Redundancy and Distinctiveness

The preceding section establishes that there is a difference between
phonetics and phonology. While the former is concerned with the physical
properties of speech sounds, the latter is concerned with the structure and
function of these sounds in conveying meaning. It was said that two languages
can have the same phonetic segments, and yet these segments may
have different phonological properties in the two languages.

This statement can be better understood by comparing a fragment of the
phonologies of English and Thai. English has two kinds of voiceless stops
phonetically: aspirated [ph, th, kh] and unaspirated [p, t, k]. Aspirated stops
are found at the beginnings of words. As a result, the word which is written
pitf is pronounced [phm]. On the other hand, unaspirated stops are found
· after word-initial s. Thus, the word spin is pronounced [spin], not *[sphm].

That the stop consonant in spin is phonetically different from the stop
. consonant in pin can be demonstrated by holding a lit match in front of the
mouth: pronouncing the word spin makes the flame flutter less than pronouncing the word pin.
There are also two series of voiceless stops in Thai: an aspirated series and
an unaspirated series. The Thai words [phaa] 'to split' and [paa] 'forest'
(Ladefoged, 1971 : 12) illustrate the same difference between [ph] and [p] as
in the English words pin and spin. However, if the comparison were to stop
at the observation that English and Thai share a common inventory of
aspirated and unaspirated . stops, an important phonological distinction
would be missed.

In English, the two different ps are found in different environments. The
fact that one p is aspirated and the other is not is predictable from the place
it falls within the word. Thus, given the environments,
##--In ## s __ In where## marks the beginning of a word, it would sound un-English to put
[p] instead of [ph] in the first blank and [ph] instead of (p] in the second
blank. The same distribution is observed in the words tick and stick, pronounced
with [th] and [t], and the words kin and skin, pronounced with
[kh] and (k]. Since the presence or absence of aspiration can be predicted
from the environment of the voiceless stop in a word, aspiration is said to
be redundant in English.

The difference between English and Thai is that aspiration is not redundant
in Thai. Since [ph] and [p] both occur in exactly the same environment in
'to split' and 'forest' (namely, at the beginning of a word and before [aa]),
it is not possible to predict whether a given p will be aspirated or unaspirated
in this language. When two words such as [phaa] and [paa] differ only by
one sound, they are said to constitute a minimal pair. The difference between
the two sounds is sufficient to signal a difference in meaning. Examples of
minimal pairs in English are pin and bin, cat and cad. In Thai, if we pronounce
[ph] instead of [p] we risk pronouncing a word of a different meaning (for
example, 'to split' instead of 'forest'). In English, on the other hand, if we
pronounce [ph] instead of [p ], as in the non-native sounding [ sphm ], we
probably will not be misunderstood, since aspiration is a redundant property
predictable from the presence or absence of a preceding [ s]. If we pronounce
[b] instead of [ph], however, a word of a different meaning will result (for
example, bin instead of pin). This means that the difference between (b] and
[ph] is not redundant in English.

We now begin to appreciate Trubetzkoy's definition of phonology (1.2).
Since both p's are capable of occurring in the same place in a word in Thai,
and since the substitution of one for the other results in a word of a different
meaning, aspiration is said to be distinctive in Thai. Similarly, the difference
between [b] and [ph] is distinctive in English, though the difference between
[p] and [ph] is redundant. Trubetzkoy rightly pointed out that the concerns
of phonology go beyond those of phonetics. In phonology we are concerned
with the distinctive vs. redundant function of speech sounds (or, more
correctly, features, as we shall see below).

If the goal of phonetics is to understand the physical properties of speech sounds,
then the goal of phonology is to understand the ways these sounds function in language.
Phoneticians have long talked about sounds grouping into intersecting
classes. Some classes are more general or inclusive (for example, the class of
voiced sounds), while some classes are more specific or exclusive (for example,
the class of voiceless aspirated stops). While these classes are assumed to be
universally available to all languages, they are used differently by different
languages (compare the use of aspiration in English and Thai). However,
phonologists argue that there are only a certain number of "natural" ways a
language can deal with these classes. It should be clear that one way languages
differ is in their general inventory of sounds. A language can lack a
sound (for example, French does not have [h]) or even a whole series (class)
of sounds (for example, English does not have breathy voiced consonants).
However a difference in inventory between two languages has not only
phonetic consequences, but also phonological consequences.
As an illustration, consider the case of English and Berber. In the labial series,
English has four oral consonants, while Berber, like many languages
in North Mrica and the Middle East, has only two:










Berber does not have a [p] or a [ v ], whereas English does. In English, in
order to distinguish [f] from all other consonants, it is necessary to say that
it is (1) voiceless, (2) labial, and (3) a fricative.

We must specify it as voiceless,
because there is a [ v] in English which differs from [f] only in that it is voiced.
We must specify it as labial, because there is an[s] in English which differs
from [f] primarily in that it is alveolar. Finally, we must specify it as a
fricative, because there is a [p] in English which differs from (f] primarily
in that it is a stop. Thus, three features are required to distinguish [f] from
other sounds in English.

In Berber, on the other hand, only two features are needed. In order to
specify (f] in Berber, we can say either that it is (1) voiceless and (2) labial
or that it is (1) a fricative and (2) labial. In the first case we need not add that
it is a fricative, because we know that if a Berber consonant is voiceless and
labial, it can only be [f]. It cannot be [p ], since this sound does not exist in
the language. Similarly, in the second case we need not add that it is voiceless,
because we know that if a Berber consonant is a fricative and labial, it can
only be [f]. It cannot be [ v ], since this sound does not exist in the language.
Thus, in English each of these phonetic features is distinctive for all these
sounds, whereas in Berber there is some redundancy. In labial consonants
in Berber, voiceless + fricative go together: one can be predicted from the
other. In English, each phonetic property has distinctive value. Thus, if one
feature is changed, say, voiceless to voiced, a distinctive sound of the language
is obtained (for example, [v]).

Notice also in Berber that while voiceless + fricative go together in
the labial series, voiced + stop also go together. Thus,
we find only [b J and not [p ]. In summary, the two Berber
labials [f] and [b] differ from each other in two features, whereas in English,
[p] and [b ], [p] and [f], [f] and [ v ], and [b] and [ v J each differ from each
other in only one feature. As a result, there is less redundant information
in English than in Berber, for the labial series of sounds.

A child in acquiring his language must learn to recognize which sounds of
his language are distinctive and which sounds are redundant. Distinctive
sound units, that is, those which are capable of distinguishing words of
different meanings, are termed phonemes, whereas redundant sounds, that is,
those which are predictable from a given environment, are termed contextual
variants or allophones (see 3.1). As the child learns the phonemes and contextual
variants of his language, he establishes that certain phonetic features
are distinctive, whereas others are redundant. Some of these redundancies are
language-specific, such as the Berber case just examined. Other redundancies
are universal (for example, no language has a sound which is both an affricate
and nasal). In addition, there are some redundancies which are not universal
but which are frequently attested in languages. Thus, most languages only
have voiced sonorants (that is, nasals, liquids, glides, and vowels) and no
voiceless ones. Burmese, however, has a complete contrast between voiced
and voiceless nasal consonants, as seen in the following examples (Ladefoged,
1971: 11):

[rna] 'healthy'
[tpa] 'order'
[na] 'pain'
[!Ja] 'nostril'
[ua 1 'fish'
[ua] 'rent'

From these words it can be seen that voicing is distint tive in nasal consonants
in Burmese. Such a situation is relatively rare, and voiceless nasal consonants
are among those sounds which are viewed as complex by phonologists.
Finally, there are many sounds which are frequently missing from the
phonetic inventories of languages, for example, the interdental fricatives [9]
and [o], the front rounded vowels [ii, 0, re], the labiovelar stops [kp, gb,
tj!h ], and the South African click sounds. As was seen in Berber, gaps in the
phonetic inventory of a language partly determine which features are used
distinctively and which features are used redundantly.

resource : https://www.google.co.id/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwib99WWp8nRAhUHrY8KHWN4DlIQFggZMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fudel.edu%2F~heinz%2Fclasses%2F2014%2F607%2Fmaterials%2Freadings%2FHyman-Phonological-Theory-and-Analysis%2F1-What%2520is%2520Phonology%2520pp1-23.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH42uEjX805WVoE66-8E1l-2NN5YA&sig2=uK9bKXnRcccKr4ccOnm-2g&bvm=bv.144224172,d.c2I

Continue Reading

Phonetics and Phonology

Since speech sounds are the product of human anatomy and physiology,
it is not surprising to find similarities across languages. In some cases
phonologists are tempted to claim certain universals (or at least certain
tendencies) in the sound systems of the world. Thus, all languages appear to
have the vowel [a] in their inventory of sounds. Other vowel sounds, such
as [i] and [ u ], are extremely common in languages, but are not universal,
while still other vowel sounds, such as [i.i], as in French rue [ri.i] 'street,' are
much more restricted in their distribution in the world's languages. 

In orderto explain why certain sounds occur more frequently than others, one turns
to the field of phonetics, the study of speech sounds. Within this field one
might first look to articulatory phonetics, the study of how speech sounds are
articulated or produced. It may be that certain sounds require less muscular
effort in their production than other sounds, and since the latter sounds
require greater effort, they are not as frequently found in languages. Nor,
as we shall see (1.5.2), are they learned as early in language acquisition as are
sounds requiring less effort. On the other hand, one might look to acoustic
phonetics, the study of the physical properties of the sounds that are produced.
In this case, it may be that a certain sound is not as frequently found as
another because it is less acoustically distinct from other sounds.

Phonology has been defined as the study of sound systems, that is, the
study of how speech sounds structure and function in languages. As we shall
see, some speech sounds can be used in a language to distinguish words of
different meanings, whereas other sounds cannot. Thus, Trubetzkoy, one of
the founders of the Prague School of Linguistics, wrote (1939:10): "It is the
task of phonology to study which differences in sound are related to
differences in meaning in a given language, in which way the discriminative
elements ... are related to each other, and the rules according to which they
may be combined into words and sentences." A phonetic study tells how the
sounds of a language are made and what their acoustic properties are. A
phonological study tells how these sounds are used to convey meaning.

While it may be the case that phonetic explanations readily account for
the relative frequency of sounds, there are many issues in the study of speech
sounds which cannot be resolved by reference to phonetics alone. Because
speech sounds function to convey meaning, speakers sometimes have internal
or mental representations of sounds which are not identical with their
physical properties. That is, there is a psychological as well as a physical
(phonetic) side to speech sounds.

In a phonetic. study of a language, an inventory of sounds is provided.
Part of a phonetic study of English will include a statement that the sound
[e] occurs but that the sound [ x] does not occur. Part of a phonetic study

of German, on the other hand, will include a statement that the sound [ x]
occurs but that the sound [e] does not occur. Phoneticians point out that
although speech is characterized by a (semi)continuous flow of sounds,
speakers segment this continuous speech signal into discrete units. If one
were to look at an acoustic record of the pronunciation of the English word
ran (such as on a spectrogram), one would not observe a pause between the
[r] and the [re], or between the [re] and the [n]. Nor would one find an
abrupt change in the acoustic properties from one sound to the other.

Instead, sounds blend into one another, creating transitions from one sound
to another. In the above example, the lowering of the velum, which is
necessary for the pronunciation of the nasal consonant [ n ], begins before
the tip of the tongue reaches the alveolar position required for the articulation
of this consonant. As a result, some of the acoustic properties of nasalization
which belong to [ n] will be realized on the preceding vowel. Because of
such resulting transitions, it is impossible to delimit in all cases exactly where
one sound begins and another ends. And yet, all speakers of English would
agree that the word ran consists of three discrete sounds.
.Since it is not always possible to ascribe a physical reality to the discrete
gQ!,md units which are transcribed between phonetic brackets, such transcriptions
as [rren ], where partial nasalization is not indicated on the vowel,
n~cessarily represent an abstraction from the actual physical record. We
· · sh~U refer to these discrete units as phonetic segments or phones. A phonetic
study 9f a language, then, provides an inventory and description of the
o~; Curring phonetic segments. However, since speech signals are semicontinuous
in nature, and since no two utterances are ever exactly the same,
its}lo:uld be clear that not all of the physical properties of a given form or
utterance will ever be included in a phonetic transcription.

A phonological study also refers to the inventory of segments in a language.
But $tating which phonetic segments occur in a language and which do not
is only a superficial part of phonology. As pointed out by Sapir (1925:16-18),
two languages can have the same inventory of phonetic segments but have
very different phonologies.

As an illustration of this point, consider the status of ts in English and
GerJl1an. Compare the German word Salz [zalt'] 'salt' with the English
plural form salts [s:>Its]. Although one might argue that these two words
end wjth equivalent sound sequences, a closer examination of the two
languages reveals that these sequences are analyzed quite differently by
speakers of the two languages.

The final ts of salts is considered to be two consonants by speakers of English,
for two reasons. First, they know that the singular form is salt and that
the plural form is obtained by adding the additional segments. Second,
ts is not found at the beginning of English words,
Unlike the single affricate segment cas in chalk, which phoneticians
break up into a [t] closure and a [s] release. If ts were one consonant, it
would be expected to occur in all of the general positions. where single
consonants are found in English.

On the other hand, analyzing ts as two consonants allows the possibility
of identifying ts with other consonant sequences such as ps and ks,
which also are not found at th~ beginning of English words (see Sapir, 1925: 20).
In other words, there IS a structural principle in English ruling out
sequences of certain consonants followed by [s] in word-initial position.
The analysis of ts as t + s therefore fits the pattern or structure of the language.

In German on the other hand, ts (which is frequently written z in the
orthography)' is found in initial position as well as in final position, for
example, Zahl [t5a: 1] 'number.' Because of its relatively free distribution,
speakers of German analyze the [t] closure followed by a~ [s~ release as the
one segment t•. While ps and ks are not found at the begining of German
words, t• is found in this position. This difference in the structuring of ps and
ks, on the one hand, and t• on the other, makes German t• different from English ts.

Since the two are identical phonetically, a purely phone~ic study
would miss this distinction. It is in a phonological study that the difference
between ts and t• is captured. Thus, it is claimed that English has two
phonological segments ft/ and /sf in sequence, while German. has, in addition
to ftf and fs/, a phonological segment ft"f. Such phonological segments or
phonemes are written between phonemic slashes.

A phonological study thus deals with the structure of the phonetic segments
in a language. It also deals with the function of these segments. In one sense
this means determining whether a given sound is used in words of everyday ·
speech or only in a particular style of speech (poetic, archaic, etc.). F~r
example, languages often use exceptional sounds or sound sequences m
ideophones, a class of forms which express noises, feelings, intensity, etc.
The bilabial trill represented orthographically as brrr in English and used to
convey the idea of one's being cold falls outside the sound system of English.
Unlike the sound b or the sound r, which are phonetic and phonological
segments of English, brrr does not combine with other sounds to build words.

While there is a word bat and a word rat, there is no English word [!;>ret],
where [1;> J represents this bilabial trill. A bilabial trill does occur in some
languages, for example, in the Babanki word [l;>i] 'dog,' though it is relatively
rare. A second sound occurring only in a singl~ E~li~ ideophone is the
coarticulated labiovelar stop [kp] as found in [kp~kp~kp~J (the ideophone
used to call chickens).

The status of [kp] in English is quite different from that of the [kp]
which frequently occurs in West African languages, for example,
Igbo [akpa] 'bag.' A purely phonetic study of English describes
this sound and notes its infrequency in the language. A phonological study
points out the limited function of [kp J in English, that is, the fact that it is
permissible only in one ideophone. It, therefore differs from [p] and [k] not
only quantitatively (that is, in frequency) but also qualitatively.

While English speakers have no difficulty pronouncing the consonants in Igbo
(bpi] 'horn' and [aka] 'hand,' they experience great difficulty in reproducing
the[kp] of [akpa] 'bag.' This is true even for speakers who use the so~nd to
call chickens. This reveals the different psych_!!._logical status of [kp] as
opposed to [p] and [k]. Like the brrr soun~, [kp] is not part of the sound
structure of English. It cannot be used to build words.


resource : https://www.google.co.id/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwib99WWp8nRAhUHrY8KHWN4DlIQFggZMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fudel.edu%2F~heinz%2Fclasses%2F2014%2F607%2Fmaterials%2Freadings%2FHyman-Phonological-Theory-and-Analysis%2F1-What%2520is%2520Phonology%2520pp1-23.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH42uEjX805WVoE66-8E1l-2NN5YA&sig2=uK9bKXnRcccKr4ccOnm-2g&bvm=bv.144224172,d.c2I 

Continue Reading