Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Face, Timothy L.

Online
ISSN
2199-3386
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Abstractness and Motivation in Phonological Theory

Eric Baković
Published Online: 2015-03-20 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/shll-2009-1041

Abstract

In this piece I adopt the standard textbook definition of abstractness in generative phonological theory, “the degree to which a UR [= underlying representation] of a morpheme may deviate from its associated PRs [= phonetic representations]” (Kenstowicz & Kisseberth 1979, p.179). I also adopt the perspective that a phonological analysis, independently of its degree of abstractness, is (only) as adequate as the motivation and evidence that can be produced in favor of it and against substantive alternatives. This is the focus of my remarks in this piece, featuring a thorough critique of the motivation and evidence for the abstract geminate rhotic representation of the intervocalic trill in Spanish (Harris 1969, 1983, 2001, 2002).

About the article

Published Online: 2015-03-20

Published in Print: 2009-03-01


Citation Information: Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages 183–198, ISSN (Online) 2199-3386, ISSN (Print) 1939-0238, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/shll-2009-1041.

Export Citation

© 2015 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
[2]
Travis G. Bradley
Language and Linguistics Compass, 2014, Volume 8, Number 2, Page 65

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in