Underspecification - Revision history

Ikirby: Undo revision 17696 by Ikirby (talk)

2021-02-07T21:45:05Z

Undo revision 17696 by Ikirby (talk)

Ikirby at 21:44, 7 February 2021

2021-02-07T21:44:44Z

Ikirby: changed "i.c" (?) to "i.e.", made aspiration notation superscript

2021-02-07T21:44:29Z

changed "i.c" (?) to "i.e.", made aspiration notation superscript

NBlöcher: Edited the format and removed the block {{format}}

2014-08-24T16:22:10Z

Edited the format and removed the block {{format}}

Wohlgemuth: utrecht

2009-06-10T12:36:40Z

utrecht

New page

'''Underspecification''' is the theory that [[underlying representation]]s are not fully specified i.c. that predictable information is not underlyingly present.

=== Example ===

in English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [p^h] in [p^h]''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].

=== Links ===

[http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon/zoek.pl?lemma=Underspecification&lemmacode=131 Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics]

{{dc}}
[[Category:Phonology]]

{{stub}}{{cats}}{{format}}

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 == Example ==
-In English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [pʰ] in [pʰ] ''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].
+In English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [pʰ] in [pʰ]''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].
 == Links ==

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 == Example ==
-In English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [pʰ] in [pʰ]''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].
+In English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [pʰ] in [pʰ] ''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].
 == Links ==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Definition==
-'''Underspecification''' is the theory that [[underlying representation]]s are not fully specified i.c. that predictable information is not underlyingly present.
+'''Underspecification''' is the theory that [[underlying representation]]s are not fully specified i.e. that predictable information is not underlyingly present.
 == Example ==
-In English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [p^h] in [p^h]''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].
+In English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [pʰ] in [pʰ]''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].
 == Links ==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 '''Underspecification''' is the theory that [[underlying representation]]s are not fully specified i.c. that predictable information is not underlyingly present.
-=== Example ===
+== Example ==
-in English there is no lexical distinction between aspirated and non-aspirated stops. Still there is a phonetic difference between the [p^h] in [p^h]''in'' and the non-aspirated [p] in ''s''[p]''in''. Underspecification theory expresses this by assuming that underlyingly both p's are not specified for aspiration. The aspiration feature is later (post-lexically) specified by a context-sensitive rule inserting [+spread glottis] at the beginning of a syllable; the non-aspiration is a consequence of a universal rule which inserts [-spread glottis] in all other contexts. See [[Structure preservation]], [[structure-building rule]].
+== Links ==
+*[http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon/zoek.pl?lemma=Underspecification&lemmacode=131 Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics]
 {{dc}}
 [[Category:Phonology]]
-{{stub}}{{cats}}{{format}}
+{{stub}}{{cats}}