Abstract
In this article we note that diacritics, both in terms of their definition by the IPA, and in studies of transcriber reliability, are treated as a single group. Further, they are usually treated as being used purely to refine the meaning of a sound and, as such, as having less status phonetically than full symbols. It is argued here that diacritics should be classified into at least two major categories, and it is shown how one of these categories is the equivalent of a ‘full’ symbol. Apart from the implications this has for reliability measures, it is argued in conclusion that a more neutral definition of diacritic by the IPA is required.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Speech and Hearing,Linguistics and Language,Anthropology,Language and Linguistics
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献