• [no] = “my” 
• [ʔo] = “your”
• [po] = “his”
• [ʧam] = “our”
• [aamaj] = “son” 
• [ki] = “house” 
• [taana] = “blanket”
• [peew] = “wife”
• [huukapi] = “pipe”
• [um] = “plural forms of animate noun” (i.e., sons, wives)
• [m] = “plural forms of inanimate noun” (i.e., pipes, blankets, houses)

• Excel-lent (contains affix)
• Absorb-ent (contains affix)
• Diligent has no affixes
• Please-ant (contains affix)

• THE MOME RATHS 
  • Preceded by quantificational determiner “the” 
  • Followed by a noun (?)
  • Assuming this, likely an adjective
• THE MOME RATHS OUTGRABE
  • Marked for plurality by -s
  • Noun?
• THE MOME RATHS OUTGRABE
  • 
    
  • Assuming it is preceded by a noun, “outgrabe” appears to modify the noun
  • Past tense?
  • Maybe a verb?

• Follows a determiner and precedes a verb, could be a noun, assuming this is a noun, “raths” is a verb and “outgrabe” is an adverb or preposition

• Follows the noun, and exhibits tense agreement with the subject
• Or continuous tense, and this is a verb

• Or adverb used to modify the verb it succeeds

1. Who: could refer to father or could refer to the S’pore teen
2. He: could refer to father or could refer to the S’pore teen
3. His: could refer the father, the Carousell buyer, or the S’pore teen

Illocutionary type inferred by child: Directive

1. Not explicit (not a performative verb)

   1. Verb: cough

   2. Voluntary act (as the boy demonstrates)

   3. Cannot be performed with simple words

   4. Cannot be used with hereby…(i think)

2. Indirect

   1. Declarative (locutionary type)

      1. Tenseable verb: cough & coughed

   2. But directive illocutionary type should be paired with imperative 

3. Expressed

   1. Illocutionary type can be inferred by hearer

4. Literal

   1. Can be inferred to be a literal demand (as seen from his response)

This utterance was

• non-explicit (no performative verb)

• indirect (illocutionary type (representative) does not match the locutionary type (expected - declarative, actual - interrogative))

• implied (inference necessary)

• non-literal (B heard the answer the first time)

The effect is that A is able to deduce additional meaning from B's words (since the speech act is implied and non-literal): B is passive-aggressively telling A that he does not agree with his reasoning behind thinking that the guy is gay.

Illocution: Requesting A to provide further explanation for their assertion that the man is gay

Nonexplicit: does not use a performative verb

Direct: Question/interrogative, locution and illocutionary form match

Literal: asking a question

Expressed: intention is to have A provide an explanation, from a genuine position of wanting to understand.

But also, a possibility of it being Implied:

B may already disagree with A. A used the word "disgusting" on the gay person, so B could be casting judgement on what they believe to be an inappropriate comment. They may be implying that they strongly disagree with A's assertion, and flout the Maxim of Quantity in asking a question instead to sound more polite, rather than outright disagreeing with A.

- Relation. B’s first utterance is not clearly answering A’s yes/no question.

- Quantity: B is not answering A’s question in an informative way

- B implies that being gay does not make one disgusting. It is also possible that B does think the other man is disgusting but does not believe that being gay links to this.

b) Does B’s second utterance violate any of Grice’s maxims? If so, what is a possible implicature?

• Manner: B is intentionally being vague and repeating his initial question

- B could be implying that the man’s manner of dressing does not define his sexuality.

b). B can be happy to serve on the committee does not necessarily mean that he would be able to serve, hence it flouted the relation maxim as a result generating an implicature that he is able to serve on the committee

1. Assume no free variation (for test purposes).

2. Look for minimal pairs.

    a. If found, the two sounds are contrastive and must be allophones of different phonemes, aka different phonemes.           Analysis completed.

    b. If not found, proceed.

3. Write down all the environments (X__Y, #Z) to see if the sounds are in complementary distribution. Com dis means they never appear in the same environment (Environments never overlap).

   -environments overlap? Different phonemes. Analysis completed.

4.  See if they share phonetic similarity (Slight difference in parameters, aka voicing, place, manner).

    -(almost) no similarity? Different phonemes. Analysis completed.

They are in complementary distribution AND share phonetic similarities, so they’re allophones of the same phoneme.   

Generalization

Look into the environment lists and find commonalities (before/after between certain categories: high/mid/low /front/back/central vowels? fricatives? nasals? always initials? refer to vowel and consonant charts).

Choose represented allophone

Represented allophone should be the one that occurs in less restricted environments.