Universal #1965

Legacy number: 1965

 Number  1959
 Original  ... languages have special restrictions for the word-initial and word-final positions that are not valid for every syllable onset and coda, respectively.
 Standardized  IF a phonotactic constraint holds for a syllable-edge, THEN it also holds for a corresponding word edge, but not vice versa.
 Keywords  word, syllable, phonotactic constraint
 Domain  phonology, morphology
 Type  implication
 Status  achronic
 Quality  absolute
 Basis  convenience sample; lgs discussed in the relevant theoretical literature
 Source  Booij 1983

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Notes
This question is part of the more general issue of what kinds of units can be domains for phonological rules, phonotactic constraints, minimality constraints, prosodic regularities. A restrictive position, as advocated by Booij among many others, is that words can be such domains (and also morphemes, especially stems), but syllables can't. In this view, the Standardized implicational formulation above is in fact incorrect: syllables can't be domains at all, unless they happen to be coextensive with words (at surface level, to take the strictest view).
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
This question is part of the more general issue of what kinds of units can be domains for phonological rules, phonotactic constraints, minimality constraints, prosodic regularities. A restrictive position, as advocated by Booij among many others, is that words can be such domains (and also morphemes, especially stems), but syllables can't. In this view, the Standardized implicational formulation above is in fact incorrect: syllables can't be domains at all, unless they happen to be coextensive with words (at surface level, to take the strictest view).