DOCSLIB.ORG

Malamud 9/13/2006 Intro to Linguistics Lecture 5. Phonology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Malamud 9/13/2006 Intro to Linguistics Lecture 5. Phonology Malamud 9/13/2006 Intro to Linguistics Lecture 5. Phonology Recall: • phonetics: the physical manifestation of language in sound waves; how these sounds are articulated and perceived • phonology: the mental representation of sounds as part of a symbolic cognitive system; how abstract sound categories are manipulated in the processing of language So phonetics deals with the physiological and acoustic parts of the path between speaker and listener, while phonology resides in the brain. Phonemes The phonological elements of a language are the basic, distinctive sounds, also called phonemes. In English, these are the following (for a dialect of Standard American English). • consonants: p, t, k, b, d, g, č, , f, θ, s, š, h, v, ð, z, ž, m, n, ŋ, l, r, w, y • vowels: i, u, I, U, e, o, ε , ə/ , , æ, a, ay, aw, oy "distinctive" = can be used to make contrasts between different words. For the stops, using minimal pairs (words that differ in exactly one sound): pill till kill bill dill gill For the vowels (for each individual pair of vowels we could come up with a minimal pair): bead booed bid bade bowed bed bud bad bod bide Boyd heed who'd hid hood head hawed had hide how'd jean June jin Jane Jen John join lead lewd lid laid load lead lad lod loud Lloyd And for the nasals: rum run rung In English, the velar nasal [η] can't occur at the beginning of a word -- cf. map, nap, *ngap – What are the restrictions on the way these elements are organized into words? Basic way in which languages differ is their inventory of sounds, or phonemes. For example: • German has the voiceless velar fricative [x], as in Bach "creek". o English has voiceless fricatives such as [s] and velars such as [k], but it doesn't have a single phoneme that has both of these properties. 1 • German also has the high front rounded vowel [ü], as in kühn "clever". o Again, English has high front [i] and rounded [u], but these properies are not combined in one vowel. • English [θ] sets it apart from many languages, including German and French. o They have several voiceless fricatives, but not the interdental. Learning a new (or a first) language includes learning the "list" or inventory of sounds. Syllables Phonological structure - the way these elements are organized - includes the notion of syllable and its subparts. This structure is crucially involved in describing the possible words. • the onset or consonant(s) at the beginning of the syllable o English normally permits up to two consonants o but in addition, [s] can be added to the beginning of many syllables as well, making up to three consonants o all sounds can occur in this position except for [ŋ] • the nucleus or vowel that is the core of the syllable o sometimes a consonant can serve as the nucleus, as in the second syllable of kitten or table • the coda or consonant(s) at the end of the syllable o English normally permits up to two consonants at the end (belt, jump, arc) o but in addition, certain sounds such as [s, t, θ] can be piled up (belts, sixths) Here's a general schema of how syllables are constructed. SYLLABLE RHYME ONSET NUCLEUS CODA consonant(s) vowel consonant(s) Rhyme = nucleus + coda, e.g. in blend rhyme = [ε] + [nd]. Sonority Human speech involves repetitive cycles of opening and closing the vocal tract = syllables. Relatively closed position = onset , then relatively open nucleus, then closing for coda or the next syllable's onset. The degree of vocal tract openness correlates with the loudness. Speech sounds differ on a scale of sonority: vowels = most sonorous end, obstruents (stops, affricates, fricatives) = least sonorous end. In between are the liquids [l] and [r], and nasal consonants like [m] and [n]. 