Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T14:26:10.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feature geometry and cooccurrence restrictions*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Moira Yip
Moira Yip
Affiliation:
Brandeis University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Recent work by Clements (1985), Sagey (1986), Steriade (1987a) and others has shown clearly that distinctive features are hierarchically organised, and that the hierarchy includes a Place of Articulation constituent. Proposals differ, however, as to the organisation below this Place node. Clements (1985) suggests that there is a Secondary Place node dominating the vowel features, but that [anterior], [coronal] and [distributed] are directly dominated by the Place node itself. Sagey (1986) has argued that there are distinct Articulator nodes, Labial, Coronal and Dorsal, each of which dominates certain binary features, respectively [round]; [anterior] and [distributed]; and [high], [back] and [low]. Dorsal is thus present for both velar consonants and vowels. Steriade (1987a) modifies the Sagey model by adding a Velar node for velar consonants, distinct from the Dorsal node for vowels.

Type
Thematic Papers
Information
Phonology , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , August 1989 , pp. 349 - 374
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

Archangeli, D. (1984). Underspecification in Yawelmani phonology and morphology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Avery, P. & Rice, K. (1988). Underspecification theory and the coronal node. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 9. 101–119.Google Scholar
Brame, M. (1972). On the abstractness of phonology: Maltese. In Brame, M. (ed.) Contributions to generative phonology. Austin: University of Texas Press. 22–61.Google Scholar
Cheng, L. (1989). Feature geometry of vowels and cooccurrence restrictions in Cantonese. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
Cheung, K. H. (1986). The phonology of present-day Cantonese. PhD dissertation, University College, London.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1976). Palatalization: linking or assimilation? CLS 12. 96–109.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2. 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudas, K. (1976). The phonology and morphology of Modern Javanese. PhD dissertation, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1960). The patterning of root morphemes in Semitic. Word 6. 162–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headley, R. K. (1977) Cambodian–English dictionary. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
Horne, E. C. (1961). Beginning Javanese. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Horne, E. C. (1974). Javanese–English dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Jacob, J. M. (1974). A concise Cambodian–English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. (1988). Modern Greek continuant dissimilation and the OCP. Ms, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, M. (1985).Multiple linking in Javanese. Ms, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Kjellin, O. (1976). A phonetic description of Tibetan. Annual Bulletin of the Research Institute of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, University of Tokyo 10. 127–143.Google Scholar
Leben, W. (1973). Suprasegmental phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Levin, J. (1987). A place for lateral in the feature geometry. Paper presented at the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Francisco, 12 1987.Google Scholar
Lombardi, L. (1989). The non-linear organization of the aifricate. Ms, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. To appear in NLLT.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1981). A prosodic theory of non-concatenative morphology. LI 12. 373–418.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1986a). Features and tiers: the structure of Semitic roots. Paper presented at Brandeis University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1986b). OCP effects: gemination and antigemination. LI 17. 207–263.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1987). Some uncontroversial questions in feature geometry. Paper presented at Brandeis University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1988). Feature geometry and dependency. To appear in Fujimura, O. (ed.) Articulatory organization: from phonology to speech signals. Basle: Karger.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1989a). Linear order in phonological representation. LI 20. 71–100.Google Scholar
MaCarthy, J. (1989b). Guttural phonology. Ms, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Mester, R. A. (1986). Studies in tier structure. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Mester, A. & Itô, J. (1988). Feature predictability and underspecification: palatal prosody in Japanese mimetics. Lg 65. 258–293.Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. & Mohanan, T. (1984). Lexical phonology of the consonant system in Malayalam. LI 15. 575–603.Google Scholar
Nacaskul, K. (1978). The syllabic and morphological structure of Cambodian words. In Jenner, P. (ed.) Mon-Khmer Studies VII. University Press of Hawaii. 183–200Google Scholar
Odden, D. (1978). Further evidence for the feature [grave]. LI 9. 141–144.Google Scholar
Oswalt, R. (1971). Inanimate imitatives in Pomo. In Sawyer, J. (ed.) Studies in American Indian languages. Berkeley: University of California Press. 175–190.Google Scholar
Paradis, C. & Prunet, J.-F. (1988). Markedness and coronal structure. To appear in NELS 19.Google Scholar
Pulleyblank, E. (1989). Articulator based features of vowels and consonants. Ms.Google Scholar
Rehg, K. (1973). On the history of Ponapean phonology. Working Papers in Linguistics, University of Hawaii 5.Google Scholar
Robins, R. H. (1958). The Yurok language. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sagey, E. C. (1986). The representation of features and relations in non-linear phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1988). The two-root theory of length. To appear in NELS 19.Google Scholar
Stafford, R. L. (1967). An elementary Luo grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1986a). Articulator harmony. Handout for talk given in series of lectures at MIT.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1986b). A note on coronal. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1987a) Vowel tiers and geminate blockage. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1987b). Redundant values. CLS 23:2. 339–362.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1987c). Locality conditions and feature geometry. NELS 17. 595–617.Google Scholar
Straight, H. S. (1976). The acquisition of Maya phonology: variation in Yucatec child language. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Trigo, L. (1988). On the phonological derivation and behavior of nasal glides. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, E. M. (1950a). The structure of the Javanese morpheme. Lingua 2. 239–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reprinted in Uhlenbeck, (1978). 10–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhlenbeck, E. M. (1950b). The Krama–Ngoko opposition: its place in the Javanese language system. Groningen, Djakarta.Google Scholar
Reprinted in Uhlenbeck, (1978). 278–299.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, E. M. (1978). Studies in Javanese morphology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Yip, M. (1988). The OCP and phonological rules: a loss of identity. LI 19. 65–100.Google Scholar