Re: Analyzing Phonology
| From: | Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Saturday, January 25, 2003, 10:22 |
|---|
Emaelivpar Dirk Elzinga:
>If you have enough vocabulary to get
>meaningful numbers, finding out how frequent different sounds are
What's "enough"? In a statistics course we were taught minimum sample size
was 40, but that really sounds _minimum_ for this application. I currently
have the newest 300 words typed into Shoebox, with at least that number
again of older words in dead tree form only. Should part of speech be
correlated against any of these variables you mentioned, btw?
Vao'"frequency counts" kao:
>be sure to take the phonetic context into account
>when looking at that kind of thing; that is, the figures for "p" in syllable
>initial position should be distinguished from "p" in syllable final
>position, and so forth.
Is this true even when [p] and [p_h] are both allophones rather than
phonemes, as in English /p/?
As for actually doing this, is there a good methodology besides the
Butt-In-Chair method? ;) Ie, is there some helpful way of organizing
things or a certain order of operations that makes phonological analysis
easier/better?
--
AA
Reply