1.4 Main trends in the phoneme theory

1.4.1 Phonological schools

As it has been already mentioned the term” phoneme” appeared in the linguistic literature of the 19th century in the works of the French linguist F. de Saussure. According to him a phoneme is defined as a total sum of acoustic impressions and articulatory movements. The linguistic aspect is lacking in this definition. He ignores the sense differentiating function of the phoneme (his phisiologysm) and draws a line between language and speech, considering it as a system of signs, expressing ideas. His conceptions greatly influenced a great number of linguists and schools.

The phoneme theory came into being in Russia. Its originator was Prof. B. de Courtenay, the founder of the Kazan linguistic school. His work on the phoneme theory may be roughly subdivided into two periods.

Firstly, he considered a phoneme to be a component of a morpheme. He stated that one and the same morpheme was always represented by the same combination of sounds. He centered his attention mainly on the phenomenon of phonetic and historical alternations.

Secondly, he abandoned this conception in the 90th of the XIX century and began to search for a unit not bound by the limits of a morpheme. He defined a phoneme as an idea of a sound which appears in the mind of a speaker before the sound is uttered. A speech sound is an invention of the scientists. What really exists is the perception of a sound, the complex perception of the articulatory movements, muscular sensation and acoustic impressions.

This complex perception is a phoneme. This theory was developed by Prof.Shcherba, Krushevsky and by other Russian and foreign linguists. According to Shcherba sounds must be studied not only from the acoustic points of view, but as sounds capable of distinguishing one word of a language from other words of the same language. They fulfill a communicative function in speech. According to Shcherba, a phoneme is realized in speech in concrete sound combinations, which he calls allophones. The most typical, which may be pronounced in isolation, represent a speech element, opposed to other sounds. It is “tipichniy ottenok” [24].

The number of phonemes in a given language is defined by the principal members. In English there are 44 phonemes, in Russian – 36. Phonemic variants are very important, because they may develop into new phonemes or they may stop functioning the theory of the phoneme was then further developed by Shcherba’s disciples. A phoneme is understood as a historical category. It functions in a language at a certain stage of its development. It may be characterized as a unit of different aspects: its material and objective aspects. It really exists in a language. It is a concrete sound, characterized by definite formation and definite acoustic qualities. It exists independently in the speech of all the members of the community; it does not depend on the will of an individual, it is obligatory for all, as it is a product of the historical development of a given collective body.

Thus, it is a social phenomenon. The phoneme has two main functions:

a) to serve as a material integument of words and morphemes;

b) to differentiate the meaning of words, their grammatical forms and morphemes.

The phoneme is the result of generalization. It is a dialectical unit of the general and the particular. It is realized in speech in concrete sound combinations as allophones, being at the same time something typical and general when opposed to other phonemes in speech.

The theory of the phoneme is being developed into two main directions in our country: the Moscow linguistic school, the Leningrad linguistic school. There are many different linguistic schools of the phoneme abroad: the Prague phonological school, the London phonological school, the American phonological school and the Copenhagen phonological school.

The phoneme theory was first formulated at the end of the 19^th century. Its founder was Prof. I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay. Though his theory lacks consistency and there are some drawbacks in it is initiated the development of the phoneme theory in Russia as well as abroad. The opinions on the nature of the phoneme and the definition of the phoneme differ among scientists in our country and abroad.

The conceptions of the phoneme nowadays are numerous and varied. Nevertheless, they may be grouped and classified because some phonological conceptions have a number of features in common.

The various phonological schools chiefly differ in their solution to the two main problems of phonology:

1) the definition of the inventory of the phonemes of a given language and

2) the definition of the phonemic status of speech sounds in unstressed positions.

The phoneme theory in the Russia is developing in two directions. Hence, two phonological schools are distinguished here: the Moscow School and the Leningrad School.

To the Moscow School belong R.I. Avanessov, A.A. Reformatsky, P.S. Kuznetsov, N.F. Yakovlev, V.N. Sidorov and their supporters. They have developed Baudouin’s morphological conception of the early period. They investigate the phoneme mostly on the basis of the Russian language.

To the Leningrad School belong L.V. Shcherba and his followers (L.R. Zinder, O.I. Dikushina, M.I. Matusevitch, V.A. Vassilyev, G.P. Torsuyev and others). They investigate the problem on the basis of foreign languages.

Prof. L.V. Shcherba has adopted and developed I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay’s psychological conception of the late period. Continuing the work of his teacher L.V. Shcherba has created a truly materialistic phoneme theory and was the first to advance the idea of the distinctive function of the phoneme.

The representatives of the Moscow phonological school consider that the same speech sound may belong to different phonemes. For instance, the following pairs of words are pronounced identically:

лук – луг сидеть – седеть

рос – роз серп - серб

рот – род пять – пядь

кос – коз рок - рог

бок – бог бачок - бочок

вот – вод предать – придать

(The voiced consonants in final position are devoiced; the vowels in unstressed position are reduced.)

