Phonetic Chart (nb. line up the sounds logically, and make sure that potentially phonetically similar sounds are adjacent to each other).

Similar documents
The analysis starts with the phonetic vowel and consonant charts based on the dataset:

The Perception of Nasalized Vowels in American English: An Investigation of On-line Use of Vowel Nasalization in Lexical Access

**Note: this is slightly different from the original (mainly in format). I would be happy to send you a hard copy.**

The ABCs of O-G. Materials Catalog. Skills Workbook. Lesson Plans for Teaching The Orton-Gillingham Approach in Reading and Spelling

Phonological Processing for Urdu Text to Speech System

CLASSIFICATION OF PROGRAM Critical Elements Analysis 1. High Priority Items Phonemic Awareness Instruction

DOWNSTEP IN SUPYIRE* Robert Carlson Societe Internationale de Linguistique, Mali

ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES MODELING IMPROVED AMHARIC SYLLBIFICATION ALGORITHM

Language Acquisition by Identical vs. Fraternal SLI Twins * Karin Stromswold & Jay I. Rifkin

Phonological and Phonetic Representations: The Case of Neutralization

Linguistics 220 Phonology: distributions and the concept of the phoneme. John Alderete, Simon Fraser University

Universal contrastive analysis as a learning principle in CAPT

Acoustic correlates of stress and their use in diagnosing syllable fusion in Tongan. James White & Marc Garellek UCLA

Pobrane z czasopisma New Horizons in English Studies Data: 18/11/ :52:20. New Horizons in English Studies 1/2016

Quarterly Progress and Status Report. Voiced-voiceless distinction in alaryngeal speech - acoustic and articula

The Journey to Vowelerria VOWEL ERRORS: THE LOST WORLD OF SPEECH INTERVENTION. Preparation: Education. Preparation: Education. Preparation: Education

Revisiting the role of prosody in early language acquisition. Megha Sundara UCLA Phonetics Lab

A Neural Network GUI Tested on Text-To-Phoneme Mapping

Weave the Critical Literacy Strands and Build Student Confidence to Read! Part 2

Stages of Literacy Ros Lugg

NCU IISR English-Korean and English-Chinese Named Entity Transliteration Using Different Grapheme Segmentation Approaches

Phonetics. The Sound of Language

Books Effective Literacy Y5-8 Learning Through Talk Y4-8 Switch onto Spelling Spelling Under Scrutiny

UKLO Round Advanced solutions and marking schemes. 6 The long and short of English verbs [15 marks]

Lexical phonology. Marc van Oostendorp. December 6, Until now, we have presented phonological theory as if it is a monolithic

Quarterly Progress and Status Report. VCV-sequencies in a preliminary text-to-speech system for female speech

On the nature of voicing assimilation(s)

On the Formation of Phoneme Categories in DNN Acoustic Models

Get Your Hands On These Multisensory Reading Strategies

Sounds of Infant-Directed Vocabulary: Learned from Infants Speech or Part of Linguistic Knowledge?

have to be modeled) or isolated words. Output of the system is a grapheme-tophoneme conversion system which takes as its input the spelling of words,

Consonants: articulation and transcription

Speech Segmentation Using Probabilistic Phonetic Feature Hierarchy and Support Vector Machines

Mandarin Lexical Tone Recognition: The Gating Paradigm

1 st Quarter (September, October, November) August/September Strand Topic Standard Notes Reading for Literature

SEGMENTAL FEATURES IN SPONTANEOUS AND READ-ALOUD FINNISH

Similarity Avoidance in the Proto-Indo-European Root

Markedness and Complex Stops: Evidence from Simplification Processes 1. Nick Danis Rutgers University

1. REFLEXES: Ask questions about coughing, swallowing, of water as fast as possible (note! Not suitable for all

Listener-oriented phonology

The Bruins I.C.E. School

Christine Mooshammer, IPDS Kiel, Philip Hoole, IPSK München, Anja Geumann, Dublin

Radical CV Phonology: the locational gesture *

To appear in the Proceedings of the 35th Meetings of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Post-vocalic spirantization: Typology and phonetic motivations

GOLD Objectives for Development & Learning: Birth Through Third Grade

Page 1 of 11. Curriculum Map: Grade 4 Math Course: Math 4 Sub-topic: General. Grade(s): None specified

Clinical Application of the Mean Babbling Level and Syllable Structure Level

Contrastiveness and diachronic variation in Chinese nasal codas. Tsz-Him Tsui The Ohio State University

Florida Reading Endorsement Alignment Matrix Competency 1

Automatic English-Chinese name transliteration for development of multilingual resources

The influence of orthographic transparency on word recognition. by dyslexic and normal readers

English Language and Applied Linguistics. Module Descriptions 2017/18

Taught Throughout the Year Foundational Skills Reading Writing Language RF.1.2 Demonstrate understanding of spoken words,

Demonstration of problems of lexical stress on the pronunciation Turkish English teachers and teacher trainees by computer

Unvoiced Landmark Detection for Segment-based Mandarin Continuous Speech Recognition

Phonology Revisited: Sor3ng Out the PH Factors in Reading and Spelling Development. Indiana, November, 2015

The phonological grammar is probabilistic: New evidence pitting abstract representation against analogy

Phonological encoding in speech production

Richardson, J., The Next Step in Guided Writing, Ohio Literacy Conference, 2010

Handout #8. Neutralization

Unit 9. Teacher Guide. k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z. Kindergarten Core Knowledge Language Arts New York Edition Skills Strand

A Fact in Historical Phonology from the Viewpoint of Generative Phonology: The Underlying Schwa in Old English

Large Kindergarten Centers Icons

Dyslexia/dyslexic, 3, 9, 24, 97, 187, 189, 206, 217, , , 367, , , 397,

Manner assimilation in Uyghur

Abstractions and the Brain

Program Matrix - Reading English 6-12 (DOE Code 398) University of Florida. Reading

Understanding and Supporting Dyslexia Godstone Village School. January 2017

DEVELOPMENT OF LINGUAL MOTOR CONTROL IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS

Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics

Speech Recognition using Acoustic Landmarks and Binary Phonetic Feature Classifiers

Frequency and pragmatically unmarked word order *

source or where they are needed to distinguish two forms of a language. 4. Geographical Location. I have attempted to provide a geographical

Critical Thinking in Everyday Life: 9 Strategies

English for Life. B e g i n n e r. Lessons 1 4 Checklist Getting Started. Student s Book 3 Date. Workbook. MultiROM. Test 1 4

ELA/ELD Standards Correlation Matrix for ELD Materials Grade 1 Reading

Notes on The Sciences of the Artificial Adapted from a shorter document written for course (Deciding What to Design) 1

TEKS Comments Louisiana GLE

Different Task Type and the Perception of the English Interdental Fricatives

SOUND STRUCTURE REPRESENTATION, REPAIR AND WELL-FORMEDNESS: GRAMMAR IN SPOKEN LANGUAGE PRODUCTION. Adam B. Buchwald

ABSTRACT. Some children with speech sound disorders (SSD) have difficulty with literacyrelated

An Evaluation of the Interactive-Activation Model Using Masked Partial-Word Priming. Jason R. Perry. University of Western Ontario. Stephen J.

Life and career planning

THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR MODEL IN ELECTRONIC LEARNING: A PILOT STUDY

Rachel E. Baker, Ann R. Bradlow. Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

The Indian English of Tibeto-Burman language speakers*

raıs Factors affecting word learning in adults: A comparison of L2 versus L1 acquisition /r/ /aı/ /s/ /r/ /aı/ /s/ = individual sound

DIBELS Next BENCHMARK ASSESSMENTS

Infants learn phonotactic regularities from brief auditory experience

University of Groningen. Systemen, planning, netwerken Bosman, Aart

A Retrospective Study

Considerations for Aligning Early Grades Curriculum with the Common Core

Problems of the Arabic OCR: New Attitudes

Hamzat al wasel: The Potentiality and the Problems in Arabic Syllable Structure. Najat Ahmed Busabaa

First Grade Curriculum Highlights: In alignment with the Common Core Standards

Writing a composition

Sample Goals and Benchmarks

Kings Local. School District s. Literacy Framework

Learning Methods in Multilingual Speech Recognition

Effect of Word Complexity on L2 Vocabulary Learning

Transcription:

PHONETICS AND PHONOLOGY PHONEMIC ANALYSIS: SOLUTIONS - R. H. Mannell 1) Artificial (nb. line up the sounds logically, and make sure that potentially phonetically similar sounds are adjacent to each other). p t k b d g m n i { a u O = (ie. stress) Compare [pb] [td] [kg] [{a] [ao] stress Sounds not compared [m] [n] [i] [u] Comparisons and Conclusions [pb] CD [p] only word-initial [b] only word-medial [td] CD [t] only word-initial [d] only word-medial [kg] CD [k] only word-initial [g] only word-medial [{a] CAE 6 versus 8; 11 versus 13; 9 versus 10 [ao] CIE 12 versus 13 stress - contrastive 2 versus 3 Phonemes (You must include the following list in any answer) /p/ [b] word-medial [p] word-initial /t/ [d] word-medial [t] word-initial /k/ [g] word-medial [k] word-initial /m/ [m] /n/ [n] /i/ [i] /{/ [{] /a/ [a] /O/ [O] /u/ [u] /=/ [=] 1

2) Artificial p t i u b d e o m n l a R Suspicious pairs [p/b], [t/d], [l/r], [i/e], [u/o], (and perhaps [e/a], [o/a]) Non-suspicious sounds [m], [n] a) Stress is always on first syllable, therefore non-contrasting b) Vowels Minimal pairs (CIE) [a] vs [o] 2 [=dira] vs 3 [=diro] [a] vs [e] 10 [=nata] vs 11 [=nate] no minimal pairs (or CAE) for [i] vs [e] and [u] vs [o] Complementary distribution [i] vs [e] [i] always syllable 1 (stressed), [e] always syllable 2 (unstressed) [u] vs [o] [u] always syllable 1 (stressed), [o] always syllable 2 (unstressed) c) Consonants Minimal pairs (CIE) [p] vs [b] 7 [=libo] vs 8 [=lipo] CAE [t] vs [d] 1 [=bito] vs 6 [=lido] (and also symmetrical cf p/b) Complementary distribution [l] vs [R] [l] always initial (ie. syllable 1), [R] always medial (ie. syllable 2) d) Conclusions /i/ ---> [i] in (stressed) syllable 1 [e] in (unstressed) syllable 2 /u/ ---> [u] in (stressed) syllable 1 [o] in (unstressed) syllable 2 /a/ ---> [a] /p/ ---> [p] /b/ ---> [b] /t/ ---> [t] /d/ ---> [d] /l/ ---> [l] initial position (syllable 1) [R] medial or VCV position (syllable 2) /m/ ---> [m] /n/ ---> [n] 2

3) Artificial s S i u z Z n J N a Suspicious pairs [s/s], [z/z], [s/z], [S,Z], [n/j/n] Non-suspicious sounds [i], [a], [u] a) Stress is always on the first syllable, therefore non-contrasting b) Vowels [i], [a] and [u] are phonetically dissimilar c) Consonants No minimal pairs or CAE Complementary distribution [s] vs [z] [s] always initial (ie. stressed syllable 1), [z] medial (VCV) [S] vs [Z] [S] always initial (ie. stressed syllable 1), [Z] medial (VCV) [s] vs [S] 1 & 2 [=su...], 9 & 10 [=sa...], 5 & 6 [=Si...] ie. [s] preceding [u] and [a], [S] preceding [i] [z] vs [Z] 2 [... zu], 7 & 11 [... za], 4 & 8 [... Zi] ie. [z] preceding [u] and [a], [Z] preceding [i] [n] vs [J] vs [N] 3,4,7 & 9 [... na...], 1,3 & 5 [... Ji...], 6.8.10 & 11 [... Nu...] d) Some general rules [alveolar] ---> [post-alveolar] /_ [i] [-voice] ---> [+voice] / V_V [n] ---> [N] / _ [u] e) Conclusions /i/ ---> [i] /a/ ---> [a] /u/ ---> [u] /s/ ---> [s] / #_ {[u] [a]} ---> [z] / V_ {[u] [a]} ---> [S] / #_ [i] ---> [Z] / V_ [i] /n/ ---> [n] / _ [a] ---> [J] / _ [i] ---> [N] / _ [u] 3

4. Spanish (simplified) p t k i u b d g e o T s x B D G a m n J l º Suspicious Pairs [i/e], [e/a], [a/o], [o/u], [p/b], [t/d], [k/g], [T/D], [x/g], [b/b], [t/t], [d/d], [k/x], [g/g], [n/j], [l/º] Non-suspicious sounds [m], [s] a) Stress is not specified b) Vowels [u] vs [o] 22 [mudo] vs 21 [modo] CAE [i] vs [e] 20 [Tima] vs 29 [Tena] [a] vs [e] 16 [ºama] vs 17 [Jame] [a] vs [o] 2 [donada] vs 24 [TeJiDo] c) Consonants a) Voice contrasts [p] vs [b] 9 [baxa] vs 10 [paxa] [t] vs [d] 6 [tonada] vs 2 [donada] [k] vs [g] 4 [kama] vs 3 [gama] [T] vs [D] 20 [moto] vs 22 [modo] [x] vs [G] 10 [paxa] vs 11[paGa] b) Place contrasts [l] vs [º] 25 [solo] vs 26 [soºo] c) Manner (stop/fricative) contrasts [t] vs [T] 7 [tapa] vs 19 [Tapa] [k] vs [x] 30 [paka] vs 10 [paxa] CAE b) Place contrasts [n] vs [J] 23 [TeniTa] vs [TeJiDa] Complementary Distribution c) Manner (stop/fricative) contrasts [b] vs [B] [b] always initial, [B] always medial (VCV) [d] vs [D] [d] always initial, [D] always medial (VCV) [g] vs [G] [g] always initial, [G] always medial (VCV) d) Some general rules {[+voice] [stop]} ---> [fricative] / V_V 4

e) Conclusions /i/ ---> [i] /e/ ---> [e] /a/ ---> [a] /o/ ---> [o] /u/ ---> [u] /p/ ---> [p] /b/ ---> [b] initially ---> [B] medially (VCV) /t/ ---> [t] /d/ ---> [d] initially ---> [D] medially (VCV) /T/ ---> [T] /k/ ---> [k] /g/ ---> [g] initially ---> [G] medially (VCV) /x/ ---> [x] /s/ ---> [s] /m/ ---> [m] /n/ ---> [n] /J/ ---> [J] /l/ ---> [l] /º/ ---> [º] 5

5) Artificial p t k i u b d g e o s V z a m n N Suspicious pairs [p/b], [t/d], [k/g], [s/z], [n/n], [i/e], [u/o], [V,a], [e,v], [o,v] Non-suspicious sounds [m] a) Stress is not specified b) Vowels None Contrast in Analogous Environment (CAE) Nothing that is immediately obvious Complementary Distribution i) Adjacent phone context Preceding context Following Context /i/ p, b, t, k, n n, #, g, z, m /e/ k, t, z, g n, s, k, p, t, N /a/ s, d, m,p, k, s b, #, z, d /V/ n, p, d, m, k, s, t N, s, t, n /u/ n, k, d, z, t, p #, d, b, g /o/ s, b, m, p, k n, p, s, N The clearest trend evident in this table is that /i, a, u/ can be word final (#), whilst /e, V, o/ are never seen to be word final. A second (but much less readily seen) pattern is that when /i, a, u/ are followed by a stop or fricative, that stop or fricative is voiced, whilst when /e, V, o/ are followed by a stop or fricative, that stop or fricative is voiceless. Further, /N/ only follows /e, V, o/ whilst /n/ can be seen to follow vowels of either group. This data suggests two classes of vowel and most likely implies three vowel phonemes each with two allophones. At this point, however, the analysis is inconclusive. Whilst following /N/, stop/fricative-voicing or word boundary (#) contexts are consistently related to vowel groups, /n/ can follow vowels of either group and so following phone and word-boundary contexts will not consistently predict the choice of vowels. It may be that both vowel identity and consonant distribution are conditioned by some other aspect of word structure. 6

ii) Position in word There are four word structures:- CVCV, CVCCV, CVCVC, CVCCVC The following table shows the vowels in the position marked "*" C*CV CVC* C*CCV CVCC* C*CVC CVC*C C*CCVC CVCC*C i, a, u i, a, u e, V, o i, a, u i, a, u e, V, o e, V, o e, V, o When examining the distribution of the vowels, it is found that [i], [u], [a] occur in the word positions marked in the following list by "*", whilst the vowels [e], [V], [o] only occur in the word positions marked by "@":- C*C*, C@CC*, C*C@C, C@CC@C This is a clear example of the conditioning of vowel phone selection by word position. At present, however, the rules would be rather cumbersome as they would require the specification of four word contexts for each vowel class. The rules may, however, be simplified by reference to syllable structure. iii) Syllable structure ("$" has been used here to mark syllable boundaries) Since we cannot be 100% sure of the position of syllable boundaries word medially, it is only possible to unambiguously determine legal syllable onsets word initially and syllable rhymes word finally. Such patterns can be said to be the unambiguously attested syllable onset and rhyme forms for the language being examined and are a very reliable guide to possible word medial syllable structures. The only unambiguously attested syllable onset that can be seen word initially is #CV..., whilst two types of syllable rhyme can be seen word finally,...v# and...vc#. A combination of the one legal onset with the two legal rhymes gives two possible syllable structures:- $CV$ and $CVC$ (ie. an open and a closed syllable, both with an initial consonant). The only syllable boundary analysis of the above four word types that results in unambiguously attested syllable structures are as follows:- $CV$CV$, $CVC$CV$, $CV$CVC$, $CVC$CVC$ and the resulting vowel distributions (see above) are:- $C*$C*$, $C@C$C*$, $C*$C@C$, $C@C$C@C$ It can be readily seen from this diagram that [i, a, u] always occur in CV syllables whilst [e, V, o] always occur in CVC syllables. (This result further confirms the syllable analysis as the two solutions combine to form the simplest analysis of this language). iv) Conclusions It is clear from the above that there are two classes of vowels that are in complementary distribution based on syllable structure. Based on considerations of phonetic similarity, it is clear which pairs of sounds belong to the same phonemes (ie. [i,e], [a,v], [u,o] ). As there is no clear indication in each case as to which allophone is the most widely distributed (they both appear in the same number of contexts) then the selection of which symbol to use for the phoneme has to be based upon some other criterion. It is common in such cases as this to 7

select to most peripheral of each pair and use its symbol as the phoneme symbol. eg. [i] is more peripheral than [e] being higher and generally more fronted. Similarly [u] is more peripheral than [o] being higher and more retracted. [a] is not as clearly more peripheral than [V] but is chosen as the phoneme symbol because it belongs to the same class as the previously chosen "i" and "u" symbols. This gives:- /i/ = [i,e], /a/ = [a,v], /u/ = [u,o] v) [e, V], [o, V]? It was suggested above that these two pairs might be sufficiently phonetically similar to allow the possibility the they might form allophonic pairs. There are a number of reasons why this is not so for the present language. Firstly, they are each much more phonetically similar to the sounds they are paired with in section iv, above, and the evidence very strongly indicates their being in the allophonic relationships shown in that section. Is it possible for the conclusions indicated in iv, above, to be correct and at the same time for there to be a possibility that the pairs [e, V] and [o, V] also be allophones of the same phoneme? The answer is NO. This would place all of the vowels into the same phoneme or alternatively some phones would simultaneously be allophones of more than one phoneme. Neither of these two conclusions is possible (or at least they are extremely unlikely). In any case, since we now have determined the syllable structure of the language we can now identify two CAEs:- [e] vs [V] 8 [kenpa] vs 16 [moskvn] ($ken$ vs $kvn$) [o] vs [V] 15 [timvs] vs 16 [moskvn] ($mvs$ vs $mos$) These two CAEs confirm the conclusion that [e, V] and [o, V] do not constitute allophonic pairs, but it must be noted that these two CAEs are not essential to that conclusion. c) Consonants None Contrast in Analogous Environment (CAE) None Complementary Distribution i) Consonant voicing [p, b], [t, d], [k, g], [s, z] It was noted in section b)i) above that stop and fricative voicing seemed to be related in some way to the preceding vowel, with the stop or fricative always being voiced when the preceding vowel was from the [i, a, u] class. It was shown later that the selection of alternative vowel classes depended upon the syllable type, so it is likely that the selection of stop and fricative voicing is related in some way to syllable type. Since the vowels [i, a, u] are only found in CV syllables then the following stop or fricative must be the onset of the following syllable. When the other three vowels [e, V, o] precede the stop or fricative word-medially there is a CC cluster. An examination of the contexts in which the voiced ("*") and voiceless ("@") stops and fricatives occur in the words results in the following distribution:- $@V$*V$, $@V@$@V@, $@V$*V@$, $@V@$@V@$ It is clear that the voiced stops and fricatives can occur in the initial position of both CV and CVC syllables for certain word structures and 8

not for others. It appears that syllable structure is not the key to this structure. If the syllable boundaries are moved then it can more clearly be seen that the voiced stops and fricatives only occur in a VCV context. The general rule is:- [-voice] --> [+voice] / V_V ii) [n, N] It was noted in section b)i) above that [N] seemed to be conditioned in some way by the preceding vowel, only occurring when the preceding vowel was from the [e, V, o] class (ie. in a CVC syllable). It can also readily be seen that [N] only ever occurs in an initial CVC syllable. However, [n] can also occur in that position (eg. [kenpa]) so if complementary distribution is to be demonstrated then it must be conditioned by the adjacent sounds. As [N] can occur following any of the three possible preceding sounds [e, V, o] then it must be conditioned by the following sound. It can be readily seen that the following sound is always [k]. The general rule is therefore:- {[nasal] [consonantal] [alveolar]} --> [velar] / _ [velar] and the specific rule is [n] --> [N] / _ [k] or [n] --> [N] / _ [velar] d) Conclusions /i/ ---> [i] / $C_$ ---> [e] / $C_C$ /a/ ---> [a] / $C_$ ---> [V] / $C_C$ /u/ ---> [u] / $C_$ ---> [o] / $C_C$ /p/ ---> [b] / V_V ---> [p] elsewhere /t/ ---> [d] / V_V ---> [t] elsewhere /k/ ---> [g] / V_V ---> [k] elsewhere /s/ ---> [z] / V_V ---> [s] elsewhere /m/ ---> [m] /n/ ---> [N] / _ [velar] [n] elsewhere 9

6) Artificial b d g i u p t k e o P T x E O s l R Suspicious Pairs [p/b], [p/p], [t/d], [t/t], [k/g], [k/x], [l/r], [i/e], [e/e], [u/o], [o/o] Non-suspicious Sounds [s] a) Stress is not specified b) Vowels [i] vs [e] 1 [pige] vs 13 [pege] [e] vs [E] 20 [steri] vs 5 [steri] [u] vs [o] 14 [kupsi] vs 4 [kopsi] [o] vs [O] 17 [skopse] vs 6 [skopse] c) Consonants None Contrast in Analogous Environment (CAE) None Complementary Environment i) Syllable analysis There are two unambiguously attested syllable onsets #CV.. and #CCV... but there is only one unambiguously attested syllable rhyme...v#, and so the attested syllable types are CV and CCV. ii) Word types There are four word types derivable from the attested syllable types and all four (and no more) are found in the data:- CVCV, CVCCV, CCVCV, CCVCCV This results in the following consonant locations #CV, #CCV, VCV, VCCV The consonant phones that can be found in the various word positions are:- #CV #*V p, t, k, l #CCV #*CV s #C*V p, t, k VCV V*V b, d, g, R VCCV V*CV s, P, T, x VC*V p, t, k, s It is clear that [b, d, g, R] are conditioned by a V_V context. The phones that they are paired with allophonically are determined by considerations of phonetic similarity (shown in the list of "suspicious 10

pairs"). The fricatives [P, T, x] are also shown to be in complementary distribution with [p, t, k] but the rule:- [stop] ---> [fricative] / V_CV does not make much sense phonetically. What would cause a stop to become a fricative in this context? It is desirable to examine the detailed context more closely. iii) Adjacent phone context The three fricatives [P, T, x] are even further restricted to the following context:- V_sV The general rule can now be restated as:- [stop] ---> [fricative] / _ [fricative] which is a simple manner of articulation assimilation. iv) General rules [-voice] ---> [+voice] / V_V or even more generally, [-voice] ---> [+voice] / [+voice] _ [+voice] [stop] ---> [fricative] / _ [fricative] d) Conclusions /i/ ---> [i] /e/ ---> [e] /E/ ---> [E] /u/ ---> [u] /o/ ---> [o] /O/ ---> [O] /p/ ---> [b] / V_V ---> [P] / _ s ---> [p] elsewhere /t/ ---> [d] / V_V ---> [T] / _ s ---> [t] elsewhere /k/ ---> [g] / V_V ---> [x] / _ s ---> [k] elsewhere /l/ ---> [R] / V_V ---> [l] elsewhere /s/ ---> [s] 11

7) Korean (simplified) p t k i u s S e @ o m n N E l a R Suspicious Pairs [s/s], [n/n], [l/r], [i/e], [e/e], [E/a], [a/o], [u/o], [i/@], [e/@], [E/@], [a/@], [o/@], [u/@] Non-suspicious sounds [p], [t], [k], [m] a) Stress is not specified b) Vowels Minimal Pairs There is an almost complete paradigm of vowels in a single environment 1 [sun], 2 [son], 3 [san], 4 [s@n], 5 [sen], 7 [sen] This proves that the vowels [u, o, a, @, e, E] belong to different phonemes. There are neither minimal pairs nor obvious CAEs separating [i] from [e] or [@]. We already know that [e] and [@] belong to separate phonemes and so [i] cannot be in allophonic variation with both [e] and [@] as that would place them in the same phoneme. The three possible hypotheses are:- 1) /i/ = [i], /e/ = [e], /@/ = [@] 2) /i/ = [i,e], /@/ = [@] 3) /i/ = [i,@], /e/ = [e] Contrast in Analogous Environment (CAE) None are presently obvious (wait for results of consonant analysis) c) Consonants [n] vs [N] 23 [man] vs 24 [man] Contrast in Analogous Environment (CAE) None Complementary Distribution i. [l] vs [R] It is easily seen that [R] only occurs in V_V context whilst [l] occurs in all other contexts. ii. [s] vs [S] [S] can be clearly seen to only occur when the following vowel is an [i] whilst [s] occurs in all other contexts. d) [i] revisited [i] can be found in numerous consonantal contexts and so it is not conditioned by [S] but on the contrary, /s/ ---> [S] / _ i Since it is quite clear that [S] is an allophone of /s/ then it is reasonable to treat the pairs:- 6 [Sin] vs 5 [sen] and 6 [Sin] vs 4 [s@n] as contrasts in analogous environment (CAE) and so accept the hypothesis that /i/ = [i], /e/ = [e], /@/ = [@] (ie. 3 phonemes) 12

e) Conclusions /i/ ---> [i] /e/ ---> [e] /E/ ---> [E] /a/ ---> [a] /o/ ---> [o] /u/ ---> [u] /@/ ---> [@] /p/ ---> [p] /t/ ---> [t] /k/ ---> [k] /s/ ---> [S] / _ [i] ---> [s] elsewhere /m/ ---> [m] /n/ ---> [n] /N/ ---> [N] /l/ ---> [R] / V_V ---> [l] elsewhere 13

