Criteria for revealing the status of a phoneme

There is no single definition of the phoneme. There are several conceptions of the phoneme proposed by different phoneticians. The difficulty of giving such a definition lies in the fact that the phoneme has several aspects and functions, and it’s difficult to define it within a single sentence that would reflect all these aspects and functions.

First of all it’s necessary to differentiate between the phonemes and sounds. The phoneme is the smallest linguistic unit. Phonemes are not physical elements, they are mental abstractions of them, and they belong to the sphere of language. In contrast, sounds are material (they can be pronounced or heard) and they belong to the sphere of speech.

Speech sounds are called allophones of phonemes. Allophones are positional variants of one and the same phoneme. Each phoneme is represented by different sounds (allophones) in different positions. For example, if we pronounce “tea’ and “two”, we will notice that we make different articulatory movements to pronounce / t /: the lips are in a rather flat shape for “tea” but they are made rounder for “two”. This is true for both the consonant / t / and the vowels. So the resulting sounds / t / are not exactly the same. However, the sounds represented by one letter have a great deal of similarity. None of the / t / sounds can be confused with any other consonant sound. Consequently, the different / t / sounds in “tea” and “two” are allophones of one and the same / t / phoneme.

We can single out several criteria to reveal the status of the phoneme.

Semantic criterion. The phoneme is a minimal unit which is capable of differentiating meaning. The main function of the phoneme is to distinguish between different words or between different grammatical forms of one and the same word.

A common test to determine whether two elements are allophones or separate phonemes relies on finding so-called minimal pairs. Minimal pairs are pairs of words which differ in only one phoneme in one and the same position and have a distinct meaning. They are used to demonstrate that the two elements constitute two separate phonemes in the language.

E.g.: in English / p / occurs both in “spin” and “pin”, but these / p /-s are allophones of the phoneme / p / and no minimal pair can be found to distinguish them. But the word “bin” forms the minimal pair with “pin”. As the two words differ in their meanings, the element / b / forms a phoneme separate from / p /.

The English words “cream-dream” are distinguished from one another by the consonant sounds / k / and / d / which occur in the same position.

The vowel sounds / e / and / æ / are capable of differentiating the grammatical forms of one and the same word (man-men) – they are different phonemes.

So phonemes can occur in the same position and differentiate meaning but allophones can’t.

These are other criteria for revealing the status of the phoneme: articulatory indivisibility, syllabic indivisibility, commutability, duration. We can show the application of these criteria while considering the diphthongs or affricates (as they are disputable units).

Articulatory indivisibility. From the articulatory point of view, the phoneme is an indivisible phonetic whole. The position of the organs of speech doesn’t change.

Syllabic indivisibility. The phoneme belongs to one morpheme. A morpheme boundary can’t pass within a phoneme. Let’s consider 1) diphthongs: syllable division and a morpheme boundary can’t separate the glide from the nucleus [ flai – iŋ ], 2) affricates: the two elements are inseparable [ kæt∫ - iŋ ].

Commutability = C. (переместительность). C. is understood as convertibility based on combinability through the procedure of replacement. We’ll demonstrate it with the help of diphthongs.

Rule: if a vowel combination has a very low degree of C., it’s a true diphthong phoneme. If a vowel combination has a high degree of C., it’s a free combination of vowels, e.g.:

/ әu /: the glide can’t be replaced but the nucleus can. Only one replacement is possible: / әu / → /au /. So / әu / is a diphthong phoneme.

/ iә /: the glide can’t be replaced but the nucleus can. 3 replacements are possible: / εә, oә, uә/. So / iә / is a diphthong phoneme.

Duration (by Trubetzkoy). The duration of the phoneme should be monophonemic (= not exceed the duration of the elements of the phoneme when they occur as separate phonemes). However auditory impressions of the duration aren’t reliable (! subjective). Compare: / t / + / ∫ / (2 articulatory efforts) > / t∫ / (1 articulatory effort + pronounced shorter). As to the diphthongs, their length is the same as that of historically long monophthongs in the same phonetic context: /laid – la:d, paut – pa:t/.

Different schools of phonology have different understanding of the notion “phoneme” and they propose different procedures / methods to reveal phonemes.

According to the Leningrad school of phonology, a phoneme is many things:

- a sum of acoustic features,

- an independent unit,

- a functionally loaded unit,

- a minimal distinctive unit of the language,

- a unit capable of differentiating meanings.

Phoneticians belonging to this school proposed to take what we hear and if it differentiates meaning, then it’s a phoneme (=a minimal distinctive unit).

According to the Moscow school of phonology: a phoneme is a part of a morpheme. The phoneticians of this school check suspicious units in morphemes through changing them. The study is based on Russian material. They check Russian consonants in strong and weak positions. The strong position for a Russian consonant is the mid position where voiced consonants retain their voice characteristics and make a difference in meaning (косы – козы). The weak position for Russian consonants is the final position where voiced consonants lose their voice quality (7 кос – 7 коз). The phoneticians consider consonants in weak positions suspicious and check them by putting them in the strong position. They believe a phoneme is found in the strong position and an allophone (= positional variation of a phoneme) is found in the weak position. This is the so-called method (criterion) of derivatives.

The same procedure is applied to defining the status of the schwa vowel / ә / in English. The material of derivatives is taken into consideration as it shows best strong and weak position for the occurrence of / ә /. The strong position for a vowel in English is the stressed position and the weak position is the unstressed position. As / ә / occurs only in the unstressed (= weak) position, it’s an allophone.

Conclusion: it’s not an easy task to define the phoneme as the criteria to reveal it depend on the approach to the phoneme.

General: The phoneme is a bunch of different features. It’s based on acoustic and phonological properties. These properties are relevant and functionally significant.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (you may just consider it and not learn it)

Phoneme Theory. Different Approaches

The founder of the Phoneme Theory was the Russian scientist Boudoin-de-Courtenay who was the head of the Kazan Linguistic School. He defined the phoneme as a physical image of a sound. He also regarded phonemes as fictitious units and considered them to be only perceptions. This approach is called mentalistic/ physical.

Ferdinand de Saussure viewed phonemes as the sum of acoustic impressions and articulatory movements. He also viewed phonemes as disembodied units of the language formed by the differences separating the acoustic image of one sound from the rest of the units. Language in his opinion contains nothing but differences. This approach is called abstractional/ abstract.

Trubetskoy (the head of the Prague Linguistic School) defined the phoneme as a unity of phonologically relevant features. Relevant feature is the feature without which we can’t distinguish one phoneme from another. This approach is called functional.

Phonemes can be neutralized. In this case we receive an archi-phoneme. That is a unity of relevant features common to both phonemes (e.g. wetting – wedding in AmE). In case of archiphoneme we cannot distinguish one phoneme from another. Thus the distinctive function of the phoneme is lost.]

Another kind of approach to the nature of the phoneme was expressed by a British scholar, the head of the London School of Phonology, Daniel Jones. He defined the phoneme as a family of sounds.

The American Linguistic School (Blumfield, Sapir, etc) defined the phoneme as a minimum unit of distinctive sound features and as abstractional unit.

The materialistic approach was expressed by Leo Tsherba. Academician Tsherba defined the phoneme as a real independent distinctive unit which manifests itself in the form of its allophones. This approach comprises the abstract, the functional.

Summing up what has been said we may state that the phoneme comprises material, real & objective features and at the same time distinctive abstractional and generalized ones (because it represents all the relevant features which are present in all the allophones of the phoneme). It exists in the material form of speech sounds (allophones).