Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:56:56.552Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Phonology of the Nasalized Verbal Forms in Sundanese

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

R. H. Robins
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is now established practice in descriptive linguistics to treat the subject-matter at separate, and definably separate, levels of analysis. Indeed the traditional categories of Phonology and Grammar represent such an employment of two different levels. Present-day linguists in Great Britain and America recognize the setting up and denning of the various levels of analysis as a basic procedure in handling the utterances of the speakers whose language is being studied.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , February 1953 , pp. 138 - 145
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1953

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

page 138 note 1 The cardinal importance of establishing separate levels of analysis in the study and description of language and in the statement of linguistic meanings was emphasized by ProfessorFirth, J. R. in ‘The Technique of Semantics’, TPS 1935, pp. 36–72 (see especially pp. 54–5, 60–1, 63–5)Google Scholar; cf. ‘Personality and Language in Society’, Sociological Review Vol. 42, 1950, p. 44Google Scholar, ‘General Linguistics and Descriptive Grammar’, TPS 1951, p. 76Google Scholar. See also Hockett, C. F., ‘A System of Descriptive Phonology’, Lang. Vol. 18, 1942, p. 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Trager, G. L. and Smith, H. L., ‘Outline of English Structure’, pp. 53–4, 81Google Scholar; cf. the use made by R. S. Wells of procedure by levels in his review of recent work by the Danish school (Lang. Vol. 27, 1951, pp. 562 ff.).Google Scholar

page 138 note 2 Firth, , ‘Technique of Semantics’, pp. 58 ff.Google Scholar; Trager, and Smith, , op. cit., p. 53.Google Scholar

page 138 note 3 See especially Firth, , ‘Sounds and Prosodies’, TPS 1948, pp. 127–152.Google Scholar

page 138 note 4 A recent bibliography of such work will be found in Allen, W. S., ‘Some Prosodic aspects of Retroflexion and Aspiration in Sanskrit’, BSOAS Vol. 13, 4, 1951, p. 945, footnote 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 138 note 5 Cf. Harris, Z. S., Methods in Structural Linguistics, pp. 76–8Google Scholar; but the discussion here is concerned with the choice between various alternative methods of ‘phonemicization’ with an eye on morphemic simplicity.

page 139 note 1 The Sundanese material here presented has been provided by my research assistant, Mr. Sobaran Nurjaman, from Garut, West Java. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the excellence of his work as my informant in our linguistic collaboration.

page 139 note 2 Cf. Spang-Hanssen, H., ‘On the Simplicity of Descriptions’, TCLC 5, 1949, pp. 61–70.Google Scholar

page 139 note 3 In this article structural elements abstracted at the Grammatical level are symbolized by large capitals, R, N. Structural elements abstracted at the Phonological level are symbolized by small capitals, c, v. Sundanese words are cited in heavy type, nenO.

page 139 note 4 The statement that the Nasalized forms are ‘derived’ from the non-nasalized Root forms is not intended as a historical statement, but means simply that the morphology of the Sundanese verbals can most easily be stated by treating the non-nasalized form, without any of its possible inflections, as basic in the description and the other forms as deriveḍ from it by the various inflectional processes. Cf. Bloomfield, L., Language, p. 217.Google Scholar

page 139 note 5 And exceptionally (see p. 144).

page 139 note 6 Grashuis, G. J., ‘Over de Verbale Vormen in het Soendaneesch’, Bijdragen, Derde Volgreeks 8, 1873, pp. 4–15Google Scholar; Oosting, H. J., Soendasche GrammaticaGoogle Scholar; Coolsma, S., Soendaneesche Spraakkunst.Google Scholar

page 140 note 1 See Grashuis, , op. cit., pp. 7–9Google Scholar, Costing, , op. cit., pp. 19–22Google Scholar, Coolsma, , Soendaneesche Spraakkunst, pp. 66–8.Google Scholar

page 140 note 2 The phonological details stated here are those necessary for treating the subject of this article. A full study of the phonology and grammar of Sundanese, based on my work with Mr. Nurjaman, is in preparation.

page 140 note 3 In recent discussions on phonological theory among members of the London group at the School of Oriental and African Studies, Professor J. R. Firth has suggested that the words ‘Substitution’ and ‘Commutation’ be employed as distinct technical terms in descriptive linguistics.

