Experimental Approaches to Sound Variation: a Sociophonetic Study of Labial and Velar Fricatives and Approximants in Argentine Spanish
by
Natalia Mazzaro
A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy Department of Spanish and Portuguese University of Toronto
© by Natalia Mazzaro (2011)
Experimental Approaches to Sound Variation: a Sociophonetic Study of Labial and Velar Fricatives and Approximants in Argentine Spanish
Natalia Mazzaro
Doctor in Philosophy
Department of Spanish and Portuguese University of Toronto
2011
Abstract
The alternation between labial and velar fricatives (e.g. [x]uego fuego ‘fire’) and labial and velar approximants (e.g. a[ ɣ]uelo abuelo ‘grandfather’) frequently co-occur in disparate Spanish dialects (Colombia, New Mexico, El Salvador, Ecuador, Chile, among others). I hypothesize that these alternations are triggered by the perceptual similarity between such variants in the context of [u] and [w]. I further hypothesize that the spread of these variables to the upper layers of society is prevented by formal education, since orthography can block sound change.
Although the labio-velar alternations have been observed before, there are few experimental studies addressing their acoustic and perceptual motivations. Yet, the only way to understand the mechanisms of sound variation and change is to analyze the physical, acoustic and perceptual characteristics of the sounds involved.
ii
This dissertation uniquely combines three methodologies of data elicitation in order to achieve a better understanding of the alternations. Vernacular speech was collected through sociolinguistic interviews. Contextually controlled target words were elicited via a picture naming task. Finally, the hypothesis that the alternations were driven by the perceptual similarity between the sounds was tested via an AX discrimination test. The sociolinguistic data was correlated with the results from the perception experiment to determine whether more variation in speech correlates with higher rates of confusion in perception.
The results reveal that Education and Following Context are two of the most powerful factor groups that influence the alternations. The alternation is almost exclusively found before the diphthongs [we, wi], and in stressed syllables. Knowing the orthography plays an important role in blocking the diffusion of this perceptually driven variation. The same factors affecting the variation in sociolinguistics interviews were found to be significant in increasing the confusion between [f] ~ [x] and [ β] ~ [ ɣ] in the perception experiment. The acoustic analysis (centre of gravity and F2 at vowel onset), however, did not support the hypothesis regarding the similarity of labial and velar fricatives and approximants.
iii
Acknowledgements
Como dice Antoine de Saint-Exupéry en El Principito, es el tiempo que uno invierte en algo lo que lo hace tan único y valioso. Abordé este tema por primera vez en un curso que tomé con Laura Colantoni hace seis años. Desde entonces ha estado en mi cabeza y ocupado interminables horas de trabajo. Le debo a este estudio casi todo lo que aprendí en estos seis años.
Primero que nada, quiero expresar mi agradecimiento profundo y sincero a la gente de Caá Catí, quien colaboró con este proyecto de muchas maneras: Irene Pérez me hospedó en su casa y me contactó con Javier Brisuela, quien a su vez me presentó a todos sus conocidos y amigos en Caá Catí.
I thank the Language Variation and Change (LVC) group in the Linguistics department at the University of Toronto, who gave me a lot good ideas to conduct my research and analyze the data. Thank you to Bridget Jankowsky for helping me with the sociolinguistic analysis and to Naomi Nagy for answering my emails and questions. I also thank Rebecca Roeder for her help in the design of the perception experiment.
My frequent feelings of frustration and lack of hopes throughout the process made me a bit sour at times, so I am grateful to all those who stood by me with sympathetic ears and encouraging words. My friends Deepa, Suat, Antonio, Donna, and Bridget have made my work at the library a pleasant time. Yasaman Rafat, Anna Limanni, Tanya Batterby, and Irina Marinescu have given me support and advice at the right time.
The members of the committee have given me feedback throughout the writing of this dissertation. Sali Tagliamonte has provided a lot of useful input in the sociolinguistic analysis. Cristina Cuervo has given me a different perspective on most of the topics reviewed in this dissertation and a lot of important tips for editing this work. I appreciated Jack Chambers’ valuable comments and contributions toward the revision. Last, but not least, I want to thank José Ignacio Hualde for being the external examiner and for his critical comments on an earlier draft of this dissertation.
iv
I thank Laura Colantoni, my supervisor, for mentoring me and supporting me throughout this work. Her sense of urgency allowed me to complete this project in a timely manner. She encouraged me with a JUERZA when I needed it most.
Mil gracias a Martín por ayudarme en TODO, por fabricar un software para el análisis sociolingüístico de los sonidos de las entrevistas, por enseñarme todo lo que sé de estadística, por auxiliarme económicamente cuando mi sueldo de estudiante graduada no me alcanzaba (en realidad NUNCA me alcanzó) cuando Word hacia lo que quería, y por prometerme una cámara para estimularme a que terminara la tesis.
¡A mamá! Gracias por su tremendo esfuerzo en la transcripción y el análisis de las entrevistas. Sólo una madre podría pasarse ocho meses transcribiendo cuarenta y cinco entrevistas y trabajando en un proyecto para el que no recibió un solo peso. Mejor dicho, sólo ESTA madre podría haberlo hecho.
Creo que me debo un gracias a mí misma también, por no haberme dado por vencida todas esas veces.
v
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ...... vi
List of Tables ...... x
List of Figures ...... xiii
Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 1
Chapter 2 Literature Review and Hypotheses ...... 6
2.1 Introduction ...... 6
2.2 On the origin of sound change ...... 6
2.2.1 The speaker as a source of sound change ...... 6
2.2.2 The listener as a source of sound change ...... 9
2.2.3 Literacy and the perception of sounds ...... 11
2.3 The diffusion of sound variation and change ...... 13
2.4 Diachronic evidence ...... 16
2.4.1 The shift affecting /b/ ...... 16
2.4.2 The shift affecting /f/ ...... 18
2.5 The acoustic characteristics of labial and velar fricatives [f, x] and approximants [ β, ɣ] ...... 20
2.6 Previous studies related to labio-velar alternations ...... 26
2.7 Hypotheses ...... 35
Chapter 3 Study Design and Methods ...... 40
3.1 Introduction ...... 40
3.2 Data Collection ...... 40
3.2.1 Sociolinguistic interviews ...... 40
3.2.2 Production experiment ...... 44
3.2.3 Perception experiment ...... 45
vi
3.3 The location: Caá Catí city ...... 47
3.4 Caá Catí Spanish in contact with Guaraní ...... 49
3.5 Sample population and participants ...... 50
3.6 Data analysis ...... 52
3.6.1 Sociolinguistic interviews ...... 52
3.6.2 Production Experiment ...... 61
3.6.3 Perception Experiment ...... 64
Chapter 4 Sociolinguistic analysis of variable /f/ and /b/ ...... 67
4.1 Introduction ...... 67
4.2 Overall distribution of /f/ variants ...... 69
4.3 Overall distribution of /b/ variants ...... 81
4.3.1 b/ labio-velar alternation ...... 83
4.3.2 b/ deletion ...... 89
4.4 Analysis of Lexical Frequency ...... 93
Chapter 5 The perception of fricatives and approximants ...... 101
5.1 Introduction ...... 101
5.2 Method ...... 101
5.3 Acoustic analysis of the perception stimuli ...... 102
5.3.1 Approximants ...... 102
5.3.2 Fricatives ...... 107
5.4 The perception test ...... 109
5.4.1 Hypotheses ...... 109
5.4.2 Results ...... 110
Chapter 6 Acoustic Analysis ...... 121
6.1 Introduction ...... 121
6.2 The fricatives ...... 121 vii
6.2.1 Data analysis ...... 122
6.2.2 Results for fricatives ...... 124
6.3 The approximants ...... 134
6.3.1 Data analysis ...... 134
6.3.2 Results for approximants ...... 135
Chapter 7 Discussion and conclusion ...... 150
7.1 Introduction ...... 150
7.1.1 Purpose and goals of the dissertation ...... 150
7.1.2 The importance of having three tasks ...... 150
7.1.3 Some problems in data collection and analysis ...... 151
7.1.4 Contribution to linguistics ...... 152
7.2 Summary of results ...... 154
7.2.1 Labio-velar alternation in fricatives ...... 154
7.2.2 Labio-velar alternation in approximants ...... 156
7.3 Comparison of the three tasks ...... 158
7.3.1 Comparison of subjects’ performance in the interviews, perception and production experiments for fricatives...... 158
7.3.2 Comparison of subjects’ performance in the interviews, perception and production experiments for approximants...... 160
7.3.3 General considerations ...... 163
7.4 Theoretical implications ...... 164
7.5 Conclusion ...... 165
7.6 Future directions ...... 166
References ...... 167
Appendix 1 Map of Argentina ...... 178
Appendix 2 Interview Questions ...... 180
Appendix 3 List of words for production task ...... 188 viii
Appendix 4 List of nonsense words for the perceptual test ...... 190
Appendix 5 Consent Form – English Version ...... 192
Appendix 6 Consent Form – Spanish Version ...... 194
Appendix 8 Analysis of [x] - speakers with low education only ...... 197
Appendix 9 Analysis of [x] with Rbrul ...... 199
Appendix 10 Acoustic measurements of approximants in different vocalic contexts ...... 201
Appendix 11 Acoustic measurements of fricatives in different vocalic contexts ...... 202
Appendix 12 Descriptive statistics for fricatives ...... 203
Appendix 13 Descriptive statistics for approximants ...... 205
Appendix 14 Scatter plot of [ β] and [ ɣ] for all the vowels ...... 206
ix
List of Tables
Table 2.1. values of centre of gravity for [f] and [x] followed by the five vowels ...... 29
Table 2.2. Percentage of confusability of the fricatives [f] and [x] with the five Spanish vowels...... 30
Table 2.3. Percentage of [f], [h], [x] and Ø according to following vowel for all the speakers ... 31
Table 2.4. Total count and percentages of occurrence of [ β], labio-velar alternation and deletion for all the speakers according to vowel context and literacy...... 33
Table 3.1. Guaraní consonant inventory ...... 49
Table 3.2. Distribution of Participants according to Social Categories: Age, Sex and Literacy .. 51
Table 4.1. Variable /f/ and variable /b/ ...... 68
Table 4.2 Overall distribution of /f/ variants in Caá Catí Spanish ...... 69
Table 4.3 Distribution of /f/ variants by internal linguistic factors: Preceding and Following Contexts, Stress and Position in the Word...... 70
Table 4.4 Influence of Stress and Position on the occurrence of [x] ...... 71
Table 4.5 Distribution of /f/ variants by external linguistic factors: Literacy, Sex and Age ...... 72
Table 4.6 Cross-tabulation of /f/ variants by Literacy and Sex ...... 73
Table 4.7. Variable rule analysis of factors contributing to the probability of [x]...... 76
Table 4.8 Overall distribution of /b/ variants in Caá Catí Spanish ...... 81
Table 4.9. Distribution of /b/ variants by internal linguistic factors: Preceding and Following Contexts, Stress and Position in the Word...... 82
Table 4.10. Occurrence of [b/ β], [ ɣ] and deletion according to Stress and Position...... 83
x
Table 4.11 Cross-tabulation of /b/ variants by Education and Sex ...... 84
Table 4.12. Multivariate analysis of the contribution of internal and external factors selected as significant to the probability of [ ɣ]...... 86
Table 4.13. Multivariate analysis of the contribution of internal and external factors selected as significant to the probability of /b/ deletion; all factor groups selected as significant...... 90
Table 5.1. Mid-consonant and vowel onset F1 and F2 for the bilabial approximant [ β] across vocalic contexts ...... 103
Table 5.2. Mid-consonant and vowel onset F1 and F2 for the velar approximant [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts ...... 103
Table 5.8: Normalized percentage of discrimination errors for [ β] vs. [ ɣ] and [f] vs. [x] in [back] vs. [-back] vowel contexts ...... 113
Table 5.9: Number and percentages of discrimination errors for [ β] and [ ɣ], [f] and [x] according to stress and position in the word ...... 113
Table 5.10. Chi-square tests on the influence of Position and Stress on the discrimination of [β] and [ ɣ] ...... 114
Table 5.11. Chi-square tests on the influence of Position and Stress on the discrimination of [f] and [x] ...... 114
Table 5.12. Statistical tests showing significant differences between literate and illiterate participants in the discrimination task...... 115
Table 6.1 Overall distributions of /f/ variants in the production experiment in Caá Catí Spanish ...... 124
Table 6.2 Distribution of /f/ variants by external (literacy, age and sex) and internal (preceding and following context, stress and position) factors...... 126
xi
Table 6.3 Overall distributions of /x/ variants in the production experiment ...... 128
Table 6.4 COG mean and SD for [f] and [x] across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty- two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish...... 129
Table 6.5 COG mean and SD for /f/ and /x/ across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty- two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish...... 132
Table 6.6 Overall distributions of /b/ variants in Corrientes Spanish...... 136
Table 6.7. Distribution of /b/ variants by external (Education, Age and Sex) and internal (Preceding and Following Context, Stress and Position) factors...... 139
Table 6.8. Cross tabulation of /b/ by Stress and Position...... 140
Table 6.9. Overall distribution of / ɡ/ variants in the production experiment...... 141
Table 6.10. Distribution of / ɡ/ variants by external (Education, Age and Sex) and internal
(Preceding and Following Context, Stress and Position) factors...... 142
Table 6.11 F2 mean and SD for [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty- two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish...... 143
Table 6.12 F2 at vowel onset (Z-normalized) of [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic context for fourteen subjects with high education...... 146
