An Oral Communication Model

Students of language have in general placed primary emphasis upon the generating mechanisms of speech. For example, it is common to classify the sounds of speech in physiological terms; phonetic tables and charts usually show organic position or mechanism in one dimension and method of production in the other. There has also been considerable interest in the acoustical effects or results of speech production. Von Kempelen was among the first to promote a serious interest in this subject, with a volume published in 1791. The literature on the subject is far more distinguished and extensive than most linguists realize; but it cannot compare with the much more voluminous literature on physiological phonetics and voice production. Within the past ten years, great impetus has been given to the study of acoustic phonetics by developments in electroacoustical instrumentation and by the new, important, and challenging problems which have come upon the field of communication engineering. As a result of these circumstances, there has been an increasing concern with the fundamental nature of spoken language. On what basis can a consistent foundation for language theory be constructed? We seek theoretical constructs or models which define the processes of oral communication. Should these models be developed in physiological, acoustical, or perceptual terms? The importance and convenience of certain acoustical information about speech has become widely recognized. Also, within recent times there has arisen a markedly increased interest in the structural analysis of language. It is the purpose of this article to consider the basic processes involved in oral communication, and to make a critical evaluation of the relationships among them. An attempt will be made to observe some of the resulting implications for theory in structural linguistics. Today it is possible to obtain many of the physiological and acoustical facts of language. It is of considerable significance, however, that experimentalists are gradually finding out the importance of theory in this field of research. To be of value, experimentation usually requires a broad framework of theoretical structure. Laboratory experimentation without theory is often mere dabbling without purpose, and the results are seldom more than casual observation. One can only conclude that the theory, the ideas, the data, and the instrumentation are not separate and independent matters. To create such dichotomies is like trying to distinguish the means from the end. The means determine the end, and without an end the means are senseless. By the same token the instrumentation determines the quality of the data, and the nature of the data required determines the nature of the instrumentation; both are trifling without a theory; and a theory is mere speculation until supported by evidence. In general, the work of the acoustical phonetician and the engineer have seemed slightly irrelevant to the student of physiological phonetics and to the linguist.