Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Romance Linguistics
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Romance Linguistics
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Abbreviations
- 1 Data, Theory, and Explanation: The View from Romance
- Part One What Is a Language?
- Part Two Phonetics and Phonology
- Part Three Morphology
- Part Four Syntax
- Part Five Semantics and Pragmatics
- Part Six Language, Society, and the Individual
- Index
- References
Part Two - Phonetics and Phonology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 June 2022
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Romance Linguistics
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Romance Linguistics
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Abbreviations
- 1 Data, Theory, and Explanation: The View from Romance
- Part One What Is a Language?
- Part Two Phonetics and Phonology
- Part Three Morphology
- Part Four Syntax
- Part Five Semantics and Pragmatics
- Part Six Language, Society, and the Individual
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary 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.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Romance Linguistics , pp. 181 - 318Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Selected References
Below you can find selected references for this chapter. The full references can be found online at the following page: www.cambridge.org/Romancelinguistics
Blevins, J. (1995). ‘The syllable in phonological theory’. In Goldsmith, J. (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Cambridge: Blackwell, 206–44.Google Scholar
Brandão de Carvalho, J., Scheer, T., and Ségéral, P. (2008) (eds). Lenition and Fortition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauer, R. (1983). ‘Stress-timing and syllable-timing reanalyzed’, Journal of Phonetics 11: 51–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giannini, S. and Marotta, G. (1989), Fra grammatica e pragmatica. La geminazione consonantica in latino. Pisa: Giardini.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1995). Metrical Stress Theory. Principles and Case Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, A. (2016a). ‘Italian, Tuscan, and Corsican’. In Ledgeway, A. and Maiden, M. (eds), The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 206–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loporcaro, M. (2011a). ‘Syllable, segments e prosody’. In Maiden, M., Smith, J. C., and Ledgeway, A. (eds), The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages. Vol 1. Structures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 50–108.Google Scholar
Marotta, G. (1999b). ‘The Latin syllable’. In Hulst, H. van der and Ritter, N. A. (eds), The Syllable. View and Facts. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 285–310.Google Scholar
Marotta, G. (2008). ‘Lenition in Tuscan Italian (gorgia toscana)’. In Brandão de Carvalho, J., Scheer, T., and Ségéral, P. (eds), Lenition and Fortition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 235–72.Google Scholar
Marotta, G. (2012). ‘Piedi metrici e sillabe orfane nella prosodia dell’italiano’. In Schafroth, E. and Selig, M. (eds), Testo e ritmi. Zum Rhythmus in der italienischen Sprache. Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 89–103.Google Scholar
Schmid, S. (2016). ‘Segmental phonology’. In Ledgeway, A. and Maiden, M. (eds), The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 471–83.Google Scholar
Selected References
Below you can find selected references for this chapter. The full references can be found online at the following page: www.cambridge.org/Romancelinguistics
Burov, I. (2012). Les Phénomènes de sandhi dans l’espace gallo-roman. Doctoral thesis, Université Michel de Montaigne – Bordeaux III, Bordeaux. https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00807535.Google Scholar
Contini, M. (1986). ‘Les phénomènes de sandhi dans le domaine sarde’. In Andersen, H. (ed.), Sandhi Phenomena in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 519–50.Google Scholar
Dols Salas, N. A. (1993). The Predictive Formalization of Consonantal Contacts in Majorcan Catalan (Empirical and Theoretical Bases). MPhil thesis, Department of Hispanic Studies, University of Sheffield.Google Scholar
Encrevé, P. (1988). La Liaison avec et sans enchaînement: phonologie tridimensionnelle et usage du français. Paris: Le Seuil.Google Scholar
Hualde, I. (2013) ‘Intervocalic lenition and word-boundary effects’, Diachronica 30(2): 232–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloret, M.-R. and Jiménez, J. (2007). ‘Prominence-driven epenthesis: evidence from Catalan’. Ms. www.academia.edu/5683215/.Google Scholar
Loporcaro, M. (1997). L’origine del radoppiamento fonosintattico. Saggio di fonologia diacronica romanza. Basel/Tübingen: Francke.Google Scholar
Marotta, G. (2010). ‘Raddoppiamento sintattico’. In Simone, R., Berruto, G., and D’Achille, P. (eds), Enciclopedia dell’italiano. www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/raddoppiamento-sintattico_%28Enciclopedia-dell%27Italiano%29/.Google Scholar
Morin, Y.-C. (1986). ‘On the morphologization of word-final consonant deletion in French’. In Andersen, H. (ed.), Sandhi Phenomena in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 167–210.Google Scholar
Sampson, R. (2010). Vowel Prosthesis in Romance. A Diachronic Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sorianello, P. (2010) ‘Gorgia toscana’. In Simone, R., Berruto, G., and D’Achille, P. (eds), Enciclopedia dell’italiano. www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/raddoppiamento-sintattico_%28Enciclopedia-dell%27Italiano%29/.Google Scholar
Selected References
Below you can find selected references for this chapter. The full references can be found online at the following page: www.cambridge.org/Romancelinguistics