Table 6.13 F2 at vowel onset (Z-normalized) of [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic context for seven subjects with low education...... 147
xii
List of Figures
Figure 2.1. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘fuco’ as uttered by a 34 year old female native speaker of Corrientes Spanish. The shaded section represents the fricative in question...... 22
Figure 2.2. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘juco’ as uttered by a 34 year old female native speaker of Corrientes Spanish. The shaded section represents the fricative in question...... 23
Figure 2.3. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘tebumen.’ ...... 24
Figure 2.4. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘tegumen’...... 24
Figure 2.5. Place features of [fu], [ βu], [xu] and [ ɣu] ...... 36
Figure 3.1. Analysis of tokens from the sociolinguistic interviews using Nat ...... 53
Figure 3.2. Duration of [f] in the word feria ‘fair’ embedded in carrier phrase ‘Digo … porque sí’...... 63
Figure 3.3. Measurements of F1, F2 and F3 at vowel onset, in the middle of the consonant and in the middle of the vowel, from the word guerra ‘war’ embedded in carrier phrase ‘Digo … porque si’...... 64
Figure 4.1 Distribution of [f], [x] and Ø across individual speakers...... 74
Figure 4.2. Percentage of [x] in Young, Adult and Older subjects with low education ...... 78
Figure 4.3: Proportion of [x] across individual words ...... 94
Figure 4.4. Correlation between lexical frequency and proportion of [x] ...... 95
Figure 4.5: Proportion of [ ɣ] across individual words ...... 96
Figure 4.6. Correlation between lexical frequency and proportion of [ ɣ] ...... 97
Figure 4.7: Proportion of /b/ deletion by individual words ...... 97
xiii
Figure 4.8. Correlation between lexical frequency and proportion of /b/ deletion ...... 98
Figure 5.1. Vowel onset F1 vs. F2 for [ β] across vocalic contexts...... 104
Figure 5.2. Vowel onset F1 vs. F2 for [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts...... 105
Table 5.3. T-tests on F2 vowel onset for [β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts...... 106
Table 5.4: Summary of statistical analysis for centre of gravity for [f] and [x] across vocalic contexts ...... 108
Table 5.5. Comparison of fricatives in the perception stimuli using centre of gravity...... 109
Table 5.6. Confusion matrix for /b/ vs. / ɡ/ ...... 110
Table 5.7. Confusion matrix for /f/ vs. / x/ ...... 111
Figure 5.3. Number of discrimination errors between [f] and [x], [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic context...... 111
Figure 5.4 Distribution of speakers by years of education and number of discrimination errors ...... 116
Figure 6.1: segment [afwe] extracted from the word afuera ‘outside’. The two arrows show the points at which the formants were measured in the diphthong [we]. The vertical dotted lines indicate the slice of fricative that was measured for COG (Centre of Gravity)...... 122
Figure 6.2: Duration and intensity of the fricative [x] and the following vowel [o] in the word ojota ‘flip flops’ from speaker 109...... 123
Figure 6.3 COG values of [f] and [x] for subjects with high and low education ...... 130
Figure 6.4: COG values of /f/ and /x/ for subjects with high and low education ...... 133
xiv
Figure 6.5: segment [xo ʋen] joven ‘young’. The three arrows show the points at which the formants were measured: mid-consonant, CV transition and mid-vowel. The CV transition was automatically located using a script in Praat...... 135
Figure 6.6. [ β] and [ɣ] F2 at vowel onset for female subjects ...... 144
Figure 6.7: [ β] and [ ɣ] F2 at vowel onset for male subjects ...... 145
Figure 6.8: Scatter plot of [ βi] and [ ɣi]. F1 and F2 were measured at the vowel onset...... 148
Figure 7.1. Percentage of [x] and /f/ deletion (sociolinguistic interviews) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment)...... 158
Figure 7.2. Difference between the COG of /f/ and /x/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of [x] and [ Ø] (sociolinguistic interviews) ...... 159
Figure 7.3 Difference between the COG of /f/ and /x/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment)...... 160
Figure 7.4. Percentage of [ ɡ, ɣ, Ø] (sociolinguistic interviews) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment)...... 161
Figure 7.5. Difference between (normalized) F2 at vowel onset of /b/ and / ɡ/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of [ ɡ ~ ɣ] (sociolinguistic interviews)...... 162
Figure 7.6. Difference between (normalized) F2 at vowel onset of /b/ and / ɡ/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment)...... 163
xv 1
Chapter 1
Introduction
The fact that certain processes recur in English varieties all over the world is incontrovertible. Perhaps it is because their recurrence is so commonplace that it has aroused much less curiosity than it deserves. It seems to be an uncanny fact, all the more mysterious because there is no plausible explanation for it in terms of contact or any other way of physical means of diffusion. If not diffusion, then these variable processes must arise spontaneously in their communities, and their communities girdle the globe. They might, then, provide a key to the mystery about the way in which language emerges from the language faculty which lies at the deepest reaches of the human inheritance. More practically, it seems to me that the study of these vernacular roots has implications for one of the ways in which we linguists – sociolinguists and others – might proceed in our research if it is to bring us closer to an understanding of that human inheritance.
(Chambers 2006:1021)
The aim of this dissertation is to analyze and contrast two types of variables that coexist in the sound system of Spanish, one for which there is awareness and stigma and one that can go unnoticed by speakers. Both variables are prevalent in widely dispersed Spanish dialects (Colombia, New Mexico, El Salvador, Ecuador, Chile, Peru, Mexico, among others), which have no evidence of contact, as the opening paragraph from Chambers (2006) states. Particularly, this dissertation investigates the alternation between labial and velar fricatives and approximants, as exemplified below:
(I) Fricative labio-velar alternation : E.g. [f] ui ~ [x] ui fui ‘I went’
1 (II) Approximant labio-velar alternation : E.g. a [β] uelo ~ a [ɣɣɣ]uelo abuelo ‘grandfather’
The main goals of my analysis are twofold: 1) to investigate the acoustic and perceptual motivations of the labio-velar alternation and, 2) to examine its subsequent spread through the speech community. In other words, the aim is to study both the causes and the propagation of
1 /b/ and /g/ are realized as approximants ([β] or [ ɣ], respectively) in intervocalic position and as stops ([b] and [g]) in utterance initial position and after a nasal consonant.
2 these variable linguistic phenomena. It is interesting to note that, although the variables in question (I and II) are similar in the place features involved (labial > velar), there are important differences in the extent of the variation in the community and in each individual, which make them an interesting case to study and compare.
Starting with fricatives, the labiodental [f] 2 alternates with the velar or glottal [x ~ h] when followed by the diphthongs [we, wi] 3 and the vowel [u]. A word such as fuerza ‘strength’ is variably realized as [x]uerza and [f]uerza by speakers from the countryside with low levels of formal education (Quilis 1993:283). This variation is often associated with rural type of speech, as shown by the following excerpt from a joke sent to me through a chain email 4:
El Gumersindo le decía al dueño de la estancia:
...Fíjese patroncito que jui mos al dotor y le dije: mire dotor, es que tenemos un problema: mi mujer y yo queremos tener condescendencia y no podemos, pero no sabemos si es porque yo soy omnipotente o mi mujer es esmeril. [...] Nos dijeron que jué ramos con otro dotor, pero en la capital, que dizque era muy güe no. Con dicirle que en la consulta tenía dos teles conetadas a una antena paranoica.
Gumersindo went to speak with the ranch owner 5:
… My wife and I went to the doctor and I said to him: look, we have a problem here: my wife and I want to have condescension but we can’t. We don’t know if it is because I am omnipotent or my wife is infertile. […] They told us to go to another doctor who was supposed to be good, but he was in the capital. When we went to his office we saw that he had two TVs connected to a paranoic antenna.
This excerpt illustrates many important facts: first, it shows people’s awareness of the labio-velar variants (in bold). Second, it indicates that these variants are used to represent rural type of speech, since Gumersindo, the person talking, is a country person. Rural speech, and also
2 IPA symbols are used throughout when giving phonological and phonetic examples. This includes the adaptation to IPA from source tests which use different notational systems whenever there is no doubt as to the IPA equivalent. Orthographic equivalents are given in arrowheads < >, lexical items in italics , and glosses in inverted commas. References are made to “labial” fricatives and approximants, a cover term for labiodentals and bilabials. 3 For simplicity, I will refer to [w] when I talk about the diphthongs [we, wi]
4 The instances of the labio-velar variants [x] and [ ɣ] are in bold. 5 The fun of the joke is lost in its translation, since the pronunciation of the farmer and the play on words cannot be translated into English.
3 speakers are generally stigmatized, as seen in this except, in which the speaker not only confuses sounds but also words (e.g. Gumarsindo says antena paranoica ‘paranoic antenna’ instead of antena parabolica ‘parabolic antenna’).
Concerning the approximants, [β] alternates with its velar counterpart [ ɣ] when preceding [w]. Thus, a word such as abuelo ‘grandfather’ is realized as a[ ɣ]uelo by speakers with low education. This variant is also present in first language acquisition; for example when children pronounce words such as vomitar ‘to vomit’ and tiburón ‘shark’ as [ ɣ]omitar and ti[ ɣ]urón. Interestingly, the data collected in this study shows that both types of labio-velar alternation (affecting fricatives and approximants) are found in the same population and the same factors are found to influence them: Phonetic Context, Stress and Literacy. Yet, as the analysis presented in this dissertation shows, there are important differences between the two types of variants [x] and [ɣ]: [x] is more stigmatized than [ɣ] and it presents signs of linguistic change (it is decreasing in use), while [ ɣ] seems to be in stable variation.
Although the labio-velar alternations ([f] vs. [x] and [ β] vs. [ ɣ]) have been studied within historical linguistics (Lloyd 1987, Penny 1991), they have not yet been subject to synchronic analysis either within phonetics or within sociolinguistics. Yet, the only way to truly understand the motivations and the mechanisms of phonetic variation is to analyze the physical (articulatory and acoustic) characteristics of the sounds involved (i.e. phonetics), as well as the social aspects of language use (i.e. sociolinguistics). The specific research questions that guide this dissertation are the following:
1. What are the acoustic and perceptual motivations of the labio-velar alternations?
2. What social (education, age and sex) and linguistic (following context, preceding context, stress, position, frequency) factors influence the variation?
3. How are the labio-velar alternations ([f] vs. [x] and [ β] vs. [ɣ]) same or different?
4. How do the performance in the sociolinguistic interviews, the perception and production experiment relate?
5. What is the influence of literacy on the perception of sounds?
4
I hypothesize that [x] and [ ɣ] are triggered by the perceptual similarity between labial and velar fricatives and approximants in the context of [u] and [w]. As stated by Ohala (1992, 1993) similarity causes confusion and confusion can lead to synchronic variation. I hypothesize that the spread of this variation to the upper layers of society is blocked by formal education, since orthography can help to resist perceptually driven sound variation.
A fairly sizable number of theories have approached the study of the inception of sound change. Of special relevance to this study is the theory that considers the role of the listener to be very important in the origin of sound variation (Ohala 1989, 1993). To approach the origin of the labio-velar alternation, I argue that labial and velar fricatives and approximants become acoustically similar in certain phonetic contexts, and that this similarity can create ambiguity and lead to misapprehension of the speech signal. A misapprehended pronunciation is a potential sound change. Ohala’s (1989) theory of ‘sound change’, meaning the hidden variation in the pronunciation that speakers and listeners do not recognize as variation, is a theory that makes reference to the ‘origin of the variation’ in the sociolinguistic sense, not on its spread.
The analysis of the diffusion of the labio-velar alternation is approached within the variationist sociolinguistics framework as developed by Labov and associates (Weinreich, Labov and Herzog 1968). Within this framework, variability is seen as an integral part of linguistic competence. The aim is to find regularity and predictability in seemingly random variation. Using the variationist method, it is possible to quantitatively determine the effect of various factors on the choice of a variant. Each factor group represents a hypothesis that tests the influence of a particular linguistic or extra-linguistic factor on the occurrence of the variant form. In the present study, the labio-velar alternations ([f] vs. [x] and [ β] vs. [ ɣ]) are hypothesized to be influenced by the following linguistic factors: Preceding and Following Context, Stress, Position in the Word, and extra-linguistic factors: Literacy, Age, Sex and Frequency of the Lemma. The hypotheses and factors are discussed in Chapters 2 and 3. The results of the sociolinguistic analysis are presented in Chapter 4.
