LINGUIST List 12.2784
Wed Nov 7 2001
Review: Correction to review in 12.2725
Editor for this issue: Terence Langendoen <terrylinguistlist.org>
What follows is another discussion note contributed to our Book Discussion
Forum. We expect these discussions to be informal and interactive; and
the author of the book discussed is cordially invited to join in.
If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for books
announced on LINGUIST as "available for discussion." (This means that
the publisher has sent us a review copy.) Then contact Simin Karimi at
siminlinguistlist.org or Terry Langendoen at terrylinguistlist.org.
Subscribe to Blackwell's LL+ at http://www.linguistlistplus.com/ and donate 20% of your subscription to LINGUIST! You get 30% off on Blackwells books, and free shipping and postage!
- Charles Reiss, correction to my review of Phonology of Hungarian in issue 12.2725
Message 1: correction to my review of Phonology of Hungarian in issue 12.2725
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 19:23:04 -0500
From: Charles Reiss <reissalcor.concordia.ca>
Subject: correction to my review of Phonology of Hungarian in issue 12.2725
In my review of Sipt�r and T�rkenczy's Phonology of Hungarian,
I made the following incorrect statement:
This somewhat negative view is supported by the fact that,
according to S+T, /kp/ is actually found in ten monomorphemic words
(page 129: Table 17).
There are actually no examples of -kp- monomorphemic clusters--
the ten examples are of -pk-. I think the other arguments against
positing a constraint to explain this gap still stand, however,
and welcome further feedback.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue