Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 01.01.1979, Page 252

232
Janez Oresnik
REFERENCES
Blöndal, Sigfús. íslensk-dönsk orðabók. Reykjavík, 1920-24.
Clayton, Mary L. [Review of Kenstowicz & Kisseberth 1977.] Language 55, 1979,
408-13.
Hulst, Harry van der. „Recent developments in phonological theory.“ Forthcoming
in Lingua.
Jóhannesson, Alexander. Die Suffixe im Islandischen. Halle (Saale), 1927.
Kenstowicz, Michael, & Charles Kisseberth. Topics in phonological theory. New
York, 1977.
Kiparsky, Paul. „Abstractness, opacity, and global rules.“ Three dimensions of
linguistic theory, ed. by O. Fujimura. Tokyo, 1973.
Larsson, Ludvig. Ordförrádet i de alsta islánska handskrifterna. Lund, 1891.
Pétursson, Magnús. Drög að hljóðkerfisfræði. Reykjavík, 1978.
Ringen, Catherine. „Vowel harmony: Implications for the Alternation Condition."
Phonologica 1976, ed. by W. U. Dressler & O. E. Pfeiffer. Innsbruck, 1977.
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. „On the phonology of Icelandic preaspiration." Nordic
Journal of Linguistics 1, 1978, 3-54.
SUMMARY
Kiparsky’s (1973) phonological universal, „Neutralization processes apply only to
derived forms“, can explain why the [v] of modern Icelandic rövl(a) is pronounced
as such, not [þl]/[þl]; the -v- does not constitute a derived input. If the notion
DERIVED FORM (or INPUT) is modified so that segment strings crucially in-
volving DERIVATIONAL morpheme boundaries are not considered derived
inputs, the universal also explains the [vn] (instead of the expected [bn]) of slaf-
neskur and slafneska.