phonetics k phonology - arbeitsbereichecebert/teaching/10phonphon/handout04.pdf · phonetics k...

Introduction to General Linguistics - Phonetics & Phonology winter term 2010/2011 Christian Ebert

1

Christian Ebert

[email protected]

Phonetics k Phonology

(Hall, Kapitel 2.1; Clark & Yallop, Chapter 4.1 - 4.3)

Phonology

Universität Tübingen

Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft


2

Phonology

phonology is concerned with the functional aspects of the sounds of speech

the interesting questions are:

Which sounds differ in their function within a language?

Which regularities does a certain language exhibit w.r.t. speech production?

as opposed to phonetics, phonological investigation are hence confined to particular languages


3

Basics

for an analysis of the functional aspects of some sound one is interested in the contexts in which this sound can occur, i.e. in its distribution

in German, the following pairs of words differ only in one segment

Tante [tant@] — Kante [kant@]

Matte [mat@] — Macke [mak@]

satt [zat] — Sack [zak]

in each sequence of segments on the left hand side replacement of the alveolar plosive [t] by the velar plosive [k] yields a sequence of segments (on the right hand side) with a different meaning

the same works for English: teen [ti:n] — keen [ki:n]table [teIbl] — cable [keIbl]

minimal pair, phoneme, allophone


4

pairs of words that differ only in one sound are called minimal pairs

by searching for minimal pairs (and 'near' minimal pairs) one can find pairs of sounds that are responsible for differences in meaning

e.g. [t] and [k] make a difference in meaning because we found corresponding minimal pairs; [t] and [k] are contrastive or distinctive

therefore [t] and [k] belong to different phonemes

a phoneme is often defined as „the smallest unit the makes a difference in meaning“

Basicsminimal pair, phoneme, allophone


5

a further example: in German, plosives are often aspirated (e.g. word-initally), which does not affect (i.e. change) the meaning

Pass [pas] — [pas]

Tal [ta:l] — [ta:l]

Kamm [kam] — [kam]

in Hindi however, aspiration makes a difference

(care for) [pal] — (blade) [pal]

(beat) [tal] — (plate) [tal]

(ear) [kan] — (my) [kan]

Beis

piel

e au

s K.

Ram

ers:

Ein

führ

ung

in d

ie P

hono

logi

e, S

. 45

f



6

hence aspirated and unaspirated plosives are not distinctive in German, but in Hindi

this means that [p] and [p] are alternative ways of realizing (i.e. articulating) one phoneme in German

but in Hindi both belong to different phonemes

such variants of articulating a phoneme are called allophones

schematically: German Hindi[p]

[p]/p/

[p]

[p]

/p/

/p/



7

phonemes are noted by putting the IPA symbol for one of the allophone sounds between slashes, e.g. /p/

a phoneme can be conceived of as an abstract representation of a sound that is realized by (i.e. articulated as) one of its allophones in a concrete context

if allophones can occur and be mutually exchanged in each context they are said to be in free variation

free variation is common w.r.t. different dialects; for instance, the variation in the articulation of rhotics in German (Bavarian [r], standard German [³], south German []) which are all allophones of the phoneme /³/ in free variation



8

there is further possibility for realizing a phoneme different from free variation: it may depend on the context the phoneme appears in

example: 'ich' sound [C] and 'ach' sound [x] in German:

(a) [C] (b) [C] (c) [x]

Viech Furcht Buchich Milch FluchtGespräch manche hochBlech dochBücher brachflüchtig lachenmöchte auchfeuchtleicht



9

the following regularities can be observed

[C] occurs after front vowels [i: I E: E y: Y 2: 9], after diphthongs [aI OI] (cf. (a)) and after the sonorants [³ l n] (cf. (b))

[x] occurs after central and back vowels [u: U o: O a: a] andafter the diphthong [aU]

the contexts are mutually exclusive: these two sounds occur in complementary distribution



10

sounds standing in complementary distribution never occur in the same context

hence they cannot be contrastive and thus we cannot find a minimal pair and produce a difference in meaning

therefore, sounds in complementary distribution are candidates for allophones of the same phoneme

this makes sense in the case of [C] and [x]:

speakers of German have only one representation for the phoneme /C/ in their mental lexicon

depending on context, it is realized as [C] or [x]



11

to conclude that two sounds are allophones it is not enough that they are in complementary distribution

for instance, in English [h] and [N] are in complementary distribution

hat [ht] ahead [.hEd] behind [bi.haInd]

sing [sIN] think [iNk]

[h] is only syllable-inital, [N] only syllable-final or before consonant

hence [h] and [N] could in principle be allophones since they are not contrastive

the same holds for German [h] and [N]:

Haus [haUs] Uhu [u:.hu:] gehören [[email protected].³@n]

Ding [dIN] Sprengung [Sp³EN.UN] bangte [baN.t@]



12

however, the two sounds do not have much in common phonetically

[h] is a voiceless glottal fricativ, [N] is a (voiced) velar nasal

the only thing they have in common is that they are consonants

therefore, we would not want to regard them as allophones despite their complementary distribution.

what we want in addition is phonetic similarity

two sounds can be regarded as phonetically similar if their common properties are not met by an other sound in the language

for instance, [C] and [x] are the only voiceless dorsal fricatives in German



13

after establishment of the allophone status of two sounds (i.e. complementary distribution & phonetic similarity) one of the allophones must serve as underlying representation for the phoneme

usually one chooses that segment with the widest distribution:

for instance, in the case of [C] und [x] the palatal [C] occurs in more contexts than the velar [x]; hence the phonem is represented as /C/

in general, speakers of a language will regard sounds of different phonemes as different, while they might not be aware of differences among allophones, which are regarded as the „same sound“.

orthography is usually geared to phonemes



14

determining the allophonic status of a sound can be difficult

example: nasal sounds in Italian

/m/ <m> /n/ <n> /J/ <gn> [N] <n>

amore (love) anello (ring) agnello (lamb) banca (bank)

ramo (knob) vano (useless) ragno (spider) lungo (long)

sano (healthy) bagno (bath) cinque (five)

[N] occurs only before velar soundsð complementary distribution with other nasals

[N] phonetically most similar to /J/, but the orthography suggests that it might be an allophone of /n/ (usually done in the literature)



15

generative phonology had its birthday 1968 with the seminal work„The Sound Pattern of English“ (SPE) written by Noam Chomsky and Morris Halle

generative phonology is one of the core components of generative grammar, which processes (i.e. pronounces) the syntactic output

the input of the phonological component is called underlying representation/form,...

... which is transformed by phonological rules ...

... into the surface phonetic representation (surface form)

Generative Phonologyrepresentations


16

Generative Phonology

the underlying representation is an abstract phonemic representation of a morpheme

by application of the phonological rules it is transformed into a concrete form that can be articulated

idiosyncratic properties are stored in the lexicon

predictable properties (such as variation with context) are derived by rule application

representations

underlying representation

surface form

phonological rules


17

for instance, the lexicon entry for ger. Buch holds the phonemic underlying representation /bu:C/

that it starts with a /b/ phoneme is an idiosyncratic property of the German language and not derivable

that /C/ is realized (i.e. pronounced) as [x] in the context of /bu:C/ is a predictable property and should hence be derived in terms of application of a phonological rule

both the lexicon entry and the phonological rule are specific to a particular language.

Other language other underlying representations & other rules

Generative Phonologyrepresentations


18

reminder:

[C] occurs after front vowels [i: I E: E y: Y 2: 9], after diphthongs [aI OI] and after the sonorants [³ l n]

[x] occurs after central and back vowels [u: U o: O a: a] andafter the diphthong [aU]

taking /C/ as underlying the needed rule has to express the following:

after back vowels, central vowels and the diphthong [aU],/C/ is transformed into [x]

Generative Phonologyphonolgical rules


19

in formal notation, the rule looks as follows:

/C/ > [x] / [u: U o: O a: aU] __

the general format for rules is as follows

A > B / X __ Y

A is the input to the rule, B is the output

the arrow > can be read as „is realized as“ or „is transformed into“

after the slash / the environment indicates the range of application of the rule, where the underscore __ stands proxy for the input

the general rule above hence expresses the information

„after X and before Y, A is realized/transformed into B“



20

we hence have the following derivation for the word Buch:

/bu:C/ underlying representation

â rule application: 'ich/ach' alternation

[bu:x] surface form

since the rules apply generally, what happens to a word like Blech?

/blEC/ underlying representation

--- rule application: 'ich/ach' alternation

[blEC] surface form

in this latter case, the rule is not applicable (i.e. she does not apply), since [E] does not conform to the specification of the (left part of the) environment



21

example: l-velarization in English (simplified)

in English, [l] und [5] („dark l“) stand in complementary distribution and are hence allophones of the phoneme /l/ sind:

leaf [li:f] feeling [fi:lIN] feel [fi:5]

distribution: word-finally [5], otherwise [l](that's not quite right, since [5] can also be found before consonants, but we will ignore this for the moment)

the rule for the l-velarization thus looks as follows:

/l/ > [5] / __ #

the symbol # is used to indicate a word boundary



22

with this rule we get the following derivations:

/#li:f#/ underlying representation

--- l-velarization ( /l/ > [5] / __ # )

[li:f] surface form

in the case of leaf, the rule does not apply, but it does with feel

/#fi:l#/ underlying representation

â l-velarization

[fi:5] surface form



23

example: plosives in Plains Cree:

[si:si:p] „duck“ [tahki] „always“ [ta:nispi:] „when“

[tagosin] „he arrives“ [paskua:u] „plains“ [nisida] „my feet“

[asaba:p] „thread“ [mi:bit] „tooth“ [na:be:u] „man“

[a:bihta:u] „half“ [kodak] „each other“

observations concerning the distribution of plosives:

[b d g] only occur between vowels, otherwise [p t k]

Conclusion:[p b] are allophones of the phoneme /p/[t d] are allophones of the phoneme /t/[k g] are allophones of the phoneme /k/



24

the corresponding rules would look as follows:

/p/ > [b] / V __ V

/t/ > [d] / V __ V

/k/ > [g] / V __ V

a „V“ in the environment stands proxy for any vowel; the environmentV __ V hence says „between vowels“

rules with the same environment can be combined into one single rule

/p t k/ > [b d g] / V __ V

in this notation, each segment of the input is transformed into the corresponding segment of the output



25

what happens if /b d g/ are assumed to be underlying instead of /p t k/ ?

the rule must be changed accordingly: /b d g/ are realized as /p t k/ word-initially, word-finally, and after consonants # __

/b d g/ > [p t k] / C __ __ #{ }

since this rule should be applicable in multiple environments, a disjunction of environments is given, i.e. they are noted in curly brackets which can be read as „or“

a „C“ in an environment stands proxy for any consonant

due to the disjunction, this rule is much complexer than the previous one underlying /p t k/ makes more sense



26

important issues with phonological rules:

● environments might be empty (i.e. the rule applies always)

● input & output can contain mutliple elements

● multiple environments might be specified ( via { ).

● occurences of vowels/consonants are abbreviated by V and C

● rules operate within a domain, e.g. a word, a morpheme, or a syllable

word boundary: #

morpheme boundary: +

syllable boundary: $



27

all of the above rules are allophonic rules

i.e. they are rules that transform one allophone into another:

/C/ > [x] ... [C x] are allophones in German

/l/ > [5] ... [l 5] are allophones in English

/p t k/ > [b d g] ... [p b] [t d] [k g] are allophones in Plains Cree

but this is not necessarily so; there are phonological processes which transform a (allophone of one) phoneme into (an allophone of) another phoneme



28

reminder: morphemes are the smallest meaning bearing units in a language

e.g. the verb form „kommst“ consists of a root [kOm] and the inflection morpheme [st] for the numerus information second person singular

the same numerus information for second person singular might be indicated by other suffixes in other contexts in German, e.g. -est [rEd+@st].

hence [st] and [@st] are alternatives of one morpheme, i.e. they are allomorphes

phonology is responsible for exactly describing the allomorphic variations depending on phonologic contexts

Generative Phonologyallomorphs


29

in many languages (German in particular) there is the phenomenon of final devoicing (Auslautverhärtung):

Lob [lo:p] Lobes [lo:b@s]Rad [³a:t] Rades [³a:d@s]Tag [ta:k] Tages [ta:g@s]Nerv [nE³f] nervös [nE³v2:s]Haus [haUs] Hauses [haUz@s]orange [?o³aNS] Orange [?o³aNZ@]

all of the above roots end with an obstruent that is voiceless word-finally and voiced otherwise

[lo:p] and [lo:b], [³a:t] and [³a:d], etc. are allomorphes



30

sonorants do not exhibit this alternation:

Wahn [va:n] Wahnes [va:n@s]

Tal [ta:l] Tales [ta:l@s]

there are two ways of explaining this observation:

the allomorph with the voiceless obstruent is underlying and becomes voiced word-internally

example: /ta:k+@s/ > [ta:g@s]

the allomorph with the voiced obstruent is underlying and becomes voiceless word-finally

Beispiel: /ta:g/ > [ta:k]



31

possibility (underlying voiceless obstruent) would call for a rule that transforms voiceless obstruents word-internally into voiced ones

but this would yield wrong results for words where voiceless obstruents remain voiceless

Typ [ty:p] Typen [ty:p@n] [ty:b@n]Rat [³a:t] Rates [³a:t@s] [³a:d@s]Glück [glYk] Glückes [glYk@s] [glYg@s]Huf [hu:f] Hufes [hu:f@s] [hu:v@s]

hence is much more plausible



32

the final devoicing rule that is needed for an explanation like is:

/b d g v z Z/ > [p t k f s S] / __ #

this rule derives the correct results:

/#ta:g#/ /#ta:g+@s#/ underlying representation

â --- final devoicing

[ta:k] [ta:g@s] Oberflächenrepräsentation

a further indication of the correctness of is, that the rule is productive, i.e. it also applies to loan words or even made up words

Job der Schlub vs. des Schlubes




33

final devoicing is not an allophonic rule since input and corresponding output segments belong to distinct phonemes

e.g. /b/ is transformed into [p] word-finally, but /b/ and /p/ are both phonemes of German

in other words, the contrast between /b/ and /p/ is neutralized word-finally

in the tradition of structuralist phonology allophonic alternation was strictly kept apart from phonemic alternation

in the tradition of generative phonology this is different: it is not obvious (and not important) whether a rule concerns allophonic or phonemic alternation

hence, the notion of an underlying segment became more important than phoneme




34

the famous motivation for such a generative view comes from Morris Halle's investigation of Russian from 1959

in Russian, voiceless obstruents become voiced, if they occur before voiced obstruents:

[podnesti] („bring“) [potpisatj] („sign“)

[sprositj] („ask“) [zdelatj] („make“)

this also holds for affricates, e.g. /ts/ > [dz], /tS/ > [dZ].

in case of the affricates the alternation is allophonic, in the other cases it is phonemic ( [djenj] „day“ vs. [tjenj] „shadow“ )

ð a distinction of these two forms of alternation would make it impossible to formulate a unified rule and grasp the generalization




35

generative phonology is an integral part of generative grammar that describes how underlying representations are transformed into (phonetic) surface forms via application of phonological rules

rules are noted in the form A > B / X __ Y („if A occurs between X and Y, replace it by B“)

there are allophonic rules, which describe the alternation of allophones, e.g. the „ich/ach“ alternation and l-velarization

morphophonemic rules describe the alternation of allomorphs, e.g. final devoicing

these different rule types do not occur in generative phonology; here the phoneme status of a sound is of less importance and one speaks rather of underlying segments

Summary


36

1. transcribe the following words (i.e. give the IPA notation of their pronunciation)(a) Halle (b) kühl (c) scheußlich (d) üppig

2. find minimal pairs for each of the following pairs of segments in German or English (or another language of your choice) as far as possible:(a) [t] - [d] (b) [s] - [S] (c) [S] - [C]

(d) [n] - [l] (e) [a:] - [o:] (f) [p] - [pþf]

3. assume that /x/ would be the phoneme underlying the velar and the palatal

fricative in German. What would the rule look like that correctly derives the distribution of [C] and [x]?

Exercise

phonetics k phonology - arbeitsbereichecebert/teaching/10phonphon/handout04.pdf · phonetics k...

Documents