5. Types of transcription

1. broad or phonological

2. narrow or phonetic

1. Provides one symbol for one phoneme. That is no matter how many variants of a sound there exist, they are all denoted by the same symbol. The following symbols were introduced by a very famous phonetician D. Jones:

i:–i

ɔ:– ɔ

u:–u

ə:– ə

We see that the symbols are the same in 2 columns, they differ only in length.

Vassiliev introduced a different type. He added 4 symbols:

ɪ,ɒ,ʊ,ɜ

His transcription is considered to be a powerful vision aid. It is appreciated by British phoneticians. Sounds i:–I, ɔ:– ɔ, u:–u, ə:– ə are different not only in length but also in quality, and different quality should be associated with different symbols. From this point of view Vassiliev’s transcription is more adequate. The leading phonetician Gimson followed Vassiliev’s transcription in his additions of the pronounce dictionary.

2. it gives a special symbol for every allophone or variant of the same phoneme: l-ł; p-ph

broad transcription is used for teaching, narrow for research

Lecture 2

The Phoneme Theory

1. the phoneme and its definition

2. aspects of the phoneme

3. types of mistakes

4. the phoneme theory at home and abroad

5. methods of phonological investigations

6. morphonology

1. the phoneme and its definition

Sounds were the 1^st phonetic elements that attracted the attention of scientists and thus the 1^st phonological theory was formulated

When linguists started analyzing sounds they found out that practically and innumerable number of sounds can be reduced to a limited number that is the idea of “phoneme” came to existence.

The term “phoneme” was coined by N. V. Kaushevski, a talented pupil of the famous Russian scholar I.A. Baudowind de Courtenay. There is no definition of the phoneme which is accepted by everybody. The definition which is accepted is a working definition by Vassiliev.

“the phoneme is the smallest further indivisible language unit that exists in the speech of all members of a given language community as such speech sounds which are capable of differentiating one word from another or one grammatical form of the word from another grammatical form of the same word”.

Two people speaking the same language and pronouncing sounds exactly alike could hardly be found. However this diversity never becomes too noticeable to an observer.

2. aspects of the phoneme

1. material

2. abstract

3. functional

The phoneme is a real objective material. It exists in the speech of all people belonging to the same community in the form of speech sounds.

Speech sounds can be called allophones. They are speech sounds which constitute this or that phoneme. They are actually pronounced speech sounds. Allophones of the same phoneme must meet the following requirements:

1. though they possess some similar articulatory features, they differ from one another up to a certain degree

2. Allophones of the same phoneme are never used in the same phonetic context. Or else they are incapable of differentiating the meaning

They cannot be opposed to one another. An allophone which does not show any considerable difference in the chain of speech is called principle. We come across with principle allophone in isolation where it is not surrounded by other sounds.

The allophones which differ from each other in various phonetic contexts are called secondary (subsidiary)

There are certain features inside a phoneme. Some features are important, some not. The features which are very important are called relevant or distinctive. The features which are less important are called irrelevant

[t] in isolation is plosive (взрывной)

Alveolar

Fortis (voiceless)

Aspirated

Forlingual

Apical

Occlusive

Allophones of this phoneme:

1. principal [tɔ:]

does not differ from the isolated

2. subsidiary

[ti:] – Slightly palatalized

[let ðəm] – Dental

[traɪ,tri:] – Post-alveolar

[nɒt kwaɪt] – No plosion

[nɒt lɪtl] – Lateral plosion

[steɪ] – Not aspirated

[twaɪs] – Labialized

What characteristic features are common to all these allophones?

1. voiceless

2. occlusive

3. Forlingual

This is the bundle of distinctive features

We should begin our teaching with principle allophones

The definition of the “phoneme” says that it is a minimal abstract linguistic unit. Language is an abstraction, speech is reality. If we proceed from this statement we may say that the phoneme as a language unit is an abstraction from speech sounds (its allophones) while the speech sounds is reality. Thus the phoneme is materialized in its allophones.

The process of abstraction.