His suggestion is that ‘Substitution’ should be used to refer to the replacement of one element by another at the same level of abstraction (word, morpheme, phonological unit, etc.) in a given place in a text or in a structure abstracted from a text.

‘Commutation,’ on the other hand, he suggests, should be used of the alternation of terms within a system. When, by abstraction at a particular level of analysis, closed systems of interrelated terms have been set up whereby all the relevant facts can be accounted for, there is Commutation of the terms within such closed and exhaustive systems and their subsystems. Thus in the Sundanese vowel system, as given here, there is a three-term Commutation of Open, Half-open, and Close, and a three-term Commutation of Front, Central, and Back.

Thus Substitution finds order and place within structures, in parallel with texts, whereas Commutation properly applies to systems, which may be multidimensional. In research procedure, substitution in a framework of structure generally precedes the setting up of a Commutation system. The statement of both sets of relations is desirable in linguistic description. See also Carnochan, J., ‘Glottalization in Hausa’, TPS, 1952, p. 79, footnote 5.Google Scholar

page 141 note 1 Though the phonetic realization of these prosodic components is most marked in the utterance of a particular vowel (or consonant [see p. 142]) in the syllable, they serve to characterize by their presence, alone or in conjunction with other such components, Sundanese syllables as wholes.

page 141 note 2 As the inflectional process of Nasalization concerns only the initial consonants of words, and so, in the Sundanese language, the initial consonants of syllables, phonological statements made here are confined to consonants in syllable initial position.

page 141 note 3 See footnote 1, p. 143.

page 142 note 1 That in Sundanese bilabial closure is the limiting condition of lip rounding is most clearly shown when one of the central, non-lip-rounded vowels precedes or follows one of these consonants, and an off-glide or on-glide is frequently heard (e.g. bna), [bwna], to get; adpa, [adupa], to measure).

page 142 note 2 In the vowels, Y and W are marked about equally by front quality with lip spreading, and by back quality with lip rounding, respectively. In the consonants, palatal or front articulation is the more prominent feature for Y, and lip rounding, or lip closure, is the more prominent feature for W.

page 142 note 3 Cf. Henderson, E. J. A., ‘Prosodies in Siamese’, Asia Major, New Series, Vol. 1, 2, 1949, p. 192.Google Scholar

page 143 note 1 The traditional designation of h-sounds as ‘glottal fricatives’ is now seen to be inadequate (cf. Allen, W. S., Phonetics in Ancient India, § 2.00Google Scholar). These sounds are the result of general, non-localized ‘cavity friction’ (cf. Pike, K. L., Phonetics, p. 71Google Scholar) as the air passes through the buccal cavity under pressure from the lungs; nevertheless it seems clear that the glottis is not wholly passive, but plays some part in the production of this friction (cf. Jones, D., Outline of English Phonetics 6, p. 186Google Scholar, Potter, R. K., Kopp, G. A., and Green, H. C., Visible Speech, p. 111Google Scholar, Joos, M., Acoustic Phonetics, p. 89Google Scholar), and it is this action of the glottis, as distinct from its non-interference (o) in the utterance of the voiceless supra-glottal consonants, that is here referred to.

page 143 note 2 See p. 144, footnote 2.

page 143 note 3 See p. 144, footnote 1.

page 144 note 1 Bracketed forms indicate that the R or N form itself is not used with the function of a verbal, but that it is so used with the inflective suffix given.

page 144 note 2 R itself may begin with N, but is not thereby counted as N, and must be subjected to a further nasalization for the derivation of N.

page 144 note 3 The irregular nədə from sədə), and nəa from səa, given in Coolsma's Woordenboek are no longer used and are rejected by Mr. Nurjaman.

page 144 note 4 Dental and alveolar articulations are treated as belonging to the same phonological category.

page 144 note 5 Cf. Hjelmslev, L., Principes de Grammaire Générale, pp. 228 ff.Google Scholar, on ‘causalité synchronique’ in linguistic systems.