8) Artificial p t k i u b d g B D G a s z Z n N l R Suspicious Pairs [p/b], [b/b], [t/d], [d/d], [k/g], [g/g], [s/z], [z/z], [n/n], [l/r] Non-suspicious sounds [i], [a], [u] a) Stress is always on the first syllable, therefore non-contrasting. b) Vowels All three are phonetically dissimilar and therefore are separate phonemes. c) Consonants [b] vs [B] 16 [=labup] vs 1 [=labup] [d] vs [D] 28 [=sadal] vs 3 [=sadal] [g] vs [G] 18 [=dugik] vs 5 [=dugik] Contrast in Analogous Environment (CAE) None Complementary Distribution i. Word and syllable types. There are only two word types:- CVCVC and CVCCVC There is only one kind of unambiguously attested syllable onset #CV... and only one unambiguously attested syllable offset...vc# which when combined result in only one syllable type, CVC. The word type CVCVC is clearly not analysable as consisting of two CVC syllables and so either CV$CVC or CVC$VC would result. The maximum onset principle is invoked to select the CV$CVC form and to therefore hypothesise the existence of a word initial CV syllable (generally far more common in the world=s languages than VC). This is an example of a language in which a word onset and offset analysis does not result in a syllable structure hypothesis which accounts for all word types. ii. Consonant positions. There are five possible consonant positions with actual consonant distribution listed alongside:- #CV b, d, g s l n VCV b, d, g B, D, G VCCV b, d, g B, D, G Z n, N VCCV b, d, g z R VC# p, t, k s l n The above consonant position analysis results in clear complementary distributions (CD) for [b, d, g] vs [p, t, k], and for [s] vs [z] vs [Z]. 14

These results do not give a clear CD for [n] vs [N] an so further analysis is required here. iii. Adjacent phone context It is readily clear from the data that [N] always precedes [g] and that the familiar velar assimilation of an alveolar nasal has occurred. {[nasal] [alveolar]} ---> [velar] / _ [velar] d) Conclusions /i/ ---> [i] /a/ ---> [a] /u/ ---> [u] /b/ ---> [p] / _# ---> [b] elsewhere /B/ ---> [B] /d/ ---> [t] / _# ---> [d] elsewhere /D/ ---> [D] /g/ ---> [k] / _# ---> [g] elsewhere /G/ ---> [G] /s/ ---> [Z] / V_C (or [Z] / V_ [r], see notes below) ---> [z] / C_V ---> [s] elsewhere /l/ ---> [R] / C_V ---> [l] elsewhere /n/ ---> [N] / _ [N] ---> [n] elsewhere Notes: 1) The voiced stop allophones are less restricted in their distribution than are the voiceless allophones and so the phoneme has been given the voiced symbol. 2) The rules for the stops, /s/ and /l/ appear to be idiosyncratic language-specific positional rules. The following rules are nevertheless evident:- {[stop] [-voice]} ---> [+voice] / _ [+voice] This explains voicing both word initially and medially (where all consonants are voiced). {[fricative] [-voice]} ---> [+voice] / [+voice] _ [+voice] This prevents voicing both word initially and word finally. The phonetic conditioning that selects [Z] or [z] is not immediately obvious until it is realised that [Z] only ever occurs preceding [R] (unfortunately there is no [z] in the same word position but with some other consonantal context). It seems likely, however, that the following rule may more reasonably determine the selection of [Z]:- {[fricative] [alveolar]} ---> [post-alveolar] / _ [post-alveolar] Which translates to the more specific [s] ---> [Z] / V_ [R] This, of course, assumes that [R] is pronounced as a post-alveolar in this language. 15