Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-21T16:01:46.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On deriving sonority: a structural account of sonority relationships*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Keren D. Rice
Keren D. Rice
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this paper, I examine sonority and place of articulation constraints on the syllabification of consonants in clusters. I argue that (i) both sonority and place of articulation relationships are important in determining the syllabification of consonants in clusters, (ii) well-formed sonority and place relationships are detectable both through phonotactics and through repair strategies that apply if the constraints on sonority and place are not met, (iii) sonority and place constraints are both structurally determined and (iv) place of articulation does not form part of the sonority relationship between consonants as the structural conditions for the licensing of sonority and for the licensing of place of articulation may differ (see Clements 1990a: 313). However, place of articulation restrictions, while independent of sonority restrictions, are, like sonority restrictions, structurally defined.

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , May 1992 , pp. 61 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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

Archangeli, D. & Pulleyblank, D. (1986). The content and structure of phonological representations. Ms, University of Arizona & University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. (eds.) (1984). Language sound structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Avery, P. & Rice, K. (1989). Segment structure and coronal underspecification. Phonology 6. 179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, M. (1964). Klamath grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Borowsky, T. (1986). Topics in the lexical phonology of English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Brackel, A. (1983). Phonological markedness and distinctive features. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Bures, A. (1989). The structure of the syllable: principles and parameters in syllabification. MA thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Cho, S.-B. (1967). A phonological study of Korean. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Cho, Y.-M. (1988). Korean assimilation. WCCFL 7. 41–52.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Keyser, S. J. (1983). CV phonology: a generative theory of the syllable. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2. 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1988). A substantive theory of feature specification. NELS 17. 79–93.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1990a). The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Kingston, J. & Beckman, M. E. (eds.) Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: between the grammar and physics of speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 283–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1990b). Place of articulation in consonants and vowels: a unified approach. Paper presented at the 21st Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, UQAM.Google Scholar
Davis, S. (1990). An argument for radical underspecification in English. LI 21. 301–306.Google Scholar
Davis, S. (1991). Coronals and the phonotactics of nonadjacent consonants in English. In Paradis & Prunet (1991). 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (1981). Wargamay. In Dixon, R. M. W. & Blake, B. (eds.). Handbook of Australian languages. Vol. 2. Canberra: Australia National University Press. 1–143.Google Scholar
Dogil, G. (1988). Phonological configurations: natural classes, sonority and syllabicity. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.) Features, segmental structure, and harmony processes. Part 1. Dordrecht: Foris. 79–104.Google Scholar
Donaldson, T. (1980). Ngiyambaa: the language of the Wangaabuwan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hamid, A.-H. (1984). A descriptive analysis of Sudanese Colloquial Arabic. PhD dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
Hamilton, P. (1989). Australian phonotactics and the internal structure of the place node. MA thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Hankamer, J. & Aissen, J. (1974). The sonority hierarchy. In Bruck, A., Fox, R. A. & La Galy, M. W. (eds.). Papers from the parasession on natural phonology. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 131–145.Google Scholar
Harris, J. W. (1983). Syllable structure and stress in Spanish: a nonlinear analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (1990). Segmental complexity and phonological government. Phonology 7. 255–300.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1986). Assimilation as spreading in Toba Batak. LI 17. 467–500.Google Scholar
Heath, J. (1984). Functional grammar of Nunggubuyu. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Hooper, J. (1972). The syllable in phonological theory. Lg 48. 525–540.Google Scholar
Hulst, H. van der (1989). Atoms of segmental structure: components, gestures and dependency. Phonology 6. 253–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itô, J. (1986). Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Itô, J. (1989). A prosodic theory of epenthesis. NLLT 7. 217–260.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1904). Lehrbuch der Phonetik. Leipzig & Berlin.Google Scholar
