Questions and answers of the text "introduction to English phonology"

1. How could you explain these non-native pronunciations?

A / To explain these non-native pronunciations, we must first know that Learning to pronounce
words correctly can be one of the most difficult parts of mastering English, which is why it is
advisable to learn to listen in order to identify when it is a native pronunciation or not.

2. How do you think this student would pronounce consonants in bold

R / The consonants are the basis of the English language, therefore, the pronunciation of the
consonants in bold would be with a common friction Some articulatory organ when pronouncing
them.

3. Do the following sounds contrast in English?

A / A minimum pair is a pair of words or phrases from a particular language that differ specifically
in a phoneme.

A phoneme is the minimum articulation of a vowel and consonant sound.

For example, cat and rat are a minimum pair differentiated by the consonants [k] and [r].

4. Which is more in line with the phonological structure of the language for which it is designed?
Why do you think the other linguist may have made different decisions?

A / I think that within fluent spoken language we cannot hear syllables. ... Most of the phonetics
found that the syllable is an aerodynamic effect ... In addition, the children had the syllable, we
used the idea of the syllable to make rhymes in poetry. However, the linguist does it in a better
way, the differences depend on the place and the way of interpreting the words and the sounds.

Questions from the second text “Natural language processing and phone and phoneme
applications”

1. What exactly is the concept "speaker's meaning"? Explain and give an example.

R / the meaning of the speaker is nothing more than acquiring the ability to use linguistic
conventions to communicate through verbal actions. However, the label linguistic conventions
may be too general to the extent that they cover different kinds of conventions that regulate
communicative activity. For example, it is true that a certain class of conventions allows us to
explain a certain dimension of communicative behavior, without being able to qualify as properly
linguistic. This is the case with some conventions that require the use of certain expressions,
whether specific or not. This is the case of conventions that modify what linguistic courtesy is, for
example, in the case of treatments. These non-linguistic conventions play an important role in
communicative behavior, but do not really face what is the foundation of verbal action, the notion
of meaning or the relationship of meaning, which we are dealing with now. Although a speaker
may be impolite or behave in a communicatively inappropriate way, given a particular social
situation, that may not affect the fact that he is perfectly understood by his interlocutors, that is,
that his acts of 12 meaning (J. Bruner, 1990) are necessary because these interlocutors can
perfectly capture their communicative intentions.