108 PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED (Those not referred to in the text are marked *.) Acta Ling. = Acta Linguistica, Revue Internationale de Linguistique Structurale, Copenhague (Volume I, 1939 etc.) Actes 4. = actes du quatrieme congres international de linguistes, Copenhague, 1936·38. Arch. Ling. = Archivum Linguisticum, A Review of Comparative Philology and General Linguistics, ed. by I. M. Campbell and S. Ullmann, Glasgow (Volume I, 1949 Artymovicz, A., Fremdwort und Schrift, Charisteria Mathesio, Prague, 1932, p. 114·117. Baudouin de Courtenay, J., Versuch einer Theorie der phonetischen Alternationen, Strassburg, 1895. Becker, R., Wie erkennt der Deutsche Fremdworter?, Charisteria Mathesio, Prague, 1932, p. 111·113. Bloch, B., A Set 0/ Postulates for Phonemic Analysis, Language 24, 1948, p. 3--47. Bloch. B. and Trager, G. L., Miscellanea, Language 18, 1942, p. 146ff. Bloch, B. and Trager, G. L., Outline 0/ Linguistic Analysis, Special Publications of the Linguistic Society of America, Baltimore, 1942 (= Linguistic Analysis) Bloomfield, L., Language, London, 1950. Bloomfield, L., A Set 0/ Postulates lor the Science 0/ Language, Language 2, 1926, p. 153-164. Bloomfield, L., The Stressed Vowels 0/ American English, Language, 11, 1935, p. 97·116. Brendal, V., Linguistique structurale, Acta Ling. I, 1939, p. 2-10. Brendal, V., Sound and Phoneme, Proceedings 2, p. 40-45. B.S.L. = Bulletin de Ia Societe de Linguistique de Paris. Biihler, K., Phonetik und Phonologie, T.C.L.P. IV, 1931, p. 22-53. * Buyssens, E., Mise au point de quelques notions /ondamentales de la phonologie, C.F.S. 8, 1949, p. 37--60. C.F.S. = Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure, Geneve (Volume 1, 1942 etc.) Charistcria Mathesio = Charisteria Guilelmo Mathesio Quinquagenario oblata, Prague, 1932. Durand, MIle M., Essai sur la nature de la notion vocalique, T.C.L.P. VIII. 1939, p. 43-50.· Durand, MIle M., Voyelles longues et voyelles breves. Essai sur la nature de la quantite phonologique, Collection Linguistique publiee par la Societe de Linguistique de Paris, XLIX, Paris, 1946. Eliason, Norman E., On Syllable Division in Phonemics, Language 18, 1942, p. 144-146. Eringa, P., Het Phonologische Quantiteitsbegrip, (diss.) Leiden, 1948. Firth, J. R., Linguistics and the Functional Point of View, English Studies, 16, 1934, p. 18-24. Firth, J. R., Sounds and Prosodies, Transactions Philological Society, London, 1948, p. 107-152.
22
Embed
PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED - Springer978-94-010-2969-8/1.pdf · PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED ... Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ... Jr., H. L.) Maitre Phonetique, 3me serie, No. 96,
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
108
PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED
(Those not referred to in the text are marked *.)
Acta Ling. = Acta Linguistica, Revue Internationale de Linguistique Structurale, Copenhague (Volume I, 1939 etc.)
Actes 4. = actes du quatrieme congres international de linguistes, Copenhague, 1936·38. Arch. Ling. = Archivum Linguisticum, A Review of Comparative Philology and General
Linguistics, ed. by I. M. Campbell and S. Ullmann, Glasgow (Volume I, 1949 ~tc.) Artymovicz, A., Fremdwort und Schrift, Charisteria Mathesio, Prague, 1932, p. 114·117.
Baudouin de Courtenay, J., Versuch einer Theorie der phonetischen Alternationen, Strassburg, 1895.
Becker, R., Wie erkennt der Deutsche Fremdworter?, Charisteria Mathesio, Prague, 1932, p. 111·113.
Bloch, B., A Set 0/ Postulates for Phonemic Analysis, Language 24, 1948, p. 3--47. Bloch. B. and Trager, G. L., Miscellanea, Language 18, 1942, p. 146ff. Bloch, B. and Trager, G. L., Outline 0/ Linguistic Analysis, Special Publications of the
Linguistic Society of America, Baltimore, 1942 (= Linguistic Analysis) Bloomfield, L., Language, London, 1950. Bloomfield, L., A Set 0/ Postulates lor the Science 0/ Language, Language 2, 1926,
p. 153-164. Bloomfield, L., The Stressed Vowels 0/ American English, Language, 11, 1935, p. 97·116. Brendal, V., Linguistique structurale, Acta Ling. I, 1939, p. 2-10. Brendal, V., Sound and Phoneme, Proceedings 2, p. 40-45. B.S.L. = Bulletin de Ia Societe de Linguistique de Paris. Biihler, K., Phonetik und Phonologie, T.C.L.P. IV, 1931, p. 22-53. * Buyssens, E., Mise au point de quelques notions /ondamentales de la phonologie, C.F.S.
8, 1949, p. 37--60.
C.F.S. = Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure, Geneve (Volume 1, 1942 etc.) Charistcria Mathesio = Charisteria Guilelmo Mathesio Quinquagenario oblata, Prague,
1932.
Durand, MIle M., Essai sur la nature de la notion vocalique, T.C.L.P. VIII. 1939, p. 43-50.·
Durand, MIle M., Voyelles longues et voyelles breves. Essai sur la nature de la quantite phonologique, Collection Linguistique publiee par la Societe de Linguistique de Paris, XLIX, Paris, 1946.
Eliason, Norman E., On Syllable Division in Phonemics, Language 18, 1942, p. 144-146. Eringa, P., Het Phonologische Quantiteitsbegrip, (diss.) Leiden, 1948.
Firth, J. R., Linguistics and the Functional Point of View, English Studies, 16, 1934, p. 18-24.
Firth, J. R., Sounds and Prosodies, Transactions Philological Society, London, 1948, p. 107-152.
109
Firth, J. R., Speech, Temple Primers, London, 1930. Firth, J. R., The Use and Distribution 0/ Certain English Sounds, English Studies, 17.
1935, p. 8-18. Fischer·J0rgensen. Miss E., Neuere Beitriige zum Quantitiitsproblem, Acta Ling. II,
1940-41, p. 175-181. Fischer-J0rgensen, Miss E., Phonologie. Bericht iiber Arbeiten in germanischen und
romanischen Sprachen, Archiv fiir vergleichende Phonetik. Band 5, Berlin 1941, p. 170-200.
Fischer-Jorgensen, Miss E., Remarques sur les principes de l'analyse phonemique, Recherches structurales, 1949, p. 214-234.
Frei, H., Saussllre contre Saussure?, C.F.S. 9, 1950, p. 7-28. Fry, D., The Frequency of Occurrence of Speech Sounds in English, Archives neerl. de
phon. exp., Tome XX, 1947, p. 103-106. Funke, 0., Versuch eines Au/risses einer Strukturlehre des modern Englischen: Zur
Charakteristik des englischen Sprachsystems. Wege und Ziele. Bern. 1945, p. 122-156.
Gimson, A. c., Implications 0/ the Phonemic/Chronemic Grouping 0/ English Vowels, Acta Ling. V. 1945-49, p. 94-100.
Ginneken, J. van. De Nederlandsche Consonantgroepen, Onze Taaltuin, 7, 1938-39; p.33-46.
Ginneken, J. van, De Phonologie van het algemeen Nederlandsch, Onze Taaltuin. 2. 1933·34; p. 321-340.
Ginneken, J. van, De Phonologische Regels van het Algemeen Nederlandsch, Onze Taaltuin, 3, 1934-35; p. 8-22.
Ginneken, J. van. Het Phonologisch Systeem van het Algemeen Nederlandsch, Onze Taaltuin, 2, 1933:34; p. 353-365.
Gougenheim, G., Elements de phonologie /rant;aise. Etude descriptive des sons du /ranr;ais au point de vue /onctionnel, Publication de la Faculte des Lettres de l'univ. de Strasbourg, 1935.
Groot, A. W. de. Phonologie und Phonetik als Funktionswissenscha/ten, T.C.L.P. IV. 1931, p. 116-147.
Groot, A. W. de, Structural Linguistics and Phonetic Law, Arch. neerl. de phon. expo XVII, 1941, p. 75-106; also Lingua, I, 1947. p. 175-208.
Groot, A. W. de, Voyelle, consonne et syllabe, Archives neerl. de phon. expo Tome XVII, 1941, p. 21-41.
Groot, A. W. de, De 117 etten der Phonologie en hun betekenis voor de studie van het Nederlands, Nieuwe Taalgids, 25. 1931, p. 225-243.
Hall, Jr., Robert A., American Linguistics, 1925-1950, Arch. Ling. Vol. 3, 1951. p. 101-125.
Hall, Jr., Robert A., French; Structural Sketch I, Language Monographs 24, Baltimore, 1948.
Harris, Zellig 5., Methods in Structural Linguistics, The University of Chicago Press, 1951. (= Methods)
Haudricourt, A. G. and Juilland, A. G., Essai pour une histoire structurale du phone-tisme /ranr;ais, Paris, 1949.
Haugen, E., The Analysis 0/ Linguistic Borrowing, Language 26, 1950, p. 210-231. Haugen, E. and Twaddell. W. F., Facts and Phonemes, Language 18, 1942, p. 228-237. Havranek, B., Zur Adaptation der phonologischen Systeme in den Schri/tsprachen,
T.C.L.P. IV, 1931. p. 267-278. * Heffner. R.-M. 5., A Note on Vowel Length in American English Speech, Language 16.
1940, p. 31-47.
110
Hill, A. A., Phonetic and Phonemic Change, Language 12, 1936, p. 15-22. Hintze, F., Zur Frage der monophonematischen Wertung, Studia Ling. IV, 1950,
p. 14-24. Hjelmslev, L., Accent, intonation, quantite, Studi Baltici VI, Roma, 1936-1937, p. 1-57. Hjelmslev, L., Essai d'une tMorie des morphemes, Actes 4, 1936, p. 140-151. * Hjelmslev, L., Langue et parole, C.F.S. 2, 1942, p. 29-44. Hjelmslev, L., On the Principles of Phonematics, Proceedings 2, London, 1936, p. 49-54. Hjelmslev, L., Quelques reflexions sur Ie systeme phonologique de findo-europeen, . Melanges Pedersen, Aarhus, 1937, p. 34-44. * Hjelmslev, L., Structural Analysis of Language, Studia Ling. I, 1947, p. 69-78. Hjelmslev, L., La structure morphologique, Rapports, Vme Congres Int. de Ling.,
Bruxelles, 1939, p. 66-93. Hjelmslev, L., The Syllable as a Structural Unit, Proceedings 3, Ghent, 1938, p. 266-272. Hockett, Charles F., A System of Descriptive Phonology, Language 18, 1942, p. 3-21. Hockett, Charles F., Review of Recherches Structurales, Int. Journal of American
Linguistics, 18, No.2, April 1952, p. 86-99. Householder Jr., Fred. W., Review of Phoneme, (D. Jones), Int. Journal of Am
erican Linguistics, 18, No.2, April 1952, p. 99-105.
Jakobson, R., Die Betonung und ihre Rolle in der Wort- und Syntagmaphonologie, T.C.L.P. IV, 1931, p. 164-182.
Jakobson, R., On the Identification of Phonemic Entities, Recherches Structurales, 1949, p.205-213.
Jakobson, R., Observations sur Ie classement phonologique des consonnes, Proceedings 3, Ghent, 1938, p. 34-41.
Jakobson, R., Remarques sur !'evolution phonologique du russe, T.C.L.P. II, 1929. Jakobson, R., Fant, C. Gunnar, M., and Halle, Morris, Preliminaries to Speech Analysis.
The distinctive features and their correlates, Technical Report No. 13, January, 1952, Acoustic Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (= Preliminaries).
Jakohson, R. and Lotz, J., Notes on the French Phonemic Pattern, Word 5, 1949, p. 151-158.
Jones, D., Chronemes and Tonemes, Acta Ling. IV, 1944, p. 1-10. Jones, D., The Phoneme, its Nature and Use, Cambridge, 1950 (= Phoneme) Jones, D., Outline of English Phonetics, 6th ed., Cambridge, 1948. (= Outline) Jone~, D., An English Pronouncing Dictionary, 11th ed., London, 1950. Joos, M., Acoustic Phonetics, Language Monographs, No. 23, 1948.
Korinek, J. M., Zur Definition des Phonems, Acta Ling. I, 1939, p. 90-94. * Kruisinga, E., The Phonetic Structure of English Words, Bibliotheca Anglicana, Vol. 2,
Bern, 1942. (= Phonetic Structure) Kurylowicz, J., Contribution Ii la tMorie de la syllabe, Bulletin de la Societe Polonaise
de Linguistique, Fasc. VIII, 1948, p. 80--114.
Language = Language. Journal of the Linguistic Society of America (volume I, Baltimore, 1925 etc).
Lawrenson, A. C., Some Observations on the Phonology of the English Vowels, Proceedings 2, 1936, p. 131-134.
Laziczius, J. von, A new category in phonalogy, Proceedings 2, p. 57-60. * Laziczius J. von, Zur Lautquantitiit, Archiv fiir vergl. Phon., Band 3, Berlin, 1939,
p. 45-50.· Lingua = Lingua. International review of General Linguistics (volume I, Haarlem,
1947 etc.)
111
Malmberg, B., Bemerkungen zum quantitatillen Vokalsrstem im modernen Franzosisch, Acta Ling. III, 1942, p. 44-56.·
Malmberg, B., Observations sur Ie srsteme lIocalique du Iranr;ais, Acta Ling. II, 1940·41, p.232-246.
Malmberg, B., Die Quantitiit als phonetisch·phonologischer Begrill. Eine allgemeinsprachliche Studie; Lunde Universitets arsskrift. N.F. Avd. 1. Bd. 41. Nr. 2., Lund· Leipzig, 1944.
Malmberg, B., Srsteme et methode, Trois etudes de linguistique generale. Lund, Gleerup, 1945.
Malone, K., Phonemes and Phont:mic Correlations in Current English, English Studies, 18, 1936, p. 159-)64.
Martinet, A., Equilibre et instabilite des srstemes phonologiques, Proceedings 3, 1938, p. 30-34.·
Martinet, A., Au sujet des 'Fondements de la tMorie linguistique', B.S.L. XLII, Fasc. 3, 1942.45; p. 19-42. (= Fondements)
Martinet, A., Neutralisation et archiphoneme, T.C.L.P. VI, 1936, p. 45-57. Martinet, A., Occlusilles and Allricates with Relerence to some Problems 01 Romance
Phonologr, Word 5, 1949, p. 116-122. Martinet, A., La phonologie du mot en danois, Paris, 1937. Martinet, A., Phonologie srnchronique et diachronique, Conferences de I'Institut de
Linguistique de l'universite de Paris, VI, 1938, p. 41-58.· Martinet, A., Un ou deux phonemes, Acta Ling. I, 1939, p. 94-103. Martinet, A., Review Grundziige (Trubetzkoy), B.S.L. XLII, 1942·45, Fasc. 2, p. 2~. Martinet, A., OU en est la phonologie?, Lingua, I, 1947, p. 34-58. Martinet, A., Phonologr as Functional Phonetics, London, 1949. Martinet, A., About Structural Sketches, Word 5, 1949, p. 13-35. Mathesius, V., On the Phonological Srstem 01 Modern English, Donum Natalicum
Schrijnen, Nijmegen·Utrecht, 1929, p. 46-53.· Mathesius, V., Zum Problem der Belastungs· und Kombinationslahigkeit der Phoneme,
T.C.L.P. IV, 1931, p. 148-152.· Mathesius, V., La structure phonologique du tcheque moderne, T.C.L.P. I, 1929,
p.67-84. Mathesius, V., Ziele und Aulgaben der flergleichenden Phonologie, Xenia Pragensia,
Prague, 1929, p. 432-445.· Meillet, A., Linguistique historique et linguistique generale, Paris 19261. Melanges·van Ginneken = Melanges de Linguistique et de Philologie, offerts a Jacq.
van Ginneken, Paris 1937. Meyer, E. A., Englische Lautdauer, Skrifter Kongl. Humanistiska Wetenskaps Sam·
fundet i Uppsala VIII, Uppsala, 1903. Menzerath, P., Neue Untersuchungen zur Lautabgrenzung una Wortsrnthese mit Hille
flon Tonlilmaulnahmen, Melanges·van Ginneken, p. 35-41. Menzerath, P., Neuere Untersuchungen zur Wortartikulation, Actes 4, 1936, p. 67-73. Menzerath, P., Der Diphthong, Bonn·Berlin, 1941. Merlingen, W., Zur Phonologie der Englischen Diphthonge und langen Vokale, Acta
Ling. VI, Fasc. 2-3, 1950·51, p. 87-93. Messing, Gordon M., Structuralism and Literarr Tradition, Language 27, 1951, p. 1-12.
Nida, E., Morphology, the descriptille Analrsis 01 Words, 2nd ed., Ann Arbor, 1949.
O'Connor, J. D., Review of An Outline 01 English Structure (Trager, G. L. and SDiith Jr., H. L.) Maitre Phonetique, 3me serie, No. 96, 1951, p. 42-44.
Paardekooper, P. C., De Lettergreep en zijn Begrenzing, De Nieuwe Taalgids 42, 1949, p. 232-241, and ib. p. 290-297.
112
Paardekooper, P. c., De Phoneemwaarde van de Svarabhakti vocaal, De Nieuwe Taal· gids 42, 1949, p. 74--84.
Palmer, H. E., A First Course of English Phonetics, 2nd. ed., Cambridge, 1930. Passy, P., Petite phoneeique comparee, Leipzig, 1912. Paul, H., Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte, Halle, 192()5. Pike, Kenneth L., Grammatical Prerequisites to Phonemic Analysis, Word 3, 1947,
p. 155-172. Pike, Kenneth L., Phonemics. A Technique for Reducing Languages to Writing. Univ.
of Michigan Pub!., Linguistics, vol. III, Ann Arbor, 1947. Pike, Kenneth L., On the Phonemic Status of English Diphthongs, Language 23, 1947,
p. 151-159. Proceedings 2 = Proceedings of the Second International Congress of Phonetic Sciences,
Cambridge 1936. Proceedings 3 = Proceedings of the Third International Congress of Phonetic Sciences,
Ghent 1938. Projet de terminologie phonologique standardisee, T.C.L.P. IV, Prague, 1931, p. 309:-323
Recherches structurales = Recherches structurales 1949, Interventions dans Ie debat glossematique, publiees Ii l'occasion du cinquantenaire de M. Louis Hjelmslev, Tra· vaux du Cercle linguistique de Copenhague, vol. V.
Reichling, A. J. B. N., Het Woord, (diss.) Nijmegen·Utrecht, 1935. Reichling, A. J. B. N., What is General Linguistics?, Lingua, I, 1947, p. 8-24. Richter, E., Lange und Kurze, Archiv fiir vergl. Phon., Band 2, Berlin, 1938, p. 12-29. * Rosetti, A., Le Mot, Esquisse d'une tMorie generale, 2me edition, Copenhague·Bucuresti,
1947. Rositzke, H. A., Vowel Length in General American English, Language 15, 1939,
p.99-109. Ross, A. S. C. and Josephs, J., Triangular Tables for the Phonemes of English, Arch.
Ling. I, 1949, p. 41-43.
Sapir, E., Language, New York, 1921. Sapir, E., The Sound Patterns in Language, Language, 1, 1925, p. 37-5l. Saussure, F. de, Cours de linguistique generale, 4me ed. Paris, 1949. (= Cours) Sechehaye, A., Les trois linguistiques saussuriennes, Vox Romanica, V, 1940, p. 1-48. Sp.rech, J., Phonema Errans, Lingua II, i950, p. 399-418. Sommerfelt, A., Can syllable division have phonological importance?, Proceedings 2,
p. 30-33. * Sprang· Hanssen, H., On the Simplicity of Descriptions, Recherches Structurales, 1949,
p. 61-70. * Stetson, R. H., Bases 0/ Phonology, Oberlin College, 1945. Stetson, R. II., Motor Phonetics. A Study 0/ Speech Movements in Action, 2nd ed.
Oberlin College - Amsterdam, 1951. Strong, H. A., Logeman, W. S. and Wheeler, B. I., Introduction to the study 0/ the
History 0/ Language, London, 189l. Studia Ling. = Studia Linguistica. Revue de linguistique generale et comparee (volume
I, Lund 1947 etc.) Swadesh, M., On the Analysis 0/ English Syllabics, Language 23, 1947, p. 137-150. Swadesh, M., The Phonemic Interpretation 0/ Long Consonants, Language 13, 1937,
p. 1-10. Swadesh, M., The Phonemic Principle, Language 10, 1934, p. 117-129. Swadesh, M., The Vowels 0/ Chicago English, Language 11, 1935, p. 148-151. Swart, J., Some Remarks on the Phonology 0/ English, Neophilologus, 1951, p. 166-167. Sweet, H., Elementarbuch des gesprochenen English, Oxford, 1886.
T.C.L.P. = Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague.
113
Trager, G. L., The Phonemic Treatment of Semivowels, Language 18, 1942, p. 220---222. Trager, G. L., La systematique des phonemes du polonais, Acta Ling. I, 1939, p.
179-188. Trager G. L. and Bloch, B., The Syllabic Phonemes of English, Language 17, 1941, p.
223-246. (= Syllabic Phonemes) Trager, G. L. and Smith Jr., H. L., An Outline of English Structure, Studies in Linguist·
ics; occasional papers No.3, Oklahoma, 1951. Trnka, B., On the Combinatory Variants and Neutralisation of Phonemes, Proceedings
3, p. 23-30. * Trnka, B., Some Remarks on the Phonological Structure of English, Xenia Pragensia,
Prague, 1929, p. 3,')7-364. Trnka, B., A Phonological Analysis of Present-Day Standard English, Studies in Engl
ish V, Prague, 1935. (= Phonological Analysis) Trnka, B., General Laws of Phonemic Combinations, T.C.L.P. VI, 1936, p. 57-62. Trubetzkoy, N. 5., Zur allgemeinen Theorie der phonologischen Vokalsysteme, f.C.L.P.
