02 Oct 2001

Dr James M Scobbie (Queen Margaret University College)

I argue that the study of child phonology is hampered by a transcriptional methodology which fails to detect phonemically crucial aspects of the child's actual phonetic output and renders it almost impossible to study the acquisition of phonetic systems. Additionally I will argue that the study of child phonology is not well served by its focus on the emergence of phonemic contrast in any case.

First I will show that many types of phonemic contrast can be "covert" , drawing on evidence from normally-developing children and from so-called "phonologically disordered" child speech. Such covert contrasts arise when adult listeners, including trained phonetic transcribers, are unable to detect auditorily a phonemic contrast which a child is in fact producing. In all such cases of mismatch, transcription underestimates the ability of the child to produce contrasts, and results in theoretical analyses postulating phonological neutralisation whereas in fact there is none. I will discuss the implications of these findings. I will then argue that to account for the patterns and the variation in child speech, we need to appeal to a coherent phonetic-phonological model of an integrated sound system.

I will also argue that there is an overwhelming tendency in child language acquisition research to focus on something like a phonemic inventory rather than on wider aspects of the sound system. Clearly, "low level" phonetic implementation is little understood, but my critique is aimed at "inventory-based" research which fails to address categorical phonological allophony. Such a narrow focus is theoretically stifling, both for researchers in surface-oriented phonological theory, and for those who take a broader view of the challenges facing children who have to learn all the rich non-universal detail of their language.

[back to PWorkshop Archives]

<owner-pworkshop@ling.ed.ac.uk>