Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:04:00.633Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

27 - The Phonetics/Phonology Interface

from Section V - Applications of Phonetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2021

By
Robert Kennedy
Edited by
Rachael-Anne Knight  and
Jane Setter
Rachael-Anne Knight
Affiliation:
City, University of London
Jane Setter
Affiliation:
University of Reading
Get access

Summary

The phonetics/phonology interface refers to the relationship between the physical dimensions of phonetics and the abstract arrangement of phonemes and their manifestations within the phonological systems of languages. This chapter provides an overview of a range of approaches to the investigation of the phonetics/phonology interface, with particular attention to the relationships between phonetic factors such as positional prominence, acoustic salience and articulatory gestures, and phonological phenomena such as segment features and inventories, assimilation, and tone. I survey several clusters of theoretical orientation, each with distinct theoretical underpinnings and claims about the extent to which phonological concepts encode, reflect or direct phonetic details. I conclude with a discussion synthesising these seemingly disparate approaches, unifying them around a theme of linking the continuous physical dimensions of phonetic science with the abstract cognitive categories and rules of combination that typify phonological models. I discuss pedagogical implications and new directions in which facets of the interface can be explored.

Keywords

phonologyinterfaceexperimental phonologymarkednessAutosegmental Phonologygrounded phonologylaboratory phonologylinguistic phonetics
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Phonetics , pp. 682 - 706
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

27.7 References

Algeo, J. (1978). What consonant clusters are possible? Word, 29(3), 206–24.Google Scholar
Allen, B., Pulleyblank, D. & Ajíbóyè, Ọ. (2013). Articulatory mapping of Yoruba vowels: An ultrasound study. Phonology, 30(2), 183–210.Google Scholar
Anderson, V. B. (2008). Static palatography for language fieldwork. Language Documentation and Conservation, 2(1), 1–27.Google Scholar
Archangeli, D. & Pulleyblank, D. (1994). Grounded Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Arvaniti, A. (2012). Segment-to-tone association. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, eds., pp. 265–74.Google Scholar
Baltazani, M., Kainada, E., Revithiadou, A. & Topintzi, N. (2016). Vocoid-driven processes: Palatalization and glide hardening in Greek and its dialects. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 1(1), 23.Google Scholar
Bateman, N. (2011). On the typology of palatalization. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(8), 588–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beddor, P., Ohala, J. & Solé, M.-J. (2007). Experimental Approaches to Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, R., McGuire, G., Ní Choisáin, M. & Padgett, J. (2014). An Ultrasound Study of Connemara Irish Palatalization and Velarization. MS, Yale University, UC-Santa Cruz, and UC-Dublin.Google Scholar
Bird, S. & Miyashita, M. (2018). Teaching phonetics in the context of Indigenous language revitalization. In 2nd International Symposium on Applied Phonetics, Aizu-Wakamatsu, Japan.Google Scholar
Blevins, J. (2004). Evolutionary Phonology: The Emergence of Sound Patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boersma, P. (2001). Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International, 5 (9/10), 341–5.Google Scholar
Boersma, P. (2012). Modeling phonological category learning. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 207–18.Google Scholar
Botma, B. & Shiraishi, H. (2014). Nivkh palatalisation: Articulatory causes and perceptual effects. Phonology, 31(2), 181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowern, C. (2008). Linguistic Fieldwork: A Practical Guide. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bradfield, J. (2014). Clicks, concurrency and Khoisan. Phonology, 31(1), 1–49.Google Scholar
Browman, C. & Goldstein, L. (1986). Towards an articulatory phonology. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 219–52.Google Scholar
Browman, C. & Goldstein, L. (1991). Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech. In Kingston, J. & Beckman, M. E., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and the Physics of Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 341–76.Google Scholar
Browman, C. & Goldstein, L. (1994). ‘Targetless’ schwa: An articulatory analysis. In Docherty, G. J. & Ladd, D. R., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology II Gesture, Segment, Prosody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 26–67.Google Scholar
Bulgantamir, S. (2015). Acoustic analysis on the palatalized vowels of Modern Mongolian. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(6), 107–10.Google Scholar
Casserly, E. D. (2012). Gestures in optimality theory and the laryngeal phonology of Faroese. Lingua, 122(1), 41–65.Google Scholar
Chelliah, S. L. & de Reuse, W. J. (2010). Phonetic and phonological fieldwork. In Chelliah, S. L. & de Reuse, W. J., Handbook of Descriptive Linguistic Fieldwork. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 251–78.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The Sound Pattern of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, J. W., Yallop, C. & Fletcher, J. (2007). An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology, 3rd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Hume, E. (1995). The internal organization of speech sounds. In Goldsmith, J., ed., Handbook of Phonological Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 245–306.Google Scholar
Cohn, A. C., Fougeron, C. & Huffman, M. K., eds. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Laboratory Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Côté, M.-H. (2012). The role of the syllable in the organization and realization of sound systems. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 232–431.Google Scholar
Crosswhite, K. (2004). Vowel reduction. In Hayes, Kirchner & Steriade, pp. 191–231.Google Scholar
D’Imperio, M. (2012). Tonal alignment. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 275–87.Google Scholar
Davenport, M. & Hannahs, S. J. (2010). Introducing Phonetics and Phonology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Davidson, L. & Roon, K. (2008). Durational correlates for differentiating consonant sequences in Russian. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 38(2), 137–65.Google Scholar
Davidson, L. (2007). The relationship between the perception of non-native phonotactics and loanword adaptation. Phonology, 24(2), 261–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Decker, P. M. & Nycz, J. R. (2012). Are tense [æ]s really tense? The mapping between articulation and acoustics. Lingua, 122(7), 810–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fant, G. (1960). Acoustic Theory of Speech Production. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Ferrari-Disner, S. (1983). Vowel Quality, the Relation Between Universal and Language-Specific Factors. UCLA Working Paper 58.Google Scholar
Ferrari-Disner, S. (1984). Insights on vowel spacing. In Maddieson, I., ed., Patterns of Sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 136–55.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, C. (2017). The Sounds of Indigenous Language Revitalization. Plenary talk, Annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Flemming, E. & Cho, H. (2017). The phonetic specification of contour tones: Evidence from the Mandarin rising tone. Phonology, 34(1), 1–40.Google Scholar
François, A. (2010). Phonotactics and the prestopped velar lateral of Hiw: Resolving the ambiguity of a complex segment. Phonology, 27(3), 393–434.Google Scholar
Fromkin, V. (1975). The interface between phonetics and phonology. In Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Leeds.Google Scholar
Gafos, A. & Goldstein, L. (2012). Articulatory representation and organization. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 220–31.Google Scholar
Gallagher, G. (2010). Perceptual distinctness and long-distance laryngeal restrictions. Phonology, 27(3), 435–80.Google Scholar
Gallagher, G. (2012). Perceptual similarity in non-local laryngeal restrictions. Lingua, 122(2), 112–24.Google Scholar
Gallagher, G. (2013). Speaker awareness of non-local ejective phonotactics in Cochabamba Quechua. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 31(4), 1067–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gick, B., Pulleyblank, D., Campbell, F. & Mutaka, N. (2006). Low vowels and transparency in Kinande vowel harmony. Phonology, 23(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. A. (1976). Autosegmental Phonology. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. (2003). Collecting phonetic data on endangered languages. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, pp. 207–10.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. K. (2004). Syllable weight. In Hayes, Kirchner & Steriade, pp. 277–312.Google Scholar
Grice, M., Ridouane, R. & Roettger, T. B. (2015). Tonal association in Tashlhiyt Berber: Evidence from polar questions and contrastive statements. Phonology, 32(2), 241–66.Google Scholar
Hale, M. & Reiss, C. (2008). The Phonological Enterprise. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hamann, S. (2011). The phonetics-phonology interface. In Kula, N. C., Botma, B. & Nasukawa, K., eds., Continuum Companion to Phonology. London: Continuum, pp. 202–24.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (2009). Introductory Phonology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. & Steriade, D. (2004). Introduction: The phonetic bases of phonological markedness. In Hayes, Kirchner & Steriade, pp. 1–33.Google Scholar
Hayes, B., Kirchner, R. & Steriade, D., eds. (2004). Phonetically Based Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hermes, A., Mücke, D. & Grice, M. (2013). Gestural coordination of Italian word-initial clusters: The case of ‘impure s’. Phonology, 30(1), 1–25.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, K. A. (2005). A phonetic analysis of Manange segmental and suprasegmental properties. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 21(8), 1–36.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, K. A. (2007). Phonology and fieldwork in Nepal: Problems and potentials. In Austin, P., Bond, O. & Nathan, D., eds., Proceedings of the Conference on Language Documentation and Linguistic Theory. London: SOAS, pp. 33–44.Google Scholar
Himmelmann, N. P. & Ladd, D. R. (2008). Prosodic description: An introduction for fieldworkers. Language Documentation and Conservation, 2(2), 244–74.Google Scholar
Holt, L. L. (2012). How perceptual and cognitive constraints affect learning of speech categories. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 348–58.Google Scholar
Hume, E. & Johnson, K., eds. (2001). The Role of Speech Perception in Phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hyslop, G. (2009). Kurtöp Tone: A tonogenetic case study. Lingua, 119(6), 827–45.Google Scholar
Iosad, P. (2017). The phonologisation of redundancy: Length and quality in Welsh vowels. Phonology, 34(1), 121–62.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. (1929). Remarques sur l’évolution phonologique du russe comparée à celle des autres langues slaves. Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Prague, 2. Reprinted 1962 in Selected Writings, vol. 1: Phonological Studies, 7–116. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R., Fant, C., G. M. & Halle, M. (1952). Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: the Distinctive Features and Their Correlates. Technical Report 13. Massachusetts: Acoustics Laboratory, MIT.Google Scholar
Johnson, K. (1997). Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. In Johnson, K. & Mullennix, J. W., eds., Talker Variability in Speech Processing. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 145–65.Google Scholar
Jongman, A., Fourakis, M. & Sereno, J. (1989). The acoustic vowel space of modern Greek and German. Language and Speech, 32, 321–48.Google Scholar
Kaun, A. (2004). The typology of rounding harmony. In Hayes, Kirchner & Steriade, pp. 87–116.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A. (1988). The phonology-phonetics interface. In Newmeyer, F. J., ed., Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 281–302.Google Scholar
Kedrova, G. Y., Anisimov, N. V., Zaharov, L. M. & Pirogov, Y. A. (2008). Magnetic resonance investigation of palatalized stop consonants and spirants in Russian. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Acoustics, Paris, France, pp. 2345–50.Google Scholar
Kennedy, R. (2017). Phonology: A Coursebook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keyser, S. J. & Stevens, K. N. (1994). Feature geometry and the vocal tract. Phonology, 11(2), 207–36.Google Scholar
Kim, K. & Kochetov, A. (2011). Phonology and phonetics of epenthetic vowels in loanwords: Experimental evidence from Korean. Lingua, 121(3), 511–32.Google Scholar
Kingston, J. (2007). The phonetics–phonology interface. In de Lacy, P., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 435–56.Google Scholar
Kirchner, R. (2012). Modeling exemplar-based phonologization. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 332–46.Google Scholar
Kochetov, A. & So, C. K. (2007). Place assimilation and phonetic grounding: A cross-linguistic perceptual study. Phonology, 24(3), 397–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krämer, M. & Urek, O. (2016). Perspectives on palatalization. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 1(1), 31.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, B. (2007). Fieldwork on Konda, a Dravidian language. In A. Aikhenvald, ed., Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung (Focus on Linguistic Fieldwork) 60(1), pp. 56–66.Google Scholar
Kulikov, V. (2013). Voicing contrast in consonant clusters: Evidence against sonorant transparency to voice assimilation in Russian. Phonology, 30(3), 423–52.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P. (2003). Phonetic Data Analysis: An Introduction to Fieldwork and Instrumental Techniques. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Maddieson, I. (2001). Phonetic fieldwork. In Newman, P. & Ratliff, M., eds., Linguistic Fieldwork. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 211–29.Google Scholar
Mielke, J., Baker, A. & Archangeli, D. (2016). Individual-level contact limits phonological complexity: Evidence from bunched and retroflex /ɹ/. Language, 92(1), 101–40.Google Scholar
Mielke, J. (2012). The nature of distinctive features and the issue of natural classes. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 185–95.Google Scholar
Miller, A. L. (2010). Tongue body and tongue root shape differences in N|uu clicks correlate with phonotactic patterns. In Fuchs, S., Toda, M. & Zygis, M., eds., Turbulent Sounds: An Interdisciplinary Guide. Germany: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 245–80.Google Scholar
Miller, A. L. (2011). The representation of clicks. In Oostendorp, M. van, Ewen, C. J., Hume, E. & Rice, K., eds., The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, vol. 1. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 416–39.Google Scholar
Miller, A. L. (2016). Posterior lingual gestures and tongue shape in Mangetti Dune !Xung clicks. Journal of Phonetics, 55, 119–48.Google Scholar
Miller, A., Brugman, J., Sands, B., Namaseb, L., Exter, M. & Collins, C. (2009). Differences in airstream and posterior place of articulation among N|uu clicks. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 39(2), 129–61.Google Scholar
Munson, B., Edwards, J. & Beckman, M. E. (2012). Phonological representations in language acquisition: Climbing the ladder of abstraction. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 288–309.Google Scholar
Newlin-Łukowicz, L. (2012). Polish stress: Looking for phonetic evidence of a bidirectional system. Phonology, 29(2), 271–329.Google Scholar
Ní Chasaide, A. & Fealy, G. (1991). Articulatory and acoustic measurements of coarticulation in Irish (Gaelic) stops. In Proceedings of the XIIth International Congress of Phonetic Science, Aix-en-Provence, France, 5, pp. 30–3.Google Scholar
Nolan, F. (1994). Phonetic correlates of syllable affiliation. In Keating, P. A., ed., Phonological Structure and Phonetic Form: Papers in Laboratory Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 160–7.Google Scholar
Pearce, M. (2009). Kera tone and voicing interaction. Lingua, 119(6), 846–64.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2001). Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast. In Bybee, J. & Hopper, P., eds., Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 137–57.Google Scholar
Prieto, P. (2009). Tonal alignment patterns in Catalan nuclear falls. Lingua, 119, 865–80.Google Scholar
Prince, A. & Smolensky, P. (2004). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Pycha, A. (2010). A test case for the phonetics–phonology interface: Gemination restrictions in Hungarian. Phonology, 27(1), 119–52.Google Scholar
Recasens, D. (1999). Lingual coarticulation. In Hardcastle, W. J. & Hewett, N., eds., Coarticulation: Theory, Data, and Techniques. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 80–104.Google Scholar
Rice, K. (2011). Documentary linguistics and community relations. Language Documentation and Conservation, 5, 187–207.Google Scholar
Ridouane, R. (2008). Syllables without vowels: Phonetic and phonological evidence from Tashlhiyt Berber. Phonology 25(2), 321–59.Google Scholar
Ritchie, S., Goodchild, S. & Dohle, E. (2016). Language landscape: Supporting community-led language documentation. In Ferreira, V. & Bouda, P., Language Documentation and Conservation in Europe. Hawai’i, HI: University of Hawai’i Press, pp. 121–32.Google Scholar
Romero, J. & Riera, M. (2015). The Phonetics–Phonology Interface: Representations and Methodologies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sagey, E. (1986). The Representation of Features and Relations in Non-Linear Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Shaw, J. A. & Davidson, L. (2012). Perceptual similarity in input–output mappings: A computational/experimental study of non-native speech production. Lingua, 121(8), 1344–58.Google Scholar
Shaw, J. A., Gafos, A. I., Hoole, P. & Zeroual, C. (2009). Syllabification in Moroccan Arabic: Evidence from patterns of temporal stability in articulation. Phonology, 26(1), 187–215.Google Scholar
Shaw, J. A., Gafos, A. I., Hoole, P. & Zeroual, C. (2011). Dynamic invariance in the phonetic expression of syllable structure: A case study of Moroccan Arabic consonant clusters. Phonology, 28(3), 455–90.Google Scholar
Sidharta (Sie Ing Djiang). (1976). The Consonantal and Vowel Systems of Malay and Huayu: A Contrastive Analysis. Singapore: Chinese Language Centre, Nanyang University.Google Scholar
Silva, D. J. (2006). Acoustic evidence for the emergence of tonal contrast in contemporary Korean. Phonology, 23(2), 287–308.Google Scholar
Silverman, D. (2006). A Critical Introduction to Phonology: Of Sound, Mind, and Body. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Solé, M.-J., Beddor, P. S. & Ohala, M. (2007). Experimental Approaches to Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stausland Johnsen, S. (2012). From perception to phonology: The emergence of perceptually motivated constraint rankings. Lingua, 122(2), 125–43.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. N. (1989). On the quantal nature of speech. Journal of Phonetics, 17(3), 3–45.Google Scholar
Sugahara, M. & Turk, A. (2009). Durational correlates of English sublexical constituent structure. Phonology, 26(3), 477–524.Google Scholar
Svantesson, J.-O. & House, D. (2006). Tone production, tone perception and Kammu tonogenesis. Phonology, 23(2), 309–33.Google Scholar
Tucker, B. V. & Warner, N. (2010). What it means to be phonetic or phonological: The case of Romanian devoiced nasals. Phonology, 27(2), 289–324.Google Scholar
Turk, A. (1994). Articulatory phonetic clues to syllable affiliation: Gestural characteristics of bilabial stops. In Keating, P. A., ed., Phonological Structure and Phonetic Form: Papers in Laboratory Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 107–35.Google Scholar
Turk, A. (2012). Prosodic structure and its phonetic implementation: Temporal aspects. In Cohn, Fougeron & Huffman, pp. 242–53.Google Scholar
Walker, R., Byrd, D. & Mpiranya, F. (2008). An articulatory view of Kinyarwanda coronal harmony. Phonology, 25(3), 499–535.Google Scholar
Williamson, K. (1970). Reading and Writing Ogbia. Rivers Readers Project, Institute of African Studies, University of Ibadan.Google Scholar
Williamson, K. (1972). Assimilation in Ogbia. Department of Linguistics and Nigerian Languages, University of Ibadan, Research Notes 5. 1–5.Google Scholar
Yamada, R. (2007). Collaborative linguistic fieldwork: Practical application of the empowerment model. Language Documentation and Conservation, 1(2), 257–82.Google Scholar
Zhang, J. (2004). The role of contrast-specific and language-specific phonetics in contour tone distribution. In Hayes, Kirchner & Steriade, pp. 157–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J. & Yuwen, L. (2010). Testing the role of phonetic knowledge in Mandarin tone sandhi. Phonology, 27(1), 153–201.Google Scholar
Zuraw, K. (2007). The role of phonetic knowledge in phonological patterning: Corpus and survey evidence from Tagalog infixation. Language, 83(2), 277–316.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×