ebook img

Principles of English spelling formation PDF

384 Pages·2017·4.49 MB·English
by  
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Principles of English spelling formation

Principles of English spelling formation Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of a Doctoral degree in Linguistics Trinity College Dublin 31 July, 2017 Des Ryan 11265114 F P σ σ s w Rh Rh On Nu Co On Nu Co / s p e l ɪ ŋ / ↕ ↕ ↕ ↕ ↕ < s p e l l i ng > On Nu Co On Nu Co Rh Rh σs σw F G Declaration I declare that this thesis has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at this or any other university and it is entirely my own work. I agree to deposit this thesis in the University’s open access institutional repository or allow the library to do so on my behalf, subject to Irish Copyright Legislation and Trinity College Library conditions of use and acknowledgement. ________________________________ Abstract Studies of English spelling have primarily focussed on correspondences between spelling and sound among core, standard spellings. Segmental-level correspondences have been examined in detail (Venezky 1970, Cummings 1988, Carney 1994, Rollings 2004), while recent work shows that English spellings also encode supra-segmental information (Evertz and Primus 2013, Evertz 2014). An outstanding problem is the degree to which morphemic spelling is applied across the system (c.f. Venezky 1970: 120; Carney 1994: 18). Berg et al. (2014) observe that the spelling of affixes is more stable than the spelling of bases, hence <profane> alternates with <profanity>, not *<profanety> or *<profaneity>. Yet none of these theories address in detail why certain spellings are chosen over others. This thesis examines how English spellings are formed, particularly where compromises are made in the representation of both morphological and phonological information. The primary focus is on the spelling of inflections, but also derivations, names and non-standard spellings. The study also examines how we know if a spelling is a good phonographic match for a word. Five principles of spelling formation are proposed. 1. Any-Spelling principle: All words must have some spelling. 2. Distinctiveness principle (DSTNCT): Different words should have different spellings. 3. Identity Preservation principle (IdP): Related words should have related spellings. Hence complex words take their spelling from the spellings of their subcomponents. 4. Phonographic Matching principle (PhM): A word’s spelling should represent its phonological form. 5. Invariance principle (INVRNC): Established spellings cannot be changed. The principles are manifested differently according to the category of word being spelt. Compound words adhere strongly to IdP. Regular inflections follow IdP by default, <jump, jumped, jumping>, but may involve PhM amendments, hence <dope, doped, doping> not <dope, *dopeed, *dopeing>. Affixed derivatives show similar patterns, <mode, modal>, regardless of stress- shifting, <origin, original>, while etymological influences complicate the picture, <possible, probable>. DSTNCT sometimes differentiates lexical homophones. <flour>, <flower>, but it is common among certain names, <Webb>, <Blu-Tac>, <OutKast>. Non-standard spellings violate INVRNC by definition, and the conditions for spelling variation arise in part due to phonological changes. Abbreviations frequently obey IdP, e.g. <a.k.a.>, but clippings may not, <telly>, <fridge>. Etymological spelling is deemed to be an example of IdP, either among unchanged base forms, <macchiato>, or adapted polymorphemic words, <philosophy>. This re-assessment helps to solve the long-standing problem of how to integrate etymological spelling into synchronic theories of spelling. A flexible unit of spelling, the complex pleremic unit, is identified and it accounts for IdP’s various manifestations. Native, monomorphemic base forms are not examined in detail as the priority is how new and complex words are spelt. This method is taken from word-formation studies (Marchand 1969, Bauer 1983, Plag 2003). The initial model of spelling formation assumes that polymorphemic words obey IdP by default, but that PhM amendments can be made, where necessary, if possible. The second iteration builds on Evertz’s (2014) graphematic hierarchy to show how unsatisfactory spellings can be identified by comparing spelling and phonology at all hierarchical levels, including phonemes, syllables, and feet. The third iteration shows how Optimality Theory can be used to explain how one imperfect spelling, e.g. <doped>, can be chosen over an even less perfect spelling, *<dopeed>. Two further applications arise from the model: the pronunciation of many polysyllabic words can be predicted from the spelling with greater accuracy; and a path is provided by which spelling pronunciation can be predicted from potential ambiguities in decoding. *** Acknowledgements It has been a privilege to spend a sizeable chunk of my life engaged in the research that I wanted to do, and this has been dependent on the faith of several people and the financial backing of others. Nevertheless, doctoral studies are notoriously isolating and repetitive, like cycling around the same island for several years, so every scrap of intellectual and personal help has been very welcome. Breffni O’Rourke, my very pleasant supervisor, believed in me and my project from the beginning and has helped me for many years, through countless conversations and insightful, detailed comments on my work. Vivian Cook has been my long-term co-editor on a complementary project, The Routledge Handbook of the English writing system, and I have learnt so much from his vast experience. He too put trust in me from a very early stage. Thanks also to the thirty-plus unpaid contributors who have given so much of their time to that project, and the growth in our understanding of the field. Heinz Giegerich was a great help during my two stints working with him in Edinburgh, as were Patrick Honeybone, Warren Maguire and Meg Laing. Thanks to the many people who have organised conferences or let me give guest lectures; every talk has helped: Beatrice Primus, Martin Evertz, Frank Kirchhoff, Martin Neef, Anneke Neijt, Nanna Fuhrhop; Rhona Alcorn, George Walkden, David Denison. Communities of research wouldn’t exist without such efforts. Thanks to the people in the linguistics community in Trinity, especially Jenny O’Reilly, and the people in the Long Room Hub, where I was fortunate enough to have a desk for over four years. Shout outs to Fergus Robson, Tim Murtagh, Manus O’Dwyer, Guilherme Braga, Feng Wei, Deirdre Dunlevy, Peter Sheekey, Robin Fuller, Frank Leahy, Mary Stefanazzi, Sarah Barry, Sarah Dunne, and Caitríona Curtis. Thanks to people who have read and discussed my work in detail at various stages: Jeff Kallen and Heath Rose in Trinity; Jesper Kruse, Robin Fuller, and anonymous reviewers whose fresh criticisms taught me a lot; also to my two external examiners, Lynne Cahill and Mark Sebba, whose recommendations have forced me to dig deeper and get even more out of myself. Most of all, thanks to my sister, Maryanne, who has cast vigilant, doctoral eyes on many drafts of the text, at times when I needed it most. I am very fortunate to have a large family, most of whom are nearby, and all of whom are regularly on the phone. Thanks to my mam for being such an inspiration and so supportive, to my dad for his constant good humour and work ethic. Thanks to my five big sisters, Catherine, Barbara, Maryanne, Emer and Margaret, whose support grows and grows; to their respective husbands (Mick, Darren, Colm, Gerry and David), and their kids, some of whom are old enough now to take me Christmas shopping: Eoin, Emilie, Eleanor, Niall; Stephen, Laura; Juliette, Darragh, Oisin; Eli, Benjamin and Donnchadh. Thanks to the several people who I’ve lived with, especially Gabe Murphy, Brian Storan, Jack Olohan, Maria Costas, to all my friends in Dublin, especially Graham Kearns, Mob, Sean Flynn, Jasper O’Connor, Imogen Rabone, Mono, Michael McCormack, Nick Leonard, Jamie Blake-Knox, and David White; in Edinburgh: James Maxwell- Penny and Bill Thompson. Thanks to Seán Farrell, Elske Rahill and Phoenix, Fintan and Brocc for putting me up for the summer of 2013. RIP Michel. A lot more people have left Dublin in recent years but it’s good they are finally coming back. I have missed you all. Thanks to the uncountable number of people who have been interested in my work, especially since my early days writing a blog about spelling at a2dez.com, and to all the people who have even asked to read the thesis. That keeps me going. Thanks to the many great baristas working in Dublin’s growing coffee scene, in the old 3FE, Vice, Cup, Angel, Kaph, Two Pups and, latterly, in Sligo’s Sweat Beat. Thanks to the growing army of podcasters who have kept me entertained for years: Second Captains, Radiolab, The Comedian’s Comedian, An Irishman Abroad, Hardcore History. Huge thanks are due to the Irish Research Council, who gave me a full scholarship for three years, and to Dublin City Council who paid my fees in my first year, a grant that has sadly been abolished. Language teaching work has also been a big part of my life, so thanks to both my employers and to the endless flow of students who have taught me about the English language from a different perspective. Thanks also to all the medical people who have helped me in recent years. My knee surgeon Ray Moran, my physiotherapist and de facto counsellor, Andrew Watson. Recovering from a cruciate ligament injury was good mental preparation for doing a PhD. These things don’t fix themselves. A special thanks goes to the backroom teams in Trinity who do so much unseen work. To Kieran Lewis my occupational therapist, to Annemarie Naughton and Louise Hamilton at student counselling. To the library staff for all their help, to Helen Thornbury and other administrative staff. Thanks to Spiro Jamie for telling me about Irlen syndrome, to Alison Crowley for my diagnosis, and to Aislinn Ryan for helping me find my tint. My life is so much better with my coloured lenses. I hope we can all help more people. Light sensitivity is a subtle but profound problem which affects everything from your mood to your relationships to your ability to read and write. I would never have finished this project without my Irlen glasses. The greatest thanks goes to Sharifa, whose love, support and patience has been unending, and may our love last forever. Here’s to many fun times ahead, along with our newborn baby, Valentine Amon. *** Conventions and abbreviations car • The word car is under discussion <car> • The spelling of the word is under discussion. Illegal or incorrect spellings are preceded by an asterisk, hence *<kar>. Putative spellings have a question mark, ?<ka>. /kɑ:/, /kɑr/ • Phonemic forms. This particular word differs between British Received Pronunciation (transcribed here first) and General American (second). These accents are explained in more detail below. //kar// • A deeper ‘underlying form’. Only applicable in reference to certain theories (e.g. Chomsky and Halle 1968) or historical forms underlying different present-day accents. [kɑ:], [kɑr], [kær] • Phonetic forms. {car} • The morpheme ‘car’, as occurs in car, cars, car tax, carless, etc. <VC> • A sequence of letters involving a vowel letter <a e i o u> and then a consonant letter: e.g. <at, et, ip, ok, uv>. /VC/ • A phonological sequence involving a short vowel and then a consonant. Long vowels are marked with a colon. The words ‘vowel’ and ‘consonant’ only refer to sounds. Otherwise I talk about ‘vowel letters’ and ‘consonant letters’. On this important distinction, see Carney (1994: 9–11). <VC C > 1 2 • A vowel letter followed by a consonant letter, followed by another (usually different) consonant letter, e.g. <arp, err, irk, onk, unk>. # • Word-final or syllable-final. <VC#> means spellings that end in a vowel letter then a consonant letter (it, fit, fix, quickfix etc.). /VC#/ similarly means words that end in a vowel then a single consonant (e.g it, pit, pick, pitch, tripswitch). It doesn’t matter here how many letters are used to represent the sounds. § • Following Carney (1994), this symbol indicates the subsystem to which a spelling belongs, be it §Greek, modern §French, §Italian, etc. The term §Latinate covers the interlocking influence of Latin and older forms of French. §Basic is a native or default system, as many borrowed words show no obvious subsystem markers (e.g. table). By contrast, chlorophyll is §Greek and chaise longue is §French. A catch-all group is known as §Exotic (e.g. Iraq) and a defective group is called §Romance, and seldom used here. ≡ • Correspondence between spelling and sound: e.g. <c> ≡ /k/, or <cat> ≡ /kæt σ Syllable g Graphematic form On Syllable onset F Graphematic foot G Rh Syllable rhyme W Graphematic word G Nu Syllable nucleus ( ) Foot boundary Co Syllable coda . Syllable boundary p Phonological form ˈ Primary stress F Phonological foot ˌ Secondary stress P W Phonological word ? spelling candidate P

Description:
1a.1 Complications at the phonemic level . His approach is 'humanistic' and a rejection of algorithmic, formal linguistics. (ibid: xxvi). Instead of analysing were borrowed. This is why we have §Greek cirrhosis, §Italian arpeggio
See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.