ARTICLE

SYLLABLE STRUCTURE OF PAKISTANI ENGLISH IN PHONOLOGICAL THEORY

  1. HOME
  2. ARTICLE

31 Pages : 300-312

http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2020(V-I).31      10.31703/gssr.2020(V-I).31      Published : Mar 1

Syllable Structure of Pakistani English in Phonological Theory

Abstract

    This article describes the syllable of Pakistani English (PE. It compares the syllable of PE with British English, in the light of concepts of syllabic (Chomsky and Halle, 1968), syllabification, template, syllable pattern, model of syllable structure, phonotactics and syllable weight. In the end, the following differences in syllabic phonology of PE and British English are summarized: In phonotactic constraints, one difference is found that is in the syllable of PE cluster of three consonants i.e. /s/, /p or t or k/, /l or r/ is allowed only in monosyllabic words, whereas word internally this cluster is not permissible. So, [ek.sklIUd] becomes [eks.klIUd] in PE; the weight of the syllable in PE is not only based on the quality of vowel but also the quality of consonant; in PE every syllable must contain vowel as a nucleus.

    Pakistani English, Syllable Structure, Syllabification, Phonotactics, Syllable Weight, Syllabic

    (1) Umaima Kamran
    Assistant Professor, Department of English, Quaid-I-Azam University Islamabad, Pakistan.
    (2) Saira Maqbool
    Assistant Professor,Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics,Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad, Pakistan.
    (3) Lubna Umar
    Lecturer, Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics,Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad, Pakistan.
Fulltext PDF

References

  • Abercrombie, D. (2000). Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Anderson, S. R. (1985). Phonology in the Twentieth Century: Theories of Rules and Theories of Representations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Blevins, J. (1995). The syllable in phonological theory. In Goldsmith, J. (Ed.), The handbook of phonological theory. (pp. 206-244). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Brockhaus, W., Durand, J., & Katamba, F. (Ed.). (1995). Skeletal and suprasegmental structure within Government Phonology. In Frontiers of Phonology: atoms, structures, derivations. (pp.180- 221). Harlow, Essex: Longman.
  • Brook, G. L. (1979). Varieties of English. (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan.
  • Carr, P. (1993). Phonology. London: The Macmillan Press Limited.
  • Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Clark, J & Yallop, C. (1995). An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Clements, N. & Keyser, J. (1983). CV-phonology: A generative theory of the syllable. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Duanmu, S., Kim, H. & Stiennon, N. (2005). Stress and Syllable Structure in English: Approaches to Phonological Variation. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 3(2), 45-78.
  • Durand, J. (1990). Generative and non-linear phonology. London and New York: Longman.
  • Everett, D. & Everett, K. (1984). On the relevance of syllable onsets to stress placement. Linguistic Inquiry, 15 (4), 705-711.
  • Fallows, D. (1981). Experimental evidence for English syllabification and syllable structure. Journal of Linguistics, 17 (2), 309-17.
  • Goedemans, R. & Hulst, H.G. van der (2005). Rhythm types. In Martin Haspelmath, Matthew Dryer, David Gil and Bernard Comrie (Eds.), The world atlas of linguistic structures, (pp. 74-77).
  • Goldsmith, J. (1990). Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Gordon, M. (2004). Syllable weight. In Phonetically based phonology. In Hayes, B., Kirchner, R & Steriade, D. (Eds.), (pp. 277-312). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  • Hammond, M. (1995). Metrical Phonology. Annual Review Anthropology, 24, 313-342
  • Hammond, M. (1997). Vowel quality and syllabification in English. Language 73 (1), 1-17.
  • Hansen, J.G. (2006). Acquiring a non-native phonology. London: Continuum.
  • Hawkins, P. (1984). Introducing phonology. London: Hutchinson.
  • Hayes, B. (1989). Metrics and phonological theory. In Newmeyer, F.J. (Ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey: Linguistic Theory: Extensions and Implications, (Vol. 2), (pp. 220-249). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  • Hogg, R. & McCully, C.B. (1987). Metrical Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hussain, S. (2010). Phonetic correlates of lexical stress in Urdu. Islamabad: National Language Authority.
  • Itô, J. 1986. Syllable Theory in Prosodic Phonology. PhD, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
  • Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an International language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Jones, D. (1956). The pronunciation of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Katamba, F. (1989). An Introduction to Phonology. London and New York: Longman.
  • Levelt, C.C & Vijver, R.V.D. (2004). Syllable types in cross-linguistic and developmental grammars. In Kager, R.; Pater, J.& Zonneveld, W. (Eds.), Constraints in phonological acquisition. (pp. 204-218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lodge, K. (2009). Fundamental Concepts in phonology: Sameness and difference. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Maddieson, I. (2005). Syllable structure. In M. Haspelmath, M. S. Dryer, D. Gil, & B. Comrie, (Eds.), World Atlas of Language Structures. (pp. 54-57). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Marlett, S. (2001). An Introduction to phonological analysis. Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL).
  • McCarthy, J. J. (1979). On Stress and Syllabification. Linguistic Inquiry, 10 (3), 443-465. MIT Press.
  • McMahon, A. (2002). Lexical phonology and the history of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nesset, T. (2008). Abstract phonology in a concrete model: Cognitive linguistics and the morphology-phonology interface. Berlin: Mount de Gruyter
  • O'Grady, W., Dobrovolsky, M. & Katamba, F. (Eds.). (1996). Contemporary Linguistic: An Introduction. London & New York: Longman
  • Roca, I. & Johnson, W. (1999). A Course in Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Selkirk, E. (1982). The syllable. In Hulst, H. and Smith, N. (Eds.), The structure of phonological representations, Part 2: (pp. 337-383). Dordrecht: Foris.
  • Selkirk, E. (1984). On the major class features and syllable theory. In Aronoff, M. & Oehrle, R. (Eds.), Language Sound Structures. (pp. 107-136). Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Tranel, B. (1991). CVC light syllable, Geminates and Moraic theory. Phonology 8, 291-302.
  • Yule, G. (2010). The study of language. (4th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Zec, D. (1995). The role of moraic structure in the distribution of segments within syllables. In Durand, J. & Katamba, F.(Eds.), Frontiers of Phonology: Atoms, Structures, Derivations. (pp.149-179). London, Longman.

Cite this article

APA

CHICAGO

    CHICAGO : Kamran, Umaima, Saira Maqbool, and Lubna Umar. 2020. "Syllable Structure of Pakistani English in Phonological Theory." Global Social Sciences Review, V (I): 300-312 doi: 10.31703/gssr.2020(V-I).31

HARVARD

    HARVARD : KAMRAN, U., MAQBOOL, S. & UMAR, L. 2020. Syllable Structure of Pakistani English in Phonological Theory. Global Social Sciences Review, V, 300-312.

MHRA

    MHRA : Kamran, Umaima, Saira Maqbool, and Lubna Umar. 2020. "Syllable Structure of Pakistani English in Phonological Theory." Global Social Sciences Review, V: 300-312

MLA

    MLA : Kamran, Umaima, Saira Maqbool, and Lubna Umar. "Syllable Structure of Pakistani English in Phonological Theory." Global Social Sciences Review, V.I (2020): 300-312 Print.

OXFORD

    OXFORD : Kamran, Umaima, Maqbool, Saira, and Umar, Lubna (2020), "Syllable Structure of Pakistani English in Phonological Theory", Global Social Sciences Review, V (I), 300-312

TURABIAN

    TURABIAN : Kamran, Umaima, Saira Maqbool, and Lubna Umar. "Syllable Structure of Pakistani English in Phonological Theory." Global Social Sciences Review V, no. I (2020): 300-312. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2020(V-I).31