I found Gussenhoven's article to be particularly informative, as he systematically lays out all the possible types of sounds that humans can phonetically make, and has numerous examples from different languages to clearly differentiate one sound from another. The paper was very clearly structured, as Gussenhoven first explains the different structures that humans use to make sounds, before then describing how these structures are used to form language.
However, it seemed somewhat strange to suggest that the primary functions of these structures were related to the digestive or respiratory systems, with speech and noise production being completely irrelevant. Many mammals use their vocal cords to a great extent to both attract mates, communicate, scare away predators etc. These functions cannot be overlooked as merely secondary, rather, I think that the structures described have evolved specifically for both purposes.
I thought Kenstowicz and Gussenhoven both made good points when it came to humans misinterpreting sound. The 't' and 'd' sounds that Kenstowicz points out were particularly interesting to me, as I come from an Indian background, where there are four different 'd' sounds and four different 't' sounds. Gussenhoven describes some of them as the 'aspirated' sounds, but there are in fact even more variations. I would become unbelievably frustrated with the way that native English speakers would say words like 'dharma', and would simply be unable to correct themselves when I pointed out the correct way of pronouncing it. However, I become more understanding when it was explained to me that as we grow older, if we are not continuously trained, we lose all capability to understand phonemes that we are not familiar with. The 8 sounds that are so distinct to speakers of a native Indian language are completely indifferentiable to someone who has not grown up with those sounds. In fact, I would consider Kenstowicz's example of 'writer' and 'rider' to be minor, and in fact, the error to be insignificant. In that example, what English speakers think are two sounds are actually the same sound. In the example of the Indian 'd' and 't', what English speakers think are two sounds are actually 8, which to me is a bigger problem.
Interestingly, this can be tied back to Kenstowicz's criticism of the single-level model, as if every sound is only expressed at one level, it probably psychologically encourages humans to believe that sounds which are clearly different are actually the same.
However, it seemed somewhat strange to suggest that the primary functions of these structures were related to the digestive or respiratory systems, with speech and noise production being completely irrelevant. Many mammals use their vocal cords to a great extent to both attract mates, communicate, scare away predators etc. These functions cannot be overlooked as merely secondary, rather, I think that the structures described have evolved specifically for both purposes.
I thought Kenstowicz and Gussenhoven both made good points when it came to humans misinterpreting sound. The 't' and 'd' sounds that Kenstowicz points out were particularly interesting to me, as I come from an Indian background, where there are four different 'd' sounds and four different 't' sounds. Gussenhoven describes some of them as the 'aspirated' sounds, but there are in fact even more variations. I would become unbelievably frustrated with the way that native English speakers would say words like 'dharma', and would simply be unable to correct themselves when I pointed out the correct way of pronouncing it. However, I become more understanding when it was explained to me that as we grow older, if we are not continuously trained, we lose all capability to understand phonemes that we are not familiar with. The 8 sounds that are so distinct to speakers of a native Indian language are completely indifferentiable to someone who has not grown up with those sounds. In fact, I would consider Kenstowicz's example of 'writer' and 'rider' to be minor, and in fact, the error to be insignificant. In that example, what English speakers think are two sounds are actually the same sound. In the example of the Indian 'd' and 't', what English speakers think are two sounds are actually 8, which to me is a bigger problem.
Interestingly, this can be tied back to Kenstowicz's criticism of the single-level model, as if every sound is only expressed at one level, it probably psychologically encourages humans to believe that sounds which are clearly different are actually the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment