The Slovene neo-circumflex revisited
Keith Langston disagrees with my account of the Slovene neo-circumflex. He rejects compensatory lengthening as an explanation of the neo-circumflex, primarily on theoretical grounds. His "moraic analysis" is quite unacceptable to me because it starts from an a priori segmentation of the sp...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Croatian |
| Published: |
Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje
2012-01-01
|
| Series: | Rasprave: Časopis Instituta za Hrvatski Jezik i Jezikoslovlje |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hrcak.srce.hr/file/142485 |
| Summary: | Keith Langston disagrees with my account of the Slovene neo-circumflex. He rejects compensatory lengthening as an explanation of the neo-circumflex, primarily on theoretical grounds. His "moraic analysis" is quite unacceptable to me because it starts from an a priori segmentation of the speech flow. In a strict autosegmental approach, the segmentation of the speech flow should be part of the analysis and not be given a priori. Langston's rejection of van Wijk's law, according to which the simplification of certain consonant clusters yielded lengthening of the following vowel, is based on a misguided theoretical interpretation which led him astray. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1331-6745 1849-0379 |