Zoque IV: Auxiliaries and Nouns

Wonderly, William L.

doi:10.1086/464134

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Independent Evidence For Realizemorph: Zoque1

Proposed Analysis1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

1998

2018

Publication Types

Select...

Article5

Other1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent6

Authors

Journals

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Data and description are from Wonderly (1951), and for previous analyses see Dell (1973), Lombardi (1990), Steriade (1993a. The data are given in (44)(45).…”

Section: Independent Evidence For Realizemorph: Zoquementioning

confidence: 99%

Nasalization, Neutral Segments and Opacity Effects

Walker¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Data and description are from Wonderly (1951), and for previous analyses see Dell (1973), Lombardi (1990), Steriade (1993a. The data are given in (44)(45).…”

Section: Independent Evidence For Realizemorph: Zoquementioning

confidence: 99%

Nasalization, Neutral Segments and Opacity Effects

Walker¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…13 For example, there has been no systematic study of [nasal] docking; Wilson (2003: 14) notes only that all patterns he knows are consistent with (24). And aside from the typology of blockers in [nasal] spreading, evidence for the fully stratified ranking in (24) is sparse: contrastively nasalized glides are rare, it is unclear that contrastively nasalized liquids or fricatives exist (Cohn 1993), and the sole piece of evidence for *NASLIQUID *NASGLIDE comes from Zoque (Wonderly 1951), where a [nasal] prefix nasalizes a word-initial glide ([nasal] + /j/ → [j]) but deletes before a word-initial liquid ([nasal] + /l/ → [l], *[l]). In addition, the typology of blockers does not always match up with the typology of segment inventories (Flemming 2004: 264-266).…”

Section: Proposed Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Gurindji nasal cluster dissimilation as trigger deletion

Stanton

2018

J. Ling.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Processes of unbounded spreading are often claimed to be myopic (e.g. Wilson 2003, McCarthy 2009): the ability of some feature [F] to spread from some segment z to some segment y does not depend on its ability to spread from y to x. Recent work (e.g. Walker 2010, 2014; Jardine 2016) has however cast doubt on the universality of this claim. This paper contributes to the discussion on (non-)myopia on by suggesting that a kind of non-myopic process, trigger deletion, is attested in Gurindji (Pama–Nyungan, McConvell 1988): when the spreading domain contains a certain kind of blocking segment, the spreading trigger deletes. In order to capture this pattern, as well as the extant typology of non-myopic processes, I argue that any successful analysis of unbounded spreading must allow surface candidates to be globally evaluated.

show abstract

Frames of reference and topological descriptions in Ayutla Mixe

Romero-Méndez

2011

Language Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zoque IV: Auxiliaries and Nouns

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Nasalization, Neutral Segments and Opacity Effects

Nasalization, Neutral Segments and Opacity Effects

Gurindji nasal cluster dissimilation as trigger deletion

Frames of reference and topological descriptions in Ayutla Mixe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About