A contrastive analysis of consonants of English and Turkish languages

For [?] the friction is strong, stronger than for [?], but less noisy than for [s]. For [?] the friction is weak.

[s] or [?] is a fortis, voiceless, post-alveolar fricative, as in конецформыначалоформыsarap wine, конецформыначалоформыsas?rmak to be surprised, confused, seffaf transparent, clear, sehir city. It is spelt <s> before <u> as in su that (which is almost within my reach) sunlar, those, suphe doubt; <s> before <i> as in siir poem sair, poet. This letter is added in the Turkish alphabet.

[?] <th> is a lenis dental fricative in English. It is fully voiced in word medial positions, as in breathing, father, gather, and partially or completely devoiced in word-initial and final positions, as in the, this, with.

[?] <th> is a fortis, voiceless, dental fricative, as in thought, author, earth.

Constrictive fricative consonants comprise four pairs [f, v; ?; ?, s, z; ? ?] and [h].

They are constrictive because the air passage is constricted and an incomplete obstruction is formed; they are fricative, because the air passes through the narrowing with audible friction Hooper, Joan Bybee. 1976. An Introduction to Natural Generative Phonology.. All the fricatives except [? ?] are unicentral. [? ?] are bicentral, because they have two places of articulation or two foci, the second being produced by the front part of the tongue raised towards the hard palate thus forming a front secondary focus.

In the production of fricative consonants the narrowing at the place of articulation is flat. Only when [s, z] are produced it is round.

[?, ?] are fore-lingual, apical, interdental, articulated with the tip of the tongue projected between the upper and the lower teeth; [s, z; ?, ?] are forelingual, apical alveolar, produced with the tip of the tongue against the teeth ridge; [h] is glottal, made in the glottis.

[f, ?, s, ? h] are strong (fortis); [v, ?, z, ?] are weak (lenis).

Voicing, [v, ?, z, ?] are fully voiced in word initial position before a vowel as in veal these, zone, giraffe, or in an intervocalic position as in cover, father, bosom.

In word final position they are partly devoiced as in love |lav], with [wid], rose [nuzj.

[f, ?, s, ? h] are voiceless, the vocal cords are apart and do not vibrate.

Fricative consonants are oral, the soft palate is raised and the air escapes through the mouth.

[z] or [?] <s z g x [gz] > is a lenis post-alveolar fricative, as in vision, measure, seizure, prestige, luxurious. It is fully voiced word-medially, as in pleasure,, usual, decision, and may-be partially or completely devoiced word-finally (word-initially it is found only in a few weakly integrated French loanwords, such as jabot, gigue).

[?] <ng n> is a dorsal nasal sonorant, as in sing, singer, sink, lynx, uncle, tongue.

[?] is occlusive, nasal, backlingual, velar.

Articulation. 1. The back part of the tongue is pressed to the soft palate.

The soft palate is lowered and the air goes through the nose.

The vocal cords vibrate.

Recommendations. 1.Open the mouth wide, raise the back of the tongue to the soft palate so that you can feel the firm contact of them. Push the air through the nose. The tip of the tongue is low in the mouth. Be sure to keep this mouth position. At the end of the sound let it die away into silence with no suggestion of [k] or [g].

[w] <w wh qu [kw] u> is a labial dorsal' sonorant, as in we, which, quick, language; note also one, once, choir, suit with [w].

[w] is constrictive, medial, bilabial, bicentral. In Turkish instead of [w] the phoneme [v] is used.

Articulation. 1. The lips are firmly rounded and slightly protruded forming an incomplete obstruction.

2. The soft palate is raised and the air goes to the mouth.

The back part of the tongue is raised towards the soft pal ate forming the secondary focus.

The sides of the tongue are raised and the air goes along the central part of the tongue.

The vocal cords vibrate.

Recommendations.

1. Keep the lips well rounded and even slightly protruded forming a round narrowing for the air stream.

2. Push the air through the mouth.

The Turkish alphabet has no Q, W or X. Instead, these are transliterated into Turkish as K, V, and KS, respectively.

[c]is a fortis, voiceless, alveolar fricative, as in cagdas modern, contemporary, cal?smak to work. This letter is added in the Turkish alphabet and that is why does not exist in English.

Summary

It has been hypothesized that sounds which are less perceptible are more likely to be altered than more salient sounds, the rationale being that the loss of information resulting from a change in a sound which is difficult to perceive is not as great as the loss resulting from a change in a more salient sound.

There are 24 consonants in the English language. The Turkish language has 20 consonant phonemes. There are 13 consonants that are the same in both languages. Among them are [b], [c], [d], [f], [k], [l], [m], [n], [p], [r], [t], [v] and [z].

