I learned something cool yesterday. Well, okay, it’s probably more dorky than cool. But I thought it was cool.
I learned about it in Advanced Old English Grammar class (see, I said it is probably dorky…).
What I learned about were allophones. Maybe the rest of you have heard about allophones before, but I hadn’t.
As I understand it, an allophone is a sound that sounds different from another sound but is linguistically indistinguishable from that sound.
Say again?
Okay, try this. Say these two words out loud:
Exam
Exit
The first syllable of each word sounds the same, right?
When my professor asked me whether the first syllables of “exam” and “exit” were the same, I said yes. He informed me that they’re not the same, but in English they’re allophonic, so when my brain is processing linguistic sounds, it doesn’t distinguish between them. And he’s right. In my Iowan dialect, at least, the first word sounds like “eggs-am.” The second word sounds like “ecks-it.” “eggs” and “ecks” are not the same sound. But they sound the same to me. Interesting…
Moreover, when I was telling Will about my new discovery, he said that for him the two syllables ARE the same; he says “eggs-am” and “eggs-it“. But because the sounds are allophonic, we are still able to communicate. Excellent.
I also learned that allophones are really what’s behind regional and national accents. It seems that the lumping together of sounds like “eggs” and “ecks” is fairly arbitrary, and different sounds get lumped together in different languages (and even in different dialects of the same language). In some other language, it’s possible that “ecks-it” and “eggs-it” could have two totally separate meanings, in the same way that “pen” and “pin” have completely different meanings in my dialect of English. So when someone whose language lumps together the sounds in “pen” and “pin” tries to speak to me in English, he sounds like he has a funny accent when he tries to say “pen” but (to my ears) says “pin”.
Now, I’m no linguist (which should be painfully apparent by this point in this post), but I found this whole concept fascinating. I don’t know exactly why. Probably because it explains the existence of accents in a systematic way, as the predictible outcome of a set of linguistic rules, rather than as evidence of the ineptness of second-language speakers. Or, to put it another way, those of us who attempt to speak a second language are still inept, but we’re inept not because we’re just stupid, but because (as I understand it) our linguistic system has influenced and changed the way we hear sounds.
Isn’t that weird? I can’t hear the difference between one set of sounds, but the miniscule difference between another set of sounds is critical to my ability to communicate.
Sadly, my inarticulate self can make only one sound in response to the enormity of this idea:
Whoa.

