My college professor made me absolutely despise this stuff with the way he explained it, but you've explained it so well that I now enjoy these types of exercises :) Thank you!
Can’t thank you enough, when you explained that we only need to check the sounds in question for minimal pairs you helped me i’ve been searching for the answer for a whole a day !
Thank you for your useful videos . I studied Linguistics in my MA . I studied syntax and phonology. I wonder if you have explained the Optimality Theory and how is going these days among linguists?
Awesome video, I'm currently binge watching your channel. I only don't understand the biblical Hebrew part because there are two words (sefer and yafe) that fit both rules. Like, one rule says that before a vowel /p/ is realized as [p], which isn't true for sefer. Would it not make more sense to make it so /p/ -> [f] V_ and [p] elsewhere?
Thank you so much. I really did not think, at one point, that I could ever really understand this. Thank you for having made it this clear and easily digestible. I am very grateful to you for this amazing work. I watched all of your Phonetics and Phonology videos and I found them truly helpful, you helped me feel alot more confident in the way I approach this course. I hope angels bless your life with graceful ease and clarity for each and every student that you clarify and ease things for.
Thank you Professor. So the last one ( Biblical Hebrew) exercise's phonological process prove that the two allophones are actually different phonemes right?
No, that problem shows that the [p] (always occurs before vowels) and [f] (always occurs after vowels) represent allophones of the same phoneme (either /p/ or /f/, which is unclear based on this dataset because one sound doesn't really occur in more environments than the other).
Thanks for the excellent lesson. As to the Biblical Hebrew exercise, I understand how you distinguish between whether it precedes or follows a vowel. Is there sufficient evidence to allow you to choose one of them as the "elsewhere"?
Hi Andre. Not sure if this answers your question, but when performing phonological analysis, once you have determined the phonological environment for one allophone (e.g., that it appears before vowels), it is sufficient to say the other allophone appears elsewhere (of course, you could also explicitly state the phonological environment in which that other allophone appears).
Biblical Hebrew [sEfEr] matches both rules, right? So, is the order of the rules important? Then, if yes, the rules should be written the other way round: first the f-rule, then if noth matched, the p-rule. Or am I missing something about the convention? BTW, does this notation have a name?
I am certainly no expert in Biblical Hebrew, but given the dataset represented in this video, those are the rules. You are correct that sometimes the ordering of rules do matter in some problems, but no ordering is needed for this dataset. I'm not sure if the notation has a name--I'd be curious to know, myself!
Thank you for this amazing explanation. I just want to understand one more thing in the final practice exercise about The Biblical Hebrew; how can we determine the phoneme between [p] and [f]? Because as I know the phoneme is usually determined according to the phonological environment. Here we can clearly see that [p] occurs only in 2 phonological environments: initial position before a vowel, after a consonant and before a vowel. Whereas [f] occurs in 3 phonological environments: final position after a vowel, between a vowel and a consonant, and between 2 vowels. So why don't we say here that /f/ is the phoneme of the allophones [p] and [f]?
Hi Soukaina. The identity of the phoneme is usually determined based on the number of contexts in which the allophones appear, so the more places, the more likely that is the phoneme. As such, you would be right in proposing that /f/ would be the phoneme (that is realized as allophones [p] or [f]) because [f] appears in more contexts. Of course, it is only 1 more context (3) than [p] (2), so the evidence isn't overwhelming, but based on this dataset, you would be correct in proposing /f/ as the phoneme!
Hello professor Evan, thank you for your explanation . I have a question please: Why, in the last data exercise, the sound [ f ] is the allophone of the phoneme /p/( and not the opposite)? thank you
Hi Bella. If I understand you correctly, then the forms you would be looking at would not be minimal pairs. For example, [in English [wit] "wheat" and [wid] "weed" are minimal pairs because there is only one sound that is different between the two words but [wits] "wheats" and [widz] "weeds" are not minimal pairs because there are two sound differences. I hope that helps!
Thanks for the explanations. Please, for the last exercice, how can we determine the phoneme from the allophones. It is of course represented in the rule you ve provided. What is the shared feature between those vowels. Thank you
Hi Samia! Generally, the sound that is used in a wider range of environments is taken to be the phoneme (so this actually the opposite of what I suggested in the video, which was my error).
