BBN–ANG–243 Phonological analysis 3–4. Segment inventory

BBN–ANG–243 Phonological analysis3–4. Segment inventory

Zoltán Kiss, Ádám Nádasdy, Attila Starcevic, Péter Szigetvári, Miklós Törkenczy

Dept. of English Linguistics, ELTE

z. kiss (elte|delg) analysis 3–4 | segment inventory 1 / 107

introduction

inventory (n.) /"Inv@nt@ri/ (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inventory)

◮ ‘a detailed, often descriptive, list of articles, giving the code number,quantity, and value of each; a catalogue’

◮ ‘a formal list of the property of a person or estate’

◮ ‘a catalogue of natural resources (esp. a count or estimate of wildlifeand game in a particular area)’


introduction

sound segment inventory (preliminary version)

◮ a formal list/catalogue of the speech sound segments of a language


introduction

same language – di=erent inventories

Jones vs. Gimson: SSBE monophthongs

Jones:Pet

e

i:

pit

ipe

t

epa

t

æpa

rt

A:po

t

Opo

rt

O:pu

t

ubo

ot

u:bu

t

2Ber

t

@:be

tter

@

Gimson: i: I e æ A: 6 O: U u: 2 3: @


introduction


Jones vs. Gimson: SSBE diphthongs

J:ba

it

eibo

at

oubi

te

aibo

ut

auqu

oit

Oibe

er

i@be

ar

E@bo

ar

O@su

re

u@hi

deou

s

ı@in

fluen

ce

u@va

luin

g

ui

G: eI @U aI aU OI I@ E@ — U@ — — —


introduction


Jones vs. Gimson: SSBE stops (stops, a=ricates, nasals)

J:ca

p

pfa

b

bfa

t

tfa

d

dba

ck

kba

g

gpa

tch

tSba

dge

dZqu

arts

tsad

ze

dztre

ad

trdr

ead

drra

m

mba

n

nsa

ng

N

G: p b t d k g tS dZ — — (tr) (dr) m n (N)


introduction

‘viewpoint creates the object’

◮ phonological analysis is non-unique

◮ costs and benefits

◮ speaker-centred, constrained approach


introduction

speaker-centred analysis

◮ linguistics: natural science involving humans◮ assumption: phonology in the mind is created based on

phonetic input◮ phonology is grounded in phonetics

◮ categories, generalizations should be psychologically real


introduction

what is a speech sound segment?

◮ a discrete unit, with well-definable boundaries, and constant quality/property (∼ an atom)

◮ represented graphically as symbol tokens


introduction

segments as a string of beads


segmentation

problems

!but speech is anything but discrete!


segmentation

discreteness↔ physical reality

◮ a continuum, overlapping/gradual properties

◮ articulation: blending gestures

◮ acoustically: continuous sound waves


segmentation

p o u n d


segmentation

consequence of non-discreteness

◮ infinite number of sounds

◮ unlimited amount of variation


segmentation

main questions

◮ segmentation—how?

◮ limited inventory?

◮ inventory members?


segmentation

human audition and perception


segmentation

acoustic cues

acoustic cues

◮ inherent/internal/local: e.g., vowels, fricatives, a=ricates

◮ transitional/relative/non-local: e.g., prevocalic stops (pat–tat–cat)


segmentation

spectrogram of guy


segmentation

segmentation: summary

◮ it is possible to segment the speech signal into distinct sections onacoustic grounds

◮ categorization of segments is aided by acoustic perceptual cues

◮ the end products of the segmentation: speech sound segments

(phones)

◮ finite number of small categories (e.g., “clear l’s”–“dark l’s”)

◮ the first analytical step of any analysis of sounds, sound systems

◮ categorization may (partially) rely on cues that reside in anothercategory (stops–vowel formant transitions)


taxonomic analysis

the next level of categorization–abstraction

◮ further level of categorization/abstraction

◮ larger groups of phones based on their function

◮ function = contrastive ability

◮ taxonomic phonology/classical phonemics


taxonomic analysis

example: English /eI/–/aI/

a. save [seIv] sane [seIn]

made [meId] main [meIn]

maze [meIz] main [meIn]

b. side [saId] sign [saIn]

c. pale [peIl] pile [paIl]

