TY  - JOUR
A1  - Hamann, Silke
T1  - Retroflexion and retraction revised
N2  - Arguing against Bhat’s (1974) claim that retroflexion cannot be correlated with retraction, the present article illustrates that retroflexes are always retracted, though retraction is not claimed to be a sufficient criterion for retroflexion. The cooccurrence of retraction with retroflexion is shown to make two further implications; first, that non-velarized retroflexes do not exist, and second, that secondary palatalization of retroflexes is phonetically impossible. The process of palatalization is shown to trigger a change in the primary place of articulation to non-retroflex. Phonologically, retraction has to be represented by the feature specification [+back] for all retroflex segments.
KW  - Phonetik
KW  - Retroflex
Y1  - 2009
UR  - http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/12521
UR  - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hebis:30-1134003
UR  - http://user.phil-fak.uni-duesseldorf.de/~hamann/Hamann2002RetRet.pdf
N1  - Postprint, zuerst in: Tracy Alan Hall, Bernd Pompino-Marschall, Marzena Rochon: Papers in Phonetics and Phonology : ZAS Papers in Linguistics. - Berlin: 28, 2002, S. 13-26
ER  -