Great video .Thank you so much . but I have a question , My professor gave me a similar exam question to those in the video (complementary distribution) but she added a question to determine which phonological processes was it . how do we answer such a question after determining that they are allophones of the same phonemes . Thank you
In order to determine which phonological process is responsible for the presence of one allophone over another, you'll need to first isolate the environment in which the sound occurs. For example, in English when a word that is written with "n" precedes a "k" or "g", that "n" is often phonetically realized as [ŋ]. The reason for this is that [g] and [k] are both velar sounds, and that velar quality affects the quality of neighboring sounds (in this case the preceding sound). As such, the phonological process is assimilation, which means one sound becoming more like a neighboring sound. Again, that can only be determined by identifying a number of words in English with the sequence (in writing) "ng" or "nk" (as in "anger", "ankle", or "sing"). Be sure to look carefully at the context in which the allophone appears and a pattern may emerge!
Thank you, Sir for your brilliant input! I have a question with regards the last problem (Biblical Hebrew). How can we figure which phoneme is the original? In this case, it's /p/. Why not /f/?
Hello! Great observation! I really should have chosen /f/ as the phoneme because, typically, the sound that has the broader distribution should be taken as the phoneme (in this case [f] appears in more contexts than [p], so /p/ should be the phoneme). Sorry about that!
Thank you dear professor for that valuable content. I have a question please, I was taught that ( [ pʰ ], [ p̚ ], [ p ] ) are allophones of the same phoneme /p/, but in the video [p] and [ pʰ ] are presented as different phonemes, how ?
Hello! I doubt there are any colleges or universities where one could get a B.A. in Linguistics entirely online, and if they did exist, yeah, I probably wouldn't trust them!
Thanks sir ! But concerning the biblical Hebrew you didn't explain why /p/ is the basic sound , which is a phoneme from which the allophones [p] and [f] derive. I really need more clarification. Thanks in advance !
This is a good point, and to be honest, I don't know whether the phoneme is /p/ or /f/, because based on this data it is not clear which sound applies in more environments, which is often the criterion for assigning one sound as the "basic"/phonemic category. I didn't address this because I was more concerned with explaining which allophones occur in which environment.
I have found it more useful to abandon enunciation for emphatic expression. Originality, customization, similar alliteration, is derived from pulse. Allophone interpretation is more environmental than alluded to by the phonological environment's water resources. Similarities may be congruent with parchment determining the differential. However re-evaluation is futility.
Butterfly may be considered a compound because it is formed by combining two different words: "butter" and "fly"; however, for me the word "butterfly" is one morpheme because the meaning of "butter" + the meaning of "fly" doesn't yield the meaning of "butterfly".
Dear PROF.EVAN, Thank you so much for all this lessons. I have one question about the last exercice, I just want to know which pne is an elsewhere and prediclable ? Because As I see [p] sound accurs before a vowels and also [f] sound accurs after a vowel. Is there any mistake in choosing data or what? I am still confused Prof.EVAN! Reda,
Hi Reda. Sorry for the delay in my response, but, yes, I would actually consider [f] as the phoneme /f/ because it appears (based on this data) in more contexts than [p]. This was not really discussed in the video, my apologies--I was just considering /p/ the phoneme for the sake of example.
@@evanashworth490 Thank you Prof.Evan, Now I understand, that [f] and [p] are allophones f of the same phoneme /p/ *[f] always preceded by a front vowel. Thank you.
Hello! I really should have spent more time on that part, because I was really choosing /p/ as the phoneme randomly, but based solely on the dataset for Biblical Hebrew, I don't think there is enough convincing evidence either way to suggest which one is the phoneme (after all, the only substantive differences between the two is that [p] always occurs before vowels and [f] always occurs after vowels. However, I agree with you that based on what we see, we can call /f/ the phoneme because the allophone [f] seems to have a slightly broader distribution (it can occur after vowels, between vowels, or in word-final position, whereas the [p] allophone occurs in word-initial position, after [ʃ], or before vowels). The general rule is that, all else being equal, the sound with the broader distribution/number of contexts in which the allophone can be taken as a the phoneme. I hope that helps. Keep up the good work!
Hi Evan, thank you for making such an informative and well-explained videos. I have several questions after watching it, and reading the comment section and your replies has helped solve most of them. However, there're two questions I'm still not sure about. The first one is: in the standard Spanish question, would it be possible to write the rule as follow? /d/→[ð] / v + _ + v OR /d/→[ð] / {a, i, o} + _ + {a, i, o} /d/ → [d] elsewhere If the answer is yes, does that mean that with the limited database available, there're multiple possible 'rules'? Thank you for your help in advance!
Hello! This is a very common form of assimilation. In many languages--including English and Italian--when [n] occurs before a velar sound such as [g] or [k], that nasal will take on the same place of articulation as its neighbor (so [n] often becomes [ŋ]). This can be seen in English words such as "incomplete" (often pronounced by speakers as [ɪŋkəmplit]), where the presence of the /n/ right before the [k] affects the quality of the nasal sound, such that the velar quality bleeds into the previous sound (your vocal tract is effecting a shortcut, essentially). I hope that helps!
Hello! Well, if you mean to request for the book where these problems came from, I think I took them from a version of the textbook Language Files. However, if you are looking for a good introductory phonology textbook, you might want to check out Introductory Phonology by Bruce Hayes or Phonology: An Introduction to Basic Concepts by Roger Lass
Sir why your videos have so much gap. Believe me if you remained consistent from the time of your start today you definitely succeeded in getting at least 1 Million subscribers.
Hello. I believe these problems were taken from a version of a textbook called Language Files, which can be purchased through multiple online vendors, new or used.
I believe these problems were taken from the linguistics textbook "Language Files"---not sure which version though. They could also be in earlier editions of Yule's "The Study of Language"
I thought I would never understand this part of linguistics prior to discovering your channel. You're a godsend sir.
My college professor made me absolutely despise this stuff with the way he explained it, but you've explained it so well that I now enjoy these types of exercises :) Thank you!
same😂
Thank you 😂😂😂thought I was alone
Could you share notes with me.
Can’t thank you enough, when you explained that we only need to check the sounds in question for minimal pairs you helped me i’ve been searching for the answer for a whole a day !
This just saved me hours of study! Thank you, so well explained
You're really a great professor. You must be awarded a special prize in linguistics. Much appreciation, sir
Thank you so much for making this video ♡♡
I'm a new subscriber from Morocco 🇲🇦
I loved the class. You make linguistics look so easy.
Words can not be sufficient to express my appreciation Sir
Thanks so much, I used to loathe this but your explanation makes this so easy to understand.
Thank you so much for your excellent work! What a life saver.
I cannot thank you enough. Totally lost before, now all clear.
if i pass the exam it would be all thanks to you . i never went to a class yet i know everything thnk you so much professor
Thanks man you really saved me from a scary exam , really appreciate it ❤️❤️❤️
Best prof, The first time I see your channel, your explanation is great thanks
Thank you for this. I really appreciate the work and it was so helpful and I enjoyed it!!!
Thanks for making educational videos. They helped me a lot for the finals 😊 Hope you can make more 💞💞
I am indeed happy I can now do something with my assignment. Thanks for your explanation.
Thanks a lot for this informative tutorial. Your explanation really helped me to understand phonological analysis!
Hi sir, so delighted to hear you ❤👌👌💪
this was very helpful! thank you
Thank you sir for making complex concepts easy to understand.
Thank you 🙏 you make these concepts very easy to learn
Thank you so much professor Evan.
I hope you do video about phonological ruls or phonolgy in general
Funny enough I'm looking at this before I head into part two of a online exam , so far I am getting it
Professor, 😊So happy I've found your channel! I was really needing this explanation... 🙋🏻♀️😊 thank you.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH DEAR PRO.EVAN, YOU SAVED MY LIFE.
#MOROCCO #AFRICA #ENGLISH
I understood and I am competent. Thank u
u saved my life . Thank u
😊I can't thank you enough for this it's really helpful ❤
thank u so much.... i was having a hard time with this topic and the midterm is in 2 days :)
Thank you so much. This really helped.
God bless you
Thank you for saving my final exam :)
Thank you for your useful videos . I studied Linguistics in my MA . I studied syntax and phonology. I wonder if you have explained the Optimality Theory and how is going these days among linguists?
this was incredibly helpful thanks heaps
you're reaaly a great prof
Awesome video, I'm currently binge watching your channel. I only don't understand the biblical Hebrew part because there are two words (sefer and yafe) that fit both rules. Like, one rule says that before a vowel /p/ is realized as [p], which isn't true for sefer. Would it not make more sense to make it so /p/ -> [f] V_ and [p] elsewhere?
That is an excellent observation and you are totally correct. Thanks for pointing that out!
Thank you for considering my suggestion about making playlist, it means alot sir. Thank you very much
Do you know the title of the book sir ?
good lord thank you so damn much, perhaps i wont fail now; funny i thoroughly enjoyed learning this.
Thank you so much professor 💜
Thank you so much. I really did not think, at one point, that I could ever really understand this. Thank you for having made it this clear and easily digestible.
I am very grateful to you for this amazing work. I watched all of your Phonetics and Phonology videos and I found them truly helpful, you helped me feel alot more confident in the way I approach this course.
I hope angels bless your life with graceful ease and clarity for each and every student that you clarify and ease things for.
Thank you so much, that was really helpful
you are the best ever
Veryy helpful Thank you soooooo much
Thank you Professor. So the last one ( Biblical Hebrew) exercise's phonological process prove that the two allophones are actually different phonemes right?
No, that problem shows that the [p] (always occurs before vowels) and [f] (always occurs after vowels) represent allophones of the same phoneme (either /p/ or /f/, which is unclear based on this dataset because one sound doesn't really occur in more environments than the other).
Thanks for the excellent lesson. As to the Biblical Hebrew exercise, I understand how you distinguish between whether it precedes or follows a vowel. Is there sufficient evidence to allow you to choose one of them as the "elsewhere"?
Hi Andre. Not sure if this answers your question, but when performing phonological analysis, once you have determined the phonological environment for one allophone (e.g., that it appears before vowels), it is sufficient to say the other allophone appears elsewhere (of course, you could also explicitly state the phonological environment in which that other allophone appears).
u da beest
Biblical Hebrew [sEfEr] matches both rules, right? So, is the order of the rules important? Then, if yes, the rules should be written the other way round: first the f-rule, then if noth matched, the p-rule. Or am I missing something about the convention? BTW, does this notation have a name?
I am certainly no expert in Biblical Hebrew, but given the dataset represented in this video, those are the rules. You are correct that sometimes the ordering of rules do matter in some problems, but no ordering is needed for this dataset. I'm not sure if the notation has a name--I'd be curious to know, myself!
Trying to study this and practice your assignments ❤
Thank you for this amazing explanation. I just want to understand one more thing in the final practice exercise about The Biblical Hebrew; how can we determine the phoneme between [p] and [f]? Because as I know the phoneme is usually determined according to the phonological environment. Here we can clearly see that [p] occurs only in 2 phonological environments: initial position before a vowel, after a consonant and before a vowel. Whereas [f] occurs in 3 phonological environments: final position after a vowel, between a vowel and a consonant, and between 2 vowels. So why don't we say here that /f/ is the phoneme of the allophones [p] and [f]?
Hi Soukaina. The identity of the phoneme is usually determined based on the number of contexts in which the allophones appear, so the more places, the more likely that is the phoneme. As such, you would be right in proposing that /f/ would be the phoneme (that is realized as allophones [p] or [f]) because [f] appears in more contexts. Of course, it is only 1 more context (3) than [p] (2), so the evidence isn't overwhelming, but based on this dataset, you would be correct in proposing /f/ as the phoneme!
Hello professor Evan, thank you for your explanation . I have a question please: Why, in the last data exercise, the sound [ f ] is the allophone of the phoneme /p/( and not the opposite)? thank you
Hello. Yes, this was an error, and, based on this dataset anyway, /f/ would be the phoneme because it appears in slightly more contexts. My apologies.
@@evanashworth490 thank you professor for the feedback.
Professor Ashworth, what do I do if it's almost a minimal pair as they are all followed by vowels but one sound ruins it?
Hi Bella. If I understand you correctly, then the forms you would be looking at would not be minimal pairs. For example, [in English [wit] "wheat" and [wid] "weed" are minimal pairs because there is only one sound that is different between the two words but [wits] "wheats" and [widz] "weeds" are not minimal pairs because there are two sound differences. I hope that helps!
first of all thanks a lot for ur smooth explanation, but can you share with us accurate method to write these answers in an exam?
