René Kager, Joe Pater and Wim Zonneveld (2004). Constraints in phonological acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. ix+417.

Abstract

After several years of being cited as in press, the long-anticipated volume Constraints in phonological acquisition, edited by René Kager, Joe Pater and Wim Zonneveld, finally appeared in spring 2004.* This is the first edited volume to be published that is devoted exclusively to phonological acquisition from the perspective of Optimality Theory. The volume includes important contributions from some of the leading figures in Optimality Theory and/or phonological acquisition. Descriptive, experimental and computational studies relating to typical first-language acquisition and foreign-word adaptation are included. The volume is unparalleled in these respects, and should serve as essential reading for researchers and students interested in phonological acquisition or Optimality Theory. In fact, the volume has already achieved considerable success, as evidenced by its many citations in the work of others. Naturally, as with any volume, some shortcomings are also expected, and this volume has its share. On balance, however, the strengths of the volume certainly outweigh its weaknesses. My review begins with a brief critique of each of the eleven chapters and then turns to a consideration of the volume's shortcomings. In fairness to all, it is important to keep in mind that there was a rather considerable lag between the times when the volume was conceived and ultimately published. Several of the chapters were drawn from a 1998 workshop on phonological acquisition held in Utrecht. Additionally, some of the work appeared in one form or another dating as far back as 1994. As a result, much of the volume reflects acquisition research that was conducted in the early stages of Optimality Theory. This review will thus attempt to fill in some of the gaps by identifying current challenges and relevant work. * I am especially grateful to Amanda Edmonds, Ashley Farris, Judith Gierut and Laura McGarrity for their discussions with me about this volume and related issues. I would also like to thank Sharon Hargus for comments on a preliminary draft of this review. This work was supported in part by a grant to Indiana University from the National Institutes of Health (DC 001694).