I, 1929, p. 39-67. Trubetzkoy, N. 5., Arileitung zu phonologischen Beschreibungen, Bmo, 1935. (= Antei
tung) Trubetzkoy, N. S., Die Aufhebung der phonologischen Gegensiitze, T.C.L.P. VI, 1936,
p. 29-46. * Trubetzkoy, N. S., Die Quantitiit als phonologisches Problem, Actes 4, p. 117-122. Trubetzkoy, N. S., Die phOlwlogischen Grundlagen der sogenannt,en Quantitiit in den
verschiedenen Sprachen, Scritti in onore di Alfredil'Trombetti, Milan. 1938, p. 155-174.
Trubetzkoy, N. S" Grundzuge der Phonologie, T.C.L.P. VII, Prague, 1939. (= Grundzuge). Translated by J. €antineau, Principes de phonologie, Paris, 1949 (= Principes).
Twaddell, W. Freeman, On Defining the Phoneme, Language Monographs, XVI, Baltimore, 1935.
Twaddell, W. Freeman, A Phonological Analysis of Intervocalic Consonant Clusters i~ German, Actes 4, p. 218-225.
Uldall, H. ]., On the Structural Interpretations oJ Diphthongs, Proceedings' a, p. 272-276 Ullmann,S., Principles of Semantics, Glasgow, 1951.
Vachek, J., Daniel Jones and the Phoneme, Otaristeria Mathesio, Prague, 1932. p. 25-33.'"
Vachek, J., Phonemes and phonological units. T.C;L.P. VI. 1936. p. 235-239. Vachek, J., Ueber die phonologische Interpretation der Diphthonge mit besonderer Be
rucksichtigung des Englischen, Studies in EngliAh, IV, Prague, 1933, .p. 87-170. (= phonologische Interpretation)
Ward, Ida C., The Phonetics 0/ English, 4th ed. Cambridge, 1948. (= Phonetics) Wartburg, W. von, Einfuhrung in Problematik und Methodik der Sprachwissenschaft,
Halle (Saale) 1943. Wells, Rulon 5., De Saussure's system o/linguistics, Word 3, 1947, p. 1-31. Wells, Rulon 5., Review of Recherches Structurales, Language 27, 1951, p. 554-570. Wijk, N. van, Kwantiteit en Intonatie, Med. Kon. Ned. Ac. v. Wetenschappen, Afd.
Letterk., N.R .. dl. 3, No.1, Amsterdam, 1940. Wijk, N. van, Scherp enzwak gesneden Klinkers, Nieuwe Taalgids 35, 1941, p. 15-24. Wijk, N. van, Phonologie. Een hoo/dstuk uit de structurele taalwetenschap. 's-Gravell'
hage, 1939. (= Phonologie) Wijk, N. van, Silbenschnitt en Quantiteit; Onze Taaltuin IX, 1940-41, p. 229-235. • Word =,Word, Journal of the Linguistic Circle of New York. (Volume I, 1945 etc.) Wyld, H. c., A History 0/ Modern Colloquial English, 3rd ed., Oxford, 1936.
rei] 80, 89, 90, 91, 94·95, 98 leil 96, lOS, 106 [eia] 104, 105 etat de langue 8·9, 56 expression (as opposed to content) 7 (cf.
signifiant) extensive vowels 97 external open juncture: see juncture
[f] 48 If I 59, 66, 72, 73, 74 features of phonemes 29, 81; see also
distinctive; relevant features of sounds 4, 6, 8, 16, 29; see also
distinctive; relevant final clusters: see clusters final [r]: see [r], final flapped [r]: see [d, flapped foreign words 43, 54·56, 99n, 105 form (acc. to Hj elmslev) 7
(acc. to de Saussure) 27 (v. meaning) 8, 54·55
" (v. substance): see substance formal (related to shape) 40 fortis (v. lenis) 10, lOn, 23, 27, 31; see
also voiced v. voiceless free vowels 85, 90 French 38, 45, 58, 95, 98n fricative [r]: see [r], fricative fricatives 48·51 front resonance (v. back resonance) 11 front vowels (v. back vowels) 11 function (ace. to Firth) 77
(ace. to Hjelmslev) 12, 37 word.differentiating 4; see also
38, 38n .glottal stop 42, 50 grammatical categories 19, 39; see also
morphemes grammatical criteria in phonemic analysis
25, 36·37, 61, 63, 102·103; see also morphological function
grammatical function: see morphological function
123
grave (v. acute) 11 glottal (articulation) 32, 34
[h] 20, 23-24, 41. 46-47, 48, 49-51, 58, 87 [h] and [U], problem of 20, 23-24, 46-47 [h], prosodic 50 [hw] 58 /hI 50, 51n, 57, 58, 60, 72, 73, 87 /hj/58 historical assimilation 45 historical linguistics 8-10; see also dia
chronic
[i] 52, 57, 75, 76, 79, 82, 88, 101 (cf. III) [i] as element of diphthong 86, 92, 95 III 75, 88, 102, 107 [il] 51, 79, 86, 88, 90, 95, 96, 101, 102,
103 (cf. Iii) IiI 79, 88, 103, 105, 106; see also Cia] ria] 100-103, 105, 107; see also [d,
potential Ich-Iaut 29 identification of phonemes 31 identification of word form 27, 28 image acoustique 7 immediate constituents 96 implications 12 indirect oppositions: see oppositions indistinctive opposition: see oppositions initial clusters: see clusters intellektuelle Bedeutung 6; see also
meaning intensity 84 interchangeable (sounds) 29 interdependence 12 interjections 38, 39, 106 intonation (= pitch) 96 intrusive [r]: see [d, intrusive invariants (Hjelmslev's term) 29 inventory of English phonemes: see pho-
nemes, establishment' of irregularities (in system) 10, 18, 41, 53,
54, 103, 105, 107; see also diachronic data
irrelevant features 78; see also marking qualities; redundant features
[k] 10, 28, 30, 42, 43 Ikl 59, 60, 66. 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 Korean [d and [l] 49
[I] 48, 49, 49n, 61, 62 PI 48, 63, 67, 71, 72, 73, 74 [1], clear and dark 48, 78 [1], syllabic 61-64 labial; see bilabial language, science of (ace. to de Saussure)
3-4 language, science of (ace. to Paul) 8n language; see also langue; linguistics; sys-
tem language, van Wijk's definition of 14 langue (v. parole) 4, 16, 17, 18, 82, 84 lateral 32, 33, 46 lax (v. tense) SIn, 81n, 84, 85 learned words 54 length 19; see also quantity lenis v. fortis 10, 23, 27, 31; see also
voiced v. VOiceless lexical function 74 lexical words 51, 69; see also nuclear
words linguistic feeling 14, 17, 24n, 47, 95
.. form 18; see also form function: see function
:: sign: see sign, linguistic linguistics (as autonomous science) 14-15 linguistics, synchronic: see synchronic linking [d: see [d, linking loans 9; see also foreign words London English 80; see also Southern
English long (v_ short) 78, 80, 82, 83, 84-87; see
also quantity long vowels 86, 87-89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 97,
63 meaning 4, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, 16n, 18, 36 medning v. form: see form medial clusters: see clusters medial position 75 minimal distinction 6, 82 minor function (Firth's term) 51 modern linguistics 3, 10 modifications, phonetic 40, 47, 50, 101,
105; see also allophones; variants
124
mono- or biphonematic interpretation 24-26 mono- or biphonematic interpretation of
afficates 25-26, 43-46 mono- or biphonematic interpretation of
diphthongs 51, 89-105 mono- or biphonematic interpretation of
[a] and [d 77, 102 mono- or biphonematic interpretation of
[h] and [:IJ] 23-24, 46-47 mono- or biphonematic interpretation of
long vowels 86, 87, 90, 92, 93 monosyllables 39, 61, 64, 75, 87 monosystemic (Firth's term) 50 morphemes 36, 37, 39 morphological function (of elements of
29-30, 31-36, 50, 82, 83, 86, 97 analysis of 31-36 definition of 5, 27 indirect 24 indistinctive 29 limited number of 30n
" pattern (system) of 17, 107 oral (v. nasal) 11, 31, 32, 33, 34 outer sandhi 39, 69; see also juncture over-differentiated phonemes 22
[p] 6, 28, 30, 42-43 Ip/ 35, 42-43, 59, 60, 65, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 palatal 11, 32, 33 paradigmatic 37 parole 4, 16-17, 27; see also langue parole organisee 9 pattern 11, 12, 15, 18, 28-29; see also
Gestalt pattern congruity 12, 24, 26, 44, 70, 92 permutational characteristics 87; see also
distribution phonema errans 53 phonematic (= phonological) function 51,
77; see also lexical function phoneme 4-6, 10-13, 16, 19, 27-36, 40, 82,
86; see also distinctive features;
"
"
oppositions acc. to Bloch & Trager 16 acc. to Bloomfield 6 acc. to de Groot 28n acc. to J akobson 11 acc. to Jones 16, 79 acc. to Projet 5 acc. to Reichling 36 acc. to de Saussure 27 acc_ to Trubetzkoy 4, 30, 35, 36 acc. to van Wijk 14n
" aspects of, distributional 28-29 " " "identificatory 40 " and variant 51, 76, 93; see also variants
125
phonemes (as members of oppositions) 4, 17, 35, 82, 86
phonemes, classification of: see classifica· lion
phonemes, establishment of English 39·41 phonemes, establishment of English con·
sonant 42·52 phonemes, establishment of English vowel
75·107 phonemic analysis, principles of 4, 6, 7,
12·13, 16·37, 82, 91; see also gram· inatical criteria
phonemic distinction (between consonants and vowels) : see consonants and vowels; oppositions
signifie 7, 27 Silbenschnitt 83, 84, 85 simplicity 93 sounds of speech 4-5, 11, 15, 64; see also
variants sounds, features of: see features of sounds
frequency of occurrence 7 " shape (or form) of 12, 13, 29; see
also substance " significant aspect of 16
structural relations between 10, 18, 23; see also distinctive features
sound-types 26 Southern English 42, 80, 87, 103n speech 16, 17; see also parole spelling pronunciation 22, 58n spiritus asper SO Sprachgehildelautlehre 4; see also phone-
mics Standard (British) English 22, 64, 94 stress 19, 96 structural approach (in phonemics) 3, 6,
13, 16, 18, 23-24, 27-29, 78, 102; see also pattern
structural layer (Pike's term) 96, 100 structural pressure 13, 24 structural relations between sounds: see
sounds structure, phonemic: see phonemic pat
tern subsidiary members (of a phoneme) 21;
see also variants substance v. form 7, 29 substitution of sounds 20 suction sounds 39 suprasegmental 19, SO, 79 suspicious segments 12, 13 svarabhakti vowel 63-64 syllabic consonants 61, 63, 64 syllabic contact (= Silbensehnitt) 84-85 syllabicity, phoneme of 62 syllable 38, 62, 64, 65, 89, 96
synchronic approach 8, 9, 41, 52 synchronic v. diachronic 9, 17, 52-54, 83 syntagmatic relations 27, 37 system 3, 8, 12, 13, 14, IS, 17, 24, 26, 44,
52, 53, 54, 78, 102 system of English phonemes: see classifi
cation systematic features 17 systemic fragments (Haugen's term) 54
I have never felt satisfied with the rather abrupt ending of this thesis. This was mainly due to the fact that, whereas the distributional criteria seemed admirably suited for dealing with consonant phonemes, this principle did not enable me to come up with such a nice classification in the case of vowel phonemes.
Later studies involving experiments with synthetic speech have convinced me, however, that no such correspondence ought to have been expected. In fact, vowels do seem to behave differently from consonants. Just as some words even stripped of contextual cues can be recognised and interpreted for what they are, e.g. proper names, so, on the whole, can any vowel be identified in isolation, with the possible exception of l'd/. In other words, vowels may be characterised sufficiently on their own acoustic strength, thus being identifiable as such and distinguishable from others even within similar contexts.
In the study of speech perception the emphasis has shifted in the direction of identification or recognition of words through their phonemic make-up. As indicated in the preface, I have meanwhile felt the need to apply experimental criteria towards solving phonemic problems. The major technique which makes such a procedure possible is that of perceptual analysis. The main technical feature of this type of analysis is a piece of apparatus, the phonetic segmentiser, which enables the investigator to select any desired stretch of speech anywhere in the speech chain.
This method lends itself admirably to the study of diphthongs and clusters. In actual experimental practice a panel of native listeners is required to judge the perceptual value of the stimuli obtained from the segmentiser.
For the latter reason I have largely devoted myself to the study of Dutch speech phenomena and I would be loath to apply the same technique to English in the absence of English listeners. The few tests that have nevertheless been made on English material suggest the necessity of clel,trly modifying the analysis as presented in the thesis.
In this respect I may point out that, though I still believe that in this book a good case has been made out for the biphonematic interpretation of the initial consonants of words such as chain and Jane, the very fact that Anglo-Saxon phonemicists seem to concur in a monophonematic interpretation could be taken as a strong warning that something may be amiss after all.
180
Basically, the same technique would make it possible to carry out "concrete", i.e. actual commutation. For some of the results of this approach the reader is referred to 't Hart-Cohen, Gating Techniques as an Aid in Speech Analysis, Language and Speech 7, 1964, 22-39. I believe that the outcome of this type of experiment constitutes a more realistic approach to the problem of how language users behave in speech communication. It goes without saying that no profitable tests can be made unless carried out against a linguistic background, which should provide the necessary theoretical framework within which the results have to be interpreted.