CRITICAL JOURNAL REVIEW

Phonology

Lecturer :
Yani Lubis, M.Hum

Written by :
Name : M. Rizki Anugerah R
Nim : 0304173216
Class : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris 1

TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS TRAINING FACULTY

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY NORTH SUMATERA
MEDAN
2019
 CRITICAL JOURNAL REVIEW

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1. Identity of journal 1

Title : 1. The Use of the Terms Phonetics and Phonology in the Description of
Disordered Speech
Author : Martin J. Ball and Nicole Muller

Journal of : Phonology

Date of journal : July 2009

Volume :4

2. Identity of journal 2

Title : The phonetics of phonological speech errors: An acoustic analysis of

slips of the tongue
Author : Stefan A. Fricsh and Richad Wright

Journal of : Phonetics

Date of journal : 7 Feb 2002

 CHAPTER II

DISCUSSION

2.1 Summary of Content

2.1.1 Journal 1

We discuss the use of the distinction between phonetics and phonology both in traditional
descriptive linguistics and in psycholinguistic models of speech production and perception. We
note that both these ways of using this distinction have been applied to the description of speech
and language disorders. We describe three problems in applying the terms phonetics and
phonology to clinical data: one problem involved describing speech error data; one problem
involved using a binary distinction in modeling speech production; and one problem derived
from these two differing approaches to the terms, that is, the problem of disentangling the
speaker's production from the listener's perception. We conclude by offering some suggestions
for refining our classificatory systems while retaining the basic insight offered by the division
into phonetic and phonological domains.

THE APPLICATION OF THE TERMS PHONETICS AND PHONOLOGY TO SPEECH

DISORDERS
There has been a long tradition of examining speech disorders using both descriptive and
organizational philosophies. From time to time an explicit examination of established
terminologies is appropriate, and it has become clear that this dual approach is not without
problems. In this respect, some of what we introduce below has already been discussed what is
novel in our presentation is that we bring this material together and suggest a way of solving the
problems that have arisen in current usage.

Differences Between Clinical and Descriptive Linguists

We have to bear in mind that the approach of clinical linguists to their data often differs
from that of descriptive linguists. Whereas descriptive linguists need to inform readers about the
sound system of a particular language, clinical linguists may be primarily interested in providing
a principled comparison between a client's production and the target, in other words, in an
explicit comparison with a target system. (Note that sociolinguistic sensitivity is important here
as well. Laver [1994] comments that speech pathologists "have an absolute need to be able to
relate the speech patterns of the individual, however idiosyncratic, to the generalised patterns
that characterise their sociolinguistic community"
For example, if the client uses the wrong variant of a contrastive speech unit, for
example, an unaspirated instead of an aspirated fortis plosive, this is deemed to be a phonetic
error. On the other hand, if the client uses a different contrastive unit than the expected one, for
example, an alveolar instead of a velar lenis plosive, this is deemed to be a phonological error. In
this way, clinical linguists are subtly altering the meaning of the terms phonetic and phonological
compared to their use by descriptive linguists.

2.2.2 Journal 2

Acoustic analysis was used to examine whether speech errors involve lexical, segmental,
or sub-featural errors in speech production. Nine participants produced tongue twisters that
induced errors between /s/ and /z/ word onsets in contexts where the error outcomes were either
words (e.g., sit to zit) or nonwords (e.g., suck to *zuck). Three measurements of the /s/-/z/
contrast were made: (1) percent voicing, (2) duration of frication, and (3) amplitude of frication.
The tokens were also transcribed under careful listening conditions. Gradient and categorical
errors were found for all acoustic dimensions. The errors might or might not be detected by
careful listening, depending on the extent to which there were errors along all three dimensions.
These data support previous articulatory studies that found speech errors at a sub-featural level.
However, cases where /s/ and /z/ are realized with a categorical change in voicing are more
common than would be expected if categorical changes in voicing were merely extreme
examples of gradient voicing errors. Also, both gradient and categorical error rates were higher
when the error outcomes were words. Thus, our study also provides evidence for the
psychological reality of phonological segments and words as units in the speech production
process.r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Traditional approaches to speech error analysis use phonetic transcription to encode
speech errors at the time they are heard. In ‘‘naturally occurring’’ speech error corpora, errors
that are observed in everyday speech are written down opportunistically. In the early corpora
(e.g., Fromkin, 1971; Shattuck, 1975) the error recorders were usually participants in the
communicative event in which the error occurred. Stemberger (1983) collected naturally
occurring errors only as an observer in an attempt to reduce the potential for perceptual bias. In
some cases, recordings of naturally occurring speech are used, and suspected errors are listened
to repeatedly to ensure accurate transcription (e.g., Garnham, Shillcock, Brown, Mill & Cutler,
1982).

