View
4
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
BBN–ANG–243 Phonological analysis3–4. Segment inventory
Zoltán Kiss, Ádám Nádasdy, Attila Starcevic, Péter Szigetvári, Miklós Törkenczy
Dept. of English Linguistics, ELTE
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 1 / 107
introduction
inventory (n.) /"Inv@nt@ri/ (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inventory)
◮ ‘a detailed, often descriptive, list of articles, giving the code number,quantity, and value of each; a catalogue’
◮ ‘a formal list of the property of a person or estate’
◮ ‘a catalogue of natural resources (esp. a count or estimate of wildlifeand game in a particular area)’
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 2 / 107
introduction
sound segment inventory (preliminary version)
◮ a formal list/catalogue of the speech sound segments of a language
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 3 / 107
introduction
same language – di=erent inventories
Jones vs. Gimson: SSBE monophthongs
Jones:Pet
e
i:
pit
ipe
t
epa
t
æpa
rt
A:po
t
Opo
rt
O:pu
t
ubo
ot
u:bu
t
2Ber
t
@:be
tter
@
Gimson: i: I e æ A: 6 O: U u: 2 3: @
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 4 / 107
introduction
same language – di=erent inventories
Jones vs. Gimson: SSBE diphthongs
J:ba
it
eibo
at
oubi
te
aibo
ut
auqu
oit
Oibe
er
i@be
ar
E@bo
ar
O@su
re
u@hi
deou
s
ı@in
fluen
ce
u@va
luin
g
ui
G: eI @U aI aU OI I@ E@ — U@ — — —
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 5 / 107
introduction
same language – di=erent inventories
Jones vs. Gimson: SSBE stops (stops, a=ricates, nasals)
J:ca
p
pfa
b
bfa
t
tfa
d
dba
ck
kba
g
gpa
tch
tSba
dge
dZqu
arts
tsad
ze
dztre
ad
trdr
ead
drra
m
mba
n
nsa
ng
N
G: p b t d k g tS dZ — — (tr) (dr) m n (N)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 6 / 107
introduction
‘viewpoint creates the object’
◮ phonological analysis is non-unique
◮ costs and benefits
◮ speaker-centred, constrained approach
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 7 / 107
introduction
speaker-centred analysis
◮ linguistics: natural science involving humans◮ assumption: phonology in the mind is created based on
phonetic input◮ phonology is grounded in phonetics
◮ categories, generalizations should be psychologically real
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 8 / 107
introduction
what is a speech sound segment?
◮ a discrete unit, with well-definable boundaries, and constant quality/property (∼ an atom)
◮ represented graphically as symbol tokens
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 9 / 107
introduction
segments as a string of beads
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 10 / 107
segmentation
problems
!but speech is anything but discrete!
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 11 / 107
segmentation
discreteness↔ physical reality
◮ a continuum, overlapping/gradual properties
◮ articulation: blending gestures
◮ acoustically: continuous sound waves
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 12 / 107
segmentation
p o u n d
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 13 / 107
segmentation
consequence of non-discreteness
◮ infinite number of sounds
◮ unlimited amount of variation
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 14 / 107
segmentation
main questions
◮ segmentation—how?
◮ limited inventory?
◮ inventory members?
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 15 / 107
segmentation
human audition and perception
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 16 / 107
segmentation
acoustic cues
acoustic cues
◮ inherent/internal/local: e.g., vowels, fricatives, a=ricates
◮ transitional/relative/non-local: e.g., prevocalic stops (pat–tat–cat)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 17 / 107
segmentation
spectrogram of guy
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 18 / 107
segmentation
segmentation: summary
◮ it is possible to segment the speech signal into distinct sections onacoustic grounds
◮ categorization of segments is aided by acoustic perceptual cues
◮ the end products of the segmentation: speech sound segments
(phones)
◮ finite number of small categories (e.g., “clear l’s”–“dark l’s”)
◮ the first analytical step of any analysis of sounds, sound systems
◮ categorization may (partially) rely on cues that reside in anothercategory (stops–vowel formant transitions)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 19 / 107
taxonomic analysis
the next level of categorization–abstraction
◮ further level of categorization/abstraction
◮ larger groups of phones based on their function
◮ function = contrastive ability
◮ taxonomic phonology/classical phonemics
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 20 / 107
taxonomic analysis
example: English /eI/–/aI/
a. save [seIv] sane [seIn]
made [meId] main [meIn]
maze [meIz] main [meIn]
b. side [saId] sign [saIn]
c. pale [peIl] pile [paIl]
Dave [deIv] dive [daIv]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 21 / 107
taxonomic analysis
3 segment pairs
1. [eI] ∼ [eI]
2. [aI] ∼ [aI]
3. [eI] ∼ [aI]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 22 / 107
taxonomic analysis
/eI/, /aI/—conclusions
◮ [eI], [eI]: complementary distribution, predictable, no contrast⇒ allophones of /eI/
◮ [aI], [aI]: complementary distribution, predictable, no contrast⇒ allophones of /aI/
◮ [eI] and [aI]: overlapping distribution, unpredictable, contrast⇒ separate phonemes: /eI/ and /aI/
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 23 / 107
taxonomic analysis
phonemes
definition
classes of phonetically similar allophones in overlapping distributioncontrasting meaning
– products of classification, higher level of abstraction, small, finite numberof basic elements
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 24 / 107
taxonomic analysis
phoneme: abstract class of phonetically similar allophones
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 25 / 107
taxonomic analysis
phoneme: abstract class of phonetically similar allophones
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 26 / 107
taxonomic analysis phonemicization
segment inventory (taxonomic version)
◮ a formal list/catalogue of the phonemes of a language
◮ phonemicization: the analytical procedures leading to an inventory
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 27 / 107
taxonomic analysis characteristics
taxonomic phonemics: some characteristics
◮ analytical procedures on surface data
◮ once a phoneme, always a phoneme principle
◮ phonemes are atomic and discrete
◮ biuniqueness/linearity
◮ contrast matching
◮ non-redundancy
◮ separation of grammatical levels
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 28 / 107
taxonomic analysis biuniqueness
biuniqueness & linearity: pant
phonemic/underlying level: phonemes /p æ n t/
phonetic/surface level: allophones [ph æ n Pt^]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 29 / 107
taxonomic analysis biuniqueness
biuniqueness & linearity: pant
phonemic/underlying level: phonemes /p æ n t/
phonetic/surface level: allophones [ph æ n Pt^]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 30 / 107
taxonomic analysis contrast transfer
contrast matching problems: contrast transfer
◮ the underlying phonemic contrast may sometimes disappear
◮ redundant properties may emerge to carry the contrast
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 31 / 107
taxonomic analysis contrast transfer
contrast transfer: word-final devoicing in English
beat bead
UR: /bi:t/ ⇐⇒ /bi:d/
Rule: WFD n. a. bi:t
SR: [bi:t] =! [bi:t]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 32 / 107
taxonomic analysis contrast transfer
contrast transfer: pre-fortis clipping+ word-final devoicing in English
beat bead
UR: /bi:t/ ⇐⇒ /bi:d/
Rule: PFC bit n. a.
Rule: WFD n. a. bi:t
SR: [bit] ⇐⇒ [bi:t]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 33 / 107
taxonomic analysis redundancy
underlying representations: redundancy-free, economical
Words in the lexicon must be representedwithout predictable information.
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 34 / 107
mentalist
the mentalist phoneme
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 35 / 107
atomicity
what is in a phoneme?
pit ⇐⇒ pet/pIt/ ⇐⇒ /pet/
what really carries the contrast?
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 36 / 107
atomicity
what is in a phoneme?
phonetic similarity
[eI] – [eI] – [aI] – [s]
the symbols do not explicitly expresssimilarity
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 37 / 107
natural classes
natural classes: vowel nasalization
◮ /eI/→ [eI]/
/n/
◮ /aI/→ [aI]/
/n/
◮ V→ V/
/n//m//N/
◮*V→ V/
/p//s//l/
◮*/s/→ [S]/
/m//n//N/
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 38 / 107
natural classes
natural classes
◮ input
◮ conditioning environment
◮ a natural class of segments: any complete set of segments that sharethe same value for a phonetic property or set of properties
◮ ‘phonetic property’ = phonetic feature
◮ hypothesis: phonological rules and segment inventories are organized
along features
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 39 / 107
features
features
◮ cognitive formal representations (abstract formal objects)
◮ articulatorily or acoustically-defined
◮ every segment: the product of a specific binary choice for phoneticproperties
◮ /m/ /n/ /p/is the velum lowered? yes yes nois the lip involved? yes no yesis the tongue tip/blade involved? no yes nois there full closure in the mouth? yes yes yes. . . . . . . . . . . .
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 40 / 107
features
features
◮ cognitive formal representations (abstract formal objects)
◮ articulatorily or acoustically-defined
◮ every segment: the product of a specific binary choice for phoneticproperties
◮ /m/ /n/ /p/is the velum lowered? yes yes no [±nasal]is the lip involved? yes no yes [± labial]
is the tongue tip/blade involved? no yes no [± coronal]
is there full closure in the mouth? yes yes yes [± continuant]
. . . . . . . . . . . .
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 41 / 107
features
features
◮ cognitive formal representations (abstract formal objects)
◮ articulatorily or acoustically-defined
◮ every segment: the product of a specific binary choice for phoneticproperties
◮ /m/ /n/ /p/is the velum lowered? + + − [nasal]is the lip involved? + − + [labial]
is the tongue tip/blade involved? − + − [coronal]
is there full closure in the mouth? − − − [continuant]
. . . . . . . . . . . .
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 42 / 107
features
segments form a string of feature matrices (sing.: matrix)
the representation of pin
/p I n/
−syllabic−sonorant−continuant−nasal+labial−voice
...
+syllabic+sonorant+continuant−nasal−back−round+high−low
...
−syllabic+sonorant−continuant+nasal−labial+voice
...
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 43 / 107
features
feature matrix
the underlying representation of pin
/p I n/
−syllabic−sonorant−continuant−nasal+labial−voice
...
+syllabic+sonorant+continuant−nasal−back−round+high−low
...
−syllabic+sonorant−continuant+nasal−labial+voice
...
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 44 / 107
features
vowel nasalization rule—featural version
[+ syllabic]→ [+nasal]/
[+ nasal]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 45 / 107
features
feature matrix
the output/surface representation of pin
[p I n]
−syllabic−sonorant−continuant−nasal+labial−voice
...
+syllabic+sonorant+continuant+nasal−back−round+high−low
...
−syllabic+sonorant−continuant+nasal−labial+voice
...
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 46 / 107
features
feature matrix
the underlying representation of pick
/p I k/
−syllabic−sonorant−continuant−nasal+labial−voice
...
+syllabic+sonorant+continuant+nasal−back−round+high−low
...
−syllabic−sonorant−continuant−nasal−labial−voice
...
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 47 / 107
features
features in phonological analysis
◮ segments = bundles of phonetic features, not atomic
◮ better understanding of phonological patterning
◮ phonological similarity vs. distance is formally explicit (shared featurevalues); predictions
◮ “unnatural” classes are di;cult/impossible to express(cf. {/p/, /s/, /l/, /æ/})
◮ phonemes = feature matrices that di=er in at least one value(distinctive features)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 48 / 107
features
segment inventory (feature-based version)
◮ phonological segments are complexes of distinctive features thatdefine/cross-classify the phoneme inventory into a segmental network
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 49 / 107
features
setting up an inventory=
finding the distinctive features
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 50 / 107
features feature functions
functions of features
features: contrastive function
◮ phoneme A⇔ phoneme B⇔ phoneme C⇔ phoneme D[
+X+Y
]
⇔
[
+X−Y
]
⇔
[
−X+Y
]
⇔
[
−X−Y
]
◮ requirement: small and economical feature set, but capable ofexpressing all the contrasts in a language
features: phonetic/descriptive function
◮ phonetic interpretation works on the output of phonological rules(“surface repr.”), that level should also be phonetic by nature
◮ requirement: distinctive features should be defined in phonetic terms
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 51 / 107
features feature functions
features: classificatory function
◮ features cross-classify segments into natural classes
◮ processes that refer to features
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 52 / 107
features feature functions
what are the distinctive features for English (RP) vowels?
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 53 / 107
features syllabic
[±syllabic]
◮ structural definition: ‘segments forming the nucleus of a syllable’
◮ since syllabification depends on sonority (the ∼ hierarchy), this featureis phonetic after all
◮ sonority◮ acoustically: periodic sound waves, with clear formant structure
(una=ected by noise)◮ articulatorily: openness, lack of occlusion⇒ spontaneous vocal fold
vibration
◮ all vowels are [+syllabic]
◮ feature adequacy: contrastive: X
phonetic: (X)classificatory: X
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 54 / 107
features RP vowel inventory
stressed vowel inventory of RP (surface contrast)
shortmonophthongs
/I/ bit/e/ bet/æ/ bat/2/ but/6/ bot/U/ put
longmonophthongs
/i:/ beat/A:/ Bart/3:/ Bert/O:/ bought/u:/ boot
(long)diphthongs
/eI/ bait/aI/ bite/aU/ bout/oU/ boat/OI/ quoit/I@/ beer/e@/ bear/U@/ boor
(/O@/) boar
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 55 / 107
features RP vowel inventory
RP monophthongs in the IPA vowel space
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 56 / 107
features RP vowel inventory
RP monophthongs: phonological place classification
front central backclose i: u:
half-close I U
mid 3: O:
half-open e
open æ 2 A: | 6
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 57 / 107
features front, back
[±front], [±back]
◮ [+ front]: front segments are produced by advancing the body of thetongue from the neutral position
◮ [+back]: back segments are produced by retracting the body of thetongue from the neutral position
◮ 3 horizontal categories: front — central —- back
◮ feature adequacy:contrastive: X (cf. bat /æ/–but /2/)phonetic: X
classificatory: X (only [+ front] Vs may trigger palatalization;only [+back] Vs are most often rounded)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 58 / 107
features high, low
RP monophthongs: phonological place classification
front central backclose i: u:
half-close I U
mid 3: O:
half-open e
open æ 2 A: | 6
}
[+high], [−low]}
[−high], [−low]}
[−high], [+low]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 59 / 107
features high, low
[±high], [± low]
◮ [+high]: high segments are produced by raising the body of thetongue above the level that it occupies in the neutral position
◮ [+ low]: low segments are produced by lowering the body of thetongue above the level that it occupies in the neutral position
◮ 3 vertical categories: high — mid — low
◮ feature adequacy:contrastive: X (cf. bat /æ/–bet /e/)phonetic: (X) simplifies!classificatory: X (cf. high vowel gliding (compression):
lenient /"li:ni@nt/→ /"li:nj@nt/;usual /"ju:Zu@l/→ /"ju:Zw@l/[+high]→ [−syllabic]
/
[−stress])
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 60 / 107
features high, low
the RP stressed monophthong inventory so far. . .
i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:
[front] + + + + − − − − − − −
[back] − − − − − − + + + + +
[high] + + − − − − − − − + +
[low] − − − + − + + + − − −
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 61 / 107
features length and quality
seen – sin / fool – full / cast – cost, etc.
two candidates
◮ Gimson:◮ length di=erence: [± long]◮ quality di=erence: [±?]
◮ the phonemic theory requires redundancy-free representations⇒choose either [± long] or “quality”
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 62 / 107
features length and quality
quality = ?
candidates
◮ the IPA: (subtle) height di=erence for seen – sin / fool – full
◮ the IPA: rounding di=erence for cast – cost
◮ traditionally: tense–lax [±tense]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 63 / 107
features rounding
rounding & the RP monophthong inventory so far. . .
i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:
[front] + + + + − − − − − − −
[back] − − − − − − + + + + +
[high] + + − − − − − − − + +
[low] − − − + − + + + − − −
[round] − − − − − − − + + + +
◮ [±round] is only relevant for /A:/ – /6/
◮ problem: /i:/ – /I/ and /u:/ – /U/
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 64 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense]
◮ the phonetically-grounded definition: rather vague
◮ ‘tense sounds are produced with a deliberate, accurate, maximallydistinct articulatory tongue gesture that involves considerable
muscular e=ort, a tensing in the tongue muscles; lax sounds areproduced rapidly, somewhat indistinctly, and without tongue muscle
tensing’
◮ tensing: advancement of the tongue root ([±ATR])
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 65 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense]—problems
◮ mere tensing of muscles does not a=ect the acoustic vowel quality
◮ for articulatory reasons, tongue root advancement is hindered for lowvowels⇒ /A:/ should be [−tense]
◮ the phonetic tense–lax status of some sounds is not clear(/3:/, /O:/, diphthongs, triphthongs)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 66 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory
i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:
[front] + + + + − − − − − − −
[back] − − − − − − + + + + +
[high] + + − − − − − − − + +
[low] − − − + − + + + − − −
[round] − − − − − − − + + + +
[tense] + − − − −? − − − −? − +
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 67 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory:length is not underlying!
i I e æ 3 2 A 6 O U u
[front] + + + + − − − − − − −
[back] − − − − − − + + + + +
[high] + + − − − − − − − + +
[low] − − − + − + + + − − −
[round] − − − − − − − + + + +
[tense] + − − − −? − − − −? − +
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 68 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense]—problems
feature adequacy:
contrastive: X (seen – sin / fool – full)phonetic: ——classificatory: ?
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 69 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense]: classification role
Trisyllabic Laxness
◮ only these occur in the antepenult: /I e æ 6 2 A: 3: O:/
◮ they are classified as [−tense]
Prevocalic Tenseness
◮ within a morpheme, only /i: u: (O:) eI aI OI aU oU/ can occur beforeanother vowel (ruin, neon, chaotic, poem. . . )
◮ they are classified as [+tense]
◮ note: /A: 3:/ should be [−tense]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 70 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense]: classification role
vowels in word-final stressed syllables
◮ /I e æ 2 6 U/ do not occur in a word-final open stressed syllable
◮ they are classified as [−tense]
◮ note: /A: 3: O:/ should be [+tense] ! (spa, far, law, more, fur. . . )
◮ note: ‘short vowels do not occur in a word-final open stressed syllable’
vowels before /N/
◮ only these can occur before /N/: /I e æ 2 6 U/
◮ /A: O: 3:/ pattern again with /i: u: O: eI aI OI aU oU/ in this respect
◮ note: ‘only short vowels occur before /N/’
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 71 / 107
features tenseness
[±tense]—problems
feature adequacy:
contrastive: X (seen – sin / fool – full)phonetic: vague, unclearclassificatory: contradictory
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 72 / 107
features length
[±long] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory
i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:
[front] + + + + − − − − − − −
[back] − − − − − − + + + + +
[high] + + − − − − − − − + +
[low] − − − + − + + + − − −
[round] − − − − − − − + + + +
[long] + − − − + − + − + − +
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 73 / 107
features length
[±long] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory[±tense] & [±round] are redundant
i: i e æ 3: 2 A: A O: u u:
[front] + + + + − − − − − − −
[back] − − − − − − + + + + +
[high] + + − − − − − − − + +
[low] − − − + − + + + − − −
[long] + − − − + − + − + − +
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 74 / 107
features length
[±long]
benefits
◮ contrast of English vowels is straightforward now
◮ classification of some phenomena is easier
◮ primary stress assignment
◮ vowels in word-final stressed syllables: only [+ long] vowels
◮ vowels before /N/: only [− long] vowels
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 75 / 107
features length
[±long]
problems
◮ Prevocalic Tenseness & Trisyllabic Laxness cannot be expressedneatly. . .
◮ no absolute definition, short–long depends on timing relations
◮ length is unstable/predictable in English: Pre-Fortis Clipping
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 76 / 107
features length
length is unstable
beat bitunderlying representation: /bi:t/ ⇐⇒ /bit/
Rule: PFC bit n.a.
surface representation: [bit] =!!! [bit]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 77 / 107
features length
[±long]—problems
feature adequacy of [± long]
contrastive: (X) (unstable, cf. Pre-Fortis Clipping)phonetic: (X) (new kind of representation is needed)classificatory: (X) (dubious, cf. Prevocalic Tenseness, TSL)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 78 / 107
features length
possible solutions
◮ more place features (= IPA)
◮ allow both quality + quantity in the lexicon
◮ both solutions: more categories,redundancy!
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 79 / 107
features redundancy
redundancy?
what if we include redundant informationto express a contrast?
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 80 / 107
features redundancy
redundancy: costs
◮ rejects a cornerstone of classical phonemics/generative phonology
◮ less economical system
◮ more complicated
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 81 / 107
features redundancy
redundancy: benefits
◮ the problems above disappear
◮ a better model of contrast perception and contrast preservation
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 82 / 107
features redundancy
little contrast (di=erence is not dispersed enough)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 83 / 107
features redundancy
large contrast (di=erence is more dispersed)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 84 / 107
features redundancy
dispersion of contrast
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 85 / 107
features redundancy
redundancy: benefits
◮ a better model of the shaping of vowel inventories: contrasts areenhanced by “redundant” phonetic features (dispersion theory)
◮ Pete–pot: height, frontness, diphthongization, length,rounding, tensing
◮ beat–bit: height, diphthongization, length, tensing◮ Bart–bot: length, rounding◮ bat–but: height
◮ predictions for likely contrast loss
◮ classification is possible along more dimensions
◮ the lexical representation is less abstract
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 86 / 107
schwa
the schwa in English
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 87 / 107
schwa
the schwa in English
a quote from Marc van Oostendorp
“I suspect that we will not have a satisfying theory of schwa until we have asatisfying Theory of Everything.”
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 88 / 107
schwa classical phonemics
the schwa in English—classical phonemics
illusion – allusion /I/←→ /@/
e=ect – a=ect /I/←→ /@/
except – accept /I/←→ /@/
pity – pitta /i/←→ /@/
rocky – rocker /i/←→ /@/
city – sitter /i/←→ /@/
Sophie – sofa /i/←→ /@/
teaches – teachers /I/←→ /@/
roses – Rosa’s /I/←→ /@/
purist – purest /I/←→ /@/
Lenin – Lennon /I/←→ /@/
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 89 / 107
schwa classical phonemics
the schwa in English—classical phonemics
conclusion of classical phonemics
The schwa is a phoneme of English.
It has the same status as /I/, /i(:)/, /æ/, /OI/, etc.
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 90 / 107
schwa classical phonemics
the schwa in English—problems with the phonemicanalysis
2 nagging facts
1. Schwa only occurs in unstressed syllables(predictable).
2. Schwa has a limited contrast.a. It only contrasts with certain vowels.b. It only contrasts in certain positions. (GA, RP?)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 91 / 107
schwa generative phonology
the schwa in English—generative phonology
neutralization
The contrast of vowels like /6/, /A:/, /eI/, etc. is suspended in anunstressed syllable.
inventory membership of schwa in the generative analysis
Schwa is derived, it is not a member of the phoneme inventory of English.
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 92 / 107
schwa generative phonology
the schwa in English—generative phonology
the Vowel Reduction Rule[
−stress+syllabic
]
→ @
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 93 / 107
schwa generative phonology
the schwa in English—generative phonology
What is the underlying representation of these unstressed vowels?
sentencesystemmoralsymbolismatomharmonymysterydramaticsulphur
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 94 / 107
schwa generative phonology
the schwa in English—generative phonology
systematic alternations:
séntence ∼ senténtial @∼ e
sýstem ∼ systémic @∼ e
móral ∼morálity @∼æ
sýmbolism∼ symbólic @∼ 6
átom ∼ atómic @∼ 6
hármony ∼ harmónious @∼ oU
mýstery ∼mystérious @∼ I@
dramátic ∼ dráma @∼ A:
súlphur ∼ sulphúrious @∼ jU@
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 95 / 107
schwa generative phonology
the schwa in English—generative phonology
sample derivation of atom ∼ atomic
UR: /æt6m/ /æt6mIk/
stress rules "æt6m æ"t6mIkVowel Reduction Rule "æt@m @"t6mIkother rules . . . . . .SR: ["æt@m] [@"th 6mIk]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 96 / 107
schwa generative phonology
the schwa in English—generative phonology
How can we derive the schwas in these words?
ópusgymnásiumdecísionóftenmélonÁllenmóuntain
etc.
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 97 / 107
schwa generative phonology
the schwa in English—nonalternating morphemes
possible URs of opus
/oUpæs//oUp6s//oUpes/
/oUpoUs//oUp2s/
/oUpju:s/etc.
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 98 / 107
schwa archiphoneme
the schwa in English—archiphoneme
underspecification
ópus /oUpVs/óften /6fVn/mélon /melVn/Állen /ælVn/móuntain /maUntVn/
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 99 / 107
schwa archiphoneme
the schwa in English—archiphoneme
sample derivation of atom ∼ atomic, and opus
UR: /æt6m/ /æt6mIk/ /oUpVs/
stress rules "æt6m æ"t6mIk /"@UpVs/Vowel Reduction Rule "æt@m @"t6mIk /"oUp@s/other rules . . . . . . . . .SR: ["æt@m] [@"th 6mIk] ["oUp@s]
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 100 / 107
schwa archiphoneme
the schwa in English—archiphoneme, problems
1. our system can only generate [@] in an unstressed syllable2. it often cannot be predicted whether the reduced vowel is
[@] or [I] or [i]/"len n/ (Lennon – Lenin)/"bet / (better – Betty)
3. in many cases the reduced vowel can only be [I] or [i(:)]rigíditydebátestúpidpássagesíllydemócracy
4. ‘all vowels except [I] or [i]’— cannot be easily defined as anarchiphoneme
5. other vowels also seem to occur in an unstressed syllable:
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 101 / 107
schwa archiphoneme
the schwa in English—archiphoneme, problems
/æ/ gastrónomy (but: astrónomy with /@/)cantéen
/6/ ápricotMontána
/e/ cóntentpellúcid
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 102 / 107
schwa types
the schwa in English—a proposal
The English vowel inventory: more structured
◮ contrastive full vowels in stressed positions(main inventory)
◮ contrastive reduced vowels in unstressed positions(subinventory 1)
◮ noncontrastive reduced vowels in unstressedpositions (subinventory 2)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 103 / 107
schwa types
the schwa in English—two kinds
2 kinds of schwa
1. contrastive schwa (sófa (⇔ Sóphie))
2. noncontrastive schwa (rhápsody)
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 104 / 107
schwa types
2 schwas: 2 behaviours
2 schwas
◮ contrastive: does not vary in pronunciation, usually final
◮ non-contrastive: large variation, usually non-final
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 105 / 107
schwa types
the schwa in English—GA realizations
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 106 / 107
schwa types
the schwa in English—GA realizations
z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 107 / 107
Recommended