Abstract
A fundamental concept of standard generative phonology stating that related morphemes have unique phonological representations is criticized. It is argued that much more morphologization of so-called phonological rules is needed to explain certain morphophonemic changes and that rules should be restricted to apply where the morphemic alternants stand in an inflectional (paradigmatic) relationship. Three rules in Israeli Hebrew are discussed, and evidence is brought in from both adults' and children's dialects to support the view outlined above. The concept of opacity is examined and arguments against reordering as a means of obtaining grammatical transparency are offered. The empirical basis underlying evaluation criteria of grammars is emphasized.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
