Difference between revisions of "Bracket Erasure Convention"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(from Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics) |
Haspelmath (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Bracket Erasure Convention''' is a convention proposed in Kiparsky (1982) stating that internal | + | The '''Bracket Erasure Convention''' is a convention proposed in Kiparsky (1982) stating that internal [[bracket]]s are erased at the end of a lexical [[level]] or [[stratum]]. |
===Comments=== | ===Comments=== | ||
| − | As a consequence of this convention words become phonologically inert at the end of each lexical [[level]], i.e., they can no longer be affected by cyclic phonological rules. After bracket erasure, morphologically derived words are treated as though they were underived. In Kiparsky's view this inertness extends to morphological processes, and word formation rules therefore do not have access to the internal structure of words derived at an earlier level. Thus, Siegel's (1978) [[Adjacency Condition]] or Williams' (1981a) [[Atom Condition]] can be reduced to the Bracket Erasure Convention. | + | As a consequence of this convention words become phonologically inert at the end of each lexical [[level]], i.e., they can no longer be affected by [[cyclic]] phonological rules. After bracket erasure, morphologically derived words are treated as though they were underived. In Kiparsky's view this inertness extends to morphological processes, and word formation rules therefore do not have access to the internal structure of words derived at an earlier level. Thus, Siegel's (1978) [[Adjacency Condition]] or Williams' (1981a) [[Atom Condition]] can be reduced to the Bracket Erasure Convention. |
===Link=== | ===Link=== | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
===References=== | ===References=== | ||
| − | *Kiparsky, P. 1982. From Cyclic Phonology to Lexical Phonology. In ''The Structure of Phonological Representations (I)''. van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.), 131-175. | + | *[[Paul Kiparky|Kiparsky, P.]] 1982. From Cyclic Phonology to Lexical Phonology. In ''The Structure of Phonological Representations (I)''. van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.), 131-175. |
*Kiparsky, P. 1985. Some Consequences of Lexical Phonology. In ''The Structure of Phonological Representations, vol 1''. van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.), 131-175. Dordrecht: Foris. | *Kiparsky, P. 1985. Some Consequences of Lexical Phonology. In ''The Structure of Phonological Representations, vol 1''. van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.), 131-175. Dordrecht: Foris. | ||
*Siegel, D. 1978. The Adjacency Condition and the Theory of Morphology. ''NELS VIII'', 189-197. | *Siegel, D. 1978. The Adjacency Condition and the Theory of Morphology. ''NELS VIII'', 189-197. | ||
Latest revision as of 15:40, 20 April 2008
The Bracket Erasure Convention is a convention proposed in Kiparsky (1982) stating that internal brackets are erased at the end of a lexical level or stratum.
Comments
As a consequence of this convention words become phonologically inert at the end of each lexical level, i.e., they can no longer be affected by cyclic phonological rules. After bracket erasure, morphologically derived words are treated as though they were underived. In Kiparsky's view this inertness extends to morphological processes, and word formation rules therefore do not have access to the internal structure of words derived at an earlier level. Thus, Siegel's (1978) Adjacency Condition or Williams' (1981a) Atom Condition can be reduced to the Bracket Erasure Convention.
Link
Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics
References
- Kiparsky, P. 1982. From Cyclic Phonology to Lexical Phonology. In The Structure of Phonological Representations (I). van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.), 131-175.
- Kiparsky, P. 1985. Some Consequences of Lexical Phonology. In The Structure of Phonological Representations, vol 1. van der Hulst, H. & Smith, N. (eds.), 131-175. Dordrecht: Foris.
- Siegel, D. 1978. The Adjacency Condition and the Theory of Morphology. NELS VIII, 189-197.
- Spencer, A. 1991. Morphological Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Williams, E. 1981. On the notions 'Lexically Related' and 'Head of a Word'. Linguistic Inquiry 12, 245-274.