Dave [deIv] dive [daIv]


taxonomic analysis

3 segment pairs

1. [eI] ∼ [eI]

2. [aI] ∼ [aI]

3. [eI] ∼ [aI]


taxonomic analysis

/eI/, /aI/—conclusions

◮ [eI], [eI]: complementary distribution, predictable, no contrast⇒ allophones of /eI/

◮ [aI], [aI]: complementary distribution, predictable, no contrast⇒ allophones of /aI/

◮ [eI] and [aI]: overlapping distribution, unpredictable, contrast⇒ separate phonemes: /eI/ and /aI/


taxonomic analysis

phonemes

definition

classes of phonetically similar allophones in overlapping distributioncontrasting meaning

– products of classification, higher level of abstraction, small, finite numberof basic elements


taxonomic analysis

phoneme: abstract class of phonetically similar allophones


taxonomic analysis phonemicization

segment inventory (taxonomic version)

◮ a formal list/catalogue of the phonemes of a language

◮ phonemicization: the analytical procedures leading to an inventory


taxonomic analysis characteristics

taxonomic phonemics: some characteristics

◮ analytical procedures on surface data

◮ once a phoneme, always a phoneme principle

◮ phonemes are atomic and discrete

◮ biuniqueness/linearity

◮ contrast matching

◮ non-redundancy

◮ separation of grammatical levels


taxonomic analysis biuniqueness

biuniqueness & linearity: pant

phonemic/underlying level: phonemes /p æ n t/

phonetic/surface level: allophones [ph æ n Pt^]


taxonomic analysis contrast transfer

contrast matching problems: contrast transfer

◮ the underlying phonemic contrast may sometimes disappear

◮ redundant properties may emerge to carry the contrast



contrast transfer: word-final devoicing in English

beat bead

UR: /bi:t/ ⇐⇒ /bi:d/

Rule: WFD n. a. bi:t

SR: [bi:t] =! [bi:t]



contrast transfer: pre-fortis clipping+ word-final devoicing in English

beat bead

UR: /bi:t/ ⇐⇒ /bi:d/

Rule: PFC bit n. a.

Rule: WFD n. a. bi:t

SR: [bit] ⇐⇒ [bi:t]


taxonomic analysis redundancy

underlying representations: redundancy-free, economical

Words in the lexicon must be representedwithout predictable information.


mentalist

the mentalist phoneme


atomicity

what is in a phoneme?

pit ⇐⇒ pet/pIt/ ⇐⇒ /pet/

what really carries the contrast?


atomicity

what is in a phoneme?

phonetic similarity

[eI] – [eI] – [aI] – [s]

the symbols do not explicitly expresssimilarity


natural classes

natural classes: vowel nasalization

◮ /eI/→ [eI]/

/n/

◮ /aI/→ [aI]/

/n/

◮ V→ V/

/n//m//N/

◮*V→ V/

/p//s//l/

◮*/s/→ [S]/

/m//n//N/


natural classes

natural classes

◮ input

◮ conditioning environment

◮ a natural class of segments: any complete set of segments that sharethe same value for a phonetic property or set of properties

◮ ‘phonetic property’ = phonetic feature

◮ hypothesis: phonological rules and segment inventories are organized

along features


features

features

◮ cognitive formal representations (abstract formal objects)

◮ articulatorily or acoustically-defined

◮ every segment: the product of a specific binary choice for phoneticproperties

◮ /m/ /n/ /p/is the velum lowered? yes yes nois the lip involved? yes no yesis the tongue tip/blade involved? no yes nois there full closure in the mouth? yes yes yes. . . . . . . . . . . .


features

features




◮ /m/ /n/ /p/is the velum lowered? yes yes no [±nasal]is the lip involved? yes no yes [± labial]

is the tongue tip/blade involved? no yes no [± coronal]

is there full closure in the mouth? yes yes yes [± continuant]

. . . . . . . . . . . .


features

features




◮ /m/ /n/ /p/is the velum lowered? + + − [nasal]is the lip involved? + − + [labial]

is the tongue tip/blade involved? − + − [coronal]

is there full closure in the mouth? − − − [continuant]

. . . . . . . . . . . .


features

segments form a string of feature matrices (sing.: matrix)

the representation of pin

/p I n/

−syllabic−sonorant−continuant−nasal+labial−voice

...

+syllabic+sonorant+continuant−nasal−back−round+high−low

...

−syllabic+sonorant−continuant+nasal−labial+voice

...


features

feature matrix

the underlying representation of pin

/p I n/


...

+syllabic+sonorant+continuant−nasal−back−round+high−low

...


...


features

vowel nasalization rule—featural version

[+ syllabic]→ [+nasal]/

[+ nasal]


features

feature matrix

the output/surface representation of pin

[p I n]


...

+syllabic+sonorant+continuant+nasal−back−round+high−low

...


...


features

feature matrix

the underlying representation of pick

/p I k/


...

+syllabic+sonorant+continuant+nasal−back−round+high−low

...

−syllabic−sonorant−continuant−nasal−labial−voice

...


features

features in phonological analysis

◮ segments = bundles of phonetic features, not atomic

◮ better understanding of phonological patterning

◮ phonological similarity vs. distance is formally explicit (shared featurevalues); predictions

◮ “unnatural” classes are di;cult/impossible to express(cf. {/p/, /s/, /l/, /æ/})

◮ phonemes = feature matrices that di=er in at least one value(distinctive features)


features

segment inventory (feature-based version)

◮ phonological segments are complexes of distinctive features thatdefine/cross-classify the phoneme inventory into a segmental network


features

setting up an inventory=

finding the distinctive features


features feature functions

functions of features

features: contrastive function

◮ phoneme A⇔ phoneme B⇔ phoneme C⇔ phoneme D[

+X+Y

]

⇔

[

+X−Y

]

⇔

[

−X+Y

]

⇔

[

−X−Y

]

◮ requirement: small and economical feature set, but capable ofexpressing all the contrasts in a language

features: phonetic/descriptive function

◮ phonetic interpretation works on the output of phonological rules(“surface repr.”), that level should also be phonetic by nature

◮ requirement: distinctive features should be defined in phonetic terms



features: classificatory function

◮ features cross-classify segments into natural classes

◮ processes that refer to features



what are the distinctive features for English (RP) vowels?


features syllabic

[±syllabic]

◮ structural definition: ‘segments forming the nucleus of a syllable’

◮ since syllabification depends on sonority (the ∼ hierarchy), this featureis phonetic after all

◮ sonority◮ acoustically: periodic sound waves, with clear formant structure

(una=ected by noise)◮ articulatorily: openness, lack of occlusion⇒ spontaneous vocal fold

vibration

◮ all vowels are [+syllabic]

◮ feature adequacy: contrastive: X

phonetic: (X)classificatory: X


features RP vowel inventory

stressed vowel inventory of RP (surface contrast)

shortmonophthongs

/I/ bit/e/ bet/æ/ bat/2/ but/6/ bot/U/ put

longmonophthongs

/i:/ beat/A:/ Bart/3:/ Bert/O:/ bought/u:/ boot

(long)diphthongs

/eI/ bait/aI/ bite/aU/ bout/oU/ boat/OI/ quoit/I@/ beer/e@/ bear/U@/ boor

(/O@/) boar



RP monophthongs in the IPA vowel space



RP monophthongs: phonological place classification

front central backclose i: u:

half-close I U

mid 3: O:

half-open e

open æ 2 A: | 6


features front, back

[±front], [±back]

◮ [+ front]: front segments are produced by advancing the body of thetongue from the neutral position

◮ [+back]: back segments are produced by retracting the body of thetongue from the neutral position

◮ 3 horizontal categories: front — central —- back

◮ feature adequacy:contrastive: X (cf. bat /æ/–but /2/)phonetic: X

classificatory: X (only [+ front] Vs may trigger palatalization;only [+back] Vs are most often rounded)


features high, low

RP monophthongs: phonological place classification

front central backclose i: u:

half-close I U

mid 3: O:

half-open e

open æ 2 A: | 6

}

[+high], [−low]}

[−high], [−low]}

[−high], [+low]


features high, low

[±high], [± low]

◮ [+high]: high segments are produced by raising the body of thetongue above the level that it occupies in the neutral position

◮ [+ low]: low segments are produced by lowering the body of thetongue above the level that it occupies in the neutral position

◮ 3 vertical categories: high — mid — low

◮ feature adequacy:contrastive: X (cf. bat /æ/–bet /e/)phonetic: (X) simplifies!classificatory: X (cf. high vowel gliding (compression):

lenient /"li:ni@nt/→ /"li:nj@nt/;usual /"ju:Zu@l/→ /"ju:Zw@l/[+high]→ [−syllabic]

/

[−stress])


features high, low

the RP stressed monophthong inventory so far. . .

i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:

[front] + + + + − − − − − − −

[back] − − − − − − + + + + +

[high] + + − − − − − − − + +

[low] − − − + − + + + − − −


features length and quality

seen – sin / fool – full / cast – cost, etc.

two candidates

◮ Gimson:◮ length di=erence: [± long]◮ quality di=erence: [±?]

◮ the phonemic theory requires redundancy-free representations⇒choose either [± long] or “quality”


features length and quality

quality = ?

candidates

◮ the IPA: (subtle) height di=erence for seen – sin / fool – full

◮ the IPA: rounding di=erence for cast – cost

◮ traditionally: tense–lax [±tense]


features rounding

rounding & the RP monophthong inventory so far. . .

i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:

[front] + + + + − − − − − − −

[back] − − − − − − + + + + +

[high] + + − − − − − − − + +

[low] − − − + − + + + − − −

[round] − − − − − − − + + + +

◮ [±round] is only relevant for /A:/ – /6/

◮ problem: /i:/ – /I/ and /u:/ – /U/


features tenseness

[±tense]

◮ the phonetically-grounded definition: rather vague

◮ ‘tense sounds are produced with a deliberate, accurate, maximallydistinct articulatory tongue gesture that involves considerable

muscular e=ort, a tensing in the tongue muscles; lax sounds areproduced rapidly, somewhat indistinctly, and without tongue muscle

tensing’

◮ tensing: advancement of the tongue root ([±ATR])


features tenseness

[±tense]—problems

◮ mere tensing of muscles does not a=ect the acoustic vowel quality

◮ for articulatory reasons, tongue root advancement is hindered for lowvowels⇒ /A:/ should be [−tense]

◮ the phonetic tense–lax status of some sounds is not clear(/3:/, /O:/, diphthongs, triphthongs)


features tenseness

[±tense] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory

i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:

[front] + + + + − − − − − − −

[back] − − − − − − + + + + +

[high] + + − − − − − − − + +

[low] − − − + − + + + − − −

[round] − − − − − − − + + + +

[tense] + − − − −? − − − −? − +


features tenseness

[±tense] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory:length is not underlying!

i I e æ 3 2 A 6 O U u

[front] + + + + − − − − − − −

[back] − − − − − − + + + + +

[high] + + − − − − − − − + +

[low] − − − + − + + + − − −

[round] − − − − − − − + + + +

[tense] + − − − −? − − − −? − +


features tenseness


feature adequacy:

contrastive: X (seen – sin / fool – full)phonetic: ——classificatory: ?


features tenseness

[±tense]: classification role

Trisyllabic Laxness

◮ only these occur in the antepenult: /I e æ 6 2 A: 3: O:/

◮ they are classified as [−tense]

Prevocalic Tenseness

◮ within a morpheme, only /i: u: (O:) eI aI OI aU oU/ can occur beforeanother vowel (ruin, neon, chaotic, poem. . . )

◮ they are classified as [+tense]

◮ note: /A: 3:/ should be [−tense]


features tenseness

[±tense]: classification role

vowels in word-final stressed syllables

◮ /I e æ 2 6 U/ do not occur in a word-final open stressed syllable

◮ they are classified as [−tense]

◮ note: /A: 3: O:/ should be [+tense] ! (spa, far, law, more, fur. . . )

◮ note: ‘short vowels do not occur in a word-final open stressed syllable’

vowels before /N/

◮ only these can occur before /N/: /I e æ 2 6 U/

◮ /A: O: 3:/ pattern again with /i: u: O: eI aI OI aU oU/ in this respect

◮ note: ‘only short vowels occur before /N/’


features tenseness


feature adequacy:

contrastive: X (seen – sin / fool – full)phonetic: vague, unclearclassificatory: contradictory


features length

[±long] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory

i: I e æ 3: 2 A: 6 O: U u:

[front] + + + + − − − − − − −

[back] − − − − − − + + + + +

[high] + + − − − − − − − + +

[low] − − − + − + + + − − −

[round] − − − − − − − + + + +

[long] + − − − + − + − + − +


features length

[±long] & the RP stressed monophthong inventory[±tense] & [±round] are redundant

i: i e æ 3: 2 A: A O: u u:

[front] + + + + − − − − − − −

[back] − − − − − − + + + + +

[high] + + − − − − − − − + +

[low] − − − + − + + + − − −

[long] + − − − + − + − + − +


features length

[±long]

benefits

◮ contrast of English vowels is straightforward now

◮ classification of some phenomena is easier

◮ primary stress assignment

◮ vowels in word-final stressed syllables: only [+ long] vowels

◮ vowels before /N/: only [− long] vowels


features length

[±long]

problems

◮ Prevocalic Tenseness & Trisyllabic Laxness cannot be expressedneatly. . .

◮ no absolute definition, short–long depends on timing relations

◮ length is unstable/predictable in English: Pre-Fortis Clipping


features length

length is unstable

beat bitunderlying representation: /bi:t/ ⇐⇒ /bit/

Rule: PFC bit n.a.

surface representation: [bit] =!!! [bit]


features length

[±long]—problems

feature adequacy of [± long]

contrastive: (X) (unstable, cf. Pre-Fortis Clipping)phonetic: (X) (new kind of representation is needed)classificatory: (X) (dubious, cf. Prevocalic Tenseness, TSL)


features length

possible solutions

◮ more place features (= IPA)

◮ allow both quality + quantity in the lexicon

◮ both solutions: more categories,redundancy!


features redundancy

redundancy?

what if we include redundant informationto express a contrast?


features redundancy

redundancy: costs

◮ rejects a cornerstone of classical phonemics/generative phonology

◮ less economical system

◮ more complicated


features redundancy

redundancy: benefits

◮ the problems above disappear

◮ a better model of contrast perception and contrast preservation


features redundancy

little contrast (di=erence is not dispersed enough)


features redundancy

large contrast (di=erence is more dispersed)


features redundancy

dispersion of contrast


features redundancy

redundancy: benefits

◮ a better model of the shaping of vowel inventories: contrasts areenhanced by “redundant” phonetic features (dispersion theory)

◮ Pete–pot: height, frontness, diphthongization, length,rounding, tensing

◮ beat–bit: height, diphthongization, length, tensing◮ Bart–bot: length, rounding◮ bat–but: height

◮ predictions for likely contrast loss

◮ classification is possible along more dimensions

◮ the lexical representation is less abstract


schwa

the schwa in English


schwa

the schwa in English

a quote from Marc van Oostendorp

“I suspect that we will not have a satisfying theory of schwa until we have asatisfying Theory of Everything.”


schwa classical phonemics

the schwa in English—classical phonemics

illusion – allusion /I/←→ /@/

e=ect – a=ect /I/←→ /@/

except – accept /I/←→ /@/

pity – pitta /i/←→ /@/

rocky – rocker /i/←→ /@/

city – sitter /i/←→ /@/

Sophie – sofa /i/←→ /@/

teaches – teachers /I/←→ /@/

roses – Rosa’s /I/←→ /@/

purist – purest /I/←→ /@/

Lenin – Lennon /I/←→ /@/



the schwa in English—classical phonemics

conclusion of classical phonemics

The schwa is a phoneme of English.

It has the same status as /I/, /i(:)/, /æ/, /OI/, etc.



the schwa in English—problems with the phonemicanalysis

2 nagging facts

1. Schwa only occurs in unstressed syllables(predictable).

2. Schwa has a limited contrast.a. It only contrasts with certain vowels.b. It only contrasts in certain positions. (GA, RP?)


schwa generative phonology

the schwa in English—generative phonology

neutralization

The contrast of vowels like /6/, /A:/, /eI/, etc. is suspended in anunstressed syllable.

inventory membership of schwa in the generative analysis

Schwa is derived, it is not a member of the phoneme inventory of English.




the Vowel Reduction Rule[

−stress+syllabic

]

→ @




What is the underlying representation of these unstressed vowels?

sentencesystemmoralsymbolismatomharmonymysterydramaticsulphur




systematic alternations:

séntence ∼ senténtial @∼ e

sýstem ∼ systémic @∼ e

móral ∼morálity @∼æ

sýmbolism∼ symbólic @∼ 6

átom ∼ atómic @∼ 6

hármony ∼ harmónious @∼ oU

mýstery ∼mystérious @∼ I@

dramátic ∼ dráma @∼ A:

súlphur ∼ sulphúrious @∼ jU@




sample derivation of atom ∼ atomic

UR: /æt6m/ /æt6mIk/

stress rules "æt6m æ"t6mIkVowel Reduction Rule "æt@m @"t6mIkother rules . . . . . .SR: ["æt@m] [@"th 6mIk]




How can we derive the schwas in these words?

ópusgymnásiumdecísionóftenmélonÁllenmóuntain

etc.



the schwa in English—nonalternating morphemes

possible URs of opus

/oUpæs//oUp6s//oUpes/

/oUpoUs//oUp2s/

/oUpju:s/etc.


schwa archiphoneme

the schwa in English—archiphoneme

underspecification

ópus /oUpVs/óften /6fVn/mélon /melVn/Állen /ælVn/móuntain /maUntVn/


schwa archiphoneme

the schwa in English—archiphoneme

sample derivation of atom ∼ atomic, and opus

UR: /æt6m/ /æt6mIk/ /oUpVs/

stress rules "æt6m æ"t6mIk /"@UpVs/Vowel Reduction Rule "æt@m @"t6mIk /"oUp@s/other rules . . . . . . . . .SR: ["æt@m] [@"th 6mIk] ["oUp@s]


schwa archiphoneme

the schwa in English—archiphoneme, problems

1. our system can only generate [@] in an unstressed syllable2. it often cannot be predicted whether the reduced vowel is

[@] or [I] or [i]/"len n/ (Lennon – Lenin)/"bet / (better – Betty)

3. in many cases the reduced vowel can only be [I] or [i(:)]rigíditydebátestúpidpássagesíllydemócracy

4. ‘all vowels except [I] or [i]’— cannot be easily defined as anarchiphoneme

5. other vowels also seem to occur in an unstressed syllable:


schwa archiphoneme

the schwa in English—archiphoneme, problems

/æ/ gastrónomy (but: astrónomy with /@/)cantéen

/6/ ápricotMontána

/e/ cóntentpellúcid


schwa types

the schwa in English—a proposal

The English vowel inventory: more structured

◮ contrastive full vowels in stressed positions(main inventory)

◮ contrastive reduced vowels in unstressed positions(subinventory 1)

◮ noncontrastive reduced vowels in unstressedpositions (subinventory 2)


schwa types

the schwa in English—two kinds

2 kinds of schwa

1. contrastive schwa (sófa (⇔ Sóphie))

2. noncontrastive schwa (rhápsody)


schwa types

2 schwas: 2 behaviours

2 schwas

◮ contrastive: does not vary in pronunciation, usually final

◮ non-contrastive: large variation, usually non-final


schwa types

the schwa in English—GA realizations


BBN–ANG–243 Phonological analysis 3–4. Segment inventory

Documents

Transcript of BBN–ANG–243 Phonological analysis 3–4. Segment inventory