Functional Aspect of Speech Sounds

Lecture № 3
FUNCTIONAL ASPECT OF SPEECH SOUNDS

Questions to be discussed:
1. Phonology as the branch of linguistics.
2. The theory of phonemes.
3. Phonemes and phonemic variants.
4. Patterns of phoneme distribution.
5. Types of phonemic opposition.
6. The nature of the phoneme. Its definition and functions.
Phonetics studies sounds as articulatory and acoustic units. Phonology investigates

sounds as units which serve communicative purposes. Phonetics and phonology are closely
connected. The unit of phonetics is a speech sound; the unit of phonology is a phoneme.
Phonemes can be discovered by the method of minimal pairs. This method consists in
finding pairs of words which differ in one phoneme. For example, if we replace /b/ by /t/ in
the word ban we produce a new word tan. Tan-ban is a pair of words distinguished in
meaning by a single sound change. Two words of this kind are termed “minimal pair”. It is
possible to take this process further. We can also produce can – ran – man – fan – than – it is
a “minimal set”.
The phonemes of a language form the system of oppositions, in which any one phoneme
is usually opposed to any other phoneme in at least one position in at least one lexical or
grammatical minimal or sub-minimal pair. (If there is more than one distinctive feature in a
pair it is called sub-minimal).
The founder of the phoneme theory was I.A. Baudouin de Courteney, the Russian
scientist of Polish origin. His theory of phoneme was developed and perfected by L. Scherba
– the head of the Leningrad linguistic school, who 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 sound types, which are capable of distinguishing
the meaning and form of words, i.e. they serve the purpose of social intercommunication.
The actually pronounced speech sounds are variants, or allophones of phonemes.
Allophones are realized in concrete words. They have phonetic similarity, i.e. their acoustic
and articulatory features have much in common. At the same time they differ in some degree
and are incapable of differentiating words. For example, in speech we pronounce not the
sound type /t/, which is aspirated, alveolar, forelingual, apical, occlusive, plosive, voiceless-
fortis – according to the classificatory definition, but one of its variants,
e.g. labialized in the word twice,
dental in the word eighth,
post-alveolar in the word try,
exploded nasally in the word written,
exploded laterally in the word little,
2
pronounced without aspiration in the word stay.
The number of sound types, or phonemes, in each language is much smaller than the
number of sounds actually pronounced.
Comparative table of phonemes in different languages
Language Consonants Vowels Total
Ukrainian
English 24 20 44
French 17 15 32
German 22 18 40
Finnish 13 8 21
Phonemic variants, or allophones, are very important for language teaching because
they are pronounced in actual speech and though their mispronunciation does not always
influence the meaning of words; their misuse makes a person’s speech sound as foreign.
That variant of the phoneme which is described as the most representative and free from
the influence of the neighbouring phonemes is considered to be typical, or principal. The
variants used in actual speech are called subsidiary. Subsidiary allophones are used in
certain positions traditionally. For example, the English /l/ is realized in actual speech as a
positional allophone:
e.g. it is clear in the initial position, and dark in the terminal position,
compare: light, let – hill, mill.
Combinatory allophones appear in the process of speech and result from the influence
of one phoneme upon another.
To distinguish the sound types from their allophones in writing, two types of brackets
are used: slant-like for the phonemes proper, and square for their allophones.
Each phoneme manifests itself in a certain pattern of distribution. The simplest of them
is free variation, i.e. the variation of one and the same phoneme pronounced differently:
e.g. would you [ˈwƱdju:] – [ˈwƱʤu:],
mutual [ˈmju:tjƱƏl] – [ˈmju:ʧƱƏl],
could you [ˈkƱdju:] – [ˈkƱʤu:].
Complementary distribution is another pattern of phoneme environment, when one and
the same phoneme occurs in a definite set of contexts in which no other phoneme ever
occurs. The allophones of one and the same phoneme never occur in the same context,
variants of one phoneme are mutually exclusive. (When allophones of one phoneme do
occur in the same context without distinctive force, they are in free variation).
e.g. complementary distribution of /u:/: pool, youth, who, tube, rouge, duke. Each word
is given as an example of different /u:/environment, it cannot be observed in other words.
Contrastive distribution is one more pattern of phoneme environment,
e.g. contrastive distribution of /u:/: book – beak, book – back, book – bark.
3
Minimal distinctive features are discovered through oppositions. This method helps to
prove whether the phonemic difference is relevant or not, whether the opposition is single,
double or multiple:
e.g. /t/ and /d/ differ along the following lines:
/t/ /d/
voiceless fortis voiced lenis
Their other characteristic features are irrelevant, thus /t/ and /d/ have only one
distinctively relevant feature, thus the opposition is single.
We can prove that this opposition is really phonemic by the minimal pairs:
e.g. ten – den, time – dime, try – dry.
If there are two distinctively relevant features, the opposition is double,
e.g. /p/ and /d/ differ along the following lines:
/p/ /d/
voiceless fortis voiced lenis
labial, bilabial lingual, forelingual,
This opposition is really phonemic. It can be proved by the minimal pairs:
e.g. pie – die, pail – dale, pry – dry.
The opposition /b/ - /h/ is multiple because these phonemes differ along the following lines:
/b/ /h/
voiced lenis voiceless fortis
labial, bilabial pharyngal
occlusive constrictive
The phonemic nature of this opposition can be proved by minimal pairs:
e.g. be – he, bit – hit, bait – hate.
The method of minimal pairs helps to establish the inventory of phonemes; it is one of
the two main problems of phonological analysis.
There is one more big problem in phonology – theory of distinctive features. It was
originated by N. Trubetskoy and developed by such foreign scientists as R. Jackobson, C.
Fant, N. Chomsky, G. Monroe and others. Distinctive features are the main, basic elements
of variability in different languages. The communication of meaning and utterance is
effected due to these features.
There are different opinions on the nature of the phoneme and its definition.
1. I.A. Baudouin de Courteney defined the phoneme as a physical image of a sound. He
originated the “mentalist” view of the phoneme.
2. The abstractional conception of the phoneme was originated by Ferdinand de Saussure,
the famous Swiss linguist and the Danish linguist L. Hjelmslev. It was advocated by their
pupils in the Copenhagen circle. The “abstract” view regards the phoneme independent of
the phonetic properties.
4
3. N.S. Trubetskoy, L. Bloomfield, R. Jakobson viewed the phoneme as the minimal sound
units by which meanings may be differentiated. They stated that the features of the phoneme
involved in the differentiation of words are called distinctive. They can be found in
contrastive sets.
4. The physical view on the phoneme was originated by D. Jones. He defined the phoneme
as a “family” of sounds. The members of the family show phonetic similarity. No member of
the family can occur in the same phonetic context as any other member.
5. L.V. Scherba was the first to define the phoneme as a real, independent distinctive unit
which manifests itself in the form of allophones.
Prof. Vassilyev developed L. Scherba’s theory and presented a detailed definition of the
phoneme. He stated that a phoneme is a dialectical unity of three aspects: 1) material, real
and objective; 2) abstractional and generalized; 3) functional.
It serves to perform the following functions: a) constitutive; b) distinctive; c)
recognitive.
V. Vassilyev states that phoneme is material, real and objective because it really exists
in the material form of speech sounds, allophones. It is an objective reality, existing
independently from our will or intention. It is an abstraction because we make it abstract
from concrete realizations for classificatory purposes. It functions to make one word or its
grammatical form distinct from the other. It constitutes words and helps to recognize them.

Functional Aspect of Speech Sounds

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Functional Aspect of Speech Sounds

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Functional Aspect of Speech Sounds

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture № 3

FUNCTIONAL ASPECT OF SPEECH SOUNDS

Phonetics studies sounds as articulatory and acoustic units. Phonology investigates

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.