2 Least sonorous sounds are restricted to the margins of the syllable -- the onset in the simplest case -- and the most sonorous sounds occur in the center of the syllable -- most often a vowel. E.g., "soon" * "blend" * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * [s][u][n] [b][l][ε][n][d] "pretending"- each syllable corresponds to a peak in sonority. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * [p][r][ə][t][ε][n][d][ I][ ŋ] "film"= one syllable BUT "fiml","pummel" = two syllables "fizm","chasm"=two * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * [f][ I][l][m] [f][ I] [m] [l] [f] [I] [z][m] [p][ ][m][l] [k][æ][z][m] • This breakdown does not need to be memorized for each word: syllabification is a general property of the language. • In these last two words, the consonant serves as the sonority peak - it is syllabic (a nucleus). English permits nasals and liquids to be syllabic, at least in unstressed syllables: prism, bottom, sump'm (for "something"), cap'm (for "captain"), hidden, button, kitten, risen bottle, little, towel, swimmer, higher, butter • For [r], the consonant can function as a vowel even in a stressed syllable: bird, fur, word In some dialects, such as Standard British, Boston, and Coastal Southern US, any [r] in the rhyme of a syllable (whether nucleus or coda) loses its r-ness and becomes a schwa-like vowel. These are called "r-less" dialects. • Another general property of English: restrictions on what consonants can be an onset cluster - sonority has to increase by two steps. • actual words with obstruent+liquid (two steps):brick, true, free, crab; play, blue, flea, glib • possible words with obstruent + liquid:blick, clee • impossible words with obstruent + nasal (just one step) :*bnick, *fnee, *gmue, *dmay • historical loss of initial obstruent in cluster (letter now silent):knee, knight, gnat, gnaw 3 • This too is part of our general knowledge of the language: we can distinguish blick and *bnick as "possible" and "impossible" even if we've never heard either word before. But what about words like snow (obstruent + nasal onset cluster)? • Take (almost) any English onset, and tack an [s] on the front of it, ignoring sonority. snow (cf. no), stop (cf. top), spray (cf. pray) • This is a special property of [s] and no other obstruent in English: loud fricative noise: it doesn't depend on the normal syllable structure. In German (and Yiddish), for example, it's the (alveo)palatal fricative, as in Schmutz "dirt." Once again, syllable structure is a way in which languages differ. Hawaiian: no coda consonants, maximum of one consonant in the onset. So: borrowed words get a lot of extra vowels, to create new syllables of the proper type. ink > 'înika Norman > Nolemana Polish: allows more consonants at the beginning or end of a word than English does. This is why some Polish names are hard for English speakers to say, such as Gdansk or Zbigniew Brzezinski. bzdura "nonsense" babsk "witch" grzbiet [gzhbyet] "back" marnotrawstw [-fstf] "of wastes" A language learner comes to understand what structures are possible in that language by observing the attested patterns. Allophones There are often differences in the way a phoneme is pronounced in a specific context. The variant pronunciations are called allophones ("other sounds"). When it's important to make this difference: • we'll use [square brackets] to indicate sounds from a phonetic point of view, i.e. focusing on their physical properties and the details of actual pronunciation; • and we'll use /slashes/ to indicate sounds from a phonological point of view, i.e. as part of an abstract representation independent of potential differences in the way the sound in pronounced in specific contexts. • I.e., [ ] = allophone, / / = phoneme. A classic example of sound alternation in English relates to the [s] found at the beginning of a syllable before a voiceless stop. spin is basically pin with [s] added, but the /p/ in each case is pronounced differently. 