Update: 2011-12-31 07:05 PM +0630
intro02-2.htm
Daniel Jones. Edited by Peter Roach, James Hartman and Jane Setter. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Scanned by Maung Kan Tun and edited by U Kyaw Tun, M.S. (I.P.S.T., U.S.A.). Not for sale. Prepared for students of TIL Computing and Language Center, Yangon, MYANMAR .
Part 2-2
2.5 Stress |
2.6 Syllable divisions |
2.7 Assimilation |
2.8 Treatment of /r/ (
linking r,
intrusive r) |
2.9 Use of /i/ and /u/ |
2.10 Syllabic consonants |
2.11 Optional sounds |
2.12 Elision
UKT: See also Stress and Stress shift in the information panels.
Stress patterns present one of the most difficult problems in a pronouncing dictionary. One reason for this is that many polysyllabic words have more than one possible stress pattern, and one must consider carefully which should be recommended. Secondly, the stress of many words changes in different contexts, and it is necessary to indicate how this happens. Thirdly, there is no straightforward way to decide on how many different levels of stress are recognisable.
(a) Where more than one stress pattern is possible, the preferred pronunciation is given first and then alternatives are listed. Many dictionaries use the convention of representing stress patterns using dashes to represent syllables: thus the two possible patterns for <cigarette> ( ˌcigaˈrette and ˈcigarette) can be shown as ˌ- -ˈ and ˈ- - . This convention, which is sometimes referred to (incorrectly) as "Morse Code", is used in this work for short words, since it is economical on space. However, in longer words users are likely to find it difficult to interpret. In the planning of this edition, an experiment was carried out to test this, and it was found that readers (both native speakers and non-native speakers of English) do indeed take less time to read word stress patterns when the whole word is given, rather than just a .'dashes and dots" pattern (Stromberg and Roach, 1993). Consequently, words of more than three syllables are given in full when alternative stress patterns are being given.
(b) The most common case of variable stress placement caused by context is what is usually nowadays known as "stress-shift". As a general rule, when a word of several syllables has a stress near the end of the word, and is followed by another word with stress near its beginning, there is a tendency for the stress in the first word to move nearer the beginning if it contains a syllable that is capable of receiving stress. For example, the word <academic> in isolation ( ˌæk.əˈdem.ɪk ) usually has the stress on the penultimate syllable /-dem-/. However, when the word <year> follows, the stress is often found to move to the first syllable /æk-/. The whole phrase <academic year> will have its primary stress on the word 'year' , so the resulting stress pattern will be ˌacademic ˈyear (where ˌ represents secondary stress and ˈ represents primary stress). To make this process easier to understand, this dictionary now gives specific examples in each case where stress-shift is possible except where certain prefixes such as 'un-' produce hundreds of such cases. In general, this shift is not obligatory: it would not be a mispronunciation to say acaˌdemic ˈyear . However, it is undoubtedly widespread and in some cases is used almost without exception: for example, although the adjective 'compact' on its own is pronounced with the stress pattern -ˈ-, in the phrase <compact disc> it is virtually always pronounced with stress on the first syllable.
(c) It is necessary to decide how many levels of stress to mark. The minimum possible range is two: stressed and unstressed. This is inadequate for representing English words in a pronouncing dictionary: a word such as <controversial> clearly has stress(es) on the first and third syllables, and equally clearly has stronger stress on the third syllable than on the first. It is therefore necessary to recognise an intermediate level of stress ("secondary"). The transcription of this word, therefore, is /ˌkɒn.trəˈvɜː.ʃəl/. An argument can be made for recognising yet another level (tertiary stress): in a word such as <indivisibility>, for example, it can be claimed that the level of stress on the third syllable /vɪz/ is weaker than that on the first syllable /ɪn/, which has secondary stress (primary stress being placed on the penultimate syllable /bɪI/ ). However, introducing this extra level creates a degree of complexity that it is better to avoid. In EPD14 some long polysyllabic words were transcribed with two primary stress marks (e.g. <cross-examination> was given as /ˈkrɒsɪgˌzæmɪˈ neɪʃn/): for the present edition only one primary stress may occur in a word or compound.
