On the rapid expansion of optimality theory at the end of the twentieth century

References

1. Anderson, Stephen R.
   2000 “Reflections on ‘On the Phonetic Rules of Russian’”. Folia Linguistica34:1/2.11–28.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Anderson, Stephen R.
   2001 “Why linguistics needs the Cognitive Scientist”. Psychiatry: Interpersonal & Biological Processes64:1.11–13. 10.1521/psyc.64.1.11.18237
   https://doi.org/10.1521/psyc.64.1.11.18237 [Google Scholar]
3. Barbosa, Pilar, Danny Fox, Paul Hagstrom, Martha McGinnis, & David Pestsky
   1995 Call for Papers: Is the Best Good Enough? Workshop on optimality in syntactic theory. Found athttps://linguistlist.org/issues/6/6–162.html#3
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bartling, Sönke & Sascha Friesike
   2014 “Towards another Scientific Revolution”. Opening Science: The evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishinged. bySönke Bartling & Sascha Friesike. Heidelberg: Springer, 3–16. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑00026‑8_1
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_1 [Google Scholar]
5. Blevins, Juliette
   1997 “Rules in Optimality Theory: Two case studies.” Derivations and Constraints in Phonologyed. byIggy Roca, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 227–260.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bloomfield, Leonard
   1926 “A Set of Postulates for the Science of Language”. Language2:3.153–164. 10.2307/408741
   https://doi.org/10.2307/408741 [Google Scholar]
7. Bloomfield, Leonard
   1939 “Menomini Morphophonemics”. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague8.105–115.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bromberger, Sylvain & Morris Halle
   1989 “Why phonology is different”. Linguistic Inquiry20:1.51–70.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Burzio, Luigi
   1995 “The Rise of Optimality Theory”. The First GLOT International State–of-the-Article-Book: The Latest in Linguisticsed. byLisa Chen & Rint Sybesma. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 199–220.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Chomsky, Noam
    1957 Syntactic Structures. The Hague & Paris: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Chomsky, Noam
    1993 “A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory”. A View from Building 20ed. byKen Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1–52.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Chomsky, Noam
    1998 “Some Observations on Economy in Generative Grammar”. Is the Best Good Enough? Optimality and Competition in Syntaxed. byPilar Barbosa, Danny Fox, Paul Hagstrom, Martha McGinnis & David Pestsky, 115–128. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle
    1968 The Sound Pattern of English. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Chomsky, Noam, Morris Halle, & Fred Lukoff
    1956 “On Accent and Juncture in English”. For Roman Jakobson: Essays on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday, ed. byMorris Halle, Horace G. Lunt & H. MacLean. The Hague: Mouton, 65–80.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Clements, G[eorge] N[ick]
    1985 “The Geometry of Phonological Features”. Phonology Yearbook2.225–252. 10.1017/S0952675700000440
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000440 [Google Scholar]
16. Davis, Stuart & Seung-Hoon Shin
    1999 “The Syllable Contact Constraint in Korean: An Optimality-Theoretic analysis”. Journal of East Asian Linguistics8.285–312. 10.1023/A:1008335414055
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008335414055 [Google Scholar]
17. Dresher, B[ezalel] Elan
    1996 “The Rise of Optimality Theory in First Century Palestine”. GLOT International2:1/2.8.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Gardner, Howard
    1987 The Mind’s New Science: A history of the cognitive revolution. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Ginsparg, Paul
    2011 “ArXiv at 20”. Nature476:7359.145–147. 10.1038/476145a
    https://doi.org/10.1038/476145a [Google Scholar]
20. Goldsmith, John
    1976 Autosegmental Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
21. Goldsmith, John
    ed. 1993 The Last Phonological Rule: Reflections on Constraints and Derivations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Goldsmith, John
    2008 “Generative phonology in the late 1940s”. Phonology25:1.37–59. 10.1017/S0952675708001395
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675708001395 [Google Scholar]
23. Grimshaw, Jane
    1993 “Minimal Projection Heads and Optimality”. InTechnical Report RuCCS TR-4, Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey. (ruccs.rutgers.edu/images/tech_rpt/tr4/minproj4.pdf). Accessed: 28 May 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Grimshaw, Jane
    1997 “Projection, Heads, and Optimality”. Linguistic Inquiry28.373–422.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Gouskova, Maria
    2004 “Relational Hierarchies in Optimality Theory: The case of syllable contact”. Phonology21:2.201–250. 10.1017/S095267570400020X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S095267570400020X [Google Scholar]
26. Halle, Morris
    1957 “On the Phonetic Rules of Russian”. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Chicago.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Halle, Morris
    1959 The Sound Pattern of Russian. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Halle, Morris
    1962 “Phonology in Generative Grammar”. Word18.54–72. 10.1080/00437956.1962.11659765
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1962.11659765 [Google Scholar]
29. Halle, Morris
    1995 “Comments on the Rise of Optimality Theory by L. Burzio”. GLOT International1.27–28.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Halle, Morris
    1997 “On Stress and Accent in Indo-European”. Language, 73:2.275–313. 10.2307/416020
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416020 [Google Scholar]
31. Hebbe, Donald O.
    1949 The Organization of Behaviour: A neuropsychological theory. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Holt, D[avid] Eric
    ed. 2003 Optimality Theory and Language Change. Netherlands: Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑010‑0195‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0195-3 [Google Scholar]
33. Hooper, Joan B.
    1972 “The Syllable in Phonological Theory”. Language48:525–540. 10.2307/412031
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412031 [Google Scholar]
34. Kahn, Daniel
    1976 Syllable-Based Generalizations in English Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
35. Kiparsky, Paul
    1982 “Lexical Morphology and Phonology”. Linguistics in the Morning Calm: Selected papers from SICOL-1981, ed. byHanʼguk Ŏnŏ Hakhoe. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company, 3–91.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Kisseberth, Charles W.
    1970 “On the Functional Unity of Phonological Rules”. Linguistic Inquiry1.291–306.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Legendre, Géraldine, Jane Grimshaw & Sten Vikner
    ed. 2001 Optimality Theoretic Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Legendre, Géraldine, Yoshiro Miyata, & Paul Smolensky
    1990a “Can Connectionism Contribute to Syntax? Harmonic grammar, with an application”. Proceedings of the 26th Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Legendre, Géraldine, Yoshiro Miyata & Paul Smolensky
    1990b “Harmonic Grammar: A formal multi-level connectionist theory of linguistic well-formedness: An application”. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Legendre, Géraldine, William Raymond & Paul Smolensky
    1993 “An Optimality-Theoretic Typology of Case and Grammatical Voice Systems”. Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session and Parasession on Semantic Typology and Semantic Universals, 464–478. 10.3765/bls.v19i1.1498
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v19i1.1498 [Google Scholar]
41. Legendre, Geraldine, Colin Wilson, Paul Smolensky, Kristin Homer & William Raymond
    1995 “Optimality in wh-chains”. InUniversity of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, 607–636. GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Lipski, John
    1990 “Spanish Taps and Trills: Phonological structure of an isolated opposition”. Folia Linguistica, 24:3/4.153–172.
    [Google Scholar]
43. McCarthy, John
    1993 “A Case of Surface Constraint Violation”. Constraint-Based Theories in Multilinear Phonology, Special Issue of Canadian Journal of Linguistics38.169–195.
    [Google Scholar]
44. McCarthy, John J.
    2000 “Harmonic Serialism and Parallelism”. Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society40. (https://scholarworks.umass.edu/linguist_faculty_pubs/40). Accessed: 28 May 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
45. McCarthy, John
    2001 Doing Optimality Theory: Applying theory to data. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
46. McCarthy, John J.
    2002 A Thematic Guide to Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
47. McCarthy, John J. & Pater, Joe
    eds. 2016 Harmonic Grammar and Harmonic Serialism. Bristol, Conn: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
48. McCarthy, John & Alan Prince
    1986 Prosodic Morphology. (https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=linguist_faculty_pubs). Accessed: 28 May 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
49. McCarthy, John & Alan Prince
    1993 Prosodic morphology I: Constraint interaction and satisfaction. (works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=john_j_mccarthy). Accessed: 28 May 2019
    [Google Scholar]
50. Medler, David A.
    1998 “A Brief History of Connectionism”. Neural Computing Surveys1:2.18–72.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Murray, Robert W.
    1987 “Preference Laws and Gradient Change: Selected developments in Romance”. Canadian Journal of Linguistics32:2.115–132. 10.1017/S0008413100012123
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008413100012123 [Google Scholar]
52. Murray, Robert W.
    1989 “On Epenthesis”. Folia Linguistica23:3/4.293–316.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Murray, Robert W. & Theo Vennemann
    1983 “Sound Change and Syllable Structure in Germanic Phonology”. Language59:3.514–528. 10.2307/413901
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413901 [Google Scholar]
54. Myers, Scott
    1991 “Persistent Rules”. Linguistic Inquiry22:2.315–344.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Newmeyer, Frederick J.