4 • pin contains an aspirated version of /p/, with a puff of air after the stop is released; [ph] • spin contains a plain /p/, without a puff of air after the stop; this is written just [p] The same is true for pairs like pit~spit, pot~spot, pair~spare, etc. A simple statement of this alternation is as follows: allophone [p] immediately following [s] the phoneme /p/ becomes: at the beginning of the allophone [ph] word But the same generalization holds not just for /p/ but for the other voiceless stops, /t/ and /k/. Compare these word pairs: • top~stop, take~stake, tie~sty, etc. • kin~skin, cope~scope, can~scan, etc. So more accurately, there's a single general statement that covers all these cases, stated in terms of natural classes. unaspirated immediately following [s] voiceless stops are: at the beginning of the aspirated word How do we know that aspirated and unaspirated voiceless stops are not different phonemes? The same way Lois Lane knew Clark Kent was the same guy as the Superman: they never appear at the same place in the same time. This is called complementary distribution. Expanding to more than one-syllable: voiceless stops are aspirated when they occur syllable- initially and are followed by a stressed vowel (rápid, raphídity); & word-initially regardless of stress (photháto). At the beginning of a word, a preceding /s/ prevents the stop from being syllable- or word-initial. Different stresses cause alternations: underlying sound /t/ is pronounced as [t] etc. or [th] etc. rápid [p] rapídity [ph] authéntic [t] authentícity [th] récord [k] recórd [kh] This process is completely unconscious for most speakers, and often quite hard to unlearn. 5 English speakers who learn a language like French or Spanish, in which all voiceless stops are unaspirated, typically impose aspiration according to their native rule; but that's wrong for these languages, and sounds foreign. Similarly, a French or Spanish speaker learning English will typically fail to produce aspiration in the right places; this is part of what it means to have a foreign accent.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Segmental Phonology and the Perception of Syntactic Structure
    JOURNAL OF VERBAL LEARNING AND VERBAL BEHAVIOR 23, 450-466 (1984) Segmental Phonology and the Perception of Syntactic Structure DONIA R. SCOTT University of Sussex AND ANNE CUTLER MRC Applied Psychology Unit, Cambridge Recent research in speech production has shown that syntactic structure is reflected in segmental phonology--the application of certain phonological rules of English (e.g., pala- talization and alveolar flapping) is inhibited across phrase boundaries. We examined whether such segmental effects can be used in speech perception as cues to syntactic structure, and the relation between the use of these segmental features as syntactic markers in production and perception. Speakers of American English (a dialect in which the above segmental effects occur) could indeed use the segmental cues in syntax perception; speakers of British English (in which the effects do not occur) were unable to make use of them, while speakers of British English who were long-term residents of the United States showed intermediate performance. Anyone who has had to make the sepa- dangerous") (Lehiste, 1973). But the fact rate meanings of an ambiguous sentence that listeners can successfully identify the clear to listeners will know that often the intended meaning even in the absence of a most efficient method is just to say the sen- disambiguating context suggests that tence in different ways. Of course, some speakers can exploit acoustic features to sentences will be more difficult to disam- highlight the distinction that is to be con- biguate in this manner than others; in gen- veyed to the listener. eral, surface structure ambiguities (e.g., In recent years, a number of studies on "The old men and women stayed at English speech perception have investi- home") prove easier than deep structure gated just what these acoustic correlates of ambiguities (e.g., "Flying planes can be syntactic structure are, and how useful they are to the listener.
    [Show full text]
  • Imperceptible Incomplete Neutralization
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Lingua 152 (2014) 24--44 www.elsevier.com/locate/lingua Imperceptible incomplete neutralization: Production, non-identifiability, and non-discriminability in American English flapping Aaron Braver * Texas Tech University, Department of English, P.O. Box 43091, Lubbock, TX 79409-3091, United States Received 1 November 2012; received in revised form 6 September 2014; accepted 9 September 2014 Available online Abstract Flapping in American English has been put forward as a case of incomplete neutralization---in other words, /d/-flaps and /t/-flaps differ at the phonetic level. This paper first presents a production experiment which shows that, in line with previous work, flapping in American English is incompletely neutralizing: vowels before /d/-flaps are slightly longer than those before /t/-flaps---even in nonce words. Early studies on the perceptibility of this difference, almost exclusively identification tasks, have shown mixed results. However, recent identification experiments (including one reported here) show that listeners are unable to properly categorize /d/- and /t/-flaps. Listeners’ poor performance on identification tasks can be due to two factors: either (a) listeners’ grammars lacking the relevant phonological categories, or (b) an effect of the type of perception tasks employed. In a 2AFC discrimination task presented here, listeners were unable to distinguish between /d/- and /t/-flaps, suggesting that poor perception performance generalizes to multiple task types. © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Incomplete neutralization; Flapping; Phonetics; American English 1. Introduction In American English flapping, underlying /d/ and /t/ become [ɾ] in certain prosodic configurations (e.g., Kahn, 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Ling 230/503: Articulatory Phonetics and Transcription English Vowels
    Ling 230/503: Articulatory Phonetics and Transcription Broad vs. narrow transcription. A narrow transcription is one in which the transcriber records much phonetic detail without attention to the way in which the sounds of the language form a system. A broad transcription omits those details of a narrow transcription which the transcriber feels are not worth recording. Normally these details will be aspects of the speech event which are: (1) predictable or (2) would not differentiate two token utterances of the same type in the judgment of speakers or (3) are presumed not to figure in the systematic phonology of the language. IPA vs. American transcription There are two commonly used systems of phonetic transcription, the International Phonetics Association or IPA system and the American system. In many cases these systems overlap, but in certain cases there are important distinctions. Students need to learn both systems and have to be flexible about the use of symbols. English Vowels Short vowels /ɪ ɛ æ ʊ ʌ ɝ/ ‘pit’ pɪt ‘put’ pʊt ‘pet’ pɛt ‘putt’ pʌt ‘pat’ pæt ‘pert’ pɝt (or pr̩t) Long vowels /i(ː), u(ː), ɑ(ː), ɔ(ː)/ ‘beat’ biːt (or bit) ‘boot’ buːt (or but) ‘(ro)bot’ bɑːt (or bɑt) ‘bought’ bɔːt (or bɔt) Diphthongs /eɪ, aɪ, aʊ, oʊ, ɔɪ, ju(ː)/ ‘bait’ beɪt ‘boat’ boʊt ‘bite’ bɑɪt (or baɪt) ‘bout’ bɑʊt (or baʊt) ‘Boyd’ bɔɪd (or boɪd) ‘cute’ kjuːt (or kjut) The property of length, denoted by [ː], can be predicted based on the quality of the vowel. For this reason it is quite common to omit the length mark [ː].
    [Show full text]
  • An Acoustic Account of the Allophonic Realization of /T/ Amber King St
    Linguistic Portfolios Volume 1 Article 12 2012 An Acoustic Account of the Allophonic Realization of /T/ Amber King St. Cloud State University Ettien Koffi St. Cloud State University Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/stcloud_ling Part of the Applied Linguistics Commons Recommended Citation King, Amber and Koffi, Ettien (2012) "An Acoustic Account of the Allophonic Realization of /T/," Linguistic Portfolios: Vol. 1 , Article 12. Available at: https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/stcloud_ling/vol1/iss1/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by theRepository at St. Cloud State. It has been accepted for inclusion in Linguistic Portfolios by an authorized editor of theRepository at St. Cloud State. For more information, please contact [email protected]. King and Koffi: An Acoustic Account of the Allophonic Realization of /T/ AN ACOUSTIC ACCOUNT OF THE ALLOPHONIC REALIZATIONS OF /T/ AMBER KING AND ETTIEN KOFFI 1.0 Introduction This paper is a laboratory phonology account of the different pronunciations of the phoneme /t/. Laboratory phonology is a relatively new analytical tool that is being used to validate and verify claims made by phonologists about the pronunciation of sounds. It is customary for phonologists to predict on the basis of auditory impressions and intuition alone that allophones exist for such and such phonemes. An allophone is defined as different realizations of the same phoneme based on the environments in which it occurs. For instance, it has been proposed that the phoneme /t/ has anywhere from four to eight allophones in General American English (GAE). To verify this claim Amber, one of the co-author of this paper recorded herself saying the words <still>, <Tim>, <kit>, <bitter>, <kitten>, <winter>, <fruition>, <furniture>, and <listen>.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Berkeley Phonlab Annual Report
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley PhonLab Annual Report Title Strengthening, Weakening and Variability: The Articulatory Correlates of Hypo- and Hyper- articulation in the Production of English Dental Fricatives Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1hw2719n Journal UC Berkeley PhonLab Annual Report, 14(1) ISSN 2768-5047 Author Melguy, Yevgeniy Publication Date 2018 DOI 10.5070/P7141042482 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UC Berkeley Phonetics and Phonology Lab Annual Report (2018) Yevgeniy Melguy Susan Lin, Brian Smith M.A. Qualifying Paper 9 December 2018 Strengthening, weakening and variability: The articulatory correlates of hypo- and hyper- articulation in the production of English dental fricatives 1. INTRODUCTION A number of influential approaches to understanding phonetic and phonological variation in speech have highlighted the importance of functional factors (Blevins, 2004; Donegan & Stampe, 1979; Kiparsky, 1988; Kirchner, 1998; Lindblom, 1990). Under such approaches, speaker- and listener-oriented principles—ease of articulation vs. perceptual clarity—often work in opposite directions with respect to consonantal articulation. Minimization of effort is thought to drive a general “weakening” of consonants (resulting in decreased articulatory constriction and/or duration) which often makes them more articulatorily similar to surrounding sounds. This can result in assimilation, lenition, and ultimately deletion, and generally comes at the expense of clarity. By contrast, maximization of clarity drives consonantal “strengthening” processes (resulting in increased articulatory constriction and/or duration) that makes target segments more distinct from neighboring sounds, which can result in fortition. Clear speech generally involves more extreme or “forceful” articulations, and usually comes at the expense of requiring more articulatory effort from the speaker.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Intrusive L
    THE AMERICAN INTRUSIVE L BRYAN GICK University of British Columbia The well-known sandhi phenomenon known as intrusive r has been one of the longest-standing problems in English phonology. Recent work has brought to light a uniquely American contribution to this discussion: the intrusive l (as in draw[l]ing for drawing and bra[l] is for bra is in southern Pennsylvania, compared to draw[r]ing and bra[r] is, respectively, in British Received Pronunciation [RP]). In both instances of intrusion, a historically unattested liquid consonant (r or l) intervenes in the hiatus between a morpheme-final nonhigh vowel and a following vowel, either across or within words. Not surprisingly, this process interacts crucially with the well- known cases of /r/-vocalization (e.g., Kurath and McDavid 1961; Labov 1966; Labov, Yaeger, and Steiner 1972; Fowler 1986) and /l/-vocalization (e.g., Ash 1982a, 1982b), which have been identified as important markers of sociolinguistic stratification in New York City, Philadelphia, and else- where. However, previous discussion of the intrusive l (Gick 1999) has focused primarily on its phonological implications, with almost no attempt to describe its geographic, dialectal, and sociolinguistic context. This study marks such an attempt. In particular, it argues that the intrusive l is an instance of phonological change in progress. Descriptively, the intrusive l parallels the intrusive r in many respects. Intrusive r may be viewed simplistically as the extension by analogy of a historically attested final /r/ to words historically ending in a vowel (gener- ally this applies only to the set of non-glide-final vowels: /@, a, O/).
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Preparation of Camera-Ready Manuscript
    Morphological effects on the darkness of English intervocalic /l/ Sang-Im Lee-Kim, Lisa Davidson, and Sangjin Hwang New York University To appear in Laboratory Phonology 4:2, October 2013. Abstract Articulatory and acoustic studies have provided evidence that in word-initial and word-final positions, English /l/ exhibits substantial differences in ‘darkness’: dark [ɫ] in word-final position is produced with a more retracted tongue dorsum and lowered tongue body than light [l] in word-initial position. The darkness of intervocalic /l/, however, is variable. While Sproat and Fujimura (1993) argue that /l/ darkness is on a continuum strongly affected by duration, Hayes (2000) maintains that the morphological status of intervocalic /l/s should affect whether they are produced as light or dark variants. In this study, ultrasound imaging is used to investigate whether the morphological affiliation of the /l/ affects the degree of tongue dorsum retraction and tongue body lowering and the acoustic characteristics of /l/ darkness. Six American English speakers produced three types of stimuli which were predicted to increase in darkness in the following order: (1) when /l/ corresponded with the onset of a suffix (e.g. flaw-less), (2) when /l/ corresponded with the final position of the stem word (e.g. tall-est), and (3) when /l/ was the final consonant of a stem word (e.g. tall). For both articulatory and acoustic measures, the predicted order was upheld. The strongest articulatory correlate of darkness was tongue body lowering, and acoustic differences were mainly manifested in F1 and normalized intensity. Phonological implications of these findings are discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • Vowel Shifts in English John Goldsmith January 19, 2010
    Vowel shifts in English John Goldsmith January 19, 2010 English vowels English vowels may be divided into those that are found in stressed syllables, and those found in unstressed syllables. We will focus here on the vowels in stressed syllables, and the rest of this section is about stressed vowels when we do not explicitly mention stress. We may focus on monosyllabic words that are produced as a full utterance to guarantee that we are looking at a stressed syllable. Unstressed syllables allow two vowels, [@] and [i] (e.g., the second vowels of sofa and silly) (and probably one more: the final vowel in 1 motto). 1 That is perhaps controversial; one English vowels are divided into short and long vowels. reason to believe it is that flapping is possible in words such as motto and Among the short vowels, there are 3 front unround vowels, 2 tomato. back round vowels, and 2 back unround vowels. For the three front Short vowels Long vowels unround vowels, see Figure 1, where you see an example in stan- pit ˘i [I] by ¯i [aj] pet e˘ [E] Pete e¯ [ij] dard orthography, in typical dictionary form, and in the IPA sym- pat ˘a [æ] pate a¯ [ej] bols that we shall use (that linguists normally use). For the 4 back Figure 1: Front vowels short vowels, see Figure 2, left column. The vowels of putt and pot (in most dialects of the US) are unround. Short vowels Long vowels put oo˘ [U] boot oo¯ [uw] Please note: many of you (at least half of you) do not distinguish putt u˘ [2] bound ou [æw] between [a] and [O]: you pronounce cot and caught the same way.
    [Show full text]
  • Stop Epenthesis in English F Marios Fourakis Centra L Institute for the Deaf
    Journal of Phonetics (1986) 14, 197 22 1 I Stop Epenthesis in English f Marios Fourakis Centra l Institute for the Deaf. 818 South Euclid, St. Louis, Mis souri 63110. U.S.A. and Robert Port lndiana University , Bloomington, Indiana 47405, U.S.A. Received 14th May 1985. and in revisedform I Ith January 1986 Some phonologists have claimed that the insertion of a stop between a sonorant and a fricative consonant in syllable-final sonorant­ fricative clusters follows from universal constraints on the human speech perception and produ ction mechanism. Others have claimed that the intrusive stops are products of language or dialect specific phonological rules that are stated in the grammar . In this experiment we examined the produ ction of sonorant - fricative and sonorant-stop­ fricative clusters by two groups of English speakers. One spoke a South African dialect and the other an American mid-western dfalect. The words tested ended in clusters of [n) or [l) plus [s) or [ts) and their voiced counterparts. Spectrographic analysis revealed that the South African speakers maintained a clear contrast between sonorant­ fricative and sonorant-stop-fricative clusters. The American speakers always inserted stops after the sonorant if the fricative was voiceless, but when the fricative was voiced, they more often omitted the stop in underlying clusters containing a stop (/ldz/ or /ndz/) but sometimes inserted a stop in clusters such as /n2/ or /lz/. Measurements of the durations of the vowels, sonorants, stops and the final fricatives were made from the spectrograms . The inserted stop in the American productions was significantly shorter than the underlying one and its presence also affected the duration of the preceding nasal.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns in Phonological and Social Variability
    Danielle Turton t-glottalling, flapping Lancaster University and pre-glottalisation in British Englishes: Patterns in Cambridge Linguistics Forum phonological and University of Cambridge social variability 5th December 2019 • We’ll be considering a range of t-lenition processes in English • glottalling, flapping and pre-glottalisation • Variation conditioned by a multitude of factors: • phonological context Overview • morpho-syntactic context • sociolinguistic factors (age, sex, social class) • Variation is entirely orderly when considering it from the perspective of phonological theory • Synchronic reflections of the life cycle of phonological processes Three examples glottal stops in flapping in Blackburn pre-glottalisation in Manchester Newcastle Theoretical background t-lenition processes Kiparsky (1979) on American English flapping • Stage 1 : word level city • /t/s which are not foot-initial are [sɪɾi] laxed • city, sit on, sit here, sit • *attack • Stage 2: phrase level sit on • lax tokens of /t/ between vowels [sɪɾ ɑn] are flapped • city, sit on t-lenition processes What happens to laxed /t/s at the word level outside of V_V? • Stage 1 : word level city • /t/s which are not foot-initial are [sɪɾi] laxed • city, sit on, sit there, sit • *attack • American English – unreleased sit on • RP – pre-glottalisation [sɪɾ ɑn] • Scouse – fricativisation Lenition • Urban British – glottal stop trajectories See also Harris & Kaye (1990) The life cycle of phonological processes Bermúdez-Otero (2015) n phon atio olo is gi g sa lo Epiphenomenal
    [Show full text]
  • Sussex by the Sea: a Descriptive Analysis of Dialect Variation in the South East of England Based on English Dialect App Data
    Sussex by the sea: a descriptive analysis of dialect variation in the South East of England based on English Dialect App data Article (Published Version) Jansen, Sandra, Robinson, Justyna A, Cahill, Lynne, Leemann, Adrian, Blaxter, Tamsin and Britain, David (2020) Sussex by the sea: a descriptive analysis of dialect variation in the South East of England based on English Dialect App data. English Today, 36 (3). pp. 31-39. ISSN 0266- 0784 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/93516/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse: Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University. Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way.
    [Show full text]
  • Stress-Related Variation in the Articulation of Coda Alveolar Stops: flapping Revisited
    Journal of Phonetics (1998) 26, 283Ð310 Article ID: jp980077 Stress-related variation in the articulation of coda alveolar stops: flapping revisited Kenneth de Jong Department of Linguistics, 319 Memorial Hall, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA Received 28 May 1997, revised 23 January 1998, accepted 9 July 1998 The present paper examines the plausibility of two models of flapping in American English: (1) a traditional model of flapping as a categorical switch from stop to flap production in a specified linguistic environment, and (2) a model of flapping in which flapping arises as a by-product of articulatory changes associated with the general implementation of prosodic structure. These models are tested against a corpus of X-ray microbeam records of English speakers producing utterances with word-final coronal consonants in the appropriate segmental context for flapping, but in varied prosodic locations. Tokens were submitted to perceptual, acoustic, and articulatory analyses. Results show that listeners consistently transcribe the presence of flaps according to acoustic di¤erences in the presence of voicing during closure and a release burst. Transcriptions and lingual measurements, however, suggest that the di¤erence between flaps and [d] is associated with gradient di¤erences in lingual positioning. Some articulatory correlates of perceived flapping correspond to predictions of a model of increased co-production of vowels and consonants yielding lenited stops heard as flaps, but others do not. Problems raised by these results for both traditional and prosodic by-product models are discussed. ( 1998 Academic Press 1. Introduction This paper reports an investigation into the nature of coronal stop flapping in American English.
    [Show full text]