29
PHONETIC TRANSCRIPTION AND CONSTRUCTION OF OLD ENGLISH
Sulaymanova Nilufar Jabbarovna
Sam SIFL Head of the chair,
Ansorova Mutriba Muazzamovna
Dean of the Foreign languages
TPPI, Tadjikistan
Abstract:
In this article we will learn about the Old English vowel system, which had a clear trend
towards symmetry and balance because practically every long vowel had a corresponding short counterpart
in this course work. Consonants have typically been more stable than vowels, though there have been shifts
throughout history. The Old English consonant system was made up of numerous connected groups of
consonants. The consonants were divided into two categories: noise consonants and sonorants. Plosives and
fricatives were created from the noise consonants. The distinction between voiced and voiceless plosives was
made on the basis of phonemic differences.
Key words: International Phonetic Alphabet, allophony, Anglo-Frisian languages, closing diphthongs,
height-harmonic diphthongs,
Old English words, reconstructed parent forms of various kinds, and reconstructed Proto-West-
Germanic (PWG), Proto-Germanic (PG), and Proto-Indo-European (PIE) forms are all described using the
following conventions:
•
Italicized forms are either Old English words in their orthography or reconstructed forms of various
kinds. Extra diacritics are used when there is phonemic uncertainty in Old English spelling
•
Forms between /slashes/ and [brackets] denote broad (phonemic) or limited (allophonic)
pronunciation, respectively. Standard IPA notation is used to represent the sounds. The following table
indicates the correspondence between spelling and pronunciation transcribed in the International Phonetic
Alphabet. For details of the relevant sound systems, see Proto-Germanic phonology and Old English
phonology [3.233].
Proto-Germanic /b d ɡ/ had two allophones each: stops [b d ɡ] and fricatives [β ð ɣ]. The stops
occurred:
1.
following a nasal;
2.
when geminated;
3.
word-initially, for /b/ and /d/ only;
4.
following /l/, for /d/ only.
By West Germanic times, /d/ was pronounced as a stop [d] in all positions. The fricative allophones
are sometimes indicated in reconstructed forms to make it easier to understand the development of Old
English consonants. Old English retained the allophony [ɡ~ɣ], which in case of palatalization became [dʒ~j].
Later, non-palatalized [ɣ] became [ɡ] word-initially. The allophony [b~β] was broken when [β] merged with
[v], the voiced allophone of /f/.
Phonological processes
In the period before the oldest documentation, a number of phonological processes influenced Old
English. The processes impacted vowels in particular, which is why many Old English words differ greatly
from related terms in languages like Old High German, which is much closer to both languages' common
West Germanic parent. The events occurred in roughly the order listed below (with uncertainty in ordering as
noted).
Nasal absorption prior to fricatives
This is the origin of modern English five, mouth, us against German fünf, Mund, uns, for example.
See Ingvaeonic nasal spirant law for more information. First a-fronting
The Anglo-Frisian languages underwent a sound change in their development from Proto-West-
Germanic by which
ā
[ɑː], unless followed by /n, m/ or nasalised, was fronted to
ǣ
[æː].
This was similar
to the later process affecting short
a
, which is known as Anglo-Frisian brightening or First Fronting (see
below). Nasalized
ą̄
and the sequences
ān, ām
were unaffected and were later raised to
ǭ, ōn, ōm
(see below).
(This may be taken to imply that a nasal consonant
n, m
caused a preceding long vowel to nasalise.) In the
non-West-Saxon dialects of English (including the Anglian dialect underlying Modern English) the fronted
vowel was further raised to ē [eː]: W.S.
slǣpan
,
sċēap
(< Proto-West-Germanic
*slāpąn
,
*skāpă
< Proto-
Germanic
*slēpaną
,
skēpą
) versus Anglian
slēpan
,
sċēp
. The Modern English descendants
sleep
and
sheep
reflect the Anglian vowel; the West Saxon words would have developed to
*sleap
,
*sheap
.
30
The vowel affected by this change, which is reconstructed as being a low back vowel
ā
[ɑː] in Proto-
West-Germanic, was the reflex of Proto-Germanic /ɛː/. It is possible that in Anglo-Frisian, Proto-Germanic
/ɛː/ simply remained a front vowel, developing to Old English
ǣ
or
ē
without ever passing through an
intermediate stage as the back vowel [ɑː].
However, borrowings such as Old English
strǣt
from Latin
strāta (via)
and the backing to
ō
before nasals are much easier to explain under the assumption of a common
West Germanic stage
*ā
.
Monophthongization
Proto-Germanic /ai/ was monophthongised (smoothed) to /aː/ ([ɑː]).
This occurred after first a-
fronting. For example, Proto-Germanic *
stainaz
became Old English
stān
(modern
stone
) (cf. Old Frisian
stēn
stáin
stein
). In many cases, the resulting [ɑː] was later fronted to [æː] by i-
dǣlan
"to divide" (cf. Old Frisian
dēla
vs. Gothic
dáiljan
, Old High German
teilen
). It is possible
that this monophthongisation occurred via the height harmonisation that produced the other diphthongs in
Old English (presumably through an intermediate stage: /ai/ > [ɑæ] > /aː/).
Second a-fronting
The second part of a-fronting, called Anglo-Frisian brightening or First Fronting, is very similar to the
first part except that it affects short
a
instead of long
ā
. Here
a
[ɑ] is fronted to
æ
[æ] unless followed by /n,
m/ or nasalised, the same conditions as applied in the first part.
Importantly, a-fronting was blocked by
n, m
only in stressed syllables, not unstressed syllables, which
accounts for forms like
ġefen
(formerly
ġefæn
) "given" from Proto-Germanic
*gebanaz
. However, the
infinitive
ġefan
-restoration (see the explanation given in that section for the
similar case of
faren
vs.
faran
).
Diphthong height harmonisation
Proto-Germanic had the closing diphthongs /ai, au, eu/ (and [iu], an allophone of /eu/ when an /i/ or /j/
followed in the next syllable). In Old English, these (except /ai/, which had been monophthongised, as noted
above) developed into diphthongs of a generally less common type in which both elements are of the same
height, called height-harmonic diphthongs. This process is called diphthong height harmonisation.
Specifically:
•
/au/ [ɑu] underwent a-fronting to /æu/ and was then harmonised to /æːɑ/, spelled
ea
(or in modern
texts
ēa
).
•
/eu/ [eu] was harmonised to /eːo/, spelled
eo
(or in modern texts
ēo
).
•
[iu] was already harmonic; it became a separate phoneme /iːu/
[
who?
]
, spelled
io
(or in modern texts
īo
).
(This interpretation is somewhat controversial; see below.)
Other later processes, such as breaking, palatal diphthongisation, back mutation, and i-mutation,
resulted in an extra diphthong ie /iy/ in Old English. Short (monotonic) /aea, eo, iu, iy/[who?] and long /a, eo,
iu, iy/ diphthongs are possible. For some or all of these Old English diphthongs, some sources reconstruct
additional phonetic forms that are not height-harmonic. The first elements of a, o, and o are thought to have
had the qualities [], [e], and I (evidence for these qualities comes from the behavior of breaking and back
mutation described below; the Middle English development of short ea into /a/ could also provide some
evidence for the phonetic realization of a). The second parts of these diphthongs, on the other hand, have a
wider range of interpretations. There are some analyses that consider all of these diphthongs as ending in the
schwa sound []; for example, a, o, o = [ae], [e], I [5] The height-harmonic interpretations /iu/ and /iy/[who?]
for io and ie are debatable, with many (especially older) sources suggesting that the pronunciation
corresponded to the spelling (/io/, /ie/), and hence that these diphthongs were of the opening rather than the
height-harmonic kind. Io (both long and short) amalgamated with eo late in the evolution of the standard
West Saxon dialect, which is one of the most noticeable variations between early Old English (p. 900) and
late Old English (p. 1500). (p. 1000).
Breaking and retraction
When the short front vowels /i, e, ae/ are followed by /x/, /w/, or /r/ or /l/ plus another consonant in
Old English, they are diphthongized to short diphthongs /iu, eo, /. [6] Long /i, / broke to /iu, a/ in the same
way, but only when followed by /x/. The geminates rr and ll are normally counted as r or l plus another
consonant, however in West Germanic gemination, breaking does not occur before ll (the /i/ or /j/ in the
following syllable prevents breaking).
In late Old English, /iu, iu/ was shortened to /eo, eo/. (see above).
Depending on the sound to be broken, the specific criteria for breaking vary: Short /æ/ breaks before
h,
rC, lC
, where C is any consonant.
•
Short /e/ breaks before
h, rC, lh, lc, w
, i.e. compared to /æ/ it is also broken before
w
, but is broken
before
l
only in the combination
lh
and sometimes
lc
.
31
•
Short /i/ breaks before
h, rC, w
. However, it does not break before
wi
, and in the Anglian dialects
breaking before
rCi
happens only in the combination
*rzi
(e.g. Anglian
iorre
"anger" from
*irziją
but
afirran
from
*a+firrijaną
).
•
Long
ī
and
ǣ
break only before
h
.
Examples:
•
weorpan
[ˈweorpɑn] "to throw" < */ˈwerpan/
•
wearp
[wæɑrp] "threw (sing.)" < */wærp/
•
feoh
[feox] "money" < */feh/
•
feaht
[fæaxt] "fought (sing.)" < */fæht/
•
healp
[hæaɫp] "helped (sing.)" < */hælp/ (but no breaking in
helpan
"to help" because the consonant
after /l/ is not /h/)
•
feorr
[feorr] "far" < */ferr/
•
feallan
[ˈfæɑllɑn] "to fall" < */ˈfællan/ (but
tellan
< earlier */ˈtælljan/ is not broken because of the
following /j/)
•
eolh
[eoɫx] "elk" < */elh/
•
liornian, leornian
[ˈliurniɑn], [ˈleorniɑn] "to learn" < earlier */ˈlirnoːjan/
•
nēah
"near" [næːɑx] (cf. "nigh") < */næːh/
•
lēon
"to lend" [leːon] < */liːun/ < */ˈliuhan/ < */ˈliːhan/
The i-mutation of broken /iu, eo, æa/ (whether long or short) is spelled
ie
(possibly /iy/, see above).
Examples:
•
hwierfþ
"turns" (intr.) < /ˈhwiurfiθ/ + i-mutation < /ˈhwirfiθ/ + breaking < Proto-Germanic *hwirbiþi
< early Proto-Germanic *hwerbiþi
•
hwierfan
"to turn" (tr.) < /ˈhwæarfijan/ + i-mutation < /ˈhwærfijan/ + breaking < /ˈhwarfijan/ + a-
fronting < Proto-Germanic *hwarbijaną
•
nīehst
"nearest" (cf. "next") < /ˈnæːahist/ + i-mutation < /ˈnæːhist/ + breaking < /ˈnaːhist/ + a-
fronting < Proto-Germanic *nēhist
•
līehtan
"to lighten" < /ˈliːuhtijan/ + i-mutation < /ˈliːhtijan/ + breaking < Proto-Germanic *līhtijaną
Note that in some dialects /æ/ was backed (retracted) to /a/ ([ɑ]) rather than broken, when occurring in
the circumstances described above that would normally trigger breaking. This happened in the dialect of
Anglia that partially underlies Modern English, and explains why Old English
ceald
appears as Modern
English "cold" (actually from Anglian Old English
cald
) rather than "*cheald" (the expected result of
ceald
).
Both breaking and retraction are fundamentally phenomena of assimilation to a following velar
consonant. While /w/ is in fact a velar consonant, /h/, /l/, and /r/ are less obviously so. It is therefore assumed
that, at least at the time of the occurrence of breaking and retraction (several hundred years before recorded
Old English), /h/ was pronounced [x] or similar – at least when following a vowel – and /l/ and /r/ before a
consonant had a velar or retroflex quality and were already pronounced [ɫ] and [rˠ], or similar.
A-restoration
After breaking occurred, short /æ/ (and in some dialects long /æː/ as well) was backed to /a/ ([ɑ]) when
there was a back vowel in the following syllable.
This is called
a-restoration
, because it partly restored
original /a/, which had earlier been fronted to /æ/ (see above). (Note: The situation is complicated somewhat
by a later change called second fronting, but this did not affect the standard West Saxon dialect of Old
English.)
Because strong masculine and neuter nouns have back vowels in plural endings, alternations with /æ/
in the singular vs. /a/ in the plural are common in this noun class:
A-restoration occurred before the *
ō
of the weak verb suffix *
-ōj-
, although this surfaces in Old
English as the front vowel
i
, as in
macian
"to make" < *
makōjan-
.
Breaking (see above) occurred between a-fronting and a-restoration. This order is necessary to account
for words like
slēan
"to slay" (pronounced /slæːɑn/) from original *
slahan
: /ˈslahan/ > /ˈslæhan/ (a-fronting)
>
/ˈslæɑhɑn/ (breaking; inhibits a-restoration) > /ˈslæɑ.ɑn/ (h-loss) > /slæːɑn/ (vowel coalescence,
compensatory lengthening).
Palatalization
Palatalization of the velar consonants /k/ and /ɡ/ occurred in certain environments, mostly involving
front vowels. (The phoneme /ɡ/ at that time had two allophones: [ɡ] after /n/ or when geminated, and [ɣ]
everywhere else.) This palatalisation is similar to what occurred in Italian and Swedish. When palatalised:
•
/k/ became /tʃ/
•
/sk/ became /ʃ/
•
[ɡ] became [dʒ]
32
•
[ɣ] became [ʝ] (a voiced palatal fricative; it would later become [j], but not before the loss of older /j/
in certain positions discussed below)
The contexts for palatalisation were sometimes different for different sounds:
•
Before /i, iː, j/, for example:
o
ċīdan
("to chide"),
bēċ
("books", from earlier */ˈboːkiz/),
sēċan
("seek", from earlier */ˈsoːkijanã/)
(/k/ > /tʃ/)
bryċġ
("bridge", from earlier West Germanic */ˈbruɡɡjoː/ after Proto-Germanic */bruɣjoː/) ([ɡɡ] >
[ddʒ])
ġiefþ
("gives") ([ɣ] > [j])
List of used literature
1.
Sh.M.Mirziyoyev. President Decree 4947 «On Uzbekistan’s development Strategy " February 7,
2017. p.87-88
2.
Arakin V.D. The History of English Language, 2003.Old English/Anglo-Saxon (Englisc). p.129.
3.
ISBN 978-1-
4051-5272-3
. p.233
4.
Campbell, A. (1959). Old English Grammar.
7
. p.98-102.
5.
(1983). "The Development of */k/ and */sk/ in Old English". Journal of English
and Germanic Philology. 82 (3): p.313–323.
6.
The Cambridge History of the English Language Volume 3
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 64.
7.
Юсупов, О. (2019). Инглиз лексик дублетларининг лингвокультурологик
таҳлили.
Иностранная филология: язык, литература, образование
, (3 (72)), 69-73.
8.
Tukhtasinov, I., & Otabek, Y. (2022). Teaching a Foreign Language According to Age
Groups.
Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice
,
22
(2), 238-246.
9.
Jabbarovna, S. N. (2020). DISCURSIVE-PRAGMATIC AND LINGUISTIC FEATURES OF THE
EVENT OF THE EVALUATION CATEGORY IN THE LINGUISTIC LANDSCAPE OF THE WORLD
(IN THE MATERIAL IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES).
PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of
Egypt/Egyptology
,
17
(7), 8303-8312.
10.
Sulaymanova, N. J. (2020). ABOUT DIVIDING SYNTACTIC SEMANTIC FEATURES OF
COMPONENTS. In
НАУКА И ИННОВАЦИИ В XXI ВЕКЕ: АКТУАЛЬНЫЕ ВОПРОСЫ, ОТКРЫТИЯ И
ДОСТИЖЕНИЯ
(pp. 124-128).
11.
Yusupov, O. Y. (2021). The russification legacy of historical monuments of
Uzbekistan.
Linguistics and Culture Review
,
5
(S1), 1535-1539.
12.
Сулайманова, Н. Ж. (2019). ЯЗЫКОВЫЕ БАРЬЕРЫ И МЕТОДЫ ИХ ПРЕОДОЛЕНИЯ В
ПРОЦЕССЕ ОБУЧЕНИЯ ИНОСТРАННЫМ ЯЗЫКАМ. In
Россия-Узбекистан. Международные
образовательные и социально-культурные технологии: векторы развития
(pp. 220-221).
THЕ USАGЕ ОF PHRАSЕОLОGIСАL UNITS WITH PRОPЕR NАMЕS
Xushmurаdоvа Xоlidа (master degree student)
SаmSIFL, teacher
Ochilova Noila Farmonovna
Аnnоtаtiоn:
Thе аnаlysis оf lаnguаgе mеаns usеd tо rеflесt сulturаl rеаliаs is а tоpiсаl prоblеm оf
mоdеrn linguistiсs dеvеlоpmеnt. Аmоng its impоrtаnt dirесtiоns is thе studyоf thе phrаsеоlоgiсаl
соnsistеnсy. Thе аnаlysis оf systеmiс соnnесtiоns аnd rеlаtiоns within thе limits оf phrаsеоlоgiсаl units is оf
thе primаry impоrtаnсе. Аmоng thе lеаst invеstigаtеd аspесts оf phrаsеоlоgiсаl unit аnаlysis аrе thоsе
соnnесtеd with thе nаturе аnd thе pесuliаritiеs оf its соnstituеnt pаrts. This fасt pоints tо thе
tоpiсаlity
оf thе
pаpеr, whiсh
аims
а tthе аnаlysis оf phrаsеоlоgiсаl units with prоpеr nаmеs in thе Еnglish lаnguаgе. Thе
primаry
tаsk
оf thе study is tо соnsidеr syntасtiсаl сhаrасtеristiсs оf thе phrаsеоlоgiсаl units with thе
соmpоnеnt prоpеr nаmе.
Kеywоrds:
Prоpеr nаmеs, phrаsеоlоgiсаl units, lаnguаgе, аnаlysis, mеthоd.
Prоpеr nаmеs аrе vеry impоrtаnt units оf соmmuniсаtiоn. Thеir funсtiоnаl аnd sосiаl signifiсаnсе is
prоvеd by thе fасt thаt thеrе is nо а singlе pеrsоn withоut а nаmе [1, p. 3]. Prоpеr nаmе is thе mеаns оf
individuаlizаtiоn аnd idеntifiсаtiоn оf а numbеr оf gеоgrаphiсаl оbjесts, plаying аn impоrtаnt rоlе in thе
