It Is Easier To Pronounce Japanese Words Once You Comprehend The Theory Of Phonology

As you study the theory of phonology (NP) during your Japanese language learning classes, you would come to know that segmental processes are either 'fortitions' or 'lenitions.' Fortitions, which include dissimilations, diphthongizations, syllabications, and epentheses are designed to make pronunciations more perceptible. Lenitions, which include assimilations, monophthongizations, desyllabications, reductions, and deletions make segments and sequences of segments easier to pronounce.

Lenitions are generally context-sensitive or syntagmatic processes. Fortitions are generally context free or paradigmatic processes and have the effect of maximizing the phonetic properties of individual segments often heightening their differences with neighbouring segments. Thus the context-free vowel de-nasalization process in English maximizes the vocalic quality of the underlying vowel in 'can't.' It also accounts for the fact that English speakers perceive vowels as non-nasal even when they superficially aren't. In addition to governing the lexicon vowel de-nasalization in English also applies to foreign words such as French [mamã] rendering it [mama] without nasalization. On the other hand French [monami] without a nasalized first vowel is rendered [mõnami] by English speakers. The nasal vowel in French [mamã] cannot survive in English because there is no post-vocalic nasal context in which it can be derived by processes of English. [khæ̃t] also lacks a postvocalic nasal, but its absence is due to the process which deletes nasals between a preceding vowel and a following stop in English. No such process exists for deleting postvocalic nasals not followed by a stop. In the case of French [monami] the first vowel is followed by a postvocalic nasal thus making vowel nasalization derivable in English.

In NP, there are circumstances in which underlying representations may be deeper than 'phonemic'. The case of syllable final obstruent devoicing in German furnishes an example. In German the words 'organization' and 'many coloured' are homophonous [bunt] in their unflected form, but their inflected alternates are [bunde] and [bunte] respectively. The neutralization of [d,t] in the uninflected form is due to obligatory application of the syllable final obstruent devoicing process. Under such circumstances where the lexical representation is relatable to the surface by processes a 'morphophonemic' underlying representation is justified, and 'organization' is /bund/ – /bunde/ and 'many-colored' is /bunt/ – /bunte/. There is one other case where non-allophonic alternates on the surface may be represented by a single underlying representation, viz. surface alternates that are derivable by optional application of processes e.g. careful-casual alternates like 'hands' /hæ̃ndz/ → [hæ̃ndz] → [hæ̃nz] , due to the optional application of [d] → Ø / n_z.

Thus in NP underlying segments are identical with their surface representations except that ‘allophonic’ features are barred from underlying representation; and 'morphophonemic' representations are legal where required by alternation provided they are mapped to the surface by obligatory or optional processes of the language.