To the best of my knowledge, no previous work has analyzed the labio-velar alternations in Spanish. Most of the available literature mentions that [x] and [ɣ] are common in certain dialects, but there has been no systematic analysis of these sounds either within phonetics or within
5 sociolinguistics. Since both labio-velar alternations are common across Spanish dialects and they often appear in first language acquisition, their study provides insights into the underlying mechanisms of the language faculty. It is by studying this type of language variation that we can get closer to understanding how the perception of sounds works and how perceivers create categories from variable input data (Pierrehumbert 1999, Colantoni 2011).
My work on the consonants contributes to instrumental sociolinguistics and phonetics by conducting an analysis of the acoustic/perceptual motivations of the labio-velar alternations and their diffusion in the speech community. The combination of methods of data collection (interviews + experiments) is an advantage of this study, since it overcomes the limitations of using a single technique. Sociolinguistic interviews are ideal for collecting ‘vernacular’ speech (i.e., the language variety first acquired by the speaker), which is more regular in its patterning and more accurately represents the speaker's linguistic system (Labov, 1972). Production experiments allow for the control of phonetic context and, in the case of sounds that are not very frequent in speech (such as /f/ and /x/), it ensures that enough tokens are collected per individual speaker. The perception experiment is necessary when testing hypotheses on perceptually driven sound variation, which is the case in this study.
This dissertation is structured as follows. Chapter 2 reviews previous literature relevant to the labio-velar alternations ([f] vs. [x] and [ β] vs. [ ɣ]). The chapter contains several sections that tackle different aspects: (i) the acoustic and perceptual characteristics of fricatives [f,x] and approximants [ β,ɣ], (ii) the theory of sound change by Ohala’s (1989, 1993) and Blevins (2004), (iii) the theories on the transmission of phonological variation and change. Chapter 2 concludes by stating the hypotheses related to the acoustic/perceptual motivations of the labio-velar alternations and their diffusion in the speech community. In Chapter 3, I discuss the method of data collection, the subjects, the setting and the analysis of the data. Chapter 4 presents the results of the variationist sociolinguistic analysis, Chapter 5 discusses the results of the perception experiment and Chapter 6 the results of the acoustic analysis. In Chapter 7, I summarize the main findings of this dissertation. I draw a connection between the results of the sociolinguistic, perception and production analyses and discuss the importance of this work and its contribution to linguistics. To conclude, I suggest possible future directions of this research.
6
Chapter 2 Literature Review and Hypotheses 2.1 Introduction
There is ample evidence that the labio-velar alternation is a common and widely dispersed phenomenon found in different dialects and languages (Quilis 1993 for Spanish, Ohala 1989, 1993, Labov 1994, Foulkes 1997, Blevins 2004 for English and other languages). Yet, very little is known about the perceptual and acoustic motivation of labio-velar alternation affecting Spanish fricatives and approximants. This chapter reviews what is known about the acoustic characteristics of labial and velar fricatives and approximants, in addition to the theories of the origin and the diffusion of sound variation and change.
The study of the origin of sound variation and change has been approached from different perspectives: i) articulatory based theories (Sievers 1901, Baudouin de Courtenay 1910, Lindblom 1990) which state that sound change is due to variation in coarticulation (section 2.1.1), ii) perceptual theories (Ohala 1989, 1993) that claim that sound change arises in the variation in perception caused by the confusion of acoustically similar sounds (section 2.1.2.) or, iii) a combination of articulatory and perceptual motivations (Blevins 2004) (section 2.1.3.). In the rest of the chapter, I focus on the perceptual theory of sound change, which is used to explain the perceptual motivations of the labio-velar alternation.
2.2 On the origin of sound change
2.2.1 The speaker as a source of sound change
Earlier theories of sound change focused on the speaker as a source of sound change. The study of sound variation and change goes back to the neogrammarian proposal on the regularity of sound change. Sievers (1901), one of the earliest exponents of the neogrammarian group, claimed that sound change begins with an individual and spreads through imitation. According to Sievers, sound change occurs within one particular generation of speakers or as a result of transmission from one generation to the next. Although the author acknowledges that sound change proceeds in a manner that simplifies speech (in terms of least effort), he argued that this is not always the case “We can admit that many phenomena in the development of languages
7 may be brought under this heading (to reduce effort in articulation), the generality with which the statement is produced is definitely false” (Sievers 1901:265). Sievers stated that “if a shift in the manner of articulation has occurred, the new manner of articulation must be applied without exception in all instances which are subject to exactly the same conditions” (Sievers 1901:265) (my emphasis). The regularity of sound change, and the importance of the study of synchronic variation as a means to explain diachronic change became the main working ideas of many linguists in the twentieth century (e.g. Ohala 1989, 1993, Foulkes 1997, Blevins 2004).
Similarly to Sievers, Baudouin de Courtenay (1910 in Stankiewicz 1972) also acknowledged that languages go towards greater simplicity determined by the principle of least effort. Most important to the current discussion, Baudouin de Courtenay emphasized the concept of errors in hearing (lapsus auris) “when one word is mistaken for another, as a factor of change at any given moment of linguistic intercourse and in the history of language as a social phenomenon.” (Stankiewicz 1972:6). Baudouin de Courtenay emphasized the importance of experimental methods in defining the types and directions of these errors.
Many years later, Lindblom (1990) referred to the same principle of least effort in articulation to explain sound variation and change. Lindblom (1990) proposed the Hypo and Hyper-Articulation Theory (henceforth H&H) to account for intra-speaker phonetic variation. The terminology Hypo and Hyper refer to a choice that speakers have depending on the need of the context. Hypo speech is economic and system oriented; it is a low-cost production of speech. The speech system operates so as to minimize articulatory effort. On the contrary, Hyper speech is output oriented; it focuses on discriminability and it involves “greater biomechanical expenditure” (Lindblom 1990:415). In response to the invariant problem (defined in section 2.1.2), Lindblom’s (1990) interest was to recognize variance as the point of departure of his investigation, rather than try to find invariant cues in the speech signal. The theory suggests that the ‘lack of invariance’ that speech signals commonly exhibit is a direct consequence of this adaptive behaviour along the continuum of hyper and hypo speech (see section 2.1.2 for definition of lack of invariance ).
The most important aim of the H&H theory is to explain the notion of sufficient discriminability and define the class of speech signals that meet that criterion. Lindblom (1990:404) proposed two basic observations about perception:
8
Speech perception involves discrimination among items stored in the listener’s lexicon. Lexical access is thus a function of the distinctiveness (rather than invariance) of the acoustic stimulus. The process of discrimination is facilitated by processes not in the signal and whose contributions show short-term variations. Accordingly, lexical access is assumed to be driven also by ‘knowledge’, that is by signal-complementary processes.
The first point refers to the knowledge of lexical items of our native language that we automatically impose on the signal. The second point claims that physically ambiguous information is disambiguated by our lexical knowledge and incomplete stimulus information is restored. This signal complementary process modulates the input and shapes the percept; and it is highly automatic. One important aspect of the H&H theory is that it takes into consideration the dynamic aspects of speech, that is, speech in context. Moreover, the H&H theory recognizes variability, rather than seeking invariance in the speech signal. According to this theory, lexical knowledge, which is more stable, will help the listener in perception. Moreover, the context where the words are embedded and the frequency of words can help the listener in disambiguating the signal. However, the H&H theory cannot explain those phenomena of sound variation and change which are below the level of consciousness and social awareness. Since speakers are not aware of their use of variant forms, they cannot manipulate their frequency of use in more formal and less formal contexts. Yet, the linguistic variation exists and it is influenced by other social and linguistic factors such as age, sex, stress, position, etc. Such factors, which are commonly studied within variationist sociolinguistics (Weinreich, Labov and Herzog 1968) need to be considered in order to arrive at a more complete characterization of the variation.
The study of the influence of lexical frequency on sound variation and change is important, since it is often claimed that more frequent words change more quickly than less frequent ones. Wang (1969) argued that word frequency and context frequency are factors that can affect phonological variation and change and she used an exemplar model to explain lexical variation in phonetic detail. This model assumes that lexical knowledge is variable and sensitive to frequency of use:
[…] the cognitive representation of a word can be made up of the set of exemplars that have been experienced by the speaker/hearer. Thus all phonetic variants of a word are stored in memory and organized into a cluster: exemplars that are more similar are closer to one another than the ones that are dissimilar, and exemplars that occur frequently are stronger than less frequent ones (Bybee 2000a, 2001; Johnson 1997, Pierrehumbert 2001). These exemplar clusters, which represent
9
autonomous words, change as experience with language changes. Repeated exemplars within the cluster grow stringer, and less frequently used ones may fade over time, as other memories do (Bybee 2002:271)
As opposed to the H&H theory, which assumes that lexical knowledge is static and that variation takes place in speech production, the theory proposed by Bybee (2002) assumes that the phonetic representation of exemplars also changes over time. For instance, given the tendency for reduction in production, the phonetic representation of a word will gradually add more exemplars that are reduced, and these exemplars will become more likely to be chosen for production, where they may undergo further reduction. The more frequent words will have more chances to undergo online reduction and thus will change more rapidly. Bybee (2002) cites her study on the weakening and deletion of intervocalic /d/ (e.g. casada ‘married’, cocido ‘cooked’) in New Mexican Spanish, which clearly shows characteristics of lexical diffusion. Her results revealed that the rate of deletion is higher among high-frequency words. She later argues that it is unknown whether this sound change will turn out to be completely regular. However, she also noted that the deletion of intervocalic /d/ between vowels had already taken place in many Latin words such as fide > fe ‘faith’, audire > oir ‘to hear’, whereas a few words maintain the /d/, as in sudare > sudar ‘sweat’, crudu > crudo ‘raw’. The deletion of intervocalic /d/ is another case of synchronic variation that has diachronic evidence, just as the neogrammarians have contended. Similarly, Ohala (1989, 1993) and Blevins (2004) claimed that synchronic sound patterns are a direct reflection of their diachronic origins. Moreover, sound changes with a phonetic motivation can appear at different times in the development of a language, and they tend to occur crosslinguistically. The theories hitherto mentioned are relevant to the phenomenon under study for there is evidence that the labio-velar alternation has been present in the language for a very long time (see section 2.3).
2.2.2 The listener as a source of sound change
The theories of perception discussed in this section focus on the listener as a source of variation in the speech signal. These theories of speech perception proposed by Ohala (1989, 1993) and Blevins (2004) argue that sound change can arise in the misperception of acoustically similar sounds. According to Ohala (1989:182), “it is crucially those types of sounds shown to be similar by the acoustic analysis and/or the perceptual data which often participate in sound changes”. Ohala (1989) claims that many regular sound changes can be accounted for by
10 reference to natural constraints of the vocal tract and its acoustic output, which pertain to the physical aspect of the vocal tract: anatomical, elasto-inertial, neuro-muscular, aerodynamic, acoustic. Thus, the speech that emerges from the vocal tract is the product of physical constraints. Henry Sweet (1874 in Ohala 1989:182) was among one of the first who proposed that “the mapping between vocal tract shape and the output sound is a many-to-one mapping, i.e. the same or similar sound may result from two or more different vocal-tract configurations”. He exemplified this with the variant forms of English ‘through’ as [ θɾu] and [f ɾu]. This perceptual confusion between [f] and [ θ] in English is related to Spanish labio-velar alternation in that the different articulations of labial and velar fricatives and approximants yield acoustically similar sounds, which are likely to be confused by the listener.
Ohala (1989) demonstrated that his theory of sound change can be easily tested in the laboratory. When the acoustic representation of two sounds reveals similarity in the spectrograms, the sounds will be perceived similarly. In Ohala’s terms (1989:183) “what looks similar to the eye in these displays will sound similar to the ear and thus be subject to confusion”. To test the level of confusability of certain sounds in the laboratory, listeners are often presented with spoken syllables or nonsense words and they are asked to identify what they hear. A high level of confusion of two sounds in the tests can confirm their auditory closeness. Concerning this Ohala argued that (1989:184) “When listeners confuse these sounds in listening tests they are, in effect, duplicating sound change in the laboratory”.
One of the most important discoveries of instrumental phonetics is the extent to which pronunciation varies, not only between speakers but also in the speech of a single speaker. Variability in the signal, most commonly known of as lack of invariance , refers to the change in the acoustic cues as a result of changing phonetic contexts, speaking rate or whether the speaker is female or male (Hayward 2000). The problem of how listeners relate highly variable acoustic signals to abstract units of linguistic representation has attracted much attention from speech researchers for the last 50 years. Ohala (1989, 1993) approaches this problem in its relation to language change. He argued that synchronic variation in speech bears a striking parallelism with diachronic sound change. By ‘variation’ Ohala does not refer to, for instance, the alternation between goi ŋ vs. goin ‘going’ in English, since this is the result of a change that has already taken place. Instead, he refers to “hidden variation, that is, variation in pronunciation that speakers and listeners do not usually recognize as a variation” (Ohala 1989:175). In a normal
11 speech situation, however, listeners are able to factor out potential distortions due to coarticulatory effects, environmental noise, etc. In other circumstances, such as in the case of inexperienced listeners (e.g. children or illiterate speakers), they are unable to apply corrective rules and they end up taking the misleading signal at face value (Ohala 1989). Thus, what was noise in the signal is interpreted as the intended pronunciation. Since there is so much variation in speech we should be able to find many more sound changes that we actually witness in the normal development of languages. However, listeners have many sources to correct their pronunciation: other speakers’ pronunciation, listeners’ reactions to speakers’ attempts at pronunciation, and, in literate cultures, spelling (Ohala 1989). The introduction of literacy and spelling in the discussion of sound change is relevant for the purposes of this study, since it is hereby argued that literacy blocks the spread of the labio-velar alternation. The effect of literacy on phonological representation is discussed in section 2.1.3.
Going back to perception, the most important source of error correction is the listener’s experience with speech. Listeners’ experience with the native language phonology allows them to “factor out” or normalize predictable variation in speech (Ohala 1993:245). For instance, one of the main acoustic differences between /s/ and / ʃ/ is the lower centre of gravity of the latter. But the centre of gravity can also vary due to contextual influences from a following vowel. Mann and Repp (1980 in Ohala 1993:245) found that a synthetic fricative that would be identified as / ʃ/ before a following / ɑ/ is identified as /s/ when the following vowel is /u/. This is due to anticipatory assimilation of lip-rounding from a following rounded vowel, which serves to lower the centre of gravity of / ʃ/. Thus, when the sibilant has a lower centre of gravity and the following vowel is heard as round, listeners can factor out the expected low frequency and “reconstruct” a higher centre of gravity characteristic of /s/.
2.2.3 Literacy and the perception of sounds
Research on adult monolingual speakers has shown that adults’ performance in phonological awareness tasks is affected by orthographic representations (Bassetti 2006). For instance, in an auditory syllable monitoring task, Taft & Hambly (1985) presented a syllable and then a word and asked participants to indicate whether the syllable occurred in that word. For example, a “YES” answer would be expected for /l əg/ /l əgu:n/
12
/l æg/ as the first syllable of /l əgu:n/ around 75% of the time (compared with control condition of /l ɒg/ with an error rate around 25%). The distinctive relationship between between /l æg/ and /l əgu:n/ lies in their orthographic representations
Learning to read the Roman alphabet seems to improve performance on other types of auditory tasks such as phoneme addition and deletion 6. Morais et al. (1979) tested two groups of Portuguese speakers on these tasks; a literate and an illiterate group. Illiterate subjects performed poorly, whereas the literate subjects made few errors. Based on these results, the author argued that learning leads to awareness that words consist of individual sounds, and that this awareness facilitates performance on addition and deletion tasks. Morais et al. (1979) claimed that since illiterate subjects had not learnt to read, they were not aware that words consisted of individual sounds, and that this lack of knowledge impaired their phoneme addition and deletion ability. Poorer performance by illiterate subjects on phoneme addition and deletion tasks, however, is not due to a general deficiency in phonological tasks (Morais & Kolinsky 1994). Illiterate subjects are able to manipulate syllables and appreciate rhyme (Morais et al. 1986), and compare short utterances for phonological length. (Kolinsky et al. 1987). Thus, literacy seems to be beneficial only in tasks involving manipulations at the individual phoneme level.
Another factor to consider in evaluating the effect of literacy on the perception of sounds is whether a given language has regular or irregular orthography. It has been shown that orthography impairs perceptual performance on rhyming (Seidenberg & Tanenhaus 1979) and syllable monitoring (Taft & Hambly 1985) tasks in English, and a lexical decision task in both English and French, which are both considered to have irregular orthographies (Jakimik et al. 1985, Ziegler & Ferrand 1998). On the other hand, orthographic knowledge improves perceptual performance on addition and deletion tasks in both Portuguese and the Hanyu pinyin written from Mandarin, which are considered to have regular orthographies. Since Spanish has relatively regular sound-spelling correspondences, orthography can provide a guide to pronunciation. Through learning to read, alphabetic literates may have acquired the ability to “imagine” the
6 In phoneme addition and deletion, participants are asked to add or remove a given sound to the beginning of a word or nonsense word.
13 spelling of words or nonsense words (Burnham et al ., 2002), which would better enable them to normalize predictable speech variation due to coarticulation in order to arrive at the intended speech signal. Therefore, literate subjects in this study are expected to have a better performance than illiterate subjects in the auditory discrimination experiment of nonsense words.
2.3 The diffusion of sound variation and change
There are three main approaches to how sound variation and change proceeds in the speech community: neogrammarian, lexical diffusion and variationist sociolinguistic (Weinreich, Labov and Herzog 1968). According to the neogrammarians, sound change proceeds in an exceptionless manner affecting every word in which a certain sound occurs simultaneously (Trask 1996). However, lexical diffusionists claim the sounds change one word at a time (Wang 1969). Yet, depending on the phenomenon under study, variationist sociolinguistics considers both approaches in its analysis of sound variation and change.
While the neogrammarians contented that sound change affects individual sounds, the lexical diffusionists claimed that sound change affects words. According to the lexical diffusionists, sound changes are not always lexically regular (i.e. they apply to all the words in specific phonetic environments) as the neogrammarians contended, but lexically gradual (i.e. the change affects individual words one by one). The neogrammarian position that sounds change by imperceptible increments, i.e. phonetically gradual , and that it proceeds affecting all relevant words simultaneously, i.e. lexically abrupt, received little support from Chinese data. Wang and Cheng (1977) pointed to the unsuitability of this model for a wide range of discrete phonetic changes: flips-flops, metatheses, epentheses, deletions, and changes in place of articulation. For instance, Li (1982) presented data from an Atayalic dialect of Formosa that was undergoing a shift from a labial to a velar place of articulation, as an example of a change taking place by lexical diffusion. With respect to this, Wang argued that
Phonological change may be implemented in a manner that is phonetically abrupt but lexically gradual. As a change diffuses across the lexicon, it may not reach all the morphemes to which it is applicable. If there is another change competing for part of the lexicon, residue may result (Wang 1969:9).
Lexical diffusion does not rule out the possibility of phonetic conditioning; indeed, the selection of a word is frequently motivated by its phonetic composition (Chen and Wang 1975), but
14 phonetic conditioning does not entirely determine the successive selection of individual words . The frequency of words is another factor often used to detect the presence of lexical diffusion. Most of the studies that argue for lexical diffusion show a strong frequency effect, with more frequent words favoured in the change. Note that Bybee (2002) also supported the idea that frequency is a powerful factor that influences sound change (see section 2.1.2.).
In order to decide whether “phonemes change” or “words change”, Labov (1994) reviewed the data collected from several studies on the Great Vowel Shift in North America. Instead of adopting one position or another, Labov concluded that some sound changes proceed regularly and simultaneously affecting all the words in which that sound occurs, while other changes are phonetically discrete but lexically gradual. For instance, the Philadelphia short /a/ split is the continuation of a long-standing pattern of lengthening of English /a/, which proceeds by changes in lexical rules at a high level of abstraction. This change is characterized by dialect mixture and by analogical change and other forms of grammatical conditioning, and it typically exhibits lexical diffusion. The Northern Cities tensing of a short /a/ appears to be an independent phenomenon: a postlexical shift of height at a low level of abstraction. This change proceeds in a continuous manner, conditioned only by phonetic context, without any trace of lexical irregularity or grammatical conditioning.
Much less work has been done on consonants (Labov 1994). Two are directly related to labio- velar alternations. The first is a monograph on the labio-velar changes in English and Dutch, Bonebrake (1979) considers one of the most striking examples of discontinuous changes in place of articulation: the shifts of [x] to [f] and [f] to [x], with the well-known list of lexical irregularities such as regular cough vs. irregular dough or slough , and regular daughter vs. irregular laughter . Labov (1994:539) concluded that “changes in place of articulation (such as this) are necessarily more abstract than changes in manner.” The explanation he offers for the difference in complexity between changes in place of articulation and changes in manner of articulation is the following:
The placement of the tongue at various points along the midsagittal section is not a simple linear shift, but a rearrangement of the shape of the tongue by adjusting several different muscles. The acoustic consequences are in turn registered by a variety of signals: the frequency distribution and amplitudes of bursts, and the transitions of three formants. Manner of articulation involves a simpler set of dimensions, and changes in manner of articulation are most often phonetically
15
gradual. They are also more likely to be lexically gradual, as current studies of change in progress attest (Labov 1994:539).
The second set of variation studies done on consonants includes the various phonetic shifts of palatals in Spanish, which show signs of neogrammarian regularity: the lenition of /t ʃ/ to a fricative in Panama city (Cedergren 1973) and the devoicing of / ʒ/ in Buenos Aires (Zamora 1949, Guitarte 1955, Fonantella de Weinberg 1978, Wolf and Jiménez 1979, Rohena-Madrazo 2008, among others). However, the considerable amount of literature on aspiration and deletion of /s/ shows no evidence of lexical conditioning in the many detailed quantitative investigations of Spanish (Ma and Herasimchuk 1968; Cedergren 1973; Poplack 1979; Terrell 1981; Hochberg 1986; Alba 1990, Mazzaro 2003) and of Portuguese (Oliveira 1983; Guy 1981). Given this evidence, the regularity of sound change and lexical diffusion would display complementary distribution as shown below:
Regular sound change Lexical diffusion Vowel shifts in place of articulation Shortening and lengthening of segments Diphthongization of high vowels Diphthongization of mid and low vowels Consonant changes in manner of articulation Consonant changes in place of articulation Vocalization of liquids Metathesis of liquids and stops Deletion of glides and shwa Deletion of obstruents (Labov 1994:543) (my emphasis)
Thus, the position that ‘phonemes change’ and that ‘words change’ depend on the data and the phenomenon in question (Labov 1994). In the case of the labio-velar alternation, according to Labov (Labov 1994) it should show signs of lexical diffusion, since it is a case of consonant change in place of articulation. The sociolinguistic analysis in Chapter 4 tests this claim.
The variationist method adopted in this study takes as the locus of analysis naturalistic linguistic data collected in its social context. This approach, as developed by Labov (1969) and Sankoff (1972), assumes that variability is an integral part of linguistic competence, and that the variation observed in linguistic performance should be construed as statistical reflections of an underlying competence that is probabilistic (Cedergren and D. Sankoff, 1973). The aim is to find regularity and predictability in seemingly random variation. Using the variationist method, it is possible to quantitatively determine the effect of various contextual features on the choice of the variant. This method allows us to determine which factors constrain the speaker’s choice of variants by
16 defining a context of variability, extracting and exhaustively coding relevant tokens for various factors and performing multivariate analysis on the data. Each factor group represents a hypothesis that tests the influence of a particular linguistic or extra-linguistic factor on the occurrence of the variant. The variationist paradigm is well suited to handle large amounts of data from many individuals to shed light on the organization of linguistic forms and, at the same time, arrive at their social significance (Guy 1993). Since linguistic data are often unevenly distributed, a multivariate analysis will give more accurate results, because while computing the effect of one independent variable, it explicitly controls for the effect of all other known independent variables (Guy 1993). However, if different variables affecting one linguistic variant were considered separately, results could easily be distorted if the data were not evenly distributed across all the independent variables. The nature of the data considered in this study, as well as the independent factors hypothesized to influence labio-velar alternations are discussed in Chapter 3.
2.4 Diachronic evidence
2.4.1 The shift affecting /b/
In order to fully comprehend the status of Spanish /b/, it is important to understand its development from Latin to Spanish. Relative consistency of the spelling and rhyme in Old Spanish verse (in the late Middle Ages) suggest that a contrast was kept between a voiced bilabial plosive /b/ (spelt ) and a voiced bilabial approximant / β/ (spelt
/b/: cabe (pres. ind. caber; < CAPIT)
/β/: cave (pres. subj. cavar; < CAVET)
However, in consonant clusters and in initial position and
17 environments and the contrast survived only in intervocalic position 7. It is in the fifteenth century that the merger was completed (Penny 1991:97). Despite this merger, contemporary Spanish continues to use both
Regarding the labio-velar alternation in Argentine Spanish, the earliest record appears to date back to 1872, in the epic poems by the Argentine writer José Hernández ‘ El Gaucho Martín Fierro’. The gaucho, Martín Fierro, is a cowboy with low level of literacy. As the following six- line stanza shows, his speech presents cases of labio-velar alternation of /f/ and /b/ followed by /u/, /we/ and /wi/. For instance, the gaucho uses güen instead of buen ‘good’ and junción instead of función ‘show’ (Hernández 1967:18). For the layman non linguist reader, these features are associated with rural type of speech. Aquello no era trabajo, You couldn’t call that work, Más bien era una junción, it was more like a party - Y después de un güén tirón and after a good throw, En que uno se daba maña, when you’d managed it skillfully, Pa darle un trago de caña the boss used to call you over Solía llamarlo el patrón. for a swig of raw liquor.
(Bilingual Edition by Ward by C. E. Ward 1967:25)
Since writers often manipulate language to create a certain effect, it is often controversial that works of literature can be used as linguistic evidence to characterize speech. However, it is a fact that José Hernández spent many years of his life as a gaucho and that his representation of rural speech is not meant to make fun of gauchos; on the contrary, it is meant to be a romantic evocation of rural life. In the words of the autor:
Me he esforzado sin presumir haberlo conseguido, en presentar un tipo que personificara nuestros gauchos, concentrando el modo de ser, de sentir, de pensar y de expresarse que le es peculiar; dotándolo con todos los juegos de su imaginación llena de imágenes y de colorido, con todos los arranques de su altivez, inmoderados hasta el crimen, y con todos los impulsos y los arrebatos, hijos de la naturaleza que la educación no ha pulido ni suavizado.
7 The contrast /b/ and / β/ is still preserved in Judeo-Spanish, but only in word initial position
18
I have tried, without presuming to having accomplished it, to present a character that represents our gauchos, focusing on his peculiar type of being, feeling, thinking and expressing himself; endowing him with the plays of his imagination full of images and colours, with all his outbursts of arrogance, outruled to the core, and with all the impulses and rash; sons of nature that education has not polished. (Hernández 1979:14) (my emphasis)
Using the Mart ín Fierro as evidence to determine a historical record of the labio-velar alternation does not mean that it originated with the nineteenth century gauchos. As it is the case with most synchronic variations, they linger in speech for a considerable amount of time before they are reflected in writing. Since this type of change is more frequent amongst the illiterate population, it could be the case that it has existed for a long time without having been recorded in writing.
2.4.2 The shift affecting /f/
Concerning the historical record of the shift affecting /f/, it goes back to the origins of Castillian from Latin (Lloyd 1987:216), where most Latin
8 The main objections to the substratum hypothesis are outlined in Trask (1996:424-9)
19 undergone changes in Spanish highlights a certain level of instability under which this fricative has existed throughout its diachronic development.
As mentioned above, the original Castilian /f/, which was realized as a bilabial fricative [ɸ] rather than as a labiodental [f], was lost in all vocalic contexts except before [w]. According to Penny (1991) /f/ before [w] was realized either as a bilabial [ ɸ] or a labial-velar [ʍ] voiceless fricative. An additional allophone of /f/ was [h], which appeared before round vowels [o] and [u] through dissimilation. The situation of /f/ in the middle ages may have looked like this:
/ɸ/: [ʍ] before [w]: ['ʍwerte] ‘strong’ ;
[h] before round [o] and [u] (e.g. furnu > ['horno] ‘oven’)
[ɸ] before [ɾ], [l], [j] (e.g. ['fjera] ‘wild beast’)
Ø before [a], [e] and [i] (e.g. figo > ['iɡo] ‘fig’)
Probably around the 13 th century, the variant [h] came to occur before all syllabic vowels (rather than only before [o] and [u]) as a result of a process of generalization. According to Penny (1991) this situation of Old Spanish can still be seen in some rural areas of Spanish today such as Santander, Extremadura, western Andalusia and varieties of American Spanish. Penny (1991) argued that “It is only in later Old Spanish that the allophones [ ʍ] and [ɸ] were modified to labiodental [f], principally in urban Spanish (which forms the basis of the standard).”
Given these historical accounts, it could be possible to argue that non-standard [x] is a phonologization of an older pronunciation, not an evolution from [fwe]. However, the evidence that labio-velar alternations are present in first language acquisition and the relevant sounds are confused in perception (see Chapter 5) clearly suggests that these phenomena cannot be just a relic from Old Spanish. The perceptual motivation of /f/ labio-velar alternation explains why it came to be, in the first place, and why it has lingered in Spanish for such a long time. Thus, the findings of this dissertation shed light on dialectal variation in the present and in the past.
Concerning the phonological account of the labio-velar alternation, the shift from /f/ to /h/ is called debuccalization and it is often treated as a case of weakening of the labial fricative, which loses its place features becoming a glottal fricative. In Argentine Spanish, as well as in Peruvian,
20
Chilean and Ecuadorian Spanish, however, the variant perceived after round back vowels is [x] rather than [h]. Phonologically, the shift [f] > [h] > [x] is referred to as ‘fortition’. Kiparsky (1988:378 in Lindblom et al. 1995:18) stated that strengthening processes, such as consonant fortitions are “usually independent of segmental context and favoured in stressed position, in the syllable onset, and in explicit speech”. As we will see, the data reported in this study partly confirms this observation, since the labio-velar alternation occurs in stressed syllables and in syllable onset position. However, the data also shows that labio-velar alternation in Spanish is heavily constrained by the following context (i.e. round/back vowels and diphthongs). Thus, it is important to point out that although the diachronic (historical) process is similar to the synchronic one in that the same sound is being affected, the phonetic contexts that triggered the alternation as well as the final outcome ([h] in Old Spanish and [x] in contemporary Argentine and other Spanish dialects) are different.
An important question to ask at this stage is what makes the labial fricative [f] and the approximant [β] so susceptible to change diachronically and vary synchronically. Furthermore, although the alternation is bidirectional in child speech and in few adult speakers, most of the alternation in fricatives and approximants in the data collected for this study is unidirectional: labial > velar. Therefore, a question to consider is why the alternation is mostly labial > velar and not the other way around. The following section tackles these questions by summarizing the acoustic characteristics of the fricatives [f] and [x] and the approximants [β] and [ ɣ].
2.5 The acoustic characteristics of labial and velar fricatives [f, x] and approximants [ β, ɣ]
Although articulatorily different, the labial fricative [f] has many characteristics in common with its velar counterpart [x]. Fricatives are characterized acoustically by the presence of friction during the constriction interval (Hayward 2000). The rasping sound is due to turbulent airflow, which occurs when the air stream emerges from the narrow constriction formed by the articulators. Depending on their noise, fricatives can be sibilant or non-sibilant. The sibilant fricatives such as /s/ and / ʃ/ have higher intensity than the non-sibilants /f/ and /x/. The higher intensity of sibilant fricatives is related to the noise source. In sibilant fricatives the airflow meets a perpendicular rigid obstacle producing a high degree of turbulence or audible friction. In non-
21 sibilant fricatives, on the other hand, there is no perpendicular obstacle, but a wall (rigid surface) parallel to the airflow. This accounts for the lower degree of friction that characterizes non- sibilant fricatives (Shadle 1990). In this section, I will concentrate on the non-sibilant fricatives, which are the focus of my study.
Identifying the place of articulation of individual fricatives within each group can be problematic due to lack of invariance in the acoustic signal. One of the sources of variation in place of articulation for non-sibilants is coarticulation with the following vowel. For instance, F2 and F3 rise after an initial bilabial followed by /i/ / ɛ/ and /æ/, but they do not rise with a following / ɑ/ and /u/. After a velar, F2 and F3 are said to originate close together, forming what is sometimes called a ‘velar pinch’. This is correct for /æ/ / ɑ/ and /u/, but for /i/ and / ɛ/ it is F3 and F4 that have a common source (Ladefoged 2003:160).
The influence of the following vowel on the identification of fricatives was clearly revealed by Harris’s (1958) study on the English fricatives (/s/, / ʃ/, /f/ and / θ/). Harris (1958) found that formant transitions play a crucial role in the identification of the non-sibilant fricatives /f/ and /θ/, which could not be identified correctly when they were paired with the wrong vocalic transitions. On the contrary, the identification of the sibilants /s/ and / ʃ/ was not dependent on the information provided by vocalic transitions. Thus, the most important acoustic cues to identify place of articulation in non-sibilant fricatives are (1) the transitions to the following vowel and (2) spectral properties (Hayward 2000).
Interestingly, Mann and Repp (1980) found that the identification of [s] and [ ʃ] can shift as a result of contextual differences, thus contradicting Harris’ (1958) finding that vocalic transitions do not influence the perception of sibilants [s] and [ ʃ]. Mann and Repp’s (1980) experiment reviewed in section 2.1.2., reports that one of the principal acoustic differences between [s] and [ʃ] is the lower centre of gravity of the latter. But the centre of gravity of [s] and [ ʃ] can also vary as a result of anticipatory assimilation of lip-rounding from a following rounded vowel, which serves to lower the frequency (Mann and Repp 1980). The centre of gravity is one of the crucial acoustic parameters used in this study to identify point of articulation in [f] and [x], thus it will be further discussed in Chapter 6.
22
Duration and intensity are relevant parameters for distinguishing between sibilants and non- sibilants, but not for distinguishing between subtypes of sibilants and non-sibilants. For instance, the duration in milliseconds of the noise portion of [f] and [x] is equivalent in stressed syllables (147ms) and only slightly different in unstressed ones ([f] 192ms, [x] 196ms). These measurements were taken from the nonsense words ‘fuco’ and ‘juco’ (see figures 2.1 and 2.2) uttered by a 34 year old female native speaker of Corrientes Spanish as part of the production experiment. The intensity of [f] in ‘fuco’ is 56.82db., while the intensity of [x] in ‘juco’ is 59.60db. Because the values of duration and intensity for [f] are similar to those of [x], such parameters are not useful in distinguishing place of articulation of labial and velar fricatives. A more complete acoustic analysis of fricatives and approximants is presented in Chapter 5.
Concerning their spectral characteristics, fricatives can be diffuse or compact , high-frequency or low-frequency prominent . The concepts of diffuse and compact refer to the distribution of energy. The labial fricative [f] is characterized as diffuse, because the energy is not located in a particular frequency region. The velar fricative [x], however, is compact because its concentration of energy is located in one part of the frequency axis. [f] is high frequency prominent (867.60Hz), whereas [x] is low frequency prominent (532Hz).
Figure 2.1. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘fuco’ as uttered by a 34 year old female native speaker of Corrientes Spanish. The shaded section represents the fricative in question.
23
Figure 2.2. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘juco’ as uttered by a 34 year old female native speaker of Corrientes Spanish. The shaded section represents the fricative in question.
Figures 2.1. and 2.2. show that the intensity of the friction of [x] in [x]uco is weaker than the intensity of [f] in [f]uco. This is illustrated by a darker band of noisy energy for [f], which is the audible friction generated during the period of constriction. The frequency of energy of [f] spreads over a wide range of the spectrogram, while the frequency of energy of [x] is mainly located in the lower and upper part of the spectrogram, continuous with the F1 and the F4 of the following vowel. Both fricatives have flat formant transitions that resemble those of /u/.
As opposed to fricatives, Spanish approximants are relatively short segments articulated with a wide constriction; which is insufficient to cause any friction. Approximants are difficult to identify on waveforms and spectrograms. This is because approximants show a defined formant structure during their articulation and there is no clear transition between them and the following vowel. Therefore, it is often difficult to tell where an approximant starts and where it ends. The change in intensity at CV transition can be used as an indicator. However, since approximants are vowel-like (Borzone de Manrique & Massone 1981, Jongman et al. 2000, Colantoni & Marinescu 2010, Mazzaro 2010, MacLeod 2009), the change in intensity is not always a useful parameter in their identification. Thus, as explained in Chapter 3, the starting point of an approximant was measured at the maximum intensity increase in the CV transition, which was done automatically using a script in Praat.
Figures 2.3 and 2.4 show the production of the approximants [ β] in the nonsense word ‘tebumen’ and [ ɣ] in the nonsense word ‘tegumen’ as uttered by a 34 year old female native speaker of
24
Corrientes Spanish. The shaded sections marked on the spectrograms represent the approximants in question. The most important aspect to notice is the formant structures of [β] and [ɣ], which are strikingly similar. The intensity line drops to almost the same level in [β] and [ɣ], which indicates a similar degree of constriction. Both approximants have a voicing bar across the bottom of the spectrogram.
Figure 2.3. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘tebumen.’
Figure 2.4. Spectrogram of the nonsense word ‘tegumen’.
The labial and velar approximants [ β] and [ɣ] are acoustically similar in duration and intensity. Their duration is significantly longer in unstressed syllables than in stressed syllables. Their average duration for unstressed syllables is 55% longer than in stressed ones (Borzone de Manrique & Massone 1981:1147) The average duration of [ β] in stressed syllables is 67ms, while [ ɣ] is longer 85ms (Mazzaro 2010). On the other hand, the average duration of [ β] in
25 unstressed position is 55ms, and the duration of [ ɣ] is 41ms. It is interesting to note that there is a marked difference in the duration of [ ɣ] according to whether it is in the stressed and unstressed position in the word, whereas in [ β] this difference is not as prevalent.
The values of mean-energy intensity for [ β] and [ ɣ] in stressed and unstressed positions in the word are strikingly similar. On average, the intensity of [ β] in stressed position in the syllable is 65dB, and in unstressed position is 66dB. On the other hand, the average intensity of [ ɣ] in stressed position is 66dB, and in unstressed position it is 67dB (Mazzaro 2010). Since there are so many acoustic similarities between [β] and [ ɣ] in terms of their formant structure, duration and intensity, it is expected that listeners will find them difficult to distinguish. So the next question to consider is which acoustic parameter listeners take into consideration to identify these sounds.
The parameter that has been used to determine place of articulation in consonants such as stops, fricatives and approximants is the second formant (F2). Since the spectral characteristics of the approximants are heavily influenced by following vowels, the use of F2 as an acoustic parameter to identify place of articulation in approximants presents some problems. In a study that 9 examined the acoustic properties of the Argentine Spanish fricatives [f, s, ʃ, x, ɕ] and the approximants [β, ð, ɣ, ʒ], Borzone de Manrique & Massone (1981) stated that “the identification of fricatives and approximants is in most cases affected by the following vowel and that the amount of influence exerted by each vowel varied according to the fricative that preceded it”. The sounds for which the vocalic transitions played the most crucial role are the velars [x] and [ɣ].
To summarize, the non-sibilant fricatives [f] and [x] have important characteristics in common: both have low intensity of noise and their CV transitions play an important role in the identification of place of articulation. An important difference between them lies in the presence of aperiodic energy distributed over a wide range for the labial [f] (1500-8500Hz) and around 4000Hz for the velar [x]. Concerning the approximants, they are vowel-like and heavily co- articulated with the following vowel making their CV transition difficult to identify. There are
9 Note that [ β, ð, ɣ] are referred to as approximants in this study
26 no significant differences between the average duration and intensity of [β] and [ ɣ], thus these parameters cannot be used to distinguish place of articulation between the labial and velar approximants. Since labial and velar approximants and fricatives have so many characteristics in common, I argue that it is their similar acoustic characteristics that lead to perceptual confusion and increased variation in production. This hypothesis will be discussed in section 2.6.
2.6 Previous studies related to labio-velar alternations
This section reviews the sparse literature related to the shift from labial to velar approximants and fricatives. As previously stated, this shift has been frequently cited as a common phenomenon affecting different Spanish dialects (Quilis 1993), yet few studies have attempted to analyse its linguistic motivations. Foulkes (1997) used experimental methods to investigate a cross-linguistic historical sound change from /p/ > /f/ > /h/. However, in this discussion, I will only focus on the /f/ > /h/ part of the shift, which is the one that most closely relates to the phenomenon under study. According to Foulkes (1997), the change from /f/ > /h/ is well attested in many languages worldwide: Spanish, Diola, Chinese, Tuareg, Muskogee, South Lappish, Tahitian, SePedi, Songhai, Koiari, Nubian, Hausa. In some of these languages (Koiari, Songhai, Tahitian, Hausa, and South Lappish), the /f/ > /h/ shift operates when followed by (or occasionally preceded by) the high back rounded vowel /u/.
Following Ohala’s (1989) theory that historical sound changes with a phonetic motivation can be replicated in the laboratory, Foulkes (1997) performed a perceptual experiment to investigate why the /f/ > /h/ change is initiated. He hypothesized that the sequences /fu/ > /hu/ are acoustically similar and, thus, they tend to be confused. Foulkes (1997) compared spectrograms of [f] with a following /i, a, u/. He noticed that in the sequences with /i, a/ the formants rise at the beginning of the vowel, typical of vowels following a labial consonant. The rise reflects that the lips are opening after the consonant. In the sequence [fu], however, the format does not rise noticeably, as with the other vowels. This is due to the fact that the lips are rounded during labial plus [u] sequences, and do not open to any great extent as the fricative constriction is widened for the vowel. In the case of /h/, there is almost no formant transition from the consonant to the vowel, since when producing the glottal fricative [h] the tongue and lips are already in position for the following vowel. Since in [hu] and [fu] the formants remain flat throughout the sequence their spectrograms are very similar.
27
Foulkes (1997) hypothesized that [fu] ad [hu] are acoustically similar, and thus easily confused. To test this hypothesis, Foulkes (1997) constructed a perception experiment in which subjects were asked to listen to three minimal pairs of the form /hVC/ and /fVC/, where V was /i, a, u/ and C was /d/ or /t/, resulting in six words: feet, heat, fat, hat, food, who’d . The listening test was made with 48 stimuli, 36 experimental and 12 control. The experimental stimuli were artificial, cross-spliced syllables. Each word containing [f] was cross-spliced with the corresponding word containing [h]. The twelve words of control stimuli were self-spliced and unspliced. The control stimuli were included to evaluate the effects of the splicing procedure on the listeners’ responses.
The results showed that the fricatives in the control stimuli were identified almost perfectly. The responses to the experimental (cross-spliced) tokens were less consistent. When listeners were presented with the [f + (h)VC] stimuli, they had no problems identifying the fricative [f] responses in almost 100% of the time. This showed that the absence of transitions in the vowel does not prevent listeners identifying [f], at least in this situation where they were only asked to distinguish [f] from [h]. Rather, the acoustic characteristics of the fricative noise alone sufficed to cue [f]. With the [h + (f)VC] stimuli, however, the results differed quite dramatically. The percentage of [f] responses illustrated that when the following vowels were [i] and [a] more than a third of the responses were [f]. By contrast, when the following vowel was [u], listeners judged the fricative noise was [f] only 12% of the time. In other words, for the [i] and [a] context, which have quite different transitions for [f] and [h], listeners ignored the spectrum from an [h] in favour of the vocalic transitions typical of an [f]. They were much less prone to ignore the aperiodic spectrum in [h + (f)u] stimuli, because the transitional information indicating an [f] is similar to that of an [h] in this context.
These results coincide with suggestions in the literature (e.g. Harris 1958) that vocalic transitions contribute strongly to the identification of place of articulation for non-sibilant fricatives. When [h] is heard with transitions appropriate for vowels following [f], it is identified as [f] most of the time if the vowel is [i] or [a]. However, misidentifications increase significantly when the vowel is [u]. This, therefore, confirms the hypothesis that the rising transitions in feet and fat provide a strong cue that the preceding fricative was labial, but the flat transitions in food do not provide this information. These flat transitions are ambiguous: they could come from [u] following [f] or from such a vowel following [h]. Thus, listeners cannot utilize the acoustic information provided by the transitions into [u] to identify the fricative as [f] or [h]. Instead, they must rely on the
28 spectrum of the fricative itself – and when forced to, as they were in the listening test, they can do this quite well, at least for speech that is reasonably clearly spoken and heard in quiet conditions.
Foulkes (1997:271) concluded that the /f/ > /h/ change preceding /u/ is one for which “the listener, and not the speaker, is primarily responsible”. This claim contradicted the suggestion of Wencks (1954) and Pagliuca and Mowrey (1987), who stated that this change is articulatorily motivated. However, in his article Foulkes also used an articulatory explanation to account for the acoustic similarity of [fu] and [hu] :
[…] labial rounding and protrusion for a vowel typically override the retraction of the lower lip intended for [f]. This results in a fricative that is endolabial, rather than exolabial (Catford 1977) as it would be in careful speech. That is, the inner, rather than the outer, surface of the lower lip articulates with the upper teeth, which produces a fricative rather more like [ ɸ] in nature. Endolabial fricatives tend to be less strident than exolabials, and therefore more closely resemble [h]. The lip protrusion which is produced by endolabial articulation will result in a relatively greater amplitude of energy in the lower frequencies compared with more strident forms of [f], thus increasing the similarity between the spectra of these endolabial fricatives and glottal fricatives (Foulkes 1997:271).
One issue that is brought up by Foulkes (1997), but which remained unanswered is the question of the unidirectionality of the change /f/ > /h/; that is, why the alternation is labial > velar and not the other way around. And why the change is not bidirectional. Foulkes (1997) study, however, is important because it addresses a sound change that involves consonants and because it uses laboratory methodology to test his hypothesis. Moreover, by doing an acoustic analysis of the /p/ > /f/ > /h/ change, Foulkes (1997) was able to explain a phenomenon that had been only addressed in historical linguistics.
Three observations arise from Foulkes’s work. First, there is a need to perform a production experiment to test the hypothesis regarding the acoustic similarity of [fu] and [hu]. Second, it is important to analyse the perception of the sounds in natural speech to recreate as close as possible the conditions under which this phenomena occur outside of the laboratory. Third, as Foulkes (1997:272) himself pointed out, “to arrive at a complete explanation we must supplement our findings with an understanding of how innovations spread through the speech
29 community, through lexicon, and other phonological environments.” That is, supplement experiments with a sociolinguistic study of the variation in question. To address all these gaps, this dissertation includes a production, as well as a perception experiment and a sociolinguistic study of the distribution of the variants in the speech community.
A study on the Spanish labio-velar alternation (Mazzaro manuscript.a), analyzed the acoustic and perceptual motivations of this phenomenon. Acoustic and perceptual analyses of the labial [f] and the velar [x] fricatives were performed to evaluate the influence that the vocalic context had on the production and identification of these fricatives. Following Mann and Repp’s (1980) analysis of the influence of vocalic context on the perception of / ʃ/ and /s/ in English, it was hypothesized that the labio-velar alternation was the result of confusion due to coarticulatory effects with the following /u/, which lowers the centre of gravity of [f] making it perceptually similar to [x]. To test this hypothesis, the target sounds were measured for: (i) duration; (ii) overall and relative intensity; and (iii) centre of gravity. Speech material was recorded by a thirty-year-old male native speaker of Corrientes Spanish. The recording consisted of a list of 87 words (including 36 distracters) with [f] and [x] in stressed and unstressed position followed by the five Spanish vowels [i e a o u].
CV syllable Centre of Gravity CV syllable Centre of Gravity [fa] 2250.90 [xa] 1407.68 [fe] 2235.92 [xe] 1298.96 [fi] 2350.39 [xi] 1621.22 [fo] 2068.80 [xo] 1297.66 [fu] 1835.20 [xu] 1185.24
Table 2.1. values of centre of gravity for [f] and [x] followed by the five vowels
Table 2.1 shows that the centre of gravity for [fu] is significantly lower than the ones reported for rest of the CV combinations. This value is actually closer to the ones listed for [x]. Thus, the hypothesis that a following [u] lowers the centre of gravity of [f] was confirmed. As suggested by Ohala (1989), acoustic similarity can lead to perceptual confusion of the speech signal, which was also confirmed by the perception experiment. Three native speakers of Argentine Spanish participated in this part of the experiment. They had to listen to nonsense words with [f] and [x]
30 and then tick what they heard on an answer sheet provided before hand. There were four possible options, which differed from each other by one consonant only (e.g. fusar, jusar, gusar, cusar). Table 2.2 clearly shows an increased level of confusion of [f] and [x] followed by [u].
CV syllable Percentage Number CV syllable Percentage Number [fu] 4 6 [xu] 2 3 [fo] 1 3 [xo] 0.5 1 [fi] 2 4 [xi] 0.5 1 [fe] -- 0 [xe] 1 2 [fa] 0.5 1 [xa] 0.5 1
Table 2.2. Percentage of confusability of the fricatives [f] and [x] with the five Spanish vowels.
The most interesting finding was that the confusion was not only from [f] > [x], but from [x] > [f] as well. If the confusion in the perceptual experiment was bidirectional, then the question that needed to be addressed is why velars do not become labials, since they are both misperceived. This question was approached from a phonological perspective in Mazzaro (2005).
In Mazzaro (2005) 10 , I supplemented the acoustic analysis with data coming from twelve sociolinguistic interviews with native speakers of Corrientes Spanish. As Table 2.3 shows, the rates of labio-velar alternation [x] differed considerably depending on the following vowel:
10 Although the corpus consisted of twelve interviews, only three of the speakers, those with low education, exhibited the variation in their speech.
31
[f] [h] [x] Ø % N % N % N % N Total [a] 100 39 39 [e] 86 18 14 3 21 [i] 90 38 10 4 42 [o] 85 17 15 3 20 [u] 30 35 70 81 116
Table 2.3. Percentage of [f], [h], [x] and Ø according to following vowel for all the speakers
The highest percentage of labio-velar alternation (70%) is found with a following [u], followed by a significantly lower rate with a following [o] (15%), [e] (14%) and [i] (10%). As can be seen from Table 2.3, [f] does not only alternate with the velar [x], but with two other variants, the glottal [h] and zero . The examples in (1) illustrate that the occurrence of these variants seem to be determined by the context in which they occur: (1) [f] appears with the low vowel [a], [f]amilia ‘family’ Ø appears with [e], [Ø]estejabamos ‘we celebrated’ [x] appears with the back vowels [o, u], and [x]orma ‘form’ [h] appears with the high front [i], sacri[h]icada ‘sacrificed’
Mazzaro (2005) proposed a formal account for this pattern of variation in /f/. It was argued that the /f/ > /x/ alternation is a case of debuccalization followed by a fortition process when the fricative precedes a round vowel. In other words, there is an intermediate stage /f/ > /h/ > /x/, whereby /f/ looses its place features and becomes a glottal aspiration. When [h] is followed by the back vowels /o, u/, there is spreading of the dorsal features of these vowels onto the preceding segment, yielding a dorsal [x]. The first stage of the change, when [f] turns to [h], is a dissimilation process motivated by an OCP constraint that disallows two consecutive segments bearing the [+labial] feature. Thus, the OCP would rule out sequences of [f] followed by labial vowels such as /u/ and /o/ and a glide /w/.
