The psychological reality of sonority in English

REFERENCES

• Abraham, Richard D. 1950. “Fixed order of coordinates—a study in comparative lexicography.” Modern language journal 34:276–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anttila, Arto, and Young-mee Yu Cho. 1998. “Variation and change in optimality theory.” Lingua 104:31–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bat-El, Outi. 1996. “Selecting the best of the worst: The grammar of Hebrew blends.” Phonology 13:283–328.
   Google Scholar
• Bentley, Madison, and Edith J. Varon. 1933. “An accessory study of ‘phonetic symbolism’.” American journal of psychology 45:76–86.
   Google Scholar
• Blevins, Juliette. 1995. “The syllable in phonological theory.” The handbook of phonological theory. Ed. John A. Goldsmith. Blackwell handbooks in linguistics no. 1. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. pp. 206–44.
   Google Scholar
• Boersma, Paul, and Bruce Hayes. 2001. “Empirical tests of the gradual learning algorithm.” Linguistic inquiry 32:45–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolinger, Dwight L. 1962. “Binomials and pitch accent.” Lingua 11:34–44.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Roger. 1970. “Phonetic symbolism in natural languages.” In Psycholinguistics: Selected papers by Roger Brown, with Albert Gilman, Eric Lenneberg, Abraham Black, Arnold Horowitz, Colin Fraser, Ursula Bellugi, David McNeill, Courtney Cazden, Camille Hanlon. New York: Free Press. pp. 258–73.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Roger W., Abraham H. Black, and Arnold E. Horowitz. 1955. “Phonetic symbolism in natural languages.” Journal of abnormal and social psychology 50:388–93.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Burnage, Gavin. 1990. CELEX: A guide for users. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Centre for Lexical Information of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, Mary Ann, and Lloyd Anderson. 1976. “Hocus pocus nursery rhymes.” Papers from the twelfth regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society. Eds. Salikoko S. Mufwene, Carol A. Walker, and Sanford B. Steever. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. pp. 72–95.
   Google Scholar
• Cardona, George. 1988. Panini: His work and its traditions. Volume 1: Background and introduction. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
   Google Scholar
• Clements, G. N. 1990. “The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification.” Papers in laboratory phonology 1: Between the grammar and physics of speech. Eds. John Kingston and Mary E. Beckman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 283–333. [also in Working papers of the Cornell phonetics laboratory 2, April 1988.]
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, William E., and John Robert Ross. 1975. “World order.” Papers from the parasession on functionalism. Eds. Robin E. Grossman, L. James San, and Timothy J. Vance. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. pp. 63–111.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, Stuart. 1998. “Syllable contact in Optimality Theory.” Korean journal of linguistics 23: 181–211.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, Stuart. 1999. “The parallel distribution of aspirated stops and/h/ in American English.” Indiana University working papers in linguistics. Volume 1. Optimal green ideas in phonology. Eds. Karen Baertsch and Daniel A. Dinnsen. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club Publications. pp. 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• De Lacy, Paul V. 2002. “The formal expression of markedness.” Ph. D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
   Google Scholar
• Drachman, Gaberell. 1977. “On the notion ‘phonological hierarchy’.” Phonologica 1976. Eds. Wolfgang U. Dressier and Oskar E. Pfeiffer. (Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft, 19). Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck. pp. 85–102.
   Google Scholar
• Durand, Jacques. 1990. Generative and non-linear phonology. London and New York: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Gnanadesikan, Amalia Elisabeth. 1997. “Phonology with ternary scales.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
   Google Scholar
• Halle, Morris, and G. N. Clements. 1983. Problem book in phonology: A workbook for introductory courses in linguistics and in modern phonology. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hooper, Joan B. 1976. An introduction to natural generative phonology. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Katre, Sumitra M. 1987. Astādhyāyi of P¯nini. Texas linguistics series. Austin: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Larson, Gary N. 1990. “Local computational networks and the distribution of segments in the Spanish syllable.” CLS 26: Papers from the 26th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Volume 2. The parasession on the syllable in phonetics and phonology. Eds. Michael Ziolkowski, Manuela Noske and Karen Deaton. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. pp. 257–72.
   Google Scholar
• Malkiel, Yakov. 1959. “Studies in irreversible binomials.” Lingua 8:113–60.
   Google Scholar
• Malkiel, Yakov. 1968. Essays on linguistic themes. Language and Style Series, 6. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Marchand, Hans. 1969. The categories and types of present-day English word-formation: A synchronic-diachronic approach. 2nd edition). Handbücher für das Studium der Anglistik. München: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, John J., and Alan Prince. 1993a. “Generalized alignment.” Yearbook of morphology 1993. Eds. Geert Booij and Jaap van Marie. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 79–153.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, John, and Alan Prince. 1993b. Prosodic morphology I: Constraint interaction and satisfaction. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science technical report no. 3. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University. To appear as a publication of The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, John J., and Alan S. Prince. 1995. “Faithfulness and reduplicative identity.” Papers in optimality theory. Eds. Jill N. Beckman, Laura Walsh Dickey, and Suzanne Urbanczyk. University of Massachusetts occasional papers, 18. Amherst: Graduate Linguistic Student Association (GLSA). pp. 249–384.
   Google Scholar
• Misra, Vidyaniwas. 1966. The descriptive technique of Pānini: An introduction. (Janua linguarum: Studia memoriae Nicolai Van Wijk dedicata, series practica no. 18.) The Hague and Paris: Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Morawski, J. 1927. “Les formules rimées de la langue espagnole.” Revista de filología española 14:113–33.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, Robert W., and Theo Vennemann. 1983. “Sound change and syllable structure in Germanic phonology.” Language 59:514–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, Stanley S. 1933. “Further experiments in phonetic symbolism.” American journal of psychology 45:53–75.
   Google Scholar
• Ohala, John J. 1974. “Phonetic explanation in phonology.” Papers from the parasession on natural phonology. Eds. Anthony Bruck, Robert A. Fox, and Michael W. LaGaly. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. pp. 251–74.
   Google Scholar
• Ohala, John J. 1990a. “Alternatives to the sonority hierarchy for explaining segmental sequential constraints.” CLS 26: papers from the 26th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, volume 2: the parasession on the syllable in phonetics and phonology. Eds. Michael Ziolkowski, Manuela Noske and Karen Deaton. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. pp. 319–38.
   Google Scholar
• Ohala, John J. 1990b. “There is no interface between phonology and phonetics: A personal view.” Journal of phonetics 18:153–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ourn, Noeurng, and John Haiman. 2000. “Symmetrical compounds in Khmer.” Studies in language 24:483–514.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, Steve. 1989. “The sonority grid in Chamicuro phonology.” Linguistic analysis 19:3–58.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, Stephen G. 2002. “Quantifying the sonority hierarchy.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
   Google Scholar
• Pinker, Steven, and David Birdsong. 1979. “Speakers' sensitivity to rules of frozen word order.” Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior 18:497–508.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, Sharon. 2000. “Epenthesis positioning and syllable contact in Chaha.” Phonology 17:397–425.
   Google Scholar
• Scheer, Tobias. 1998. “A theory of consonantal interaction.” Folia linguistica (Acta Societatis Lin- guisticae Europaeae) 32:201–37. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, and Societas Linguistica Europaea.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, Fred Newton. 1913. “The order of words in certain rhythm-groups.” Modern language notes 28:237–9.
   Google Scholar
• Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1984. “On the major class features and syllable theory.” Language sound structure: Studies in phonology presented to Morris Halle by his teachers and students. Eds. Mark Aronoff and Richard T. Oehrle. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. pp. 107–36.
   Google Scholar
• Shin, Seung-Hoon. 1997. “Constraints within and between syllables: Syllable licensing and contact in optimality theory.” Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.
   Google Scholar
• Thun, Nils. 1963. Reduplicative words in English: A study of formations of the types tick-tick, hurly-burly and shilly-shally. Uppsala: Carl Bloms Boktryckeri.
   Google Scholar
• Vennemann, Theo. 1988. Preference laws for syllable structure and the explanation of sound change: With special reference to German, Germanic, Italian, and Latin. Berlin, New York, and Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Vogel, Irene Barrie. 1977. “The syllable in phonological theory; With special reference to Italian.” Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University.
   Google Scholar