Markedness: Reduction and Preservation in Phonology

338 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The gradual path to cluster simplification* (2008, methodology): “In English and Diola Fogny (15 The overall proposal here is equally compatible with the faithfulness-based approach to target conditions taken by Jun (1995, 2004) and de Lacy (2002, 2006).”
Weighted Constraints in Generative Linguistics (2009, background): “Many constraints in the OT literature stand in the specific-to-general relationship exemplified by *Voice and *Coda-Voice, in which the specific constraint assigns violations to a proper subset of the forms violated by the general constraint (see, e.g., de Lacy, 2006).”
Locality and globality in phonological variation (2011, background): “See also de Lacy (2006) for further discussion of constraints of this type — extending the generalizations about weak and prominent positions to sentence prosody is not without complication (do constraints against prominent units in weak positions extend all the way up the prosodic hierarchy?) but…”
The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. (2009, background): “Markedness (i.e., well-formedness) hierarchies, such as sonority, could vary in detail due to both predictable grammatical processes (e.g., conflation; de Lacy 2006) and variation in finegrained phonetic properties that could inform their inference (Hayes & Steriade 2004).”