, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1981. A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology. Linguistic Inquiry 12:373–418 Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1985. Features and Tiers: The Structure of Semitic Roots. Conférence présentée au Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1986. OCP Effects: Gemination and Antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17:207–263 Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1987. The Featural Structure of Semitic Roots. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1988. Feature Geometry and Dependency: A Review. Phonetica 45: 84–108.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1989a. Guttural Phonology. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1989b. Linear Order in Phonological Representation. Linguistic Inquiry 20:71–99 Google Scholar
McCarthy, John et Prince, Alan. 1993. Prosodic Morphology. I: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst/Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Mester, Armin. 1986. Studies in Tier Structure. Thèse de doctorat, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Mester, Armin. 1989. Dependent Tier Ordering and the OCP. In Features, Segmental Structure and Harmony Processes, sous la dir. Hulst, de Harry van der et Smith, Norval, 127–144 Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Moscati, Sabatino, Spitaler, Anton, Ulendorff, Edward et Soden, Wolfram Von. 1964. An Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz (1980).Google Scholar
Mrayati, Mohamed, Alam, Yahya Meer et Al-Tayyan, Hassan. 1987. Origins of Arab Cryptography and Criptanalysis, vol. I. Damas: Arab Academy of Damascus Publications.Google Scholar
Odden, David. 1988. Anti Antigemination and the OCP. Linguistic Inquiry 19:451–475 Google Scholar
Padgett, Jaye. 1992. Stricture and Nasal Place Assimilation. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carole. 1988a. On Constraints and Repair Strategies. The Linguistic Review 6:71–97 Google Scholar
Paradis, Carole. 1988b. Towards a Theory of Constraint Violations. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 5:1–43 Google Scholar
Paradis, Carole et Prunet, Jean-François. 1993. On the Validity of Morpheme Structure Constraints. Revue canadienne de linguistique 38:235–256 Google Scholar
Paradis, Carole et Prunet, Jean-François, dir. 1991. Phonetics and Phonology, vol. 2: The Special Status of Coronals: Internal and External Evidence. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1993. Dissimilarity in the Arabic Verbal Roots. Proceedings of the NELS 23, sous la dir. Shafer, d’Amy J., 367–381 Graduate Linguistic Student Association, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Piggott, Glyne. 1989. Variability in Feature Dependency. Ms., McGill University.Google Scholar
Plénat, Marc. 1994. Observations sur le mot minimal français: l’oralisation des sigles. Ms. [À paraître dans De Natura Sonorum, sous la dir. Laks, de Bernard et Plénat, Marc. Paris: PUV]Google Scholar
Prasse, Karl. 1972. Manuel de grammaire touaregue (Tahaggart), vols. I—III: Phonétique-Écriture-Pronom. Copenhague: Institut de Copenhague.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan. 1987. Planes and Copying. Linguistic Inquiry 18:491–509 Google Scholar
Prince, Alan et Smolensky, Paul. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Ms., Rutgers University/University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Reiss, Charles. 1992. The Outcome of/lr/and/nr/in Old Icelandic. Ms. [Date présumée.]Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1992. On Deriving Sonority: A Structural Account of Structural Relationship. Phonology 9:61–99 Google Scholar
Rice, Keren et Avery, Peter. 1989. On the Interaction between Sonorancy and Voicing. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 10:65–82 Google Scholar
Rice, Keren et Avery, Peter. 1991. On the Relationship between Laterality and Coronality. In Phonetics and Phonology, vol. 2: The Special Status of Coronals: Internal and External Evidence, sous la dir. Paradis, de Carole et Prunet, Jean-François, 101–124 New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, Franz. 1983. A Grammar of Biblical Aramaic. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. [1961.]Google Scholar
Sabia, Abdelali. 1992. L’espace en arabe marocain: l’adverbe de lieu. Thèse d’État, Université Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdallah, Fes.Google Scholar
Sagey, Elisabeth. 1986. The Representation of Features and Relations in Non-Linear Phonology. Thèse de doctorat, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy. 1991. Suboral Places of Articulation. Ms., Université de Haïfa.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1980. Prosodic Domains in Phonology: Sanskrit Revisited. In Juncture, sous la dir. Aronoff, de Mark et Kean, Mary-Louise, 107–129 Saratoga: Anna Libri.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1984. On the Major Class Features and Syllable Theory. In Language Sound Structure, sous la dir. Aronoff, de Mark et Oehrle, Richard T., 107–113 Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1988. Dependency, Place and the Notion ‘Tier’. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1990. A Two-Root Theory of Length. In University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 14, sous la dir. Dunlap, d’Elaine et Padgett, Jaye, 123– 171. Graduate Linguistic Student Association, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1993. [Labial] Relations. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1982. Greek Prosodies and the Nature of Syllabification. Thèse de doctorat, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1992. Segments, Contours and Clusters. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Linguists, sous la dir. Crochetière, d’André, Boulanger, Jean-Claude et Ouellon, Conrad. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval.Google Scholar
Wexler, Peter. 1990. The Schizoid Nature of Modem Hebrew. A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past. Texte d’une conférence présentée au Department of Judaic Studies. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, octobre 1990.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 1987a. Feature Geommetry and Co-occurrence Restrictions. Ms., Brandeis University.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 1987b. La structure des traits distinctifs et les restrictions de co-occurrence en Javanais et Cambodgien. Ms., Brandeis University.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 1987. Edge-In Association. In Proceedings ofNELS 18, sous la dir. Blevins, de James et Carter, Judi, 538–552 Graduate Linguistic Student Association, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 1988a. The Obligatory Contour Principle and Phonological Rules: A Loss of Identity. Linguistic Inquiry 19:65–100 Google Scholar
Yip, Moira. 1988b. Template Morphology and the Direction of Association. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6:551–577 Google Scholar
Younes, Rebecca. 1983. The Representation of Geminate Consonants. Ms., University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar