The Phonetics/Phonology Interface

doi:10.1017/9781108644198.028

27 - The Phonetics/Phonology Interface

from Section V - Applications of Phonetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 November 2021

Robert Kennedy

Edited by

Rachael-Anne Knight and

Jane Setter

Show author details

Rachael-Anne Knight: Affiliation:
City, University of London
Jane Setter: Affiliation:
University of Reading

Book contents

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

phonology interface experimental phonology markedness Autosegmental Phonology grounded phonology laboratory phonology linguistic phonetics

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Phonetics , pp. 682 - 706
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108644198.028 [Opens in a new window]
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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

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.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.