References
Archangeli, Diana. 1988. Aspects of underspecification theory. Phonology 5. 183–207.
Archangeli, Diana, Adam Baker & Jeff Mielke. 2011. Categorization and features: Evidence from American English /r/. In Rachid Ridouane & G. N. Clements (eds.), Where do Phonological Contrasts Come From?, 173–196. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675711000029.
Archangeli, Diana & Douglas Pulleyblank. 2007. Harmony. In Paul de Lacy (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology, 353–378. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Archangeli, Diana & Douglas Pulleyblank. 2016. Emergent morphology. In Daniel Siddiqi & Heidi Harley (ed.), Morphological Metatheory, 237–270. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Archangeli, Diana & Douglas Pulleyblank. 2018. Phonology as an emergent system. In S. J. Hannahs & Anna Bosch (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Phonological Theory, 476–503. London: Routledge.
Archangeli, Diana & Douglas Pulleyblank. 2022. Emergent Phonology (Conceptual Foundations of Language Science 7). Berlin: Language Science Press. https://doi.org./10.5281/zenodo.5721159.
Benus, Stefan & Adamantios Gafos. 2007. Articulatory characteristics of Hungarian ‘transparent’ vowels. Journal of Phonetics 35. 271–300.
Gafos, Adamantios. 1999. The Articulatory Basis of Locality in Phonology. New York: Garland.
Gafos, Adamantios & Amanda Dye. 2011. Vowel harmony: Opaque and transparent vowels. In Marc van Oostendoorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, volume IV: Phonological Interfaces, 2164–2189. Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA & Oxford.
Gerken, LouAnn & Alex Bollt. 2008. Three exemplars allow at least some linguistic generalizations: Implications for generalization mechanisms and constraints. Language Learning and Development 4. 228–248.
Gerken, LouAnn, Colin Dawson, Razanne Chatila & Josh Tenenbaum. 2015. Surprise! Infants consider possible bases of generalization for a single input example. Developmental science 18(1). 80–89.
Gerken, LouAnn & Carolyn Quam. 2016. Infant learning is influenced by local spurious generalizations. Developmental science. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12410.
Hansson, Gunnar Ólafur. 2010. Consonant Harmony: Long-Distance Interaction in Phonology (University of California Publications in Linguistics 145). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Hayes, Bruce & Zsuzsa Cziráky Londe. 2006. Stochastic phonological knowledge: The case of Hungarian vowel harmony. Phonology 23. 59–104.
Hayes, Bruce, Kie Zuraw, Péter Siptár & Zsuzsa Cziráky Londe. 2009. Natural and unnatural constraints in Hungarian vowel harmony. Language 85. 822–863.
Heinz, Jeffrey, Chetan Rawal & Herbert Tanner. 2011. Tier-based strictly local constraints for phonology. In Dekang Lin, Yuji Matsumoto & Rada Mihalcea (eds.), Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human language technologies, 58–64. Portland, Oregon: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Jardine, Adam. 2016. Learning tiers for long-distance phonotactics. In Laurel Perkins, Rachel Dudley, Juliana Gerard & Kasia Hitczenko (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA 2015), 60–72. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Jardine, Adam & Jeffrey Heinz. 2016. Learning tier-based strictly 2-local languages. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 4. 87–98.
McMullin, Kevin James. 2016. Tier-based locality in long-distance phonotactics: Learnability and typology. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia doctoral dissertation.
Mielke, Jeff, Adam Baker & Diana Archangeli. 2016. Individual-level contact reduces phonological complexity: Evidence from bunched and retroflex /ô/. Language 92. 101–140.
Mohanan, Karuvannur Puthanveettil, Diana Archangeli & Douglas Pulleyblank. 2010. The emergence of optimality theory. In Linda Ann Uyechi & Lian-Hee Wee (eds.), Reality exploration and discovery: Pattern interaction in language and life, 143-158. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University.
Ní Chiosáin, Máire & Jaye Padgett. 2001. Markedness, segment realization, and locality in spreading. In Linda Lombardi (ed.), Segmental Phonology in Optimality Theory, 118–156. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory. Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar (RuCCS Technical Report 2). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science.
Ringen, Catherine & Robert Vago. 1998. Hungarian vowel harmony in Optimality Theory. Phonology 15. 393–416.
Rose, Sharon & Rachel Walker. 2004. A typology of consonant agreement as correspondence. Language 80. 475–531.
Rose, Sharon & Rachel Walker. 2011. Harmony systems. In John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle & Alan C. Yu (eds.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory. 2nd edn., 240–290. Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Siptár, Péter & Miklós Törkenczy. 2000. The phonology of Hungarian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Suzuki, Keiichiro. 1998. A Typological Investigation of Dissimilation. University of Arizona doctoral dissertation.
Törkenczy, Miklós. 2011. Hungarian vowel harmony. In Marc van Oostendoorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, 2963–2990. Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Vago, Robert. 1976. Theoretical implications of Hungarian vowel harmony. Linguistic Inquiry 7. 243–263.