Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T05:05:33.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Firth's early phonological views and prosodic analysis: a reply to Coleman (2004)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2006

Elena Battaner-Moro
Elena Battaner-Moro
Affiliation:
Departamento de Comunicación II, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos elena.battaner@urjc.es
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In a previous issue of this journal, John Coleman (2004) reviewed the written-up version of a poster I presented at the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona (Battaner-Moro 2003, henceforth BM). The aim of the poster was to discuss the evolution of Firthian prosodic analysis. In his review, Coleman derives from it ‘an ignorance or a neglect of Firth's publications prior to 1948' on my part (p. 211). He focusses his criticisms on the following three statements:

  1. ‘Firth never did prosodic analysis.’

  2. ‘There is a complete absence of programmatic work in Firth's works.’

  3. ‘Prosodic analysis was developed by the members of the London School and not at all by John Firth.’

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , June 2006 , pp. 97 - 102
Copyright
Journal of the International Phonetic Association 2006