Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T02:18:25.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Linguo-labials revisited: The PRDS solution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 February 2009

Martin J. Ball
Martin J. Ball
Affiliation:
Department of Behavioural and Communication Studies, Polytechnic of Wales, Pontypridd, Mid Glamorgan, CF37 1DL, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Both Maddieson (1987) and Kelly (1987) discuss the problem of symbolising linguo-labials in Austronesian languages of Vanuatu, and highlight the alternative solutions to the problem of symbolising rare speech sounds. Maddieson outlines five possible answers: firstly no official IPA symbolisation be provided, allowing transcribers to utilise ad hoc personal transcriptions. Secondly, existing symbols could be modified by existing diacritics, though interpreted in a new way. An alternative to this would be to invent a new diacritic specifically to denote linguo-labial articulation and to attach it to an existing symbol. The final two strategies involve the invention of brand new unit symbols for the sounds, or the use of digraphs. Maddieson argues convincingly against the use of digraphs, but otherwise leaves the debate open for other contributors. Both Kelly (1987) and Bladon (1987) are also to some extent non-committal on the problem, but seem to favour the use of an existing or a new diacritic attached to standard labial/alveolar symbols.

Type
Revision of the IPA: Notes
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , December 1987 , pp. 115 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Journal of the International Phonetic Association 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ball, M. J. (forthcoming). The contribution of speech pathology to the development of phonetic description. In Ball, M. J. (editor). Theoretical Linguistics and Disordered Speech. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Bladon, A. (1987). Comment by the editor on Maddieson and on Kelly. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 17:1, 33.Google Scholar
Canepari, L. (1983). Phonetic Notation/La Notazione Fonetica. Venezia: Cafoscarina.Google Scholar
Carney, E. (1979). Inappropriate abstraction in speech-assessment procedures. British Journal of Disorders of Communication 14, 123–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henton, C. (1987). The IPA consonant chart: Mugwumps, holes and therapeutic suggestions. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 17:1, 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, J. (1987). Comments on Maddieson's ‘Revision of the IPA: linguo-labials as a test case’. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 17:1, 31–32.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P., Cochran, A. and Disner, S. (1977). Laterals and trills. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 7:2, 46–54.Google Scholar
Maddieson, I. (1987). Revision of the IPA: Linguo-labials as a test case. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 17:1, 26–30.Google Scholar
PRDS GROUP (1983). Final Report: The Phonetic Representation of Disordered Speech. London: The King's Fund.Google Scholar
Pullum, G. and Ladusaw, W. (1987). Phonetic Symbol Guide. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar