In recent years we have witnessed conflicting proposals in the field of phonology with regard to descriptive and explanatory power of various theories. Especially significant is the controversy involving abstract versus concrete representations. This paper is an attempt to view the abstractness controversy in the light of examples from linguistic borrowing. Examining certain Arabic loans into Turkish it is shown that phonetic explanations are overridingly more credible than abstract accounts that rely on the theory of markedness.
Items in KU ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
We want to hear from you! Please
share your stories
about how Open Access to this item benefits YOU.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as: This work is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. For more information, please see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The University of Kansas prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, national origin, age, ancestry, disability, status as a veteran, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, gender identity, gender expression and genetic information in the University’s programs and activities. The following person has been designated to handle inquiries regarding the non-discrimination policies: Director of the Office of Institutional Opportunity and Access, IOA@ku.edu, 1246 W. Campus Road, Room 153A, Lawrence, KS, 66045, (785)864-6414, 711 TTY.