Thanks for the explanations.
Please, for the last exercice, how can we determine the phoneme from the allophones. It is of course represented in the rule you ve provided. What is the shared feature between those vowels. Thank you
Hi Samia! Generally, the sound that is used in a wider range of environments is taken to be the phoneme (so this actually the opposite of what I suggested in the video, which was my error).
Thank you so much for your explanations.
Great video .Thank you so much . but I have a question , My professor gave me a similar exam question to those in the video (complementary distribution) but she added a question to determine which phonological processes was it . how do we answer such a question after determining that they are allophones of the same phonemes . Thank you
In order to determine which phonological process is responsible for the presence of one allophone over another, you'll need to first isolate the environment in which the sound occurs. For example, in English when a word that is written with "n" precedes a "k" or "g", that "n" is often phonetically realized as [ŋ]. The reason for this is that [g] and [k] are both velar sounds, and that velar quality affects the quality of neighboring sounds (in this case the preceding sound). As such, the phonological process is assimilation, which means one sound becoming more like a neighboring sound. Again, that can only be determined by identifying a number of words in English with the sequence (in writing) "ng" or "nk" (as in "anger", "ankle", or "sing"). Be sure to look carefully at the context in which the allophone appears and a pattern may emerge!
Thank you, Sir for your brilliant input! I have a question with regards the last problem (Biblical Hebrew). How can we figure which phoneme is the original? In this case, it's /p/. Why not /f/?
Hello! Great observation! I really should have chosen /f/ as the phoneme because, typically, the sound that has the broader distribution should be taken as the phoneme (in this case [f] appears in more contexts than [p], so /p/ should be the phoneme). Sorry about that!
Thank you dear professor for that valuable content. I have a question please, I was taught that ( [ pʰ ], [ p̚ ], [ p ] ) are allophones of the same phoneme /p/, but in the video [p] and [ pʰ ] are presented as different phonemes, how ?
Hi, Jip! [ pʰ ], [ p̚ ], [ p ] are indeed all allophones of the same phoneme /p/ in English, but in Hindi, [p] and [ pʰ ] are different phonemes.
Thanky you again!!!!!
Thank u so much 💜💜
Great video, professor. Question if i may: where can i do a BA in linguistics online? I've done some research, but many seem shady. Thanks
Hello! I doubt there are any colleges or universities where one could get a B.A. in Linguistics entirely online, and if they did exist, yeah, I probably wouldn't trust them!
Thanks sir ! But concerning the biblical Hebrew you didn't explain why /p/ is the basic sound , which is a phoneme from which the allophones [p] and [f] derive. I really need more clarification.
Thanks in advance !
This is a good point, and to be honest, I don't know whether the phoneme is /p/ or /f/, because based on this data it is not clear which sound applies in more environments, which is often the criterion for assigning one sound as the "basic"/phonemic category. I didn't address this because I was more concerned with explaining which allophones occur in which environment.
Alright, thanks sir !
/f/ sound is predictable because it always preceded by front vowel [-back] vowel
I have found it more useful to abandon enunciation for emphatic expression. Originality, customization, similar alliteration, is derived from pulse. Allophone interpretation is more environmental than alluded to by the phonological environment's water resources. Similarities may be congruent with parchment determining the differential. However re-evaluation is futility.
thank you sir ...
Plz answer my question I asked before that why butterfly 🦋 is a compound word if it has 1 morpheme??
Butterfly may be considered a compound because it is formed by combining two different words: "butter" and "fly"; however, for me the word "butterfly" is one morpheme because the meaning of "butter" + the meaning of "fly" doesn't yield the meaning of "butterfly".
thank you so much
Dear PROF.EVAN,
Thank you so much for all this lessons.
I have one question about the last exercice, I just want to know which pne is an elsewhere and prediclable ?
Because As I see [p] sound accurs before a vowels and also [f] sound accurs after a vowel.
Is there any mistake in choosing data or what? I am still confused Prof.EVAN!
Reda,
I got a response from a Moroccan prof.WAHIB MOHSINE
/f/ sound is predictable because it always preceded by front vowel [-back] vowel .
Hi Reda. Sorry for the delay in my response, but, yes, I would actually consider [f] as the phoneme /f/ because it appears (based on this data) in more contexts than [p]. This was not really discussed in the video, my apologies--I was just considering /p/ the phoneme for the sake of example.
@@evanashworth490 Thank you Prof.Evan,
Now I understand, that [f] and [p] are allophones f of the same phoneme /p/
*[f] always preceded by a front vowel.
Thank you.
Slm rida hani
In the last exercice, i think that f is the phoneme not p.can you explain that more.thanks in advance
Hello! I really should have spent more time on that part, because I was really choosing /p/ as the phoneme randomly, but based solely on the dataset for Biblical Hebrew, I don't think there is enough convincing evidence either way to suggest which one is the phoneme (after all, the only substantive differences between the two is that [p] always occurs before vowels and [f] always occurs after vowels. However, I agree with you that based on what we see, we can call /f/ the phoneme because the allophone [f] seems to have a slightly broader distribution (it can occur after vowels, between vowels, or in word-final position, whereas the [p] allophone occurs in word-initial position, after [ʃ], or before vowels). The general rule is that, all else being equal, the sound with the broader distribution/number of contexts in which the allophone can be taken as a the phoneme. I hope that helps. Keep up the good work!
Hi Evan, thank you for making such an informative and well-explained videos. I have several questions after watching it, and reading the comment section and your replies has helped solve most of them. However, there're two questions I'm still not sure about.
The first one is: in the standard Spanish question, would it be possible to write the rule as follow?
/d/→[ð] / v + _ + v OR /d/→[ð] / {a, i, o} + _ + {a, i, o}
/d/ → [d] elsewhere
If the answer is yes, does that mean that with the limited database available, there're multiple possible 'rules'?
Thank you for your help in advance!
Hello! Yes and yes!
Hi Mr Evan. Do you have a video about Syllables?
Thank you
I do not--I might make a video on this topic in the future. Many thanks!
Please can we have more of the data to analyze
thank you
thank you professor, please could you provide us how we can find the pdf format of this lesson
Hello! Unfortunately, I don't have a pdf of this document. My apologies!
Hi
Thanks for this. What is the book title ?
I believe these problems came from The Study of Language by George Yule and/or Language Files
Hello, In 12:52, Why is the /n/ is realized as [ŋ] ?
Sorry, it 12:46.
Hello! This is a very common form of assimilation. In many languages--including English and Italian--when [n] occurs before a velar sound such as [g] or [k], that nasal will take on the same place of articulation as its neighbor (so [n] often becomes [ŋ]). This can be seen in English words such as "incomplete" (often pronounced by speakers as [ɪŋkəmplit]), where the presence of the /n/ right before the [k] affects the quality of the nasal sound, such that the velar quality bleeds into the previous sound (your vocal tract is effecting a shortcut, essentially). I hope that helps!
Sir pls suggest the book for me to read so as i can enhance my comprehesion
Hello! Well, if you mean to request for the book where these problems came from, I think I took them from a version of the textbook Language Files. However, if you are looking for a good introductory phonology textbook, you might want to check out Introductory Phonology by Bruce Hayes or Phonology: An Introduction to Basic Concepts by Roger Lass
Sir why your videos have so much gap. Believe me if you remained consistent from the time of your start today you definitely succeeded in getting at least 1 Million subscribers.
Thanks
I wish you also talked about rules derivation and ordering i’m really struggling with it 😢
My apologies, I may make a future video on this topic.
How to write a poem with phonological analysis?
I'm not sure it would be a good idea to combine poetry with phonology :)
Where can i find this book
Hello. I believe these problems were taken from a version of a textbook called Language Files, which can be purchased through multiple online vendors, new or used.
Does anyone guys know the title of this book ?
I believe these problems were taken from the linguistics textbook "Language Files"---not sure which version though. They could also be in earlier editions of Yule's "The Study of Language"
@@evanashworth490 Thank you Sir
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
11:00
Thanks for this lecture. I'll have a linguistics midterm tomorrow. I will edit this comment after that.
Difficult 💔
These can be tricky, but hang in there!
I didn’t really understand this one
Sorry about that!
Free Palestine