Syllable division: experimental data

There is another point to be considered here: the functional aspect, which manifests itself in frequencies of occurrence of permitted sound sequences. Although there are more similarities than differences in the inventories of phonological syllable models in English and Russian, the total number being very similar (21 vs 23), with only one model of four-consonant cluster in the Russian onset and a couple of four-consonant clusters in English codas to make the distinction, phonetically the majority of Russian syllables are different from the English ones.

The basic difference consists in the dominance of an open syllable in Russian (CV), and a closed syllable in English (CVC) in actual speech. According to Russian scholars' research data, 78% of Russian syllables are open.

Another important feature, also supported by experimental evidence, concerns the dynamics of syllable articulation. There is a close contact in the Russian syllable between the onset consonants and the following vowels (CV), which affects the quality of vowels. In English, like in all Germanic languages, there is a close contact between the vowel and the coda consonants (VQ, which affects the length of vowels. Positional length of vowels, which is present in all English dialects but which is particularly important for GA and Scottish Standard English, determines vowel duration in English. As we have pointed out in the description of English vowels, the determining factor is fortis/lenis feature of the consonant following the vowel. Also, taking into account partial devoicing of consonants in the word-final position, the listener has to rely on the positional length of the vowel as a clue for word recognition: /e/ is longer before a 'voiced' consonant: bed - bet.

According to Russian scholars research data, most English syllables are closed when there is a fortis consonant in the coda (Златоустова и др. 1997).

This takes us to one more controversial point in syllable division which concerns medial cluster division in English.

There are two authentic sources for looking up syllable boundary of any given word in English: EPD {Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionary by Daniel Jones, 16^h ed. Cambridge, 2003) and LPD {Longman Pronunciation Dictionary, 2^nded., Longman, 2000byJ.C. Wells).

The two sources agree on the following:

1. Compounds should be divided into syllables according to the morphological principle: hard-ware.

2. A single consonant which appears between two syllables after a short stressed vowel should be attached to the preceding vowel: better ['bet-э].

However, there are differences as to where to put a consonant which follows a long vowel or a diphthong:

EPD attaches a single word-medial consonant to the following syllable (Maximal Onset principle): la.dy, in.vi.ted, while LPD puts all word-medial single consonants and clusters to the stressed syllable (Maximal Stress principle): lady, in vit ed. (Here we preserve their conventions of showing the phonetic syllabification.) Thus the word window will be differently attested in the two dictionaries due to the two different principles of syllable division: EPD ['wm.daul, LPD ['wind эи].

Experimental evidence, as reported from British sources by Alan Cruttenden, shows that following a long vowel a consonant was syllabified with the following syllable which supports EPD: la-dy {Cruttenden 2001).

As for the universal principle of Maximal Onset which did not seem to work in case of a single consonant after a stressed short vowel, actually it did work: experimental data was a compromise between the universal rule and language-specific phonotactic rule. The retention stage of a consonant belongs to the previous short vowel, while the release is with the next syllable. In fact, the boundary between the two syllables runs within the medial consonant, city ['sit-ti], better ['bet-ta]. Timing is a very important clue for syllable and word recognition here.

Поиск по сайту: