Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:18:20.784Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MARTIN KRÄMER , Underlying representations (Key Topics in Phonology). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Pp. x + 266. ISBN: 978-0-521-18003-0

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 December 2016

Dustin Bowers
Dustin Bowers*
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of [email protected]
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
Book Review
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , August 2017 , pp. 247 - 249
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © International Phonetic Association 2016 

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

Albright, Adam. 2002. The identification of bases in morphological paradigms. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo & Hogg, Richard M.. 2003. The actuation problem in Optimality Theory: Phonologization, rule inversion and rule loss. In Eric Holt, D. (ed.), Optimality Theory and language change, 91–119. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Burzio, Luigi. 2002. Surface-to-surface morphology: When your representations turn into constraints. In Boucher, Paul (ed.), Many morphologies, 142–177. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Cotterell, Ryan, Peng, Nanyun & Eisner, Jason. 2015. Modeling word forms using latent underlying morphs and phonology. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 3, 433–447.Google Scholar
Curtin, Suzanne. 2011. Do newly formed word representations encode non-criterial information? Journal of Child Language 38 (4), 904–917.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curtin, Suzanne. 2014. Now you hear it: 14-month-olds succeed at learning minimal pairs in stressed syllables. Journal of Cognition and Development 15 (1), 110–122.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, Fant, Gunnar & Halle, Morris. 1952. Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman & Halle, Morris. 1956. Fundamentals of language. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jarosz, Gaja. 2006. Rich lexicons and restrictive grammars: Maximum likelihood learning in Optimality Theory. Ph.D. thesis, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1968. How abstract is phonology? Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Tesar, Bruce. 2013. Output-driven phonology: Theory and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar