Phonemic Overlapping

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Thu, HE FIRST STEP in the phonemic analysis of a language or dialect is to group the infinitely varied sounds which make up the spoken utterances of the speech community into a limited number of classes called phonemes. The principles governing this classification do not concern us here;' but it is obvious that each phoneme, defined as a class, will include as many actual and objectively different speech sounds as there are utterances containing a member of the class.We know that the sounds comprising a single phoneme-the allophones, to give them a convenient name-sometimes differ strikingly among themselves. Most writers on the subject have dwelt on this fact, and all readers are familiar with the stock examples offered as illustrations: the different varieties of [k] in keep cool, of [1] in leaf and feel, or of the velar spirant in German ich and ach.2 To offset this diversity among theallophones, some writers postulate a basic resemblance which unifies the entire class, by defining the phoneme, like Daniel Jones,3 as a 'family' of sounds clustering around a norm or, like Bloomfield,4 as a constant feature in the sound waves.But though writers are agreed that allophones of the same phoneme are often very different phonetically, they appear to be uniformly silent on another aspect of the phonemic interrelation of sounds. I do not know of any published work that has even posed the question-important as it is both in practice and in theory-whether phonemes may intersect: whether a given sound, that is, may belong to two or more different phonemes in the same dialect. If the question has ever occurred to writers on phonemic theory, they appear to have treated their answer to it,

Formal and empirical issues in phonological typology

“…But if we want the derivation from morphophonemics to phonetics to pass through a phonemic level, we must split raising into a morphophonemic ruleē Ñī (solid arrow in 7) and an allophonic ruleō Ñū (dashed arrow), although they are obviously the same process. A formally identical English case was noted by Bloch (1941).…”

Context-dependent categorical perception in a songbird

“…Instead, both discrimination and labeling tests reveal only two perceptual categories, with the perceptual boundary between categories depending on the position of the note in a syllable. A likely interpretation of our results is that the trimodal distribution of produced notes we examined reflects two overlapping perceptual categories, similar to the phenomenon of phonemic overlapping in speech (14,15). Short and intermediate notes belong to one category that occurs in the initial position of a syllable, whereas intermediate and long notes belong to the second category, which occurs in the final position.…”

From Linguistics to Musicology. Notes on Structuralism Musical Generativism, Cognitive Science, and Philosophy

“…(my italics). Alternatively, in Bloch's (1941) formulation of Bloomield's position, the phoneme deines the "constant feature of the soundwave" or "the central member of a class" of sound waves around which the allophones form a statistical "cluster". (Bloch, 1941, p. 93).…”