Anderson, S. (2008). ‘Phonologically conditioned allomorphy in the morphology of Surmiran (Rumantsch)’, Word Structure 1: 109–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basbøll, H. (1989). ‘Phonological weight and Italian raddoppiamento fonosintattico’, Rivista di linguistica 1: 5–31.Google Scholar
Chierchia, G. (1986). ‘Length, syllabification and the phonological cycle in Italian’, Journal of Italian Linguistics 8: 5–33.Google Scholar
D’Imperio, M. and Rosenthall, S. (1999). ‘Phonetics and phonology of main stress in Italian’, Phonology 16: 1–28.Google Scholar
Gess, R. (2008). ‘More on (distinctive!) vowel length in historical French’, Journal of French Language Studies 18: 175–87.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I. (1990). ‘Compensatory lenghthening in Friulian’, Probus 2: 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hualde, J. I. (2012). ‘Stress and rhythm’. In Hualde, J. I., Olarrea, A., and O’Rourke, E. (eds), The Handbook of Hispanic Linguistics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 153–71.Google Scholar
Magalhães, J. (2016). ‘Main stress and secondary stress in Brazilian and European Portuguese’. In Wetzels, W. L., Costa, J., and Menuzzi, S. (eds), The Handbook of Portuguese Linguistics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 107–24.Google Scholar
Post, B. (1999). ‘Restructured phonological phrases in French: evidence from clash resolution’, Linguistics 37: 41–63.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1978). ‘The French foot: on the status of “mute” e’, Studies in French Linguistics 1: 141–50.Google Scholar
Vigário, M. (2016). ‘Segmental phenomena and their interactions: evidence for prosodic organization and the architecture of grammar’. In Fischer, S. and Gabriel, C. (eds), Manual of Grammatical Interfaces in Romance. Berlin: De Gruyter, 41–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selected References
Below you can find selected references for this chapter. The full references can be found online at the following page: www.cambridge.org/Romancelinguistics
Harris, J. and Lindsey, G. (1995). ‘The elements of phonological representation’. In Durand, J. and Katamba, F. (eds), Frontiers of Phonology. London: Longman, 34–79.Google Scholar
Haudricourt, A. and Juilland, A. ([1949] 1970). Essai pour une histoire structurale du phonétisme français. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I. and Sanders, B. (1995). ‘A new hypothesis on the origin of the Eastern Andalusian vowel system’, Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 21(1): 426–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/bls.v21i1.1386.Google Scholar
Loporcaro, M. (2005). ‘Typological remarks on Sardinian: 1. Vowel harmony 2. Sardinian in a correlative typology of the Romance languages’, Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 58: 210–27.Google Scholar
Savoia, L. and Baldi, B. (2016a). ‘Armonie vocaliche e metafonia nelle varietà siciliane’, Bollettino Centro di studi filologici e linguistici siciliani 27: 201–37.Google Scholar
Savoia, L. and Baldi, B. (2016b). ‘Propagation and preservation of rounded back vowels in Lucanian and Apulian varieties’, Quaderni di linguistica e studi orientali 2: 11–58.Google Scholar
Vago, R. (1988). ‘Underspecification in the height harmony system of Pasiego’, Phonology 5: 343–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selected References
Below you can find selected references for this chapter. The full references can be found online at the following page: www.cambridge.org/Romancelinguistics
Bateman, N. (2007). A Cross-linguistic Investigation of Palatalization. Doctoral thesis, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Bolognesi, R. (1998). The Phonology of Campidanian Sardinian. Doctoral thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Colina, S. (2013). ‘Galician geada: in defense of underspecification in Optimality Theory’, Lingua 133: 84–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumas, D. (1981). ‘Structure de la diphtongaison québécoise’, Canadian Journal of Linguistics 26: 1–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanciullo, F. (1976). ‘Il trattamento delle occlusive sonore latine nei dialetti salentini’, L’Italia dialettale 39: 1–82.Google Scholar
García Arias, X. L. (2003). Gramática histórica de la lengua asturiana. Oviedo: Academia de la Llingua Asturiana. Llibreria Llingüística.Google Scholar
Loporcaro, M. (2016). ‘Metaphony and diphthongization in southern Italy: reconstructive implications for sound change in early Romance’. In Torres-Tamarit, F., Linke, K., and van Oostendorp, M. (eds), Approaches to Metaphony in the Languages of Italy. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 55–87.Google Scholar
Massini-Cagliari, G., Cagliari, L. C., and Redenbarger, W. J. (2016). ‘A comparative study of the sounds of European and Brazilian Portuguese: phonemes and allophones’. In Wetzels, W. L., Menuzzi, S., and Costa, J. (eds), The Handbook of Portuguese Linguistics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 56–68.Google Scholar
Michnowicz, J. (2008). ‘Final nasal variation in Merida, Yucatan’, Spanish in Context 5: 278–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauzet, P. (2011). ‘Los morfèmas de plural nominal a Sant Julian de Cremsa: [-w] e lo ton bas’. In Rieger, A. (ed.), Actes du 9e Congrès de l’Association Internationale d’Études Occitanes. Aachen: Shaker, 827–47.Google Scholar
Schmid, S. (2018). ‘Palatal and postalveolar obstruents in six Italo- and Rhaeto-Romance varieties’. In Recasens, D. and Sánchez Miret, F. (eds), Production and Perception Mechanisms of Sound Change. Munich: Lincom, 91–110.Google Scholar
Vanrell, M. and Cabré, T. (2011). ‘Troncamento e intonazione dei vocativi in Italia centromeridionale’. In Gili Fivela, B., Stella, A., Garrapa, L., and Grimaldi, M. (eds), Contesto comunicativo e variabilità nella produzione e percezione della lingua. Atti del 7° convegno de l’Associazione Italiana di Scienze della Voce, 26–28 gennaio 2011, Lecce. Rome: Bulzoni, 200–11.Google Scholar