1

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling
Decoding System for Advanced Learners:
A Deletional Model
Teruo YOKOTANI

1. Introduction
While the specific implementation may vary, it is indisputable that teaching the relationshipbetween spelling and pronunciation is crucial in English education. Phonics is readily available inelementary education, and there are sets of rules published for intermediate learners. However, there
appears to be a lack of comprehensive rule sets to impart advanced knowledge to higher-level
learners, in contrast to the well-established field of English grammar. Research by the author has
found no similar resources specifically focused on spelling.
Yokotani (2023a) has provided insight into a potential solution for this perceived gap. In thisstudy, the concept of silencing is applied not only to individual letters but also to pronunciation
symbols. Essentially, nearly all the phenomena that would typically be addressed by deletion rules
in a conventional framework are instead treated as silencing of pronunciation symbols. This decisionarose from concerns about potential complexity introduced by deletion rules. In situations where adeleted symbol influences other processes, the need to establish an order between these two kindsof processes may arise. Acquiring such extra rule-by-rule conditions can pose a burden for learners.
However, this silencing approach is not without its challenges, as partly acknowledged in thesame paper. Besides encountering some rules that demanded seemingly ad hoc conditions for theirapplication, similar operations have also been identified elsewhere. Furthermore, specifying thetiming for the deletion of silenced pronunciation symbols presents its own difficulties. These
drawbacks should be recognized as significant challenges.
This paper introduces a model that employs deletion rules, with minimal reliance on extrinsic
ordering. The focus is primarily on one particularly challenging case, for which a practical solution
is provided. Furthermore, the organization of the different rule sets assumed in the previous work
has been simplified, making the entire system more learner-friendly. Moreover, the illustration of
the workings of the rules employed elucidates the cognitive processes that decoders need when
implementing these rules. The collective insights and methodologies presented in this paper are
─ 1 ─

2

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号

anticipated to foster positive advancements in the field.
The organization of the present paper is outlined as follows: Section 2 delves into the issues
associated with the silencing approach; Section 3 introduces the terms and concepts fundamental to
the new system. A comprehensive overview of this system is offered in Section 4, while detailed
illustrations, with a particular emphasis on one of the most challenging cases, are presented in
Section 5. Concluding remarks in Section 6 wrap up the paper.

2. Problems with the Silencing Model
One of the distinctive features of the decoding model proposed by Yokotani (2023a) is its
incorporation of silencing operations for not only individual letters but also pronunciation symbols.
In contrast to other possible systems, this one processes nearly all events that would typically behandled by deleting pronunciation symbols via silencing of those symbols. This choice was made to
avoid unnecessary complexity in the rule system that would arise from using deletion rules.
Specifically, when a deleted symbol affects other processes, it often necessitates somehow
specifying the order of application for these processes. For instance, in the words car and carry,
distinct vowel symbols,  and , are assigned to the <a> vowel letters. This difference can be
explained by postulating that the first [r]s in the pronunciation representations are syllable-final in
car and syllable-initial in carry. ([•kA:r•] vs. [•k{ •rI•], where ‘•’ stands for a syllable boundary.)
Consequently, part of the decoding process flow that can explain the difference between these twowords is as follows: Assignment of [r] (plus the appearance of a geminate sequence) (→ Resolutionof the geminate sequence) → Assignment of  (and its adjustment to ) It is crucial that thesymbol corresponding to the first <r> in carry does not exist in the pronunciation representation at
the point where the vowel adjustment takes place. To ensure this, however, it is necessary to
specify the order of rule application: deletion of the first [r] in the geminate must occur prior to thevowel adjustment. However, such specifications can be burdensome for learners.
Anticipating the prevalence of such issues, Yokotani (2023a) proposed generally replacing
rules deleting pronunciation symbols with those silencing them. In this approach, even if a symbol
is not pronounced, it can still persist within the decoding process, influencing other rules or
preventing their application. The idea was that a provision ensuring silenced symbols do not appear
in the final representation would be sufficient.
It has been found, however, that the aforementioned strategy has its drawbacks. Specifically,
the following issues have been identified. First, although not explicitly mentioned as a challenge in
Yokotani (2023a), it was unavoidable to specify the application conditions of a rule that adjusts─ 2 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model

3

vowel symbols immediately before [r] as being immediately before a coda [r] that is not silent, todistinguish cases such as car [•kA:r•] and carry [•k{r•ri•] (p. 110), where the shaded [r] is a silent
one. Additionally, in the case of a resyllabification rule that was posited to occur in words such as
celluloid ([•sel•l jU•lOId•]→[•sell• jU•lOId•]), it was necessary to introduce an undesirable condition
regarding the target consonant symbols: Entire geminate strings had to be permitted to be resyllabified as well (p. 107). Furthermore, moving a whole string of geminate to a coda position inthis way created another challenge. Because silencing for degemination was assumed to take placeon the element closest to the right-hand edge of a syllable, it was possible for both elements in ageminate to be silenced ([...l•l...]→[...ll•...]→[...ll•...]). To prevent this, an ad-hoc constraint was
introduced to ensure that both elements of a geminate cannot be silent simultaneously (p. 109).
Moreover, additional issues not addressed in the same paper have come to light. Consider casessuch as rheumatism, which would start with the sequence [rhju:...], where [h] is silent. To
achieve the desired final outcome of /ru:.../, muting the [j] would be essential. However, the context
for this [j]-silencing would have to be an undesirable one: “immediately after [r], which canoptionally be followed directly by silent [h] ”. Additionally, in a minority of cases within a larger
dataset, instances emerge where vowel letters undergo pre-[r vowel adjustment immediately before<hr>, such as in Nehru /ne@ru:/ and Tehran /te@rA:n/. Given that the <e> in these words are
immediately followed by a coda <h> in the orthographic representation, it is reasonable to assume
that the vowel letters are initially assigned [eI], as in the interjection eh, which subsequently
changes to [e@] through adjustment by [r]. In a silencing approach, accounting for this situation
would necessitate one of two less-than-ideal methods. The first method would be to allow the pre[r] vowel symbol adjustment rule to apply not only before [r] but also before a sequence of silent[h] followed by [r] . Alternatively, the second method involves the removal of silent [h] from therepresentation prior to vowel symbol adjustment. This latter approach would be recognized as acase of extrinsic rule ordering. While strategies from generative phonology, such as displaying silent
symbols on separate tiers, are conceivable, they should not be included in the system for learners
and instructors, as most of them are not experts in the theoretical field.

3. A New Model
This section introduces a model that addresses the drawbacks of the silencing approach discussed in
the last section. This system abolishes the use of rules silencing pronunciation symbols andprimarily relies on deletion rules. While some rules have somewhat more stipulative application
conditions, efforts have been made to avoid externally specifying the order of rule sequences.
─ 3 ─

4

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号

3.1 Database
The rule set presented in this paper is designed to explain the British pronunciation found in Mayor(2009, hereafter referred to as LDOCE5). LDOCE5 is a widely recognized ESL English-English
dictionary, and its prominence renders further elaboration unnecessary. Word searches wereconducted using the accompanying CD-ROM version and the iOS version purchased separately.
The CD-ROM version allows wildcard searches using pronunciation symbols, while the iOS version
enables wildcard searches based on spellings. By selecting the entries that appear on the left side of
the iOS version’s screen during searches, the present author identified 48,084 headwords. It should
be noted, however, that unlike in most of the previous studies on related topics by the present
author, simultaneous searches based on both text and pronunciation symbols were not conducted inthis study.
LDOCE5 employs the following notation system, which is predominantly adopted in thispaper:(1) Symbols Employeda. Vowels: {, e, I, Q, V, U, i, u, @, @ , A:, i:, O:, 3:, u:, ju:, aI, eI, OI, aU, @U, e@, I@, U@
b. Consonants: p, b, t, d, k, g, f, v, T, D, s, z, S, Z, h, tS, dZ, m, n, N, l, r, w, j		# [@ ] = optional [@]; The ties in [tS, dZ] are not in LDOCE5.
|

However, while LDOCE5 employs [ | ] and [ ] for stress representation, this paper utilizes [ ⸍ ] and [ ⸌ ]placed over vowel symbols and vowel letters. Additionally, while LDOCE5 does not provide stressmarkers for monosyllabic content words, this paper indicates every primary stress with [ ⸍ ], even formonosyllabic words. Furthermore, while the dictionary generally treats word-final <r> or <re> assilent, the present system considers them pronounced when followed by vowel-initial words,
representing this situation as ‘/(r)/’.
3.2 Terms and Concepts
This subsection introduces the concepts and terminology that will be used in the proposed new
system.
(2) Kinds of representations
a. <...> = L-Rep (Literal Representation)b. [...] = S-Rep (Symbolic Representation)c. /.../ = F-Rep (Final Representation) # Pronunciations found in LDOCE5.
(3) Unitsa. Symbol Unit (SU)	(i) A single pronunciation symbol or a combination of pronunciation symbols that collectively
─ 4 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model5

corresponds to one single linguistic sound is referred to as an SU (Symbol Unit) : [{, aU, I@,
ju:], etc.
			# [a], [:] are symbols, while [{] functions as both a symbol and a unit simultaneously.
	(ii) An SU representing a vowel sound is termed a VSU (Vowel SU), while one that corresponds
to a consonant sound is denoted as a CSU (Consonant SU).
b. Letter Unit (LU)	(i) A single character or a combination of characters that corresponds to one single SU isreferred to as an LU (Letter Unit) : <u, e, oa, sh, ph>, etc. (The same as ‘grapheme’.)			When each of these characters corresponds to one single SU, it is considered an LU. The
components, namely <o, a, s, p, h>, are referred to as letters.
	(ii) An LU that corresponds to a VSU is referred to as a VLU (Vowel LU), and one corresponding
to a CSU is abbreviated as a CLU (Consonant LU).
(4) Vowel Symbol Unit Strength (VSUS /vi:sVs/)a. Weak Vowel Symbol Unit (WkVSU)	A VSU representing a weakly pronounced VSU is abbreviated as a WkVSU (Weak VSU) :[@, i, u, I, U, @U, u:] (Exhaustive)			 (The underlined portion indicates the weak versions of the same pronunciation symbols.)b. Strong Vowel Symbol Unit (StVSU)
		 A VSU which is not a WkVSU is denoted by a StVSU (Strong VSU) : [e, Q, V, eI], etc.
			# When a stress marker is absent, word-final [j :] are ambiguous in terms of stress. The
same ambiguity exists for @U as well either when it is either word-final or when it
immediately precedes another VSU. For the sake of clarity and convenience, all are treatedas a WkSU (in this system).
			[Note for Readers] This grouping of vowels is influenced by the categorization presented in
Takebayashi (1996: 273-280).
(5) Vowel Letter Unit Strength (VLUS)
a. Strong Vowel Letter Unit (StVLU)	A VLU corresponding to a StVSU is a StVLU (Strong VLU) and is indicated by an enclosing
box (

).

b. Weak Vowel Letter Unit (WkVLU)	A VLU that is not a StVLU, including a silent VLU, is referred to as a WkVLU (Weak VLU).
			# WkVLUs may be enclosed with a circle or explicitly marked as “└wk” (wk = weak),but most often, no specific markings are applied.

─ 5 ─

6

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号

a >[pn@], <act○v
ec. Examples: <pand○kIv]i ○>[
y >[ti]<best>[bst], <bird>[b:rd, <cit○a ○,y = WkVLUs.
e ○,# <a>, <e>, <i> = StVLUs; ○,i ○(6) Regulation (Reg) : The word regulation is used as a cover term encompassing various rules anddecisions.
(7) Meaning of Regulations (MoR) : ‘X → Y’ signifies the following:a. “Change X to Y” or b. “Impart the characteristics of Y to X.”
3.3 Overview of the System
This subsection presents an overview of the system proposed in this paper, which is influenced bysuch generative phonological analyses of English phonology as presented by Kiparsky (1982), Halleand Mohanan (1985), Borowsky (1990), and Jensen (2022). The present system houses five rulesets, each corresponding to different types of regulations. Rules are treated as directives to befollowed. Thus, instead of using the term application, which is typically associated with rule-based
generative phonology, the word execution is employed.
(8) Rule Group (RG)A Rule Group (RG) refers to a rule set to be considered when seeking rules to be executed. There
are five such distinct sets.
(9) Overview of the Rule Groups
a. RG-1: Preparation rules	• Primary operation: Modification or alteration of L-Reps (e.g., <x>→<ks> for facilitating
subsequent rule execution).
b. RG-2: Rules without syllable structure information
	• Primary operation: Assignment and modification of CSUs.
c. RG-3: Rules for constructing syllable structures	• Primary operation: Construction of syllable structures
d. RG-4: Other Rules
	• Primary operation: Assignment and adjustment of VSUse. RG-5:“Fair-copying” rules (in a limited number)	• Primary operation: “Finalization” of S-Reps.
During the decoding process, the RGs are consulted in the order given here when selecting rules for
execution.
As mentioned in Section 3.1, the goal of the proposed system is to replicate the pronunciation
representations found in LDOCE5. This study shows the potential mental operations required to─ 6 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model7

reproduce those pronunciation representations, given knowledge of which vowel letters―or
sequences thereof―within words are pronounced as full vowels. Decoding processes may introduce
deviations from structures produced in typical English phonological systems. For example, somerules sometimes create structures that are phonologically ill-formed, such as [j] being the nucleus ofa syllable. However, no corrective measures are implemented unless such irregularities significantly
affect the entire decoding process.
3.4 Details of Rule Execution
What follows is a detailed description of the steps involved in rule execution. As mentioned earlier,the instructions are articulated as directives for the decoder. The rules are written under theassumption that learners have knowledge of what decoding means.
(10) Rule Selection and Execution (RSE)a. Rep Set (RS) and RS Finished (RSfin)
	Representations arising during the decoding in this system are mainly comprised of an L-Rep
and an S-Rep. This pairing is termed a Rep Set (RS). Once an RS has undergone all executable
rules, it is referred to as an RS Finished or RSfin for short.
			 At the beginning of the decoding process, each of the target representations solely consistsof the word’s spelling, enclosed in a pair of angle brackets. For the sake of convenience, these
initial states are treated as if they were RSfins.
b. Candidate Search	(i) Rules whose execution conditions are satisfied by RSfins are referred to as candidates.
	(ii) Once an RSfin is achieved, begin searching for candidates within the available RG. This
process is termed candidate search. The RG available at the start of the decoding process is
RG-1. If no more candidates are found within a given RG, consider the next immediately
following RG. Continue this pattern until RG-5 is reached. Do not return to a previous RG orskip one.
c. Approval	For identified candidate rules to be executed, they need approval. If a rule is not in rivalry withanother, it is automatically approved. Refer to the Rule Strength Condition in (11) below for thedefinition of rivalry and the approval process for rules in rivalry.
d. Obligatoriness of Execution
	Execute all rules that have been approved for the RS under operation. This includes cases where
undesired structures, such as [kk], may arise during execution.

─ 7 ─

8

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号

e. “Approved-Only” Execution	For a given RSfin, execute only the rules that have been approved for that particular RSfin. Even
if the execution of approved rules creates structures upon which other rules can be executed, do
not execute these additional rules. Only after the RS under operation becomes an RSfin and a
new candidate search is completed, should you consider executing such rules alongside othercandidates.
# For example, within RG-2, the first rules apprroved for the word mecca are rules assigning
CSUs. At this stage, execute only these rules. Although their execution produces a sequenceof identical CSUs, [kk, do not immediately execute any rule to resolve this. The resolution
rule can be executed only after it becomes a candidate and is approved, which occurs
following the completion of the CSU assignment operations and the initiation of a new
candidate search.
(11) Rule Strength Condition (RSC)	When the following criterion applies to any pair of candidate rules, they are considered to be inrivalry:
If one is executed, the RS will no longer satisfy the execution conditions of the other.
	When such a pair of candidates arises, retain the stronger candidate and discard the weaker one.
(By “discard,” it is meant that the candidate is no longer considered for selection.) In any given
pair, the stronger candidate is the one with stricter execution conditions. Conditions are deemedstricter when they encompass more specific word constituents than others or require moreparticular structures. If other pairs of candidates are in rivalry, repeat this comparison process as
many times as the number of those pairs. Only the candidates that survive this process areapproved.
	[Note for Readers] This condition is greatly influenced by the Elsewhere Condition by Kiparsky(1982: 8).

4. System Illustration
This section offers step-by-step illustrations of the decoding process as envisaged in the proposedsystem using specific words. Before delving into the details, it is appropriate to introduce thefollowing provisions, which are integral to the system and apply consistently throughout decoding
processes:(12) General Principle on Structure Assignment (GePSA /dZeps@/)	Unless otherwise specified, structures (SUs, syllable structure, etc.) assigned by rules are─ 8 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model9attached to units that are not marked as silent.
(13) Meaning of “bare”
	The term bare refers to the state of not having been given a higher-level structure. (This means
when either LUs have not been assigned SUs or SUs do not belong to any syllable.)
4.1. Illustration 1
Proceeding to the first actual illustration, it is pertinent to mention that the words below have been
selected as examples. Their choice is influenced by space limitations and the inherent moderatecomplexity they present in explanation.
(14) a. <partial> /pA:S@l/ b. <partiality> /pA:Si{l@ti/
Note that in these examples, the <ti> portions correspond to /S/ in (a) and to /Si/ in (b).
4.1.1 RG-1 (Preparation)
The initial representations for the first candidate searches are as follows:(15) a. <partial> b. <partiality>
Within RG-1, the first rules indentified as candidates for these are the rules in (16) and (17) below:(16) Letter Unit Clarification (LUC)
a. Boxing (Box) : Enclose StVLUs in.

Examples: <ago> → <ago>, <manner> → <manner>, <road> → <road>b. Tying (Tie) :	When consecutive characters form an LU, connect them with ‘⁀’. However, this is not necessary
when they are enclosed in.

	Examples: <pho ne> → <ph one>, <shi ne> → <sh ine>, <thread> → <thread>(17) S-Rep Creation (SRepC /esrepsi:/) : Provide an empty S-Rep around the L-Rep.
Not in rivalry, theses rules are immediately approved and executed. The process is illustrated in (18) :(18) a. <partial> ⇒ 1 ―LUC, SRepC→ <partial> [ ]		 b. <partiality> ⇒ 1 ―LUC, SRepC→ <partia lity> []Here, ‘ ⇒ 1’ denotes the “start of the search of RG-1,” and “―LUC, SRepC→” indicates that therules LUC and SRepC are executed on the representation to the left, leading to the subsequent RS.
This presesntational principle also applies to instances that follow. Both sets of representations at
the end are RSfins, which means that all approved rules have been executed on them. As a result,
new candidate searches commence. No candidates are identified within RG-1. Consequently,
candidate searches based on RG-2 begin.

─ 9 ─

10

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号

4.1.2 RG-2
In RG-2, the following rules are identified as candidates.
(19) Consonant SU Assignment Default (CDft /si:deft/)	Assign CSUs to the CLUs situated to the left of an arrow. Treat those processes as separate rules:<c> → [k], <g> → [g], <j> → [dZ], <q> → [k], <y> → [j]	For the remaining <C>s, excluding <x>, the assignment is the same as the character itself: <b>→ [b], <m> → [m], <v> → [v], etc.
When it is necessary to indicate specific rules, a rule that assigns [k] to <q>, for example, is referred
to as CAss(q). It should be noted that <x> is excluded here because in this system, that letter isdecomposed into <ks> by an RG-1 rule, which is not detailed here. Additionally, 
 very often
corresponds to [z] in practice, but this paper primarily uses 
 → [s]. Concerning the two RSs
under consideration, CAss(p), CAss(r), CAss(t), and CAss(l) are candidates, and since there is norivalry among them, all of them are approved and executed. The following changes occur:(20) a. <partial> [ ] ⇒ 2 ―CDft→ <partial> [p rt l]		 b. <partia lity> [] ⇒ 2 ―CDft→ <partia lity> [p rt l t ]Since the RSs on the right are RSfins, new candidate searches are initiated within RG-2. However,no further candidates are identified, prompting subsequent searches based on RG-3.
4.1.3 RG-3
The rule set directly below is the main part of RG-3. It is concerned with constructing syllable
structures. As such, these rules are commonly executed. Each presented rule will be followed by adisplay of the resulting RS produced upon its execution.
(21) Syllable Structure Construction Rules (SSC)	Consider each of the following rules individually for candidacy, and execute those that areapproved. Conduct the processes of consideration, approval, and execution separately for eachrule. The order of the rules to be considered is as follows:
PHAss >> Nuc >> Ons >> Cod >> LRepSyll
	Continue this procedure until there are no more rules that can be approved (and executed).
	[Note for Readers] Repeating the procedure is essential for processing words such as Khmer[•k@•me@(r)•]. The initial syllable results from a -insertion rule, not detailed in this paper, thattakes effect only after constructing the second syllable. This necessitates two iterations of theprocedure immediately above.
a. Placeholder Assignment (PHAss /f{s/)		 Assign [□]s to StVLUs and [○]s to WkVLUs.
─ 10 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model11

		 # Note that dummy <V>s and silent VLUs are also WkVLUs.
		<

V~ >

→

[□], <┌ wk, can be silent or dummy <V>

V~

>

→ [○]

▷ <partial> [p rt l] ⇒ 3 ―PHAss→ <partial> [p□rt○○l]▷ <partia lity> [p rt l t ] ⇒ 3 ―PHAss→ <partia lity> [p□rt○□l○t○]

[Note for Readers] Think of placeholders as symbols where all attributes are underspecified,
except for syllabicity, vocality, and strength. While it is possible to use [V]s to represent suchobjects, employing distinct symbols or placeholders can help avoid confusion with the [V]meaning “some kind of VSU” that might appear in execution conditions. A dummy <V> hasbeen incorporated into the execution context to address cases such as <t abVl>, which isderived from <table> with an RG-1 rule. Although not discussed in this paper, word-final<Cle> and <Cre> are typically replaced respectively with <CVl> and <CVr> by an RG-1 rulefor ease of subsequent operation. Furthermore, part of the condition on the WkVLU indicatesthat this rule is an exception to the general provision GePSA (12), which generally prohibits
structure assignment on silent items.
b. Nucleus Formation (Nuc)		Assign the status of a nucleus to all placeholders, including those associated with silent VLUs
or dummy <V>s: [□] → ■ / [○] → ● ,		where the blackened placeholders denote those with a nucleus status.
		 ▷ <partial> [p□rt○○l] ―PHAss→ <partial> [p■rt●●l]		 ▷ <partia lity> [p□rt○□l○t○] ―PHAss→ <partia lity> [p■rt●■l●t●]		[Note for Readers] While it is possible for PHAss (a) to directly assign blackened placeholders,
thereby eliminating this rule from the paper, this approach has not been taken. Ideally, syllable
structures are represented in the arboreal form, as shown in (22) below, where nucleus
formation is depicted through the assignment of a syllable node and its associated line.
Retaining this rule better aligns with this representation.
c. Onset Formation (Ons)		If the word has a single CSU or a sequence of CSUs that typically appear at the beginning of aword, treat those CSUs as part of the nearest syllable to the right. However, when the CSUs inquestion are sandwiched between nuclei, exclude [sC] sequences.
		 ▷ <partial> [p■rt●●l] ―Ons→ <partial> [p■rt●●l]		 ▷ <partia lity> [p■rt●■l●t●] ―Ons→ <partia ity> [p■rt●■l●t●]		# The shaded portions represent onset elements.
		[Note for Readers] This rule is presented here in a simplified version. Please refer to Appendix
─ 11 ─

12

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号

1 of Yokotani (2023b) for the complete version.
d. Coda Formation (Cod)		 Make CSUs part of the nearest syllable to the left if such a syllable is available.
		 ▷ <partial> [p■rt●●l] → [•p■r•t●•●l•]		 ▷ <partia lity> [p■rt●■l●t●] → [•p■r•t●•■•l●•t●•]		 # The shaded portions represent coda elements.
e. L-Rep Syllable (LRepSyll /elrepsIl/)		 Create a syllable structure on the L-Rep based on that in the S-Rep.
<partial> → <•par•ti•al•><partiality>→ <•par•ti•a•li•ty•>[•p■r•t●•●l•] [•p■r•t●•●l•][•p■r•t●•■•l●•t●•][•p■r•t●•■•l●•t●•]

These are all the syllable structure construction rules presented in this paper. For words such as
partial and partiality, the operations of syllable structure construction conclude at this point.
Even if the process is applied again from PHAss, no candidates are identified, which prompts
candidate searches based on RG-4.
4.1.4 RG-4
For the examples currently under consideration, candidate searches based on RG-4 are conductedon the LRepSyll outputs, presented below in alternative forms.
(22)

a.

σ

σ σ

b.

LRepC ╱ ｜ ╲ ╱ ｜ ｜ ╲
< p a
→[ p

□

r

t

i

a

l

>

r

t

○ ○

l

]

╲ ｜ ╱ ╲ ｜ ｜ ╱

σ

σ

σ σ

σ

σ

╱ ｜ ╲ ╱ ｜ ｜ ╱ ｜ ╱ ｜

LRepC

< p a
→ [

p

□

r

t

i

a

l

i

t

y >

r

t

○ □

l

○

t

○

]

╲ ｜ ╱ ╲ ｜ ｜ ╲ ｜ ╲ ｜

σ σ

σ

σ σ

σ

σ

For these RSs, the rule in (23) below is among those identified as candidates. It addresses the VLUs
of the <ti> portions, <i>, which exhibit the unique behaviours previously mentioned. The inclusionof [S and    in the contextual CSUs accounts for words such as fashion, luncheon, andtruncheon, where <i> and <e> are considered to lack vocalic content analogously to partial. The
bold text is used solely for emphasis and has no relation to the execution conditions.
(23) <i>-to-Yod (iYod /aIjQd/)a. Main conditions[s, z, S, tS, dZ] ┐		 ┌ from the YWP in (b) below[
X
Y]→ jI if [Y] corresponds to <V～> (or <o>, <at(e)>)●<i>/<e> ┘			 → j otherwise
Prose version: Suppose there is a weak placeholder (‘●’) corresponding to either <i> or <e>.
─ 12 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model13

Let [X] denote the SU immediately preceding this placeholder and [Y] the SU immediately
following it. [X] can be one of [s, z, S, tS, dZ, while [Y] matches one of the LU sequences
listed in (b) below. If [Y] corresponds to an StVLU, <o> or <at(e)>, then replace the weakplaceholder with [I. Otherwise, replace it with [j. However, based on the value of [Y],additional SUs might be included in [X]. Refer to (c) for details.
b.	The Yod Word Parts (YWP) : -a, -al, -an, -ance/-ence, -ancy/-ency, -ant/-ent, -ary/-ery,-at(e), -o, -on, -ous.
c. Further conditions(i) [t] can also be part of [X] if [Y] comes from <-a>, <-on>, or <-ous>.
Examples: digestion, Croatia, nation, cautious.
[Note for Readers] [tS in the first example is considered to be derived via a rule notdiscussed here from a sequence of [t followed by [j. [S] in the others is arise from a rule
discussed below that changes [t] to [S] in certain environments.
(ii) If the weak placeholder is <i>, [X] can also be the following:• [l, n] if [Y] corresponds to <on> Ex. onion, opinion, million, etc.
• [n] from <ann>, <toman>, <Son> if [Y] corresponds to <a>Examples: Britannia, kleptomania, Sonia [Exhaustive examples]
There are additional execution conditions beyond (c), but due to space limitations, they are notdiscussed here. iYod (23) is notably intricate. However, when addressing palatalization/affricationinduced by weak <i, e>, it has to be admitted that any precise rule aiming for similar effects,
regardless of the approach taken, would require a complexity on a par with the one described above.
		 Focusing on the rule under discussion, it yields the following S-Reps:(24) a. [•p■r•tj•●l•] b. [•p■r•tjI•■•l●•t●•]
In partial, the <a> in -al constitutes a WkVLU, leading to the assignment of [j to the preceding<i> VLU. Conversely, in partiality, the relevant <a> portion after <i> is an StVLU, resulting in the
allocation of [I to the preceding weak <i>. Note that in the former, [j] comes to occupy a nucleus
position, which is ill-formed from a phonological point of view, but this is not blocked in this system
as mentioned at the end of Section 3.3. The current system leans more towards phonics rather than
traditional English phonology. As such, the formation of such structures in the workflow is notdeemed problematic.
Analyses in generative phonology such as Hayes (1982: 267-269) and Jensen (2022: 299)
propose that the sound corresponding to the (first) <i> in words such as partial and partiality is
originally [j in both instances, postulating a rule vocalizing the glide in a specified context ([j]→I).
In this approach, since [j] needs to disappear after causing palatalization, there must be some kind─ 13 ─

14

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号of ordering among palatalization, [j]-vocalization, and the deletion of [j]. On the other hand, thispaper introduces [] into the environment from the outset. This eliminates the need for the
vocalization operation, thereby reducing the necessity to specify the rule application order.
When considering parts other than <ti>, the following rules, presented in simplified forms,
become candidates and, upon approval, are executed. The ‘♦’s denote conditions on the targets. (SeeYokotani (2023b: 22) for the full forms of the rules assigning default StSUs and WkSUs. Rule (25) isbased on a rule by Carney (1994: 299, Rule A.31).
(25) Strong <a> Default (S<a>Dft) : [■] → { (♦ <a>)(26) Weak <i/y> (Wk<i/y>) : [●] → I (♦ <i/y>) (or → @ in certain cases)(27) Weak <a> (Wk<a>) : [●] → @ (♦ <a>)In relation to these, the two regulations below take effect. The notation ‘1m’ in the first denotes ‘1
mora’, and in the second, influenced by rules from Halle and Mohanan (1985: 67, 81),‘NIF-[C]’is anabbreviation for ‘not immediately followed by a CSU’, meaning ‘either prevocalic or word-final’.
(28) Vowel Adjustment Pre-[r] 1m (VAR1m)
1m ┐ ┌ co
[
]
V r

→

A: if [V] = [{]Ex. <f a r> → [fA:r]

					

→

O: if [V] = [Q]Ex. <port> → [pO:rt]

				

→

3: otherwise

Ex. <f ur>, <f ir>, <verb> → [3:]Prose version: When placing a 1m VSU immediately before coda [r], modify the VSU as
follows: change [] to [, [] to [], and any other 1m VSU to [].
(29) Vowel Adjustment High Vowel (VAhv /vA:v/)a. [I] → i (♦ NIF-[C])b. [...U] → ...u (♦ NIF-[C])Prose version: When placing [] or [...] in NIF-[C] position, modify the VSU or part of 
it as follows: change [] to [] and [] to [].
When determining the approved rules for the RSs in (22) above based on RSC (11), there is arivalry between iYod (23) and Weak <i/y> (26) concerning the vowel portion of <ti>. This isbecause both of them involve the manipulation of weak <i>. The former yields [j] or [jI] dependingon the environment, while the latter typically produces [I] consistently. When one rule is executed,
the resulting RS no longer meets the execution conditions of the other. This is because once thetarget placeholder is replaced with an SU or a sequence of SUs, there is no placeholder to change
any longer. RSC (11) decides that iYod is the stronger rule. While the execution conditions of Weak<i/y> are not tied to specific word-parts, iYod incorporates several such conditions, particularly
regarding the [Y] portion. Thus, in both partial and partiality, Weak <i/y> is superseded by iYodfor the second-syllable <i>.
─ 14 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model

15

Concurrently, the rule of Weak <a> assigns [@] to the weak <a> in the adjective; and the rule ofWeak <i/y> (along with its associated VAhv) gives [i] to <y> in the noun, and [@] to the <i> in the
penultimate syllable of the latter. When these rules are executed along with iYod, the RSs in (22)result in those in (30) below. These are the results of these combined operations, including iYod:(30) a. <•par•ti•al•> [•pA:r•tj•@l•]     b. <•par•ti•a•li•ty•> [•pA:r•tji•{•l@•ti•]
New candidate searches are initiated by the novel RSfins. For both partial and partiality, thefollowing rule in (31)——a revised version of the one presented in Yokotani (2018: 64)——is
identified as a candidate. The transformation in (32) arises from the approval and execution of this
rule.
(31) <t>-to-Esh (tEsh /teS/)
		Not [s] ┐		
			 [

t

X

┌ given by iYod (23)

j (I)

]

→

S

Prose version: Change [t] to [S] if the former is not immediately preceded by [s] and isimmediately followed by either [j] or [jI] that has been given by iYod.
(32) a. <partial> [•pA:r•tj•@l•] ―tEsh→ <partial> [•pA:r•Sj•@l•]		 b. <partiality> [•pA:r•tji•{•l@•ti•] ―tEsh→ <partiality> [•pA:r•Sji•{•l@•ti•]
Since no other candidates are found, these RSs are RSfins.
Candidate searches are performed again, with only one detected for the RSs immediately
above.
(33) Yod-Deletion (YodDel /jQddel/)
[	 C

j

]

→

Ø

But Not [V (r) l j V] → Ø		└ [S, tS, dZ, Z, l, r, w, j]stronger ┘└ weakerProse version: Delete [j] when it directly follows any of the SUs [], unless
all three of the following conditions are met: (i) C is [l], which is immediately preceded by[V(r)]; (ii) the target [j] is directly followed by a VSU; (iii) the VSUs on either side of the [j]are in a strong-weak relationship.
[Notes for Readers] The CSUs for [C] may seem too numerous for learners to remember.
However, based on the author’s experience, this challenge can be addressed relatively easily
with mnemonic techniques.
	