Transcription is also normally used to encode errors in speech error elicitation

experiments (e.g., Baars, Motley & MacKay 1975; Dell & Reich, 1980), though usually the
utterances themselves are recorded on tape or computer and listened to repeatedly. In all cases
where transcription is used, the noting of a speech error necessarily coincides with the hearer
noticing an anomalous percept. Thus, in transcriptional approaches, a speech error is defined to
be an utterance that produces an anomalous percept that would be recognized as anomalous by
the speaker (Dell, 1986). Mowrey & MacKay (1990, p. 1299) note that imperceptible speech
errors may also exist and claim that ‘‘such production anomalies are errors if speech output
differs from the speaker’s intended output, however subtle the anomaly’’. Their claim raises the
question of how articulatorily detailed the speaker’s intentions are, which we discuss below.

Transcribed speech error evidence has been used to argue in favor of the psychological
reality of many phonological units, including the feature, segment, phoneme, cluster, syllable,
and word. Among sub-lexical errors it has been claimed that errors occur primarily at the level of
the phoneme or feature (Wickelgren, 1965) and that erroneous utterances are phonetically and
phonotactically grammatical (Wells, 1951; Fromkin, 1971). In other words, it is claimed that
speech errors occur by misordering abstract phonological units and the result is a phonetically
normal segment and possible word according to the grammar of the language. Phonetic errors are
often explicitly argued against (e.g., Fromkin, 1971) and it is claimed that when abstract units
move to different locations, they phonetically accommodate to their new environment. It should
be noted that there is some disagreement on these conclusions among experimenters using the
same collection techniques. For example, Stemberger (1983), based on his own corpus of
naturally occurring errors, claimed that phonologically ungrammatical utterances do occur,
though infrequently.
 2.2 Strength and weakness of Journal
2.2.1 Strength

This journal is really complete. The writerss has made this by completing their research
by giving data. Data is one of the important thing when we are writing a journal. And I think this
journal is really complete because of the attachments that writers have attached in this journal. Its
explaination is also clear. Theory and model of analysis used exactly, the language used by the
authors easy to understand the intent and purpose by the reader, and the analysis is very detailed
and easy to understand.

2.2.2 Weakness
Unfortunately The writersss don’t explain the meaning of some words or English
contractions that they have written in this journal. It can stop the reader to read this journal and
getting stuck in the part that they don’t know at all. The writersss also don’t explain about what
phonology is when they introduce the topic. they shoul explain it first and then the reader won’t
get any problem for understanding this journal. Overall this journal is really good.

2.3 Critcism of Journal

 Title: On the first and second journal contents are accordance with the title. In the first
journal we can see that the subject of his research is not a specific. the subject still very
wide.

  Volume and number: volume and number on the main journals and the comparison there
is placed at the bottom of journal
  Year of journal:  on the first and second journals listed the year of journal, so that readers
can know what kind of educational problems facing this year and can be checked with
last year as well as next year.
 author: The name of first and second author on the journal is quite clear, although it is
only made by one author. the author of the second journal put her email, it allows the
reader can easily criticize directly to the author. While in the first journal not put email of
the author
 The contents of the journal: On the second journal contains a discussion of clear, where
the two of jornal discussed the phonological speech error, solving the problems

 The method of the first jurnal is unclear. It’s so different with second journal.
    In the first of journal, time, date and located of research are not specific and it's can
make journal to be not clear. The subject of the research in this journal not mentioned in
the number of quantitative. wheres in the second of journal was cointained
  Design journal:  design of journal was comparative, structure is neat and compact so it is
more easily understood than the first journal
 CHAPTER III

CLOSING

3.1 Conclusion

In the first journal The terms phonetic and phonological have a long history in speech-
language pathology, and the derived categories of distortions and substitutions are encountered
in many assessments of speech. What we have shown here is that these terms as presently
utilised are problematic, partly because users of the terms do not always distinguish between
them as descriptive labels for perceived speech and as diagnostic labels of speech production
disorders, and also because a binary distinction seems insufficient for both these approaches. We
have shown the need to ensure that clinicians overtly state whether they are describing the effect
of a speech error, or its source; further, we have demonstrated the need for a richer set of
descriptive terms for disordered speech, suggested what these terms should be, and outlined a
way of undertaking speech error analysis that unifies the approaches referred to in this artide.

While in the second journal, This study presented an acoustic and perceptual analysis of
onset /s/ and /z/ speech errors by nine talkers. In support of the claims of Mowrey & MacKay
(1990), we found that gradient, noncontrastive errors can occur, and that such errors are actually
common. In addition, we found that categorical errors also occur at rates that are higher than
would be expected if the only source of errors was from noncontrastive variation that happened
to extend into another phonetic category. Finally, we demonstrated a lexical effect on both
gradient and categorical errors. These patterns provide evidence for a set of higher level units
that organize phonetic gestures at the level of the segment and word, agreeing with some of the
observations of traditional speech error analyses based on transcribed data.

3.2 Suggestion

I suggest The writersss to write this journal completely. So that the reader can understabd
the topic easily. Although the explanation is complete, but it would be more complete if you
elaborate the topic with using data accurately.