Rit (Vísindafélag Íslendinga) - 01.06.1970, Page 463
461
systematic analysis by modern linguistic methods. Alternations
of the kind exemplified above are used quite extensively as
evidence for phonemic identity, above all in Hjelmslev’s paper
on the expression system of Danish (Hjelmslev 1951), but
here they compete with criteria of a quite different kind, and
it is not altogether clear how crucial it is to reduce all instances
of such alternations to phonetic (bound) variation. In most
other contributions to Standard Danish phonology they play
a less central role.
In an unpublished paper read before the Linguistic Circle
of Copenhagen in 1967 Eric Hamp sketched a generative
phonology of Danish. Hamp’s paper, which presented feature
matrices for vowels and consonants as well as a number of
rules relating the classificatory matrices to phonetic realiza-
tions, is of course quite crucial to the present study. He was
not, however, specifically concerned with the problems
considered here (except for a few rules on diphthongs), and
since his paper is available only in the form of a handout from
the session it is somewhat difficult to enter into a detailed
discussion of his analysis, however informative it has been.
In accordance with the rather specific scope of this paper
—and for considerations of space—I have considered it
justifiable to treat the subject matter with only occasional
references to the literature on Danish phonology, although an
appraisal of the various analyses from the point of view of
simplicity of morphological (morphophonemic) rules would
be highly interesting. Bibliographical references to papers
and monographs on Danish phonology, some of which are
pertinent to the present study, have been given elsewhere
(Basboll 1969, Rischel 1969).
The present analysis is chiefly based on forms occurring
in my own usage, but these largely agree with those given in
standard works on Modem Danish grammar and phonetics
(see, e.g., Andersen 1954:319, 344, 3475 Diderichsen 1957:
53-54, 60-61; Hansen 1956:50-51, 59, 64-72, 88-89, 105;
1967:1.302, 2.365-368, 3.18-19, 118; Spore 1965:138).