[From Rick Marken (931005.1300)]
Martin Taylor (931005 13:30) --
Bruce is trying to develop the idea of phonemic contrasts, and
Rick resists the perception.
Not at all. I am trying to determine the referent (the usual meaning,
not Hal's) of the word "contrast". Everything Bruce has said in his
posts on the "pair test" convinces me that he uses the term "phonemic
contrast" to refer to what are called "errors" in PCT.
I think they are talking about different
levels of the talker/listener's hierarchy, and will never agree if they
continue to do so.
This implies that the word "contrast" refers to a perception of some
kind and that Bruce and I are only disagreeing about the type of
perception. If this is what Bruce meant by contrast (a type of perception)
then I have no problem with it; I have many perceptions that I would
be comfortable calling "contrasts"; my perception of the relationship
between bin and pin is one, as well as my perception of the relationship
between the height of a very short and a very tall person, etc. What I
am "resisting" is the idea that "contrast" refers to some special property
of speech which provides a basis for its perception. I reject this meaning
of "contrast" because, as an explanation of speech perception, it is
"dormative", ranking right up there with "affordance".
Bruce used the continuum level (finessing "configuration-transition")
phonetic difference, to try to present the category level phonemic contrast.
Rick used the phrase "word event," which seems to me to be an oxymoron
You are seeing a disagreement between Bruce and I that does not exist.
If Bruce thinks of a contrast as nothing more than a phonetic difference
then I have no problem; the word "contrast" is just being used to refer
to perceived differnces between speech sounds. I think that limits a nice
word a bit (why not include perceived difference between anything -- like
short and tall people) but it certainly makes sense to me. If this is all
Bruce means by "contrasts" then I perceive no contrast between our views.
But I have the feeling (and Bruce can correct me if I'm wrong) that Bruce
thinks there is something more to "contrast" than "perceived difference".
I think he believes that contrasts "do" something to make speech perception
possible. I think Bruce believes that contrasts EXPLAIN perceptions (notably
of speech); I believe that contrasts ARE perceptions.
Best
Rick