It is worth noting that this is a revised version of the one given in Yokotani (2023ab),which mandates [l] to be in the onset based on the observations first made by Borowsky (1990)
and utilized by Davis and Hammond (1995). In the previous models, instances where [j]remains in the final output were addressed by a re-syllabification rule mentioned in Section 2.
This rule moves [l] to a coda position when it appears in the ‘But Not’ environment in (33). It
─ 15 ─

16

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号

was necessary to ensure that the resyllabifcation applies earlier than the old [j]-deletion/
silencing rule. The end was achieved through RSC (11) or an analgous provision.
	

The revision was prompted by the observation that no other cases truly necessitated there-syllabification rule. While re-syllabification may provide a more comprehensive account of
the phonetic value of [l] in the coda, such detailed phonetic considerations are not pursued in
the present system. Allophonic details of this nature can be derived by constructing syllable
structures in the F-Rep. Additionally, eliminating the re-syllabification rule simplifies the entire
system. The rule can compete with YodDel, which is currently under discussion. Removing theformer makes the decoding processes more straightforward, leading to easier learning andteaching.
With no competing candidates, YodDel is immediately approved and executed, resulting in theremoval of [j following [S in each RS.
(34) a. <•par•ti•al•> [•pA:r•S •@l•] b. <•par•ti•a•li•ty•> [•pA:r•S i•{•l@•ti•]
These new RSfins trigger new candidate searches.
Of the two RSs presented immedidately above, no RG-4 candidates are found for (b), whereas
one is identified for (a). This rule, which is still under development, modifies @into a form thatmight be pronounced or not. It is provided here to illustrate its general working.
(35) Schwa Optionalization (SchwOp /SwQp/) [Incomplete]		┌ strong		
[ V

C~

@

┌ [l, n, m], in coda

Y

]

→

@

# [C~] = one or more [C]sThe RS that reflects this change is shown in (a) below, while (b) simply repeats a previous one.
(36) a. <•par•ti•al•> [•pA:r•S •@ l•] b. <•par•ti•a•li•ty•> [•pA:r•Si•{•l@•ti•]
A new candidate search is initiated for (a), but no candidates within RG-4 are found, just as was
already the case with (b). Consequently, the two RSs in (36) undergo candidate searches based on
RG-5, the final Rule Group.
4.1.5 RG-5
Within RG-5, two rules are identified as candidates for both RSs. One rule pertains to the deletionof [rin the coda, while the other is a“fair-copying” rule specified to be executed at the conclusionof the process. The presentation will begin with the former.
(37) [r]-Deletion (rDel /A:del/) : [r] → Ø ( ♦ in coda, not word-final)This becomes a candidate for both words, and its execution after approval yields the RSfins below:(38) a. <•par•ti•al•> [•pA:r•S•@l•] ⇒ 5 ―rDel→ <•par•ti•al•> [•pA: •S•@ l•]─ 16 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model17

		 b. <•par•ti•a•li•ty•> [•pA:r•Si•{•l@•ti•] ⇒ 5 ―rDel→ <•par•ti•a•li•ty•> [•pA: •Si•{•l@•ti•]
The final rule in the entire system, provided in (39), marks the conclusion of the decoding
processes. The ensuing representations are the final ones.
(39) Fair Copying (FairCop /fe@kQp/) : Perform the following:a. Create an F-Rep (/.../) adjacent to the S-Rep. Copy the non-stray SUs and their accompanying
stress information onto the F-Rep in the order they appear.
b. /r/ → (r) (♦ word-final)(40) a. <•par•ti•al•> [•pA: •S •@ l•] ―FairCop→ /pA:S@ l/		 b. <•par•ti•a•li•ty•> [•pA: •Si•{•l@•ti•] ―FairCop→ /pA:Si{l@ti/"/(r)/" in (39b) denotes that the final /r/ is pronounced when followed by a word starting with avowel as mentioned towards the end of Section 3.1. This rule is not relevant to the examples underconsideration.
4.2 Illustration 2: Car and Carry
The cases of car and carry presented in Section 2 are addressed as follows. The only addition
required is a rule placed in RG-2 that deletes the first element of a geminate. This rule not only
removes the unnecessary CSU but also silences the associated CLU, preventing it from being
reassigned a CSU by CDft (19). It is worth noting that this rule belongs to RG-2, the RG with rulesthat are executed on an RS whose S-Rep contains nothing but CSUs.
>		→

C (= silent C)
◇

C

→

Ø

(41) No Geminate (NoGem) [RG-2] < C
				

[ C

]

( ♦ CC = geminate)

The following illustrates how this rule works in the processes involved.
(42) a. <car> ⇒ 1 ―LUC, SRepC→ <car> [ ]b. ⇒ 2 ―CDft→ <car> [k r]c. ⇒ 3 ―SSC→ <•car•> [•k■r•]d. ⇒ 4 ―S<a>Dft (25)+VAR1m (28) → <•car•> [•kA:r•]e. ⇒ 5 ―FairCop→ /kA:(r)/(43) a. <carry> ⇒ 1 ―LUC, SRepC→ <carry> [ ]rb. ⇒ 2 ―CDft→ <carry> [k rr ] ―NoGem→ <ca ◇ry>[k Ør ]
rc. ⇒ 3 ―SSC→ <•ca ◇•ry•>[•k■ •r●•]rd. ⇒ 4 ―S<a>Dft (25), Wk<i,y> (26)+VAh (29) → <•ca ◇•ry•>[•k{ •ri•]e. ⇒ 5 ―FairCop→ /k{ri/It is worth noting that it is not a geminate per se that blocks vowel symbol adjustment, as
demonstrated in the case below:
─ 17 ─

18

青山学院大学文学部紀要

第 65 号(44) a. <Starr> (a surname) ⇒ 1 ―LUC, SRepC→ <Starr> [ ]r [st Ør]b. ⇒ 2 ―CDft→ <Starr> [st rr] ―NoGem→ <Sta ◇r>c. ⇒ 3 ―SCC→ <•Starr•> [•st■ r•]d. ⇒ 4 ―S<a>Dft (25)+VAR1m (28) → <•Starr•> [•stA: r•]e. ⇒ 5 ―FairCop→ /stA:(r)/5. Final Remarks
The foregoing discussions have highlighted the following novel aspects of this paper:	(i) The concept of Rep Set Finished (RSfin) explicitly defines the scope and timing ofexecutable rules.
	(ii) The Rule Strength Condition in (11) determines the executability of competing rules,

thereby minimizing the need for rule ordering. The provision is undeniably much easier forlearners to understand compared to conditions similar to Kiparsky’s Elsewhere Condition. It
must be acknowledged that some rules have stipulative executions, as seen in ‘given by iYod’in tEsh (31). However, this level of complexity can be justified when considering thesimplification it brings to the overall system.
	(iii) The process flows depicted in (43) and (44) demonstrate that geminate sequences areresolved using representations consisting solely of consonant symbols. This obviates thenecessity for a sequential ordering of rules between the relevant VSU assignment (and any
associated adjustments) and the degemination rule. This observation can be considered a novel
finding.
Assigning rules to distinct groups may be seen as a kind of extrinsic ordering. It should be
noted, however, that at least in most cases, the assignments are natural ones. For example, RG-2 isplaced before the group responsible for syllable structure construction and only houses rules thatmake no reference to syllable structure. Similarly, RG-4 contains rules for vowel symbol
assignment. This arrangement is inevitable because, although it may not be apparent in the present
paper, many of these rules are based on the syllable structures of the words under decoding. The
preparation and finalization stages of RG-1 and RG-5 are not central to the overall system. Thus,
what learners need to remember about the rule grouping is basically “consonant → syllable →vowel” only.
Although parts of it have been alterned in the presnt paper, Yokotani (2023b) pesents a morecomprehensive basis of the system with more illustrations. The author hopes those intrested in the
topic find hints for their research.
─ 18 ─

A Basis for a Syllable-Based English Spelling Decoding System for Advanced Learners: A Deletional Model

19

Acknowledgement
This paper is adapted from an unread section of Yokotani (2023b), which was presented at theTokyo Circle of Phonologists meeting held at International Christian University, Tokyo, on
September 23, 2023. Although the relevant section was not presented at the meeting, the author
extends gratitude to the participants for their insightful comments and remarks on the generalarchitecture of the present system. Their feedback significantly enhanced the final version of thispaper.

References
Borowsky, T. (1990) Topics in the Lexical Phonology of English, New York: Garland Pub. (Publishedversion of the same authorʼs 1986 Ph. D. disseration.)
Carney, E. (1994) A Survey of English Spelling, London and New York: Routledge.
Davis, S. and M. Hammond (1995) “On the Status of Onglides in American English,” Phonology 12,
159-182.
Halle, M. and K.P. Mohanan (1985) “Segmental Phonology of Modern English,” Linguistic Inquiry 16,
57-116.
Hayes, B. (1982) “Extrametricality and English Stress,” Linguistic Inquiry 13, 227-276.
Jensen, J. T. (2022) The Lexical and Metrical Phonology of English, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Kiparsky, P. (1982) “Lexical Morphology and Phonology,” In I. S. Yang (ed.) Linguistics in the MorningCalm, Seoul: Hanshin, 3-91.
Mayor, M. (2009) Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (5th), Essex: Pearson Education
Limited.
Takebayashi, S. (1996) Eigoonseigaku, Tokyo: Kenkyusha (『英語音声学』東京：研究社 )Yokotani, T. (2018) “Pronunciation Rules for <e, i>-triggered Palatoalveolarization,” Journal of Collegeof Literature 59, College of Literature, Aoyama Gakuin University, 51-71.（「<e, i> が引き起こす
硬口蓋歯茎化のための発音規則」『紀要』(59), 青山学院大学文学部 , 51-71.）----(2023a) “English Spelling Decoding Rules for Advanced Learners: A Syllable-Based Model,” Journalof College of Literature 64, College of Literature, Aoyama Gakuin University, 95-116.（「上級者向け英語スペリング読み替え規則集―音節に基づいたモデル―.『紀要』(64), 青山学院大学文学部 , 95116.）----(2023b) “A Basis for English Spelling Decoding Rules for Advanced Learners: A Deletional
Approach,” A talk at Tokyo Circle of Phonologists (TCP), at International Christian University,
Tokyo on September 23, 2023. As of March 2024, its handout is retrievable as a PDF titled“Yokotani 2023 TCP” fromhttps://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1S2vaYFN5Qcv0rFOnHQJT_4esPLRTRDSI?usp=drive_link─ 19 ─