Classification of English speech sounds

Two major classes of sounds
consonants
vowels

auditory effect
consonants → voice and noise combined,
vowels → voice only
articulatory point of view
consonants → various obstructions are made,
vowels → no obstruction is made
.

Consonants
a complete, partial or intermittent blockage of the air passage
the air stream is blocked or hindered or otherwise gives rise to audible friction
→ sounds which have noise

The phonological analysis of English consonant sounds helps to distinguish 24 phonemes:
[p, b, t, d, k, g, f, v, θ, ð, s, z, ∫, ʒ, h, t∫, ʤ, m, n, ŋ, w, r, 1, j].

Articulatory classification of English consonants
The particular quality of a consonant would be best thought of as a complex bundle of features
articulatory posture
place in the mouth
organ makes an obstruction
work of vocal cords, etc.

Articulatory classification of English consonants
Each sound is known to have three aspects:
acoustic,
articulatory,
auditory
→ can be studied on these three levels.

Articulatory classification of English consonants
Russian phoneticians classify consonants according to the following principles:
degree of noise;
place of articulation;
manner of articulation;
position of the soft palate;
force of articulation.

The primary importance → the type of obstruction and the manner of production of noise.
Two large classes of consonants:
a) occlusive, in the production of which a complete obstruction is formed;
b) constrictive, in the production of which an incomplete obstruction is formed.

[ti:] - [si:] tea - sea (occlusive - constrictive)
[si:d] - [si:z] seed - seas (occlusive - constrictive)
[pul] - [ful] pull - full (occlusive - constrictive)

Each of the two classes is subdivided into noise consonants and sonorants ← either noise or tone component prevail in the auditory characteristic of a sound.
Noise consonants are divided into plosive consonants (or stops) and affricates.

lateral

Another point of view
is shared by a group of Russian phoneticians. The first and basic principle of classification - the degree of noise.
Such consideration leads to dividing English consonants into two general kinds: a) noise consonants;
b) sonorants.

“Degree of noise"
The term belongs to auditory level of analysis.
There is an intrinsic connection between articulatory and auditory aspects of describing speech sounds.
In this case the term of auditory aspect defines the characteristic more adequately.

Sonorants
differ greatly from other consonants.
In their production the air passage between the two organs of speech is fairly wide.
→ the auditory effect is tone, not noise
→ sound more like vowels than consonants

[r], [j], [w]
the class of semivowels
Acoustically sonorants are opposed to all other consonants because they are characterized by sharply defined formant structure and the total energy of most of them is very high.

Functional grounds
according to their position in the syllable → consonantal category
from the point of view of their phonetic description → vowel glides

According to the Soviet phoneticians
sonorants = consonants from articulatory, acoustic and phonological point of view
sonorants can be classified according to all the principles of classification of consonants:
[beık - meık] bake - make (noise consonant - sonorant)
[vi:l- wi:l] veal - wheel (noise consonant - sonorant)

Classifications of British and American scholars
no sonorants
Daniel Jones and Henry A. Gleason –
separate groups of nasals [m, n, η], the lateral [l] and semi-vowels, or glides [w, r, j].
Bernard Bloch and George Trager – nasals, lateral + trilled [r].

The manner of articulation
The point of view of the closure:
complete closure → occlusive (stop or plosive) consonants
incomplete closure → constrictive consonants
the combination of the two closures → occlusive-constrictive consonants, or affricates
intermittent closure → then rolled, or trilled consonants

Russian phoneticians
Consonants:
unicentral (pronounced with one focus)
bicentral (pronounced with two foci)
according to the number of noise producing centers, or foci.

The shape of narrowing
Constrictive consonants and affricates:
sounds with flat narrowing
sounds round narrowing

The place of articulation
is determined by the active organ of speech against the point of articulation. According to this principle the English consonants are classed into:
labial,
lingual,
glottal.

The class of labial consonants
bilabial;
labio-dental

The class of lingual consonants
forelingual,
medio- lingual,
backlingual.

back
lingual

Oppositions
based on the active organ of speech and the place of obstruction
[waı] - [laı] why - lie (bilabial - forelingual)
[pık] - [kık] pick - kick (bilabial -backlingual)
[saı] - [haı] sigh - high (forelingual - glottal)
[Ies] - [jes] less - yes (forelingual - mediolingual)

Voiced - voiceless characteristic
depends on the work of the vocal cords
[p, b], [t, d], [k, g], [s, z], [f, v], [ʃ, ʒ], [ʧ, ʤ] → absence or presence of vibrations of the vocal cords, voice or tone component
There is also energy difference (force of articulation) → all voiced consonants are weak (lenis) and all voiceless consonants are strong (fortis)

Controversy
In the intervocalic position the voicing difference is important
latter – ladder
In word-initial and final positions the pronunciation of consonants traditionally considered to be voiced may well be voiceless
cap – cab, not – nod

Controversy
In initial position aspiration would be a more important feature for stops
tick – Dick, cap – gap
In a word-final position the length of the proceeding vowel constitutes the chief difference
bead – beet

↓ ↓
the presence or absence of voice is not a constant distinctive feature
→ oppositions [p, b], [t, d], [k, g], [s, z], [f, v], [ʃ, ʒ], [ʧ, ʤ] are primarily based on energy difference → on fortis - lenis articulation

The position of the soft palate
oral
nasal
When the soft palate is raised → oral consonants
When the soft palate is lowered → nasal consonants

Nasalization
cannot be a phonologically relevant feature of English consonants → no differences of meaning in the presence or absence of nasalization
→ it is an indispensable concomitant feature of English nasal consonants.

Distinctive oppositions of English consonants
Degree of noise
bake - make, veal - wheel
Place of articulation
labial vs. lingual
pain - cane
lingual vs. glottal
foam = home, care - hair, Tim - him

Distinctive oppositionsof English consonants
Manner of articulation
occlusive vs. constrictive
pine - fine, bat - that, bee – thee
constrictive vs. affricates
fare - chair, fail – jail
constrictive unicentral vs. constrictive bicentral
same – shame

Distinctive oppositions of English consonants
Work of the vocal cords and the force of articulation
voiceless fortis vs. voiced lenis
pen - Ben, ten - den, coat - goal
Position of the soft palate
oral vs. nasal
pit - pin, seek - seen

The problem of affricates
their phonological status? their number?
What kind of facts a phonological theory has to explain?
Are [t∫, ʤ] monophonemic entities or biphonemic combinations (sequences, clusters)?
If they are monophonemic, how many phonemes of the same kind exist in English → can such clusters as [tr, dr] and [tθ, dð] be considered affricates?

The problem of affricates
[t∫, ʤ] are complexes ← articulatory distinguish two elements.
phonemic duality of affricates → necessary to analyze the relation of affricates to other consonant phonemes
↓ ↓
define the status of affricates in the system

The type of obstruction
complete
incomplete
→ affricates cannot be referred to either of the groups, since they consist of both:
the closure and the narrowing
↓↓
single out a group of affricates, or occlusive-constrictive consonants

Controversy
Russian specialists – are two affricates in English: [t∫, ʤ].
D. Jones – six of them: [t∫, ʤ], [ts, dz], and [tr, dr].
A.C. Gimson – [t∫, ʤ], [ts, dz], [tr, dr] +
[tθ, tð].

Why such a difference in
their opinions?
Russian phoneticians → affricates through three aspects: articulatory, acoustic and functional (the most significant one)
British phoneticians → primary concern is the articulatory-acoustic unity of these complexes (practical reasons of teaching English)

Articulatory indivisibility
N.S. Trubetzkoy - a sound complex may be considered monophonemic if:
its elements belong to the same syllable;
it is produced by one articulatory effort;
its duration should not exceed normal duration of elements.

Syllabic indivisibility
butcher [but∫ -ə] lightship [lait-∫ip]
mattress [mætr-is] footrest [fut-rest]
curtsey [kз:-tsi] out-set [aut-set]
eighth [eitθ] whitethorn [wait-θo:n]
↓ ↓
[t∫], [tr], [ts], [tθ] belong to one syllable
can’t be divided into two elements
by a syllable dividing line.

Articulatory indivisibility
Special instrumental analysis shows that all the sound complexes are homogeneous and produced by one articulatory effort
↓ ↓

Articulatory indivisibility
At the beginning of the articulation the organs of speech are in the position of the second fricative element [ʃ], [r], [s], [θ] or [ʒ], [z]
but there is a complete obstruction (a closure) formed by the tip and the sides of the tongue against the alveolar ridge and the side teeth
Then the closure is released and the air escapes from the mouth cavity, producing audible friction.

Duration
length of sounds depends on the position in the phonetic context → it cannot serve a reliable basis in phonological analysis.
length of English [t∫] chair and match is different
[t∫] in match is considerably longer than |t| in mat and may be even longer than [∫] in mash.
→ does not prove that [t∫] is biphonemic.

morphological criterion – monophonemic if a morpheme boundary cannot pass within it (morphologically indivisible)
↓ ↓
[t∫], [ʤ] – a monophonemic status, since they are indispensable
[ts], [dz] and [tθ], [dð] – their last elements are separate morphemes [s], [z], [θ], [ð]

[ts], [dz] and [tθ], [dð] do not correspond to the phonological models of the English language and cannot exist in the system of phonemes.
The case with [tr], [dr] complexes is still more difficult.