The present study attempts to reexamine what is oft-times referred to as "Natural Process Analysis (NPA)" from a phonological and clinical perspective. First, theoretical implications of NPA are examined. Based upon modern phonology, an analytic tool should necessarily be equipped with theoretical constructs including input and output forms, and intervening rules, processes, or constraints, depending upon the framework. NPA fails because it only relies upon dynamic processes to reach output forms, always positing adult-like input forms for each and every child. Second, for NPA, phonemes are the smallest phonological unit to be analyzed. This assumption sometimes leads to correct output forms resulting from incorrect input forms because it fails to take distinctive features into account. Finally, it is suggested that practical clinicians be provided with a proper knowledge of phonology to conduct a clinically effective phonological analysis of functional misarticulation systems.
