Cover not available
Part of
The Continuity of Linguistic Change: Selected papers in honour of Juan Andrés Villena-Ponsoda
Edited by Matilde Vida-Castro and Antonio Manuel Ávila-Muñoz
[Studies in Language Variation 31] 2024
► pp. 15–35

Chapter 1
Cognitive attributes of preclassical phonology

| Universität Heidelberg , Germany | Universidad de Alcalá , Spain
Cognitive phonology, as a development of cognitive linguistics, is one of the most interesting fields of research in the twenty-first century. It is often opposed to so-called “classical phonology”, since the latter mainly builds on structuralist foundations. This chapter considers the proposals made between 1889 and 1921 concerning the concept of “phoneme”, which coincide in many basic assumptions with contemporary cognitive phonology. Among these proposals, those of Jan Baudouin de Courtenay are especially relevant, together with those of Edward Sapir. Basic concepts of cognitivism, such as mental representation, similarity, social use and frequency, can be found in them, both explicitly and implicitly.
Keywords: phoneme, phonology, phonetics, cognitivism, mental representation, usage, frequency
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The history of the phoneme concept
  • 3.Theoretical foundations of cognitive phonology
  • 4.Baudouin de Courtenay, cognitivist phonologist avant la lettre
  • 5.Other precognitive proposals
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 5 February 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.31.01mor
References (100)
References
Abercrombie, David. 1967. Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Alarcos-Llorach, Emilio. 1977. Gramática estructural (según la Escuela de Copenhague y con especial atención a la lengua española) [Structural grammar (according to the Copenhagen School and with particular focus on the Spanish language)]. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Albrow, Kenneth H. 1981. The Kazan School and the London School. In Ronald E. Asher & Eugenie J. A. Henderson (eds.), Towards a history of phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1985. Phonology in the twentieth century: Theories of rules and theories of representations. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
2021. Twentieth century phonology: Second edition revised and expanded. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Baudouin de Courtenay, Jan. 1881. On Pathology and Embryology of Language. In E. Stankiewicz (ed.), A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology: The Beginnings of Structural Linguistics, 121-124. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Baudouin de Courtenay, Jan. 1889. On the Tasks of Linguistics. In E. Stankiewicz (ed.), A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology: The Beginnings of Structural Linguistics, 125-43. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
, Jan. 1894. Próba teorij alternacyj fonetycznych [An attempt at a theory of phonetic alternations]. Kraków.Google Scholar
, Jan. 1895. Versuch einer Theorie phonetischer Alternationen [An attempt at a theory of phonetic alternations]. Strassburg: Truebner. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, Jan. 1909. The Classification of Languages. In E. Stankiewicz (ed.), A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology: The Beginnings of Structural Linguistics, 155-159. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
, Jan. 1910. Phonetic Laws. In E. Stankiewicz (ed.), A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology: The Beginnings of Structural Linguistics, 160-177. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, John, Colin Yallop & Janet Fletcher. 2007. An introduction to phonetics and phonology, 3rd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donegan, Patricia & David Stampe. 1979. The study of Natural Phonology. In D. A. Dinnnsen (Ed.), Current approaches to phonological theory. 126 173. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan. 2011. The phoneme. In Marc van Oostendorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logo. (15 December, 2021.)Google Scholar
Durnovo, Nikolaj, Bohislav Havránek, Roman Jakobson, Vilém Mathesius, Jan Mukařovský, Nikolaj Trubeckoj, Bohumil Trnka. 1929. Thèses présentées au Premier Congrès des philologues slaves [Theses presented at the First Congress of Slavic Philologists]. In Mélanges linguistiques dédiés au Premier Congrès des Philologues Slaves, 5-29. Praha: Jednota Československých Matematiků a Fysiků.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang. 1984. Explaining Natural Phonology. Phonology, 1, 29-51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duxans-Barrobés, Helenca & Marta Ruiz Costa-Jussà. 2020. Introducción al habla [Introduction to speech]. Barcelona: UOC.Google Scholar
Eddington, David. 1995. Psychological status of phonological analysis. Hispania 8. 873–884.Google Scholar
Firth, John. 1934. ðə wəːd “founiːm” [The word phoneme]. Le Maître Phonétique 12(49), no. 46. 44–46.Google Scholar
. 1948. Sounds and prosodies. Transactions of the Philological Society 47. 127–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk (ed.). 2006. Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gil, Juana (ed.). 2015. Nuevas aportaciones al estudio de la percepción del habla [New contributions to the study of speech perception]. Revista Española de Lingüística 45(1). 7–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1979. On understanding grammar. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Godel, Robert. 1957. Les sources manuscrites du cours de linguistique générale de F. de Saussure [The manuscript sources of the Course in General Linguistics by F. de Saussure]. Geneva: E. Droz.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John A. 1990. Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Graff, Willem L. 1935. Remarks on the phoneme. American Speech 10(2). 83–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1962. Phonology in generative grammar. Word 18. 54–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hara, Makoto. 1968. En defensa del concepto ‘fonema’ contra la fonología generativa de la escuela de Chomsky [In defence of the concept ‘phoneme’ against the generative phonology of the school of Chomsky]. In Carlos Magis (ed.), Actas del III Congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas, 435–442. Mexico City: El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
Harris, Zellig. 1951. Methods in structural linguistics. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Häusler, Frank. 1976. Das Problem Phonetik und Phonologie bei Baudouin de Courtenay und in seiner Nachfolge [The problem of phonetics and phonology in Baudouin de Courtenay and his succession]. Halle: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Havet, Louis. 1967 [1876]. The phoneme, 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heaman, Isabel M. 1984. Baudouin de Courtenay – a pioneer of structural linguistics. Working Papers of the Linguistic Circle of the University of Victoria 4(1). 23–40.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, Louis. 1943b. Langue et parole [Language and speech]. Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure 2. 29–44.Google Scholar
. 1972. Sprogsystem og sprogforandring [Linguistic system and language change]. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague XV(6). 48–54.Google Scholar
. 1974 [1943a]. Prolegómenos a una teoría del lenguaje [Prefaces to a theory of language]. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1958. Powstanie pojęcia fonemu w lingwistyce polskiej i światowej [The origin of the notion of the phoneme in Polish and international linguistics]. Polska Akademia Nauk, Sprawozdania z prac naukowych wydziału nauk społecznych 1(6). 48–54.Google Scholar
. 1962. Selected writings: Word and language, vol. 1. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1971 [1960]. The Kazan’s School of Polish linguistics and its place in the international development of phonology. In Roman Jakobson, Selected writings: Word and language, vol. 2, 394–‍428. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1972 [1929]. El círculo de Praga [The Prague Circle]. Barcelona: Anagrama.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1923. Language. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Johnson, Keith. 2010. Acoustic and auditory phonetics, 3rd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel. 1917. Everyman’s English pronouncing dictionary. London: Everyman’s Reference Library.Google Scholar
. 1950. The phoneme: Its nature and use. Cambridge: W. Heffer & Sons.Google Scholar
. 1957. The history and meaning of the term ‘phoneme’. Le Maître Phonétique 35(72). 1–20.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1994. Phonology in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Koerner, Ernst F. K. 1972. Jan Baudouin de Courtenay: His place in the history of linguistic science. Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes 14(4). 663–683. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kohler, Klaus. 1966. Is the syllable a phonological universal? Journal of Linguistics 2. 207–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Categorical speech perception revisited. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 27(5). 339–‍54 [URL]. (17 May, 2022.)Google Scholar
Krámsky, Jirí. 1974. The phoneme: Introduction to the history and theories of a concept. Munich: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar
Kruszewski, Nikolaj. 1881. Über die Lautabwechslung [On sound alternation]. Kasan: Universitätbruchdruckerei.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 1994. Principles of linguistic change. Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald Wayne. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lepschy, Giulio. 1971 [1966]. La lingüística estructural [Structural linguistics]. Barcelona: Anagrama. Torino: Giulio Einaudi.Google Scholar
Li, Charles. 1976. Subject and topic. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Bjorn. 1992. Phonological units as adaptive emergents of lexical development. In Charles A. Ferguson, Lise Menn & Carol Stoel-Gammon (eds.), Phonological development: Models, research, implications, 131–163. Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Marouzeau, Jules. 1933. Lexique de la terminologie linguistique. Paris: Paul Geuthner.Google Scholar
Mathesius, Vilém. 1929. Ziele und Aufgaben der vergleichenden Phonologie [The aims and tasks of comparative phonology]. Xenia Pragensia. 432–435.Google Scholar
Mompeán, José Antonio. 2006. The phoneme as a basic-level category: Experimental evidence from English. International Journal of English Studies 6. 141–172.Google Scholar
. 2012. La fonología cognitiva [Cognitive phonology]. In Iraide Iberretxe & Javier Valenzuela (eds.), Lingüística cognitiva, 305–326. Barcelona: Anthropos.Google Scholar
Moreno-Fernández, Francisco. 2017. A framework for cognitive sociolinguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mugdan Joachim. 1985. The origin of the phoneme: Farewell to a myth. Lingua Posnaniensis 28. 137–150.Google Scholar
Mugdan, Joachim. 2011. On the origins of the term phoneme. Historiographia Linguistica 38(1–2). 85–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nathan, Geoffrey. 1986. Phonemes as mental categories. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS). 212–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Where is the natural phonology phoneme? In Jürgen Trouvain (ed.), Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences ICPhS XVI, 6–10 August 2007, Saarbrücken, Germany, 93–98. Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes. [URL]. (15 December, 2021.)Google Scholar
Ogden, Richard & John K. Local. 1994. Disentangling prosodies from autosegments. A note on a misplaced research tradition. Journal of Linguistics 30(2). 477–498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J. 1986. Consumer’s guide to evidence in phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3. 3–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perry, Joseph A. 1974. Phoneme and supralect. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 4(1). 13–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet, Mary E. Beckham & Robert Ladd. 2000. Conceptual foundations of phonology as a laboratory science. In Noel Burton-Roberts, Philip Carr & Gerard Docherty (eds.), Phonological knowledge, 273–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pike, Kenneth L. 1947. Phonemics: A technique for reducing languages to writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Quilis, Antonio. 1981. Fonética acústica de la lengua española [Acoustic phonetics of the Spanish language]. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
. 1993. Tratado de fonología y fonética españolas [Treatise on Spanish phonology and phonetics]. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Robins, Robert. 1967. A short history of linguistics. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor. 1975. Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology General 104. 192–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. & M. Sandra Peña Cervel (eds.). 2005. Cognitive linguistics. Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction. Berlin & New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & Co.Google Scholar
. 1925. Sound patterns of language. Language 1. 37–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1879. Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes [Memoir on the primitive system of vowels in Indo-European languages]. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
. 1915. Cours de linguistique générale [Course in general linguistics]. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Senis, Angela. 2016. Le phonème face à la théorie du langage de J. R. Firth [The phoneme and J. R. Firth’s theory of language]. Modèles Linguistiques 74. [URL]. (28 March, 2021.)Google Scholar
Sinclair, John. 1991. Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stampe, David. 1969. The acquisition of phonetic representation. Princeton Center for Language Study 5. 443 454.Google Scholar
Stankiewicz, Edward (ed.). 1972. A Baudouin de Courtenay anthology: The beginnings of structural linguistics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. [URL] (13 June, 2022.)Google Scholar
Strauss, Steven L. 1982. Lexicalist phonology of English and German. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweet, Henry. 1877. Handbook of phonetics. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Taylor, John. 1990. Schemas, prototypes and models in search of the unity of the sign. In Savas L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Meanings and prototypes: Studies in linguistic categorization, 521–534. London & New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2002. Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Polysemy's paradoxes. Language Sciences 25. 637–657. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Where do phonemes come from? A view from the bottom. International Journal of English Studies 6. 19–54.Google Scholar
. 2017. Phonology and cognitive linguistics. Journal of Cognitive Linguistics 2. 1–24.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai S. 1939. Grundzüge der Phonologie [Principles of phonology]. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Twaddell, William Freeman. 1935. On defining the phoneme. Baltimore, MD: Waverly Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vachek, Joseph. 1933. What is phonology? English Studies 15. 81–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1964. On some basic principles of ‘classical’ phonology. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. [URL]. (28 March, 2021.) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vinogradov, Viktor. 1962. Jan Baudouin de Courtenay. Slavia Orientalis XI. 447–460.Google Scholar
Wells, John. 1982. Accents of English, vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar