Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:02:21.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stephen R. Anderson, Phonology in the twentieth century. Theories of rules and theories of representations. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 1985. Pp. x + 373.

Review products

Stephen R. Anderson, Phonology in the twentieth century. Theories of rules and theories of representations. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 1985. Pp. x + 373.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Roger Lass
Roger Lass
Affiliation:
University of Cape Town
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
Reviews
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , September 1987 , pp. 476 - 481
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

Anderson, J. M. & Ewen, C. J. (1980). Studies in dependency phonology. Ludwigsburg Studies in Language and Linguistics, 4.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. & Jones, C. (1974). Three theses concerning phonological representations. JL 10. 1–26.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. & Jones, C. (1977). Phonological structure and the history of English. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language, New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Chao, Y -R. (1934). The non-uniqueness of phonemic solutions of phonetic Systems. Academica Sinica (Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology) 4 (4). 363–97. [Reprinted Joos, 1957.]Google Scholar
Ewen, C. J. (1982). The internal structure of complex segments. In van der Hulst & Smith (1982), 27–68.Google Scholar
Foley, J. (1977). Foundations of theoretical phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Giegerich, H. (1985). Metrical phonology and phonological structure: English and German. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marris, Z. S. (1960). Structural linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. & Fought, J. (1981). American structuralism. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joos, M. (1957). Readings in linguistics I. Washington, D.C.: ACLS.Google Scholar
Lass, R. (1980). On explaining language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lass, R. (1984). Phonology. An introduction to basic concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laufer, A. & Condax, I. D. (1979). The epiglottis as an articulator. JIPA 9. 50–6.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1970). Prosodic analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Robins, R. H. (1957). Aspects of Prosodic analysis. Proceedings of the University of Durham Philosophical Society. I. Series B, No. 1, 1–12. [Reprinted in Palmer, 1970.]Google Scholar
Twaddell, W. F. (1935). On defining the phoneme. Language Monographs, 16. [Reprinted Joos, 1957.]Google Scholar
van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (1982). The structure of phonological representations II. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar