Cover not available
Part of
Sonic Signatures: Studies dedicated to John Harris
Edited by Geoff Lindsey and Andrew Nevins
[Language Faculty and Beyond 14] 2017
► pp. 101–116

Underlying representations and Bantu segmental phonology

Advances in output-oriented derivational theory are progressively subverting the notion of an underlying-surface distinction in phonology. Moreover, categorical patterning in languages’ sound systems can no longer be taken as immediate proof that phonological or phonetic forms are themselves represented in terms of categorical entities. (Harris 2007: 137)

Keywords: underlying representations, morphophonemics, alternations, phonological rules, allomorphy, generalizations
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Bantu [d] ~ [l] alternations
  • 3.Lusoga [p] ~ [ɣ] alternations
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.14.c6
References
Anderson, Stephen R
2008 The logical structure of linguistic theory. Language 84: 795–814. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana & Douglas Pulleyblank
2015 Allomorphs in a connected world. Colloquium, University of California, Berkeley, March 16, 2015.
Bastin, Yvonne, André Coupez, Evariste Mumba & Thilo C. Schadebergs
(eds) 2002 Bantu lexical reconsgtructions 3 / Reconstructions lexicales bantoues 3. Tervuren: Musée Royal de l’Afrique Central. [URL]Google Scholar
Blanchon, Jean Alain
1991 Le pounou (B43), le mpongwè (B11a) et l’hypothèse fortis/lenis. Pholia 6: 49–83.Google Scholar
Botne, Robert
1992 Double reflexes in eastern and southern Bantu. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 29: 131–148.Google Scholar
Brown, Gillian
1972 Phonological Rules and Dialect Variation: A Study of the Phonology of Lumasaaba. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burzio, Luigi
1996 Surface constraints versus underlying representations. In Jacques Durand & Bernard Laks (eds.), Current Trends in Phonology: Models, and Methods, 118–136. University of Salford: European Studies Research Institute, University of Salford.Google Scholar
Byarushengo, Ernest Rugwa
1977 On the phonological status of p/h and d/l. In Ernest Rugwa Byarushengo, Alessandro Duranti & Larry M. Hyman (eds), Haya Grammatical Structure, 17–34. Los Angeles: Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Currie Hall, Kathleen
2013 A typology of intermediate phonological relationships. The Linguistic Review 30: 215–275.Google Scholar
Gulere, Cornelius W
2009 Lusoga-English Dictionary. Kampala, Uganda: Fountain Publishers.Google Scholar
Guthrie, Malcolm
1967–1971 Comparative bantu, Vols. I-IV. London: Gregg Press.Google Scholar
Harris, John
1994 English Sound Structure. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2007 Representation. In Paul de Lacy (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology, 119–138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce
1995 On what to teach the undergraduates: Some changing orthodoxies in phonological theory. Linguistics in the Morning Calm 3: 59–77. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co.Google Scholar
2009 Introductory Phonology. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M
2015 Why underlying representations? Henry Sweet Lecture, Annual Meeting of the Linguistics Association of Great Britain, September 16, 2015. Submitted. [JM6] [URL]
2016. The autosegmental approach to tone in Lusoga. To appear in Diane Brentari & Jackson Lee (eds), Shaping phonology. University of Chicago Press.
Hyman, Larry M. & Sharon Inkelas
2000 [2012] Complementarity and opacity: [l] – [d] in Bantu. Phonology Laboratory Annual Report, 321–326. Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley. [URL]Google Scholar
Janssens, Baudouin
1993 Doubles réflexes consonantiques: Quatre études sur lel bantou de zone A. Doctoral dissertation, Université Libre de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert
2014 Simultaneous Structure in Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maho, Jouni Filip
2009 NUGL Online. [URL]Google Scholar
Meeussen, A.E
1969 [1980] Bantu Lexical Reconstructions. Tervuren: Musée Royal de l’Afrique Centrale.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J
1983 Grammatical Theory: Its Limits and Possibilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ngunga, Armindo
2000 Phonology and Morphology of the Ciyao Verb. Stanford: C.S.L.I.Google Scholar
Nash, Jay
1991 Ruwund Vocabularies. Urbana-Champaign: Center for African Studies.Google Scholar
1992 Aspects of Ruwund Grammar. PhD Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Ruttenberg, Piet
2000 [1971] Lexique yaka-français. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Sanderson, G.M
1954 A Dictionary of the Yao language Zomba. Nyasaland: The Government Printer.Google Scholar
Schadeberg. Thilo C
1989 The velar nasal in Nyole (E35). Annales Aequatoria 10: 169–179.Google Scholar
Scheer, Tobias
2014 The Corpus: A tool among others, Corela [En ligne], HS-13 | 2013, mis en ligne le 19 février 2014, consulté le 09 juillet 2015. URL: [URL]
Volk, Erez
2007 High, low and in between: Giryama tonology. Masters Thesis, Tel-Aviv University.
2011 Mijikenda tonology. Doctoral dissertation, Tel Aviv University.
Wal, Jenneke van der
2004 Lusoga phonology. Masters Thesis, Afrikaanse Taalkunde, Leiden University.