Review published in:
Diachronica
Vol. 18:1 (2001) ► pp. 171180
References
Agutter, Alex
1988a “The dangers of dialect parochialism: The Scottish Vowel Length Rule”. Historical Dialectology ed. by Jacek Fisiak, 1–22. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
1988b “The not-so-Scottish Vowel Length Rule”. Edinburgh Studies in the English Language ed. by John M. Anderson & Norman Macleod, 120–132. Edinburgh: John Donald.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen A.
1992Amorphous Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert & Rubach Jerzy
1987 “Postcyclic versus postlexical rules in Lexical Phonology”. Linguistic Inquiry 181.1–44.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Halle Morris
1968The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Mohanan K. P.
1985 “Segmental phonology of modern English”. Linguistic Inquiry 161.57–116.Google Scholar
Iverson, Gregory K. & Salmons Joseph C.
1995 “Aspiration and laryngeal representation in Germanic”. Phonology 121.369–396. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul
1973 “How abstract is phonology?”. Three Dimensions of Linguistic Theory ed. by O. Fujimura, 1–136. Tokyo: Taikusha.Google Scholar
1982 “Lexical phonology and morphology”. Linguistics in the Morning Calm ed. by I.-S. Yang, 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter
1990 “On dividing phonetics and phonology”. Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech ed. by J. Kingston & Mary Beckman, 398–405. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993A Course in Phonetics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger & Anderson John M.
1975Old English Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca
1995 “Underspecification and markedness”. The Handbook of Phonological Theory ed. by John Goldsmith, 114–174. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar