On the Back of the Tongue: Dorsal Sounds in Australian Languages (original) (raw)
Related papers
The consonant systems of Australian Aboriginal languages, whilst not particularly large, are very 'long and thin' -i.e. they have unusually few contrasts in the traditional vertical dimension on the IPA chart (manner of articulation), an unusually large number in the horizontal dimension (place of articulation) and no voicing contrast. Whilst three or four manner features may be sufficient, some 8 or 9 place features are needed for a theoretically adequate analysis. Our articulatory and acoustic studies show that many of the prosodic contrasts (stress, focus…) are realised in the durational and spectral characteristics of the coda consonants rather than of the vowels. Furthermore there seems to be a very strong imperative to preserve place of articulation distinctions. In connected speech Australian languages are resistant to some anticipatory processes common in other languages, such as assimilation of nasality and of place of articulation, leading to the enhancement of the left edge of consonants. Our acoustic measurements confirm that, in contradistinction to English, the stability of VC combinations is on a par with that of CV combinations.The paper discusses the interplay between the unusual feature configurations of these languages, their phonotactics and the phonetic realisations of these contrasts. It would appear that natural classes can be defined more satisfactorily in terms of articulatory features rather than acoustic features.
An acoustic study of nasal consonants in three Central Australian languages
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2016
Nasal formant and bandwidth values are examined, as are the locations of spectral minima. Several differences are found between the bilabial /m/ and the velar /˛/, and also the palatal /fi/. The remaining coronal nasals / 9 n n î/ are not well differentiated within the nasal murmur, but their average bandwidths are lower than for the other nasal consonants. Broader spectral shape measures (Centre of Gravity and Standard Deviation) are also considered, and comparisons are made with data for stops and laterals in these languages based on the same spectral measures. It is suggested that nasals are not as easily differentiated using the various measures examined here as are stops and laterals. It is also suggested that existing models of nasal consonants do not fully account for the observed differences between the various nasal places of articulation; and that oral formants, in addition to anti-formants, contribute substantially to the output spectrum of nasal consonants. V
The Cambridge Handbook of Phonetics
2021
Phonetics - the study and classification of speech sounds - is a major sub-discipline of linguistics. Bringing together a team of internationally renowned phoneticians, this handbook provides comprehensive coverage of the most recent, cutting-edge work in the field, and focuses on the most widely-debated contemporary issues. Chapters are divided into five thematic areas: segmental production, prosodic production, measuring speech, audition and perception, and applications of phonetics. Each chapter presents an historical overview of the area, along with critical issues, current research and advice on the best practice for teaching phonetics to undergraduates. It brings together global perspectives, and includes examples from a wide range of languages, allowing readers to extend their knowledge beyond English. By providing both state-of-the-art research information, and an appreciation of how it can be shared with students, this handbook is essential both for academic phoneticians, a...
177th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, 2018
The phonological systems of human languages are constrained by what are often assumed to be universal properties of human auditory perception. However, the atypical phonologies found in many hearingimpaired speakers (lack of voicing contrast, lack of fricatives) indicate that such constraints also operate at an individual level. Thus, if a large group of speakers in a speech community operates with an atypical auditory system over a number of generations, then it seems logical that the phonology of the language(s) spoken by such a community would also over time be influenced by the particular properties of that common auditory system. Over half of the Australian Aboriginal population develop chronic otitis media with effusion in infancy and 50-70% of Aboriginal children have a significant hearing loss at both the low and high ends of the frequency range. The majority of Australian languages have phonologies which are atypical in world terms, having no voicing distinction and no fricatives or affricates, but an unusually large number of places of articulation. Whilst there would seem to be no way of conclusively demonstrating a historical causal connection between atypical hearing profiles and atypical phonologies, this paper explores some of the minimal prerequisites for such a theory.
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
This study presents formant transition data from 21 speakers for the apical alveolarretroflex contrast in three neighbouring Central Australian languages: Arrernte, Pitjantjatjara, and Warlpiri. The contrast is examined for three manners of articulation: stop, nasal, and lateral /t Ô/ /n î/, and /l ì/, and three vowel contexts /a i u/. As expected, results show that a lower F3 and F4 in the preceding vowel signal a retroflex consonant; and that the alveolarretroflex contrast is most clearly realized in the context of an /a/ vowel, and least clearly realized in the context of an /i/ vowel. Results also show that the contrast is most clearly realized for the stop manner of articulation. These results provide an acoustic basis for the greater typological rarity of retroflex nasals and laterals as compared to stops. It is suggested that possible nasalization of the preceding vowel accounts for the poorer nasal consonant results, and that articulatory constraints on lateral consonant production account for the poorer lateral consonant results. Importantly, differences are noticed between speakers, and it is suggested that literacy plays a major role in maintenance of this marginal phonemic contrast.
On the articulatory classification of (alveolo)palatal consonants
Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 2013
Linguopalatal and sagittal vocal tract configuration data from a large number of languages reveal that the so-called palatal consonants (i.e. [ç ʎ c ɲ j]), as well as the vowel [i], are often realized simultaneously at the alveolar and palatal zones. Moreover, while some of these sound categories may also exhibit a palatal constriction ([ç c ɲ j i]), others are exclusively alveolar or alveolopalatal in line with the manner of articulation characteristics involved ([ʎ], also [ɕ] and [tʃ]). Consonants may favor one or more places of articulation and differ in fronting degree depending on the language taken into consideration; moreover, there appears to be a symmetry requirement by which consonants differing in manner, such as [c] and [ɲ], may agree in place. The data reported in this paper argue in favor of a revision of the articulatory classification of palatal consonants by the International Phonetic Alphabet involving their subdivision into two classes, an alveolopalatal and a pal...
Pinker, author of The Language Instinct, once pointed out that great strides in science often come about by devoting massive research efforts on isolated, apparently simple, yet representative phenomena that he called Amodel organisms@. Linguistics is no different in this regard; just this kind of massive research effort on an isolated, apparently simple, yet representative phenomenon was carried out by Patricia Kuhl, a psycholinguistic researcher. 1 Kuhl=s model-organism studies focused on the perception by children and adults of only two sounds, namely, [pHA] and [bHA]. 2 To appreciate the importance of Kuhl=s findings, it is important first to understand a bit more about [pHA] and [bHA]. When a native speaker of English makes these sounds, and other native speakers listen to them, the listeners are obviously aware that the two sounds differ. The difference comes about because voicing begins late in [pHA] and much earlier in [bHA]; otherwise, the two sounds are