There are 3 consonants which do not exist in the Turkish language. They are [q], [w] and [x]. Instead, these are transliterated into Turkish as [k] [v], and [ks], respectively.

Also there 3 consonants which are added in the Turkish alphabet. They are [c], [g], [s].

Conclusion

Having analyzed the consonant sounds and having found some similarities and differences between consonant sounds of English and Turkish language we can come to the following conclusions:

1) [p, b] are forelingual, bilabial, apical alveolar stops [t, d], backlingual, velar [k, g] produced with the back part of the tongue against the soft palate.

[p, t, k] are strong or fortis as they are pronounced with more muscular energy and a stronger breath effort than [b, d, g] which are weak or lenis.

[p, b] are occlusive, plosive, bilabial; [p] is strong and voiceless, [b] is weak and voiced, in final position it is partly devoiced.

[t?] <ch tch t> is a fortis, voiceless, palato-alveolar affricate

[c] is a fortis, voiceless, alveolar fricative

[f, v] are constrictive fricative, labio-dental; [f] is strong and voiceless; [v] is weak and voiced, in the final position it is partly devoiced.

[?, ?] are fore-lingual, apical, interdental, articulated with the tip of the tongue projected between the upper and the lower teeth; [s, z; ?, ?] are forelingual, apical alveolar, produced with the tip of the tongue against the teeth ridge; [h] is glottal, made in the glottis.

[t, d] are occlusive, plosive, forelingual, apical, alveolar; [t] is strong and voiceless, [d] is weak and voiced, in final position it is partly devoiced.

[z] is a lenis alveolar fricative, as in zahmet trouble, difficulty, zan guess, supposition. It is fully voiced in word-medial positions, as in guzel beautiful,taze fresh, and partially or completely devoiced in word-initial and final positions, as in basit simple. [s, z] are constrictive fricative, forelingual, apical alveolar, [s] is strong and voiceless, [z] is weak and voiced, in final position it is partially devoiced.

2) There are only two affricates in English: [?, ?]. In Turkish we have [?, ?]. They are occlusive-constrictives because a complete obstruction to the stream of air is formed and it is released slowly, with friction, [?, ?] are bicentral. They have two narrowings, both flat, the second focus being between the front part of the tongue and the hard palate (front secondary focus).

[?, ?] are palato-alveolar, forelingual apical.

[?] is strong (fortis), [?] is weak (lenis).

[?] is fully voiced in word initial position before a vowel or in intervocalic position, eg Jack, pigeon. In word final position it is partly devoiced [?], eg George, [tf] is voiceless in all positions.

[?, ?] are occlusive-constrictive, forelingual, apical, palato-alveolar, bicentral; [tf] is strong and voiceless, [?] is weak and voiced. In word final position it is partially devoiced.

[g] - Not exactly a consonant, it rather distinguishes properties of the vowel it follows.

When following a member of the 'light' vowels (e, i, u) it becomes a gliding 'i' sound. This letter does not exist in the English alphabet.

[h] is constrictive fricative, glottal, voiceless. As [h] occurs only in рrе-vocalic positions it is the sound of breath passing between the vocal cords and out of the mouth which is already held really for the following vowel: before [i:j the mouth is in position fur [i:], before [u:] it is ready for [u:] and so on;

[?] <sh ch sch s ss t sc с х [ks]> is a fortis, voiceless, post-alveolar fricative, as in ship, machine, schedule, sure, assure, mansion, session, Russian, nation, conscience, special, ocean, luxury. It is spelt <s ss> before <u>, <s ss sc c> before <i>, and <c> before <e>. Therefore textbooks usually distinguish <ti si sci ci ce> as graphs for [s].

[?, ?] are constrictive fricative, forelingual, apical, palate-alveolar, bicentral; [?] is strong and voiceless, [?] is weak and voiced, in final position it is partially devoiced.

[?, ?] are fore-lingual, apical, interdental, articulated with the tip of the tongue projected between the upper and the lower teeth; [s, z; ?, ?] are forelingual, apical alveolar, produced with the tip of the tongue against the teeth ridge; [h] is glottal, made in the glottis.

[f, ?, s, ? h] are strong (fortis); [v, ?, z, ?] are weak (lenis).

Bibliography

1. Berg T. (1989). On the internal structure of polysyllabic monomorphemic words: the case for superrimes. Studia linguistica 43: 5-32.

2. Bolinger Dwight L.1986. Intonation and Its Parts. Melody in Spoken English. Stanford:Stanford University Press.

3. Cambridge survey, vol. 2: Linguistic theory: extensions and implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 220-49.

