PowerPoint Presentation

Structure of the talk



Natural Phonology



Phonological processes vs. phonological

rules



Features of connected speech phenomena



Assimilation of place, voice and manner



Elision of unaccented vowels (vowel

deletion, syncope)



Simplification of consonant clusters

(consonant deletion)



Linking in English

Natural Phonology



Natural Phonology views language as the
“natural reflection of the needs, capacities,
and world of its users” (Donegan – Stampe
1979: 126).



The communicative needs of speakers have to
be fulfilled within the limits imposed on them
by the anatomy of the speech apparatus



This lowest physiological level determines the
segmental make-up of the world’s languages.

Phonological process



A phonological process is “a mental
operation that applies in speech to
substitute, for a class of sounds or
sound sequences presenting a specific
common difficulty to the speech
capacity of the individual, an
alternative class identical but lacking
the difficult property.”

Features of phonological

processes



Phonological processes are inborn,

natural, universal and mental



The full repertoire of phonological

processes is available to the child at the

very beginning of the acquisition period.



The processes undergo supression,

limitation and ordering



Processes are believed to be

phonetically motivated

Example



Underlying representation /  / Adult form

b Denasalisation

p Devoicing of final

consonant

                                           Gliding
                                           Frication
Processes                                  Stopping

 Labial assimilation

 Neutralisation
Surface form /  / Child’s form

Phonological rules



Phonological rules are conventions that have

to be learned and observed by all speakers of a

language



Phonological rules are basically morphological



Phonological rules can:

change features of segments

delete segments

insert segments

coalesce segments

permute or interchange segments (metathesis)

Processes/rules dichotomy



Processes:



possess synchronic

phonetic motivation



are inborn



apply subconsciously

only their absence is

noticeable



are exceptionless



apply to slips of the

tongue, loan word etc.



may be obligatory or

optional



Rules:



have no synchronic

motivation, but possess

a grammatical function



have to be learned



are formulated through

observation



tolerate exceptions



are not productive



are obligatory, style-

independent

Examples of processes and rules



Lenitions – context-

sensitive (weakening

processes):

assimilation

deletion

reduction

monophthongisation



Fortitions – contex-free

strengthening processes:

onset strengthening

dissimilation

insertion

diphthongisation



Rules:



velar softening:

    // - //
    / - /
    // - //
    // - //



the // - //

alternation in Polish

// - //

Connected speech

processes



Connected speech = natural (casual)
speech



Sounds belonging to one word (syllable)
can cause changes in sounds belonging to
the neighbouring word (syllable).



Connected speech processes
(phenomena) include: assimilations,
deletions, linking (consonant epenthesis)

Assimilation



Regressive and progressive assimilation



Regressive assimilation – a sound

undergoing the process becomes more

similar to the following segment.



Progressive assimilation - a sound

undergoing the process becomes more

similar to the preceding segment.



Types of assimilatory change: place,

voice and manner.

Place assimilation in

English



The alveolars/dentals tend to assimilate to the place of

articulation of the following segment (regressive

assimilation).



The propensity of // for place assimilation can be accounted

for by the fact that a nasal can be produced in most places of

articulation.



Examples: / / → / /

                  / / → / /
                      / / → / /
                          // → //
                    // → //



Yod coalescense: / / → //, / / → //,

/ / → //, / / → //



Non-assimilating languages: Russian, Polish

Voice assimilation



Voice assimilation can be of two kinds, namely

voicing where [-voice] → [+voice] and

devoicing that is a change [+voice] → [- voice]



The plural -s, 3rd person singular –s and the

possessive s undergo the former process,e.g.

bags //, lives //, Bob’s //, while the

latter is mainly applied across word

boundaries, e.g.



I like that black dog /    /



Differences between Polish and English: no

regressive voicing in English

Assimilation of manner



The interdental // tends to be realised in

various ways depending on the

phonological context in which it finds itself.



// can be realised as:



A nasal sound, e.g. / /



A plosive, e.g. / /



An approximant, e.g. /  /



A tap, e.g. // (only in American

English)

Vowel deletion



Established cases of vowel deletion:

-  initially: state, scholar
-  medially: evening, chimney, Gloucester
-  finally: time, name, hands <handes>, eaten



Present Day English: affected vowels /, /



C + // + // + WV e.g. factory, territory



C + // + // e.g. family, bachelor,specialist



C + // + // or // e.g. parade, police, terrific



F + // + S e.g. phonetics, thermometre,

suppose

Vowel deletion



1. I suppose that parcel is for me.



2. I must admit I was totally wrong.



3. It is perfectly clear that we shouldn’t have
suspected the dustman.



4. The main criteria for the selection of consonants
surrounding the

unstressed vowel in word-

initial position were manner of articulation and
voicing.

Consonant deletion



Established cases of consonant deletion:

-    initially: hlaford, write, know, gnat,
-    medially: listen, listen, castle, but often
-    finally: lamb, thumb, hymn,



Present Day English:



further simplification of consonant clusters:

wristwatch, handbag, mostly, windmill, etc.



Plosive deletion across word boundaries, e.g. can’t do



The loss of // after //: always, already, although



The loss of // in of: lots of people



//-dropping – the loss of // in pronouns and function

words

Cluster simplification in English



1. The handsome landlord put the wristwatch
in his

wife’s handbag.



2. It is perfectly clear that we shouldn’t have
suspected

the dustman.

Hiatus avoidance

strategies



Hiatus – a sequence of two vowels belonging to

different syllables, e.g. do exercises, going, drawing.



Vowel sequences are not sufficiently perceptible,

therefore they are dispreferred.



Hiatus avoidance strategies:

heterosyllabification

diphthong formation

consonant epenthesis

vowel deletion

glide formation

coalescence

Hiatus avoidance in

English



English resolves hiatus by means of consonant
epenthesis and, occassionally, by means of
glide formation



Consonant epenthesis (linking), e.g. going
//, the apple //, drawing //



The use of a given linking (epenthetic)
consonant is determined by the articulatory
characteristics of the first vowel.



Glide formation, e.g. two or three //

can be realised as //

Connected speech processes as

natural phenomena



In Natural Phonology language is seen as a
reflection of the capacities of the speaker.



In speech the language user has to
overcome constraints imposed on him/her
by the physical properties of the speech
apparatus.



Connected speech phenomena can be
thought of as strategies employed by the
speaker to overcome articulatory
difficulties.

Recommended

bibliography



Casali, Roderick F. 1996. Resolving hiatus. New York: Garland Publishing.



Farnetani, Edda. 1997. “Coarticulation and connected speech processes”,

in: Hardcastle, William. – Laver, John (eds), 371-404.



Głowacka, Dorota. 2001. “Unstressed vowel deletion and new consonant

clusters in English”, Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 37: 71-

94.



Goldstein, Louis – Fowler, Carol A. 2003. “Articulatory Phonology: a

phonology for public language use”, in: Schiller, Niels Olaf – Meyer, Antje

(eds), 159-207.



Hardcastle, William J. – Laver, John (eds). 1997. The handbook of phonetic

sciences. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.



Laver, John. 1994. Principles of Phonetics. Cambridge University Press.



Schiller, Niels, Olaf. – Meyer, Antje. 2003. Phonetics and Phonology in

language comprehension and production. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.



Shockey, Linda. 2003. Sound patterns of spoken English. Oxford:

Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Document Outline