(d) Secondary stresses have only limited occurrence after a primary stress: such a secondary stress is only marked in closed or hyphenated compound words where the second element is polysyllabic (e.g. ˈfishˌmonger).
( e ) Stress assignment on prefixes:
(i) In words containing a prefix such as, for example, con-, de-, im-, in-, secondary stress is not applied to the prefix where the following (i.e., second) syllable is stressed. Examples include <intoxicate> / ɪnˈtɒk.sɪ.keɪt (us) -ˈtɑːk-/.
(ii) Where the prefix is separable, however, as in <impossible>, a variant showing secondary stress on the prefix is listed, as follows: / ɪmˈpɒs.ə.bl̩ , ɪm-/.
(iii) In all other cases, primary or secondary stress is applied to the prefix where appropriate.
(f) In the case of words which do not have a prefix but have a stressed second syllable preceded by a syllable with a full vowel (e.g. <shampoo>, <Chinese> ) the first syllable is usually treated as unstressed, though in some cases capable of receiving primary stress through stress-shift.
The 14th Edition of EPD marked syllable division (using hyphens) only when it was important to distinguish between the affricate /ʧ/ (U02A7) and the phonemes /t/ (U0075) and /ʃ/ (U0283) at a syllable juncture (e.g. <satchel> /ˈsætʃəl/ and <nutshell> /ˈnʌt-ʃəl/ ). However, although native speakers may well find no difficulty in dividing words into syllables, it seems that learners of English have trouble in doing so, and the divisions are therefore marked. Descriptions of stress and rhythm are usually expressed in terms of syllables, and so it is helpful to have polysyllabic words clearly broken up into their constituent syllables. The syllabified transcription of a polysyllabic word is easier to read and interpret than an undivided one. In addition, the dictionary is likely to be of interest to the field of speech and language technology, where syllable divisions can be useful in developing automatic speech and language analysis systems.
A dot. is used to divide syllables, in accordance with the current recommendations of the International Phonetic Association. These may be read in the IPA Handbook (International Phonetic Association 1999). However, this is not used where a stress mark ˈ or ˌ occurs, as these are effectively also syllable division markers.
No completely satisfactory scheme of syllable division can be produced -- all sets of rules will throw up some cases which cannot be dealt with properly. The principles used in this edition are set out below. This requires some discussion of phonotactics, the study of permissible phoneme sequences.
(a) As far as possible, syllables should not be divided in a way that violates what is known of English syllable structure. The 'Maximal Onsets Principle', which is widely recognised in contemporary phonology, is followed as far as possible. This means that, where possible, syllables should be divided in such a way that as many consonants as possible are assigned to the beginning of the syllable to the right (if one thinks in terms of how they are written in transcription), rather than to the end of the syllable to the left. However, when this would result in a syllable ending with a stressed /ɪ/, /e/, /æ/, /ʌ/, /ɒ/ or /ʊ/, it is considered that this would constitute a violation of English phonotactics, and the first (or only) intervocalic consonant is assigned to the preceding syllable; thus the word <better> is divided /ˈbet.əʳ/ , whereas <beater> is divided /ˈbiː.təʳ/. In the case of unstressed short vowels, /e/, /æ/, /ʌ/ and /ɒ/ are also prevented from appearing in syllable-final position; however, unstressed /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ are allowed the same "privilege of occurrence" as /ə/ when a consonant begins a following syllable, and may therefore occur in final position in unstressed syllables except pre-pausally. Thus in a word such as <develop> , the syllable division is /dɪˈvel.əp/ .
(b) Notwithstanding the above, words in compounds should not be re-divided syllabically in a way that does not agree with perceived word boundaries. For example, <hardware> could in theory be divided /ˈhɑː.dweəʳ/ , but most readers would find this counter-intuitive and would prefer /ˈhɑːd.weəʳ/ . This principle applies to open, closed and hyphenated compounds.
UKT: See also Assimilation in Information Panels.
Assimilation is a process found in all languages which causes speech sounds to be modified in a way which makes them more similar to their neighbours. A well-known example is that of English alveolar consonants such as /t , d , n/ , which, when they are followed by a consonant which does not have alveolar place of articulation, tend to adopt the place of articulation of the following consonant. Thus the /t/ at the end of <foot> /fʊt/ changes to /p/ when followed by /b/ in the word <football> , giving the pronunciation /ˈfʊp.bɔːl/. A similar case is the assimilation of /s/ to a following /ʃ/ or /j/ , resulting in the pronunciation of <this ship> as /ðɪʃˈʃɪp/ and <this year> as /ðɪʃˈjɪəʳ/ . This assimilation can be considered to be optional.
The assimilation of /n/ is a rather special case: many English words begin with the prefixes 'in-' and 'un- ' , and in a number of cases the /n/ of these prefixes is followed by a consonant which is not alveolar. In some cases it seems to be normal that the /n/ is regularly assimilated to the place of articulation of the following consonant (e.g. <inquest> /ˈɪŋ.kwest/ ), while in others this assimilation is optional (e.g. <incautious> may be /ɪnˈkɔː.ʃəs/ or /ɪŋˈkɔː.ʃəs/ ). Where it is clear that the prefix is attached to a word that exists independently, so that prefix and stem are easily separable, the assimilation is normally treated as optional. When it seems more like an integral part of the word, the assimilation is shown as obligatory. The occurrence of assimilation in British and American English may differ.
UKT: See also Rhotic in the Information panels.
The accent used for British English is classed as non-rhotic -- the phoneme /r/ is not usually pronounced except when a vowel follows it. The American pronunciations, on the other hand, do show a rhotic accent, and in general in the accent described, /r/ is pronounced where the letter [r] is found in the spelling.
It is necessary to show, in British English entries, cases of potential pronunciation of /r/, mainly in word-final position; in other words, it is necessary to indicate, in a word such as <car>, that though the word when said in isolation does not have /r/ in the pronunciation ( /kɑː/ ), there is a potential /r/ which is realised if a vowel follows (e.g. in <car owner> ). This is indicated by giving the transcription as /kɑːʳ/ , where the superscript /ʳ/ (U028B) indicates the potential for pronunciation. This is traditionally known as 'linking r'. A controversial question is that of so-called 'intrusive r', where the phoneme /r/ is pronounced when no 'r' is seen in the spelling. For example, the phrase 'china and glass' will often be pronounced with /r/ at the end of the word 'china'; although this type of pronunciation is widespread in the speech of native speakers of the accent described, it is still safer not to recommend it to foreign learners, and it is therefore avoided in this dictionary.
UKT: This section and the section in the Information panels are important for Bama speakers since Bama, unlike US English and Pali, is a non-rhotic language. Myanmars, including those who knows Pali, found it extremely difficult to pronounce English words with /r/ in the word-final position. Even in the /r/ as the ONSET in the syllable is pronounced as /j/ -- the equivalent of English [y].
There are many places in present-day British and American English where the distinction between /ɪ/ and /iː/ is neutralised. For example, the final vowel of <city> and <seedy> seems to belong neither to the /ɪ/ phoneme nor to /iː/. The symbol /i/ is used in this case (though it is not, strictly speaking, a phoneme symbol; there is no obvious way to choose suitable brackets for this symbol, but phoneme brackets / / will be used for simplicity). A parallel argument can be made for the distinction between /ʊ/ and /uː/ (with a corresponding 'neutralised' symbol /u/ ), though this is needed much less frequently. This issue, and the issues which follow, are discussed in detail in Roach (2000), pp. 84-86.
(a) In word-final position, /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ do not occur. Word-final, close vowels are transcribed with /i/ and /u/ if unstressed. Word-final /iː/ and /uː/ are possible both with stress ( <grandee> , <bamboo> ) and without ( <Hindi> , <argue> ), although in the unstressed case it is often not possible to draw a clear line between /iː/ and /i/ , or between /uː/ and /u/.
(b) In compounds such as <busybody> and names such as <Merryweather>, /i/ is permitted to occur word-medially, e.g. <busybody> is transcribed /ˈbɪz.iˌbɒd.i (us) ˈbɪz.i.bɑːdi/ and <Merryweather> as /ˈmer.iˌweð.əʳ (us) ˈmer.iˌweð.ɚ/ . In all other cases word-medially, /ɪ/ is used when the vowel is unstressed, unless a vowel follows (see below).
(c) The vowel symbols /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ only occur in front of another vowel symbol if they form part of a composite (diphthong or triphthong) phoneme symbol (e.g. /ɪə , ʊə/ ). Otherwise /i/ or /u/ is used (e.g. <scurrying> /ˈskʌr.i.ɪŋ/ , <influenza> /ˌɪn.fluˈen.zə/ .
(d) A matter related to this decision concerns words ending in '-ier', '-eer', '-ia'. The usual transcription in the 14th Edition of the EPD was /ɪə/. However, <reindeer> and <windier> (comparative form of 'windy') do not have identical pronunciations in their final syllables in British English (BBC). In this edition, the alternative /- jə/ previously given for the latter type of word has been dropped; <reindeer> is transcribed as /ˈreɪn.dɪəʳ/ and <windier> as /ˈwɪn.di.əʳ/. The latter transcription, which indicates a different (closer) vowel quality in the second syllable of <windier> , and implies a pronunciation with three rather than two syllables, is felt to be accurate in terms of contemporary pronunciation.
The long vowels /iː/ and /uː/ may also occur before other vowels, but only when in a stressed syllable (e.g. <skiing> /ˈskiː.ɪŋ/ , <canoeing> /kəˈnuː.ɪŋ/ ).
UKT:
• Adapted from: http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsASyllabicConsonant.htm
A syllabic consonant is a phonetic element that normally patterns as a consonant, but may fill a vowel slot in a syllable. Examples: the final nasals in the following :<pattern> /pæt.ən/ (US) /pæt̬.ɚn/
<bottom> /ˈbɒt.əm/ (US) /ˈbɑː.t̬əm/The phonetic representations are from DJPD16, and I am not sure which pronunciation (British or US) SIL is referring to.
• The example given by DJPD16 :
<bottle> /ˈbɒt.l̩/ (US) /ˈbɑː.t̬ḷ/
The syllabic l is represented by small letter l with the diacritical mark (a short vertical line immediately under the letter). However, inputting with U006C and U0329 produced the character with the diacritical mark shifted to the left ( l̩). The other alternative is to use U013C ( ļ ) where the diacritical mark is a small curved line instead of a straight vertical line. See also Syllabic consonant in the Information panels.
Syllabic consonants are frequently found in English pronunciation: these are cases where instead of an expected vowel-plus-consonant sequence, the consonant alone (usually one of /m, n, ŋ, I, r/ ) is pronounced with the rhythmical value of a syllable. (See Roach, 2000, pp. 86-90.)
UKT: Unlike Myanmar
{byiÑ: ak~kara},
the corresponding English letters [m, n, ŋ, I, r] cannot by stand alone to form syllables. For example,
can be read as {ma. ma.}, but mm cannot be read without vowels. You will have to write [ma ma] or [mi mi], etc. to pronounce it. However, in some words, under some circumstance, these letters can be read as if they have vowels of their own. Such a consonant-letter is known as syllabic consonant.
In EPD14, syllabic consonants were only marked where there is ambiguity in the pronunciation of a word; for example, in a word such as <bottle> , the transcription /ˈbɒtl/ is said to imply unambiguously that the /l/ is syllabic, whereas in the derived form <bottling> there may be two pronunciations, one with and one without a syllabic /l/. In this instance the EPD14 preferred pronunciation was /ˈbɒtļɪŋ/, with /ˈbɒtlɪŋ/ given as an alternative.
(a) The main problem here is how to deal with optional and obligatory syllabicity and the permissibility of vowels. The most frequently found case is where an item may have (i) a schwa vowel followed by a non-syllabic consonant, (ii) a syllabic consonant not preceded by schwa or (iii) a non-syllabic consonant not preceded by schwa. For example, <lightening> may be (i) /ˈlaɪ.tə.nɪŋ/, (ii) /ˈlaɪtn̩.ɪŋ/ or (iii) /ˈlaɪt.nɪŋ/. Such items are transcribed as /ˈlaɪ.tən.ɪŋ/ and /ˈlaɪt.nɪŋ/, the first representing cases (i) and (ii), in which there are three syllables, and the second representing only the disyllabic pronunciation, (iii). The use of superscript schwa in words such as /ˈlaɪ.tən.ɪŋ/ should be interpreted as meaning that the schwa may be pronounced, or may be omitted while giving its syllabic character to the following consonant.