Kahn, D. (1976). Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. M. (1988). Modern Greek continuant dissimilation and the OCP. Ms, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Kaye, J. D. (1990). ‘Coda’ licensing. Phonology 7. 301–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, J. D., Lowenstamm, J. & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1985). The internal structure of phonological elements: a theory of charm and government. Phonology Yearbook 2. 305–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, J. D., Lowenstamm, J. & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1988). Rektion und Kon-stituentrektion in der Phonologie. Linguistische Berichte 114. 31–75.Google Scholar
Kaye, J. D., Lowenstamm, J. & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1990). Constituent structure and government in phonology. Phonology 7. 193–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kean, M.-L. (1975). The theory of markedness in generative grammar. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, M. (1989). Comments on ‘The structure of (complex) consonants; by H. van der Hulst & N. Smith’. Paper presented at the Conference on Feature and Underspecification Theories, MIT.Google Scholar
Kim-Renaud, Y. (1986). Studies in Korean linguistics. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1985). Some consequences of Lexical Phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2. 85–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J. (1983). Phonological acquisition and change. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1988). Feature geometry and dependency: a review. Phonetica 45. 84–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1990). Prosodic morphology and templatic morphology. In Eid, M. & McCarthy, J. (eds.) Perspectives on Arabic linguistics II. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 1–54.Google Scholar
Maddieson, I. (1984). Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mascaró, J. (1987). A reduction and spreading theory of voicing and other sound effects. Ms, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Mester, R. A. & Itô, J. (1989). Feature predictability and Underspecification: palatal prosody in Japanese mimetics. Lg 65. 258–293.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. & Basri, H. (1986). The phonology of Selayarese. Oceanic Linguistics 25. 210–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. (1982). Lexical Phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. (1986). The theory of Lexical Phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. & Mohanan, T. (1984). Lexical phonology of the consonant system in Malayalam. LI 15. 575–602.Google Scholar
Mohanan, T. (1989). Syllabification in Malayalam. LI 20. 589–626.Google Scholar
Murray, R. & Vennemann, T. (1983). Sound change and syllable structure in Germanic phonology. Lg 59. 514–528.Google Scholar
Paradis, C. & Prunet, J.-F. (1989). On coronal transparency. Phonology 6. 317–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, C. & Prunet, J.-F. (eds.) (1991). The special status of coronals: internal and external evidence. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Piggott, G. (1992). Variability in feature dependency: the case of nasal harmony. NLLT 10.Google Scholar
Prince, A. (1984). Phonology with tiers. In Aronoff & Oehrle (1984). 234–244.Google Scholar
Rehg, K. & Sohl, D. (1981). Ponapean reference grammar. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, K. (1989). On eliminating resyllabification into onsets. WCCFL 8. 331–346.Google Scholar
Rice, K. & Avery, P. (1987). Underspecification and reduplication in Ponapean. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Rice, K. & Avery, P. (1990). On the interaction between sonorancy and voicing. NELS 20. 428–442.Google Scholar
Rice, K. & Avery, P. (1991a). On the relationship between laterality and coronality. In Paradis & Prunet (1991). 101–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, K. & Avery, P. (1991b). Segmental complexity and the structure of inventories. Paper presented at the GLOW workshop on the acquisition of phonology, Leiden.Google Scholar
Rice, K. & Avery, P. (1991c). A learning path for phonology: a theory of segmental acquisition. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference on Child Language Acquisition.Google Scholar
Sagey, E. (1986). The representation of features and relations in non-linear phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Sapir, J. D. (1965). A grammar of Diola-Fogny. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schein, B. & Steriade, D. (1986). On geminates. LI 17. 691–744.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1984). On the major class features and syllable theory. In Aronoff & Oehrle (1984). 107–136.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1991). Vowel height and the OCP. Paper presented at the 10th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Arizona State University.Google Scholar
Sievers, E. (1881). Grundzüge der Phonetik. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Hartel.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1982). Greek prosodies and the nature of syllabification. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1987). Locality conditions and feature geometry. NELS 17. 595–617.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. & Keyser, S. J. (1989). Primary features and their enhancement in consonants. Lg 65. 81–106.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T. (1988). Preference laws for syllable structure and the exploration of sound change. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Yip, M. (1991). Coronals, consonant clusters, and the coda condition. In Paradis & Prunet (1991). 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zee, D. (1988). Sonority constraints in prosodic structure. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar