The Bloomsbury Companion to Phonology

Nancy C. Kula, Bert Botma, Kuniya Nasukawa, Nancy C. Kula, Bert Botma, Kuniya Nasukawa

• Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9781441140180
• eBook ISBN: 9781441150554
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Linguistics
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

Originally published as the Continuum Companion to Phonology, this book offers the definitive guide to a key area of linguistic study. It covers all the most important issues, concepts, movements and approaches in the field. Each companion offers a comprehensive reference resource giving an overview of key topics, research areas, new directions and a manageable guide to beginning or developing research in the field. It offers a survey of current research and also gives more practical guidance on advanced study and research in the area. The book includes coverage of key research areas in phonology, including the interaction of phonology with other areas of linguistics while also providing some guidance on how phonological research can be conducted in the field and in the laboratory. It moves from coverage of the smallest units such as features and syllables to larger units incorporating phrasal and prosodic structure. It is a complete resource for postgraduate students and researchers working in phonology.

Part I

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1

Methodology in Field Phonology

Mary Pearce

Chapter Overview

1.Introduction

2.General Considerations for Fieldwork

3.Phonological Issues in Fieldwork

4.Conclusion

5.Acknowledgements

1. Introduction

There is a tendency among linguists to polarize towards either a theoretical or descriptive approach and this means that most books on phonology will either discuss theoretical issues with just a minimum number of data examples, or it will give detailed data with only a few references to linguistic theory. But this handbook acknowledges the scope for descriptions with a solid theoretical analysis and for theories which are backed up by solid and convincing data. In order to produce a well-analysed description or a theory based on empirical evidence, it is necessary to carry out field research.

In this brief overview of phonological field methods, I am assuming that the reader is probably a phonologist with a theoretical background who would like to collect data in order to describe some aspect of the phonology of a specific language or to find support for a theory. The data collection could take place in a multicultural city with one or two speakers of the language, or in a speech community, possibly in a rural setting. Some of the ideas presented here do not apply to all situations. Evidently, if an anechoic room is available, some of the comments about recording equipment are not necessary, but I will assume that the linguist may need to take all of their recording equipment with them. As Bowern (2008b) points out, it is not always necessary to travel to a remote part of the world to do fieldwork, but measuring just one speaker outside of their normal language context is unlikely to give much insight. Therefore, it is assumed in this chapter that there is a speech community involved and that the linguist may well have travelled to work with them. If the language under consideration is either endangered or otherwise in a contact situation, Bowern (2008b) is a helpful resource to refer to. For endangered languages, there is the whole question of what should be documented and described. This is beyond the scope of this short article, but the fieldworker should consider their responsibility towards the documentation and also be aware that they may not be able to return at a later date for more data. They may therefore have to concentrate on recording more dialogues and general data rather than focusing exclusively on one small part of the phonology.

I will begin with an overview of general principles and considerations which apply to all types of fieldwork, and then move on to consider a few areas of phonology where specific guidelines may be of use. There are three books which have been written on this topic, which I find particularly helpful as reference books. These are Ladefoged (2003), Crowley (2007) and Bowern (2008a). Chapter 5 of the latter is particularly relevant for Phonology as is the regularly updated website and appendix with a phonological checklist.

Note also that various software options are available which can help considerably in fieldwork. As well as the acoustic analysis tools and data management tools provided by university departments, research institutes and SIL International, there is also an increasing selection of resources being made available from the endangered language centres. These tools help with electronic descriptions, data from related languages, guidelines for research and tools to speed up research.

2. General Considerations for Fieldwork

If the time for fieldwork is limited, some feel that learning the language is an optional extra which they cannot afford to engage in, but it is worth attempting. The speakers appreciate the effort and will probably respond with more enthusiasm to the tasks they are given and in learning the language, the linguist will develop a greater appreciation for the areas where more analysis is needed. Clearly, if the length of fieldwork is less than 6 months, the time is probably better spent in elicitation and analysis, but even in this case, it is still worth learning greetings and simple phrases as this helps in relationship building.

In any case, respect for the speakers of the language is essential. This includes respect for the phonological insights that the speaker might have. It is not normal for a speaker to be able to verbalize all the phonological categories in their own language, even if linguistically trained, but speakers can often make sound judgements as to whether two things are different from each other, and it is worth investigating these judgements further. The participatory approach as advocated by Kutsch Lojenga (1996) is helpful, where the opinion of the speaker is sought when trying to decide on contrasts. Of course this should not be the only method used to find contrast: British speakers may feel that cheetah and cheater are pronounced differently and that those and thing begin with the same sound, having been influenced by the orthography. So investigations of this kind should always include recordings.

Before conducting fieldwork, the researcher should consider what material will be made available to the language community after the research. This might include a lexicon, copies of files, a phonological description etc. Feedback can also be given during the fieldwork. Many speakers are interested in the results of the research and in learning more about their language. In experiments which involve a number of participants, it is common practice to just use initials when referring to subjects, but language consultants should be acknowledged.

For all fieldwork, it is becoming increasingly important to have ethical and government permission for linguistic work. More details on this are usually available from universities or research bodies that support fieldwork. The usual request is that the linguist gets written consent from anyone that they record. I have found that in some locations, having a form to sign can be culturally inappropriate – so my approach has been to record them giving permission (in their own language). In this way I have the permission and no one is upset, and in addition, I have more data in the language which I can analyse. Related to this, there are issues concerning how much to pay people who help with research. For this, it is best to get advice from other linguists who are working in similar settings.

Before embarking on fieldwork, a great deal of planning is necessary. The plans should be flexible as they are likely to change as soon as some data is collected. It is good to plan in time to consider the results, to reanalyse, and to devise new tests during the fieldwork in light of what the early sessions reveal. This means that it is important to have a system for recording field notes involving separate notebooks for transcriptions and glosses, for plans for each session with lists of data to record etc., and for ongoing analysis. In the initial planning, it is helpful to write a list of research questions, and then to decide what data are needed to answer those questions.

The right level of phonetic transcription will probably depend on the research questions. The linguist must decide how much to simply listen out for things that they expect and write a transcription accordingly, and how much to organize the material so that the transcription is clear for inquiries other than the one they are engaged in. However good the phonetician, all transcriptions need to be treated with an open mind as until the phonological analysis is complete, some details will never be certain and others will only get resolved with the use of speech analysis software. Casali (2000, 2008) notes the need to maintain a healthy distrust of the data and to be willing to revise it.

It is clearly important to collect enough data to support your claims. But there should also be enough data to support theories that may not have developed yet. For this, it can be helpful to have a body of general data to fall back on, such as word lists and natural speech. If possible, these data should be published after the field trip so that other researchers can verify the data and the claims, and so that the local community can benefit. Several word lists are available from research institutions involved in descriptive linguistics. It can also be helpful to consider discussing some semantic domains in more detail to get a longer list. For this the use of books on topics such as plants or birds can be helpful. To vary the activity, I also devise games where speakers draw fun pictures and then describe them or make up stories. If I am focusing on grammatical tone, I include elements which will produce words in that category. If I need nouns with the structure CVCV, for example, I draw a map with various objects beside the road (carefully choosing objects which have names of the target structure). Then I ask for the speaker to tell a story of someone who travels the length of the map passing the objects.

When eliciting phonetics and sometimes phonology, it can be helpful to try out various versions of an utterance to see which is most acceptable. Ladefoged (1997) says ‘One of the most efficient procedures for getting results in the field is to test different hypotheses by trying out various vocal gestures of our own.’ This can of course be overdone if we then don’t listen to the proper pronunciation adequately, but as long as the speaker is happy to tell us when we are wrong or to choose between two options, this can be effective.

2.1 Acoustic Phonetics and Recordings

Although I discuss this only briefly, the use of instrumental analysis in research is vital. This has been noted as far back as Pike, Ralph and Bascum (1959). Baart (2001) claims that acoustic phonetics in fieldwork adds accuracy, precision and objectivity. It is useful for ascertaining pitch height and movements, duration and quality of vowels and consonants, measurements of Voice Onset Time (VOT) and syllable length, aspiration, voice quality and phonation.

While acoustic measurements are very useful, the researcher should guard against such assumptions as ‘the pitch extraction will reveal the correct phonetic tones’, or ‘the formants will tell me which vowel it is’. There are two dangers here: first, the fieldworker can rely too much on pitch tracks rather than their own hearing, and secondly, they can confuse phonetic data with phonological analysis. But once phonological hypotheses have been developed, the acoustic data can provide useful support for the claims. For example, if the claim is that there are six contrastive vowels, you would expect to find clustering of the formants around these positions – but it is not valid to find six clusters and therefore assume that there are six vowels.

The field linguist must establish what level of quality to aim for in a recording. It is clear that we would all like the highest level possible, but this has to be weighed up against ambient noises such as goats and traffic and the fact that if recordings are done outside (where there is enough light), the microphone may pick up the sound of the wind or neighbours etc. There is also the issue of how intrusive the recording equipment looks. I have at times recorded a group with a digital recorder with internal microphone because that appears to be just a cassette recorder. I may have lost something in quality, but the speakers felt more at ease and they were able to talk naturally. It may be that a mixture of approaches is called for with different groups and different research questions. It is also a good idea to have a second recorder as backup in case the first fails for some reason.

The recordings should be digital and the recording equipment should be user friendly to avoid disappointment (which means avoiding small recording machines with several commands on one button). Always test the recordings for ambient noise such as light fixtures which may affect the pitch track. Recordings in WAV format are normally better than MP3 recordings if you are carrying your own data on a computer, but if data is being sent to other people electronically, it may be that WAV files are too large, in which case MP3 recordings (although they are compressed) can be used for most purposes. Sometimes MP3 is better because the compression loses some of the extraneous noise. This will depend on the purpose of the recording.

There are several data recorders and dictaphones on the market now, some of which are better than others, so it is good to ask for advice from field linguists before purchasing one. Elements to consider are: the power source, for example, AA batteries if in a remote place, USB download, WAV files, manual recording levels – an indication of overload in volume, 44 kHz or higher, good microphone, easy controls and memory for previous settings, some sort of playback. Some portable computers are also fine for recording with an external microphone, but others add extra noise so this must be tested in advance. For the analysis, there are various computer programs available which can both record the speech and present the wave forms as spectrograms and pitch tracks. Some offer extra analysis tools and the chance to manipulate the recording for use in perception tests etc. These programs are extrememly useful to the field linguist, but it is important not to rely on the visual data alone. So the linguist needs to listen first and then use these programs as a backup. A laryngeograph can be useful if breathy voice is interacting with tone, and if speakers are happy about using it (and about giving consent in written or recorded form). Most of this equipment takes practice to use, so good preparation time is essential.

All recordings should include the date, the speaker, reference numbers and glosses. It is advisable to speak these data into the microphone at the beginning of every recording session as it makes labelling easier. The files should be kept in well-ordered folders with clear marking of what they contain. In my field trips, I have recorded about 1 megabyte of data per week. This amount of material requires good organization.

It may be that the research includes some statistical analysis. Some of this can be done while still in the field situation, but it is more likely that the majority will be done at a later date. Therefore, it is essential to make sure that the details of the speakers are recorded, such as age, gender, education, dialect, parentage etc., as it is otherwise hard to find these facts at a later date. Special care should be taken if there is unlikely to be an opportunity to return to the same place. Similarly, care should be taken if the language is endangered and further research may be impossible.

If the language is endangered, it is worth considering carefully what material should be documented, even if this is not directly linked to the research question. Endangered language courses and departments can provide details on what information is most important, and a researcher going to work on an endangered language should really enrol on at least a short course in documentation before doing fieldwork. If this is not possible, the relevant departments can still provide helpful suggestions and they may know other linguists in the area.

3. Phonological Issues in Fieldwork

3.1 Contrast and Variation

In most theoretical work, data sets are presented as clean, ordered sets so that the contrasts and variation are easy to spot. In reality, this task can be quite complicated. In order to establish the phonemic status of segments, for example, one can create a large chart with a column for each phone and rows for each environment. The chart can then be used by the linguist to indicate minimal or analogous pairs and other items to show that the sound exists in each environment. The cells that remain empty may reveal phones that are in complementary distribution. It is also often helpful to list all the phones that appear on either side of two phones that are likely to be in complementary distribution. The use of a chart thus makes the conditioning environments more apparent than simply looking at all the words in a word list.

For analysing syllable structure you can circle all ambivalent items in a word list, such as vowels that could be glides. Then the analysis of syllable shapes can be based on words with no ambivalent segments.

For comparing contrastive segments or tones, it is helpful to develop some frames to place them in so that the rest of the utterance around the words being considered is always the same. Think of several frames in advance as some frames may not work well for various reasons. It could be that they perturb the patterns too much (particularly for tones), or it could be that the frame seems so unnatural that the speaker cannot say them naturally. I found this with frames such as ‘Say . . . again’ which produced a major pause before and after the item.

There are a number of games which can be used for phonological purposes. Look first at word games that are already in use in the community. Games such as Pig Latin can reveal helpful information about the phonology of the language. It is also possible to experiment with nonce words to reveal phonological structures. Yip (2003) discusses various ideas along these lines. Loan words (Yip, 2006) can also be useful. They should not be treated as if they are normal words in the language, but if their source and original form is known, the changes can be informative. For example, I noticed in one field trip that words borrowed into Kera from French had a final high tone although this is not the normal pattern in Kera or French. There was also a strong voicing/tone interaction in loans. This told me something about Kera phonological rules and also about the Kera perception of French as having a stressed final syllable (perceived and realized as a high tone i...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Series
• Part I:  Research Methodology
• Part II:Research Issues
• Part III:New Directions
• Part IV:History of the Field
• Bibliography
• Language Index