“…3. Brink (1974) suggests that Dutch zingt, normally pronounced [zirjt], undergoes both a &-epenthesis (which he motivates by reference to a proposed derivation /konirj-tJ3/->konin-k-tja->[koninkJ3]) and a ^-deletion (illustrated by /zink-t/->[zirjt]), so that its derivation is: /zirj-t/->zirj-k-t-»[zint]; I would be inclined to favour an analysis in which the k of [koninkja] was derived via assimilation and not by insertion, with the lexical representation of -tjd (the diminutive suffix) being something like C*j$, where C* becomes homorganic phonetic shapes, or a theory of syntax which recognized only a surface level. The proposals I know of for theories along these lines seem to me to be demonstrably inadequate, but that is not my topic here.…”