Article published In:
DiachronicaVol. 22:2 (2005) ► pp.219–269
Must sound change be linguistically motivated?
A number of well-documented sound changes in Austronesian languages do not appear to be either phonetically or phonologically motivated. Although it is possible that some of these changes involved intermediate steps for which we have no direct documentation, the assumption that this was always the case appears arbitrary, and is in violation of Occam's Razor. These data thus raise the question whether sound change must be phonetically motivated, as assumed by the Neogrammarians, or even linguistically motivated, as assumed by virtually all working historical linguists.
Cited by
Cited by 23 other publications
Anonby, Erik
2020. Emphatic consonants beyond Arabic: The emergence and proliferation of uvular-pharyngeal emphasis in Kumzari. Linguistics 58:1 ► pp. 275 ff. 
Arnold, Laura
2020. Highs and Lows: A Previously Unattested Tone Split from Vowel Height in Metnyo Ambel. Transactions of the Philological Society 118:1 ► pp. 141 ff.
BEGUŠ, GAŠPER
2019. Post-nasal devoicing and the blurring process. Journal of Linguistics 55:4 ► pp. 689 ff.
Beguš, Gašper
2020. Estimating historical probabilities of natural and unnatural processes. Phonology 37:4 ► pp. 515 ff.
Blevins, Juliette
2007. The importance of typology in explaining recurrent sound patterns. Linguistic Typology 11:1
Blust, Robert
2011. Austronesian: A Sleeping Giant?. Language and Linguistics Compass 5:8 ► pp. 538 ff.
Blust, Robert
Blust, Robert
Bowern, Claire, John Charles Smith, Betsy Sneller, Meredith Tamminga, Jadranka Gvozdanović, John A. Goldsmith, Götz Keydana & Juliette Blevins
Embarki, Mohamed
Eska, Joseph F.
2018. Laryngeal Realism and the Prehistory of Celtic. Transactions of the Philological Society 116:3 ► pp. 320 ff.
Hall, T. A
2007. Natural vs. unnatural sound changes: A reanalysis of occlusivization in Southeast Solomonic. Folia Linguistica 27:1-2 ► pp. 5 ff.
Hall, T. A.
2006. Natural vs. unnatural sound changes: A reanalysis of occlusivization in Southeast Solomonic. Folia Linguistica Historica 40:Historica vol. 27,1-2
Heitner, Reese M.
2024. Double U: When Two /u/ Make One /w/ and the Phonetics of Consonantalization. In Icons of the Alphabet, ► pp. 79 ff.
Heitner, Reese M.
2024. Alphabetic Iconography: A Metalinguistic Guide to Phonologies and Orthographies. In Icons of the Alphabet, ► pp. 343 ff.
JangYoungJun
2011. Sound changes in the Heart Sutra. Studies in Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology 17:1 ► pp. 87 ff.
Jochim, Markus & Felicitas Kleber
2024. Fast-Speech-Induced Hypoarticulation Does Not Considerably Affect the Diachronic Reversal of Complementary Length in Central Bavarian. Language and Speech 67:2 ► pp. 463 ff.
Operstein, Natalie
2017. Chapter 5. Sociolinguistic factors in loanword prosody. In Language Contact and Change in Mesoamerica and Beyond [Studies in Language Companion Series, 185], ► pp. 105 ff.
Rangelov, Tihomir, Mary Walworth & Julie Barbour
2023. A multifaceted approach to understanding unexpected sound change. Diachronica 40:3 ► pp. 384 ff.
Stanford, James N. & Timothy J. Pulju
2012. Review of Trudgill (2011): Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Studies in Language 36:4 ► pp. 947 ff.
Trudgill, Peter
2015. Chapter 6. Societies of intimates and linguistic complexity. In Language Structure and Environment [Cognitive Linguistic Studies in Cultural Contexts, 6], ► pp. 133 ff.
[no author supplied]
2023. References. In Sounds of English Worldwide, ► pp. 354 ff.
[no author supplied]
2034. Title Pending 10779. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.