Humanities & Social Sciences 3 (2017 10) 317-324 ~ ~ ~ УДК 81. 34, 81.44. 81-2 English in the Continuum of Phonemic-Nonphonemic (Syllabic) Languages: a Rethink of an Earlier Proposal Olga I. Brodovich* Institute of Foreign Languages 13 Linija 12, Vassilievsky Island, St. Petersburg, 199178, Russia Received 10.09.2016, received in revised form 26.09.2016, accepted 10.01.2017 The paper is dedicated to the analysis of syllable structure in English against the background of some typologically similar and different languages. <...> Brodovich 1986, Brodovich 1987) the present author was proposing the idea that English in its phonological development is drifting away from its affiliation with the purely phonemic languages to closer ties with syllabic languages. <...> All rights reserved * Corresponding author E-mail address: olgabrodovich@yandex.ru – 317 – (Kasevich 1983) stating the principal distinctions between phonemic and syllabic languages. <...> The properties of English demonstrating its closeness to syllabic languages are the following. (1) Сloser contact of all stressed vowels with the following consonant than with the preceding one, in particular the dependence of a vowel’s variation pattern on the following, and not on the preceding, consonant; (2) difference in variation patterns between syllable-initial and syllablefinal allophones of consonants; (3) a decrease in the number of consonants – at least in dialect – accepted syllable-finally, and a weakening of their final articulations; (4) the trend for a syllable boundary to coincide with the morpheme boundary and the resistance of English to Olga I. Brodovich. <...> English in the Continuum of Phonemic-Nonphonemic (Syllabic) Languages: a Rethink of… resyllabification, i.e. changing by a syllable-final consonant of its membership in the syllable when another vowel is added to the word; (5) scarcity of non-syllabic morphemes in English and their alternation with syllabic allomorphs. <...> Many of these properties of English become particularly evident when dialect data are considered not as a collection of disparate facts but as instances of a uniform system. <...> The following facts from English dialect variation prove the first item. • In many dialects of English checked vowels develop lengthened and/or diphthongal realizations when followed by certain consonants, particularly by the nasal and/or /d/. <...> Thus, bad [bж:d], sand [sж:nd], did [di:d]. • In London speech checked vowels develop narrower and diphthongal realizations before voiced consonants, especially before /d/. <...> So here <...>