Description and classification

The kinesthetic factor is responsible for one’s finding definite movements and positions of the organs of speech necessary to produce a sound.

The kinetic factor is responsible for one’s ability to coordinate the differentiated articulatory movements necessary to produce a chain of sounds.

It is essential to classify the difference between classification and description. While describing sounds we try to set down as many as possible of the features which are present in them. In reality complete description is beyond our powers since it would mean mentioning an infinite number of features. So our descriptions are bound to be partial and we mention those features which seem to contribute substantially to the sound in question.

The sound [d] in the word “do” in articulatory terms may sound like this: the lips are somewhat rounded, ready to produce the following vowel: the teeth are close together. The soft palate is raised (because [d] is an oral sound); the tongue-tip is firmly in contact with the top of the alveolorage; the sides of the tongue are in continuous contact with the sides of the palate. The back of the tongue is raised to approximately the close vowel position (ready for the vowel again). Air under pressure from the lungs is compressed within the completely stopped mouth cavity and pharynx. The tongue-tip (but not the sides or the back) then lowers suddenly allowing the compressed air to escape with a slight explosion. Just before the explosion the vocal cords stop to vibrate in normal voice and continue to do so in a vowel.

Though it may sound a comprehensive description it is actually very incomplete. What is the exact lip aperture? How far apart are the teeth? What is the front part of the tongue doing? How firm is the contact of the soft palate and the wall of the pharynx? What is the shape of the pharynx? How much pressure are the lungs exerting? What is the exact duration of voicing before the explosion? And so on… But however much we add, the description would never be totally exhausted.

In classifying sounds on the other hand all we need to do is to mention those features by which they differ and leave it at that.

In classifying the sounds [s] and [d] we need to mention only one feature. For instance, auditorilly [s] is fricative and [d] is not. Articulatory [s] is constrictive and [d] is not. Or that articulatory [d] is a stop and [s] is not. Or auditorially [d] is plosive and [s] is not. Or that [d] has voice in it and [s] has none. Any of these features is sufficient to separate the 2 sounds and it is not necessary to quote them all. But If we have to classify [s], [d] and [t] one feature is no longer enough. Auditory [s] is fricative but both [t] and [d] are not. Articulatorily [s] is constrictive but both [d] and [t] are not. [d] and [t] Articulatorily are both stops and [s] is not. [d] has voice in it but both [s] and [t] have none. So we need two features to classify them: presence or absence of voice and presence of absence of explosion or friction.

And all the sounds of English will need more features for their classification. There is a certain economy in the use to which features of the kind are put in making distinctions of sound. We do not necessarily need to look for a new feature every time we have to separate one sound from another.

Поиск по сайту: