THE NOTION OF PHONOLOGICAL RULES
The basics
In
This is an excerpt from the paper...
In the English language lexicon, each word is represented in its underlying--basic--form, which discounts all the alternations in pronunciation that are predictable by phonological rules. This underlying form is known as the phonemic (or morphophonemic or phonological) representation of the word. The phonemes are the segments that contrast in the underlying forms. American English may be said to have 13 vowel phonemes, which contrast in the underlying forms of words such as bate, bat, beat, bet, bite, bit, bout, but, boat, dot, bought, balm, and boy. Some authorities consider that there are additional vowel phonemes exemplified in the words bush and beaut(y), while others believe that these can be derived from the same underlying vowel as that in the word bud. The variants of phonemes that occur in phonetic representations of sentences are known as allophones. They may be considered to be generated as a result of applying the phonological rules to the phonemes in underlying forms. For example, there is a phonological rule of English that says that a voiceless stop such as /p/ is aspirated when it occurs at the beginning of a word (e.g. in pin), but when it occurs after a voiceless alveolar fricative (i.e., after /s/), it is unaspirated (e.g. in spin). Thus the underlying phoneme /p/ has an aspirated and an unaspirated allophone, in addition to other allophones that are generated as a result of other rules that apply in other c
. . .
identify the essential theoretical properties of sound systems. Generative phonology uses a distinctive feature notation system, in order to cope with all the types of phonetic relationship that have been observed. There are many kinds of phonological rules. Some change the distinctive features of segments; others add or delete segments; others again combine two segments as one (Crystal, 1987, p. 163).
Ducrot and Todorov (1972) critiqued the concept of distinctiveness, remarking that generative phonology "denies that in the description of a language one must always single out distinctive units and properties" (p. 174). They noticed that Chomsky believed he could show that in the course of the operation of the phonological component, one does not at any point obtain a representation of sentences corresponding to their description by phonologists. If one did, one would have to complicate the component deliberately and, what is worse, disallow the representation of certain rules in their full generality, rules (such as that of assimilation) whose existence seems incontestable. Ducrot and Todorov (1972) go on to note that this critique "shows less the inadequacy of the phonological representation than its incompatibility with the gen
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
American English, Conclusions Bouton, Ducrot Todorov, Chomsky Halle, Encyclopµdia Britannica, Prague School, Morris Halle, PHONOLOGICAL RULES, phonological rules, References Bouton, University Press, underlying forms, phonological representation, chomsky halle 1991, encyclopµdia britannica, crystal 1987, ducrot todorov, todorov 1972, halle 1991, chomsky halle, ducrot todorov 1972, add delete segments, delete segments, de saussure 1972, contrast underlying forms,
Approximate Word count = 1666
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
