Usage-Based Phonology Anna Nordenskjöld Bergman

Usage-Based Phonology overall approach What is the overall approach taken by this theory? summarize How would you summarize the approach? strengths What are the strengths of this approach? handle effectively What types of phenomena does it handle effectively, or what does it account for well? weaknesses Do you see any weaknesses to the approach? What are they ?

Field Work – Real Life

X becomes Y A  B / ____C

Advertising example

Food for thought WHY then…… is /r/ different sometimes within the same language? For ex Skånska Between languages? Why cannot Japanese people ever learn to say engLish like Americans do? How can we still communicate?

England

First differences…… communicative Usage-Based Phonology wants to find out more about how we perceive, store and manipulate language for our communicative end goals Usage-based Phonology seeks to find underlying causation for variation, change and universal communicative means We will come back to this

Structure - Function de Saussure > Chomsky > Usage Based (Bybee) Langue/Parole – Competence/Performance What is the proper domain for linguistics? Bybee et al set out to explore the use of linguistic forms vs. the storage and processing on the other

This is the list of words…. consequences 1In all standard (generative) models of phonology, the lexicon is distinguished from the phonological grammar. What consequences does a choice of model have? 2Word frequency Standard Generative models do not encode word frequency

Why another model? “Evidence has accumulated that speakers have detailed phonetic knowledge of a type which is not readily modeled using the categories and categorical rules of phonological generative theory” (Pierrehumbert 2001) How do we account for variation, selection and change? Compare Generative models and ideas from Evolutionary Phonology

Phonetic targets Phonetic variation selection/variation Exact phonetic targets and phonetic variation (compare selection/variation) must be learned during language acquisition. The Usage-based framework readily accommodates such findings by proposing that: mental representations of phonological targets and patterns are gradually built up through experience with speech (feed back system) Conventions Hence, what is a strength of this approach?

Language Use in Linguistic Theory frequency Usage-Based phonology – linguistic theory in the context of phonology : “The frequency with which certain words, phrases, or patterns are used, will be shown to have an impact on phonological structure” (Bybee 2003) variation We find variation and gradience commonplace in empirical studies, and we find phonological phenomena intimately bound up with lexicon and morphology, syntax, discourse, and social context (Bybee 2003).

Categorization Studies show that the way human beings categorize both nonlinguistic and linguistic entities is not by discrete assignments to categories based on the presence/absence of features, but rather by comparison of features shared with a central member

Dynamic Clouds in our heads

Lexicon and Grammar constructions “In a model in which memory storage includes not just individual words, but also phrases and constructions, lexicon and grammar are not strictly separated, but are integrated and subject to the same organizational principles“ (Bybee 1998, Langacker 1987)

Usage-Based Phonology – Exemplar Theory tokens exemplars “…. A school of thought that holds that the units of a speaker’s phonological knowledge are memorized phonetic tokens of individual lexical items. Thus in producing a lexical item, the speaker’s phonetic target is determined by the average phonetic value of the stored exemplars of that item” (Dinkin 2010)

Exemplar theory category cognitive map variation In exemplar model, each category is represented in memory by a large cloud of remembered tokens of that category. These memories are organized in a cognitive map, so that memories of highly similar instances are close to each other and memories of dissimilar instances are far apart. The remembered tokens display a range of variation

Technicalities of the mind frequent categories IF every encountered token is stored as a separate exemplar, then frequent categories will obviously be represented by numerous tokens, and infrequent categories will be represented with less numerous tokens Memories decay run/ran/run

frequency Word frequency and lenition 1Every 2Memory 3Artillery 1 Very frequent = schwa completely absent 2 Mid-frequency = syllabic /r/ 3 Low-frequency = schwa + /r/ (Bybee 2000)

Conclusions Any Linguistic theory aims at finding answers to Universals, Synchronic and Diachronic behavior In the past many scholars held a position (some still do!) that certain language properties are inherent to an inherent language acquisition ‘device/ability’ possessed by all children (Chomsky 1965)

….Usage-Based Phonology Analyzes real language spoken by real people in real situations (Kristiansen 2006) … can describe differences and tell us why we can still communicate … can give a model that accounts for change …can give us insight to our cognition …can trace and track languages/lects geographically and over time … does not say anything unless from data, is this so different from before?

Suggested further reading Phonology and Language Use – Bybee 2003 Exemplar Dynamics: Word Frequency, lenition and contrast – Pierrehumbert 2001 Language Usage and Cognition – Bybee 2007 Toward a Usage-Based Cognitive Phonology – Kristansen 2006

Usage Based Phonology What is the overall approach taken by this theory? Keywords = Usage, frequency, cognition Keywords = Usage, frequency, cognition How would you summarize the approach? Pretty straight forward, it is based on observations and data collections and it analyses what is found. Language use by real people in real situations. Pretty straight forward, it is based on observations and data collections and it analyses what is found. Language use by real people in real situations. What are the strengths of this approach? Compare what it tells us about Language Change, Language use and Cognition in mankind Compare what it tells us about Language Change, Language use and Cognition in mankind Do you see any weaknesses to the approach? What are they ? Does it really give you all answers? What kind of information does this approach lack? Descriptive/Prescriptive? Does it really give you all answers? What kind of information does this approach lack? Descriptive/Prescriptive?