4. Main trends in phoneme theory.

Many linguists consider the phoneme as a basic element of a language. However, some of them use purely psychological approach to the phoneme while the others prefer the physical aspect of the phenomenon. So, the basic approaches were divided into 4 basic classes.

The mentalistic or psychological approach regards the phoneme as an ideal « a mental image » or as the target to which the speaker aims. According to this concept allophones of the phoneme change its materiality. This approach was developed bya well-known Russian linguist Buduenom де Куртуне, and something of the sort was taken Sapir.

A so-called functional approach presents the phoneme as the minimal sound unit of a language by means of which it is possible to distinguish the meanings, without a special consideration of actually pronounced sounds of speech. For representatives of this approach the basic characteristic of the phoneme is meaning differentiating.

More conventional form of the functional approach is concentrated in the abstract approach, where the phoneme is viewed as an independent unit from acoustic and physiological qualities associated with it, thus from speech sounds. This view on the phoneme was first mentioned in the works of Ельмслев, Тогби etc.

The physical approach to the phoneme is submitted by such linguists as Дэниэл Джоунз, Mark Jakovlevich Bloh, Трагер etc. representatives of this approach consider the phoneme as a "family" of the homogeneous sounds adequate to certain concrete circumstances, such as:

- The Various members of the "family" should have phonetic similarity

- No member of the family can occur in one context with other member of family.

This approach is purely materialistic as considers the phoneme only as a group of articulatory similar elements, without paying special attention to its functional and abstract aspects.

Lecture 3-4. The System of English phonemes. Modifications of phonemes in connected speech.

1. The system of English phonemes.

It is a common knowledge that every language has its own number of phonemes and different number of allophones representing them. So every language has its own system of phonemes. The systematic character of the sounds in every language is determined by the fact that every member of the system is determined by all the other members and does not exist in isolation, doesn’t function without them.

Passing to the main issue of the lecture I would like to remind you that in every phonetic system there are two main levels – segmental and suprasegmental and speech sounds are the units of the segmental level of the system. I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that traditionally all the scholars distinguish two major classes of sounds in every language – vowels and consonants. The distinction between them is basically based on auditory effect. Consonants are known to combine noise and voice, while vowels are the sounds that consist only of voice. O the articulatory level the difference lies in the work of organs of speech (formation of obstruction while pronouncing consonants and absence of the latter in the articulation of vowels)

Now it seems to be fair enough to consider every class of sounds separately. Let us begin with consonants.

English consonants.

On the articulatory level every consonantal sound may be determined by 2 main factors:

• the way it is articulated

• where it is produced (mouth or pharynx)

Surely, besides these main factors there are some other factors, in accordance with which a consonantal sound may be classified. They are:

• type of obstruction

• the work of vocal cords

• which cavity is used as a resonator (mouth or nasal) etc.

In order to work out a classification for such a complex unit as a sound of speech, it is necessary to specify, to find out those qualities of a sound that should be relevant to the phenomenon under consideration. So the attempts to classify the sounds should have theoretical basis. From the theoretical point of view the classification should be of linguistic character but from practical point of view it should be formed in such a way to be used in the process of teaching the language.

Anyway there are several ways or points of view on the question.

Viacheslav Alexandrovich Vasilyev (Torsuev and Trakhterov) are sure that primary importance should be given to the type of obstruction and manner of noise production. On this basis they distinguish two main groups of consonants:

• occlusive (in the production of which organs of speech from a complete obstruction) – p, b, t, d, k, g

• constrictive (in the articulation of them organs of speech form incomplete obstruction) – s, z, f, v, w, sh, ж’

Each of these 2 classes is subdivided into noise consonants and sonorants (taking into account what is prevailing in the articulation of them - noise or voice). Noise consonants in their turn are subdivided into plosives (or stops) and affricates. Sonorants are divided into medial and lateral. Everything mentioned above maybe shown in the following scheme.

Consonants
Occlusive		Constrictive
Noise consonants	Sonorants	Noise consonants	Sonorants
Plosives (stops)	Affricates	Medial	lateral

Another group of phoneticians (Sokolova, Tihonova, Gintovt and others) presents another point of view. They consider the degree of noise production to be one and the only principle according to which all the consonants should be classified. In accordance with this principal al the consonants should be subdivided into 2 main classes:

• noise consonants

• sonorants

The idea presented by this group may be shown in the following table:

Consonants
Noise consonants			Sonorants
Occlusive consonants	Constrictive consonants	Occlusive-constrictive	Occlusive	Constrictive

Lateral

Medial

The class of sonorants should be given special attention because the status of these sounds, their place in the system as always been a disputable question to all the phoneticians. Sonorants are the sounds that differ greatly from all other consonants. Why? The reason is simple.

In the articulation of these sounds organs of speech form an obstruction but it is not narrow enough, or to be more exact it is too wide to produce noise. The air escapes rather freely, that is why we hear not noise but tone. This fact or peculiarity makes sonorants sound more like vowels than consonants. Taking this into account some English phoneticians (Gimson, Jones, Glisson) determine sonorants, such as {r,j,w} as semi-vowels. On the acoustic level sonorants are opposed to consonants by their clear formant structure and rather high level of energy. On the other hand functional aspect of these sounds shows that they should be included into the system of consonants regarding their position in the syllable. Russian phoneticians came to an agreement that sonorants are consonants from articulatory and phonological point of view.

Now let us go back to our consonants.

Another principle of classification of the sounds is the place of articulation. According to this principle they differentiate:

• labial sounds – the sounds produced mainly by lips. Within them there can be founds subclasses – bilabial (both lips are active) – p,b and labio-dental (articulated by the upper teeth and lower lip) – f,v

• lingual (the active organ of speech is the tongue). Within this subgroup there may be distinguished: forelingual consonants (articulated by the front part of the tongue) - t, d, n, s, z, l; mediolingual consonants (by the blade of the tongue)- j and backlingual consonants (articulated by the back of the tongue) - k/g

• glottal, those that are articulated in the glottis. To them in English belongs the sound - h

Scheme 3.

According to the work of vocal cords all the phoneticians distinguish voiced and voiceless consonants. In relation to this, it should be mentioned that it have been known for a long time that the main distinction between such pairs of consonants as [p\b, t\d, k\g etc.] was based only on presence or absence of voice, i/e/ on the opposition voiced\voiceless. But many experiments proved that on the physiological and acoustic levels the difference between these consonants lies not only in the opposition voiced\voiceless but also in the intensity or energy used for the articulation of the sounds. This fact gave rise to the idea that all the consonants may be divided into fortis and lenis. All the voiceless consonants are lenis and all the voiced - are fortis.

Another characteristic which should be taken into account is the position of the soft palate. From this point of view all the consonants are divided into oral (soft palate is raised) and nasal (soft palate is lowered). In English there are only 3 consonants in the articulation of which the soft palate is lowered: [m, n, ŋ].

Another fact that is worth mentioning is that the absence or presence of nasalization doesn’t lead to any changes in the meaning of a word in English.

Speaking about English consonants one can’t but mention the issues of phonological character. One of the major points for discussion – is the problem of affricates – the question of their phonological status and of their amount, i.e. how many affricates do exist in English.

Here, all the phoneticians deal with two main questions:

- whether [t∫] and [dз] are monophonemic or biphonemic units as well as tr, dr, dz, etc.

- and if these combinations are monophonemic then how many combinations of this kind do exist in English.

I do believe that you won’t be surprised when you hear that there is no definite answer to this question and there are a lot of theories and points of view on the problem.

Linguists of the Soviet and now Russian school do believe that in the system of English consonants there exist two affricates [t∫] and [dз]. Daniel Jones, a famous English phonetician, defines 6 affricates: [t∫ - dз, ts – dz, tr - dr]. Gimson adds to the Jones group 2 more – [tǾ and d∂]. And strange as it may seem – Mark Yakovlevich Blokh and G.Trager deny the existence of affricates in English and consider them to be biphonemic units.

From the facts mentioned above arouses the question: how is it possible to determine whether the units are biphonemic or monophonemic. For this purpose you should follow the rules worked out by Trubetskoy:

The combination of two sounds is monophonemic if:

• its elements belong to 1 syllable

• it has articulatory unity, i.e. their elements are pronounced with one articulatory force

• its length is not longer than the length of its elements, taken together.

If we follow these rules, then it will become clear that [t∫] and [dз] are affricates and monophonemic, while tr and dr are biphonemic combinations, though Gimson mentions their articulatory unity.

Summing up all the facts mentioned above, we may come to an agreement that all the English consonants should be classified according to the following principles:

• according to the type of obstruction and manner of noise production;

• according to the active organs of speech and place of obstruction;

• according to the work of vocal cords and force of articulation;

• according to the position of the soft palate.