15

This is a well-written argument, but I think it's mistaken to conclude that they are the same phoneme; or, more to the point, I think this is a case that highlights a limit of phoneme/allophone analysis. Indeed, the same argument can also be used to show that /ə/ and /ʊ/ are allophones of the same phoneme: there cannot be a minimal pair because of the ...


12

I think this question may be trickier to answer than you realize--it largely depends on your definition of vowel and consonant. If you take a structural phonological approach to defining those terms (i.e., if whether something is a vowel or a consonant depends on where it occurs in the syllable), then they are by definition in complementary distribution, so ...


10

The phenomenon is known as "flapping", and the result, transcribed as [ɾ], is a "flap". It also applies to /d/, but people notice it most when applied to /t/ since the result is more different compared to /d/. You might call is a "fast d". If an American were to say [mɛtʰəl] very carefully, that could be called hyperarticulation, that is, aiming to stop a ...


9

This is because they are not minimal pairs. They differ in a consonant. The "бить" has soft б while "быть" has hard б.


7

You've almost got it! The trick is, the professor isn't asking if [p̚ t̚ k̚] are allophones of a single phoneme. That is, they're not asking if there's a single underlying phoneme /C̚/ that surfaces as all three of those. Instead, they're asking if [p̚] might be an allophone of something else, and if [t̚] might be an allophone of something else, and if [k̚] ...


6

[ə] and [ʌ] are allophones of a single phoneme. Schwa appears in an unstressed syllable and wedge appears in a stressed syllable. Because of this complementarity, it is not possible to find minimal pairs distinguishing the vowel. However, the analysis has to be performed on phonetic transcriptions and not an assumed phonemic reduction of the phonetics, thus ...


6

Of the top of my head, French comes close. According to Wikipedia "the approximants [j], [ɥ] and [w] correspond to /i/, /y/ and /u/ respectively. While there are a few minimal pairs (such as loua [lu.a] 's/he rented' and loi [lwa] 'law'), there are many cases where there is free variation". Also many linguists consider Proto-Indo-European *i and *u as ...


6

Not all Calabrian is the same Calabrian (it: Calabrese) is the name given to the romance dialect continuum spoken in Calabria. It is commonly divided into two different language groups: In the southern two-thirds of the region, the Calabrian dialects are more closely related to Sicilian, grouped as Central-Southern Calabrian, or simply Calabro, and are ...


5

As a Parisian speaker of French, I may overhear the problem since I intuitively sort out the quality of sound according to the spelling and the context, but I don’t feel that so many confusions occur at the end of words. In French, since the final syllable bears the stress, it is least able to lose distinctions. So, the phenomenon jlawler points for Vulgar ...


5

The term "allophone" refers to two different things. One is an actual physical realization in a given context. For example, in English the lips start to continuously protrude on consonants in anticipation of a following round vowel in the syllable, for example in "scoot" as opposed to "skate". Or, the velum starts to lower about half-way into a vowel before ...


5

What is the language you transcribe? Assuming Standard (American or British) English, writer /ˈraɪtər/ and rider /ˈraɪdər/ are different and the transcription is correct. When you do a phonetic transcription of some dialect (or even a phonemic one after determining the phonemes of that dialect) you'll use the flap [ɾ] letter.


5

The term "minimal pair" means "pair of words distinguished only by the selection of a single phone". As far as I know there is a single minimal pair, икать "to pronounce unstressed е (je) as и (i), the Standard Russian pronunciation, rather than as е (je)" versus ыкать "to make the sound of the letter ы". Otherwise, there are no minimal pairs, because the ...


5

The distinction between long and short vowels is historic, not merely orthographic. It goes back to proto-Germanic and in many cases to proto-Indo-European. As for minimal pairs, they are not rare. You can start with “Wolle” /ˈvɔlə/ versus “(zum) Wohle” (ˈvo:lə).


5

Since the only syllable-final consonants in Japanese are /N/, a nasal whose place always assimilates to the following consonant, and /Q/, which geminates the following consonant, and there are no complex onsets (except for /Cj/), and a devoiced vowel is still considered phonologically/prosodically present (and often articulated as a puff of air), Japanese ...


5

They are called allomorphs. It refers to phonological variations of a same morpheme. See the In English suffixes section of the given wikipedia article. It gives an example of the past tense morpheme -ed. The /t/-/d/ and /s/-/z/ distintion of your example is surely of different phonemes. Any English speaker will naturally "recognize" the difference.


4

Your question doesn't really have an answer. For me, there is a contrast between the weak form of just meaning recently, /dʒəst/, and the word just meaning fair, /dʒʌst/. I use the weak form of just almost all the time, and the vowel is definitely different from the one I use in just, meaning fair. So I perceive them as different phonemes. But many ...


4

For a minimal pair to contrast /ə/ and /ʌ/, how about: "subversion" meaning an act of subverting, and "subversion" as in version 1 subversion 1.2.


4

No. All it shows is that the two phonemes /d/ and /t/ have overlapping allophones. Minimal pairs such as /dip/ and /tip/ show that they are still distinct phonemes.


4

"Diaphonemes" are related to dialects, as you mentioned. Diaphonemes form a system that allows you to describe all of the phonemic contrasts in whatever set of dialects you are concerned with, even if no one dialect makes all the contrasts. A well-known example is John Well's lexical sets for British RP and General American: in RP, there is a split between ...


4

I've been looking for a functional explanation in the literature, and this apparently isn't a question that has been explored: why is the change from clear to dark l so common? Dark l has a very low F2, and clear l has a higher F2, so it is unlikely that this is acoustically driven. I suspect that it is related to things necessary to articulate a lateral. [...


4

There is no clear answer to the title question in general; it may depend on the sounds, or the language. (Well, unless you define "assimilation" in such a way as to explicitly refer to a process that changes one phoneme to another.) Examples like these are part of the reason why people have come up with concepts like "archiphonemes" (...


4

A phoneme is an abstract entity deduced from the distribution of phones (actual sounds) in a language. It is typically transcribed with the symbol that represents the most common sound (allophone) of that phoneme, or rather the one that represents the "intersection" of the features the phoneme is considered to have in the present analysis. The second clause ...


4

It's certainly true that there is no phonemic contrast between /e i o u/ and /ɛ ɪ ɔ ʊ/ in Spanish. I'm less familiar with the phonology of Hebrew, but the variety described by the Wikipedia article "Modern Hebrew phonology" also has no contrast between /e i o u/ and /ɛ ɪ ɔ ʊ/. The Wikipedia article on Spanish phonology suggests certain conditions for /e i ...


3

Some presuppositions of the question need to be exposed, mainly regarding the term "allophonic". The historical distinction between "allophonic" vs. "morphophonemic" has fallen into desuetude, to the point that it is rare to find any contemporary mention of "allophony" that accepts the idea that being allophonic (as opposed to something else) is an important ...


3

To me, perhaps to some other phonologists, this question is uninterpretable, since it mixes fact and theory. Allophones are the realizations of phonemes and have acoustic properties. Phonemes are part of our theories about observable acoustic properties. Phonemes don't have acoustic properties, only allophones do. Consequently, any sort of acoustic ...


3

The tags include "phonetics" but not "phonology", but people often ask questions about phonetics and tag them "phonology", so I assume that you're asking about a phonological issue. If you really mean specifically and only "as a question of phonetics, to be answered in strictly phonetic terms", I refer you to myriad statements by the phonetician John Ohala ...


3

If a phoneme appears twice in a word, it will be pronounced the same if and only if the tokens of the phonemes appear in the same context (as defined by the allophonic rule). The phoneme /t/ is aspirated foot-initially, and it is glottalized syllable-finally after a vocoid: "tout" is pronounced [tʰæʊt˺]. It is non-aspirated and non-glottalized elsewhere, as ...


3

There are many. denn/den Zinn/ziehn (dem) Sohne/(die) Sonne As for the word Mond, it's not irregular as you guessed. That syllable is structured just like gehst or klebt: onset nucleus coda suffix M o n d - Mond g eh s t - gehst kl e b t - klebt Germanic languages tend to have a rule ...


3

Labrune (The phonology of Japanese) does not report any such allophonic rule. She does report a trill realization as a social variant, typifying street thugs. It should be noted that while the standard IPA symbol for an alveolar flap or tap is [ɾ], people commonly write [r], in case there is no contrast. It may be that if your data is from movies, the actors ...


3

I don't know anything significant about Ancient Hebrew. Since there were different varieties of Hebrew and Aramaic in ancient times, I can't be sure whether information that I find in documents online applies to all varieties. With that caveat, the title and first sentence of this question seem a bit strange to me, because my understanding is that Ancient ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible