You are on page 1of 2

Consider the distribution of [r] and [l] in Korean in the following words

:
rupi

"ruby"

mul

"water"

kiri

"road"

pal

"big"

saram

"person"

sul

"Seoul"

ratio

"radio"

ilkop

"seven"

ipalsa

"barber"

Are [r] and [l] separate phonemes or allophones of the same phoneme? If you conclude that
they are allophones of the one phoneme, state the rule that explains their distribution.
They are allophones of the same phoneme (because there are no minimal pairs). In
this case, their distribution is determined by location. The sound [r] occurs only at the
beginnings of syllables, and the sound [l] occurs only at the ends of syllables. So, the
rule would be either
/r/  [l] when syllable-final
or
/l/  [r] when syllable-initial.
Either response would be acceptable, given the data you have.
Here are some Japanese words in phonetic transcription. Based on these data, are [t], [tš],
and [ts] in complementary distribution? Which are allophones and which are phonemes?
(NOTE: Treat [tš] and [ts] as if they were a single sound - which they are as palatal and
alveolar affricates, respectively.)

tatami

"mat"

tomodatši

"friend"

utši

"house"

tegami

"letter"

totemo

"very"

otoko

"male"

tšitši

"father"

tsukue

"desk"

tetsudau

"help"

šita

"under"

ato

"later"

matsu

"wait"

natsu

"summer"

tsutsumu

"wrap"

tšizu

"map"

kata

"person"

tatemono

"building"

te

"hand"

The sounds are in complementary distribution, and they are all allophones of the same
phoneme (because there are no minimal pairs). The sound [t] only occurs before [a],

[e], and [o]. The sound [ts] occurs only before [u]. The sound [tš] occurs only before
[i]. So, the best rule to describe the distribution of these sounds would be
/t/  [ts] before [u]
and
/t/  [tš] before [i].
If you wanted to simplify the rule even more, you could say
/t/  an affricate when before a high vowel.

Consider these phonetic forms of Hebrew words. Are [b] and [v] allophones of one
phoneme? Can you formulate a rule to explain their distribution? Does the same rule, or
lack of a rule, apply to [p] and [f]? If not, why not? (NOTE: [?] represents a glottal stop,
and [x] represents a pharyngeal fricative.)

bika

"lamented"

litef

"stroked"

mugbal

"limited"

sefer

"book"

šavar

"broke" (masc.)

sataf

"washed"

šavra

"broke" (fem.)

para

"cow"

?ikev

"delayed"

mitpaxat

"handkerchief"

bara

"created"

ha?alpim

"the Alps"

The sounds [b] and [v] are allophones (because there are no minimal pairs). As in the
first example above, the key here is location in the syllable. The sound [b] only occurs
at the beginning of a syllable. But unlike the earlier example, [v] does not necessarily
always occur syllable-final. In a word like [šavar], the [v] isn't exactly syllable-initial
or syllable-final. So, in this case, [b] is always syllable-initial, and [v] is never syllableinitial, but [v] occurs everywhere else. The rule would then have to be
/v/  [b] when syllable-initial.
It couldn't be put the other way around (since [v] isn't only syllable-final).
As for [p] and [f], the same rule applies:
/f/  [p] when syllable-initial.