Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:49:37.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unnatural phonology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Staffan Hellberg
Staffan Hellberg
Affiliation:
University of Göteborg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The school of generative phonology ‘discovered’ two things. First, that both morphophonemic and allophonic rules could be formulated in terms of distinctive features (most of which had phonetic correlates). This was one of the reasons why both types of rules were brought together under the common name of phonological rules. Secondly, that these rules normally seemed to be natural, in the sense that they showed phonetic plausibility (related, e.g., to substantive properties of the vocal tract). This naturalness was attested by their tendency to appear in identical or similar form in several languages. For some time, then, the typical generative phonologist endeavoured to write all morphophonemic and allophonic alternations he worked with as natural phonological rules.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , September 1978 , pp. 157 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

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

Andersen, H. (1969). Lenition in Common Slavic. Lg 45. 553–574.Google Scholar
Andersen, H. (1973). Abductive and deductive change. Lg 49. 765–793.Google Scholar
Bach, E. & R. T., Harms (1972). How do languages get crazy rules? In Stockwell, & Macaulay, (eds), 1972: 1–21.Google Scholar
Bjarkman, P. C. (1975). Towards a proper conception of processes in natural phonology. PCLS II. 60–72.Google Scholar
Braine, M. D. S. (1974). On what might constitute learnable phonology. Lg 50. 270–299.Google Scholar
Darden, B. J. (1974). Introduction. In Papers from the parasession on natural phonology. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Elert, C.-C. (1970). Ljud och ord i svenskan. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Envall, P. (1930–1947). Dala-Bergslagsmålet: dialekthistorisk och dialektgeografisk översikt. (Svenska, landsmål, B. 47.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Ericsson, T. (1914) Grundlinjer till undersökningen av Södermanlands folkmål: inledning ock historik, ijud- och formlära. (Svenska, landsmål, B. 8.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Gjerdman, O. (1927). Studier över de sörmlöndska stadsmålens kvalitativa ljudlära, Vol. 2. Uppsala: Appelbergs.Google Scholar
Grip, E. (1901). Skuttungemålets ljudlära. (Svenska, landsmål, 18.6.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Götlind, J. (1940–1941). Västergötlands folkmål, vol. I: Vokalerna. (Skrifter, utgivna av Kungl. Gustav, Adolfs Akademien för folklivsforskning, 6.) Uppsala: Lundequistska.Google Scholar
Hoff, I. (1946). Skjetvemålet: utsyn over lydvoksteren i målet i Skiptvet i Østfold ijamforing med andre ostfoldske mål. Oslo: Dyvwad.Google Scholar
Isaacsson, A. (1923). Om södra Fjärdhundralands folkmål: en sammanställning av de viktigassste egenheterna i ijud- ock formlära. (Svenskalandsmål, B. 21.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Kallstenius, G. (1927). Översikt av Värmlands svenska dialekter. (Svenska landsmål, 21.2.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Karlsson, F. (1974). Phonology, morphology, and morphophonemics. (Gothenburg papers in theoretical linguistics, 23.) Göteborg: Department of Linguistics, Göteborg University.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Lg 45. 715–762.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). The internal evolution of linguistic rules. In Stockwell, & Macaulay, (eds), 1972: 101–171.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. E. F. (1972). Phonetics and the description of language. In Rigault, A. & Charbonneau, R. (eds), Proceedings of the seventh international congress of phonetic sciences. The Hague: Mouton, 63–97.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. E. F. (1975). Experiments in sound structure. To appear in Proceedings of the eighth international congress of phonetic sciences.Google Scholar
Lindkvist, E. (1942). Om Gästriklands folkmål. Uppsala: Från Gästrikland.Google Scholar
Linell, P. (1976). Evidence for a functionally-based typology of phonological rules. (Preliminary version.) Uppsala: Department of Linguistics, Uppsala University. To appear in Communication and Cognition.Google Scholar
Nordberg, B. (1975). Contemporary social variation as a stage in a long-term phonological change. In Dahlstedt, K.-H. (ed.), The Nordic languages and modern linguistics 2. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. 587–608.Google Scholar
Noreen, A. (1903–1907). Vårt sprÅk: Nysvensk grammatik i utförlig framställning, Vol. I. Lund: Gleerups.Google Scholar
Noreen, A. (1905–1917). Vårt språk: Nysvensk grammatik i utförlig framställning, Vol. 3. Lund: Gleerups.Google Scholar
Noreen, E. (1917–1943). Årtemarksmålets ljudlÄra: (inledning, deskriptiv ljudlära, historisk ljudlära: vokaler. (Svenska landsmål, B. 43.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Ohala, J. J. (1974). Phonetic explanation in phonology. Papers from the parasession on natural phonology. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 251–274.Google Scholar
Ralph, B. (1974). Constraining predictiveness in phonology. (Gothenburg papers in theoretical linguistics,26.) Göteborg: Department of Linguistics, Göteborg University.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. (1974). Non-phonetic environments in natural phonology. Papers from the parasession on natural phonology. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 285–296.Google Scholar
Schagerström, A. (1882–1884). Upplysningar om Vätömdlet i Roslagen. (Svenska landsmå1, 2.4.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Stampe, D. (1969). The acquisition of phonetic representation. PCLS 5. 443–454.Google Scholar
Stampe, D. (1973). On chapter nine. In Kenstowics, M. J. & Kisseberth, C. W. (eds), Issues in phonological theory. The Hague: Mouton 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, R. P. & Macaulay, R. K. S. (eds) (1972). Linguistic change and generative theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Teleman, U. (1965). Språkvårdens argument. Modersmålslärarnas förenings drsskrift, 1965. 156–177. Reprinted in Loman, B. et al. Språket i blickpunkten. Lund: Gleerups, 1969: 194–216.Google Scholar
Venneman, T. (1972). Phonetic detail in assimilation: problems in Germanic phonology. Lg 48. 863–892.Google Scholar
Vestlund, A. (1923–1947). Medelpads folkmål: inledning, kap. 1–2. (Svenska landsmål, B.48.) Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Wessén, E. (1969). Våra folkmål, 9th ed.Stockholm: Fritzes.Google Scholar
Wulff, F. (1898). Svenska rim och svenskt uttal: några föredrag. Lund: Gleerups.Google Scholar