Diphthong

The concept of diphthong is a concept Linguistique, used in Phonétique and Phonologie, which evokes the specific shape of vowel.

The word comes from Latin of Greek origin “diphtongus” (of “diphtoggos”, double sound) and which appeared in French as of the 13th century (in the simplified form “ditongue”).

A diphthong is a Phone (thus the realization of a Phonème, a sound under consideration under the linguistic angle) whose joint varies constantly (slip or glide) during its realization: i.e. that on a phonetic diagram of the vowels, it will be represented like a vector. In some Language S, whose English, one can also find Triphtongue S whose quality varies twice, which could be represented like broken lines. As actually, the phonetic analysis shows that all its product by the articulatory system varies, would be this only at the beginning and at the end of its articulation, there is no inevitably absolutely distinct line between true a monophtongue and a true diphthong but one can distinguish well in general from the typically stable vowels (monophtongues) and others more typically variable (di or triphthongs).

Identification

The diphthong is often completely mixed in the spirit of those which speak about it with a Digramme and this error is very widespread in secondary education. It thus should be understood that a digraph, the sequence of two vowel-letters, can note (and in French notes often) a monophtongue as well as a diphthong (for example in the word " faute" the digraph note the same sound as in the word " mot". On the other hand only one letter can very (and in English it is often the case) note a diphthong. Thus in the English words scale and past , the note a diphthong in the first word and a monophtongue in the second.

It is the phonetic inventory of a language which gives a list of its phons, independently of their conventional notations. From this first inventory one can seek the list of the phonemes. This phonematic examination is done by the method of the minimal pairs, which consists in testing permutations minimal of sounds which can make it possible to obtain new words. Two independent researchers must normally by this method draw up an identical list of the phonemes, but certain phenomena can complicate this research:

The inventory of the phonemes normally is not obstructed by the existence of allophone S, easily not joined together in only one phoneme; on the other hand, it is known that the existence of Archiphonème S (several phonemes appearing distinct in certain contexts and identical in others) can obstruct counting indeed. In the same way, the diphthongs in a language are likely to be interpreted like continuations of two phons, therefore of two phonemes (in particular if their arrival and starting points exist as a mononphtongues), unless there exist allophones monophtongues and other diphthongs of the same phoneme in various dialects.

Being given as the concept of phoneme, in practice, is usually used as well by phonetists as by phonologists, a conflict on the number of those in a language will be able to emerge between these two disciplines. Such a conflict could be solved by the adoption of the theory more " économique" or by the recourse to parallel disciplines like morphology.

In practice, the diphthongs are seldom taken as examples in the oppositions and seldom integrated in the tables of the vowels. They would however be opposed to it to the other vowels by their only character of diphthongs (a dimension often not taken into account in the tables that the phonetists affect) and could then be classified in a two-dimensional board according to their starting point and of arrival. There exists little of teaching examples of the characterization of a diphthong by the method of the minimal pairs, in some language that it is.

Notation

Phonetics

In phonetic notation (which is written between hooks: ) and taking into account their dynamic nature, the diphthongs are noted by two letters:
  • the first represents the initial quality of the sound (stamp-source);
  • the second the final quality of this one (stamp-target).

Each of both being a vowel or a semivowel.

Phonological

In phonological notation (which is written between two oblique bars: //), any phoneme must normally be represented by only one graphème. To represent a diphthong phonologiquement, a fortiori of the triphthongs, a conflict emerges between the preoccupation with a simplicity (to resemble as much as possible with the phonetic writing and not to have to introduce special signs) and the preoccupation with a rigor, which normally imposes a distinct and only one sign for any phoneme. This question is seldom mentioned in the scientific literature. A solution would be perhaps to stick several letters (such as for example in the French notation " œ") to represent the diphthong, which is possible by using specialized software but not the current word processing.

Origin of the diphthongs

The processes which lead to the appearance (or the modification) of the diphthongs are mainly studied by the phonetists because they generally have a dynamics Phonétique. However this appearance will of course have consequences early or late on the phonological system .

In theory, there exist three possible origins for a diphthong: evolution of an old diphthong, the diphthongization and the coalescence of two phonemes.

In addition it is logical in this research symmetrically to study the fate of the diphthongs which disappear.

Evolution of an old diphthong

A current diphthong can quite simply come from an old diphthong (or triphthong) whose pronunciation will have changed, either to the starting point, or at the point of arrival, or to both.

Diphthongization

The other well documented source is the diphthongization, which is obtaining a diphthong starting from old a monophtongue, often under the influence of the tonic accent and/or the vicinity. It is thus not inevitably the phoneme in all its occurrences which undergoes the change, as in a regular evolution, but only some of its occurrences. Because of these determining factors, of the same words root can be touched or not by the diphthongization of one of their Voyelle according to their Morphologie (makes the vowel of it will have several Allophone S initially). In the phenomenon known in French language like the vocalic Alternation, one finds the result (still visible in the writing) of the old French diphthongization which has differently affected of the same words stock like: grind/molar/to grind (let us specify that in this example, the old diphthongs obtained in the modern language were fixed like simple Phonème S and that none of these three Mot S contains diphthong today). It is seen that a phonetic process at the beginning led to the appearance in these words of phonemes separated today. The Diachronic result of diphthongization, a phonetic process, can thus then be observed synchronically, by the comparison of the various misadventures of the original root, as well phonetically as phonologiquement.

Diphthongization, this evolution of an ancestral monophtongue in monophtongue (S) current (S) on the one hand (similar or not in its pronunciation to that of origin) and/or in diphthong (S) on the other hand perhaps observed:

  • is inside the same language, as one has just seen it, according to the words;
  • is between related phonemes of two languages sisters (ground suelo , good bueno makes think of a Spanish diphthongization of a phoneme which remained a French monophtongue);
  • is in parallel between two word families (thus it is interesting to observe that the vocalic alternation of the verb " pouvoir" in French resembles that of the verb " poder " in Spanish).

The coalescence of two phonemes

A third possible source would be the coalescence of two phonemes, not inevitably two vowels besides, which would be systematized so much so that they end up becoming inseparable, thus forming a new phonological unit (?).

Existence of the modern French diphthongs

The existence of the modern French diphthongs can be the subject of two divergent analyzes, according to the adopted point of view (rather phonetic or rather phonological) and of the francophonie considered (phenomenon of Diphtongaison, in particular in Canada). These apparently contradictory points of view are due above all to the exact definition which is given to the two terms employed:
  • French modern (general standard of use or alternatives regional, creolized or historical)
  • with the concept of “diphthong” in itself.

Usual, traditional and dominant position

According to the commonly allowed definition and which is included in all the usual works: “The diphthongs do not exist any more in modern French”. The same sources note as: “French , nor vowels in Hiatus (example: chaos), nor the successions vowel Semi-consonant (example: work), nor the successions semi-consonants/vowel (example: yes) are not diphthongs ” (notices on the French diphthongs). These assertions, very peremptory and which do not seem to suffer from any exception, however moderate are even disputed by certain specialists (in phonology).

Modern French does not have any more diphthongs: the groups of Phoneme S noted by IE in foot , ui in night , oi in time , are indeed sequences semi-consonant + vowel. One should not confuse the Digramme S (two vowels written after) of the true diphthongs (as in “fact”). The Former French however counted diphthongs, whose trace remains in the modern Orthographe: for example in flower or high .

This position is also confirmed by many secondary sources (quotations on Internet). A site expresses even a " avertissement" according to which the existence of diphthongs in standard French would be an English concept! And probably of many printed works.

A theory concurente

The traditional position on the diphthongs of French seems to come from a primarily phonetic approach directly transposed on the phonematic level. Being given that it is not interdict in phonetics to use several graphèmes to refine the description of a sound phenomenon, then if a slipping phonation, as well like starting point than like point of arrival of other phons already known by the language, one has will tend phonetically to note it by the same signs as the phons simple of the even if it means language to use or introduce semi-consonants (i.e. the idea that certain vowels in fact are used locally like consonants). This notation by several graphèmes between hooks will have tendency to " naturally; reporter" in the phonematic notation between oblique bars, if one jumps the stage of the phonematic examination in particular. Being given the problem inherent in the phonematic notation raised higher, the notation obtained, because of rule " a lettre=un phonème" will be automatically interpreted with wrong way like a succession of two phonemes!

To describe this reality complexes without falling into this circular reasoning:

It will thus be necessary already to take account of the abundant literature on diphthongization in regional French or a bilingual context. Then the sites which recall the evolution of old diphthongizations of French do not diagnose all the complete extinction of the diphthongs obtained

In addition the analysis of a complex by semivowels does not seem contradictory with the existence of a diphthong since apparently this case is envisaged in the definition of the Semi-voyelle (translated of the linguistic English but definitions they are not theoretically independent of the language?).

If the diphthongs disappeared, that did they become? In fact, if it is probable that in the impressive list of the old diphthongs and triphthongs of the French, there are the many ones who disappeared while meeting in new phonemes, it misses an exhaustive table their current phonological results, which would make it possible to examine what they really became and to check this total disappearance.

Inside even of wikipedia FR, there is a page on the French Canadian who explicitly recognizes the existence of diphthongs in this variety of French. To deny the existence of diphthongs in French would thus return in fact to exclude French from Canada, without speaking about other more minority forms, of the French language.

More serious, a rather awkward contradiction comes owing to the fact that the bond of this page towards its English equivalent carries out directly towards a list of the French diphthongs, without allusion to any regional idiosyncracy! However this can be explained if it is admitted that the idea of French diphthongs is a concept " anglais" , which touches perhaps also Canadian.

One also notes that certain very pointed sites are not concerned apparently with their existence, without however denying it explicitly.

The scientific problem of the existence of the French diphthongs (independently of the regional aspects) thus remains open and an analysis, even an expertise, in particular under the phonological angle would be thus the welcome. Here a test of what that could give:

1 Let us take the word " roi" ; city like example of diphthong on the page in English. Let us write phonetically. Now let us write phonologiquement /rwa/ as if it had, temporarily, three phonemes:

in substituent the R: weight, me, you, law, finger, oneself, wood, coi, faith, goose, joy, what, nut, voice! (each one of these words taken two to two constitute a minimal pair) in substituent it by another vowel (one will test only simple vowels): rat, D, spoke, rice, belch, russet-red, Ru, kidney, round, return! (idem)
  • now if it is considered that there are three phonemes one must be able to cross between W and has it, but one finds with difficulty a consonant to be substituted for W:
R (E) not??? one obtains some results in him substituent a vowel: rhéa, ria, rua, coiled (let us note that this last is quite distinct from king in his pronunciation, whereas the /w/ semivowel would be for the anti-diphthongs only the one shape of the /u/ vowel???) finally if one wants to substitute for has another vowel, the list of what one obtains also is very limited: coiled, wheel (that one can hear as well as what true in is not coiled, well disjoins)

If it were composed of two phonemes, /w/ and /a/, that is to say a semivowel followed by a vowel. This semivowel should have in French an autonomous behavior, allowing a free association with the other vowels and consonants. It is far from being the case as one has just seen it (without being an absolute proof, indeed certain phonemes can have indeed combinative very limited).

2 If one studies now the family of the word three, taken as another example: thirty, thirteen, tricycle, tri-car, trépigner, third, third,… it is seen that if the word three begin with three consonants, it would be the only one of his family has to have a /w/ phoneme in his root /trw/ +/voyelle/, only formed elsewhere of /tr/ +/voyelle, even /T/ +/voyelle/in certain cases. Three remainder different from perforated when well even the semi-consonant is generally described like a simple form of the /u/ phoneme.

3 the comparison between the word three and his/her Latin cousins: very in Spanish, tre in Italian and even its cousins Germanic like Three in English or drei in German shows that none of these languages carries the trace of a similar phoneme W but that their quite recognizable structure is rather (dental consonant) + R + vowel (S), as in French (the numbers are words who tends to be preserved extremely well).

4 in initial position of the complex, it is noticed that the traditional words behave as if it begin with a vowel, i.e. that they are the subject of a connection, as in " oiseaux" whereas the exogenic words like wapiti or toilets or ouistiti are never dependant (one does not say lez-ouaters). That corroborates the idea that in the traditional words, that which one knows that it is well the result of a diphthongization, is always a single phoneme, in opposition to the behavior of the borrowed words, in which W-A behaves on the other hand like two phonemes of which the first, a consonant (or a semi-consonant) cannot be dependant.

It is thus noted that, from the phonological point of view, the digraph appears well to note a French diphthong (even if one can write it phonetically because this assumption has an explanation much more economic than that by making two phonemes and is also corroborated by the lexical study and the comparison of the related languages. Other phonemes, as those which are proposed like diphthongs on the page in English, can be tested same manner.

Random links:1765 | Puerta | List reading | Mrs Soleil | M13 (virology) | Characters of the human Comedy | Quatrième_convention_de_Genève