Inherent Features

Counterpart

Feature System

Definition

Inherent Features are segmental (opposed to prosodic) features on the “axis of simultaneity only” (Jakobson 1949:421) that are “displayed by phonemes irrespective of their role in the relief of the syllable, and the definition of such a feature does not refer to the relief of the syllable or of the syllable chain” (Jakobson & Halle 1956:22). Implementation of an inherent feature in a given position in the syllable involves less variability than that of the prosodic features (1956:26). Their definition is based only “on the choice between two alternatives admissible in the same position within a sequence.” Inherent features include the sonority features [vocalic], [consonantal], [compact/diffuse], [tense/lax], [voiced/voiceless], [nasal/oral], [discontinuous/continuant], [strident/mellow], [checked/unchecked] and the tonality features [grave/acute], [flat/plain], and [sharp/plain] (Jakobson & Halle 1956).

Purpose

The inherent features characterize the segmental aspects of a speech sound, opposed to the prosodic aspects of sound, which may involve temporal features such as length or change of pitch (tone), and are thus associated more with the properties of a syllable than a segment.

History

Trubetzkoy (1939/1969) was an influential work of the Prague School that categorized a variety of phonological oppositions, including vocalic, consonantal, and prosodic properties (1969:90-227), but did not formally oppose segmental from prosodic properties. As revealed late in his 80s, Jakobson drew on the distinction between prosodic and inherent features from Noreen (1903:406, where the term was “qualitative sounds” (kvalitativ ljudlära) or “absolute properties” (absoluta egenskaper 1907 §30) (Jakobson & Waugh 1987:145).

Although the term was not used in Jakobson & Lotz’s (1949) analysis of French, it was used in Jakobson’s (1949) analysis of Serbo-Croatian, where it was given the apposition qualitative features (421), opposed to the prosodic features of length (duration) and high-tone. Jakobson, Fant, & Halle (1952:13-14) contrast inherent and prosodic features, but concentrate their work on defining twelve inherent features (1952:40). Halle (1959:126) continues the distinction in his analysis of Russian. And Jakobson continued to use the term just a few years before his death (Jakobson & Waugh 1979:143). Brentari’s (1998) analysis of sign language phonology uses the term Inherent Features as those features that do not change within the syllable and incorporates them as a major node in sign language feature geometry (1998 chapter 3).

Harms (1967:22-23) used the term prosodic features, but these were not opposed to a single term for non-prosodic features. Chomsky & Halle (1968) do not use the term. Sommerstein (1977:35) briefly uses the term “inherent or segmental features.” However, most scholars have gravitated to the use of segmental or subsegmental feature,s in contrast with the suprasegmental or prosodic features.

References

Chomsky, Noam and Morris Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.

Jakobson, Roman; C. Gunnar M. Fant; and Morris Halle. 1952. Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. M.I.T. Acoustics Laboratory Technical report No. 13.

Jakobson, Roman and Morris Halle. 1956. Phonology and phonetics. Part I of Fundamentals of Language (Janua Linguarum, 1), 1-51. ’S-Gravenhage: Mouton.

Author

Paul D. Fallon