The appearance of the Journal of the International Phonetic Association offers a natural opportunity for taking both a look backward and a look forward in the field of phonetics. Ever since the publication of The Phonetic Teacher in 1886 and through the long period of Le Maître Phonétique, the organ of the Association has continued to appear, even if during war years the interval between successive numbers may sometimes have been long. It now comes in a new guise, the major change being the setting of the body of the journal in orthography instead of in phonetic transcription, and this is a suitable moment at which to ask what this change, a far from superficial one, betokens: what kind of scholars were the men who formed the Association and guided its early years, was their work of lasting value, what fresh light has been shed on the field in the intervening period, where do we stand now and what guesses can we make about the sort of work our successors will be doing?

Tous les efforts qui se sont poursuivis depuis le début de ce siècle pour tenter de simplifier l'orthographe du français ont paru sombrer dans l'indifférence générale et se solder par autant d'échecs. On pourrait donc croire que les Français et les francophones en général sont satisfaits de leur orthographe ou qu'en tout cas, ils ne désirent pas que soit reposé le problème de la graphie de leur langue. Or, il semble bien qu'il n'en soit rien. Si l'opinion publique, inconsciente de l'existence d'un problème parce que ne distinguant pas entre langue et graphie, n'est pas touchée, le monde des éducateurs, aussi bien ceux de l'enseignement du second degré que les instituteurs, s'est montré ces dernières années fort sensible aux critiques dont l'orthographe a été l'objet. Dans les contacts qui se multiplient et s'intensifient, à l'heure actuelle, entre linguistes professionnels et enseignants avides de “recyclage”, la question de l'orthographeest celle qui paraît susciter l'intérêt le plus vif. Sensibilisés par l'insuffisance flagrante des résultats obtenus par tous les efforts faits pour inculquer l'orthographe à leurs élèves, instituteurs et professeurs prennent conscience du fait que l'orthographe française est inadaptée aux conditions du monde d'aujourd'hui, à supposer que le système graphique du français, qui doit tant de ses traits à l'intervention de beaux-esprits, ait jamais, depuis quatre cents ans, été adapté aux besoins réels de la société française. Pour être sûr que l'ensemble de la population scolaire qui doit poursuivre des études au-delà des éléments ait acquis un maniement simplement satisfaisant de l'orthographe, il faudrait probablement que, pendant cinq ans, la moitié du temps disponible à, l'école soit consacré à, des exercices visant à, ce but.

Most intonation analysts would consider it a truism to insist that any model of the formal properties of a language's intonation system has to be relativistic in character. By this one would mean that the linguistic constants in the system are the contrasts between the features involved (pitch, loudness, or whatever) and not the values of the features themselves, as defined in any absolute, physical way. The point hardly needs quotation to support it, but it will be useful to refer to one person's formulation of the relativity claim as a reminder of how the position is typically presented. Abercrombie, for example, says (1967: 107):

As Chomsky and Halle point out (1968: 318), the specification of [1] in terms of the continuant-noncontinuant scale is problematic. At first sight one would consider it [+ continuant], since there is no total blockage of air flow through the mouth. It can, however, be taken as [— continuant] if the defining criterion of “stop” (= “noncontinuant”) is stated as the blockage of air flow past the primary stricture, i.e. a complete closure in the sagittal plane of the oral cavity. Evidence exists in support of both points of view; Chomsky and Halle adduce data from Chippewyan in favour of treating [1] as continuant and data from “certain dialects of English spoken in Scotland” in favour of taking it as noncontinuant. For the latter they refer to Lloyd, 1908, as attesting the use of “lax diphthongs” before noncontinuants and [1], but “tense diphthongs” before continuants and [r].

1. What follows is a sketch of the phonology of the English spoken in Emper, Co. Westmeath. Emper is a pocket of fertile country partly enclosed in a loop of the River Inny and situate some eleven or twelve miles to the north-west of Mullingar. The population, fluctuating about two hundred souls, is composed mostly of farmers and farm labourers. They are engaged in mixed farming, that is tillage, stock-raising, and dairying; and are a settled community in that the farms in most cases have been occupied by the same families for generations. It is difficult to say at what date exactly the people of Emper ceased to speak Irish and became English speakers. The evidence is scanty and entirely oral, yet sufficient to warrant the conclusion that at some time after the middle of the eighteenth century, and certainly before 1800, Emper had become English speaking. The findings and conclusions below are based on my own (dialect) pronunciation and my memory of auditory observation of the speech of the older stratum of the inhabitants, and especially of those born before 1900. This is my vernacular speech and I have never lost touch with it.