Abstract
Phonologists often look to “external” data to determine which analysis of some set of data is psychologically real for the users of the language. In this vein, Chao (1931, 1934) argued that secret language data support the analysis of Beijing palatals as allophones of the velars. However, several of the secret language rules described by Chao are not allophonic rules of Beijing phonology, and some do not even belong to the phonology at all. In particular, the process which relates palatals to velars is argued not to be allophonic and to be probably quite independent of the phonology (as suggested by data from a second secret language). Depending on how we analyze the latter, the palatals turn out to be phonemically distinct from velars, or else their phonemic status remains indeterminate. Thus, “external” data cannot always be used to settle the cases of indeterminacy (or, non-uniqueness).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
