This document provides an overview of the introductory linguistics course "Intro to Slavic Linguistics" being taught in the autumn of 2012 at the University of Chicago. It includes information about the instructor, texts, requirements, and an outline of topics to be covered over the course of the semester, beginning with introductions to Slovenian/Slovene, Bulgarian, and Macedonian languages and moving on to discussions of phonetic symbols, phonology, and contrasts between phonetics and phonology.

1. 10/17/2012
SLAV 20100/30100 intro, organization
Intro to Slavic Linguistics instructor: Yaroslav Gorbachov
Autumn 2012 gorbachov@uchicago.edu
Foster 403
Yaroslav Gorbachov
gorbachov@uchicago.edu office hours: Wed 4:35 – 6 pm
texts: Comrie, Corbett, The Slavonic Languages
” Sussex, Cubberly, The Slavic languages
extra readings: available as PDFs
č ę requirements: see syllabus
Slovenian / Slovene Slovenian / Slovene
speakers: ca. 2.4 million; 30+ dialects
late 10th c.: the Freising Fragments, the
earliest instance of written Slovene
16th c.: Adam Bohorič develops Slovene
orthography (the Roman-based 'bohoričica')
first books in Slovene written by the Lutheran
preacher Primož Trubar
1

2. 10/17/2012
Slovenian / Slovene earliest adaptation of Roman
2nd half of 16th c.: multiple books printed in Ecçe bi detd nas ne ze-
gresil te u veku gemu be
Slovene siti starosti ne prigem-
lióki nikolige se pet-
sali neimugi ni slzna
…incl. Jurij Dalmatin's translation of the Bible teleze imoki nú uv uę-
ki gemu be siti bone-
mid-19th c.: the Reformation model of se zavuiztiu bui ne-
priiazninu vuignan
literary Slovenian is abandoned; a new od zlavui bosige <…>
literary norm based on the Central Slovenian
dialects gradually takes shape
Croatian 'gajevica' is adopted to replace the Freising Fragments (p. 158v),
from Slovenia 2nd half of 10th c.
16th c. 'bohoričica' source: http://nl.ijs.si/e-zrc/bs/index-en.html
earliest adaptation of Roman Bulgarian
Ešte bi děd naš ne sŭ-
grěšil tŭ v věku jemu by
speakers: ca. 8.5 million
žiti starosti ne prijem-
l'oči nikolije že pe- 12-19th c.: Bulg. recension of Church Slavonic
čali neimyjĭ ni slzna
telese imoči nŭ v vě-
ky jemu by žiti pone- mid-19th c.: codification (standardization)
že zavistju by ne-
prijaznĭnu vygnan based on N-E dialects (around Veliko Tărnovo)
od slavy božijě <…>
late 19th c.: underwent influence from the
Russian language (special terminology)
Freising Fragments (p. 158v), since the 20th c.: influence from the W Bulg.
from Slovenia 2nd half of 10th c.
source: http://nl.ijs.si/e-zrc/bs/index-en.html dialect of Sofia
2

3. 10/17/2012
Macedonian Macedonian
speakers: ca. 1.6 million 1945: the present orthography was adopted
prior to WWII: mostly classified as Bulgarian based on the Serbian version of the Cyrillic
1944: the Anti-Fascist Assembly of Macedonia alphabet (as modified by Vuk Karadžić)
proclaimed the territory as part of Yugoslavia 1946: the first official Macedonian grammar
Aug. 2, 1944: Macedonian becomes the was written by Krume Kepeski
official language of the Republic of Macedonia by mid-50's: the literary language was
Oct. 29, 1944: 1st iss. of the Nova Makedonija standardized (west-central dialectal base,
newspaper (the first document to appear in areas around Skopje)
literary Macedonian)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_language
3

4. 10/17/2012
phonetic symbols & conventions
vocal tract and
articulatory phonetics points of articulation
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/langling/resources/midsagsectionbw.jpg
phonetic symbols & conventions phonetic symbols & conventions
IPA chart – pulmonic consonants IPA chart – vowels
http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA/ipachart.html source of the vowel chart: http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA/ipachart.html
4

5. 10/17/2012
phonetic symbols & conventions
clickable IPA charts with audio recordings
(click on a character to "sound" it!)
phonetics vs. phonology;
http://www.paulmeier.com/ipa/consonants.html the phoneme
http://www.paulmeier.com/ipa/vowels.html
phonetics vs. phonology phonetics vs. phonology
notions: tie [thɑɪ]
phonetics sty [stɑɪ]
phonology steam [stji:m]
phone (speech sound) but [bʌʔ]
phoneme ('underlying' sound) butter [bʌɾǝɹ]
allophone
5