Native speaker subconsciously does not notice the difference between the allophone of the same phoneme. They abstract themselves from this difference; it does not affect the meaning. It is not capable of differentiating the meaning. But this thing concerns not all articulatory features of the phoneme.

Changes of essential features:

1. forelingual – backlingual [tɔ:n-kɔ:n] the meaning changes

2. Fortis – lenis [tɔ:n-dɔ:n]

3. Occlusive – constrictive [ti:-si:]

The bundle of these features is called the invariant of the phoneme

The relationship between the phoneme and its allophone is the relation between what is abstract and general and what is concrete or specific. Like a house which cannot exist in general outside real houses, the phoneme does not exist in general outside pronounced and hear speech sound

Functional aspect is reflected in the definition. It means that the phoneme is apposable to other phonemes of the same language. To distinguish the meaning of the morphemes, words and sentences. Phonemes when opposed to each other in the same phonetic context are capable of differentiating the meaning.

The main linguistic function of the phoneme is to distinguish the meaning:

1. morphemes [sli:pǝ-sli:pɪ]

2. words [peɪ-beɪ]

3. sentence []

the phoneme performs its distinctive functions through the opposition of the articulatory feature which constitute the invariant. This fact cannot be changed without the affecting the meaning. That is why they relevant_______________________________________ cannot differentiate the meaning are indistinctive.

How can we prove that the phoneme can differentiate the meaning?

First we take the sound, and then change some articular features. If the meaning is changed it means that the opposed sounds are different phonemes. The opposition where the phoneme is opposed to some other phoneme in the same phonetic context is called phonological (distinctive). Let’s prove that “Fortis-lenis” is relevant (важный, значимый)

[hɜ:d — hɜ:t] this is a phonological opposition (the meaning is different, the features are relevant)

3. types of mistakes

There are two types of mistakes: phonetic and phonological. It is very important to observe the difference between them. If we change the relevant feature, the mistake is called phonological. Here we substitute (заменяем) an allophone of one phoneme by an allophone of a different phoneme:

[θri: — tri:] the place of articulation is different

[θ] - interdental

[t] - alveolar

The manner of noise production:

[θ] - fricative

[t] - occlusive

If the speaker substitutes an allophone of some phoneme by another allophone, the mistake is called phonetic

[let◡ðǝm] the sound “t” is alveolar or dental

[∫i:i:p] – Over lengthened [i:]

4. the Phoneme Theory at Home and Abroad

The number of definitions of the phoneme is numerous. Not all of them proceed from (исходят) the fact that the phoneme has 3 aspects. The definitions differ according to the aspect which is either exaggerated or ignored. Some scholars take into consideration only the abstract aspect, others stick only to its materiality, and the third group exaggerates the abstract aspect of the phoneme. This conception was originated by I. A. Baudowind de Courtenay in the 70s of the 19^th century.

At that time psychology was in fashion. Naturally most of humanitarian disciplines were influenced by psychology. And I. A. Baudowind de Courtenay had a conception of the phoneme which was not an exception. It was a psychological conception. He underestimated (недооценивать, преуменьшать) the material nature of the phoneme and carried to the extreme its abstract nature. According to this conception a phoneme does not exist objectively (реально). He used to say that phonemes exist only in the mind of the speaker. He said that the speech sounds were fictitious (воображаемые, выдуманные) units, inventions of scholars.

Thus, according to this conception, actually pronounced speech sounds are imperfect (несовершенны) to realization of ideal psychical images (психологические эквиваленты). His conception is idealistic because he proceeds from the phoneme existing in the mind but not in reality.

I. A. Baudowind de Courtenay’s concept was followed and developed by his immediate follower and one of his best students: L. V. Scherba (1880-1944) – the author of the book “Russian vowels in qualitative and quantitative aspects”. In this book he gave a definition of the phoneme up to a certain degree influenced by the definition of his teacher. But he emphasized the close link between the phoneme and the meaning. The term phoneme was quite new at that time. For some time he did not use it. He spoke of sound-types (звукотипы) up to the 30s until his book “A manual of French Phonetics” appeared. There he gave a truly materialistic conception of the phoneme.

Scherba describes the phoneme as “звуковые типы, способные в противопоставлении дифференцировать слова и их формы, каждая фонема определяется тем общим (инвариантом), что отличает ее от других фонем того же языка. Реально произносимые звуки являются тем частным, в котором реализуется общее (фонема) и называются оттенками, аллофонами фонемы”

This definition gives us a good ground for the conception of the phoneme shared our contemporary linguists. Among them are: V. A. Vasiliev, Бондарка, Торсуев, Соколова.

Most of the linguists look upon the phoneme as one of the basic linguistic units capable of distinguishing words. Thus all seem to agree that the phoneme is a functional unit. In Eastern Europe in the 20s of the last century the study of the phoneme was carried out within the scope of the Prague School of Linguists. This school was initiated by the outstanding linguist Vilem Mathesius (1882-1945) in 1926. the representatives of this school: Богумил Трынка, Богуслав Гавранеа, Йозеф Вахек, Р.О. Якобсон, Трубецкой…they were interested in how the phoneme fulfill its distinctive functions. They considered the phoneme to be a bundle of distinctive features. They were interested in singling out relevant features of the phoneme in structuring its invariant. Their concept brought them to divorcing phonology from phonetics. That is actually pronounced speech sounds from the phoneme. They believed that only phonology was a linguistic field of science. Phonetics belongs to physics and biology. Phonology studies the function of speech sound in the language.

In the USA the phoneme theory was originally spread in Ferdinand de Saussure’s interpretation. He gave the following definition: “фонема не есть что-то звучащее, но нечто бестелесное, образуемое не своей материальной субстанцией, а исключительно теми различиями, которые отделяют ее звуковой образ от других”

The characteristic feature of the American interpretation of the phoneme is the following: most American linguists deny the objective reality of the phoneme. The American linguist Twaddel broad up this view of the phoneme to an extreme. He defined the phoneme as an abstract unit, a scientific fiction. Leonard Bloomfield definition of the phoneme: “the phoneme is a bundle of distinctive features”.

All these views can be qualified as idealistic. All of them precede from the phoneme existing in the mind, not in reality.

The second group of the conceptions is characterized by the denial of the abstract aspect of the phoneme. The supporters of this conception regard the phoneme as a of articulatory similar sounds, as a mechanical sum of its allophones.

D. Jones belonged to the London School of Phonology. He acknowledged (признавать, допускать) that the term and the concept were introduced by Scherba in 1911. He regards the phoneme as a family of related sounds as a mere sum of sounds which are more or less alike. This concept is vulgarly-materialistic.

Let’s prove it. The concept of the house cannot be viewed as a mere total of all the houses existing in the world. What units all the houses is its function.

Neither can a phoneme be viewed as a mere sum of its allophones without any regard to its functional realization.

Not many scholars support this vulgarly-materialistic conception. Among them are Bloch and Trager.

5. methods of phonological investigations

the vast majority of our linguists accept the semantically-distributional method. The aim of any phonological analysis is:

• to determine the distinctive difference between the sounds: to establish there relevant features

• to find the inventory of the phonemes of the language

the investigation in the phonological analysis can be performed in a way of phonological opposition.

This method is based on the phonological rule: the phonemes can distinguish meaning when opposed to one another.

It is also based on the assumption that allophones of the same phoneme never occur in the same phonetic context. The idea was formulated by Трубецкой «Phonology»

semantically-distributional method attaches great significance to the meaning. This method consists in substitution of a sound for another sound in order to find out how it affects the meaning.

The procedure is called the commutation (изменение, смена, замещение) test. This is the method of opposition. It is referred to as a method of commutation. The method consists in establishing minimal pairs of words. By a minimal pair we mean a pair of words which are differentiated by only one sound in the same position. The possible results of the commutation test are:

1. if the substitution (замена) leads to the change of meaning that is a different word or a different grammatical form appears, then the opposed sounds are the allophones of different phonemes

[pin—sin]

2. the meaning is the same. The words are phonetic synonyms. Then the sounds which are opposed are the allophones of the same phoneme.

[pin—pin]

3. when the meaningless word appears, here we can say nothing about the opposed sounds. There phonemic status is unclear

[pin—hin]

To establish the system of phoneme (the inventory of phonemes) it is necessary to establish the whole system of oppositions. Each phoneme should be opposed to all other phonemes in at least one position, one minimal pair. Thus phonemes of the language form a system of oppositions. These oppositions may be of 3 kinds

1. single

2. double

3. triple

1. when the sounds are alike but for one feature

[pen-ben] – fortis-lenis

2. two features are different

[pen-den] – fortis-lenis, bi-labial-forlingual

3. 3 features

[pen-ðen] – bilabial – Forlingual, occlusive – constrictive, fortis-lenis

It is the single opposition that this or that feature is relevant.

Drawbacks: 1. not all the phoneme can be opposed [h] is never used at the end, [носовой n] is never used in the beginning

The other method is called the substitutional, or formally distributional method, as the term suggests, it implied a substitution procedure: we take a word, make a substitution and see what will happen. This method was employed by American descriptivist when he the language of the Indians in America. They supposed the meaning could not always be taken into consideration, they gave the following example: ШКАФ-ШКАП – the sounds are different but the meaning is the same.

The research workers relied in the response. This method is accused as being non-semantic. But the accusations are not well grounded because in the example the reference to meaning is made, though indirectly. The researches made reference to the meaning though the important, that is indirectly. They have the right to ask the informant of the use of the word, if it is the same or not, but not the meaning of the word.

This is an application to meaning in its ordinary scene.

The method of substitution cannot be applied in its pure form, with the help of these methods the words are analyzed only when they are in the strong position, when they are not neutralized.

6. Morphonology

Morphonology is a combination of grammar and phonetics, a branch of phonology. It studies the relationship between the phonemes and the morphemes. Up to now we have view a phoneme as a speech realization in the strong position.

The problem is now to concern the phonetic status of speech sounds when they are neutralized. It generally happens in the derivatives of grammatical forms of the same word.

The primary concern of morphemes is to establish the phonetic status of sounds when their distinctive features are neutralized [‘object – ob’ject] - [ɒ­ǝ], луг-лук [k]

When we analyze these examples, the question: weather the allophones are of the same or different phoneme?

There are two schools of thought that approach this problem in the opposite ways

1. Moscow school (morphological) петр савич кузнецов, а.а. реформатский, р.и. аванесов…

It came to the existence in the 20^th . they state that the phonemic contents are constant and cannot vary. In establishing the phonetic status of the sound they preceded from the theory of strong or weak position.

A strong position of a vowel is when it is stressed; of a consonant – before a vowel.

They think that the variation of the allophones of the same phoneme is not limited. One and the same sound can belong to different phonemes. The school is called morphological because they rely on the morphological criterion. [‘object-ob’ject] – morphemes are the same, allophones [ɒ­ǝ] are of the same phoneme, лук- луга – morphemes are different, allophones belong to different phonemes.

2. the Leningrad school (scherba’s school) applied in practice scherba’s ideas: л.р зиндер, м.и. матусевич, л.в. бондаренко, в.а. васильев.

The status which is proved: the phonetic context is not constant. One and the same sound cannot belong to different phonemes. Difference between the allophones is limited.

They try to solve phonetic and phonological problems not referring to other language levels. They treat allophone or a neutral sound as allophones of different phonemes: [ɒ­ǝ] – different, лук-луг – the same

Pro. And cons.

1. Moscow: + 1. phonemic changes are not analyzed apart from the morpheme . the form and the meaning make a dialectical unity

+ 2. it is natural that all of the same phoneme sound different [dog - laid], in first case – [d] is voiced, in the second – partially devoiced

• 1. sometimes it is impossible to find a strong position for the sound: корова, корзина, собака [decorate]

• 2. the difference between the allophones of the same phoneme appears to be too strong [news - newspaper] [z] and [s] are different to view them as the allophones of the came phoneme

2. Leningrad

• 1. it divorced the meaning and the form, they suppose that the phoneme is independent of the morpheme

• 2. difficult to establish the limits within which allophones of the same phoneme can differ: soft and hard [l] in English belong to the same phoneme, in Russian to the different (let-lot/will you – will you’; ел-ель the articulation is the same the meaning is different)

• If we do not consider the morphological principles we can fail in establishing the phonetic contents of the word.

+ its seeming simplicity

Lecture № 3

Organs of speech. Articulatory phonetics.

Articulatory phonetics – one of the oldest and the most developed so far branches of phonetics. It is of primary concern for teachers of foreign languages.

articulatory findings are very important in teaching pronunciation. It is concerned with the production of speech or with the principal aspect of speech. It studies speech sounds from the point of view of their articulation and in connection with the organs of speech by which they are produced.

Articulatory investigations of speech sounds are made on the basis of good knowledge physiology. That is the structure of the voice and sound producting mechanisms.

Human speech is produced and controlled by the brain. The brain sends its commands through the nervous system to muscles which are situated in the organs of speech. The brain on the one hand controls the production of speech sounds and on the other hand it perceives speech sounds coming from the external and interprets them as phonemes (segmental units)

The term “organs of speech” is not exact. it is preferable to refer to this organs as pronunciation organs or as articulation organs because these organs are not designed for the production of speech but for a certain physiological function. Though they are also used as organs of speech.

Necessity created these organs. Labor and speech were one of the most essential stimuli under the influence of which the brain of an ape gradually changes into that of a man.

The undeveloped larynx of an ape was slowly transformed by modulations to produce more developed modulations. Thus the organs of the mouth gradually learnt to pronounce one articulate sound after another.

Every language community in the course of its history developed what we call the articulatory basis that is the basis of articulation. Te term was introduced by our phoneticians. The term “articulatory basis” means a set of pronunciation sentences characterizing the work, position or movements of speech organs with a special reference to the members of language community.

The articulatory basis of a language community is made of pronunciation habits of its members. We have foreign accents because the articulatory basis is different.

Professor Pavlor the idea of linguistic activities of man in his history of the second signal system. For a long time it had been considered that speech is what differentiates the man and makes him superior to any other animal. The title: “Man is a talking animal”.

Bit this view is absolute as the latest experiments with chimpanzees showed that young chimpanzees could be taught the language of the deaf. They learnt it, used for communication with one another and with a man, they used the pattern by which the symbols were made, they orated their own symbols according to their pattern.

Vassiliev divided the organs of speech into 4 groups according to the sound producing function:

1. power mechanism

2. vibrator mechanism

3. resonator mechanism

4. obstructer mechanism

1. includes the lungs, the bronchi and the windpipe (дыхательное горло). Its function is to regulate the procedure of the air and produce the air stream. Responsible for the production of the force component

2. is used to produce voice or pitch or musical tone. Includes the larynx with the vocal cords on it. The process of producing voice is still not quite clear. Voice is the main component of intonation. It is believed that voice is produced in this way: if the vocal cords are brought together the air is concentrated under them. Then under the pressure of the air stream the vocal cords reopened and the air goes through them. Then they come together again. This periodical oscillation (колебание) of the vocal cords produces oscillation of the air stream. The voice is produced. These periodical oscillations are perceived by the air as voice. The height of the voice depends on the frequency of the vibrations of the vocal cords. The pitch is higher when the vocal cords vibrate frequently. Female vocal cords are thinner and vibrate more frequently.

3. responsible for the production of vowel sounds. Not only the vocal cords vibrate but each part as a whole body, each part vibrated separately, producing overtone (обертон). The function is to modify the overtones and to produce vowel sounds. The shape and the volume of the resonator may be different. Resonator is formed by the mouth cavity, the pharynx and the nasal cavity. For example, the sound [лягушка] – the sound is correct when we stretch the lips, move the tongue forward, put it law, drop the jaw. Only in this case the mouth cavity will have the exact volume.