دعوة لمناقشة "أحدث كتاب فى الصوتيات الإنجليزية "

[Prof. Ahmed Shafik Elkhatib]

الإخوة الأفاضل والأخوات الفضليات أعضاء الجمعية المهتمين بعلم اللغة

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته.

إعمالا للسنة التي استنها منتدى علم اللغة من طرح أحد الموضوعات المنشورة عليه للمناقشة، وذلك كل أسبوع وفقا لمعايير أسبقية ذكرناها عند طرحنا للموضوع الأول يوم الجمعة الماضي، فإنني أتقدم لحضراتكم بطلب التفضل بمناقشة موضوع "عرض ومراجعة أحدث كتاب في الصوتيات الإنجليزية" للأستاذ الدكتور دنحا كوركيس.

والموضوع، وإن كان منشورا باسم عربي، فإنه مكتوب باللغة الإنجليزية. وقد نُشر يوم 3 أكتوبر 2006، في الساعة 6:11مساء، مما يمنحه الأولوية على موضوعين آخرين نشرهما الكاتب على المنتدى في اليوم نفسه في توقيت لاحق.

وبالرغم من أن الموضوع قد حظي بعدد مشاهدات بلغ 183، فإنه لم يحظ بتعليق واحد حتى الآن!

وتجدون الموضوع على الرابط التالي:

http://www.arabswata.org/forums/showthread.php?t=402

وفي انتظار مناقشاتكم القيِّمة حتى نهاية يوم الجمعة القادم- الموافق 15 ديسمبر- إن شاء الله.

[عامر العظم]

البروفيسور الخطيب،
أؤكد لك أن مئات من أساتذة اللغات والترجمة، الذين ينتمون إلى مئات الجامعات العربية والأجنبية، موجودون في مجموعة واتا الإخبارية وهناك أكثر من 1300 دكتور وبروفيسور في فندق واتا الرئاسي!

وأؤكد لك أيضا أن الجمعية مسموعة في كل مكان وإن كنت لا تصدق، فاسأل أو اختبر عامر العظم!

إن لأمر محزن حقا أن لا يستفزهم هذا الحراك العظيم وأنه لأمر محزن أيضا أن تنهار وتفقد مئات شهادات الدكتوراه قيمتها ووزنهها في وأمام هذا الصرح العظيم!

ومن هذا المنطلق، ستعطي الجمعية شهادة الدكتوراه الفعلية في التكريم السنوي الثالث قيمتها وقدرها وحقها ووزنها الطبيعي!

تحية بروفيسورية

[Prof. Ahmed Shafik Elkhatib]

أصدقك.
وأتفق معكم في أن نقدر كل شخص بقدره!
تحية مصدقة مقدرة!:)

[Prof. Ahmed Shafik Elkhatib]

This is a well-balanced review that proceeds chapter by chapter and ends with a good evaluation of the book. However, I have a few remarks to make about this review. These fall into two groups, namely remarks that belong to the domain of formalities, and those that pertain to essence.
First: Formalities
(1) Although the review is in English, the title given in the contents of the Linguistic Forum is in Arabic – a fact that misleads readers into the expectation of reading an Arabic article, then discovering that their expectation was false. The question is: Why not an English title for an English piece and an Arabic title for an Arabic one?

(2) The title of the book is Applied English Phonology. However, it is rendered into Arabic as عرض ومراجعة أحدث كتاب في الصوتيات الإنجليزية. Since Prof. Gorgis suggests المنظومة الصوتية as a translation of the term "phonology", the rendition into الصوتيات needs an explanation on the part of the reviewer. Cf. the following link:
http://www.arabswata.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2429
(3) One cannot help wondering why the reviewer chose the Linguistic Forum for his review although he himself informs us that Phonetics is not a branch of Linguistics? Cf. the following link for his view and my response to it.
http://www.arabswata.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1248
Let's now move on to the other type of remarks, viz. those dealing with essence:

(1) Prof. Gorgis states that chapter two, titled ''Phonology'', presents a classical phonemic analysis of English in terms of functional/non-functional contrasts, viz. complementary vs. overlapping distribution, and free variation. He, however, does not try to define or exemplify the term "overlapping" distribution, which is the least familiar (and probably the least occurring) one among the three terms, the other two being complementary distribution and free variation.

(2) Interestingly, what counts as two or more allophones of the same phoneme in one language can be allophones of different phonemes in other languages, e.g. Korean, Spanish, etc. It is this "etc." that makes me think that the reviewer missed a good chance of citing an example from the book, or even providing one on his own, e.g. the two allophones [p] and [b] of the Arabic phoneme /b/ vs. the two distinct phonemes in English.

(3) Applications based on such contrasts are seen to be ''indispensable [not only to] devising alphabetical writing systems'', but to the study of phonemics. Once again, Prof. Gorgis leaves an important term undefined, namely "phonemics." This practice is reminiscent of the reviewer's criticism, elsewhere in the review, of a similar practice on the part of the author.

(4) The reviewer points out that in chapter three, as in orthodox descriptions, the 24 consonants of English already shown to comprise six classes in terms of manner of articulation, are here accounted for in terms of five groups whereby liquids and glides are, as the convention goes, are characterized as approximants. Prof. Gorgis here sounds as if the author were the first to do so.

(5) The author makes the point that because the description of vowels and diphthongs is a much more complex task than doing the same for the consonants a comparison of American English with some other major varieties spoken outside the US takes the form of four tables containing mostly monosyllabic words pointing to differences in one direction, viz. American vs. others. To me, I think that such tables may add to the complexity of a situation that is already complex enough—a fact which I would have liked to see raised by the reviewer.

(6) The reviewer mentions that chapter eight examines some structural factors in second/foreign language phonology, and adds that ten languages are briefly contrasted with English to show several learning difficulties most likely to emerge from mismatches between L1 and L2 phonemes and allophones. He goes on to say that the comparisons, showing phonemic and phonetic conflicts between L1 and L2, extend to another five languages. My comment here is that I wish Prof. Gorgis had informed us about these fifteen languages, or at least to have told us explicitly whether they included Arabic or not. However, there is a hint later in the review that may serve to introduce Arabic as one of these languages.


(7) The phonemes and
the graphemes for which they stand are presented firstly, followed by correspondences via reverse direction. Once again I wish the reviewer had elucidated what is meant by such a process.

(8) I quite agree with Prof. Gorgis that a CD-ROM could have facilitated the pronunciation of not only English sounds, but the sounds of the ten languages whose speakers are supposed to be learning some variety of English, mainly American or British as is the case in the Middle East.

(9) The reviewer is also justified in criticizing the author for addressing the issue of communication disorders in the United States only, and one cannot help wondering why he compares AE with some other major varieties spoken outside the US.

(10) Today, we talk about Southern British English (SBE) instead of British English (BE). I, once more, would have liked the reviewer to give the readers a definition of this variety of British English, and to cite some of the important differences between the two.

(11) An interesting question, which my own students share with the reviewer's is when the letter 'g' is pronounced as [g] or [J] and whether its pronunciation, like that of 'c', is governed by the same following letters, viz. 'e', 'i', and 'y'?—a question to which there is no conclusive answer thus far, as Prof. Gorgis admits.