SEGMENTAL PHONOLOGY-phonemes

SEGMENTAL PHONOLOGY-phonemes

(1)            a. the cat is on the mat

                b. the mat is on the cat

What is the difference in sounds?

What is the difference in meaning

Obviously the set of sounds uttered in (1a) and (1b) is identical. So the difference lies in

the order in which these sounds appear: [k]and [m] permute in (1b). We see that the order of

appearance can alter meaning. In (1a) and (1b) the relationship between the cat and the mat is

inverted.

In our examples we produce a change in meaning through a substitution of segments in a

string of sounds. These segments are called phonemes. A precise definition will be given later on.

Now imagine you’re in London and you want to go to Bond Street. You ask a couple:

“Excuse me, could you tell me where Bond Street is?”. They both answer in chorus: “Second left

and then right”,which can be transcribed as

(2)                    a [sek?nd left ?n Cen raHt]

                         b [sek?nd left ?n Cen RaHt]

Both have given you the same information although you perceive a difference in the

sounds used, that is, the woman has used [r], the regular English / r / sound, whereas the man

used the rolled lingual [R] instead. They are transcribed phonetically respectively as

[raHt] and [RaHt]

This difference in the pronunciation, which allows you to deduce that the wife is English and the

husband Scottish, doesn’t entail a change in meaning.

The two segments [r] and [R] can be used indifferently since there is no change of

meaning: the difference between the two is said to be phonetic. This was not the case for the

substitution of [h] for [R] in [Ri:Hz] - [hi:Hz], which brings about a change in meaning and is said

to be phonological (or phonemic).

Minimal Pairs

Let’s come back to the concept of phoneme. Since the substitution of [h] for[R] changes

she into he, [h] and [R] belong necessarily to two different phonemes. Whereas [r] and [R], which

under no circumstances change the information given, are said to belong to the same phoneme /r/.

In the discussion of phonological versus phonetic differences, what matters is whether the

substitution of one sound for another brings about a change in meaning or not; the description of

this change does not enter the field of phonology.

Generally, when we wish to decide whether two segments belong to the same phoneme or,

on the contrary, are realisations of two different phonemes, we put them in an identical context,

that is the same string of sounds. When there is a difference between two otherwise identical

strings of sound and this difference results in a change of meaning, these two strings are said to

constitute a minimal pair. 

If we substitute one segment for another and this results in a change in meaning the two

segments belong to two different phonemes. Thus [k] and [m] are realisations of two different

phonemes /k/ and /m/ because substituting one for the other as first element of the string [-zt]

gives two different words: /kzt/ (cat) and /mzt/ (mat).

One can safely say that the phonemes of a given language form a system in which they are

all opposed to one another. Take English /p/:

/p/ is opposed to /b/ as in /pHg/ : /bHg/ pig : big

/p/ is opposed to /t/ as in /pi:/ : /ti:/ pea : tea

/p/ is opposed to /d / as in /pHg/ : /dHg / pig : dig

/p/ is opposed to /k/ as in /pzt/ : /kzt/ pat : cat

/p/ is opposed to /g/ as in /pPt/ : /gPt/ pot : got

/p/ is opposed to /m/ as in /pzt/ : /mzt/ pat : mat

/p/ is opposed to /n/ as in /pHt/ : /nHt/ pit : knit

/p/ is opposed to /M/ as in /rHp/ : /rHM/ rip : ring

/p/ is opposed to /f/ as in /pi:t/ : /fi:t/ peat : feet

/p/ is opposed to /v/ as in /pet/ : /vet/ pet : vet

/p/ is opposed to /S/ as in /pN:t/ : /SN:t/ port : thought

/p/ is opposed to /C/ as in /pzt/ : /Czt/ pat : that

/p/ is opposed to /s/ as in /pzt/ : /szt/ pat : sat

/p/ is opposed to /z/ as in /pHp/ : /zHp/ pip : zip

/p/ is opposed to /R/ as in /pi:/ : /Ri:/ pea : she

/p/ is opposed to /Y/ as in /lep?/ : /leY?/ leper : leisure

/p/ is opposed to /tR/ as in /pi:p/ : /tRi:p/ peep : cheap

/p/ is opposed to /dY/ as in /pi:p/ : /dYi:p/ peep : jeep

/p/ is opposed to /l/ as in /pHt/ : /lHt/ pit : lit

\/p/ is opposed to /r/ as in /pPt/ : /rPt/ pot : rot

/p/ is opposed to /w/ as in /pi:/ : /wi:/ pea : we

/p/ is opposed to /j/ as in /p?Tk/ : /j?Tk/ poke : yoke

/p/ is opposed to /h/ as in /pi:/ : /hi:/ pea : he

This procedure can theoretically be applied to each phoneme of the language. Note,

though, that in the chart above, /p/ is opposed to other consonants only. This is because even

though all phonemes of a given language form a system, oppositions in that language are

organised in such a way that consonants can only be opposed to consonants and vowels to

vowels.