According to the Moscow School the [к] sound of the word “лук” is an allophone of the [к] phoneme, whereas the [к] sound in the word “луг” is an allophone of the [г] phoneme. Consequently, the [Λ] sound of the word “бачок” is an allophone of the [a] phoneme, but the [Λ] sound of the word “бочок” is an allophone of the [o] phoneme.

According to the Moscow School the neutral vowel sound in “progressive” [prә’gresiv] belongs to the English [ou] phoneme because [ou] occurs in a stressed position in “progress” [’prougres]. The neutral vowel sound in “activity” [әk’tiviti] belongs to the English [әe]phoneme because [әe] occurs in a stressed position in “act” [әekt]. The neutral vowel sound in “gooseberry” [guzbәri/ belongs to the /e/ phoneme, because /e/ occurs in a stressed position in “berry” [beri]. Consequently, the [z] sound in the word “gooseberry” [guzbәri] belongs to the [s] phoneme, because [s] is used in a strong position in “goose” [gu:s]. But the [s] sound in the word “newspaper” [’nju:speipә] belongs to the [z] phoneme because [z] is used in a strong position in “news” [nju:z].

The representatives of the Leningrad phonological school consider that the [к] sound of the words “лук” and “луг” are allophones of the [к] phoneme. The neutral sounds of the words “бочок” and “бачок” are allophones of the neutral vowel phoneme [Λ].

According to the Leningrad School the neutral vowel sounds in the words “progressive” [’prougresiv],“activity” [әk’tiviti], “gooseberry” [guzbәri], etc. belong to the neutral phoneme [ә]. Consequently, the [s] sounds in the words “goose” [gu:s] and “newspaper” [’nju:speipә] belong to the [s] phoneme, whereas the [z] sounds in the words “gooseberry” [guzbәri] and “news” [nju:z] belong to the /z/ phoneme.

The Leningrad School analyses and investigates sounds as real speech units, which is of great practical value in the process of teaching a foreign language to students.

There is a third phonological school which is known as the Prague Linguistic Circle. To this school belong N.S. Trubetzkoy, R. Jacobson, H. Martinet and others. The originator of it was N.S. Trubetzkoy. He became acquainted with Baudouin’s phoneme theory when he was studying at Moscow University. He admits that his own theory is a development of Baudouin de Courtenay and Shcherba’s phnoneme systems.

One of the main points of his theory is that of archiphonemes. According to N.S. Trubetzkoy the archiphoneme is a combination of distinctive features common to two phonemes. For instance, the speech sounds [к] and [г] (in the words “лук” and “луг” and «кот», «год») differ only by the work of the vocal cords but possess the following identical features: (1) plosive, (2) backlingual. These two common features are called relevant and they constitute the archiphoneme to which both [к] and [г] belong. It is neither voiced nor voiceless and is designated by the capital letter [К]. According to N.S. Trubetzkoy, a speech sound is a combination of all the features, both relevant and irrelevant, while the archiphoneme is a combination of only relevant features [25].

The London phonological school is represented by Prof. D. Jones of London University. In his monograph “The phoneme: its Nature and Use” he says that the phoneme theory was first introduced to him in 1911 by L.V. Shcherba of Leningrad. D. Jones’ own definition of the phoneme is a follows: “… a phoneme is a family of sounds in a given language which are related in character and are used in such a way that no one member ever occurs in the same phonetic context as any other member” [26].

In this and other definitions of the phoneme he does not mention the distinctive function of the phoneme but he tells about it in his later works.

In his work “the Phoneme: its Nature and Use” D. Jones develops the so-called “atomistic” conception of the phoneme. According to it he breaks up the phonemes into atoms which are different features of the phonemes, such as quality, length, tone, etc. Such distinctive features exist independently from each other. Jones’ atomistic theory is criticized because one distinctive feature cannot exist apart from all the others. For example, length by itself is an abstraction, while a long name is a reality [26].

The American phonological school is headed by Leonard Bloomfield and Edward Sapir. Here also belong W. F. Twaddel, Ch. F. Hockett and others.

Bloomfield’s definition of the phoneme runs as follows: “…a minimum unit of distinctive sound-features…” [27].

W.F. Twaddel defines it as “an abstractional fiction”. The representatives of the American phonological school tend more and more to develop an abstractional view of the phoneme [27]. Ch. F. Hockett says that language may be compared to any system of codes, such as the Morse code or the waving flags code [27]. The Copenhagen Trend is known as structuralism. Their treatment of the phoneme is mathematical. They consider the phoneme in mathematical ratios and compare the language with a system of signs. Their approach is synchronical as well.