2.2. The notion of phonological opposition

The outline of the problem discussed

1. The 4(3) aspects of speech sound.

2. System of phonemes.

3. Distinctive and redundant features.

4. The application of phonemic theory.

Speech sounds can be analyzed from the viewpoint of three aspects: 1)

acoustic, 2) physiological or articulatory, 3) functional (phonological).

Acoustic Aspect of Speech Sounds.

Acoustically, speech sound is a physical phenomenon produced by the

vibration of the vocal cords and perceived due to the vibration of the layers of air

which occur at the rate of 12 to 20 thousand times per second. This is the limit of

human hearing. Thus in order to produce a sound some physical body must be set

into vibration, or oscillatory motion, by the application of some external force – a

blow must be struck, or the pressure of air applied. When the vibration moves

forward, it compresses, or condenses the air.

Sounds may be periodical and non-periodical. If the vibrations of a physical

body are rhythmical, that is the same pattern of vibration is repeated at regular

intervals of time, the resultant sound waves as periodical. The auditory impression of

such periodical waves is a musical tone, or in speech – a speech-tone. If the

33

vibrations are not rhythmical, that is a vibratory pattern occurs at irregular intervals

of time, the resultant wave is non-periodical and is perceived as noise, in speech – a

speech-noise.

Sounds have a number of physical properties which all exist and manifest

themselves simultaneously; each of them can be singled out and separated from the

others only for purposes of analysis.

The 1st of the properties is frequency, which is the number of vibrations per

second. Sound waves may follow one another at different rate of frequency; therefore

the number of vibrations, or cycles, as they are called, per second (cps) varies greatly.

(The greater the frequency, the higher the pitch)

Dependent on the frequency of vibration is the length of the sound wave (its

duration), i.e. its length or quantity of time during which the same vibratory motion is

maintained. It is measured in milliseconds (msecs).

Wave length is inversely proportional to the frequency of vibration; the higher

the frequency, the shorter the wave length. One should bear in mind that the

frequency of sound depends on certain physical properties of the vibrator such as its

mass, length and tension.

The greater the mass of the vibrator, the shorter its vibration, and the lower the

pitch. Some people’s vocal cords are thicker and heavier than those of others and

their voices are lower than the voices of those with thinner, lighter vocal cords.

The longer the vibrator, the slower the vibrations, the lower the frequency and

the pitch. A man’s voice is lower than a woman’s partly because his vocal cords are

longer.

The 2nd physical property of a sound is intensity, changes in which are

perceived primarily as variations in the loudness of a sound. The intensity of a sound

is produced by the amplitude of vibrations, i.e. by the degree of the condensation of

air and therefore by the force of the pressure which the displaced air particles exert on

the ear-drum. Naturally, the greater the external force applied, the greater the

amplitude of vibration, the louder the sound.

The intensity and frequency of sounds are closely interdependent.

The analysis of a sound frequency and intensity at a definite period of time can

be presented graphically with the help of a sound spectograph. Acoustic

characteristics of speech sounds are represented by spectograms.

Definitions in classifications of speech sounds are considered to be more

precise than articulatory ones, they are practically inapplicable and useless in

language teaching because the acoustic features of speech sounds cannot be seen

directly or felt by the language teacher. Acoustic descriptions, however, can be

applied in the fields of technical acoustics. They are also of great theoretical value.

Articulatory and Physiological Aspect of Speech Sounds.

To analyze a speech sound physiologically and articulatory some data of the

articulatory mechanism and its work should be introduced.

Speech is impossible without the following four (4) mechanisms:

1) the power mechanism,

2) the vibrator mechanism,

3) the resonator mechanism,

34

4) the obstructor mechanism.

The power mechanism consists of the diaphragm, the lungs, the bronchi, the

windpipe (or trachea), the glottis, the larynx, the mouth cavity and the nasal cavity.

The vibrator mechanism (the voice producing mechanism) consists of the vocal

cords, they are in the larynx, or voice box. The vocal cords are 2 horizontal folds of

elastic tissue. They may be opened or closed (completely or incompletely). Voice

produced by the vocal cords vibration is modified by the shape and volume of the air

passage.

The resonator mechanism consists of the pharynx, the larynx, the mouth cavity

and the nasal cavity.

The obstructor mechanism consists of the tongue, the lips, the teeth, the soft

palate with the uvula, the hard palate, the alveolar ridge.

It should be borne in mind that the 4 mechanisms work simultaneously and that

each sound is the result of the simultaneous work of all of them.

When the air from the lungs gets into the larynx, it makes the vocal cords

vibrate and produce the sounds of noise, i.e. voiced consonants and vowels. The air

may pass through the larynx when the vocal cords do not vibrate and are taken apart.

In this case voiceless consonants are produced. When, in the production of

consonants voice prevails over noise sonorants are produced. The auditory

impression of sonorants is that of neither noise nor voice, therefore some of them are

called semi-vowels [w, j, r].

Having passed through the vocal cords the air gets into the pharynx and then, if

the nasal cavity is closed, it gets into the mouth cavity. If the soft palate is lowered,

and the passage to the stream of air is closed, the air passes out through the nasal

cavity.

Articulatory differences between vowels, consonants and sonorants depend on

the 3 articulatory criteria. They are:

1) the presence or absence of an articulatory obstruction to the air stream in

the larynx (or in the supra-glottal cavities);

2) the concentrated or diffused character of muscular tension;

3) the force of exhalation.

On the basis of these criteria consonants may be defined as sounds in the

production of which a) there is an articulatory obstruction to the air stream; b)

muscular tension is consentrated in the place of obstruction; c) the exhaling force is

rather strong.

Vowels may be defined as sounds in the production of which a) there is no

articulatory obstruction to the air stream; b) muscular tension is diffused more or less

evenly through the supra-glottal part of the speech apparatus; c) the exhaling force is

rather weak.

Sonorants are sounds intermediate between noise consonants and vowels

because they have features common to both. There is an obstruction, but not narrow

enough to produce noise. Muscular tension is concentrated in the place of

obstruction, but the exhaling force is rather weak. English sonorants are: m, n, ., l, r,

w, j.

Functional (phonological) Aspects of Speech Sounds.

35

This aspect implies differentiation between the notion of speech sounds and

phonemes, as well as between the disciplines studying them – phonetics and

phonology. It also implies the notion of allophones, their types, the notion of

phonological oppositions, etc.

The founder of the phoneme theory is I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay (1845 –

1929). He did a lot in the study of phonetic alterations and the study of phonemic

alternations and was the 1st linguist who demanded accurate distinction between

synchronic and diachronic approaches to phonemic investigation.

Baudouin de Courtenay’s views were later developed and perfected by his

disciple L.V. Shcherba, who separated phonetics from phonology and stated that

sounds are not only articulatory and acoustic units but that they also possess

functional properties. L.V. Shcherba stated that in actual speech we utter a much

greater variety of sounds than we are aware of; in every language these sounds are

united in a comparatively small number of sounds types which are capable of

distinguishing the meaning and the form of words; that is they serve the purpose of

social intercourse.

As was mentioned in our first lecture there are different opinions on the nature

of the phoneme and its definition among linguists. Baudouin de Courtenay viewed

phonemes as fictitious units and considered them to be only perceptions. Ferdinand

de Sausure (France) viewed phonemes as the sum of acoustic impressions and

articulatory movements. N.S. Trubetskoy (the Prague Linguistic School) defined the

phoneme as a unity of phonologically relevant features. He wrote that when the

phoneme is neutralized it becomes an “archi-phoneme” or a unity of relevant features

common to 2 phonemes, thus it is an abstraction. O. Jespersen, head of London

school of phonology, defined phonemes as a family of sounds. The phoneme theory

in America was elaborated by the so-called structuralists: L. Bloomfield, E. Sapir and

others who defined the phoneme as a minimum unit of distinctive sound features, an

“abstractional fiction”. The representatives of Copenhagen view all linguistic

problems as “algebraic” (O. Jacobson).

In spite of the lack of consistency all of them did a lot for the development of

the phoneme theory.

L.V. Shcherba took the positive ideas from his teacher B. de Courtenay and

was the 1st to define the phoneme as a real independent distinctive unit which

manifests itself in the form of its allophones.

Shcherba’s theory was further developed by his disciples. Prof. V.A. Vassilyev

in his works states the 3 basic functions of a phoneme: 1) constitutive because

sounds constitute words, phrases and sentences, 2) distinctive because sounds help to

distinguish between them, 3) recognitive, which means that its allophones help to

recognize words and consequently phrases and sentences.

The phoneme is functional because it functions to make one word or its

grammatical form distinct from the other; it functions because it constitutes words

and because due to the fact that it really functions we recognize words (even though

they are not pronounced properly).

Since each phoneme is a member of the system it is opposed in this system to

every other phoneme by one or more articulatory / acoustic features, thus, for

36

instance, labial / lingual, voiced / voiceless, sonorous / noise, occlusive / constrictive,

etc.

Each phoneme manifests itself in a certain pattern of distribution. The pattern

of distribution may be different. The simplest is free variation, that is the variation of

one and the same phoneme pronounced by the same or different speakers, e.g. [k]

with different degree of aspiration which doesn’t affect the differentiatory properties

of this phoneme.

Another pattern of phoneme environment is complementary distribution

when one and the same phoneme occurs in a definite set of contexts in which no

other phoneme occurs. In other words, if the same sound occurs in different

environments, it is supposed to be one phoneme which manifests itself in the form of

different allophones (variations complement each other to cover the whole

distribution of a phoneme).

Different phonemes can occur in identical context which is never the case with

allophones (мел, мёл, мял; pat, pet, pit).

Sounds are in contrastive distribution when we find them in contrasted pairs:

said – sad, pit – peat, bed – bad, take – cake. Here we can observe contexts which are

the same but for one sound phoneme.

The features by which phonemes are opposed are called the distinctive

features.

Apart from the distinctive features phonemes in their allophonic realization

possess redundant or concomitant features.

Correct allophones are just as important for the recognition of the words as

phonemic differences.

Redundant features are also important because potentially they are able of

performing the distinctive function. Thus, an English speaker will distinguish

between the 2 words – pence and pens, said in whisper though the difference of [s] –

[z] will be neutralized. What helps to keep the 2 words distinct is the different length

of the nasal sound before final [s]. In the word “pence” [n] is shorter than in “pens”.

The degree of length of nasal sounds being a redundant feature plays (in the whisper

situation) a distinctive role.

Category of redundancy is inherent in the language at all. It ensures its

functioning in difficult situations.

For purposes of analysis (but not in actual pronunciation) the phoneme is

further divisible into minimal distinctive features whose combination constitutes the

invariant of the phoneme present in all its allophones.

E.g. the English [p] phoneme is divisible into the following minimal distinctive

features each of which is opposed to the minimal distinctive features of other

phonemes: 1) the bilabial articulation of [p] vs. the forelingual articulation of [t] (cf.

[pen] – [ten]) and the backlingual articulation of [k] (cf. [pen] – [ken]), 2) the stop

articulation of [p] vs. the fricative articulation of [f] (cf. [pen] – [fen]), 3) voicelessfortis

articulation of [p] vs. voiced-lenis articulation of [b] (cf. [pen] – [ben] Ben).

Examples of non-distinctive (redundant, irrelevant) features: the aspiration of

[p, t, k] – this feature is non-distinctive because the aspirated and unaspirated variants

37

of the phonemes [p, t, k] never occur in the same phonetic contexts and thus cannot

perform the distinctive function.

Although the phoneme is divisible into minimal distinctive features, it is

defined as the smallest (i.e. further indivisible) language unit. There is no

contradiction here. The segmental phoneme is further indivisible into smaller

consecutive segments. This means that the phoneme exists in actual speech as whole

sounds. The minimal distinctive features into which a phoneme is divisible for

purposes of analysis are concurrent in a speech sound (a variant of some phoneme).

A phoneme can only perform its distinctive function if it is opposed to another

phoneme (or to no sound) in the same position. Such an opposition is called

distinctive, or phonological.

Phonemes (as terms of phonological opposition) are discovered by the method

of minimal pairs, or by distinctive oppositions. This method consists in finding as

many pairs of words as possible which differ in one phoneme. But such pairs can

only be found if the investigator knows that the members of a pair under

consideration are really different words or grammatical forms and not just 2 different

repetitions or variant pronunciations of the same word or form by the same speaker

(aspiration, different degree).

The procedure of finding minimal pairs by substitution of one sound for

another is called commutatation test (коммутационная проверка). If such

substitution results in the change of meaning, the commuted sounds are different. It

may result in 1) the pronunciation of a different word or form, 2) the pronunciation of

a meaningless sequence of sounds, 3) a different repetition or variant pronunciation

of the same word or form.

In the 1st case the contrasted sounds will be allophones of different phonemes

or, in other words, they will represent different phonemes, e.g. [bæk] (back) – [bæt]

(bat) – [bæg] (bag) – [bæd] (bad) – [bæn] (ban) – [bæ.] (bang).

In the 2nd case the phonemic status of the contrasted sounds will remain

uncertain until a phonological opposition is found for the sound which turns a

member of the minimal pair into a meaningful sequence of sounds, cf. [bæk] (back) –

[bæt] bat, but [tæk] (tack) – [tæp] (tap), [pæt] (pat) – [kæt] (cat).

In the 3d case the different sounds occurring in the same positions will be free

variants of the same phoneme, e.g. the exploded [k]-sound and the plosionless one

that may be pronounced in the word [bæk] (back), or the dark [l]and the clear [l] that

may be pronounced in such word as “field” [fild].

Those linguists who deny, ignore or underestimate the distinctive function of

the phoneme and define the latter as the sum of total of its mutually exclusive

allophones object to the use of the semantic method of phonetic analysis. They

maintain that it is possible, as D. Jones puts it, “to group the sounds of a language

into phonemes even without knowing the meaning of words”. It is maintained that it

is possible to establish the phonetic status of any sound of a given language

exclusively on the basis of the distribution of sounds in it. This method is known in

modern phonology as the purely distributional method of identifying the phonemes

of a language as items of its system.

38

Although the practical application of the purely distributional method is

theoretically feasible, its implementation in its pure form is faced with such

difficulties that it is actually a nonsense.

The first such difficulty is that of delimiting, i.e. singling out, words and their

grammatical forms in an absolutely unintelligible utterance consisting of 2 or more

words in normal speech in a continuum.

Without isolating words and their forms it is impossible to establish the

distribution of speech sounds, i.e. their occurrence in certain combinations and

positions in words and their forms.

But all that doesn’t mean that research with a view to finding formal indicators

of word and morpheme boundaries in various languages is of no theoretical

importance. Reliable acoustic data on such formal indicators are necessary not so

much for the identification of phonemes as for solving the problem of the machine

recognition of speech, i.e. for constructing cybernetic typewriters which will type

spoken words leaving spaces between them without which it is extremely difficult to

read texts.

Unlike the distributionalists, the founder of American descriptive linguistics, L.

Bloomfield considered it impossible to identify the phonemes of a language without

recourse to meaning in the ordinary sense of the word: “As long as we pay no

attention to meaning, we cannot decide whether 2 uttered forms are the same or

different. The study of significant speech sounds is phonology… It involves the

consideration of meanings”.

One of the most outstanding linguists R. Jacobson is of the same opinion:

“Each venture … to reduce language to its ultimate invariants by means of a mere

analysis of their distribution in the text and with no reference to their empiric

correlates, is condeMnEd to failure.

There are the following general phonological rules of identifying phonemes

without direct reference to the distribution of speech sounds.

One (the first) of such rules, having the character of a phonological axiom,

may be called the law of great phonemic dissimilarity. According to this law,

entirely or greatly different sounds, such as a vowel and a consonant or [m] and [s],

etc. cannot be allophones of the same phoneme. The English consonants [n] and [h]

are so different from each other that they cannot be classed together as allophones of

the same phoneme, although they are never mutually opposed because they always

occur in different positions and may, therefore, be considered, on the basis of their

distribution alone, to be allophones of the same phoneme: [n] occurs only at the end

of a word or a syllable, e.g. [bæg, bæni.] (bang, banging), whereas [h] occurs only at

the beginning of a word or a syllable, e.g. [hæv, biheiv] (have, behave).

The 2nd rule of phoneme identification without immediate distributional

evidence, although less axiomatic, may be called the law of conditioned allophonic

similarity.

According to this law, 2 more or less similar sounds, which are, at the same

time more or less different, are allophones of the same phoneme if the difference

between them is clearly due to the influence of purely external phonetic factors, such

as the neighboring sounds, stress, etc. and not to the speaker’s (usually unconscious)

39

need and, therefore, habit to produce this difference for distinctive purposes in spite

of the influence of the purely phonetic factors.

When no lexical or grammatical minimal pair can be found, the phonetic status

of the “suspicious” sound can be ascertained only on the basis of its occurrence in the

so-called sub-minimal pairs, i.e. pairs of words or grammatical forms whose

members differ from each other not in one sound, as a minimal pair does, but in 2 or

more sounds, e.g.

[м ъ к л сь и н ы] (макасины) [с ъ м л в а р] (самовар)

[м ъ г л зь и н ы] (магазины) [м ы л л в а р ] (мыловар)

LITERATURE

1. Антипова А.М. Система английской речевой интонации. – М.: Высш.шк.

1979.

2. Vassilyev V.A. English phonetics (A Theoretical Course.) – M.: Higher School

Publishing House, 1970.

3. Дубовский Ю.А. Анализ интонации устного текста и его составляющих. –

Минск: Высш.шк., 1978.

4. Leontyeva S.F. A Theoretical Course of English Phonetics. – M.: Высш.шк.,

1980.

5. Торсуев Г.П. Строение слога и аллофоны в английском языке (в

сопоставлении с русским) – М.: Наука, 1975.

6. Трахтеров А.Л. Практический курс фонетики английского языка. – М.:

Высш.шк., 1976.

7. Шахбагова Д.А. Фонетические особенности произносительных вариантов

английского языка. – М.: Высш.шк., 1982.