CC BY
374TRADITIONAL THEORIES ON SYLLABLE
FORMATION AND DIVISION 1 "2 Babadjanova Sh. , Saydjanova K.
1Babadjanova Shahnoza - Teacher;
2Saydjanova Kamila - Teacher, FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT,
TASHKENT MEDICAL ACADEMY, TASHKENT, REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN
Abstract: speech can be broken into minimal pronounceable units into which sounds show a tendency to cluster or group. These smallest phonetic groups are generally given the name of syllables. Being the smallest pronounceable units, syllables form morphemes, words and phrases. Each of these units is characterized by a certain syllabic structure. Thus a meaningful language unit phonetically may be considered from the point of view of syllable formation and syllable division. Keywords: syllable, articulatory, acoustic, auditory and functional levels, expiratory theory.
The syllable is a complicated phenomenon and like a phoneme it can be studied on four levels - articulatory, acoustic, auditory and functional. The complexity of the phenomenon gave rise to many theories.
We could start with the so-called expiratory (chest pulse or pressure) theory. This theory is based on the assumption that expiration in speech is a pulsating process and each syllable should correspond to a single expiration. So the number of syllables in an utterance is determined by the number of expirations made in the production of the utterance. This theory was strongly criticized by Russian and foreign linguists. Trask [4], for example, wrote that in a phrase a number of words and consequently a number of syllables can be pronounced with a single expiration. This fact makes the validity of the theory doubtful.
Another theory of syllable put forward by O. Jespersen is generally called the sonority theory. Each sound is characterized by a certain degree of sonority which is understood us acoustic
property of a sound that determines its perceptibility. According to this sound property a ranking of speech sounds could be established [1]: <the least sonorous> voiceless plosives voiced fricatives —voiced plosives — voiced fricatives — sonorants — close vowels - open vowels <the most sonorous>. In the word plant for example we may use the following wave of sonority: [pla:nt]. The most serious drawback of this theory is that it fails to explain the actual mechanism of syllable formation and syllable division. Besides, the concept of sonority is not very clearly defined. Further experimental work aimed to description of the syllable resulted in lot of other theories. However, the question of articulatory mechanism of syllable is a still an open question in phonetics. We might suppose that this mechanism is similar in all languages and could be regarded as phonetic universal.
In Russian linguistics there has been adopted the traditional theory of syllable. It is called the theory of muscular tension. In most languages there is the syllabic phoneme in the centre of the syllable which is usually a vowel phoneme or, in some languages, a sonorant. The phonemes preceding or following the syllabic peak are called marginal. The tense of articulation increases within the range of prevocalic consonants and then decreases within the range of postvocalic consonants.
The experiments showed that the arc of loudness of perception level is formed due to variations of the volume pharyngeal passage which is modified by contractions of its walls [2]. The narrowing of the passage and the increase in muscular tension which results from it reinforce the actual loudness of a vowel thus forming the peak of the syllabic. So the syllable is the arc of loudness which correlates with the arc of articulatory effort on the speed production level since variations in loudness are due to the work of all speech mechanisms.
It is perfectly obvious that no phonetician has succeeded so far in giving an adequate explanation of what the syllable is. The difficulties seem to arise from the various possibilities of approach to the unit. There exist two points of view [3]:
1. Some linguists consider the syllable to be a purely articulatory unit which lacks any functional value. This point of
view is defended on the ground that the boundaries of syllables do not always coincide with those of morphemes.
2. However the majority of linguists treat the syllable as the smallest pronounceable unit which can reveal some linguistic function.
Trying to define the syllable from articulatory point of view we may talk about universals. When we mean the functional aspect of the syllable it should be defined with the reference to the structure of one particular language.
The definition of the syllable from the functional point of view tends to single out the following features of the syllable [4]:
a) a syllable is a chain of phonemes of varying length;
b) a syllable is constructed on the basis of contrast of its constituents (which is usually of vowel - consonant type);
c) the nucleus of a syllable is a vowel, the presence of consonants is optional; there are no languages in which vowels are not used as syllable nuclei, however, there are languages in which this function is performed by consonants;
d) the distribution of phonemes in the syllabic structure follows by the rules which are specific enough for a particular language.
References
1. Jones Charles, 1997. The Edinburgh History of the Scots Language, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
2. Ladefoged Peter, 1993. A Course in Phonetics (3rd edn). New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovitch.
3. Pinker Steven, 1994. The Language Instinct, London: Penguin.
4. Trask R.L., 1996. Historical Linguistics. London: Arnold.
