Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 01.01.2010, Side 151

149
Til vamar hljóðkerfisreglu
R-agnar Ingi Aðalsteinsson og Sigurður Konráðsson. 2009. u-hljóðvarp: Regla eða val mál-
notanda? íslenskt mál 31:167—178.
Ritmálsskrá Orðabókar Háskólans. Vefslóð www.lexis.hi.is/cgi-bin/ritmal.
Þorsteinn G. Indriðason. 1994. Regluvirkni í orðasafni og utan þess. Um lexíkalska hljóð-
kerfisfraeði íslensku. Málfræðirannsóknir 9. Málvísindastofnun Háskóla íslands, Reykja-
vík.
^orsteinn G. Indriðason. 2008. Um virkar og frjósamar orðmyndunarreglur í íslensku.
Islensklmál 30:93-120.
SUMMARY
‘Making case for a phonological rule
Comments on a discussion paper’
eywords: phonology, morphology, morphophonemics, phonological features, morpho-
logical features, «-umlaut, i-umlaut, productivity
This
Paper is partially a remark on a paper that appeared in the latest volume of Islenskt
m<*}- h argues that although «-umlaut does not apply in all the environments where one
^'ght a priori expect it to apply, it should not be classified as a morphological rule (or a
Phonological inflection rule), as suggested in the paper commented on. In Modern
e|andic, «-umlaut behaves in similar ways as other rules that have been classified as
Phonological rules in the language and the exceptions can be shown to be of similar kinds.
ence it is argued that if we want to say that «-umlaut in Modern Icelandic is not a phono-
g>cal rule because of the existing and definable (surface) exceptions to it, then the conse-
'luence is that the inventory of phonological rules in the language is considerably smaller
an standardly assumed.
j 0rste,nn G. lndriðason
stituttfor lingvistiske, litter<s.re og estetiske studier (LLE)
Wnesplassen 7
?°°7 Bergen
0rste,nn.mdridason@lle .uib.no