4. Chitoran, Dumitru. 1978. English Phonetics and Phonology. Bucuresti: Editura Didactica si Pedagogica.

5. Clark, John and Collin Yallop. 1995. An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology. Second edition. Oxford: Blackwell.

6. Clements G.N. & S.J. Keyser (1983). CV phonology: a generative theory of the syllable.(Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 9.) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

7. Clements G.N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2: 225-52.

8. Collins, W. (1979). The works of William Collins, ed. R. Wendorf and C. Ryskamp. Oxford:

9. Contributions to generative phonology. Austin: University of Texas Press. 171-200.

10. Crystal David. 1985. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 2nd edition, updated and enlarged. Oxford: Blackwell.

11. Danielsson B. (1955, 1963). John Hart's works on English orthography and pronunciation [1551, 1569, 1570]. (Stockholm Studies in English 5, 11.) 2 vols. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.

12. Deligiorgis, Ioanna. 2001. Glides and Syllables. Bucuresti: Editura Cartea Romaneasca.

13. Dobson E.J. (1955). Review of K?okeritz (1953). The Review of English Studies [new series]

14. Dobson E.J. (1968). English pronunciation 1500-1700. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

15. Fischer-Jorgensen, Eli. 1975. Trends in Phonological Theory. A Historical Introduction.

16. Frawley, W. (1984). A note on the phonology of slant rhyme. Language and Style 17: 44-7.

17. Fudge E. (1987). Branching structure within the syllable. Journal of Linguistics 23: 359-77.

18. Goldsmith J.A. (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.

19. Halle Morris. 1990. “Respecting metrical structure”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8:149-176.

20. Harris Zellig S. 1951. Structural linguistics. Sixth Impression 1963. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.

21. Hawkins, Peter. Introducing Phonology. 1984. London: Routledge.

22. Hayes B. (1988). Metrics and phonological theory. In Newmeyer, F.J. (ed.), Linguistics: the

23. Heffner R.M.S. General Phonetics. 1964. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.

24. Hooper Joan Bybee. 1976. An Introduction to Natural Generative Phonology. New York: Academic Press.

25. Hyman, Larry M.1975. Phonology: Theory and Analysis, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

26. Jakobson R. & L. Waugh (1979). The sound shape of language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

27. Jakobson R. (1971). Selected writings, vol. 2: Word and language. The Hague: Mouton.

28. Jespersen O. (1946). A modern English grammar on historical principles. 7 vols. (Part I: Sounds and spellings [1909]). London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.

29. Kiparsky P. (1985). Some consequences of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2:

30. Kiparsky, P. (1987). On theory and interpretation. In Fabb, N., D. Attridge, A. Durant & C. MacCabe (eds.), The linguistics of writing: arguments between language and literature. New York: Methuen Inc. 185-98.

31. Lass R. (1984). Phonology: an introduction to basic concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

32. Malone J.L. (1982). Generative phonology and Turkish rhyme. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 550-3.

33. Malone J.L. (1988b). Underspecification theory and Turkish rhyme. Phonology 5: 293-7.

34. Manaster Ramer, A. (1994). Stefan George and phonological theory. Phonology 11: 317-23.

35. Mohanan K.P. (1986). The theory of lexical phonology. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

36. Ohala J.J. (1986). Consumer's guide to evidence in phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3: 3-26.

37. R.T. Oehrle (eds.), Language sound structure: studies in phonology presented to Morris Halle by his teacher and students. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 107-36.

38. Selkirk E. (1984). On the major class features and syllable theory. In Aronoff, M. &

39. International Phonetic Association (1999). "Turkish", Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 155.

40. Ishjatms, N. (1996), "Nomads In Eastern Central Asia", History of civilizations of Central Asia, vol. 2, UNESCO Publishing.

41. Katzner, Kenneth (March 2002). Languages of the World, Third Edition. Routledge, an imprint of Taylor & Francis Books Ltd.

42. Lewis, Geoffrey (1953). Teach Yourself Turkish. English Universities Press. (2nd edition 1989)

43. Lewis, Geoffrey (2001). Turkish Grammar. Oxford University Press.

44. Lewis, Geoffrey (2002). The Turkish Language Reform: A Catastrophic Success. Oxford University Press. Ozsoy, A. Sumru; Taylan, Eser E. (eds.) (2000). Turkce'nin ag?zlar? cal?stay? bildirileri (Workshop on the dialects of Turkish). Bogazici Universitesi Yay?nevi.

References

The Classification of English Consonants According to the Place of Articulation

Consonant phonemes of Standard English

Consonant phonemes of Standard Turkish

Размещено на Allbest.ru