Abstract
Arguments about constituency in syntax can often be settled by such methods as testing whether conjoining is possible, or whether a particular string can be moved as a single constituent by a transformational rule. In view of the isomorphism which has been noted between syntactic structures and phonological structures (cf. Clements & Keyser, 1983:25–26; the notion of ‘structural analogy’ in Anderson & Durand, 1986:3; and most notably the isomorphism pointed out between Sentence and Syllable by Kurylowicz, 1949), one might wonder whether such means are available for settling analogous arguments in phonology. It appears that they are not: in this area conjoining does not occur, while movement rules are either not recognized at all, or restricted to those accounting for processes of metathesis, which would normally be taken to be local transformations operating on single segments (cf. Vincent, 1986:318, fn. 3). What types of arguments, then, ARE available for settling questions of phonological constituency? This article attempts to explore some aspects of this question.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Philosophy,Language and Linguistics
Reference30 articles.
1. Burmese disguised speech;Haas;BIHP,1969
2. Contribution à la théorie de la syllabe;Kuryłowicz;BPTJ,1948
3. Linguistic play in its cultural context;Conklin;Lg,1959
4. Kuryłowicz J. (1949). La notion de l'isomorphisme. Recherches structurales (TCLC 5). 48–60.
Cited by
84 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献