Activity in Contrastive Analysis:
A. Give minimal pairs for the
following consonants in English.
1. /k/ - /g/
2. /m/ - /n/
3. /l/ - /r/
4. /b/ - /v/
5. /b/ - /m/
6. /p/ - /f/
7. /s/ - /ʃ/ (“sh”)
8. /t ʃ/ - /dʒ/ (“ch” – “j”)
9. /s/ - /z/
B. Find minimum pairs for the
above consonants in your language (Tagalog, Korean)
If the sound phones happen
not to exist in your language, write “Does not exist as phones”.
If one of the phones produces
an “understandable but odd” word, use the symbol “?” as in vul - ?ful
C. Briefly explain, if prose,
why you came to the conclusion why those phones do not exist or sound “understandable
but odd”.
Post your answers in the comments below. I look
forward to your answers.
A.
ReplyDelete1. leak-league
2. mine-nine
3. laugh-rough
4. lobes-loaves
5. bet-met
6. pine-fine
7. sift-shift
8. choking-joking
9. price-prize
B.
1. kamay-gamay
2. mataba-nataba
3. balat-barat
4. baso-vaso
5. bata-mata
6. Pilipinas-Filipinas
7. salamin-?shalamin
8. "does not exist as phones"
9. suklay-?zuklay
Mie Belyn, your answer in B number two, mataba-nataba cannot be considered a minimal pair since there is no change of meaning, 'to grow fat'. Please give another example where a change in the consonant signals a change in meaning.
DeleteFor 4, there needs to be a question mark before "?vaso" since it is "odd" in Tagalog. Same thing in number 6: "?Filipinas".
Please explain why these (nos. 4, 6, 7, and 9) are considered "odd" and the sounds in no. 8 "do not exist as phones".
Thank you.
Sir G
A.
ReplyDelete1. kate-gate
2. mail-nail
3. late-rate
4. base-vase
5. bite-mite
6. pit-fit
7. seen-sheen
8. cheep-jeep
9. sap-zap
B.
1. kulay-gulay
2. madapa-nadapa
3. alay-aray
4. bulag-?vulag
5. bali-mali
6. palaka-?falaka
7. sulat-?shurat
8. “does noy exist as phones”
9. sabi-?zabi
C.
There are words in Tagalog that are understandable but odd like the followings:
*bulag-vulag
*palaka-falaka
*sulat-shulat
*sabi-zabi
^
|
those words are understandable but when you say “ay! Falaka”. Its very strange and I will say that you are a“gay”or you are so “maarte”.
Another is there are consonant that are not exist in Tagalog like “ch” and “j”.
But there are words pronounce as “ch” like tsinelas vs. chinelas or tsane vs chane. Things like those.
April, Your answers in Part C are good. But you do not put * ('ungrammatical or unacceptable') because the words you marked, like bulag, are in fact correct. Since words like ?vulag are "understandable but odd", you should mark these with a "?".
DeleteReconsider B number two for /m/ and /n/ because the example you gave does not signal a change in meaning: 'to stumble'. Those are only dialectal varieties. Look for a minimal pair which shows that a change in consonant signals a change in meaning.
Thank you!
Sir G
Sir...the reason why there is no ''?'' in part C. coz all those words are examples of mine...heheh..
ReplyDeleteAhm..another answer in number 2. Does not exist in phones .... Because theres lot of words change the consonant but do not change the meaning of the words like the followings:
a. Mamahal-Namahal
b. makinang-nakinang
c.masama-nasama.
April,
DeleteYou said, "the reason why there is no ''?'' in part C. coz all those words are examples of mine...heheh.."
The symbol "?" in front of a word means that it is 'understandable but odd'. For example, you gave the word "vulag" which is understandable but odd, so it should be marked with a "?" as in "?vulag".
What I was saying is that you should have not placed the asterisk (*) in front of the word "bulag" (see your answer above) because "*" means 'ungrammatical or unacceptable'. Is "bulag" is a word in Tagalog, it is correct and should not be marked "*"
The phones /m/ and /n/ DO exist as phones in Tagalog. (An example of "do not exist as phones" in Tagalog are /tʃ/ and /dʒ/ which are "ch" and "j", respectively, because they are influences of Spanish and English.)
Please do try to look for minimal pairs for /m/ and /n/. Try root words instead; NOT prefixes like "ma-" and "na-".
Sir G
PS, Since this is an educational blog and not a social networking thread, please stick to formal language in your posts. Thank you.
Ohh...yes...I got it... Im sorry sir.. I thought its ok if I use "*" in giving examples.... Thank you sir....
ReplyDelete