Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:53:42.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphology, Phonology and the Scottish Vowel-length Rule

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

John Anderson
John Anderson
Affiliation:
Department of English Language, University of Edinburgh, David Hume Tower, George Square, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Notes and Discussion
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , September 1993 , pp. 419 - 430
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

REFERENCES

Aitken, A. J. (1981). The Scottish vowel-length rule. In Benskin, M. & Samuels, M. L. (eds.) So meny people, longages and tonges. Edinburgh: Benskin & Samuels. 131–157.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1986). Suprasegmental dependencies. In Durand, J. (ed.) Dependency and non-linear phonology. London: Croom Helm. 55–133.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1988a). System geometry and segment structure: a question of Scots economy. NELS. 18 22–37.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1988b). Old English ablaut again: the essentially concrete character of dependency phonology. In Duncan-Rose, C. & Vennemann, T. (eds.) On language: rhetorica, phonologica, syntactica. A festschrift for Robert P. Stockwell from his friends and colleagues. London: Routledge. 161–182.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1992). Linguistic representation: structural analogy and stratification. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (in press). Contrastivity and non-specification in a dependency phonology of English. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 26.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. & Ewen, C. J. (1987). Principles of dependency phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, P. (1992). Strict cyclicity, structure preservation and the Scottish vowel-length rule. JL. 28 91–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carstairs, A. D. (1987). Allomorphy in inflexion. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Colman, F. (1985). On some morphological formatives in Old English. Folia Linguistica Historica. 6 267–283.Google Scholar
Colman, F. (1987). The phonology and morphology of an Old English digraph: ie. In Anderson, J. M. & Durand, J. (eds.) Explorations in dependency phonology. Dordrecht: Foris. 49–77.Google Scholar
Colman, F. (1991). Money talks: reconstructing Old English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, M. & Mohanan, K. P. (1985). The segmental phonology of Modern English. Lin. 16 57–116.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (1989). Derived phonological contrasts. In Ramsaran, S. (ed.) Studies in the pronunciation of English: a commemorative volume in honour of A. C. Gimson. London: Croom Helm. 87–105.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. & Shaw, P. (1985). On the theory of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook. 2 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). From cyclic to lexical phonology. In Van Der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. S. H. (eds.) The structure of phonological representations, vol. I. Dordrecht: Foris. 131–175.Google Scholar
McMahon, A. M. S. (1991). Lexical phonology and sound change: the case of the Scottish vowel-length rule. JL. 27 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noske, R. G., Schinkel, J. & Smith, N. S. H. (1982). The question of rule ordering: some counter fallacies. JL. 18 389–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, J. C. (1982). Accents of English, vol. II: The British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar