The main trends in phoneme theory.

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 832.

Subsidiary allophones are variants of phonemes that appear under the influence of the neighboring phonemes with which they are in complementary distribution. They are subdivided into combinatory and positional.

Principle allophone is that variant of a phoneme which is considered to be free from the influence of the neighboring sounds.

At the same time there are quite predictable changes in the articulation of allophones that occur under the influence of the neighboring sounds in different phonetic situations. Such allophones are called subsidiary.

Positional allophonesappear in the process of speech and result from the influence of one phoneme upon another.

The examples below illustrate the articulatory modifications of the phoneme [d] in various phonetic contexts:

[d] is slightly palatalized before front vowels and the sonorant [j], e.g. deal, day, did you;

[d] is pronounced without any plosion before another stop, e.g. bedtime, bad pain, good dog;

[d] is pronounced with the nasal plosion before the nasal sonorants [n] and [m] ,

e.g. sudden, admit, could not, could meet;

the plosion is lateral before the lateral sonorant [l], e.g. middle, badly, bad light;

The alveolar plosion is particularly sensitive to the influence of the place of articulation of a following consonant. Thus followed by [r] the consonant [d] becomes post alveolar, e.g. dry, dream; followed by the interdental it becomes dental, e.g. breadth, lead the way, good thing. When [d] is followed by the labial [w] it becomes labialized, e.g. dweller.

In the initial position [d] is partially devoiced, e.g. dog, dream; in the intervocalic position or when followed by a sonorant it is fully voiced, e.g. order, leader, in the word-final position it is voiceless, e.g. road, old, raised.

These modifications of the phoneme [d] are quite sufficient to demonstrate the articulatory difference between its allophones, though the list of them could be easily extended.

Allophones are arranged into functionally similar groups, that is groups of sounds in which the members of each group are not opposed to one another, but are opposable to members of any other group to distinguish meanings in otherwise similar sequences. Consequently, allophones of the same phoneme never occur in similar phonetic contexts, they are entirely predictable according to the phonetic environment, and thus carry no useful information, that is they cannot differentiate meanings.

The articulatory features which form the invariants of the phonemes are called distinctive or relevant.To extract relevant feature of the phoneme we have to oppose it to some other phoneme in the same phonetic context. If the opposed sounds differ in one articulatory feature and this difference brings about changes in the meaning of the words the contrasting features are called relevant.

The articulatory features which do not serve to distinguish meaning are called non-distinctive, irrelevant or redundant.

Most linguists consider the phoneme as the basic linguistic unit. However, their views on it vary greatly. Different views reflecting the principle trends as for the phoneme fall into several classes:

a) the psychological or mentalistic view regards the phoneme as a mental image based upon the complex psychological perception of speech sound. According to this perception a phoneme is an ideal entity. This view was shared by Baudouin de Courteney, Sapir, Alf.Somerfelt, M.Tatham;

b) the physical viewwas originated by Daniel Joneswho regards the phoneme as a family of sounds and the members of which reveal pronounced phonetic similarity. This view is shared by the American linguists B.Bloch and J.Trager. This approach may be regarded vulgarly materialistic since it views the phoneme as a group of articulatory similar sounds without any regard to its functional and abstract aspects.

c) the functional viewtreats the phoneme as the minimal sound unit by which meanings are differentiated without much attention to the articulatory and acoustic characteristics of actually pronounced sounds. According to this conception the phoneme is a certain features of the articulatory factor and they are involved in the differentiation of the meaning. These features are called distinctive (relevant),because they alone help to differentiate words. But this theory neglects the so called non-distinctivefeatures of the phoneme such as aspiration, or the dark or clear variants of the phoneme (the articulatory features which do not serve to distinguish meaning are called irrelevant, redundant). The proponents of this theory are N.Trubetskoy, L.Bloomfield, R. Jakobson, M.Halle.A stronger form of the "functional" approach is advocated in the so called "abstract" view of the phoneme which regards the phonemes essentially independent of the acoustic and physiological properties associated with them, that is speech sounds. This view of the phoneme was pioneered by L.Hjelmslev and his associates in the Copenhagen Linguistic circle, H. J.Uldall nad K.Togby. This theory refuses abstract relations of the phoneme.

Questions for self-control:

1. In what ways can the term “sound” be interpreted in Phonetics?

2. What are the main trends in phoneme theory?

3. What is called a “principle allophone” ?

4. What are subsidiary allophones and what influences their subdivision?