ALLOPHONIC VARIATION OF THE CONSONANT PHONEMES
Keywords:
allophonic variation, consonant phonemes, phonemes, allophones, phonetic environment, dialectal variation, phonological rules, speech style, language learning, pronunciation, speech technology, speech recognition, sociophonetics, historical linguistics, language acquisition, phonetic transcription, minimal pairs, phonetic perception, language technology, speech synthesis, cross-linguistic studies.Abstract
This article explores the concept of allophonic variation within the
context of consonant phonemes, focusing on how phonemes can have different
realizations depending on their phonetic environment, dialect, social factors, and
speech context. The text emphasizes the distinction between phonemes (the
abstract units of sound) and their allophones (the actual pronunciations),
highlighting that allophonic variations do not alter the meaning of words but
reflect the dynamic and flexible nature of spoken language.
References
1. Anderson, S. R. (1981). Phonology in the 1980s. Cambridge University
Press.
2. Barr, D. J., & Johnson, A. H. (2014). Speech perception and phonetic
variation. Journal of Phonetics, 42(1), 10-30.
3. Beddor, P. S. (2009). Phonetic variation and phonology. In J. H.
Goldstein, D. H. Whalen, & C. T. Best (Eds.), The Handbook of Speech
Perception (pp. 527-552). Blackwell Publishing.
4. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2018). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer
(Version 6.1.06) [Computer software]. Retrieved from
5. Docherty, G. J., & Foulkes, P. (1999). Describing dialect variation: The
phonology of northern English. Oxford University Press.
6. Labov, W. (2001). Principles of linguistic change: Social factors.
Blackwell Publishing.
7. Ladefoged, P., & Johnson, K. (2014). A Course in Phonetics (7th ed.).
Cengage Learning.
8. Wright, R. (2004). A review of the social dimensions of allophonic
variation. Language and Speech, 47(4), 299-328.
9. Khusanova, M. (2023). HISTORY OF USING TESTS IN
MONITORING THE LEVEL OF QUALIFICATION. Science and
innovation, 2(B7), 17-21
10.Mahira, K. (2024). METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS FOR A
FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHER: MONITORING AND
ASSESSING SKILLS. Multidisciplinary and Multidimensional
Journal, 3(10), 10-15.
FAN, TA’LIM, TEXNOLOGIYA VA ISHLAB CHIQARISH
INTEGRATSIYASI ASOSIDA RIVOJLANISH ISTIQBOLLARI
221
11.Mahira, K. (2024). TEACHER ASSESSMENT: HISTORICAL
DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
EUROPEAN RESEARCH OUTPUT, 3(11), 45-49.
12.Xolmurodova, S., & Khusanova, M. (2023). TEACHING WRITING IN
ENGLISH. Научный Фокус, 1(1), 1173-1175.
13.Iroda, B., & Mohira, H. (2023). EFFECTIVE PRONOUNICIATION
TEACHING IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE. O'ZBEKISTONDA
FANLARARO INNOVATSIYALAR VA ILMIY TADQIQOTLAR
JURNALI, 2(19), 700-703.
14.No, P. Didactic Conditions for the Formation of Discussion Competence
among Students.
15.Mokhira, K. (2023). HOLISTIC SCORING AS A GRADING
METHOD. International Journal of Contemporary Scientific and
Technical Research, 493-495.
16.Mokhira, K. (2023). THE IMPORTANCE OF DIFFERENT SUB–
SKILLS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN PARTICIPATING IN A GROUP
DISCUSSION. International Journal of Contemporary Scientific and
Technical Research, 496-499.
17.Qizi, K. M. S. (2022). Learning new content material through cooperative
group discussions