(b) The problem remaining is that of /l/ corresponding to the '-le' spelling form, preceded by any plosive or homorganic fricative, as in <bottle>, <wrestle>. It is not felt to be acceptable in BBC pronunciation to pronounce this with a vowel in the second syllable, and therefore the superscript schwa convention is not used in such cases: rather, the /l/ is marked as syllabic, i.e. /l ̩/ (U006C U0329). The entry for <bottle> is /ˈbot.l ̩/, and for <cycle>, /ˈsaɪ.kl ̩/ .
(c) Where a word such as the above carries a suffix with an initial vowel, as in <bottling> , <cycling> , speakers' intuitions about the number of syllables are very divergent, so no single recommendation will be adequate. The entry for <bottle> gives the syllabic /l ̩/ (three-syllable) version of <bottling> as the first recommendation, and it is therefore necessary to add for the -ing form the two-syllable alternative /ˈbot.lɪŋ/ .
(d) Syllabic nasals are not usual where they would result in a nasal-plosive-syllabic consonant sequence (e.g. <London> /ˈlʌd.dən/ , <abandon> /əˈbæn.dən/ must contain a schwa vowel in the final syllable).
The convention used in EPD14 of printing phoneme symbols in italics to indicate that they may be omitted is retained, though used more sparingly. It is not necessary to give alternative pronunciations that simply follow general rules of simplification that apply in rapid speech. For example, pointing out the possibility of omitting the [d] sound in <engine> seems unnecessary, whereas it does seem worth recording the fact that some speakers pronounce words such as <lunch> and <French> with a final /ntʃ/ while others have final /nʃ/. There is a difference between the two cases: the former is a straightforward example of elision, and needs no special explanation that refers to a specific word or class of word, while the latter is a particular case of an insertion or deletion that is restricted to a particular phonological environment; speakers are usually consistent in using one or other of the alternative pronunciations in the latter case.
UKT: See also Elision in the Information panels.
As mentioned in the preceding section, there are many cases where sounds which are produced in words pronounced on their own, or in slow, careful speech, are not found in a different style of speech. This is known as elision, and this dictionary normally does not show elisions in order to avoid adding a large number of additional pronunciations that are typical of casual speech. It is usual to explain elision in terms of the Principle of Least Effort -- we try to avoid doing more work than is necessary. We find elision most commonly in the simplification of consonant clusters. A common example is the loss of /t/ and /d/ in combination with other consonants. Examples are:
<act badly>
/ˌæktˈbæd.li/ (careful speech)
/ˌækˈbæd.li/ (rapid speech)<strange person>
/ˌstreɪnʤˈpɜː.sən (us) -ˈpɝː.sən/ (careful speech)
/ˌstreɪnʒˈpɜː.sən (us) -ˈpɝː.sən/ (rapid speech)
The fricative /θ/ is also frequently lost in clusters in rapid speech. Examples are:
<sixth place>
/ˌsɪksθˈpleɪs/ (careful speech)
/ˌsɪksˈpleɪs/ (rapid speech)
Elision of vowels is also found, and again this seems to be characteristic of rapid or casual speech. Examples are:
<philosophy>
/fɪˈlɒs.ə.fi (us) -'lɑː.sə- / (careful speech)
/fəˈlɒs.fi (us) -'lɑː.sə- / (rapid speech)<persuade>
/pəˈsweɪd (us) pɚˈ- / (careful speech)
/psweɪd/ (rapid speech)
-- Non-identical segments having the same point of articulation.
e.g., [p] [b]
[m] / [t] [d] [s] / [k] [g]; etc. From:
http://sps.k12.mo.us/khs/linguistics/lingtrms.htm#H
Go back homorganic-note-b
End of TIL file