Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-pn7tm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-15T12:27:30.245Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The phoneme revisited

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

Sanford A. Schane
Sanford A. Schane*
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The phoneme as a viable phonological unit for capturing relevant surface contrasts has been rejected within generative phonology. However, certain diachronic and synchronic effects can only be explained in terms of the phoneme. The historical phenomena of denasalization in French, depalatalization in Rumanian, delabialization in Romance, palatalization and labialization in Nupe, and palatalization in Japanese are due to surface contrast rather than to statable morphophonemic or phonetic processes. From these observations I conclude that the phoneme must be recognized as a phonological entity. Synchronically, a phonemic representation is not to be discovered by applying a set of procedures to a phonetic representation, nor does it exist as an autonomous level within a generative phonology; rather, it is to be characterized as a representation of relevant surface contrasts which is deducible from the function of the rules within a generative phonology. Thus the phoneme does in fact have a place in generative phonology without in any way changing the theoretical basis.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , September 1971 , pp. 503 - 521
Copyright
Copyright © 1971 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Augerot, James E. 1968. A study of Romanian morphophonology. Doctoral thesis, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Current issues in linguistic theory. The structure of language readings in the philosophy of language, ed. by Fodor, Jerry A. and Kats, Jerrold J. 50–118. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Cooper, Franklin S., et al. 1952. Some experiments on the perception of synthetic speech sounds. JASA 24.597–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1959. The sound pattern of Russian. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Harris, James W. 1969. Spanish phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1970. How concrete is phonology? Lg. 46.58–76.Google Scholar
Ishida, Reiko. 1961. Voiceless vowels in Japanese. Studies in descriptive and applied linguistics, Bulletin of the Summer Institute in Linguistics 1.81–90. Tokyo: International Christian University.Google Scholar
Johns, David A. 1969. Phonemics and generative phonology. Papers from the 5th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 374–81.Google Scholar
Kuroda, S.-Y. 1965. Generative grammatical studies in the Japanese language. Doctoral thesis, MIT.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1968. The phonological component of a grammar of Japanese. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Miller, Roy A. 1967. The Japanese language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nandris, Octave. 1963. Phonétique historique du roumain. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Pike, K. L. 1947. Phonemics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Pope, M. K. 1934. From Latin to modern French with especial consideration of Anglo-Norman: phonology and morphology. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M. 1968. Aspects of phonological theory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, Ioão. 1608. Arte da lingua de Iapam. Nagasakigakurin.Google Scholar
Schane, Sanford A. 1968. French phonology and morphology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schatz, Carol D. 1954. The role of context in the perception of stops. Lg. 30.47–56.Google Scholar
Smith, N. V. 1967. The phonology of Nupe. Journal of African Languages 6.53–69.Google Scholar
Stanley, Richard. 1967. The controversy over the phoneme. Unpublished.Google Scholar
Väänänen, Veikko. 1963. Introduction au latin vulgaire. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Wang, William S-Y. 1968. Vowel features, paired variables, and the English vowel shift. Lg. 44.695–708.Google Scholar
Wenck, Günther. 1966. The phonemics of Japanese: questions and attempts. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar