tailieunhanh - Báo cáo khoa học: "Computer Backup for Field Work in Phonology"

In the study of a previously unrecorded language, a taxonomy of the sound system is the most useful starting point for developing the phonological component of a grammar. If the linguist makes at least tentative assumptions about segmentation and fixes the limits of supposedly relevant contexts, a computer can approximate this taxonomy. | Mechanical Translation and Computational Linguistics nos. 1 and 2 March and June 1968 Computer Backup for Field Work in Phonology by Joseph E. Grimes John R. Alsop and Alan Wares Summer Institute of Linguistics In the study of a previously unrecorded language a taxonomy of the sound system is the most useful starting point for developing the phonological component of a grammar. If the linguist makes at least tentative assumptions about segmentation and fixes the limits of supposedly relevant contexts a computer can approximate this taxonomy. A program by Alsop reduces a concordance of phonetic segments in their contexts to a series of taxonomic statements about phoneme distribution by applying Bloch s criteria for contrast within limited contexts. When applied to data on Paipai a Yuman language of the Colorado delta collected by Wares on a survey trip the program found contrast between segments Wares had identified as allophones in two parallel consonantal series indicating a distinction of presumably low functional load with morphophonemic implications. There was a time when phonological analysis was thought of primarily as a data-processing operation to be performed on strings of symbols in a phonetic transcription. The symbols were classified with reference to their environments and the resulting taxonomy was an end in itself. One of the reasons this approach foundered was that no linguist is a sufficiently good phonetician to make it work consistently. The strings of phonetic symbols have to be completely correct. On the other hand evidence from instrumental phonetics and theoretical backing from generative grammar suggest that even a good phonetic transcription will not necessarily guarantee a complete phonological analysis. There is also plenty of field experience that indicates that a self-correcting approach to field work can give the desired analysis readily even though one starts with only reasonable phonetic ability. The first author explains .