USC Advanced Undergraduate Phonology ✳︎ Fall 2019 ✳︎ Smith


Generative phonology and phonemic analysis


The concept of the “phoneme” (a functionally significant unit in the rigidly defined pattern or configuration of sounds peculiar to a language), as distinct from that of the “sound” or “phonetic element” as such (an objectively definable entity in the articulated and perceived totality of speech), is becoming more and more familiar to linguists. The difficulty that many still seem to feel in distinguishing between the two must eventually disappear as the realization grows that no entity in human experience can be adequately defined as the mechanical sum or product of its physical properties."

– Sapir (1933)

Generative phonology

Example of a derivation
Lexicon /hæk/+/d/ /su/+/d/ /bræg/+/d/
Grammar (simplified) make /d/ voiceless after a voiceless segment
Surface forms [hækt] [sud] [brægd]

Productivity

Applying devoicing to novel words
Lexicon /tiʧ/+/d/ /go/+/d/ /rɪk/+/d/
Grammar (simplified) make /d/ voiceless after a voiceless segment
Surface forms [tiʧt] [god] [rɪkt]
Ricking from Berko Gleason's 1958 wug study
Ricking from Berko Gleason’s 1958 wug study

Phonemes and allophones

Phonemicization diagram for /t/
Phonemicization diagram for /t/
Derived allophones for /t/
Derived allophones for /t/

Alternations and phonotactics

Distributions and phonemic analysis

Flowchart reproduced from Language Files with some additions by me.</br> A more comprehensive flowchart is at the end of this document.
Flowchart reproduced from Language Files with some additions by me.
A more comprehensive flowchart is at the end of this document.

Minimal pairs and near-minimal pairs

Some English words
[sut] ‘suit’ [pʌt] ‘putt’
[ʃɪn] ‘shin’ [ʃɪp] ‘ship’
[ʃɪp] ‘ship’ [but] ‘boot’
[pʊt] ‘put’ [ʃin] ‘sheen’
[sʊt] ‘soot’ [bʌt] ‘butt’
[luʒ] ‘luge’ [wuʃ] ‘woosh’
[lus] ‘loose’ [lut] ‘loot’

Complementary distribution

English example of [n] and dental [n] from Bruce Hayes' Introductory Phonology textbook
[noʊ] ‘know’ [tɛn̪θ] ‘tenth’
[ənoɪ] ‘annoy’ [mʌn̪θ] ‘month’
[ʌnjən] ‘onion’ [pæn̪θɚ] ‘panther’
[nʌn] ‘nun’ [krəsæn̪θəməm] ‘chrysanthemum’

Practicing phonemic analysis

Setswana problem from Odden (2005)
[lefifi] ‘darkness’ [loleme] ‘tongue’
[selɛpɛ] ‘axe’ [molɔmo] ‘mouth’
[xobala] ‘to read’ [mmadi] ‘reader’
[lerumɔ] ‘spear’ [xoɲala] ‘to marry’
[loxadima] ‘lightning flash’ [diʤɔ] ‘food’
[dumɛla] ‘greetings’ [feedi] ‘sweeper’
[lokwalɔ] ‘letter’ [kʰudu] ‘tortoise’
[mosadi] ‘woman’ [podi] ‘goat’
[badisa] ‘the herd’ [hudi] ‘wild duck’

Limitations of the flowchart

Complementary distribution, revisited

[l] and dental [l] from Bruce Hayes' introductory phonology textbook
[lɪsən] ‘listen’ [wɛɫ̪θ] ‘wealth’
[luz] ‘lose’ [hɛɫ̪θ] ‘health’
[əlaʊ] ‘allow’ [fɪɫ̪θi] ‘filthy’
[əɡloʊ] ‘aglow’ [tɪɫ̪θ] ‘tilth’
[blɛnd] ‘blend’ [stɛɫ̪θ] ‘stealth’
[n] and dental [n]
[noʊ] ‘know’ [tɛn̪θ] ‘tenth’
[ənoɪ] ‘annoy’ [mʌn̪θ] ‘month’
[ʌnjən] ‘onion’ [pæn̪θɚ] ‘panther’
[nʌn] ‘nun’ [krəsæn̪θəməm] ‘chrysanthemum’

Positional neutralization / contextually-limited contrast

/t/, /d/ and tapping
[wɛt] ‘wet’ [wɛɾɚ] ‘wetter’ [wɛɾəst] ‘wettest’ [wɛɾɪŋ] ‘wetting’
[bæt] ‘bat’ [bæɾɚ] ‘batter’ [bæɾɪŋ] ‘batting’
[sæd] ‘sad’ [sæɾɚ] ‘sadder’ [sæɾəst] ‘saddest’
[ʃut] ‘shoot’ [ʃuɾɚ] ‘shooter’ [ʃuɾɪŋ] ‘shooting’
[fid] ‘feed’ [fiɾɚ] ‘feeder’ [fiɾɪŋ] ‘feeding’
[laʊd] ‘loud’ [laʊɾɚ] ‘louder’ [laʊɾəst] ‘loudest’
[wɛd] ‘wed’ [wɛɾɪŋ] ‘wedding’
It's difficult to draw a single tree for this relatively complicated phonemicization.
It’s difficult to draw a single tree for this relatively complicated phonemicization.
Sometimes it helps to have a tree for every environment.
Sometimes it helps to have a tree for every environment.

Minimal pairs, revisited (displaced contrast)

[aɪ] and [ʌɪ] in speakers from the Mid-Atlantic Region, New England, and Canada
[lʌɪk] [ʤaɪb] [klaɪm] [raɪð]
[flʌɪt] [tɹʌɪp] [ʃaɪn] [waɪd]
[snʌɪp] [lʌɪf] [baɪ] [əblaɪʤ]
[laɪv] [ʌɪs] [spaɪ] [saɪd]
Tapping and Canadian raising
[rʌɪt] [rʌɪɾɚ] ‘writer’
[raɪd] [raɪɾɚ] ‘rider’
[slaɪd] [slaɪɾɪŋ] ‘sliding’
[slʌɪt] [slʌɪɾɪŋ] ‘slighting’

Recap

Summmary of phonemic analysis
Type Phonemic analysis Predictable? Contrast? What to look for
Contrast
(that isn’t neutralized)
multiple phonemes unpredictable contrastive (near-)minimal pairs
Allophony
(that isn’t free variation)
multiple allophones
(predictable)
predictable non-contrastive complementary distribution
& alternations
Positional
neutralization
multiple phonemes
that share an allophone
predictable
(but not totally predictable)
contrastive
(contextually-limited)
(near-)minimal pairs
& alternations
Free
variation
multiple allophones
(unpredictable)
unpredictable non-contrastive overlapping distribution
& alternations
This is my attempt at making a comprehensive flowchart for the phonemic analysis of two sounds. This is a fun exercise, but ultimately, it shows that phonemic analysis is as much an art as it is a science.
This is my attempt at making a comprehensive flowchart for the phonemic analysis of two sounds. This is a fun exercise, but ultimately, it shows that phonemic analysis is as much an art as it is a science.

What are the goals and data?


  1. This property is called biuniqueness: every phonemic representation must be able to be mapped to a unique phonetic representation, and every phonetic representation must be able to be mapped to a unique phonemic representation. There was a way to do positional neutralization and respect biuniqueness, and it was famously argued against using Russian data by Morris Halle at the 1957 LSA. Stephen Anderson has written about the famous Russian example, what actually happened, and puts the 1957 argument in context.  ↩