6. 10/17/2012
phonetics vs. phonology phonetics vs. phonology
[thɑɪ], [ǝ.ʹthæk] [thɑɪ], [ǝ.ʹthæk]
[stɑɪ] [stɑɪ]
t [stji:m] t [stji:m]
[bʌʔ] [bʌʔ]
[ʹbʌ.ɾǝɹ] [ʹbʌ.ɾǝɹ]
complementary distribution! allophones (positional variants)!
phonetics vs. phonology phonetics vs. phonology
[th] [th]
[t] [t] брат [brɑt] мат [mɑt]
/t/ [tj] /t/ [tj] брать [bratj] мать [matj]
[ʔ] [ʔ]
[ɾ] [ɾ]
allophones (positional variants)! contrastive sounds or positional variants?
6

7. 10/17/2012
phonetics vs. phonology phonetics vs. phonology
[th] [th] дан [dɑn] дань [danj]
[t] /t/ [t] брат [brɑt] брать [bratj]
/t/ [tj] /tj/ /t/ [tj] мат [mɑt] мать [matj]
[ʔ] [ʔ] дал [dɑl] даль [dalj]
[ɾ] [ɾ] рана [rɑ.nǝ] раня [rɑ.njǝ]
in Russian ― contrasƟve sounds! what about [ɑ] vs. [a]?
phonetics vs. phonology phonetics vs. phonology
phonemes in (Hiberno)English and Russian: phonemes in English and Russian:
/ɑ/ [ɑ] /ɑ/ /t/ [t] /t/
/æ/ [a] [tj] /tj/
what about [ɑ] vs. [a]? what about [t] vs. [tj]?
7

8. 10/17/2012
phonetics vs. phonology phonetics vs. phonology
palatalized consonants + low vowels in Russ.: are Russian [m] and [mj] phonemes or allophones
мат 'mat' /mɑt/ [ mɑt ] of the same phoneme?
мят 'wrinkled' /mjɑt/ [ mjat ] what about [t] and [tj]?
мать 'mother' /mɑtj/ [ matj ] unlike Eng., they are phonemes (contrastive)
мять 'to wrinkle' /mjɑtj/ [ mjætj ] what about Russian [ɑ] [a] [æ] [ɒ] [ʌ]?
velar ("dark") /ɫ/, stress + low vowels: they are all allophones
мал 'small' /mɑl/ [ mɒɫ ] what about English [ɑ] [æ] [ʌ]?
малой 'tight' (shoes) /mɑloj/ [ mʌ.'lɔj ] can you come up with minimal pairs?
definitions definitions
phonetics (Gk. phonē 'sound') phonology
the study of the sounds of human speech Gk. phonē + logia 'the study of sounds'
studies the physical properties of speech studies sound systems (sound patterns) of
sounds (a.k.a. phones), such as [t], [th], [tj]… specific human languages
physiological production
phonemes (such as /t/) as opposed to phones
acoustic properties (such as [t], [th], [tj], [ɾ]…)
auditory perception so, what are phonemes?
8

9. 10/17/2012
definitions definitions
a few possible definition of phonemes: allophones
a class of sound identified by a native speaker non-contrastive speech sounds
as "the same" positional variants (i.e., they surface in different
abstract mental representations of sounds in positions, hence are in complementary
the speaker's mental grammar (underlying snd.) distribuƟon ― like Clark Kent and Superman)
smallest discrete (segmental) units of sound speech sounds ('phones') that are classified by a
employed to form meaningful contrasts native speaker as belonging to the same class,
between words and word forms or phoneme
contrastive sounds (in minimal pairs): as in R. (usually speakers are unaware of the existence
мат vs. мать, Eng. bid vs. pit, bid vs. bead, etc. of those variants in their language!)
'hands on' 'hands on'
labial stops in English and Korean (p, ph, b): phones in English:
spat [spæt] [pul] 'fire' [p] [ph] [b]
pat [p hæt] [phul] 'grass' phones in Korean:
bat [bæt] [pɑl] 'foot'
[p] [ph] [b]
stab [stæb] [phɑl] 'arm'
phonemes in English and Korean:
tab [thæb] [kɑp] 'small box, pack'
dab [dæb] [kɑbe] 'in small box' (loc.) /ph/ [ph] /ph/
bit [bɪt] [pɒp] 'law' [p]
phit [pɪt] [mubɒp] 'lawlessness' /b/ [b] /p/
9

10. 10/17/2012
VOT; categorical perception VOT; categorical perception
VOICE ONSET TIME (VOT)
VbV
gradual continuum,
not discrete changes VpV
VphV
source: www.indiana.edu/~hlw/PhonUnits/consonants2.html source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_onset_time
VOT; categorical perception VOT; categorical perception
spit [sp] – pit [ph] – bit [b]
sty [st] – tie [th] – die [d]
why do you categorize a [p] as the phoneme /b/??
categorical perception: a change in
some variable along a continuum
is perceived not as gradual but as
instances of discrete categories
(i.e., two different sounds)
http://pip.ucalgary.ca/psyc-369/mod6-hearing/unit6.3-the-perception-of-speech-and-music/Relationships1.html
10

11. 10/17/2012
VOT; categorical perception VOT; categorical perception
spit [sp] – pit [ph] – bit [b] for English CV and VCV stops, the VOT may be
sty [st] – tie [th] – die [d] negative (voicing precedes the burst), but even if
it occurs within 20 ms following the release, then
reason: for Eng. "voiced" stops, the VOT kicks in
the stop is still perceived as voiced
very late, it may even follow the release (burst)!
if the VOT is over 20 ms after the burst the stop is
perceived as voiceless
very un-Slavic!
the real pronunciation of Eng. voiced stops:
spit [sp] – pit [ph] – bit [p]; sty [st] – tie [th] – die [t]
perceptions and orthographies are misleading!
a toe a doe
to sum up to sum up
speech sounds (phones) are imprecise, they vary the phonetic environment in which they occur,
within a permissible range of a value (the VOT of affects the allophonic realization of a phoneme
a vcd. consonant between, say, -20 ms & 20 ms) (phonological conditioning / rules)
phonemes are discrete units on the level of Eng. [ph] vs. [p] /ph/ → [p] / s ___
mental representation: Eng. /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, etc.
Kor. [p] vs. [b] /ph/ → [b] / V ___ V
in actual speech they are realized as phonetic
segments, and not necessarily the same ones: phonological conditioning leading to allophonic
Eng. /ph/ → [p], [ph] variation is thus language-specific ('the rules of
pronunciation')!
Eng. /th/ → [t], [th], [ʔ], [ɾ]
11

12. 10/17/2012
to sum up to sum up
it is not reliable to ask native speakers about their
…phonetics deals with universal aspects of
phonological intuitions, because they usually are
speech sounds, be they Eng., Russ., or Ainu
unaware of allophonic variation
[t], [tj] in English and Russian
categorical perception:
[p], [ph], [b] in English and Korean
a stop with a positive VOT of up to 20 ms will be
…phonology deals with language-specific mapped onto a voiced consonant by an English
aspects of sound (language-specific patterning speaker (but not a Russian one!)
of sounds, the sound systems) 3 sounds [p], [ph], [b] map onto 2 phonemes: /p/,
/b/ by English speaker but /p/, /ph/ by a Korean one
/i/, /ɪ/, /p/, /b/ in English, etc.
брат [ɑ] брать [a] брали [a] брал [ɒ] ― Russ. /a/
phonology phonology
phonology is concerned with: beyond phonemes (what else speakers are
sound systems (phonemic inventories) aware of):
restrictions on segment occurrence and co- syllable (phnlg. deals with syllable structures
occurrence (phonotactics), e.g. *h#, *#hC, *#ŋ ― permissible structures, restricƟons, etc.)
allophonic variation, phonological conditioning
― the ex. of Japanese
the mapping between phonemes and phones
(accomplished by using phonological rules) stress (emphasis or prominence that may be
given to certain syllables in a word)
categorical perception of sounds (R. [ɑ] & [a],
Eng. [ɑ] & [ʌ] for a native speaker of Russian) tone (the use of pitch in some languages to
distinguish lexical or grammatical meaning)
free variation (tomato, either, genuine)
12

13. 10/17/2012
history of the concept phoneme history of the concept phoneme
Polish Russian linguist Ivan (Jan) Baudouin de elaborated during the years 1926-1935, prince N.
Courtenay, professor of the Imperial Kazan Univ. Trubetzkoy (prof. of Slavic Philology at the Univ.
and the Imperial Derpt (Tartu) Univ. of Vienna) + others of the Prague Linguistic Circle
introduced the distinction between language (an taken over by the structuralists (F. de Saussure, E.
abstract system of elements) and speech (its Sapir, and L. Bloomfield)
implementation by individuals) used in generative linguistics by N. Chomsky and
– before Saussure's langue vs. parole! M. Halle
in the 1870's – 1880's, B. de Courtenay was the since R. Jakobson and M. Halle, phonemes are
first scholar to introduce the notion phoneme considered to be further decomposable into
(фонема) as a linguistic abstraction features, the true minimal constituents of lang.
13