lin 232 basic phonology by kolawole adeniyi · 2019-04-10 · basic phonology by kolawole adeniyi ....

LIN 232

BASIC PHONOLOGY

By Kolawole ADENIYI

ABOUT THE COURSE

This course is the beginning of our building on the foundation laid by phonetics. Remember that

assertion by Pike 1947 that “phonetics gathers the raw material, phonology cooks it”. It is here that

we will begin the processing. You will be introduced to the concepts germane to phonological

analysis, their application and relationships between them. And of course, you will be guided

through the analyses of some data. But there is no cause to worry: phonology is as simple as saying

that “if I can see 2 people in front of me right now, then the 2 of them are here”. This is however

based on the condition that you know your phonetics.

COURSE OUTLINE

1) Definition of Phonology

2) Steps in Practical Phonological Analysis (premises)

3) Concepts: Contrast, Distinction, and Redundancy

4) The Phoneme

5) Phonemic Features

6) Suspicious Sounds (Pairs/Sets)

7) Allophones

8) Distribution (definitions and differences): Complementary Distribution (CD), Free Variation,

Parallel Distribution (PD), Neutralisation

9) Discovery Procedure

10) Phonetic and Phonemic Transcriptions

11) Phonological Processes 1

12) Phonological Processes 2: assimilation

13) Environments for Phonological Processes

14) Phonological Rules

15) Naturalness

LECTURE 1: Definition of Phonology

Introduction

In this lecture, we’ll define phonology, and see why structure is so important in achieving meaningful

communication.

Objectives

At the end of this lecture, you should be able to:

Define phonetics

Define phonology

Understand the link between phonetics and phonology

PRE-TEST

What is phonetics?

Phonology is the study of how speech sounds are used in natural language. Hyman 1975 views it as

the study of sound system of language. But whatever form the definition takes, the point remains

that phonology deals with the organisation of how speech sounds are organised in the process of

human communication, and what function each sound performs in the organisation. You will agree

with me that if a speaker of English brings [b], [i:], and [d]together, he will have *bi:d+ “bead”. But if

the same speaker mistakenly put *k+ where *d+ should be, you will have *bi:k+ “beak”, which is

another word entirely.

The point here, therefore, is that there is something about the choice of [d] when you want

to refer to the form of necklace called “bead”, and the choice of *k+ when you want to refer to a part

of the body of a fowl called “beak”. Only the two sounds vary in the two words; so what is it about

them that results in the changes in the meaning of the words? That is the sort of question phonology

answers.

So we will be looking at the sounds that each language uses in its inventory, the status of

each of the sounds, and the processes that each sound undergoes (and under what conditions they

undergo the changes).

Let me make a point clearer at this point: in phonetics, we studied the sounds in isolation;

we described them by means of their phonetic features. We even grouped the sounds into natural

classes (remember natural classes?). But in phonology, we will be looking at what happens to the

sounds when they are in the company of one another. Take a look at the Yaqui data below and tell

me whether there is any link at all between *t+ and *t∫+

teput “flea”

teput∫-im “fleas”

Again, take a look at the Yoruba data below and see whether there is a relationship between [n] and

[ɱ]

n l “is going”

ɱ f “is breaking”

What do you find?

To give you a clue, in Yaqui, *t+ changes to *t∫+ because there is now *-im] after it (it is no

longer at the end of the word!). In Yoruba, you will observe that the syllabic nasals share the same

place of articulation with the sounds following them. Meaning that a syllabic nasal sound in Yoruba

“borrows” the place of articulation of the sound directly following it! Phonology simply looks at such

effects as these, their patterns (and those patterns change from language to language), among

others.

Summary

Phonology takes up the study of speech sounds where phonetics stops. It goes on to throw light on

the structure of sounds, particularly when they are used in context. And because sounds are always

used in context, phonology becomes central to our study of language.

POST-TEST: Define phonology, in your own words

What is the difference between phonetics and phonology?

Recommended texts:

Hyman, L.M. 1975. Phonology Theory and Analysis. New-York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston

Collinge, N. E. Ed. 1999. An Encyclopedia of Language. London and New-York: Rutledge.

Pike, K.L. 1947. Phonemics: A technique for Reducing Languages to Writing. University of Michigan

Fudge, Eric. 2005. Language as Organised Sounds: Phonology. In: N. E. Collinge, An Encyclopaedia of

Language. London & New York: Rutledge, 17-37

Clark, J., C. Yallop and J. Fletcher. 2007. An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology. Oxford:

Blackwell

LECTURE 2: Steps in Practical Phonological Analysis (premises)

Introduction

Phonology is not done “just like that”. One thing must logically precede another for the expected

result to materialise. In this lecture, you’ll learn the stages involved in analysing data.

Objectives

In this lecture, you’ll learn:

The evergreen premises of phonological analysis given by pike (1947)

Why you still need the premises today

PRE-TEST:

Why must you wear cardigans during winter in Canada?

Give a phonetic explanation for the slight variations in the production of the same sounds by the

same speakers at different times

Now that we have defined phonology in the last unit, let us take a look at some of the factors that

ensure that the Phonologist achieves his aim.

There are many factors conditioning the behaviour of speech sounds in context. But for ease of

remembering, Pike 1947 summarises the factors under 4 categories, which he calls premises of

phonological analysis. In short, a premise means a proposition guiding the behaviour of speech

sounds in context. Let me put it differently, a premise, in our context, is a condition guiding the

behaviour of sounds in words (or larger units). These premises are crucial to your survival in

phonology because they derive from language universals, in the sense that they tend to be the same

in all languages. Here are the 4 premises:

I. Sounds tend to be modified by their environments (they tend to slur into one another, or

slur into silence). By way of illustration, this is like saying that if a leaf stays long on the

soap, it eventually becomes soap itself. Yet another illustration is that of a Nigerian who

after two Months in America begins to pronounce the word /betә/ as *beɾә] etc. The

point is that just as it happens to humans, it happens to speech sounds, such that when

/t/ occurs before /u:/ in /tu:/ English ‘two’, the /t/ itself being an unrounded sound,

acquires a level of roundedness from /u:/, and you actually have *tʷu:+. Now try it out

phonetically: you’ll see that the lip rounding begins as soon as you configure your

articulators for the production of /t/. Great! So, this is how sounds behave; only that it

depends on the environmental influence.

Now, remember that we have done assimilation in LIN 241 and 252. Here is the principle

that explains that concept right! We defined assimilation, then, as the process by which

sounds take on features from their environments. Take another look at the data on

Yoruba syllabic nasal we analysed in unit 1 of this course. Let me give you an example

that you should find funny: in certain languages, you will never find a voiced sound at

the end of a word! Even if the sound is voiced, it must become voiceless the moment is

occurs word-finally! Can you think of the reason for this? The next activity to a word-

final position is silence, and voicelessness is only a component of silence; so in such

languages, voicelessness is that feature that is in a word final position that transfers to

every word-final sound to ensure they are all voiceless/devoiced.

II. Sound systems have a tendency toward phonetic symmetry. Here is an illustration: there is a

gathering strictly for married men. If you find ten men and nine women, you should

expect to find one more woman somewhere around, if you search well. Why?

Something tells you that they should all be in pairs! That’s it! Phonetically speaking,

sounds that are similar behave in similar ways. For instance, if a particular language has

/p t k/ and then /b d/, you should expect to also find /g/ because this symmetry predicts

that plosives come in voiced/voiceless pairs in the language. This symmetry applies to

different categories of sounds.

III. Sounds tend to fluctuate. Come to think of it, if you produce the same sound two

consecutive times, do you think you can say exactly the same thing the two times?

Phonetically, you can’t, and this is the idea of sound fluctuation. Sometimes these

fluctuations are so pronounced that they become perceptible to the ear of foreigners

(native speakers are often unaware of it). At that point, the phonetics of that language

will record it, and it becomes a duty for the phonology to tell whether the fluctuation is

significant or not.

Consider the different productions of the sound /k/:

Velarised in ‘ankle’ *ӕnkˠl+

Labialised in ‘quick’ *kʷwik+

Palatalised in ‘key’ [kʲi:], etc., but it is still the same phoneme /k/

IV. Characteristic sequences of sounds exact structural pressure on the phonemic interpretation

of suspicious segments or suspicious sequence of segments. Structural influence on the

interpretation of sounds in line with the predominant syllable structure or the word or

morpheme structures in any particular language. This is more serious with sounds of

unstable qualities (or which are phonetically complex) e.g. semivowels, affricates, long

vowels etc.

Consider when a language has a syllable structure that forbids clusters of any kind, and

yet in your transcription, you feel you heard something like *[pai]. The prevailing syllable

structure tells you that the last sound should not be a vowel, because it breaks the rule

that forbids cluster by resulting in a vowel cluster. [i] is therefore a sound of

indeterminate quality. But the syllable structure suggests that it is actually a consonant

[y] which is a semi-vowel.

This rule many times result in glide formation in languages. Take a look at the Emai data

below:

Gloss underlying form surface form

Toe /chiɛ/ [ehjɛ]

Elder /ᴐdiᴐ/ [ᴐdjᴐ]

(tone is not marked)

You will notice that where there are contiguous vowels underlyingly, the first of those

vowels comes out as a glide in the surface form (which is the form spoken). This is because the

language does not allow vowel clusters. You should be able to deduce by this that the language

allows consonant clusters.

Lastly under this premise is the determination of sounds like long vowels and affricates.

Whether to recognise a sequence of long vowel as just one or two, or whether to recognise such

sounds as [t∫+ as just one sound segment or two. These depend on the prevailing structure in the

language. By this I mean that if you have heard clearly other sequences of consonants that are seen

as one, and you have no doubt about them, and you now have a problem determining just a few,

you can invoke the prevailing structure principle to resolve your dilemma. Also, if you have already

convincingly found sequences of vowels such as [aa], [ee], and [oo], why should you not consider

interpreting [u:] as [uu]? After all, it is the prevailing pattern. And remember the premise of pattern

congruity.

Now, these are only the major premises; there are more, so I recommend that you read Pike

1947 yourself. Begin from 57 (it’s not a crime if you read to the end of the book, after all, its all

about phonology).

Summary

You’ve learnt in this lecture that there are certain reasonings behind phonological analysis, and that

once you understand them, having a direction for approaching any data becomes easy for you.

POST-TEST:

Profer a phonetic explanation to the principle of pattern congruity

What can make a sound become labialised?

Recommended texts


Press

Schane S. 1973. Generative Phonology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Gleason’s Workbook, Series 3


Welmers, W.E. 1973. African Language Structures. Berkeley: University of California Press.


Blackwell

LECTURE 3: Concepts: Contrast, Distinction, and Redundancy

Introduction

In this lecture, you’ll learn what it takes for sounds to be different from one another and the effect

of the differences on the languages.

Objectives

At the end of this course, you’ll learn

The role of features in the meaning of words

Why some features are not as important as others in certain contexts

PRE-TEST

What does it mean for sounds to be different from one another?

Contrast

Baudoin de Courtenay (1895) was said to be the first to use the word ‘contrast’. The basic idea

expressed by the term is that of a sound being different from another. Usually, such differences

referred to by the term are of features. The difference however may be phonetic in the sense that it

does not affect meaning, and it can affect meaning. Let me illustrate this for you:

*tʷu:+ ‘two’

[teɪbl] ‘table’

The initial sounds in the two English words above are not exactly the same in the sense that

one is labialised*tʷ+ and the other is not *t+. When you look well, you will find that this difference

(labialisation) does not affect the meaning of words in English. Another way of saying this is that

removing the feature in question does not change the meaning of the word; it only indicates

inaccurate pronunciation. You will also find that there is something in the environment that

warrants the presence of the feature: it comes immediately before [u:] a rounded sound! So it is the

phonetic environment that makes it surface there. So we say contrasts like this are only phonetic, or

allophonic.

On the other hand, consider the English data below:

*tʷu:+ ‘two’

[dʷu:] ‘do’

The only way we can explain the difference in the meaning of the two words in this data is

the presence of *tʷ+ in the first and that of *dʷ+ in the second. Recall that this is only a matter of

voicing feature. Because this ‘little’ feature difference has affected the lexical meaning of the words

concerned, we say that it is distinctive (makes a sound different), or phonemic. Note that there is

nothing in the phonetic environment, in the case of distinctive contrast, that can explain it.

Now, to define the terms distinction and redundancy. Distinction is when contrast affects the

lexical meaning of a word, and redundancy is when it does not.

Summary

When we say that a sound contrasts with another, we mean it is different such that the difference

can affect meaning in a language. Sometimes, the raw data collected on the field may reflect

differences that really don’t affect meaning; in which case we say such features are redundant.

Post test

What is contrast?

Give another word for redundancy

Recommended Texts


Odden 2004. Phonemes, contrast, and phonetic detail. http://www.ling.ohio-

state.edu/~odden/IntroducingPhonology/Chapter%203%20theory%20extension.pdf

LECTURE 4: The Phoneme

Introduction

What is our aim when we are confronted with a mass of data to analyse? It’s to determine which of

the sounds are core and which are not; in other words which ones are phonemes, and which are not.

Thus, in this lecture, you’ll learn what it means for a sound to be a phoneme.

Objectives

At the end of this lecture, you’d have learnt:

What makes a sound a phoneme

How to determine the factors and prove they valid

Pre-test:

With your understanding of Unit 3, define the term phonemic feature

Phoneme, what is it?

Let’s begin from the simple definition in Microsoft® Encarta® 2009: ‘distinguishing speech sound: a

speech sound that distinguishes one word from another, e.g. the sounds "d" and "t" in the words

"bid" and "bit." The same Encarta goes further to define the phoneme as ’the smallest phonetic unit

that can carry meaning’. This simply means when a speech sound (like each of the ones on the IPA

chart) is capable of affecting the meaning of a word, it is seen as a phoneme.

Now, let’s consider some professional definitions:

It is defined in Odden 2004 as ‘a separate type of symbolic object which stands for a particular class of phones encountered in a language, following certain analytic rules’

Hyman 1975: ‘minimal units of sound capable of distinguishing words of different meaning’

Pike 1947: ‘one of the significant units of sound arrived at for a particular language by the analytical procedures developed from the basic premises’

Jones 1931: ‘a family of sounds in a given language, consisting of an important sound of the language, together with other related sounds, which take its place in particular sound sequences’

Gleason 1955: ‘a class of sounds which are phonetically similar and show certain characteristic patterns of distribution in the language or dialect under consideration’

You will find different definition in the literature; but one thing that is common is that for a sound to be regarded as a phoneme, it has to appear in an environment phonetically identical (analogous) to a similar sound, and still be the cause of change in meaning. Let’s take a look at a Yoruba data. Tone is not marked.

[ka] ‘read/confess’ [ga] ‘stand’ [ta] ‘sell’ [da] ‘pour’ [ba] ‘perch’ [sa] ‘pick’

As the first sound in each of the 6 sounds above changes, meanings change. And note that each of the changing sounds occurs word-initially, and before [a] (identical environment). For the fact that the alternation of the consonant sounds in identical environment result in change in meaning, we say that each of the sounds is a phoneme.

Now, when a sound is established to be a phoneme, it is written in slants, e.g. /k/.

At this point, we want to examine certain definitions of the term phoneme; our focus is going to be the significance of each of those definitions to the understanding of the term.

Of course we have already established that a phoneme can effect change in the meaning of words; that is Hyman 1975. Pike 1947 also makes this point by the phrase ‘significant unit’. Another point from Hyman’s definition is that the unit to be called a phoneme must be the minimal unit, that is, it can no longer be broken down (if you break it down, it’ll no longer stand as a sound). This is also a point made my Pike’s 1947 definition.

Odden 2004 says a phoneme is ‘symbolic’ and it ‘stands for a particular class of phones’; Jones 1931 says ‘a family of sounds in a given language’; Gleason 1955 says ‘a class of sounds which are phonetically similar’. The implication of these is that a phoneme is not necessarily a single sound; it refers to a collection of sounds that within themselves don’t affect meaning.

This is what I mean: English has the different variants of /p/, aspirated [pʰ], unreleased [p°], to mention only 2. Now, take a look at the following data.

[әplaɪ] „apply‟ [pʰɪn] „pin‟

p°] „cup‟

p], that is, releasing the plosive closure, [әpʰlaɪ], you will still understand that I have said „cup, and „apply‟ respectively. This means that the interchanging of these three variants of /p/ does not affect meaning in English. So we group all of them together and say they are one phoneme. We then use one member of the group as the representative; here English chooses /p/, for reasons you learnt in LIN 231.

But supposing you put /b/ in each of the slots above, I can assure you that the 1st and 3rd words will become jargons, while the second will become another word entirely: „bin‟. Thus, /b/ must be another phoneme (member of another group of sounds)

Let me also point this out to you: Gleason said ‘in the language or dialect under consideration’. This means each language has its own different sets of phonemes. You must interpret each language independently. Consider the hypothetical language below

Language K

[әkɪp°] ‘Mother’

[әkɪp] ‘Aunt’

The only difference between the two words is [°] the unreleased superscript; but the

meaning has changed. This means [p] and [p°] are two different phonemes (or belong to two

different phonemes). Now, compare this result with the English data I gave you above! What do you find?

A fall out of this idea that a group of sounds THAT ARE PHONETICALLY SIMILAR can form a phoneme is that the distribution of each of the members of the group is predictable. That is, in the

English data we just treated (and of course in the totality of English), you always find [pʰ] word-

initially, [p°] word-finally, while [p] is wider in its occurrence. A statement of where each member of

the group occurs is called the distribution. Distribution is possible because the occurrence of each member of the group of sounds forming the phoneme is predictable. We’ll say more on this when we get to complementary distribution in unit 7.

Summary A phoneme is a cover term for a group of sounds that are contextual variants of each other. This fact shows that the phoneme is usually discovered through analysis; it is analysis that will bring to the fore the different variants to be together called a phoneme, and the relationship between them. Post-test What is a phoneme?

Recommended Texts Clark, J., C. Yallop and J. Fletcher. 2007. An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology. Oxford:

Blackwell


LECTURE 5: Phonemic Features

Introduction

You’ll learn here that some features can singlehandedly change or alter meaning. Those features are our focus

Objectives

At the end of this class, you are expected to have learnt:

Why some features are called phonemic

Why those features deserve special mention

Pre-test

If aspiration does not affect meaning in English, but it affects it in language K, what do you think is happening? As a Linguist, how can you explain this?

Label the following sounds: / /, /ᴐ/, /e/, /ø/

Features Features are properties of linguistic units, e.g. voicing, labial, velar, nasal or nasalised, low (tone), high (tone) etc., (remember your phonetics?). Each sound is composed of features, for instance:

[t] has the following features, among others: voiceless, alveolar, etc.

Do you still remember that in labelling a vowel sound, you are required to talk of stuffs like horizontal position, vertical position and lip rounding. These are all features.

Phonemic Features

Now, let us return to the questions I gave you in the pre-test, /e/, /ø/

/e/ is front close-mid unrounded vowel

/ø/ is front close-mid rounded vowel

Let’s put this sounds in context, using our hypothetical language, language K. bebe ‘book’

bebø „teacher‟ bøbe „librarian‟ bøbø „library‟

You will observe that the difference between these two sounds is lip-rounding. That is, other than lip-rounding, they both have the same features. Now, look at the data. The only difference between items 1 and 2 is restricted to the two sounds we just labelled; and that is what results in the change in meaning. Do you really get the gist?

If lip-rounding is important enough to affect meaning, it must be described as phonemic. That is, it is a phonemic feature. A phonemic feature is a feature that is capable of distinguishing the meaning of words.

One important fact about a phonemic feature is that it is not predictable. Take another look at our data. You cannot say, for instance that one of the two vowel sounds is always restricted to a particular position. Wherever you find one, you can actually find the other.

To drive home this point, let me give you a Yoruba example.

ᴐmᴐ „child‟ gᴐ „stupid‟ agᴐ „fool‟ mᴐ „knowledge‟ itᴐ „saliva‟ kᴐ „build‟

The question here is whether nasalisation is phonemic in this Yoruba data. Remember, we have made two points about phonemic features: it independently affects meaning; you won’t be able to predict where it occurs. At this level in phonology, keep those two points in mind. Now looking at predictability, can you predict where nasalised vowels occur in this data?

Yes. It always occurs after nasal consonants. Always! Since it can be predicted, it is not a phonemic feature here in this data. It is only phonetic because of that premise we mentioned: sounds tend to be more like their environments! Meaning the nasal feature in the vowels is only an environmental influence. That is why it can be predicted. Once a nasal sound occurs before it (environment), the automatically becomes nasalised.

To recapitulate, a phonemic feature cannot be predicted by reading the environment; it doesn’t surface as a result of the environment.

What are the functions of phonemic features? Schane (1973:28), under the caption ‘distinctive features’ outlines three of the functions. (1) they are capable of describing systematic phonetics, that is, separating which sounds are core and which are not to any particular language; (2) they serve to differentiate lexical items, for instance the voicing feature solely distinguishes

between /pɪn/ ‘pin’ and /bɪn/ in English; (3) they define natural class. We’ll talk more about this by

and by. Summary Any feature that either alters or changes the meaning of a word when tampered with is phonemic (distinctive). Such features are not predictable. Post-test What are the other words that have the same meaning as phonemic. Texts: Zwicky, A. M. 1982. Phonemes and Features. Innovations in linguistics Education 2.2, 55-76 Schane S. 1973. Generative Phonology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.


Blackwell


LECTURE 6: Suspicious Sounds (Pairs/Sets) Introduction Phonological analysis is not just done arbitrarily. Before you even begin to investigate any pair or set of sounds, you will have to establish a certain level of similarity between them. That level of similarity is the focus of this lecture. Objectives Basically, you’re going to learn:

the criteria for setting up suspicious pair/set

minimal pairs/sets and their importance

importance of such groupings Pre-test What are the signs that will make you conclude that certain sounds are suspicious? Sounds are said to be suspicious when they have strong phonetic similarities. I mean the phonetic similarities between them will be so strong that you begin to think that they may actually be allophones of the same phoneme. (Don’t worry; I will explain what I mean by allophone shortly). When you have only two sounds that are similar in this manner, you call it a pair, but when there are more than two sounds, you say that you have a set.

In setting up suspicious pairs or sets, Pike 1947: 69 advises that you ensure that the sounds are similar in all but one feature. On the basis of this, I will now give you examples of suspicious sounds usually encountered in the course of language documentation. But note suspicion can come in any form: voicing difference, place of articulation, features relating to secondary articulation, etc.

[P pʰ] [g gh] [f v] [k g]

[ ᴐ] [P pʲ] [l ɫ] [p b] [∫ ʒ] [m ɱ]

I expect a particular question to have formed in your mind: what happens if a particular sound is not suspicious with any other sound in the phonetic inventory?

I simply present to you the answer given by Pike 1947: 71...THEY ARE SEPARATE PHONEMES!

Now I don‟t expect you to be at a loss here; if Shehu‟s native language is Hausa, and Kemi‟s is Yoruba; Shehu‟s linage has always been Muslims, and Kemi‟s has always been Christians, you don‟t need to waste your time investigating whether they are members of the same family! And now, it‟s up to you to relate that to Linguistics.

Minimal Pairs and Minimal Sets A minimal pair is regarded as a Linguist’s delight, because once you find it, you need not investigate any further. Elugbe (class notes) says ‘often, two sounds occur in identical environments, and there are pairs of words which would have been identical but for the difference in the two sounds, we call the two words minimal pair’. Let me illustrate this with this Yoruba words

[i ja ] ‘mother’

[i j ] ‘feather’

And this, from Ebira

[hu ] „to drink‟ [hu] „to uproot‟ [h ] „to roast in open fire‟

In the Yoruba data, the only thing we can identify as the source of the di erent meanings of the two sounds is the [ ]-[ ] alternation. In the Ebira data, the only observable cause of the different meanings is the differences in the tone on each vowel. Observe that the sounds (or features) causing the difference in meaning in each of the two data occur in exactly the same environment, that is, analogous environment. This fact of similarity of the environment of occurrence of the deferring sounds is vital to our determination of what is a minimal pair or set.

Why is a minimal pair (or set) a Linguist‟s delight? When a Linguistic investigator has identified a suspicious pair, he scans his data to see

whether the two sounds can be found occurring in analogous environment. Finding the suspicious sounds in analogous environments is the easiest way to determine whether sounds are independent phonemes. For instance, if the suspicious sounds are found in a minimal pair (analogous environment), then the Linguistic investigator easily concludes that they are different phonemes.

What if you really don‟t find the suspicious sounds in exactly the same environments; but they are in almost the same environments?

That‟s what is called NEAR MINIMAL PAIR (or near minimal set). This is when you have more than one difference in the words concerned, but the allowance is still there to compare the suspicious sounds. The implication for analysis is still the same as of minimal pair, but with less force. This is exactly the point made in the following data from Lewis (class notes) [senɪt] „senate‟ [zenɪɵ] „Zenith‟

You will observe that the first and last sounds of the two words are different. But if we want to compare the first sounds [s] and [z], on the ground that they are both at the beginning of the word and are both followed by [e], we can, because the other area of difference (word-final position) is too distant to possibly affect the suspicious sounds under investigation. This is called near minimal pair. Summary Sounds are usually regarded as suspicious when they are similar in all but one phonetic features. Phonological analysis is largely about investigating whether suspicious pairs/sets are the same or

different. Finally, suspicious sounds found in exactly the same environments belong to different phonemes. Post test Why does a Linguist need to search for minimal pairs in his data? Recommended Texts: Pike, K.L. 1947. Phonemics: A technique for Reducing Languages to Writing. University of Michigan



Blackwell


LECTURE 7 Allophones Introduction Phonemes sometimes have contextual variants. We‟ll learn why and how to find the variants in this lecture. Objectives Here, you‟ll learn:

what allophones are why they‟re easy to find (they‟re always predictable) the relationship between allophones, and between them and phonemes

Pre-test If Pike (1947) says that sounds tend to be more like their environments, do you think that on the basis of this, a sound occurring in three different environments can have three different appearances? „When the difference between two similar sounds is completely predictable...from the phonetic context, we say that they are allophones of the same phoneme‟ Fudge (2005). Lewis (class notes) defines allophones as different representations of the phoneme at the phonetic level. By this, we mean allophones occur in phonetically predictable environments, and they are usually restricted to such environments. See how Hyman (1975: 63) puts it: „An allophone is...a phonetic realisation of a phoneme in a particular environment‟. Let me give you an example from English [ pʰɪt] „pit‟ [ɪm pʷᴐ:t] „import‟ [ә plaɪ] „apply‟ [sɪp] „sip‟ In this data: [pʰ] is aspirated because it occurs in a word-initial stressed syllable; [pʷ] is labialised because it occurs before a rounded vowel; [p] is not modified by its environment in the last two occurrences.

Because the first two occurrences are predictable we say they are only environmentally-conditioned variants of /p/; they are allophones of /p/. Let me sound this warning however, it is the three variants of /p/ attested in the data that allophones of the same phoneme (a phoneme the appearance of which we do not know), so we choose [p] to represent that phoneme for reasons we will talk about later. Summary Allophones are phonetic (predictable) variants of the same phoneme.

Texts Fudge, Eric. 2005. Language as Organised Sounds: Phonology. In: N. E. Collinge, An Encyclopaedia of




Blackwell


LECTURE 8: Sound Distributions Introduction After learning about allophones and their different contexts, you‟ll now learn in this lecture how to state those contexts in “phonological terms”. Objectives At the end of this class, you should be able to state the alternations between allophones:

in prose; and in phonetic notation you should also be familiar with and use effectively terms like CD, PD, free variation, etc.

In lecture 4, I gave you Gleason‟s (1955: 261) definition of the phoneme as a „class of sounds which are phonetically similar and show certain characteristic patterns of distribution in the language or dialect under consideration‟; what this means is that if we have different sounds in a particular group to be called a single phoneme, then we must understand where each of the sounds occurs. Remember Unit 6 where we said when 2 sounds occur in the same environment and yield difference in meaning, we are dealing with different phonemes. This should tell you that you that, under normal circumstances, sounds that are members of the same phoneme will not occur in the same environment.

Recall also unit 2 where we said sounds are modified by their environments. So each member of the class of sounds known as phoneme occurs in a customised environment, where that environment dictates its appearance. When it is another environment dictating the appearance of another member of that class, it will have to conform to that environment, yielding another slightly different appearance. Thus we can predict hoe a member of a phoneme will appear by looking at what is in its environment. This is the idea I want to teach you under different sub-headings in this unit. Complementary Distribution (CD) Hyman (1975:62) says sounds are said to be in CD when they are found in mutually exclusive environments, that is, they are found in different environments. Note from this point that it is only allophones that can be said to be in CD, for the reason that every appearance conforms to its particular environment, so it cannot be found in any other environment. The same customisation happens to every other allophone of the phoneme, so that where one occurs, the other never, and vice versa.

Let me give you a Spanish example from Hyman (1975: 62) Spanish saβer „to know‟ naða „nothing‟ laɣo „lake‟

banca „bench‟ demora „delay‟ gana „desire‟

When you look closely at this data, you will notice that the voiced plosives occur at the beginning of words, whereas voiced fricatives occur between vowels. So when you pair, [b β], [d ð], and [g ɣ], you will notice see that the members in each of the suspicious pairs never occur in the same environment. In other words, the occurrence of each sound in a CD relationship is predictable, just like saying voiced plosives in Spanish always occur word-initially, while voiced fricative always occur between vowels. The statement of the predictability of sounds in CD is what we call distributional statement.

Let me introduce you to another way of making distributional statement, using the Spanish example that you are now familiar with: [g ɣ] [g] [ɣ] #- v-v [b β] [b] [β] #- v-v [d ð] [d] [ð] #- v-v „v‟ stands for „vowel‟, „#‟ stands for word boundary, while „-„ stands for the location of the sound we are analysing. Free Variation When sounds confirmed to be in CD occur in the same position (of course with no change in meaning), we talk of free variation. This is better said with data, and I now give you a very easy one from Language K Language K gu ‘pestle’ atak ‘fight’ din ‘cook’ set ‘cutlass’ baluu ‘bird’

orᴐp ‘head’

g lәk ‘fish’

k lәk ‘fish’

You can see that except in the last two items in this data, the voiceless member of each pair ([g k], [d t], [b p]) always occurs at the end of words, while the voiced occurs at the beginning, which is clearly a case of CD. Remember [g] and [k] are already established as allophones of the same

phoneme in this data; now they both occur in the same position, which seems to break our CD rule! But there is something strange yet: the two sounds occur in the same position and still don’t affect meaning, which means they’re not different phonemes; they are still allophones. This is what is called allophones in free variation. Parallel Distribution (PD) Sounds in parallel distribution are said to occur in analogous (similar) environments. Now, do you realise we have said this before? Check out the sections on minimal and near minimal pairs again. So here, we’re using a different terminology to explain the same idea. When you find suspicious sounds occurring in parallel distribution with effect on meaning, you say that the sounds belong to different phonemes. Neutralisation Now recall what we mean by contrast. When the contrast between two or more phonemes is suspended in a particular environment, we talk of neutralisation. Elugbe (personal communication). In such situations, it is going to appear as if the phonemes concerned share a common allophone. In other words, the data suggests that a single phone (allophone) represents two or more phonemes in a particular environment. Polish

Singular plural gloss 1 klup klubi club 2 trup trupi corpse 3 snop snopi sheat 4 zwup zwobi crib 5 kot koti cab 6 lut lodi ice 7 ko∫ ko∫e basket 8 nu∫ noʒe knife

Our suspicious pairs are [p b], in 1-4; [t d], in 5-6; and *∫ ʒ], in 7-8. When you analyse this data in this light, you will see that the sounds contrast between vowels (in the plural column). Can you see that?

Now zero in 1 and 2; there is this allophone [p] which is the variant of /b/ in word-final position. And remember that the same sound has already been said to contrast with /b/. This means two different phonemes share a common allophone: /p/ has allophone [p] /b/ has allophone [p] and [b]

The sharing of allophone [p] is what we call neutralisation. Now check this out on other items in the data. Let me give you a classic example from German German

1. [bʊnt] league

2. [bʊnt] colourful (sg)

3. [bʊndәn] leagues

4. [bʊntәn] colourful (plural)

Observe that items 1 and 2 are exactly the same, but they mean different things to the German. 3 and 4 (the plural forms of the words in 1 and 2) will give you insight into what is happening; 3 has [d] while 4 has [t]. So in the plural forms the two sounds contrast because they occur in the middle

of words, but in the singular forms (1 and 2), the contrast is lost between they are both occurring in word-final position.

A point to note here is that because it is at word-final position that the contrast is suspended (neutralised) in this German data, we say word-final position is the position of neutralisation. Position of neutralisation is that position where the contrast is suspended between any given set of phonemes.

Position of relevance is that position where the opposition is realised phonetically. There are issues of controversy about this concept, but we will wait till we get to LIN 331 before we go into them. This is because the controversy leads to more concepts and divergent approaches to phonological analysis, due to this issue of neutralisation. But I can assure you, you will find them very interesting. Summary When suspicious pairs/sets do not occur in the same environment, they are said to belong to the same phoneme; that is they are in CD. If they are found in the same environment, they are said to be in PD, that is, they belong to different phonemes. Lastly, only allophones can be found in free variation, n which case they are found in the same environment without any effect on meaning. Post Test What is the relationship between each of these pairs of sounds *t d+, and *∫ ʒ] in the Polish data above? In your own words, explain the relationship between CD and free variation Recommended Texts Fudge, Eric. 2005. Language as Organised Sounds: Phonology. In: N. E. Collinge, An Encyclopaedia of



Ladefoged, Peter. (1967). Linguistic Phonetics 6. Working Papers in Phonetics, Department of Linguistics UCLA. Collinge, N. E. Ed. 1999. An Encyclopedia of Language. London and New-York: Rutledge.


Blackwell

LECTURE 9: Discovery Procedure Introduction In this class I want to further break down the steps to phonological analysis for you Objectives At the end of this class, you’d have learnt the step-by-step approach to identifying phonemes, and be adequately armed to practice with any available data Pre-test I have already told you many of the items we will be discussing here in this unit: how to determine phonemes and allophones, as well as distributions of sounds. Before you begin to read, make a list of the steps you feel you should take in analysing sounds. The procedure The idea here is of the steps that a linguistic investigator needs to take in his field work to ensure accuracy in his work. Here, you will notice yet again that knowledge of phonetics cannot be discounted. This is because it all begins from hearing the sounds as said by your informants (including those features that even the native speakers are not aware of, remember narrow transcription?), and documenting them. If your ears fail to pick everything about each sound, your analysis will be flawed. This also requires that you have all your phonetic symbols and diacritics at your finger tips. So, let’s see the steps

1. Data collection. I’ve already explained this, but I need to add that you will do yourself a lot of good if you use more than one informant. This will help you to eliminate idiolectal variances. Also confirm every sound you feel you don’t hear well right there on the field. It does no harm when your informants repeat certain items a number of times.

2. Identify every phone in your data. It is always better to list them on a plain sheet of paper

first. Here you will list [p], [pʰ] and [pʲ] separately, for instance. Every minute phonetic

variance leads to a different item to be listed. 3. Put the sounds you have identified in a phonetic chat. Lewis (class notes) advises that here,

you would need extra rows for such forms as secondary articulation, etc. And, of course, you know that consonants will be in phonetic consonant chat while vowels will be in phonetic vowel chat. Let me show you what I mean: Phonetic consonant chat for language K p b k g

pʰ kʰ pʷ kʷ

s z 4. List all pairs of segments that suspicious because they are phonetically similar 5. List all pairs of segments that are not suspicious with any sound in your data 6. Among the suspicious pairs (or sets), look for minimal pairs (sets). If you get, and it is the

presence of the suspicious segments that result in difference in meaning, then the suspicious sounds involved belong to different phonemes. But if there is no difference in meaning, the sounds are likely to be allophones in free variation.

7. For suspicious pairs you do not find in minimal pair, describe the environments in which each occurs.

8. Look for complementary distribution. If you get, then the sounds are allophones of the same phoneme.

9. After determining that a set of suspicious sounds are allophones of the same phoneme (CD), see the one that has the wider distribution. It is the symbol of the one with the wider distribution that you should choose to represent the phoneme.

10. Try to understand the phonological processes that made the phoneme change to its allophone(s) in their respective environments.

11. Write out rules for the phonological processes. Note that your rules are only formal representations of distributional statements, for instance, if you distributional statement says that a vowel becomes nasalised if it occurs after a nasal consonant, your rule (informal)

will look like: V V /N- .Don‟t worry, we‟ll talk more on this later. 12. Look for parallel distribution (PD) of suspicious sounds for which neither minimal pairs nor

CD has been found. If you get PD, then the sounds belong to separate phonemes, since they occur in analogous environments.

13. Transcribe your data phonemically by replacing all the allophones with their respective phonemes.

14. Present a phonemic chart of the sounds of the language under study. A phonemic chat will contain ONLY the phonemes you have found by your analysis. These are the sounds you establish for the language, which you will eventually use to design an orthography for that language.

Let me point out to you that the procedures here may not be exactly what you find in other

materials, e.g. Lewis (class note) has 12, many other materials have even less, and you may be lucky to find a few materials that have more. The whole idea is to give you a summary of the steps to take when confronted with a fresh data (when your lecturer is not in sight). I believe that the more steps we’re able to brake the process to, the more explanatory. You need not cram, only practice!

Summary There are easy-to-follow steps to phonological analysis. Though these steps are not iron clad, they provide you with a reliable guide, especially at this level of your exposure to phonology. Post test Get a data, and try this procedure out for yourself. If you’re stuck at any point, you may bring the data for discussion.

Recommended Text Pike, K.L. 1947. Phonemics: A technique for Reducing Languages to Writing. University of Michigan



LECTURE 10: Phonetic and Phonemic Transcriptions

Introduction You learnt transcription in LIN 241. If you still know that (I expect you do), then you know phonetic transcription already. But there is a transcription you still do after separating phonemes from allophones. You’ll learn ‘why?’ in this class, as well as the difference between the two transcriptions.

Objectives At the end of this class, you should be able to:

Do raw (phonetic) transcription

Separate phonemes from allophones

Do a kind of transcription having only the phonemes

Pre test What is the difference between phonetics and phonemics?

Your phonetic transcription simply refers to your raw data. If in the course of data elicitation, you notice that certain plosives tend to be produced extra puff of air than normal (aspiration), you have to represent that in your transcription. If you notice that every time a vowel is adjacent to a nasal consonant, the vowel tends to be nasalised (nasalisation), you will also reflect that observation in your transcription. In other words, the raw data you take on the field captures every detail of the speech of your informant.

You will then have such sounds as [pʰ], [a ], and [tʷ] in your data.

Note that the diacritics, superscripts and other attached features make this kind of transcription appear complex. Also note that phonetic transcriptions are put in square brackets [ ].

So the English transcriptions [pʰɪt] ‘pit’ and [tʷu:] ‘two’ are phonetic for instance because they

capture lip rounding and aspiration. In essence, a phonetic transcription is also known as allophonic transcription, in the sense that

most times, features represented are mere allophones. Exercise: provide ten transcriptions in your language that reflect such secondary features as lip

rounding etc. If you succeed, then you have done a phonetic transcription of you language in your little way!

Phonemic transcription: for one, phonemic transcription is put in slants / / and it rarely has such

complexities as phonetic transcription. In other words, phonemic transcription is simpler than phonetic transcription.

There are many reasons for this: one, it is not the raw data. Two, the raw data you take is passed through phonological analysis such that features that are not significant would have been eliminated. Remember that non-significant features are those features that do not affect meaning in a language.

So, let us to the two transcriptions done above: [pʰɪt] ‘pit’ and *tʷu:+ ‘two’. As for the transcription for ‘pit’, the presence of *ʰ] does not make any difference in terms of

meaning. That is, whether you say [pʰɪt] or [pɪt], you will still understand that there is no difference

in meaning. So, in phonemic transcription, we can do without it. We therefore have /pɪt/. Note that

it is now in slants. And it only contains features that affect meaning; those features not affecting meaning have been dropped by during phonological analysis.

Note also that a phonemic transcription has fewer symbols than phonetic. Confirm this by comparing the transcriptions we have given so far in this lesson, and then, get more examples from your mother tongue as practice.

Let us conclude this chapter by relating our transcription to charts. Your phonetic chart of a language has all the sounds recorded in that language whether the sounds are significant or not; that is, phonemes and allophones. On the other hands, a phonemic transcription will not include allophones.

Summary Phonetic transcription is what you do when you record raw data on the field and is expected to reflect every nuance of speech, which you’ll then go on to sift in the form of phonological analysis. Phonemic transcription, on the other hand, is that which you do for only the significant sounds of the language after your “sifting”. Post test: We have said previously in this class that features are sometimes predictable. Where will you put a predictable feature; phonetic or phonemic chart?

Recommended Texts Collinge, N. E. 1990. An Encyclopaedia of Language. London and New York: Routlege


Blackwell


LECTURE 11. Phonological Processes 1

Introduction

I’m introducing you to the wide subject of phonological processes in this class. We’re going so

continue over the next few lectures. So, fasten your seat belts.

Objectives One major point you must have learnt by the end of this class is why there are phonological processes in language Pre-test What is the first premise of phonological analysis as given by Pike? What are secondary articulations and why do they occur in language?

Phonological process is a term used to capture sound changes that result when sounds are used in context. When transcribed, the English word electric has [k] as the final sound, but in electricity, a word that is clearly derived from electric, the [k] changes to [s].

Why? You may ask? And the only answer I will give you in this class is that what changes [k] to [s] is exactly what we mean by phonological processes. let me give you another illustration by means of a data from Ghotuo.

Ghotuo [ti] ‘push’ [tja] ‘push them’ Explanation: the *i+ sound in ‘push’ is a basic component of the word. But when another vowel is

added at its back, it changes to a glide, because somehow, the language does not want two vowels to stand side-by-side in that environment. Now, the change from [i] to [j] is what we capture by phonological processes.

Why do we actually have phonological processes in language? Most phonological processes arise due to the need for ease of articulation. That is particularly

critical because the same limited set of articulators is used to produce all the sounds used in speech. And in rapid speech, you produce so many sounds within seconds. So the articulators sort of blend the the sounds in such a way that it is easier to keep up the required speed for speech. Schane (1973: 61). This is what leads to the loss or change of some features. Let’s take the electric/electricity example I gave you above.

In producing electricity, which has more sounds than electric, you’ll notice that *k+ changes to [s], right? Knowledge of phonetics tells us that this is actually a stop becoming a non-stop. You still remember that phonetic point?

Okay, this is why the articulators played that game on you: by adding the suffix ‘-ity’ to electric, you have put [k] between two vowels. So the articulators just say “this guy want us to produce a non-stop followed by a stop, and then followed by another non-stop. It’s not easy for us; we’ll blend them and make the three sounds non-stops for ease.” So they keep your voicing feature for instance, but change the stop feature (later I will tell you that they change [-cont] to [+ cont]) to non-stop. And they say to themselves “at least this has not changed the meaning of the word; so he should get used to it!”

How do you respond? You get used to it! Unfortunately, you never knew you’ve fallen for that trick, except you’re a linguist like me!

So, this is how we come by phonological processes, though reasons may vary. We’ll talk about reasons by and by.

Before we leave this lesson, let me introduce you to the categorisation of phonological processes. There are four of them, according to Schane (1973): (1) assimilation; (2) syllable

structure; (3) weakening and strengthening; and (4) neutralisation. But I can tell you that more than 70 % of the processes you’ll find are assimilatory. So we’ll take it in the next lesson.

Summary Most phonological processes arise in language because of the articulators push to ease articulation, and this is all because sounds have to be used in context to communicate. This is however only the introduction to this subject of discussion. We shall continue in the next lecture. Post test: Why do we have phonological processes in language?

Recommended Texts Collinge, N. E. 1990. An Encyclopaedia of Language. London and New York: Routlege


Blackwell

Schane, S. 1973. Generative phonology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

LECTURE 12. Phonological Processes 2: Assimilation Introduction In lecture 11, I taught you why there’s phonological processes in language,, and I hope you all understood. This lecture now focuses on those phonological processes that are context-driven; that is, those that result as an effect of influence from the environment.

Objectives At the end of this class, you should have learnt that:

Certain contexts spur specific phonological processes

And that this is language-specific

Pre-test: If indeed sounds tend to be like their environments and all we can see in the environment of a particular sound x are sounds; does it mean that that sound x is likely to become like one of the sounds around?

Assimilation

Assimilation is a term used by some phoneticians to refer to ‘‘the contextual variability of speech sounds, by which one or more of their phonetic properties are modified and become similar to those of the adjacent segments’’ Farnetani (1997: 376), quoted in Laniran and Clements (2003). This is just a deeper way of saying what Pike (1947) said in his first premise of phonological analysis, “sounds tend to be more like their environments”. Let me explain this with what I expect you did in O’ Level Government or History. The French colonial policy was that of assimilation, in which citizens of African French colonies are absorbed into France by the offering of France’ citizenship. They were also made to speak French, which makes them appear as if they were real French men and women. My God! I hope you still remember. So by that relationship with France which also manifests in their language, we say that they were assimilated to France, and have the citizenship of France. Assimilation in phonetics is similar, only that we are not talking about human relationship; it is sound relationship. So we say there is a kind of relationship that will happen between sounds and one will become like the other. So the example of electricity I gave you in the last lesson in which [k] becomes a non-stop because the sounds surrounding it are non-stops (vowel) is actually an example of assimilation!

In Yoruba, every time a vowel comes after a nasal consonant, the vowel becomes nasalised. This means the vowel is becoming like the nasal consonant in terms of nasality (the vowel is assimilating to the nasal feature!). Check this out in the following data. Yoruba

[ i ʃa n ] „Matches‟ [ n ] „Yesterday‟ [ m ] „Knowledge‟ [i ] „Pounded yam‟ Types of Assimilation

Assimilation can be of 2 types: partial, and complete. In the Yoruba data we just gave you, vowels only assimilate 1 feature (nasality) from the nasal consonants preceding them. I

expect you to agree with me that only 1 out of the many features of nasal consonants is partial. Assimilation can however be complete if a sound changes entirely to become exactly like another in its environment. Let’s look at a hypothetical language. Language K /ilouo/ [ilouu]

You will see from this that rather than /o/ merely becoming more like /u/, it just become exactly like it. This is complete assimilation! Direction of Assimilation Assimilation can be progressive (perseverative) or regressive (anticipatory) in nature. Progressive assimilation is when the feature is being transferred forward, while regressive is when the feature is being transferred backwards. Hey! Don’t get confused. I will explain. Take another look at the Yoruba data above; you will see that the nasal consonants are transferring their nasality feature to sounds on their right, that is, sounds coming after them. That is progressive assimilation. On the other hand, you will see that in the following English data, the feature is being transferred the other way: backward, that is, to preceding sounds. English

[wi n+ ‘win’ [pi ŋk+ ‘pink’ [h :n+ ‘horn’

This English data therefore illustrates regressive nasal assimilation. Finally, there are many types of assimilatory processes. They include: palatalisation,

velarisation, labialisation, glottalisation, nasalisation, voicing etc. We will discuss these as part of the next lesson. Summary If the leaf stays too long on the soap, it becomes soap itself. Or, when a sheep keeps company with a dog, it will end up eating faeces. In the same vein, when sounds stay together in certain contexts, they rub off on one another. This is what we mean by assimilation. Depending of the nature of the effects sounds have on one another, there are different names for assimilatory processes. Post test: Find a word to describe the process by which a sound that in not nasal becomes nasalised. Recommended Texts: Laniran, Y. O. and G.N. Clements (2003). Downstep and high raising: interacting factors in Yoruba tone production. Journal of Phonetics 31 (2003) 203–250

Pike 1947. Phonemics: A technique for Reducing Languages to Writing. University of Michigan Press


Blackwell

LECTURE 13 Environments for Phonological Processes

Introduction

In this lecture, I’ll go deeper in the idea I started in the last class, that there are specific

environments for specific phonological processes.

Objectives

At the end of this class, you are expected to have learnt:

How to relate phonological processes to phonetic environments supporting them.

Types of phonological processes other than assimilation

Pre-test:

What do you still remember about secondary articulation, which you did in LIN 241?

I mentioned in lesson 11 that there are other types of phonological processes, namely syllable

structure, weakening and strengthening, and neutralisation. I also did say that all these other

phonological processes are like 30% of phonological processes attested in language. I will introduce

you to them in this lesson and supply data to demonstrate them. Thus this lesson will be in 4 parts:

assimilatory processes; syllable structure processes; weakening and strengthening processes; and

neutralisation.

Part 1: Assimilatory processes

Here, we will discuss some of those phonological processes that result as a result of sounds

becoming like each other, or simply put, being influenced by their environments.

i. Nasalisation: this results when a sound takes on a nasal feature from another sound

adjacent to it. Check the Yoruba data that I gave you in lesson 12 above; it’s a perfect

example of nasalisation. The diacritic for nasalisation is a tilde [ ] placed on the nasalised

sound, like this [a ], which is a nasalised [a]. Environment: a sound will get nasalised

either before or after a nasal sound.

ii. Labialisation: Ckark, Yallop and Fletcher (2007: 63) define labialisation as “the addition of lip

rounding or lip protrusion to any sound which is normally articulated with the lips in a

neutral or spread position”. Have you ever observed that when you produce the English

[b] your lips are neither rounded nor protruded? Now try it. Good! But now, also

produce [bʷu:k+ “book”. You will see that while producing the very first sound, your lips

are already protruding and assuming rounding position. That’s labialisation! As you can

see, [b] becomes labialised because it is occurring in the environment of [u:] which is a

vowel produced with rounded lips. The diacritic for labialisation is a raised [ʷ] in front of

the labialised sound.

iii. Palatalisation: Lewis (n.d.) defines palatalisation as “the superimposition of a raised front of

the tongue to another place of articulation”. Now, don’t forget that the front of the

tongue is the place or articulation for the palatal sound. So, that’s the logic. And it

happens when a sound (not palatal - palatal sounds cannot be palatalised), is in the

environment of a high front vowels [i], [ɪ], [y], [ʏ], and in some languages, [e]. The diacritic for palatalisation is a raised [ʲ] in front of the palatalised sound. Lewis (n.d.) has an interesting data from Bwatye Language. Let‟s look at it together. [ɓʲelto] “boundary” [ɗʲekto] “hen” mʲent ] “life”

You can see that a consonant becomes palatalised before [e] in this language.

iv. Velarisation: this happens when the back of the tongue is raised at the time of production of another sound (which is not itself a velar sound – velar sounds cannot be velarised). This is because the configuration for the velar sound interferes with the production of that sound, and it goes on to influence the quality of the sound so produced. The diacritic for velarisation is a raised symbol of a voiced velar central fricat[~] across the symbol of the velarised sound, like this [t ] or [t ]. The environment is the environment of high back vowels. well, you‟ll see that the back of the tongue is raised while producing the [l].

v. Voicing: this is when a voiceless sound becomes voiced in the environment of a voiced sound. This is sometimes called Intervocalic Voicing because very often, it occurs when a voiceless sound comes between two vowels. Let‟s look at this English example:

/haus/ “house”. When you pluralise this word, what you get is [hauziz] “houses”. This shows that the word-final /s/ in house, has become [z] in “houses” because it is now between /au/ and /i/.

Thus, you have something like: /s/ [z]

Strange notation? Don‟t worry, we‟ll return to it in lesson 14.

Part 2. Syllable Structure Processes

These are phonological processes that alter the structure of the syllable of languages. Schane (1973) says they affect “the relative distribution of consonants and vowels within the word”. Schane goes on to say that “for example, a cluster of two consonants could be simplified in one of three ways: one of the consonants could be deleted, a vowel could be inserted between the two consonants, or the two consonants could coalesce into a single segment”. Let me give you

an example from a major Nigerian Language, Yoruba. In Yoruba, the syllable structure forbids consonant clusters. The structure also forbids a consonant ending a syllable. So when a typical Yoruba speaker wants to pronounce the English word [brᴈ:d]“bread” (which is only 1 syllable having CC C structure), he will say [b r d ]. Don‟t be afraid – CCVC means consonant, consonant, vowel, consonant, which is what you have in the transcribed word!

Now, can you see what I‟m seeing? Our Yoruba speaker has inserted [u] between [b] and [r] which has altered the syllable structure of English, but now conforms to that of Yoruba. Our speaker also inserted [i] at the end of the word. By the insertion of these two vowels, our speaker has turned just one syllable to three b – r - d ! What a serious alteration, you would say!

Let me now illustrate another type of syllable structure process with a popular biblical name – Moses (having 2 syllables, mo - ses. A typical Yoruba speaker calls this Mose, still preserving the 2 syllables, but deleting the consonant at the end of the second syllable. This is vowel deletion.

One major type of syllable structure processes is glide formation. Let‟s use our hypothetical language to explain this.

Language K

fru „milk‟

ilre „cow‟

frwilre “cow milk”

Here is the explanation of the data: the word for milk has a word-final vowel, while the word for cow has a word-initial vowel. So to form cow milk, putting the word for milk first, followed by the word for cow, we find ourselves with fru + ilre. A sequence not permitted by the structure of the language. What do we do? Since the language does not forbid consonant clusters, we convert the first vowel to a consonant so that we avoid the erring vowel cluster. The consonant is however, the closest to vowels (a glide) among all the consonants.

The process of converting a vowel to a glide ([w] is a glide) is called glide formation, and it is done to preserve the syllable structure of the language. So, it‟s a syllable structure process.

Let me emphasise that the motivation for syllable structure processes is to preserve the syllable structure of the language; because this is necessary to ensure correctness (you still remember deep structure of your syntax?). This is done by breaking up unwanted clusters of consonants and vowels one way or the other.

Part 3: weakening and strengthening processes.

Weakening is the process by which the articulation of a sound proceeds from strong to weak. The best way to understand this is to study again the manners of articulation as arranged on the vertical axis on the IPA chart. Look at it from stop (on top) downwards. We say that as you proceed from stop downwards, the sounds you produce are also getting weaker. Thus, you have, for instance, affricate, as a sound weaker than the plosives, and fricatives yet weaker, and then you go on to approximants. Any process that changes sounds in this order therefore weakens such sounds. What I mean is, if a plosive changes to an affricate, then the plosive has been weakened.

A good example here is the English word electric which has [k] as the final sound; but when electricity is derived from this same word, the [k] changes to [s], that is, a plosive changes to a fricative.

There are technical terms for these processes, and I now present below some of the terms. Spirantisation: plosive to fricative Affrication: plosive to affricate Liquidation: stop to liquids Sibilisation: non-sibilant sound to sibilant

Part 4: Neutralisation

Neutralisation occurs when the contrast between two or more sounds gets lost. Try and follow this

exposition: English has phonemes /s/ and /z/, right? Okay! But the plural marker in English is usually

/s/, except in certain specific circumstances where you have [z] or nothing at all (there are other

variants which are basically morphemic). Now the problem is with this variant [z] which sometimes

stands in the place of /s/ as the plural marker in words like boys [b ɪz]; it is still /s/ (when you

transcribe it phonemically!).

My whole story is that /s/ sometimes appears as [z], but this appearance can be confused

with the other phoneme /z/ which contrasts with /s/ in the minimal pair /su:/ ‘sue’, /zu:/ ‘zoo’. Every

time a sound appears such that it can ordinarily confused with another phoneme, we say there is

neutralisation – the absence of that feature that makes them physically different.

We will spend a lot more time on this issue in LIN 331. So, for now, let’s keep it in the cooler.

Summary

One good thing about phonological processes is that each of them is spurred in specific

environments, and by our knowledge of phonetics, we easily know why. That means if you can

master the environments, phonological analysis becomes child’s play. For syllable structure

processes; once you know the syllable structure of a language, the sequences allowed, and those

disallowed, it becomes easy to know why syllable structure processes happen: to force erring

sequences to conform.

Post-test

Collect data on borrowed words in your mother tongue and determine how erring syllables are

forced to conform to the structure of the language

Recommended Texts:

Lewis. Nd. Lecture notes on LIN 241 (production of Speech) and LIN 232 (Basic Phonology).

University of Ibadan

Schane S. 1973. Generative Phonology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.



Blackwell


Blackwell

LECTURE 14: Phonological Rules

Introduction

In this class, I will explain to you how to reduce the prose form of analysis to phonetic notations. You

can be sure that you will do more works in this class (or after) than in others. This is because I’m to

just lay the foundation for you, and from now on, you’ll be expected to write rules for every analysis

you do. The rules we’ll do are however informal rules.

Objectives

By the time we finish this class, you’ll be expected to be able to write phonological rules for any

phonological process you come across.

Pre-test

Try and use only symbols to state the change of /k/ to [s] in the English pair electric/electricity.

We’ve dwelled so long on the process of phonemic discovery and the processes that condition the

alternation between a phoneme and its allophones. But it has all been talk, talk and

talk...explanation all the way. There are, however, very short, notational, ways of expressing these

processes. These involve the use of notations (or, if you like, say symbols). However, as short as the

symbols are, Clark, Yallop and Fletcher (2007) say “a phonological rule states that a certain class of

segments undergoes a change in some particular environment”.

First, let me explain some of the symbols we’re going to use.

[ ] brackets (phonetic symbols are in brackets)

/ forward slash (used to state environment of change)

// slants (phonemes are in slants)

V capital ‘v’ (an abbreviation device for vowels)

N capital ‘n’ (abbreviation devise for nasals)

C capital ‘c’ (abbreviation devise for consonants)

Arrow (showing direction of change)

− dash (showing position of changed sound, in relation to its environment)

# ash (to denote word boundary)

/ (morpheme boundary)

{} braces (used to abbreviate sequences of partially similar rules)

ø null (use to show that nothing is in particular positions)

Now, before I begin to guide you in the use of these symbols in constructing rules, let me state that, basically, we‟re going to concern ourselves with only informal rules, at this stage.

So, we begin to demonstrate the use of the symbols: if you want to say, as we have in the electric/electricity example, that [k] changes to [s], you will write:

1. [k] [s]

If you want to add the environment in which this takes place, you add „/‟ after [s], which means “in the environment of”. After the „/‟, you will now add V- V, which means between two vowels (remember that „-‟ indicates the exact environment of the changed sound).

Thus, we have:

2. [k] [s]/ V – V

This means [k] becomes [s] when it‟s between two vowels (remember that when [k] occurs word-finally in electric it remains [k]. It is when you add another vowel at the back that it changes).

The English word /b :l/ “ball”. If a typical Yoruba man (I mean a village man) wants to say this, he will say [b lu]. Many things have happened here, but I will only choose the insertion of a vowel at the end of the word for the next rule.

In the English word, there is no vowel at the end; so in your rule, you say ø „null‟ (that is “nothing”) becomes a vowel at the end of the word. Here is it:

3. ø V/ - #

You can also say:

4. ø [u]/ - #

Let‟s take the word Moses (I leave you to transcribe it). Yoruba deletes the word-final [s].

Thus, your rule will simply read:

5. [s] ø/ - #

Do you still remember that Yoruba data in which oral vowels become nasalised after nasals? It‟s in unit 5. Let‟s write a rule for it:

6. /N –

Braces are used when we want to conflate two or more rules that are structurally related. Let us attempt to conflate rules 4 and 5 in 7 below:

7.

You can now see that phonological rules can be used to explain every phonological process; they can explain sound change, insertion, deletion, coalescence, etc.

Summary Phonological rules are convenient notational ways of presenting phonological analysis, which can then be used to make the description of language easier by just stating the rules, rather than repeating the process every now and then.

Post-test Now revisit all the data we‟ve treated in this course and write rules for all the processes. a cheap test, actually!

Recommended Texts Schane S. 1973. Generative Phonology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.



Blackwell

Lewis. Nd. Class notes on LIN 232, 241

Harms, R. T. 1969. Introduction to Phonological Theory. New-Jersey: Prentice-Hall, inc.

LECTURE 15: Naturalness

Introduction

In this final class, I want to emphasise the fact that some phonological processes are phonetically-

motivated, and so easily explained and understood. Also, sounds may be grouped based on features

they share and processes they undergo in similar environments, a situation having simplifying effect

on analysis. We will look into this in this lecture.

Objectives

After you’ve gone through this class, you’ll be expected to:

Know what it means for a phonological process to be natural

Know the motivation for, and the good things about natural classes of sounds

Pre-test:

Which of these 2 statements makes sense to you?

- [a] becomes nasalised after a nasal sound

- [a] becomes nasalised after a voiceless bilabial fricative

Try to explain whichever you choose.

Naturalness in phonology is a topic that has many parts. One deals with natural classes of sounds,

another links the natural classes with features uniting those sounds in the classes. Yet another part

deals with the phonetic naturalness of phonological processes, while an extension of this deals with

the naturalness of rules. But at the end of the day, we’re still talking about the same thing:

naturalness.

So, we take it one after the other. Sounds can be grouped into a natural class if they are more

closely related than each of them is to any other sound in the language. One good advantage of this

is that the more natural a class of sounds, the fewer the features needed to characterise them. This

means the easier our phonological analysis on the long run. Hyman (1975: 139-140) lists some

criteria for grouping sound into natural classes. Here is a paraphrase of those criteria:

a. If sounds undergo the same phonological rules;

b. If they both function in similar environments of phonological rules;

c. If one segment is converted into the other segment by a phonological rule;

d. If one segment is derived in the environment of the other segment.

He says sounds can be grouped into natural classes if one or more of these criteria are met. A

partial summary of this is that sounds belonging to a natural class undergo similar processes in

similar environments. Thus, in German, all voiced obstruents undergo devoicing in word-final

position. That is, [b], [d], and [g] for instance do not occur in word final position in the language.

Rather they change to [p], [t], and [k] respectively. So, in that language, instead of analysing these

voiced obstruents one after the other, you can just say you’re analysing the class, voiced obstruent,

in which case, you’ll end up doing only one analysis for all of them, rather than many analysis

repeating the same thing.

Now, look at [b], [d], and [g] with your phonetic eye. They all all plosives and voiced, and the

sounds they change to are also all plosives, but voiceless. This means that the sounds changing are

united in their manner of articulation and that unity is unique to them alone (they don’t have that

relationship with [m] or [l] for instance) in the inventory of German sounds. Now see that the sounds

being changed to are also united in their plosive feature (they also share this feature with their

voiced counterparts from which the change is coming). In addition, they are united by voicelessness.

And this unity of features reflect in the unique process they go through. Sounds not belonging to

their class do not go through the process. Now, the class may be expanded or reduced, depending of

phonetic considerations like features they share with another group of sounds on another level.

We’ll do more of this when we begin to talk of features in detail in LIN 331.

In another sense, naturalness is about phonological analysis making phonetic sense, being

logical. And this actually goes beyond phonology. Collinge (1990: 457) says “naturalness is

considered to be a property of human language in general”. When I tell you that a vowel becomes

nasalised in the environment of a nasal sound, you understand that there is something in the

environment to warrant that. That is therefore expected, going by the phonetic reality of the

environment. But when I say that a vowel gets nasalised in the environment of an [l], you should ask

what is it about [l] that should warrant this kind of change. Nothing. This means that this latter

process is not natural.

One more example before we leave this discussion: when I say that a consonant becomes

palatalised before [ɪ], you should understand that the high and front features of [ɪ] are capable of

causing that (the area of production of [ɪ] is around the hard palate, so palatalisation occurs when it transfers features from that area to neighbouring sounds). But this argument will not do if I say palatalisation occurs in the environment of [a] ([a] is a low vowel and is not produced anywhere near the palata area of the oral cavity).

Lastly natural rules are rules written for natural phonological processes, while a phonological process that is not phonetically plausible will not have a natural rule. But bear in mind that not all rules are natural, actually. We‟ll return to that by and by.

So much for naturalness for this level; I assure you you‟ll return to it again and again until you graduate.

Summary

Sounds belonging to natural classes also undergo similar processes. So establishing natural classes

makes analysis considerably easier. Naturalness also mean that phonetically plausible phonological

processes will also have phonetically plausible rules.

Post-test

Which of these 2 statements makes sense to you?

- [a] becomes nasalised after a nasal sound

- [a] becomes nasalised after a voiceless bilabial fricative

Try to explain whichever you choose.

Recommended Text:


Ohala, J. J. 1990. Naturalness in Phonology. www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/.../03_naturalness_ ordering.pdf



Blackwell

lin 232 basic phonology by kolawole adeniyi · 2019-04-10 · basic phonology by kolawole adeniyi ....

Documents