Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 571

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Aspects of underspecification theory

Archangeli, Diana·1988·Phonology

Abstract

An evaluation metric in Universal Grammar provides a means of selecting between possible grammars for a particular language. The evaluation metric as conceived in Chomsky & Halle (1968; henceforth SPE) prefers the grammar in which only the idiosyncratic properties are lexically listed and predictable properties are derived. The essence of underspecification theory is to supply such predictable distinctive features or feature specifications by rule. Viewed in this way, the general idea of underspecification has always been a part of any theory of phonology that includes such an evaluation metric.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0952675700002268

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 571

Metadata

Authors
Archangeli, D.
Venue
Phonology
Published
1988-08
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
183-207
ISSN
  • 0952-6757 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8188
OpenAlex
W2161345614
Cited by
571
References
0
FWCI
8.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Aspects of underspecification theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0952675700002268
The paper
Archangeli, D. (1988). Aspects of underspecification theory. Phonology. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952675700002268

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.