Phonetics as a branch of linguistics

The phoneme /а/ and /о/ belong to archiphoneme which is realized in the sound [A], as in [вАлы] meaning both валы and волы. 
14. The system of consonant phonemes. Problem of affricates

The phonological analysis of English consonant sounds helps to distinguish 24 phonemes: [p, b, t, d, k, g, f, v, θ, ð, s, z, ∫, ж (h, t∫, dж, m, n, ŋ, w, r, 1, j]. Principles of classification suggested by Russian phoneticians provide the basis for establishing of the following distinctive oppositions in the system of English consonants:

Degree of noise

Place of articulation

labial vs. lingual

lingual vs. glottal

Manner of articulation

     3.1 occlusive vs. constrictive

constrictive vs. affricates

constrictive unicentral vs. constrictive bicentral

4. Work of the vocal cords and the force of articulation

4.1 voiceless fortis vs. voiced lenis

5. Position of the soft palate

 5.1 oral vs. nasal

There are some problems of phonological character in the English consonantal system; it is the problem of affricates - their phonological status and their number. The question is: what kind of facts a phonological theory has to explain.

1) Are   the   English   [t∫,  dж]   sounds   monophonemic   entities   or biphonemic combinations (sequences, clusters)?

2) If they are monophonemic, how many phonemes of the same kind exist in English, or, in other words, can such clusters as [tr, dr] and [tθ, dð] be considered affricates?

To define it is not an easy matter. One thing is clear: these sounds are complexes because articulatory we can distinguish two elements. Considering phonemic duality of affricates, it is necessary to analyze the relation of affricates to other consonant phonemes to be able to define their status in the system.

The problem of affricates is a point of considerable controversy among phoneticians. According to Russian specialists in English phonetics, there are two affricates in English: [t∫, dж]. D. Jones points out there are six of them: [t∫, dж], [ts, dz], and [tr, dr]. A.C. Gimson increases their number adding two more affricates: [tθ, tð]. Russian phoneticians look at English affricates through the eyes of a phoneme theory, according to which a phoneme has three aspects: articulatory, acoustic and functional, the latter being the most significant one. As to British phoneticians, their primary concern is the articulatory-acoustic unity of these complexes.

Before looking at these complexes from a functional point of view it is necessary to define their articulatory indivisibility.

According to N.S. Trubetzkoy's point of view a sound complex may be considered monophonemic if: a) its elements belong to the same syllable; b) it is produced by one articulatory effort; c) its duration should not exceed normal duration of elements. Let us apply these criteria to the sound complexes.

1.  Syllabic indivisibility

2.  Articulatory indivisibility. Special instrumental analysis shows that all the sound complexes are homogeneous and produced by one articulatory effort.

3.   Duration.  With G.P. Torsuyev we could state that length of sounds depends on the position in the phonetic context, therefore it cannot serve a reliable basis in phonological analysis. He writes that the length of English [t∫] in the words chair and match is different; [t∫] in match is considerably longer than |t| in mat and may be even longer than [∫] in mash. This does not prove, however, that [t∫] is biphonemic.

According to morphological criterion a sound complex is considered to be monophonemic if a morpheme boundary cannot pass within it because it is generally assumed that a phoneme is morphologically indivisible. If we consider [t∫], [dж] from this point of view we could be secure to grant them a monophonemic status, since they are indispensable. As to [ts], [dz] and [tθ], [dð] complexes their last elements are separate morphemes [s], [z], [θ], [ð] so these elements are easily singled out by the native speaker in any kind of phonetic context. These complexes do not correspond to the phonological models of the English language and cannot exist in the system of phonemes. The case with [tr], [dr] complexes is still more difficult.

By way of conclusion we could say that the two approaches have been adopted towards this phenomenon are as follows: the finding that there are eight affricates in English [t∫], [dж], [tr], [dr], [ts], [dz], [tð], [dθ] is consistent with articulatory and acoustic point of view, because in this respect the entities are indivisible. This is the way the British phoneticians see the situation. On the other hand, Russian phoneticians are consistent in looking at the phenomenon from the morphological and the phonological point of view which allows them to define [t∫], [dж] as monophonemic units and [tr], [dr], [ts], [dz], [tð], [dθ] as biphonemic complexes. However, this point of view reveals the possibility of ignoring the articulatory and acoustic indivisibility.

 

15. The system of vowel phonemes. Problems of diphthongs and vowel length

The following 20 vowel phonemes are distinguished in BBC English (RP): [i:, a:, o:, u:, з:, i, e, æ, σ, υ, л, ə; ei, ai, oi, аυ, eυ, υə, iə].

Principles of classification provide the basis for the establishment of the following distinctive oppositions:

1.   Stability of articulation

1.1. monophthongs vs. diphthongs

1.2. diphthongs vs. diphthongoids

2.   Position of the tongue

2.1. horizontal movement of the tongue

a) front vs. central

          b) back vs. central

          2.2. vertical movement of the tongue

close (high) vs. mid-open (mid) 
open (low) vs. mid-open (mid) 
3.  Position of the lips rounded vs. unrounded don — darn, pot - part

The English diphthongs are, like the affricates, the object of a sharp phonological controversy, whose essence is the same as in the case of affricates are the English diphthongs biphonemic sound complexes or composite monophonemic entities?

Diphthongs are defined differently by different authors. One definition is based on the ability of a vowel to form a syllable. Since in a diphthong only one element serves as a syllabic nucleus, a diphthong is a single sound. Another definition of a diphthong as a single sound is based on the instability of the second element. The 3d group of scientists defines a diphthong from the accentual point of view: since only one element is accented and the other is unaccented, a diphthong is a single sound.

D. Jones defines diphthongs as unisyllabic gliding sounds in the articulation of which the organs of speech start from one position and then glide to another position.

N.S. Trubetzkoy states that a diphthong should be (a) unisyllabic, that is the parts of a diphthong cannot belong to two syllables; (b) monophonemic with gliding articulation; (c) its length should not exceed the length of a single phoneme.

In accordance with the principle of structural simplicity and economy American descriptivists liquidated the diphthongs in English as unit phonemes.

The same phonological criteria may be used for justifying the monophonemic treatment of the English diphthongs as those applicable to the English affricates. They are the criteria of articulatory, morphophonological (and, in the case of diphthongs, also syllabic) indivisibility, commutability and duration. Applied to the English diphthongs, all these criteria support the view of their monophonemic status.

Problem of length. There are long vowel phonemes in English and short. However, the length of the vowels is not the only distinctive feature of minimal pairs like Pete -pit, beet - bit, etc. In other words the difference between i: i. u: - υ is not only quantitative but also qualitative, which is conditioned by different positions of the bulk of the tongue. For example, in words bead- bid not only the length of the vowels is different but in the [i:] articulation the bulk of the tongue occupies more front and high position then in the articulation of [i].

Qualitative difference is the main relevant feature that serves to differentiate long and short vowel phonemes because quantitative characteristics of long vowels depend on the position they occupy in a word:

(a) they are the longest in the terminal position: bee, bar, her;

(b) they are shorter before voiced consonants: bead, hard, cord;

(c) they are the shortest before voiceless consonants: beet, cart.

 
16. The notion of alternation and its types 

The sound variations in words, their derivatives and grammatical form words, are known as sound alternations. For example: the dark [l] in spell alternate with the clear [l] in spelling; combine (n) [‘kσmbain], combine [kəm’bain] where [n] in the stressed syllable of the noun alternates with the neutral sound. It is perfectly obvious   that    sound    alternations   of   this   type   are    caused    by    assimilation, accommodation   and   reduction   in   speech.   To approach   the   matter from the phonological viewpoint, it is important to differentiate phonemic and allophone alternations. Some sound alternations are traced to the phonemic changes in earlier periods of the language development and are known as   historical.   Historical alternations mark both vowels and consonants, though the alternating sounds are not affected by the phonemic position or context. The sounds changes, which occurred in the process of historical development of the language, are reflected in present-day English as alternations of phonemes   differentiating words, their derivatives and grammatical forms. The following list of examples presents the types of alternations:

1. Vowel alternations.

1.1 Distinction of irregular verbal forms [i:-e-e] mean - meant - meant; [i-æ-A] sing - sang - sung; [i-ei-i] give - gave - given;

1.2 Distinction of causal verbal forms: [i-e] sit - set; [ai-ei] rise - raise; [o - e] fall-fell

1.3 Distinction of parts of speech in etymologically correlated words [a: - æ] class - classify, [o: - e] long - length; [ei - æ] nation - national

2. Consonants alternations  

2.1 Distinction of irregular verbal forms [d - t] send - sent

2.2 distinction of parts of speech [s - z] advice - advise; [k - t∫] speak - speech;

3. Vowel and consonant alternations [i - ai] + [v - f] live - life; [a: - ae] + [θ - ð] bath - bathe. 
17. Contextual alternations in English

Alternations are also widely spread on the synchronic level in the present-day English and are known as contextual. In connection with contextual sound alternations there arises a problem of phonemic identification of alternated sounds. The study of the relationship between phonemes and morphemes is called morphophonemics. The interrelation of phonology and morphology is also known as morphophonology оr mоrрhоnоlogy which is actually the phonology of morphemes. Morphonology studies the way in which sounds can alternate in different realizations of one and the same morpheme.

We are interested in the sound in its weak position. Scholars of different trends are not unanimous in solving the problem.

The so-called morphological (Moscow phonological) school supports the theory of neutralization of phonemes. The concept of neutralization derives originally from the Prague School of phonology. Neutralization occurs when two or more closely related sounds, which are in contrast with each other in most positions, are found to be non-contrastive in certain other positions. That means that there are environment where the two sounds do not contrast with each other, even though they normally do. When this happens, the opposition between the two sounds is said to be neutralized. The loss of one or more distinctive feature(s) of a phoneme in the weak position is called phonemic neutralization.

The Moscow philologists claim that interchange of sounds manifests close connection between phonetics and morphology. Alternations are observed in one and the same morpheme and actualize the phonemic structure of the morpheme. Thus, phonemic content of the morpheme/is constant. It should be noted here that alternations of morphemes cannot be mistaken for the oppositions of minimal pairs in different stems of words. Lets us compare some examples: postman [ə] < [æ], sixpence [ə] < [e]. Thus, one and the same sound may belong to different phonemes

The supporters of the morphological trend define the phoneme as follows «Это функциональная единица, представленная рядом позиционно чередующихся звуков» (М.В. Панов). The notion of «фонетический ряд», suggested by R.I. Avanesov, demonstrates positionally determined realizations of the phoneme. Positionally alternating sounds are grouped into one phoneme whether they are similar or have common features (that is common allophones) with other phonemes.

The Russian preposition с + noun may have the following realizations: с Колей — [c], с Тимошей — [c'], с Галей — [з], с Димой — [з'], с Шypoй — [ш]. с Женей — [ж], с Щукарём — [ш'].

In the morphological conception the alternations of the phonemes are not analyzed apart from the morpheme, as form and content make dialectical unity. The phonetic system is not isolated from the grammatical and lexical structure of the language, and the unity between the form and the content cannot be destroyed.

Yet as an answer to the problem is not entirely satisfactory since ordinary speakers are in no doubt that the sound which occurs in a word like гриб is [п] not [б], and in English word speak [p^h] is nothing but   [p]. The perception of the listeners makes us find the morphological conception too discrepant and confiding.

The so-called Leningrad (Petersburg) school asserts that the phoneme is independent of the morpheme. The supporters of this conception claim that the phoneme cannot lose any of its distinctive features. In the line of words of the same root morpheme (гриб - грибы) the sound [п] is an allophone of the phoneme /п/ and the sound [б] manifests the phoneme /б/. Consequently, the consonants [6] and [п] do not lose any their distinctive features and represent different phonemes. It seems that according to this point of view the unity between the form and the content is destroyed, thus phonology is isolated from morphology.

According to N.S. Trubetzkoy, an archiphoneme is defined as a combination of distinctive features common to two phonemes. It consists of the shared features of two or more closely related phonemes but excludes the feature which distinguishes them. For example: archiphoneme [П] consists of the features: bilabial, plosive, but excludes voicing which separates them.

One of the disadvantages in extending the notion of an archiphoneme is that the Prague School phonologists limited neutralization to closely related phonemes. A neutralization can be said to occur only if there is uncertainty about the identity of the sound in the position of neutralization. Before two phonemes can be neutralized, they must have common qualities which do not occur in other phonemes. Thus [p], [b] can neutralize because they are the only labial plosives in the language, they share these two features, but no other sounds share them. However, [n] and [ŋ] cannot neutralize, so any neutralization of nasals must involve all the three of them - [n], [ŋ], [m].

18. Modifications of sounds in English

Sounds in actual speech are seldom pronounced by themselves. To pronounce a word consisting of more than one sound, it is necessary to join the sounds together in the proper way. There exist several types of junction, some of which are common to all or many languages, while others are characteristic of individual languages. In order to master these specific types of junction it is necessary to understand the mechanism of joining sounds together. This mechanism can only be understood after analyzing the stages in the articulation of a speech-sound pronounced in isolation.

Every speech-sound pronounced in isolation has three stages of articulation. They are (1) the on-glide, or the initial stage, (2) the retention-stage, or the medial stage, and (3) the off-glide (release), or the final stage.

The on-glide, or the beginning of a sound, is the stage during which the organs of speech move away from a neutral position to lake up the position necessary for the pronunciation of a consonant or a vowel. The on-glide produces no audible sound.  The retention-stage or the middle of a sound is the stage during which the organs of speech are kept for some time either in the same position necessary to pronounce the sound (in the case of non-complex sounds) or move from one position to another (within complex sounds, such as diphthongoids, diphthongs and affricates). For the retention-stage of a stop consonant the term stop-stage may also be used. The off-glide, or the end of a sound, is the stage during which the organs of speech move away to a neutral position. The off-glide of most sounds is not audible, the exception being plosives whose off-glide produces the sound of plosion before a vowel and in a word-final position before a pause.

In English there are two principal ways of linking two adjacent speech sounds: I. Merging of stages. II. Interpenetration of stages. The type of junction depends on the nature of the sounds that are joined together. As all English sounds come under the classification of consonants and vowels we may speak of joining:

(a)  a consonant to a following vowel (C + V), as in the word [mi:] me;

(b)  a vowel to a following consonant (V + C), as in the word [σn] on;

(c)  two consonants (C + C), as in the word [bləυ] blow:

(d)  two vowels (V + V), as in the word [riæləti] reality.

Merging of stages, as compared with interpenetration of stages, is a simpler and looser way of joining sounds together. It usually takes place if two adjacent sounds of a different nature are joined together. In this case the end of the preceding sound penetrates into the beginning of the following sound. In other words, the end of the first sound and the beginning of the second are articulated almost simultaneously. Interpenetration of stages usually takes place when consonants of a similar or identical nature are joined. In this case the end of the first sound penetrates not only into the beginning but also into the middle part of the second sound, as in [ækt] act, [begd] begged.

The modifications are observed both within words and word boundaries. There are the following types of modification: assimilation, accommodation, reduction, elision, and inserting. The adaptive modification of a consonant by a neighbouring consonant in a speech chain is assimilation. Accommodation is used to denote the interchanges of VC or CV types. Reduction is actually qualitative or quantitative weakening of vowels in unstressed positions. Elision is a complete loss of sounds, both vowels and consonants. Inserting is a process of sound addition.

MODIFICATIONS OF CONSONANTS

 

1.   Assimilation

1.1. Place of articulation

•    t, d > dental before [ð, θ]: eighth, at the, said that

•    t, d > post-alveolar before [r]: tree, true, dream, the third room

•    s, z > post-alveolar before [∫]: this shop, does she

•    t, d > affricates before [j]: graduate, could you

•     m > labio-dental before [f]: symphony

•      n > dental before [θ]: seventh

•      n > velar before [k]: thank

1.2. Manner of articulation

•    loss of plosion: glad to see you, great trouble

•    nasal plosion: sudden, at night, let me see

•    lateral plosion: settle, at last    

1.3. Work of the vocal cords

•    voiced > voiceless: newspaper, gooseberry (and in grammatical …)

      has, is, does > [s]; of, have > [f]

Notice: In English typical assimilation is voiced > voiceless; voiceless > voiced is not typical.

1.4. Degree of noise

•    sonorants > are partially devoiced after [p, t, k, s]

2. Accommodation

2.1. Lip position

•    consonant + back vowel: pool, rude, who (rounded)

•    consonant + front vowel: tea, sit, keep (spread)

3. Elision

3.1. Loss of [h] in personal and possessive pronouns and the forms of the auxiliary verb have.

3.2. [l] lends to be lost when preceded by [o:]: always, already, all right

3.3. In cluster of consonants: next day, just one. mashed potatoes

4. Inserting of sounds

4.1. Linking [r] (potential pronunciation of [r]): car owner

4.2. Intrusive [r]: [r] is pronounced where no r is seen in the spelling china and glass: it is not recommended to foreign learners.

 

 

 

 

MODIFICATION OF VOWELS

1.   Reduction

1.1.     Quantitative

1.2.     Qualitative

2.   Accommodation

2.2 Positional length of vowels: knee - need - neat

2.3.   Nasalization of vowels: preceded or followed by [n, m]: never, then, men 

 
19. Theories on syllable formal ion and division.

Speech can be broken into minimal pronounceable units into which sounds show a tendency to cluster or group. These smallest phonetic groups arc generally given the name of syllables. Being the smallest pronounceable units, syllables form morphemes, words and phrases. Each of these units is characterized by a certain syllabic structure. Thus a meaningful language unit phonetically may be considered from the point of view of syllable formation and syllable division.

The syllable is a complicated phenomenon and like a phoneme it can be studied on four levels - articulatory, acoustic, auditory and functional. The complexity of the phenomenon gave rise to many theories.

We could start with the so-called expiratory (chest pulse or pressure) theory by R.H. Stetson. This theory is based on the assumption that expiration in speech is a pulsating process and each syllable should correspond to a single expiration. So the number of syllables in an utterance is determined by the number of expirations made in the production of the utterance. This theory was strongly criticized by Russian and foreign linguists. G.P. Torsuyev, for example, wrote that in a phrase a number of words and consequently a number of syllables can be pronounced with a single expiration. This fact makes the validity of the theory doubtful.

Another theory of syllable put forward by O. Jespersen is generally called the sonority theory. According to O. Jespersen, each sound is characterized by a certain degree of sonority which is understood us acoustic property of a sound that determines its perceptibility. According to this sound property a ranking of speech sounds could be established: <the least sonorous>  voiceless plosives à voiced fricatives àvoiced plosives à  voiced fricatives à sonorants à close vowels àopen vowels <the most sonorous>. In the word plant for example   we may use the following wave of sonority: [pla:nt]. According to V.A. Vasssilyev the most serious drawback of this theory is that it fails to explain the actual mechanism of syllable formation and syllable division. Besides, the concept of sonority is not very clearly defined.

Further experimental work aimed to description of the syllable resulted in lot of other theories. However the question of articulatory mechanism of syllable in a still an open question in phonetics. We might suppose that this mechanism is similar in all languages and could be regarded as phonetic universal.

In Russian linguistics there has been adopted the theory of syllable by LV Shcherba. It is called the theory of muscular tension. In most languages there is the syllabic phoneme in the centre of the syllable which is usually a vowel phoneme or, in some languages, a sonorant. The phonemes preceding or following the syllabic peak are called marginal. The tense of articulation increases within the range of prevocalic consonants and then decreases within the range of postvocalic consonants.