The relative sonority theory (the prominence) created by the Danish phonetician O. Jesperson, considers that sounds tend to group themselves according to their sonority (prominence, audibility or carrying power). The most sonorous sounds are vowels, less sonorous are sonorants / w, j, r, m, n, n / & the least sonorous are noise consonants. O. Jesperson classifies sounds according to the degree of sonority in the following way (beginning with the most sonorous):
1. Open vowels / /
2. Mid-Open vowels / /
3. Close vowels / i:, i, , u: /
4. Sonants / /
5. Voiced fricatives / /
6. Voiced stops / b, d, g /
7. Voiceless fricatives / f, , s /
8. Voiceless stops / p, t, k /.
Sounds are grouped around the most sonorous ones, i.e. vowels (& sometimes sonants) which from the peak of sonority in a syllable. One peak of sonority is separated from another peaks by sounds of lower sonority i.e. consonants. This distance between the 2 points of lower sonority is a syllable, e.g. / k – to - b / “October”. The number of syllables is determined by the number of peaks of prominence. Thus in the word / melt / “melt” there is one peak of sonority / e / & the word is monosyllabic. In the word / metl / “metal” there are two peaks of sonority - / e / and / l /, separated by the least sonorous / t /, & consequently, there are two peaks.
In Czech words like “vlk”, “krk” & in English “pst” the sounds / l, r, s / are sonorous peaks. But there are cases that contradict Jesperson’s theory e.g. / sta: / “star”, / skeit / “skate”, / nekst / “next”. In these words the sound / s / is more sonorous than / t / & / k / & forms the second peak of sonority. Yet, the words are monosyllabic. It is evident that the relative sonority theory doesn’t explain the mechanism of syllable formation. It only makes an attempt at explaining our perception of a syllable. Neither does it explain syllable division, as it doesn’t say to which syllable the less sonorous sounds belong, e.g. / n aism n / “an ice-man” & / nais m n / “a nice man”, / n eim / “an aim” & / neim/ “a name”, / s m dresiz / “some addresses” & / s m dresiz / “summer dresses”.
Nevertheless, the relative sonority theory has been accepted by D. Jones & some other phoneticians.
The widespread among Russian linguists is the muscular tension (or the articulatory effort) theory which is known as Scherba’s theory. According to this theory a syllable is characterized by variations in muscular tension. The energy of articulation increases at the beginning of a syllable reaches its maximum with the vowel (or the sonant) & decreases towards the end of the syllable. So, a syllable is an arc of muscular tension. The boundaries between syllables are determined by the occurrence of the lower articulatory energy. There are as many syllables in a word as there are maxima of muscular tension in it. Cf. / ta: / “tar” & / ta: / “tower” (a reduced variant of / ta /). The sound / a:/ in the second example is pronounced with two articulatory efforts, so there are 2 arcs of muscular tension & therefore, 2 syllables. Consonants within a syllable are characterized by different distribution of muscular tension. In accordance with this, L. Shcherba distinguishes the following 3 types of consonants.
Initially strong consonants, in the articulation of which the beginning is stronger while the end is weaker. They occur at the end of a closed syllable.
E.g. / I|t /, / |s /, / pi|n /, / s |d /, / pa:|t/.
Finally strong consonants, in the articulation of which the beginning is weak while the end is more energetic. They occur at the beginning of a syllable. E.g. / m|I /, / t|ai /, / p|a:t /, / s| d /.
Double peaked consonants, in the articulation of which both the beginning & the end are energetic whereas the middle is weak. They produce the impression of two consonants. These consonants occur at the junction of words or morphemes. E.g. / pe|nn|aif /, / tt|aim /, / mi|dd|ei/. The type of consonant is therefore a cue for syllable division. If in / nais ha s/, the sound / n / is initially strong, the syllabic boundary is after the /n / - / n ais ha s /. If the sound / n / is finally strong, the boundary is before it - / nais ha s /. In other words, if there is a new onset of muscular tension on the sound / n /, the latter belongs to the second syllable, & if the new onset of muscular tension is on / ai /, the sound / n / belongs to the first syllable.
The above theories define syllables on either the production or perception level. N. Zhinkin has worked out the so-called loudness theory, which takes into account both the levels. On the perception level the syllable is defined as an arc of actual loudness. The experiments, carried out by Zhinkin, showed that the organ immediately responsible for the variations in loudness of a syllable in the pharynx. The narrowing of the pharyngeal passage & the resulting increase in muscular tension of its walls reinforce the actual loudness of the vowel thus forming the peak of the syllable, while the loudness variations of all the speech mechanisms are involved. So on the speech production level the correlate of “arc of loudness” is “the arc of articulatory effort” (the latter term is suggested by V. A. Vassilyev).
The acoustic aspect of the syllable has been studied by E. Zwirner, R. Jacobson & M. Halle. According to the results obtained, the peak of the syllable (a vowel or sonant) has a higher intensity than its consonants & in many cases a higher fundamental frequency. Perceptually, the peak is louder & higher in pitch. These acoustic features easily agree with physiological definition of the syllable as an arc of articulatory effort (muscular tension).
In analyzing the above theories of the syllable, we cannot but agree with the scholar who point out that each of the existing theories is correct to a certain extent, but none of them is able to explain reliably all the cases of syll. boundaries.
Достарыңызбен бөлісу: |