Defining distributions:consonant allophones

There are 44 phonemes in Standard Australian English, represented by 26 letters of the alphabet in multiple combinations.

Making generalizations

Making statements more precise.

Having established that certain sounds are allophones of the same phoneme, and that they are in complementary distribution, we might write a statement like (2) to say what happens to the phoneme or phonemes in question, and where.(2) a. /k/ and / / become [c] and [ ] when they are followed by a frontvowel. They are pronounced as [k] and [ ] in all other contexts.

b. /p/, /t/ and /k/ become [ph], [th] and [kh] at the very beginning of a word. In other contexts (i.e. after another consonant or at the end of a word), they are pronounced as [p], [t] and [k].

The English statement also does not tell us why /p/, /t/and /k/ are affected, rather than just one or two of them; or why thesethree sounds should behave similarly, rather than /p/, /s/ and /r/, for instance.

Similarly, we cannot see what /k/ and / / have in common, or indeed what the resulting allophones have in common, simply by looking at the phoneme symbols.

As we can now express what particular sets of sounds have in common (3).(3) a. Velar stops become palatal when they are followed by a frontvowel. They are pronounced as velar in all other contexts.

b. Voiceless stops are aspirated at the very beginning of a word.Elsewhere, they are unaspirated.

We can take this one step further by regarding each of the articulatorydescriptions as a binary feature: that is, a sound is either voiceless or voiced, and these are opposites; similarly, a sound is either nasal or not nasal. Instead of voiced and voiceless, or oral and nasal, we can then write:

These distinctive features allow each segment to be regarded as asimultaneously articulated set, or matrix, of binary features, as shownin (4).(4) /p/ /z/ /l/ [ – voice ] [ +voice ] [+voice ]

They do describe phonetic characteristics of sounds; ; but we are trying to provide a phonological description, not a phonetic one.

One possible way of overcoming this lack of economy in the feature system is to group sets of features together. Redundancy rules take the shapeshown in (5).(5) [+stop] → [– fricative, – approximant][+fricative] → [– stop, – approximant][+labial] → [– labiodental, – dental, – alveolar, – palatal] [+alveolar] → [– labial, – labiodental,– dental, – palatal] the first rules says ’if a segment is a stop, it cannot also be either a fricative or an approximant’. Particular languages may also rule out combinationsof features which are theoretically possible, and which may occur routinely in many other languages.

Two language-specific redundancy rules for English are given in (6): the first tells us that English has no palatal nasal (although Italian and French do), and the second, that English has only lateral approximants (though Welsh, for instance, has also a lateral fricative). These redundancy rules cannot be written the other way around: it would not be accurate to say that non-palatals are all nasal in English, or that all approximants are lateral.(6) [+nasal] → [– palatal] [+lateral] → [+approximant]While we should expect to have to state redundancy rules of the sortin (6), since these express quirks of particular languages, it seems unfortunate that our feature system is not structured so as the factor out the universal redundancies in (5) however , to produce a better phonological feature system, we need first to spell out what we want such as system to achieve.

A more economical feature system

the system should be relatively economical it should enlighten us about which

combinations of features can go together universally, and therefore which segments and segment- types are universally possible.

it should allow us to group together those segments and segment- types which characteristically behave similarly in the world’s languages.

Some requirements of a phonological feature system are as follows:

Certain elementary phonetic features can be adopted without further question into our revised system: for instance, [±oral], [±lateral] and [±voice] do correspond to binary oppositions, and help us to distinguish classes of consonants in English and other languages.

Also binary system.It is a relation between the members of a pair of linguistic items, as a pair of distinctive features, such that one is the absence of the other.

Voice – voicelessness They are two things which OPPOSE each other.Binary = two

Binary opposition

Turning first to manner of articulation, we might initially wish any sensible feature system to distinguish vowels from consonants. <a e i o u>. ‘without vowels’ spy - fly <y> indicates the vowel [aI] type <y> indicates the vowel [aI]<e> in type does not correspond to a vowel in speech .

This binary opposition between vowels and consonants is not entirely clear-cut. For instance, vowels are almost always voiced. However, there are also consonants which are almost always voiced.

For example. Nasal soundsApproximants

Pairs distinguished only by [+voice]/p/ /b//t/ /d//k/ /g//f/ /v//s/ /z/

[+voice]

A or Not –A This example creates a binary system which makes it easier to recall what has certain qualities. We call these “binary features” or “distinctive features”.In phonology, we use a binary features to describe each individual phoneme based on natural classes, voice and manner.+ sign = it has that feature.- Sign = it does not have that feature.

Binary features

Many phonologist would use three features to distinguish consonants from vowels and produce a classification.

1. [+/- syllabic]= We can distinguish consonants from vowels. [+syllabic] sounds are syllabic from the core,

or nucleus of a syllable. All vowels are [+syllabic].

Major classes of features

[-syllabic] syllabic segments may not function as the nucleus of a syllable.

All consonants are [-syllabic]. Nucleus Cat=Bed= Beet= Rain=

Some consonants like (/l m n r/) may have [+syllabic] allophones in certain contexts.

2. [+/- consonantal]= this feature distinguishes oral stops, fricatives, nasal and liquids from glides like (/j/, /w/) and vowels (-consonantal).

[+consonantal]= the airflow is obstructed in the oral cavity, either being stopped completely, or causing local audible friction.

[-consonantal]= airflow is continuous and unimpeded. Nasal stops.

3. [+/-sonorant]= distinguish nasals, vowels and all approximants from oral stops and fricatives.

[+sonorant]= they are produced with the balance of air pressure in the vocal tract.[-sonorant]= oral stops and fricatives are not sonorant because they are produced without the balance of air pressure in the vocal tract.

All vowel

Glides (/j,w/)

Liquis and nasal

Oral stops and fricatives

[+syllabic, -consonantal, +sonorant]

[-syllabic, -consonantal, +sonorant]

[-syllabic, +consonantal, +sonorant]

[-syllabic, +consonantal, -sonorant]

To finish the job of accounting for manner, we must introduce two further features. The more important of these is [±continuant].

[+continuant]= have continuous oral airflow throughout their production.

[–continuant]= have airflow stopped in the oral tract. (oral and nasal stops).

[+continuant]: [–continuant]: oral and nasal stops.

Second, the affricates /tʃ/ and /d/ can be classified as a subtype of oral plosive; but the complete articulatory closure, for these sounds only, is released more gradually than usual, so that the affricates incorporate a fricative phase.

The affricates are generally described as: [+delayed release]. stops are: [–delayed release].

[+delayed release]: affricates[–delayed release]: all others

[+consonant][+nasal][-lateral][+sonorant][+continuant][-labial][+anterior][+voice]

N

Natural classes

The major class features identify several categories of sounds which recur cross-linguistically in different phonological rules. Feature nota- tion can also show why certain sounds behave similarly in similar contexts, within these larger classes. For instance, English /p/, /t/ and /k/ aspirate at the beginnings of words.

All three may also be glottally reinforced at the ends of words. All three are unaspirated after /s/; and no other English phoneme has the same range of allophones, in the same environments. In feature terms, although /p/, /t/, /k/ differ in place of articulation, all three are obstruent consonants, and within this class, are [–voice, –nasal, –continuant].

A group of phonemes which show the same behaviour in the same contexts, and which share the same features, constitute a natural class. More formally, a natural class of phonemes can be identified using a smaller number of features than any individual member of that class.

the class of voiceless plosives, /p/, /t/ and /k/, can be defined uniquely using only three features. If we subtract one of the plosives, we need more features, since we must then specify the place of articulation; and the same is true in defining a single plosive unambiguously.

A warning note on phonological rules

Paradoxically, phonological rules are not rules in one of the common, everyday English meanings of that word; they are not regulations, which spell out what must happen. Instead, they are formal descriptions of what does happen, for speakers of a particular variety of a particular language at a particular time.

Some phonological rules may also state what sometimes happens, with the outcome depending on issues outside phonologyand phonetics altogether. For example, if you say hamster slowly and carefully, it will sound like [hamstə] (or [hamstəɹ], depending onwhether you ‘drop your [r]s’ in this context or not.

If speakers of English keep pronouncing [hampstə] and [prInts] prince in sufficient numbers, and in enough contexts, these pronunciations maybecome the norm, extending even into formal circumstances, and being learned as the canonical pronunciation by children (this is exactly what has already happened in bramble, and the name Dempster). Even now,children (and occasionally adults too) spell hamster as hampster, showing that they may believe this to be the ‘correct’ form

No feature system is perfect; however carefully designed a system is, it will not in itself explain all the properties of a particular language, which may sometimes reflect quirks and idiosyncrasies which have arisen during the history of that system.