Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-20T11:03:33.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Caroline Féry, Intonation and prosodic structure (Key Topics in Phonology). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. Pp. ix + 374.

Review products

Caroline Féry, Intonation and prosodic structure (Key Topics in Phonology). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. Pp. ix + 374.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2020

Adam James Ross Tallman
Adam James Ross Tallman*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, CNRS
*
Author’s address: Laboratoire Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596, CNRS & Université Lumière Lyon 2), Maison des Sciences de l’Homme Lyon Saint Etiennes, 14 av. Berthelot, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract 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.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , February 2021 , pp. 208 - 214
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Bennett, Ryan & Elfner, Emily. 2019. The syntax–prosody interface. Annual Review of Linguistics 5, 151–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar, Banjade, Goma, Gaenzsle, Martin, Lieven, Elena, Paudyal, Netra Prasad, Rai, Ichchha Purna, Rai, Manoj, Rai, Novel Kishore & Stoll, Sabine. 2007. Free prefix ordering in Chintang. Language 83, 43–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar, Hildebrandt, Kristine E. & Schiering, Réné. 2009. The distribution of phonological word domains: A probabilistic typology. In Janet Grijzenhout & Barış Kabak (eds.), Phonological domains: Universals and deviations, 47–75. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2007. Frequency of use and the organization of language. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hildebrandt, Kristine A. 2007. Prosodic and grammatical domains in Limbu. Himalayan Linguistics 8, 1–34.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2006. Word-prosodic typology. Phonology 23, 225–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2009. How (not) to do phonological typology: The case of pitch-accent. Language Sciences 31, 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladd, Robert D. 2008. Intonational phonology . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Taylor Lampton. 2018. The phonology–syntax interface and polysynthesis: A study of Kiowa and Saulteaux Ojibwe. Ph.D. thesis, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Scheer, Tobias. 2011. A guide to morphosyntax–phonology interface theories. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schiering, Réné, Bickel, Balthasar & Hildebrandt, Kristine A.. 2010. The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent. Journal of Linguistics 46(3), 657–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tallman, Adam James Ross. 2020. Beyond grammatical and phonological words. Language and Linguistics Compass, e12364. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gijn, Rik & Zúñiga, Fernando. 2014. Word and the Americanist perspective. Morphology 24, 135–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, Irene. 2019. Life after the Strict Layer Hypothesis: Prosodic structure geometry. In Hongming Chang & Youyong Qian (eds.), Prosodic studies: Challenges and prospects, 9–60. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodbury, Anthony C. 1992. Prosodic elements and prosodic structures in natural discourse. In Mark Liberman & Cynthia McLemore (eds.), Proceedings of the IRCS Workshop on Prosody in Natural Speech (Institute for Research in Cognitive Science Technical Report No. 92–37), 241–253. Philadelphia, PA: Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Woodbury, Anthony C. 1998. Utterance-final phonology and the prosodic hierarchy: A case from Cup’ig (Nunivak Central Alaskan Yupik Eskimo). Osamu Fujimora, Brian D. Joseph & Bohumil B. Palek (eds.), Proceedings of LP ’98, 47–61. Prague: The Karolinum Press.Google Scholar
Woodbury, Anthony C. 2011. Atkan Aleut “unclitic” pronouns and definiteness: A multimodular analysis. In Etsuyo Yuasa, Tista Bagchi & Katharine Beals (eds.), Pragmatics and autolexical grammar in honor of Jerry Sadock, 125–141. Benjamins: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, Yi, Lee, Albert, Prom-on, Santitham & Liu, Fang. (2015). Explaining the PENTA model: A reply to Arvaniti and Ladd. Phonology 32, 505–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zúñiga, Fernando. 2014. (Anti-)cliticization in Mapudungun. Morphology 24, 161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar