PHONOLOGY is a branch of linguistics concerned with the systematic organization of sounds in languages. It has traditionally focused largely on the study of the systems of phonemes in particular languages (and therefore used to be also called _phonemics_, or _phonematics_), but it may also cover any linguistic analysis either at a level beneath the word (including syllable , onset and rime , articulatory gestures , articulatory features, mora , etc.) or at all levels of language where sound is considered to be structured for conveying linguistic meaning .
* 1 Terminology * 2 Derivation and definitions * 3 History * 4 Analysis of phonemes * 5 Other topics in phonology * 6 See also * 7 Notes * 8 Bibliography * 9 External links
The word _phonology_ (as in _the phonology of English _) can also refer to the phonological system (sound system) of a given language. This is one of the fundamental systems which a language is considered to comprise, like its syntax and its vocabulary .
DERIVATION AND DEFINITIONS
The word _phonology_ comes from
The history of phonology may be traced back to the _
The Polish scholar Jan Baudouin de Courtenay (together with his students, Mikołaj Kruszewski and Lev Shcherba ) shaped the modern usage of the term _phoneme _ in 1876–7, which had been coined in 1873 by the French linguist A. Dufriche-Desgenettes who proposed it as a one-word equivalent for the German _Sprachlaut_. Baudouin de Courtenay's work, though often unacknowledged, is considered to be the starting point of modern phonology. He also worked on the theory of phonetic alternations (what is now called allophony and morphophonology ), and may have had an influence on the work of Saussure according to E. F. K. Koerner . Nikolai Trubetzkoy, 1920s
An influential school of phonology in the interwar period was the
Prague school . One of its leading members was Prince Nikolai
Trubetzkoy , whose _Grundzüge der Phonologie_ (_Principles of
Phonology_), published posthumously in 1939, is among the most
important works in the field from this period. Directly influenced by
Baudouin de Courtenay, Trubetzkoy is considered the founder of
morphophonology , although this concept had also been recognized by de
Courtenay. Trubetzkoy also developed the concept of the _archiphoneme
_. Another important figure in the
Prague school was
Noam Chomsky and
Morris Halle published _The
Natural phonology is a theory based on the publications of its proponent David Stampe in 1969 and (more explicitly) in 1979. In this view, phonology is based on a set of universal phonological processes that interact with one another; which ones are active and which are suppressed is language-specific. Rather than acting on segments, phonological processes act on distinctive features within prosodic groups. Prosodic groups can be as small as a part of a syllable or as large as an entire utterance. Phonological processes are unordered with respect to each other and apply simultaneously (though the output of one process may be the input to another). The second most prominent natural phonologist is Patricia Donegan (Stampe's wife); there are many natural phonologists in Europe, and a few in the U.S., such as Geoffrey Nathan. The principles of natural phonology were extended to morphology by Wolfgang U. Dressler , who founded natural morphology.
In 1976 John Goldsmith introduced autosegmental phonology . Phonological phenomena are no longer seen as operating on _one_ linear sequence of segments, called phonemes or feature combinations, but rather as involving _some parallel sequences_ of features which reside on multiple tiers. Autosegmental phonology later evolved into feature geometry , which became the standard theory of representation for theories of the organization of phonology as different as lexical phonology and optimality theory .
Government phonology , which originated in the early 1980s as an attempt to unify theoretical notions of syntactic and phonological structures, is based on the notion that all languages necessarily follow a small set of principles and vary according to their selection of certain binary parameters . That is, all languages' phonological structures are essentially the same, but there is restricted variation that accounts for differences in surface realizations. Principles are held to be inviolable, though parameters may sometimes come into conflict. Prominent figures in this field include Jonathan Kaye , Jean Lowenstamm, Jean-Roger Vergnaud, Monik Charette, and John Harris.
In a course at the LSA summer institute in 1991, Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky developed optimality theory —an overall architecture for phonology according to which languages choose a pronunciation of a word that best satisfies a list of constraints ordered by importance; a lower-ranked constraint can be violated when the violation is necessary in order to obey a higher-ranked constraint. The approach was soon extended to morphology by John McCarthy and Alan Prince , and has become a dominant trend in phonology. The appeal to phonetic grounding of constraints and representational elements (e.g. features) in various approaches has been criticized by proponents of 'substance-free phonology', especially by Mark Hale and Charles Reiss .
An integrated approach to phonological theory that combines synchronic and diachronic accounts to sound patterns was initiated with Evolutionary Phonology in recent years.
ANALYSIS OF PHONEMES
An important part of traditional, pre-generative schools of phonology
is studying which sounds can be grouped into distinctive units within
a language; these units are known as phonemes . For example, in
English, the "p" sound in _pot_ is aspirated (pronounced ) while that
in _spot_ is not aspirated (pronounced ). However, English speakers
intuitively treat both sounds as variations (allophones ) of the same
phonological category, that is of the phoneme /p/. (Traditionally, it
would be argued that if an aspirated were interchanged with the
unaspirated in _spot_, native speakers of English would still hear
the same words; that is, the two sounds are perceived as "the same"
/p/.) In some other languages, however, these two sounds are perceived
as different, and they are consequently assigned to different
phonemes. For example, in Thai ,
Part of the phonological study of a language therefore involves looking at data (phonetic transcriptions of the speech of native speakers ) and trying to deduce what the underlying phonemes are and what the sound inventory of the language is. The presence or absence of minimal pairs, as mentioned above, is a frequently used criterion for deciding whether two sounds should be assigned to the same phoneme. However, other considerations often need to be taken into account as well.
The particular contrasts which are phonemic in a language can change over time. At one time, and , two sounds that have the same place and manner of articulation and differ in voicing only, were allophones of the same phoneme in English, but later came to belong to separate phonemes. This is one of the main factors of historical change of languages as described in historical linguistics .
The findings and insights of speech perception and articulation research complicate the traditional and somewhat intuitive idea of interchangeable allophones being perceived as the same phoneme. First, interchanged allophones of the same phoneme can result in unrecognizable words. Second, actual speech, even at a word level, is highly co-articulated, so it is problematic to expect to be able to splice words into simple segments without affecting speech perception.
Different linguists therefore take different approaches to the problem of assigning sounds to phonemes. For example, they differ in the extent to which they require allophones to be phonetically similar. There are also differing ideas as to whether this grouping of sounds is purely a tool for linguistic analysis, or reflects an actual process in the way the human brain processes a language.
Since the early 1960s, theoretical linguists have moved away from the traditional concept of a phoneme, preferring to consider basic units at a more abstract level, as a component of morphemes ; these units can be called _morphophonemes_, and analysis using this approach is called morphophonology .
OTHER TOPICS IN PHONOLOGY
In addition to the minimal units that can serve the purpose of differentiating meaning (the phonemes ), phonology studies how sounds alternate, i.e. replace one another in different forms of the same morpheme (allomorphs ), as well as, for example, syllable structure, stress , feature geometry , accent , and intonation .
The principles of phonological analysis can be applied independently of modality because they are designed to serve as general analytical tools, not language-specific ones. The same principles have been applied to the analysis of sign languages (see Phonemes in sign languages ), even though the sub-lexical units are not instantiated as speech sounds.
* Absolute neutralisation * Cherology * English phonology * List of phonologists (also Category: Phonologists ) * Morphophonology * Phoneme * Phonological development * Phonological hierarchy * Prosody (linguistics) * Phonotactics * Second language phonology * Phonological rule
* ^ _A_ _B_ Lass, Roger (1998). "Phonology: An Introduction to
Basic Concepts". Cambridge, UK; New York; Melbourne, Australia:
Cambridge University Press
* Anderson, John M.; and Ewen, Colin J. (1987). _Principles of
dependency phonology_. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
* Bloch, Bernard (1941). "Phonemic overlapping". _American Speech_.
16 (4): 278–284.
JSTOR 486567 . doi :10.2307/486567 .
* Bloomfield, Leonard . (1933). _Language_. New York: H. Holt and
Company. (Revised version of Bloomfield's 1914 _An introduction to the
study of language_).
* Brentari, Diane (1998). _A prosodic model of sign language
phonology._ Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press .
* Chomsky, Noam . (1964). Current issues in linguistic theory. In J.
A. Fodor and J. J. Katz (Eds.), _The structure of language: Readings
in the philosophy language_ (pp. 91–112). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
* Chomsky, Noam; and Halle, Morris . (1968). _The sound pattern of
English_. New York: Harper & Row.
* Clements, George N. (1985). "The geometry of phonological
* v * t