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

The Linguistic Review

Editor-in-Chief: van der Hulst, Harry


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.463
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.789

CiteScore 2018: 0.69

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.643
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.679

Online
ISSN
1613-3676
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 23, Issue 3

Issues

Spoken syntax: The phonetics of giving a hand in New Zealand English

Jennifer Hay / Joan Bresnan
Published Online: 2006-11-07 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/TLR.2006.013

Abstract

This article considers the exemplar theories which are independently developing in phonetics and in syntax, and argues that they jointly make some predictions that neither does alone. One of these predictions is explored in the context of two sound changes which occurred in the history of New Zealand English. We show that both of these phonetic changes were affected by phrase-level factors. The raising of /æ/ was more advanced in the word hand when it referred to a limb, than when used in phrases such as give a hand or lend a hand. And the centralization of the /i/ vowel was more advanced in utterances of give involving abstract themes (give a chance), than when it had a meaning of transfer of possession (give a pen). We argue that existence of such effects lends support both to the idea (from syntactic exemplar theory) that phrases are stored, and the idea (from phonetic exemplar theory) that lexical representations are phonetically detailed.

About the article

Published Online: 2006-11-07

Published in Print: 2006-10-01


Citation Information: The Linguistic Review, Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages 321–349, ISSN (Online) 1613-3676, ISSN (Print) 0167-6318, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/TLR.2006.013.

Export Citation

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.

[4]
JENNIFER HAY, KATIE DRAGER, and BRYNMOR THOMAS
English Language and Linguistics, 2013, Volume 17, Number 2, Page 241
[5]
Lacey Wade
Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology, 2017, Volume 8, Number 1, Page 30
[6]
Meredith Tamminga, Laurel MacKenzie, and David Embick
Linguistic Variation, 2016, Volume 16, Number 2, Page 300
[8]
Joan Bresnan
Computational Linguistics, 2016, Volume 42, Number 4, Page 599
[9]
Bram Vandekerckhove, Dominiek Sandra, and Walter Daelemans
Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 2015, Volume 30, Number 7, Page 816
[10]
Katrin Schweitzer, Michael Walsh, Sasha Calhoun, Hinrich Schütze, Bernd Möbius, Antje Schweitzer, and Grzegorz Dogil
Speech Communication, 2015, Volume 66, Page 65
[11]
Lauren Squires
Journal of Sociolinguistics, 2013, Volume 17, Number 2, Page 200
[12]
Victor Kuperman and Joan Bresnan
Journal of Memory and Language, 2012, Volume 66, Number 4, Page 588
[13]
Katie K. Drager
Laboratory Phonology, 2010, Volume 1, Number 1
[14]
Travis Wade and Bernd Möbius
Laboratory Phonology, 2010, Volume 1, Number 2
[15]
Adele E. Goldberg
Cognitive Linguistics, 2009, Volume 20, Number 1, Page 201
[16]
Rens Bod
Cognitive Linguistics, 2009, Volume 20, Number 1
[17]
Michael Walsh, Bernd Möbius, Travis Wade, and Hinrich Schütze
Cognitive Science, 2010, Volume 34, Number 4, Page 537

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in