Lecture 1 Phonetics as a Linguistic Science Plan

Lecture 3

Phonological Theories (2)

Plan:

1. The Prague Phonological School

2. The London Phonological School

3. Phonological Trends in the USA

1. The Prague Phonological School

The fundamental scientific works have been done by the representatives of the Prague phonological school - well-known linguists W. Matezius (1882-1945), B. Havranek (1893-1978), N.S.Trubetzkoy (1890-1938), B. Trnka, I. Vachek, V. Skalichka and.otbers. Among them very important phonological ideas were advanced by the Russian scholar N.S. Trubetzkoy. In his book «Principles of Phonology» first published in German in 1939, N.S. Trubetzkoy discussed the relation of phonology to other studies, the nature of phonemes and their variants, how to determine the phonemes of a language, relations between phonemes in general analysis and in particular languages, the classification of phonological and non-phonological oppositions, neutralization, mono- and biphonemic combinations, phonological statistics, boundary-markers (junctures) and prosodic elements (syllables, stress and intonation). His theoretical work on phonology shows «... the breadth of Trubetzkoy’s knowledge and the intricacy and incisiveness and cerebral character of his scientific analysis».

N.S. Trubetzkoy came to the phoneme concept through the classification of phonological oppositions. The concept of distinctiveness presupposes the concept of opposition. One thing can be distinguished only from another thing insofar as a relationship of opposition exists between the two. Likewise one sound property may be opposed to another phonic property. Oppositions of sound, capable of differentiating the lexical meaning of two words in a particular language are phonological or phonologically distinctive or distinctive oppositions. In contrast, those oppositions of sound that do not have this property are phonologically irrelevant or no distinctive. For example, in English the opposition /e - æ/ as in /bet - bæt/ phonological (distinctive) while the opposition between aspirated /ph, th, kh/ and non-aspirated /p, t, k/ sounds and also opposition between dark and soft /1/ sounds are non-distinctive as there is not a single word pair in English that is differentiated by these oppositions. Each member of a phonological opposition is called a phonological (or distinctive) unit. Phonological units that, from the standpoint of a given language, cannot be analyzed into still smaller successive distinctive units are called phonemes. N.S. Trubetzkoy points out that phonemes should not be considered as «building blocks» out of which individual words are assembled. Each word is a phonic entity and the phonemes are then the distinctive marks of the configurations of words.

Sounds participate in phonological oppositions only by means of their phonologically relevant properties. Another definition of phoneme given by N.S. Trubetzkoy is «the sum phonologically relevant properties of a sound (laut-gebilde)».

Phonemes are functional sounds of a language while speech sounds are the realizations or manifestations of phonemes in speech. This distinction between language and speech was borrowed by N.S. Trubetzkoy from F. de Saussure’s and K. Bu hler’s works. N.S. Trubetzkoy insisted on defining a phoneme solely on the basis on its function in the system of a language.

One of the rules for the determination of phonemes was formulated in the following way: «If two sounds occur in exactly the same position and cannot be interchanged without a change in the meaning of the words or without rendering the word unrecognizable, the two sounds are phonetic realizations of two different phonemes». For example in beet /bi:t/ — but /bʌt/, /i:/ and /ʌ/ are interpreted as realiza-tions of two different phonemes.

The rule for the determination of individual phonemes and phoneme combinations is very important in solving the problem of phonemic interpretation of diphthongs and affricates. N.S. Trubetzkoy wrote: «A combination of sounds can be interpreted as the realization of a single phoneme only if it is produced by a homogeneous articulatory movement or by the progressive dissolution of an articulatory complex». This rule was illustrated by the English diphthongs /eI/ and /ou/ which are regarded as monophonematic. This rule is solely phonetic but not phonematic as it is based on the articulatory movement, i.e. it is an articulatory characteristics of a diphthong. This is one of the interesting points which clearly show the close relationship of phonetics and phonology separated by N.S. Trubetzkoy into two independent sciences.

According to another rule if the constituent parts of combinations of sound are not distributed over two syllables then such combinations of sounds are to be regarded as the realization of single phonemes. This rule is true for the English diphthongs and affricates /ʧ/, /ʤ/. The combinations of sounds which cannot be determined by the rules are called phoneme clusters.

N.S. Trubetzkoy presented the classification of phonological oppositions in terms of logic. Two things which have no features in common cannot be contrasted, likewise two phonemes which have no common features cannot be opposed. Firstly, oppositions are classified in relation to the entire system of oppositions. According to this principle oppositions may be unidimensional and pluridimensional (or bilateral and multilateral). Two phonemes possessing a common feature, which no other phoneme has, are in unidimensional opposition. For example in English /t-d/, /p-b/, /k-g/, /b-m/, /d-n/, /g-ŋ]/ /f-v/, /s-z/, /s-ʃ/, /z-ʒ/. /t-ʧ/, /d-ʤ/, /r-1/ are unidi mensional (bilateral) oppositions.

Two phonemes, whose feature is common to some other phoneme, are in pluridimensional (multilateral) opposition. For example, the opposition /b - d/ in English is pluridimensional as the common features of the members of this opposition (plosive + voiced - lenis are characteristic of the phoneme /g/.)

According to N.S. Trubetzkoy the unidimensional oppositions are fewer but more interesting than the others. Pairs of phonemes, having similar oppositions between them, are called proportional oppositions. In English pairs of phonemes /p-b/, /t-d/, /s-z/, /ʃ-ʒ/, /θ-ð/, /ʧ- ʤ/, /f-v/, /k-g/ have similar oppositions in which the distinctive feature is voiceless - voiced (resp. fortis - lenis (tense - lax). These pairs of phonemes constitute proportional oppositions.

If there is no pair of phonemes in similar relation to the existing pair of phonemes, such an opposition is called isolated. For example, /r-1/ is an isolated opposition in English, Russian and Uzbek.

Secondly, oppositions may be classified on the basis of relationship between their members. According to this principle they may be private, gradual and equipollent.

If the member of opposition is differentiated from the other by one distinctive feature such an opposition is called private. For example /d-t/, /f-v/ etc. Which differentiated by a voiced-voiceless (resp. fortis-lenis) feature. The member of such an opposition, characterized by the presence of a feature, is called marked and the member of opposition, which is characterized by the absence of a feature, is called unmarked. Thus, a voiced member is marked (+) while an unvoiced member is unmarked (-).

Gradual oppositions are those whose members are characterized by different gradations of one and the same feature. In English /i:-a:/ according to the highs of the tongue they may be distinguished as close-open where half-open and half close members are omitted. Likewise /p-k/ is a gradual opposition, because, according to the place of articulation, /p/ is labial and /k/ is back lingual, between which forelingual (alveolar, apical) and interlingual /j/ members of opposition are omitted.

If both members of opposition have the same distinctive features except one, which is different, such an opposition is called equipollent, in English /p-f/, /b-v/, /t- θ/, /d-ð/, /k-h/ are equipollent oppositions.

Thirdly, oppositions may be classified on the basis of distinctive force and their occurrence in different positions according to which oppositions may be neutralizable and constant. In particular positions the feature of one member of the opposition may have a different distinctive force. As in Russian and in Uzbek voiced members of the oppositions become unvoiced at the end of words: пруд /прут-прут/ прут/, teg /tek/ - tek/tek etc. The opposition where the opposition is neutralized is called the position of neutralization.

N.S.Trubetzkoy stated that usually only unidimensional (bilateral) oppositions may be neutralized. In the position of neutralization one of the phonemes becomes the representative of an archiphoneme. An archiphoneme is the sum of the relevant (distinctive) features common to both members of the opposition. In the above examples:

/d/

/t/ archiphoneme

/t/

This unit may have different features in other languages The unidimensional, privative, proportional opposition, the members of which are in similar relations with each other, combined into correlation /p-b/, /t-d/, /s-z/, /ʃ-ʒ/, /f-v/, /θ-ð/, /ʧ-ʤ/, /k-g/. Such pairs of phoneme are called correlation pairs and the feature voiced - voiceless (resp. fortis - lenis) is called the feature of correlation.

Constant oppositions are those which are not neutralized in some positions and always preserve their distinctive features. But there may be cases when two phonemes are opposed in some position, but not in others. For example, English /p/ and /b/ are not opposed after /s/, because only one of them can occur after /s/ as in the word spin. Such types of neutralization is called contextual which appear in many languages. After N.S. Trubetzkoy’s definition of neutralization there were attempts to classify neutralizations into several other types.

N.S. Trubetzkoy advanced a valuable theory and methods available in paradigmatic analysis of phonemes i.e. in establishing phonological and non-phonological oppositions. But there are some shortcomings in his description of syntagmatic relations of phonemes. N.S. Trubetzkoy’s theory was applied to the description of the phonemic system of English by B.Trnka, J.Vachek, by V.A.Vassilyev and A.Cohen.