Article published In:
Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 16:1/2 (1989) ► pp.6188
References
Anderson, Stephen R.
1971 “On the Description of Apicalized Consonants”. Lin 21.103–107.Google Scholar
1974The Organization of Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Anglin, M.
1971Perceptual Space of English Vowels in Word-Context. Ph. dissertation, Howard Univ., Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Daniel & Cornells H. van Schooneveld
eds. 1977Roman Jakobson: Echoes of his scholarship. Lisse: Peter de Ridder. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon & Robert Harms
eds. 1968Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Baitaxe, Christiane
1978Foundations of Distinctive Feature Theory. Baltimore, Md.: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua
1957 “Three Methodological Remarks on Fundamentals of Language ”. Word 131.323–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bluhme, Herman
1974 “Segmental Phonemes versus Distinctive Features in English”. Linguistics 1261.11–24.Google Scholar
Bondarko, L. V. & L. R. Zinder
1968 “Distinctive Features of Phonemes and Their Physical Characteristics”. ZPhon 211.74–76.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle
1974 “Phonological Features: Problems and proposals”. Language 501.52–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carnochan, John
1962Contribution to the Discussion on Roman Jakob-son, “The Phonemic Concept of Distinctive Features”. Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (Helsinki 1961) ed. by Antti Sovijäri & Pentti Aalto, 444–445. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren
1954Review article on Jakobson, Fant & Halle (1951). RomPh 81.40–46.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle
1968The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Contreras, Heles
1969a “Simplicity, Descriptive Adequacy, and Binary Features”. Language 451.1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1969b “Vowel Fusion in Spanish”. Hispania 521.60–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crothers, John
1978 “Typology and Universals of Vowel Systems”. Greenberg, Ferguson & Moravcsik 1978:94–152.Google Scholar
Delas, Daniel
1973 “Phonétique, phonologie et poétique chez Roman Jakobson”. Langue Française 191.108–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donegan, Patricia J.
1976 “Raising and Lowering”. Papers from the 12th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 145–160. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Ege, Niels
1965 “The Danish Vowel System”. Gengo Kenkyu 471.21–35.Google Scholar
Eramian, Gregory M.
Fant, Gunnar
1967The Nature of Distinctive Features”. To Honor Roman Jakobson: Essays on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, 634–642. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1973Speech Sounds and Features. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A.
1977 “New Directions in Phonological Theory: Language acquisition and universals research”. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory ed. by Roger Cole, 247–299. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Fischer-Jørgensen, Eli
1958 “What can the New Techniques of Acoustic Phonetics Contribute to Linguistics?”. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Linguists (Oslo, 1957) ed. by Eva Sivertsen, 433–478. Oslo: Oslo Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Garvin, Paul L.
1953Review article on Jakobson, Fant & Halle (1951) Language 291.472–481. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goyvaerts, Didier & Geoffrey Pullum
eds. 1975Essays on the Sound Pattern of English. Ghent: E. Story-Scientia. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H., Charles A. Ferguson & Edith Moravcsik
eds. 1978Universals of Human Language. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Gross, Maurice, Morris Halle & Marcel-Paul Schützenberger
eds. 1973The Formal Analysis of Natural Languages. Paris: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris
1957 “In Defense of the Number Two”. Studies Presented to Joshua Whatmough on his Sixtienth Birthday, 65–72. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris & Kenneth Stevens
1969 “On the Feature ‘Advanced Tongue Root’”. MIT RLE Quarterly Progress Report 941.209–215.Google Scholar
Hanson, Göte
1967 “Dimensions in Speech Sound Perception: An experimental study of vowel perception”. Ericsson Technics 231.3–175.Google Scholar
Harris, James W.
1969Spanish Phonology. Cambridge; Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1970 “Sequences of Vowels in Spanish”. Lin 11.129–134.Google Scholar
Henrici, Gert
1975Die Binarismus-Problematik in der neueren Linguistik. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles F.
1955A Manual of Phonology. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Holenstein, Elmar
1974Jakobson ou le structuralisme phénoménologique. Paris: Éditions Seghers.Google Scholar
1977 “Jakobson’s Contribution to Phenomenology”. Armstrong & van Schooneveld 1977:145–162.Google Scholar
Horálek, Karel
1964 “À propos de la théorie des oppositions binaires”. Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguists (Cambridge, 1962) ed. by Horace G. Lunt, 414–417. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hurford, James
1971 “The State of Phonology”. Linguistics 211.5–41.Google Scholar
Husserl, Edmund
1901–1928Logische Untersuchungen. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Imai, Kunihiko
1975Review article on Chomsky & Halle (1968). Goyvaerts & Pullum 1975:413–432.Google Scholar
Ivić, Pavle
1965 “Roman Jakobson and the Growth of Phonology”. Linguistics 181.35–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1962 [1938] “Observations sur le classement phonologique des consonnes”. Selected Writings I1, 272–279. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, Gunnar Fant & Morris Halle
1951Preliminaries to Speech Analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (Our reference is to the 11th ed. of 1976.)Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman & Morris Halle
1956Fundamentals of Language. The Hague: Mouton. (2nd ed. 1971.)Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman & Linda R. Waugh
1979The Sound Shape of Language. Brighton: The Harvester Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul
1968 “Linguistic Universals and Linguistic Change”. Bach & Harms 1968:170–202.Google Scholar
Krohn, Robert
1972 “On the Sequencing of Tautosegmental Features”. Papers in Linguistics 51.114–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981 “Is there a Constraint on Tongue-Height Features?”. Lingua 531.353–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter
1968 “The Nature of General Phonetic Theories”. Georgetown University Round Table: Selected Papers in Linguistics (1961–1965), 283–298. Washington: Georgetown Univ. Press.Google Scholar
1971aPreliminaries to Linguistic Phonetics. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1971b “The Limits of Phonology”. Form and Substance: Phonetic and linguistic papers presented to Eli Fischer-Jørgensen. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag. 47–56.Google Scholar
1975A Course in Phonetics. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich.Google Scholar
1980a “What Are the Linguistic Sounds Made of?”. Language 561.485–502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1980b “Articulatory Parameters”. Language and Speech 231.25–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindau, Mona
1978 “Vowel Features”. Language 541.541–563. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1979 “The Feature ‘Expanded’”. Journal of Phonetics 71.163–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lisker, Leigh & Arthur Abramson
1964 “A Cross-Language Study of Voicing in Initial Stops: Acoustical measurements”. Word 201.384–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCawley, James D.
1973 “On the Role of Notation in Generative Phonology”. Gross et al. 1973:51–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, Ian
1984Patterns of Sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, Bertil
1963Structural Linguistics and Human Communication. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martinet, André
1955Économie des changements phonétiques. Berne: A. Francke. (3rd ed. 1971.)Google Scholar
1965La linguistique synchronique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Moulton, William G.
1973 “Vowel Systems with Five Heights”. Lexicography and Dialect Geography: Festgabe für Hans Kurath, 187–194. Wiesbaden: Steiner.Google Scholar
Naro, Anthony J.
1970 “Binary or n-ary Vowel Height Features? Historical evidence”. Papers from the 6th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 533–542. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1971 “Resolution of Vocalic Hiatus in Portuguese: Diachronic evidence for binary features”. Language 471.381–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J.
1985 “Around flat”. Phonetic Linguistics: Essays in Honor of Peter Ladefoged, 223–241. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. & Jeri J. Jaeger
eds. 1986Experimental Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Parker, Frank
1976 “Refining the Notion of Distinctive Feature”. Lingua 381.61–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pauliny, Eugen
1966 “The Principle of Binary Structure in Phonology”. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 21.121–126.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M.
1968Aspects of Phonological Theory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Rivas, Alberto
1978 “Hierarchical Classes of Features in Binary-Feature Phonology”. Papers from the 8th Regional Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, 178–188. Cambridge, Mass. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Ruwet, Nicolas
1963 Préface to Roman Jakobson, Essais de linguistique générale, 7–21. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Šaumjan, Sebastian
1968Problems of Theoretical Phonology. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Saltarelli, Mario
1973 “Orthogonality, Naturalness and the Binary Framework”. Issues in Linguistics: Papers in Honor of Henry and Renée Kahane, 798–807. Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Sanders, Gerald A.
1974 “The Simplex-Feature Hypothesis”. Glossa 81.141–192.Google Scholar
Schourup, Laurence
1973 “Where Binarity Fails”. OSU Working Papers in Linguistics 141.27–36. Columbus, Ohio: Dept. of Linguistics, Ohio State Univ.Google Scholar
Singh, Sadanand & D. R. Woods
1971 “Perceptual Structure of 12 American English Vowels”. JASA. 491.1861–1866. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sommerstein, Alan H.
1977Modern Phonology. Baltimore, Md: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai Sergeyevič
1939Grundzüge der Phonologic (= Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague, 7.) Prague. (Our reference is to the French translation, Principes de phonologie , transl. by Jean Can-tineau: Paris: Klincksieck 1949.)Google Scholar
Ungeheuer, Gerold
1959 “Das logistische Fundament binärer Phonemklassifikationen”. SL 131.69–97.Google Scholar
Utaker, Arild
1974 “On the Binary Opposition”. Linguistics 1341.73–93.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo & Pater Ladefoged
1973 “Phonetic Features and Phonological Features”. Lingua 321.61–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, William S-Y.
1968 “Vowel Features, Paired Variables and the English Vowel Shift”. Language 441.695–708. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Robert D.
1966 “A Criticism of Distinctive Features”. Journal of Linguistics 21.195–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williamson, Kay
1977 “Multivalued Features for Consonants”. Language 531.843–871. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winteler, Jost
1876Die Ker enzer Mundart des Kantons Glarus in ihren Grundzügen dargelegt. Leipzig & Heidelberg: F. C. Winter.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Maciukenas, James & Kathryn Riley
2007. 2007 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference,  pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 february 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.