    2014 “Getting the Word Out: The early Generativists’ multipronged efforts to diffuse their ideas”. Language90:1.241–268. 10.1353/lan.2014.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2014.0012 [Google Scholar]
56. Odden, David
    2011 “Rules and Constraints”. The Handbook of Phonological Theoryed. byJohn Goldsmith, Jason Riggle & Alan C. L. Yu. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 1–39. 10.1002/9781444343069.ch1
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444343069.ch1 [Google Scholar]
57. Paradis, Carole
    1987 “On Constraints and Repair Strategies”. The Linguistic Review6:1.71–97. 10.1515/tlir.1987.6.1.71
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.1987.6.1.71 [Google Scholar]
58. Paradis, Carole & LaCharité, Darlene
    1993 “Introduction: The emergence of constraints in generative phonology and a comparison of three current constraint-based models”. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics38:2.127–153. 10.1017/S0008413100014717
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008413100014717 [Google Scholar]
59. Pater, Joe
    2019 “Generative Linguistics and Neural Networks at 60: Foundation, friction, and fusion”. Language95:1.e41–e74. 10.1353/lan.2019.0009
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0009 [Google Scholar]
60. Pinker, Steven
    2015 “A Consequential Collaboration”. Short ’schrift for Alan Prince, ed. byEric Baković, published onlineJune 2015. (https://princeshortschrift.wordpress.com/archives/pinker). Accessed: 28 May 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Pinker, Steven & Alan Prince
    1998 “On Language and Connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition”. Cognition28:1/2.73–193.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky
    1990 “NSF Small Grant for Experimental Research (SGER) Proposal”. Short ’schrift for Alan Prince, ed. byEric Baković, published onlineJune 2015. (https://princeshortschrift.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/prince-smolensky-90-sger-proposal-universal-phonology-reduced.pdf). Accessed: 28 May 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky
    1991 “Notes on Connectionism and Harmony Theory in Linguistics”. Technical Report CU-CS-533-91, Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado, Boulder. (https://princeshortschrift.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/prince-smolensky-91-tr-connectionism-and-harmony-theory-in-linguistics-cu-cs-533-591-ocr.pdf). Accessed: 28 May 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
64. Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky
    2004 Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. [Updated reprint of 1993 unpublished manuscript]. 10.1002/9780470759400
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470759400
65. Rice, Keren D.
    1992 “On Deriving Sonority: A structural account of sonority relationships”. Phonology9:1.61–99. 10.1017/S0952675700001500
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700001500 [Google Scholar]
66. Ross, John R.
    1967 Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
67. Ross, John R.
    1986 Infinite Syntax. New York: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Rumelhart, David E. & James L. McClelland
    1986 Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Vol.1: Foundations. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Sapir, Edward
    1938 “Why Cultural Anthropology Needs the Psychiatrist”. Psychiatry1.7–12. 10.1080/00332747.1938.11022170
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1938.11022170 [Google Scholar]
70. Smolensky, Paul
    1996 “The Initial State and ‘Richness of the Base’ in Optimality Theory ROA-154”. Rutgers Optimality Archivepublished online 1996 (roa.rutgers.edu/files/154-1196/roa-154-smolensky-2.pdf). Accessed: 21 June 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
71. Smolensky, Paul
    2015 “Pre- and Early-OT Memorabilia”. Short ’schrift for Alan Prince, ed. byEric Baković, published onlineJune 2015. (https://princeshortschrift.wordpress.com/archives/smolensky/). Accessed: 28 May 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Smolensky, Paul & Géraldine Legendre
    2006 The Harmonic Mind: From neural computation to optimality-theoretic grammar. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
73. Thorndike, Edward L.
    1932 The Fundamentals of Learning. New York: Columbia University Teachers’ College. 10.1037/10976‑000
    https://doi.org/10.1037/10976-000 [Google Scholar]
74. Till, James E.
    “Predecessors of Preprint Servers”. Learned Publishing14:1.7–13. 10.1087/09531510125100214
    https://doi.org/10.1087/09531510125100214 [Google Scholar]
75. Trubetskoij, Nikolaj S.
    1969 Principles of Phonology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
76. Turing, A[lan] M.
    1947 “Lecture to the London Mathematical Society on 20 February 1947”. A. M. Turing’s ACE Report of 1946 and Other Papersed. byBrian E. Carpenter & R. W. Doran, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 106–124.
    [Google Scholar]
77. Vaux, Bert
    2008 “Why the phonological component must be serial and rule-based”. Rules, Constraints, and Phonological Phenomenaed. byBert Vaux & Andrew Nevins, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 20–60. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226511.003.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226511.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
78. Vennemann, Theo
    1988 Preference Laws for Syllable Structure: And the explanation of sound change with special reference to German, Germanic, Italian, and Latin. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
79. Wells, Rulon S.
    1949 “Automatic Alternation”. Language25:2.99–116. 10.2307/409938
    https://doi.org/10.2307/409938 [Google Scholar]