phonological rules

[Frederick J Newmeyer]

Dear Funknetters,

I'm hoping that people can help me out with a literature reference or two. Not being a phonologist, I'm not sure where to start looking. Joan Bybee and others have argued for quite a few years now that evidence from phonetics (both diachronic and synchronic) refutes the idea of classical phonology, in which phonological processes are algebraic and discrete. To give one example (which might not be from Bybee), at first glance we might conclude that a common phonological process is stated simply: 'Nasalise vowels before nasal consonants'. But the actual facts seem to be more complicated. What has been claimed is (and I have no reason to doubt the claim) is that the *degree* of vowel nasalisation increases over time. That is, it's not just that more speakers are nasalising, but all are doing it to a somewhat higher degree over time. Likewise, at any synchronic stage, some speakers nasalise their vowels more than others, nasalisation tends to be more pronounced in more frequent !
 words than in less frequent ones (or is it the other way around?), the preceding segment has an effect on the degree of nasalisation, and so on.

Facts like these have been used to call into question the classical rule. What I am looking for is a *balanced* discussion of this issue. Is there a defence of classical phonology against the conclusions that Bybee and others have drawn or, even better, an article that contrasts and evaluates the two positions? I can imagine that there are handbook chapters that analyse the arguments, but I'm not sure which.

Thanks! I'll summarise if there is enough interest.

Fritz



Frederick J. Newmeyer
Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
Adjunct Professor, U of British Columbia and Simon Fraser U
[for my postal address, please contact me by e-mail]