Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:48:05.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Sharon Inkelas and Draga Zec (eds.) (1990). The phonology—syntax connection. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Pp. xv + 428.

Review products

Sharon Inkelas and Draga Zec (eds.) (1990). The phonology—syntax connection. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Pp. xv + 428.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Geert Booij
Affiliation:
Free University, Amsterdam

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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

Booij, G. E. (1988a). On the relation between lexical and prosodic phonology. In Bertinetto, P. M. & Loporcaro, M. (eds.) Certamen Phonologicum: papers from the 1987 Cortona Phonology Meeting. Turin: Rosenberg & Selier. 6375.Google Scholar
Booij, G. E. (1988b). Review of Nespor & Vogel (1986). JL 24. 515525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. E. & Lieber, R. (to appear). On the simultaneity of morphological and prosodic structure. In Kaisse, E. and Hargus, S. (eds.) Principles and implications of Lexical Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Booij, G. E. & Rubach, J. (1984). Morphological and prosodic domains in Lexical Phonology. Phonology Yearbook 1. 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borowsky, T. (1986). Topics in English phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Keyser, S. J. (1983). CV phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Inkelas, S. (1989). Prosodic constituency in the lexicon. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman (1949). The phonemic and grammatical aspects of language in their interrelations. In Actes du 6e congrès international des linguistes. Also in selected writings, Vol. 2. (1971). The Hague: Mouton. 103114.Google Scholar
Jong, D. de (1990). The syntax-phonology interface and French liaison. Linguistics 28. 5788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kager, R. W. J. (1989). A metrical theory of stress and destressing in English and Dutch. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. (1985). Connected speech: the interaction of syntax and phonology. Orlando, Fl.: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1985). Some consequences of Lexical Phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2. 85138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nespor, M. (1990). Vowel deletion in Italian: the organization of the phonological component. The Linguistic Review 7. 375398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. (1989). On clashes and lapses. Phonology 6. 69116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odden, D. (1987). Kimatuumbi phrasal phonology. Phonology Yearbook 4. 1336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poser, W. J. (1984). The phonetics and phonology of tone and intonation in Japanese. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Pullum, G. & Zwicky, A. (1988). The syntax-phonology interface. In Newmeyer, F. J. (ed.) Linguistics: the Cambridge survey. Vol. 1: Linguistic theory: foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 255280.Google Scholar
Rubach, J. & Booij, G. E. (1990). Syllable structure assignment in Polish. Phonology 7. 121158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1972). The phrase phonology of English and French. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3. 371405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar