Cover not available
Part of
Crossroads Semantics: Computation, experiment and grammar
Edited by Hilke Reckman, Lisa Lai-Shen Cheng, Maarten Hijzelendoorn and Rint Sybesma
[Not in series 210] 2017
► pp. 193–205

Chapter 12
Extending categorial grammar to phonology

| Meertens Instituut, Amsterdam

What would be the implications of applying categorial grammar technology to phonological structure? We show how expressing phonological insights requires a few extensions into the formalism in order to be able to deal with autosegmentalism, with feature repulsion and with the interface with syntax (and possibly with semantics). It is argued that both our understanding of categorial grammar and phonology can profit from the confrontation.

Keywords: categorial grammar, phonology, autosegmentalism, formalism, representations
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.A simple categorial system
  • 3.Autosegmental categorial grammar
  • 4.Feature repulsion
  • 5.Interaction with morphosyntax
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 12 April 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.210.12van
References
Berent, Iris
2013 The phonological mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blom, Chris
2012 Optional arguments in abstract categorial grammar. Utrecht University MSc thesis.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. & Samuel J. Keyser
1983 CV phonology: A generative theory of the syllable (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 9). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, John
2005 Phonological representations: Their names, forms and powers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Everett, Daniel
2016 An evaluation of universal grammar and the phonological mind. Frontiers in Psychology 7. 15. DOI logo
Goldsmith, John
1976 Autosegmental phonology. Cambridge MA, MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Lambek, Joachim
1958 The mathematics of sentence structure. American Mathematical Monthly 65. 154–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levelt, Clara & Marc van Oostendorp
(2007) Feature co-occurrence constraints in L1 acquisition. Linguistics in the Netherlands 24(1). 162–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McGee Wood, Mary
2014 Categorial grammars. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moortgat, Michael
1988 Categorial investigations. Dordrecht: ICG.Google Scholar
Morrill, Glynn
2010 Categorial grammar: Logical syntax, semantics, and processing. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew
2010 Locality in vowel harmony. Cambridge, MA: MIT. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oostendorp, Marc van
2007 Derived environment effects and consistency of exponence. In S. Blaho, P. Bye & M. Krämer (eds.), Freedom of Analysis?, 123–148. Mouton de Gruyter Berlin/New York.Google Scholar
2013 σ strikes back: A defense of headedness and constituency in phonology. The Linguistic Review 30(2). 347–371.Google Scholar
Oostendorp, Marc van, Colin Ewen, Beth Hume and Keren Rice
(eds.) 2011 The Blackwell Companion to Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Parker, Steve
2011 Sonority. In Marc van Oostendorp, Colin Ewen, Beth Hume and Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, 1233–1255. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Scobbie, James M.
1997 Autosegmental representation in a declarative constraint-based framework. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Topintzi, Nina
2011 Onsets. In Marc van Oostendorp, Colin Ewen, Beth Hume and Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, 1021–1054. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Steedman, Mark
1996 Surface structure and interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Veer, Marijn van ’t
2015 Building a phonological inventory: Feature co-occurrence constraints in acquisition. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Deirdre
1981 Aspects of a categorial theory of phonology. Amherst: University of Massachusetts dissertation.Google Scholar
1988 Consequences of some categorically motivated phonological assumptions. In Richard Oehrle, Emmon Bach and Deirdre Wheeler (eds.), Categorial Grammars and Natural Language Structures, 467–488. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar