Chapter Four




                               From
                       A Course in Phonology
                                By
                      Iggy Roca Wyn Johnson
                             pp. 85-97



   Presented by                                     Presented to
Qamra’ S. Al-Otaibi                            Dr. Norice Methias
We introduce a number of formal devices central to
             the model of phonology



   “The distinctive              “autosegmental
      feature”                     phonology”
   Binary X Unary
   Natural classes of
   segments
1. What are parameters?

   Distinct segments must by definition differ in the
         setting of at least one such parameter


          Contrast                         Contrast
        between two                      between two
        segments in                      segments in
             one                               two
        parameter ,                      parameter ,
        e.g. sip - zip                    e.g. /n/ - /f/
The advantages of a system based on parameters
      (Descriptive Phonetic Parameters)

       It enables us to describe each of the
       sounds of any language in a
       reasonably economic manner, e.g.
       /p/=voiceless bilabial obstruent stop

       It allows us to see at a glance what
       the significant differences between
       any two sounds are, e.g.
       /p/=voiceless bilabial obstruent stop
       /b/=voiced bilabial obstruent stop

       Because of its phonetic motivation:
       we not defining the sounds in
       question with arbitrary labels, but
       with labels that are directly
       grounded in their phonetic
       realization.
The disadvantages of a system based on parameters
        (Descriptive Phonetic Parameters)
            Problem                                                         Problem
This goes against the grain of                                  a. Uneconomical
Occam’s razor, as faviouring            1                       b. Potentially misleading, or
simplicity in scientific          The need to                   at least confusing.
modeling.                          proliferate
                                 labels to keep                             Solution
           Solution              pace with the         2        Adoption of one of the two
The focus of this book is not    phonetic facts   Duplication   complementary labels as the
on phonetics, but on                               of labels    “only” official label , its
phonology. Phonology is                                         counterpart being entirely
concerned with structural                                       disposed of , or at least
patterns rather than with                                       relegated to informal prose.
phonetic munitiae, and                                          The terminological gap left
therefore a simplification of                                   behind will of course be filled
the repertoire of parameters                                    with the negated term of the
is in order here.                                               surviving label.
What are the reasons you
    still need to gain
 familiarity with the less
    common labels?

• the selection of labels has
sadly not been carried out
uniformly by all practitioners.
• many such labels are in
current use of the phonetic
literature, to which the
phonological must of course
have ready access.
an important step in the process:
The negation “non-” will be expressed by the negative algebraic symbol “-”, so
that, for instance, we will write “non-sonorant” as “-sonorant”. We will write
“sonorant” with the opposite algebraic symbol, “+”: [+ sonorant]
 The kernel of the process:
A restricted set of “DISTINCTIVE FEATURES”
Why distinctive?
The keep sound distinct
Why features?
 They express properties of the sounds:
Endowed with an alternative binary value:
Positive value if the property named by the label is present in the sound being
defined, and negative if it is not.
The relationship between the phonetic parameters and the distinctive
features?
The distinctive features simply translate the phonetic parameters in a self-
explanatory manner.
Exercise, page 89
• Distinctive feature labels
Distinctive feature labels are always enclosed in square brackets. Such labels are
preceded by the operations + or – expressing the precise value of the feature:
[ sonorant] stands for either [+sonorant] or [-sonorant], and so on.


What is the relationship between the list of distinctive features and
UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR?
The list of distinctive features is provided once and for all for all languages: it
is assumed to be part of UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR, the set of principles for
language all humans are endowed with innately. The

Is the list of distinctive features universal?
list of distinctive features is assumed to be universal
by pretty well all phonologists, its actual contents
vary slightly from proposal to proposal : you must not
lose sight of the fact that, like any other aspect of
phonology, this list is hypothetical, given the
conjectural, rather than mechanistic, nature of the
enterprise.
The advantages of the system proposed by the
                       author
             (the distinctive features)
1. Ideal to implement classification of the
sounds of speech, set of consonants, to be
more precise. It immediately brings out
both the criteria for classification and the       Ideal to
exact position of any given element in the       implement
system.                                         classification
                                                                 unambiguous
2. Maximally simple (it should only contain     of the sounds
                                                  of speech
features necessary to implement
classification).
3. Clear (each value is immediately                                      clear
transparent), e.g. [-sonorant] refers to non-
sonorants, that is, obstruent.
4. Unambiguous: there is no chance of
missing the complementarity between             simple
[+sonorant] and [-sonorant], as there would
be if we used the labels “sonorant” and
“obstruent”.
Phonetic symbols are very useful when we want a written record of language sounds.
   However, they are not at all helpful when we want to find or explain sound patterns.
Example:
• The assimilation of /p/ to [P] , /p/ changes to [P]
1. Rule1: (1) P P / — f
• The assimilation of /b/ to [B] , /b/ changes to [B]
Rule2: b B / — f
•The assimilation of /m/ to [ɱ], /m/ changes to [ɱ]
Rule3: m ɱ / — f
Since the assimilation process also occur in front of /v/, we double the set of the three
rules:
• The assimilation of /p/ to [P] , /p/ changes to [P]
Rule4: (1) P P / — v
•The assimilation of /b/ to [B] , /b/ changes to [B]
Rule5: b B / — v
•The assimilation of /m/ to [ɱ], /m/ changes to [ɱ]
Rule6: m ɱ / — v
We will need six individual rules: not a very economical outcome.


One single phonological process underlies the six rules: lexically bilabial
sounds are pronounced as labiodental before a labiodental sound.


                                  Problem

 If we used phonetic symbols, we would miss an important linguistic
 generalization.

 Our interpretation of phonetic symbols as distinctive features does not
 take us any further. This problem extends to all instances of
 assimilation.

In next sections of this chapter, we will look at some more instances
of assimilation, with a view to finding a solution to the problem.
Examples
(2) intolerant
(3) impossible
/m/ and /n/ in the negative prefixes in- and –im.
They are both [+sonorant], [-continuant], [+voice], [+nasal]
/m/ Labial, /n/ alveolar
Question
What is the lexical consonant of /m/ and /n/ in the negative prefixes in- and –
im?
Hypothesis
/in/ is the lexical form of the negative prefix in- (-im and –in are one and the
same prefix).
Test
The general ides is that the sound that has the wider distribution is lexical,
whereas the sound or sounds with a more limited distribution is or created by
contextually restricted rule(s). To test this hypothesis, there are two strategies
 looking for the next best environment in the same set of forms.
    Extending the data set in other directions.
   looking for the next best environment in the same set of forms
   Initial-vowel base environment
   (4) Inability
   There is little reason to believe that the prefix-final nasal will assimilate to a following
   vowel. The nasal in the prefix turns up as [n] in ALL CASES
    Extending the data set in other directions
    (5) Ten pens (te[m] pens), ten doors (te[n] doors).
    (6) Some pens, some doors.

                                      Conclusion
                         Rule of labial assimilation for nasals

                         (7) [coronal] [labial] / [ ______] [labial]
                                                     +nasal
• we are now replacing phonetic symbols with distinctive features.
•Rule (7) states that a coronal nasal immediately preceding a labial itself becomes labial.
 The distinctive features are superior over the phonetic symbols in the formulation of
rules
Rules should be formulated in as economical a manner as possible.
• What is the definition of the feature[coronal] ?
 [coronal encodes alveolar place of articulation. It refers to a movement of the
blade of the tongue.

• what is the definition of “coronal” concerning the terminology?
The expression “coronal” is defined as ‘pertaining’ to the blade of the tongue.

• What do we mean by “Natural Classes”?
The assumption behind the distinctive feature model is that similarity of behaviour
follows directly from membership of a common class: each feature defines a class.
For example, the feature relevant in the present case is “coronal”. The sounds [t],
[d], [s], [z], [θ], [ð], [ʃ], [ʒ], [tʃ], and [dʒ], among others, are defined as [coronal],
since they all involve a gesture of the tongue blade.
Active and Passive articulators

A more substantial point in connection with the feature
 [coronal] concerns the reference it makes to the active,
rather than the passive, articulator: notice that there are
           no features [alveolar], [dental], etc.
Chapter4 natural classes of sounds distinctive features

Chapter4 natural classes of sounds distinctive features

  • 1.
    Chapter Four From A Course in Phonology By Iggy Roca Wyn Johnson pp. 85-97 Presented by Presented to Qamra’ S. Al-Otaibi Dr. Norice Methias
  • 2.
    We introduce anumber of formal devices central to the model of phonology “The distinctive “autosegmental feature” phonology”  Binary X Unary  Natural classes of segments
  • 3.
    1. What areparameters?  Distinct segments must by definition differ in the setting of at least one such parameter Contrast Contrast between two between two segments in segments in one two parameter , parameter , e.g. sip - zip e.g. /n/ - /f/
  • 4.
    The advantages ofa system based on parameters (Descriptive Phonetic Parameters) It enables us to describe each of the sounds of any language in a reasonably economic manner, e.g. /p/=voiceless bilabial obstruent stop It allows us to see at a glance what the significant differences between any two sounds are, e.g. /p/=voiceless bilabial obstruent stop /b/=voiced bilabial obstruent stop Because of its phonetic motivation: we not defining the sounds in question with arbitrary labels, but with labels that are directly grounded in their phonetic realization.
  • 5.
    The disadvantages ofa system based on parameters (Descriptive Phonetic Parameters) Problem Problem This goes against the grain of a. Uneconomical Occam’s razor, as faviouring 1 b. Potentially misleading, or simplicity in scientific The need to at least confusing. modeling. proliferate labels to keep Solution Solution pace with the 2 Adoption of one of the two The focus of this book is not phonetic facts Duplication complementary labels as the on phonetics, but on of labels “only” official label , its phonology. Phonology is counterpart being entirely concerned with structural disposed of , or at least patterns rather than with relegated to informal prose. phonetic munitiae, and The terminological gap left therefore a simplification of behind will of course be filled the repertoire of parameters with the negated term of the is in order here. surviving label.
  • 6.
    What are thereasons you still need to gain familiarity with the less common labels? • the selection of labels has sadly not been carried out uniformly by all practitioners. • many such labels are in current use of the phonetic literature, to which the phonological must of course have ready access.
  • 7.
    an important stepin the process: The negation “non-” will be expressed by the negative algebraic symbol “-”, so that, for instance, we will write “non-sonorant” as “-sonorant”. We will write “sonorant” with the opposite algebraic symbol, “+”: [+ sonorant]  The kernel of the process: A restricted set of “DISTINCTIVE FEATURES” Why distinctive? The keep sound distinct Why features? They express properties of the sounds: Endowed with an alternative binary value: Positive value if the property named by the label is present in the sound being defined, and negative if it is not. The relationship between the phonetic parameters and the distinctive features? The distinctive features simply translate the phonetic parameters in a self- explanatory manner. Exercise, page 89
  • 8.
    • Distinctive featurelabels Distinctive feature labels are always enclosed in square brackets. Such labels are preceded by the operations + or – expressing the precise value of the feature: [ sonorant] stands for either [+sonorant] or [-sonorant], and so on. What is the relationship between the list of distinctive features and UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR? The list of distinctive features is provided once and for all for all languages: it is assumed to be part of UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR, the set of principles for language all humans are endowed with innately. The Is the list of distinctive features universal? list of distinctive features is assumed to be universal by pretty well all phonologists, its actual contents vary slightly from proposal to proposal : you must not lose sight of the fact that, like any other aspect of phonology, this list is hypothetical, given the conjectural, rather than mechanistic, nature of the enterprise.
  • 9.
    The advantages ofthe system proposed by the author (the distinctive features) 1. Ideal to implement classification of the sounds of speech, set of consonants, to be more precise. It immediately brings out both the criteria for classification and the Ideal to exact position of any given element in the implement system. classification unambiguous 2. Maximally simple (it should only contain of the sounds of speech features necessary to implement classification). 3. Clear (each value is immediately clear transparent), e.g. [-sonorant] refers to non- sonorants, that is, obstruent. 4. Unambiguous: there is no chance of missing the complementarity between simple [+sonorant] and [-sonorant], as there would be if we used the labels “sonorant” and “obstruent”.
  • 10.
    Phonetic symbols arevery useful when we want a written record of language sounds. However, they are not at all helpful when we want to find or explain sound patterns. Example: • The assimilation of /p/ to [P] , /p/ changes to [P] 1. Rule1: (1) P P / — f • The assimilation of /b/ to [B] , /b/ changes to [B] Rule2: b B / — f •The assimilation of /m/ to [ɱ], /m/ changes to [ɱ] Rule3: m ɱ / — f Since the assimilation process also occur in front of /v/, we double the set of the three rules: • The assimilation of /p/ to [P] , /p/ changes to [P] Rule4: (1) P P / — v •The assimilation of /b/ to [B] , /b/ changes to [B] Rule5: b B / — v •The assimilation of /m/ to [ɱ], /m/ changes to [ɱ] Rule6: m ɱ / — v
  • 11.
    We will needsix individual rules: not a very economical outcome. One single phonological process underlies the six rules: lexically bilabial sounds are pronounced as labiodental before a labiodental sound. Problem If we used phonetic symbols, we would miss an important linguistic generalization. Our interpretation of phonetic symbols as distinctive features does not take us any further. This problem extends to all instances of assimilation. In next sections of this chapter, we will look at some more instances of assimilation, with a view to finding a solution to the problem.
  • 12.
    Examples (2) intolerant (3) impossible /m/and /n/ in the negative prefixes in- and –im. They are both [+sonorant], [-continuant], [+voice], [+nasal] /m/ Labial, /n/ alveolar Question What is the lexical consonant of /m/ and /n/ in the negative prefixes in- and – im? Hypothesis /in/ is the lexical form of the negative prefix in- (-im and –in are one and the same prefix). Test The general ides is that the sound that has the wider distribution is lexical, whereas the sound or sounds with a more limited distribution is or created by contextually restricted rule(s). To test this hypothesis, there are two strategies
  • 13.
     looking forthe next best environment in the same set of forms.  Extending the data set in other directions. looking for the next best environment in the same set of forms Initial-vowel base environment (4) Inability There is little reason to believe that the prefix-final nasal will assimilate to a following vowel. The nasal in the prefix turns up as [n] in ALL CASES Extending the data set in other directions (5) Ten pens (te[m] pens), ten doors (te[n] doors). (6) Some pens, some doors. Conclusion Rule of labial assimilation for nasals (7) [coronal] [labial] / [ ______] [labial] +nasal • we are now replacing phonetic symbols with distinctive features. •Rule (7) states that a coronal nasal immediately preceding a labial itself becomes labial.  The distinctive features are superior over the phonetic symbols in the formulation of rules Rules should be formulated in as economical a manner as possible.
  • 14.
    • What isthe definition of the feature[coronal] ? [coronal encodes alveolar place of articulation. It refers to a movement of the blade of the tongue. • what is the definition of “coronal” concerning the terminology? The expression “coronal” is defined as ‘pertaining’ to the blade of the tongue. • What do we mean by “Natural Classes”? The assumption behind the distinctive feature model is that similarity of behaviour follows directly from membership of a common class: each feature defines a class. For example, the feature relevant in the present case is “coronal”. The sounds [t], [d], [s], [z], [θ], [ð], [ʃ], [ʒ], [tʃ], and [dʒ], among others, are defined as [coronal], since they all involve a gesture of the tongue blade.
  • 15.
    Active and Passivearticulators A more substantial point in connection with the feature [coronal] concerns the reference it makes to the active, rather than the passive, articulator: notice that there are no features [alveolar], [dental], etc.