Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T00:31:57.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impossible nativizations as phonological evidence and the explanation of constraints on phonological structure1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Donald G. Churma
Donald G. Churma
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has been argued in a number of studies that the facts of loan phonology in Japanese and in Miami Cuban Spanish provide strong support for David Stampe's theory (see especially Stampe, 1973, Donegan & Stampe, 1979) of ‘natural phonology’ (cf. Ohso, 1971 Lovins, 1973, 1974; Bjarkman, 1976). To the evidence adduced in these studies, I would like to add some evidence from English. The English evidence is especially compelling, since it involves not only actual nativizations, but (intuitions about) IMPOSSIBLE nativizations.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , September 1984 , pp. 223 - 227
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

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

Algeo, J. (1978). What consonant clusters are possible? Word 29. 206–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, C. L. (1979). Syntactic theory and the projection problem. LIn 10. 533–581.Google Scholar
Bjarkman, P. (1976). Natural phonology and loanword phonology (with selected examples from Miami Cuban Spanish). Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1964). Current issues in linguistic theory. In Fodor, J. & Katz, J. (eds), The structure of language, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 50–118.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Churma, D. (1979). Arguments from external evidence in phonology. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1982). A note on the Elsewhere Condition. LIn 13. 682–685.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Keyser, S. J. (1981). A three-tiered theory of the syllable, Occasional Paper 19, Center for Cognitive Science, MIT.Google Scholar
Donegan, P. & Stampe, D. (1979). The study of natural phonology. In Dinnsen, D. (ed.), Current topics in phonological theory, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press. 126–173.Google Scholar
Hockett, C. (1958). A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, A. (1958). Introduction to linguistic structures. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, M. & Kisseberth, C. (1977). Topics in phonological theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. (1972). Fundamentals of linguistic analysis. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Lovins, J. (1973). Loanwords and the phonological structure of Japanese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Lovins, J. (1974). Why loan phonology is natural phonology. In Bruck, A.Fox, R. A. & La, Galy M. W. (eds), Papers from the parasession on Natural Phonology. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 240–250.Google Scholar
Ohso, M. (1971). A phonological study of some English loan words in Japanese, Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 14. 1–26.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1982). The syllable. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds), The structure of phonological representations (Part II), Dordrecht: Foris. 337–383.Google Scholar
Stampe, D. (1973). A dissertation on natural phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Stanley, R. (1967). Redundancy rules in phonology. Lg 43. 393–436.Google Scholar
Whorf, B. L. (1940). Linguistics as an exact science. Technological Review 43. 61–3, 80–3.Google Scholar
[Reprinted in Carroll, J. B., (ed.), Language, thought, and reality. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. 220–232.]Google Scholar