The Syllable in Dutch, with Special Reference to Diminutive Formation

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Linguistic Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Thu, 5 Feb 2015 21:46:57 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BOOK NOTICES BOOK NOTICES not affixes vs. words, but bound vs. unbound words. In a critique of this theory, M. REIS shows that at least some affixes must be marked as such in the lexicon, if one is to account for certain rules of derivational word formation in German. J. TOMAN extends Hohle's theory of word-syntax to most coordinate compounds. Finally, G. FANSELOW contends that a limited set of rules of semantic interpretation, rather than the selectional properties of lexical items, predict possible compounds. [REGINE MOORCROFrT, University of Western Ontario.] The syllable in Dutch, with special reference to diminutive formation. By MIEKE TROMMELEN. (Publications in Language Sciences, 15.) Dor-

The Dutch diminutive

“…In his review ofTrommelen (1983),Shannon (1988) observes that the latter two structures that Trommelen must assume to arrive at her statement that the long form occurs after a branching rhyme lack independent motivation Booij (1984). voices similar objections.19 Marc can Oostendorp suggests that schwa-sonorant consonant cases (e.g.…”