32
This analysis, however, suffered from a number of shortcomings. First, if the OCP constraint is triggered by the [round] features of the following vowel, then we would expect labio-velar alternation to occur before /u/ and /o/. However, the preliminary data presented in Table 2.3 showed 81 cases of labio-velar alternation before /u/ and only three cases before /o/. Thus the rounding effect of the vowel cannot be used to fully account for the alternation. Another question posed in this study was why we do not find the reverse process in Corrientes Spanish, that is, assimilation of labials to velars instead of dissimilation. Using underspecification in feature geometry, Cho (1991) suggested that the reason why velars do not become labials is that velars are more specified than labials, thus more marked. However, the concept of markedness is itself very controversial (see Ohala 1989, 1993, Blevins 2004, Haspelmath 2005, just to name a few), so the question was left unanswered.
Regarding the approximants, Mazzaro (2008) analyzed the labio-velar alternation affecting /b/. This phenomenon, which occurs in the same subset of the population, is intriguing because it also involves a change from labial to velar in the same phonetic environments. The purpose of this study was to test whether the labio-velar alternation affecting /f/ and /β/ were in fact related and, in that case, whether they could both be accounted for with the same set of acoustic and perceptual parameters. The results from the perceptual test 11 performed by thirteen native speakers of Corrientes Spanish confirmed those reported in Mazzaro (2005), that the confusion between labials and velars is bidirectional. Interestingly, however, the velar variants [x] and [ ɣ] showed higher rates of confusion than their labial counterparts, especially when followed by the labial vowels [o, u]. This result may suggest that velar variants are playing a more active role in the process of labio-velar alternation than has been previously acknowledged. As explained in the hypothesis section 2.6, in a [x]u and [ ɣ]u sequence the lips are already rounded at the onset of the consonant, which yields a labialized velar fricative [x w] and approximant [ ɣw].
11 The format of the perception test was the same as the one used in Mazzaro (2005), with the addition of nonsense words for [ β] and [ ɣ]
33
[β] [ɣ] and Ø % Count % Count TOTAL All vowels 79 2107 21 568 2663 [a] 73.9 676 26.1 239 915 [e] 84.7 527 15.3 95 622 Following [i] 94.7 461 5.3 26 487 [o] 87.7 313 12.3 44 357 [u] 53.3 16 46.6 14 30 [we] 45.6 115 54.4 137 252 Literacy Literate 83.9 1496 16.1 286 1782 Illiterate 69.3 611 30.7 270 881 TOTAL 2107 555
Table 2.4. Total count and percentages of occurrence of [ β], labio-velar alternation and deletion for all the speakers according to vowel context and literacy.
Table 2.4 shows the results from the sociolinguistic analysis. The occurrence of [ɣ] and Ø is constrained by back/round vowels and diphthongs. There is a significant higher occurrence of [β] with following [a], [e], [i] and [o] and a lower occurrence of [ β] with a following [u] (54.4%). The labio-velar alternation is favoured by [we] only. Overall, there is a higher rate of use of the standard variant [ β] by literate speakers than by illiterates. Illiterates have a higher rate of use of the non-standard forms [ɣ] and Ø. An important question to consider at this stage was whether increased variation in certain contexts was due to the acoustic similarity between labial and velar approximants.
In Mazzaro (2010), I investigated the acoustic and perceptual motivations of the [ β] > [ ɣ] alternation and its subsequent spread through the speech community. The study presented data from eight sociolinguistic interviews, production and perception experiments. Subjects were native speakers of Caa Catí (Corrientes) Argentina. All the participants were male, four of them young (18-33) and four adult (34-65). Literate and illiterate participants were evenly distributed in each age group.
34
Locus Equation was used to identify place of articulation for [ β] and [ ɣ]. Since Sussman et al . (1991) used Locus Equation for the discrimination of English voiced stops with a release bursts, it was necessary to adapt the metric to use it with Spanish approximants, which lack such release. Thus, instead of measuring the “frequency value of F2 at the first discernable glottal pulse after the release burst” as Sussman et al . did, the F2 was measured at the maximum intensity slope in a CV transition . The acoustic analysis showed that the regression slope of [ɣ] was significantly steeper in the context of back/round vowels and diphthongs. This finding was also reported by Sussman et al . (1991). A steeper slope indicates maximal coarticulation. Conversely, the regression slope of [β] remained more stable across vowels contexts, suggesting less CV coarticulation.
The data collected in the production experiment was used to test the hypothesis that a following rounded vowel influenced the acoustic characteristics of [β] making it more similar to its velar counterpart. Thus, if the slope values of [β] and [ ɣ] were similar in the context of back/round vowels, then this would explain why speakers confuse them in perception. Since the labio-velar alternation is more frequent in the illiterate population, I expected that there would be no significant difference in Locus Equation between [ β] and [ ɣ] in the context of back/round vowels for illiterate speakers. However, when literacy and vowel type were combined, the statistical test showed significant difference in the coarticulation of [β] and [ ɣ] followed by non back/round vowels and diphthongs for literate and illiterate speakers. Contrary to what I had expected, the statistical tests also showed significant difference in the coarticulation of [ β] and [ ɣ] followed by back/round vowels and diphthongs for both, literate and illiterate speakers. One possibility why the results did not turn out as expected could be the reduced amount of tokens per cell (4), which in turn reduced confidence in the results obtained.
The results from the perception experiment corroborated previous findings reported in Mazzaro (2008). The percentage of confusion of [β] was slightly higher (2.8%) than the percentage of confusion of [ ɣ] (2.2%). There was an increased rate of discrimination errors for [β] and [ɣ] in the context of back/round vowels and diphthongs. Literate speakers had less discrimination errors than illiterate ones.
35
The relationship between the interview and the picture naming task showed that: i) in the interviews, labio-velar alternation is highly constrained by back/round vowels and diphthongs and literacy. Literate participants have a higher percentage of usage of the standard form than illiterate participants. ii) The acoustic analysis indicated maximal coarticulation of [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts, while the regression slope of [β] was more stable across vocalic contexts. iii) In the perception experiment, the discrimination of [ β] and [ ɣ] is lower in the context of back/round vowels and diphthongs. Literate participants were better discriminators than illiterate participants. Confusion was bidirectional.
The bidirectionality of the confusion was explained by assuming a connection between labio- velar alternation in speech and the phenomenon of velar insertion, also present in this dialect of Spanish. Velar insertion in Spanish, normally defined as the alternation between [w] and [gw], occurs when /g/ is inserted immediately preceding the labiovelar glide giving a pronunciation for a word such as huevo ‘egg’ ['we. βo] as ['gwe. βo]. This pattern assumes that the velar consonant will be inserted in utterance-initial position and in post-nasal position across a word boundary (Harris 1969, Hwu 1994, Del Teso, & Weston 1995, Hammond, 2001, Whitley 2002, Hualde 2005, MacLeod 2009). Harris (1969) suggested that the trigger for velar insertion comes from lenition of underlying /gw/ to [w], which causes confusion regarding the source of surface [w] in orthographic
2.7 Hypotheses
Labials ([f] [ β]) and velars ([x] [ ɣ]) before [+round, +high] vowels and diphthongs have articulatory, acoustic and perceptual affinity. A labiodental fricative [f] before [u], [we] and [wi] has a second formant (F2) at frequencies that are significantly similar to the F2 12 of [x] in the same phonetic context (Mazzaro 2005). On the other hand, the acoustic analysis of [ β] and [ɣ] (Mazzaro 2010) showed that the regression slope of [ɣ] was steeper in the context of [back/round] vowels and diphthongs. A steeper slope indicates maximal coarticulation, which means that the identification of [ɣ] is heavily influenced by the following vowel.
12 F2 is the parameter used to determine place of articulation in consonants such as stops, fricatives and approximants
36
Given these findings, I propose that the acoustic similarity between labial and velars in the context of a [+round, +high] vowel and diphthongs makes them difficult to distinguish and are good candidates for synchronic variability. Context sensitive sound variation is never immune to coarticulatory influences. Thus, the velar consonants assimilate the labial feature of the following vowel, while the labial consonant assimilates the back feature of the following vowel. For instance, the sequences [fu] and [xu] have a [labial] as well as a [back] component, and the sequences [ βu] and [ ɣu ] have a [back] and a [labial] component, as shown in Figure 2.1:
[fu] [labial] [xu] [back]
[back] [labial]
[βu] [labial] [ɣu] [back]
[back] [labial]
Figure 2.5. Place features of [fu], [ βu], [xu] and [ ɣu]
Note that although in Figure 2.1 the place features of the consonant and the vowel appear one before the other, these features overlap in speech. The acoustic similarity between these consonants and vowels yields an ambiguous signal that can lead to variation in perception. Variation in perception can potentially lead to sound change (Ohala 1993:243). I argue that labio-velar alternations are found in the lower strata of the population due to the effect of literacy 13 in blocking the spread of this perceptually driven variation to the rest of the speech community.
The data collected in the interviews and the production experiments (Mazzaro 2005, 2010) showed that the alternation is unidirectional, rather than bidirectional. However, given that labial and velar consonants in the context of round vowels and diphthongs become acoustically similar
13 It has also been argued that the labio-velar alternation in this dialect of Spanish is due to its contact with Guaraní. However, as stated earlier (see Section 2.3.2), the fact that labio-velar alternations appear in child speech and are frequent in different Spanish dialects in contact (or not) with aboriginal languages makes this argument difficult to sustain. See Chapter 3: Section 3.4 where this argument is further developed.
37 to each other, a bidirectional confusion as well as variation would be predicted. Since the direction of the alternation in actual speech is labial > velar and not the other way around, e.g. [f]umar > [x]umar and not [x]urar > [f]urar; [ β]urro > [ ɣ]urro and not [ ɣ]ula > [ β]ula, an important question to consider is why there is no evidence of velar > labial alternation in the same contexts. As revealed by the variationist analysis, besides the following vocalic context, labio-velar alternation is constrained by stress and position. Specifically, the alternation occurs mainly in initial and stressed position, which is a strong prosodic environment. With this in mind, it could be possible to suggest that the labio-velar alternation affecting /b/ is a strengthening process that applies to the strong prosodic positions in the word. Following MacLeod (2009), I argue that there is velar insertion after weakening of /b/, which is likely to occur before [we] and [wi]. This would explain why there is only labial-to-velar alternation in speech.
Although in Spanish there is no evidence of bidirectionality for /f/ in production, there are examples of velar-to-labial changes in other languages such as English and Dutch (Ohala 1989, 1993, Labov 1994, Foulkes 1997, Blevins 2004). Given that not all linguistic possibilities can occur in one language and that “all human languages manifest asymmetry or disequilibrium in some part of their phonology” (Ohala 1989:192), it is not surprising that Spanish exhibits labial- to-velar and not velar-to-labial alternation in speech. In other words, the fact that there is no [x] > [f] in Spanish, does not invalidate the proposal that the labial-to-velar alternation is due to the fricatives being perceptually similar in certain phonetic environments.
Going back to the theory of Evolutionary Phonology, Blevins (2004:5) stated that “synchronic sound patterns are a direct reflection of their diachronic origins”. Furthermore, sound changes with a phonetic motivation can appear at different times in the development of a language (Ohala 1989, 1993, Blevins 2004). In the case of Spanish, there is diachronic evidence of variation and change affecting /b/ and /f/. These phonetically motivated phenomena are still observed in most dialects of Spanish. Sound variation and change that is phonetically motivated is expected to occur cross linguistically (Ohala 1989, Foulkes 1997). This is exactly the case of the labio-velar alternation, which appears in different languages such as English, German, Rumanian, Russian, etc.
38
Considering the historical background, the sociolinguistic, the acoustic, and the perceptual nature of the labio-velar alternation, the following are the hypotheses to be tested:
1) The labial fricative [f] and the approximant [ β] are perceptually similar to the velar fricative [x] and the approximant [ ɣ], respectively, in the context of the round vowels and diphthongs.
1.a. The labial approximant [ β] is acoustically similar to the velar approximant [ ɣ]. In particular, the F2 of [β] is expected to drop when followed by [u] and [w]. This lowering of F2 in [β] will make it acoustically similar to [ɣ].
1.b. The labial and velar fricatives [f] and [x] are acoustically similar to each other in the context of [u] and [w]. When these fricatives are followed by a labial [u] or [w], F2 will be low at the CV transition. According to the studies previously reviewed (Harris 1958, Foulkes 1997), the F2 at CV transition is the most important cue for discrimination of place of articulation in non-sibilant fricatives. If the F2 lowers in these fricatives’ CV transition, then their identification will be compromised. In addition to F2, the centre of gravity of the frequency spectrum has been successful in discriminating place of articulation between non-sibilant fricatives (Jongman et al. 2000). Since the centre of gravity can lower as a result of a labial articulation, it is expected that the centre of gravity of [fu] and [xu] will drop making them undistinguishable from each other. Thus, acoustic similarity will lead to confusion in perception.
2) The variation is conditioned by following vocalic context, specifically following [back/round] vowels and diphthongs are predicted to favour the occurrence of labio-velar alternation. More labio-velar alternation will be found in initial and stressed positions, since medial unstressed positions are more conducive to lenition and deletion (Colantoni & Marinescu 2010). Preceding vocalic context is not expected to have any effect on the alternation. Concerning the social variables, given the sociolinguistic principle that women tend to use more standard forms than men of the same social class, more labio-velar alternation is expected to be found in men. This perceptually based variation will be blocked by literacy, as orthography helps to disambiguate the confusing signal. Thus, there will be less labio-velar alternation in speakers with a higher level of formal education. Given the historical evidence that the variation affecting /f/ and /b/ has existed in Spanish for hundreds of years (Penny 1991) and that it is localized in a specific subset
39 of the population (rural speakers) (Quilis 1993), I do not expect this variation to be a case of language change in progress, but rather a case of stable variation.
This chapter has reviewed the literature concerning the theories of sound change upon which this study is based. I have summarized previous acoustic research on fricatives and approximants consonants. In addition, I have described the diachronic evidence on labio-velar alternation in Spanish, which planted enough ground to lay out my hypotheses. The individual hypotheses will be explored in different chapters; the results of the sociolinguistic analysis are presented in Chapter 4, the results of the perceptual analysis are presented in Chapter 5 and those of the acoustic analysis are presented in Chapter 5. Chapter 3 discusses the methods of data collection, the subjects and the experiments. Finally, Chapter 7 relates the different analyses, summarizes and interprets the findings in light of the theories of sound change reviewed.
40
Chapter 3 Study Design and Methods 3.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the procedure of data collection and its analysis. Subjects were invited to participate in a session that consisted of three tasks: a) sociolinguistic interview, b) production experiment, and c) perception experiment. The twenty-two native speakers of Caá Catí Spanish who best completed all the tasks were selected for analysis. The data coming from the three different tasks were analyzed separately using different software programs Nat (Lazzari 2009), Goldvarb (Sankoff D., Tagliamonte S.A. & E. Smith, 2005) and Rbrul (Johnson 2008) for sociolinguistic interviews, Praat (Boersma & Weenink. 2009) for the acoustic analysis of the production experiment and R (R Development Core Team, 2009) for the statistical analyses of the production and perception experiments. The procedure of analysis is described in Section 3.4.
Each session started with a sociolinguistic interview. Because sociolinguistic interviews are more relaxed and flexible than experiments, they help to put participants at ease. One-on-one interviews are one of most effective ways to collect samples of informal speech from a specific community. Since tokens are embedded in normal conversations, they give an accurate approximation of how sounds occur in natural discourse. However, one of the disadvantages of sociolinguistic interviews is that they may not provide enough tokens of the relevant sounds for an appropriate analysis, or the sounds may not appear in the required phonetic environments. To supplement data from interviews, I included a production experiment to elicit tokens in specific contexts. The perception of sounds was tested in a subsequent experiment, where participants were required to perform an AX discrimination task. A more detailed description of the design and application of these methods of data collection follow.
3.2 Data Collection
3.2.1 Sociolinguistic interviews
The interviews and the experiments took place in Caá Catí, a city of 4007 inhabitants (INDEC census 2001), 100km south of Corrientes city, the capital of the province of Corrientes (map in Appendix 1). The participants were native inhabitants of Caá Catí that were selected according to
41 the social categories: gender, education, and age (further selection criteria and participant’s details are discussed in section 3.3). Sociolinguistic interviews are useful for determining the pattern of occurrence of certain linguistic variants in the speech community in general and in each participant in particular. The data collected in this way informs how variation is influenced by external factors such as social class, education, age, and sex and internal factors such as neighboring sounds, stress, position and word frequency influence the variation. Since questions are organized into thematic modules, the interviews are designed to elicit not only the vernacular, but also the more formal style of speech (Labov, 1984). For instance, questions that focus on personal experiences such as ‘how did you meet your husband/wife?’, make people focus on the content of the answer rather than the form, whereas questions such as ‘Do you speak Guaraní?’ tend to make people focus more on form rather than content. See Appendix 2 for list of questions in English.
The aim of a sociolinguistic interview is to elicit natural speech. Thus, interviews are performed as if they are informal conversations between two friends, where the participant is free to deviate from the topic introduced by the interviewer. The interviewer is then willing to remit control over the direction of the conversation and follow the participant’s lead. In this way, it is possible to minimize the ‘observer’s paradox’, since “the aim is to observe how people talk when they are not being systematically observed” (Labov 1984:30). To make participants feel more comfortable, sociolinguists prefer to collect their data at a place of the participant’s own choosing, such as their home or place of employment.
Following the sociolinguistic tradition, my original plan was to perform the interviews at participants’ homes, which would help to put them at ease and make the interview situation less intimidating. Being at home has the additional advantage of having participants interact with other family members in the household, which yields more instances of casual conversation. However, some of the interviews performed at participants’ houses during my first visit to Caá Catí had to be discarded due to loud background noise. Some rural houses do not have a living room or comfortable chairs, so people tend to sit and talk at the entrance or patios with loud ambient noise (wind, animals, traffic, music/radios). Having a place with low ambient noise is an important consideration for the study of sounds. To obtain recordings with less background noise, during my second trip to Caá Catí I rented a house in the town centre and participants were invited to come for the interview. The computer and recording equipment (see the end of
42 section 3.1.2 for description of the recording equipment) were set in the livingroom of the house, where I would also have coffee and cookies to serve. This was meant to create a friendlier environment than the one found in a typical speech laboratory.
In recruiting participants for this study I used the ‘friend-of-a-friend’ (Milroy, 1987) sampling technique. This technique consists in having a group of contacts that serve as an initial link to approach prospective participants14 . The friend-of-a-friend technique for recruiting participants is especially appropriate for this community. In my experience as a member of Argentine society, I find that the best services, products, prices, seats, etc. are obtained through friends of friends. Having a network of good contacts can make life much easier and more convenient. Likewise, defining myself as a friend of X will act as an implicit guarantee of good faith and ensure my obtaining a good interview. As Milroy (1987:54) explains, “knowledge of X’s name is received as a claim by X that obligations to her/him should be fulfilled in the form of help for her/his ‘friend’”. Moreover, knowing the informant beforehand will help recreate the informal and friendly atmosphere necessary to obtain a close-to-vernacular language.
Some complications arose during the interviews. Some participants tended to speak very little and some cancelled their appointments. In most cases, the interviews done with male participants tended to be shorter than those with female participants. This was specially the case of men with lower education, who seemed to be more self-conscious than those with higher education. Male shyness could also be related to fact that interviews were done in a private house, with no other people around. Then, I, a female interviewer, was sitting face to face with a male, who also happened to be a stranger. To prevent the feeling of discomfort in my male participants, I started inviting wives, partners and girlfriends to the interview, but then the solution created another problem; since women would take control of the conversation leaving no space for men to talk. When this was the case, I used the production experiment to supplement the missing tokens from a short interview. Women, on the other hand, showed more interest in the study and they also became more involved in the conversation. Men’s shyness and women’s greater involvement in the conversation resulted in a greater number of tokens for women.
14 During my first trip to Caá Catí, I made initial contact with a local family that hosted me and helped me find prospective participants for the study.
43
Another problem with the collection of data was the temperature. The period during which I conducted my research was June-August, which is winter in Argentina. Winter is not generally an issue in Corrientes, since it is warm and sunny most months of the year. However, the winter 2007 was an exception and the temperature scored record lows that year. Since the heating systems in rural areas are not as efficient as in cities, people suffer from the lower temperatures in the countryside much more. People became sick and could not leave their homes. Older people became especially concerned about their health and were more reluctant to go out, in which case I would come to their homes.
Before the interview participants were advised that the whole session would last between an hour and an hour and a half. Nevertheless, three female participants did not complete all the phases of the study because they had to leave earlier. One participant came back to complete the experiment, but the other two were not able to come again. Three older male participants that were recruited for the study could not perform the perception experiment, since they were unable to discriminate between the different phonemes presented. Two female participants came with their babies who sat on their laps during the session. After a while, the children became restless and wanted to leave. So, the sessions had to be interrupted and were never resumed. There was a good incentive to cooperate in the research, yet the Caá Catí population was a difficult one to study. None of the people had participated in an interview or an experiment before and many of them did not behave in a way that was appropriate to the nature of the study. Some people canceled their appointments at the last minute and some did not even bother to cancel, they just did not come. The participants received 15 pesos (approximately CAD$4) as compensation for their participation in the study. At first most of the subjects, even the ones with the lowest income, did not want to accept the money, and they only accepted it when I explained that they were being paid for their time.
All in all, out of forty-five speakers recruited for the research (10 older, 17 adults and 18 young participants), this dissertation presents the result of twenty two that best completed all the parts of the research.
44
3.2.2 Production experiment
In the production experiment participants were asked to describe a set of pictures shown on a computer screen. The visual cues were meant to elicit words with the target sounds /f/, /x/, /b/ and / ɡ/ (Appendix 3). For instance, participants were shown a picture of a grandfather holding his grandchild and they were asked ‘what can you see?’. Participants were told before hand that they had to answer in full sentences. So, ‘abuelo’ grandfather or ‘un abuelo’ a grandfather were not possible answers. This was done to avoid having /b/ and / ɡ/ in initial position in the word and in the sentence, which would make them voiced stops, not approximants. Some words were not easy to elicit, so more specific questions were needed to guide participants with the answers. For example, to elicit the word ‘afuera’ outside , I showed a picture of man eating in the garden and I asked ‘Where is John eating with his family? Inside the house?’ I would also give hints to the answers where informants looked puzzled, since the idea was not to test their lexical knowledge, but to elicit certain words.
The elicited words had fricatives and approximants in syllable onset position followed by the five Spanish vowels and the diphthongs [wi] and [we]. The relevant sounds were in stressed or unstressed syllables and in word initial and word medial positions. Words with the fricatives [f] and [x] and the approximants [ β] and [ɣ] in coda position were not be considered. A total of 93 words were selected for each speaker: /f/ 23, /x/ 24, /b/ 25, /g/ 21. Notice that the number of words elicited per phoneme is not the same, this is because there are not real words for each and every CV combination. In addition, the number of elicited words per subject is not the same, since some stimuli had to be discarded because the recording was not clear or the word was different (e.g. abuelito ‘granny’ instead of abuelo ‘grandfather’, which changes the stress of the relevant syllable
Before performing the actual test, subjects did a training task with the picture of a barbecue and the question ‘What is one of Argentinians’ favorite food?’. Being only for training purposes, the elicited word ‘asado’ barbecue did not contain any of the target sounds. The production experiment was meant to supplement the data from the sociolinguistic interviews, since some CV combinations such as [ βwi] and [ ɣwi] occur less frequently in speech. The production experiment also allowed for the control of segmental and supra-segmental contexts, which is not
45 always feasible in the interviews. The tokens collected in this manner were subject to acoustic analysis (section 3.4.2). The production experiment took place after the interview and it lasted for approximately 15 minutes.
All the recordings were done with an M-Audio Microtrack 24/96 professional 2-channel mobile digital recorder and an AT831-SP Audio Technica unidirectional lapel microphone placed at approximately 23cm from the speakers’ lips. Materials were recorded in mono at a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz and 16bit resolution and transferred to a CD-R as .wav files for analysis. There were sixty pictures in total, which were attached to sixty Power Point slides and shown on a laptop computer. The next slide was shown only when the participant had provided the correct answer. In some cases, however, the correct answer was not provided, even when hints were given. In this case, the token was excluded. For instance, the picture of an ‘estofado’ beef stew elicited some ‘guisos’ beef soup responses.
3.2.3 Perception experiment
The perception experiment was performed by the same 22 subjects that participated in the interviews and the production experiments. As stated in Chapter 2 (section 2.5.), I hypothesize that the acoustic similarity between phonetic categories leads to confusion in perception. To test this hypothesis, the number of discrimination errors between labial and velar approximants and fricatives were compared, and statistical tests (2 sample T-tests, analysis of variance and chi- square) to determine significant differences were performed (see chapter 6 for further details).
The perception experiment followed the production experiment and it took 15 minutes to complete. Participants performed an AX discrimination task, i.e. they heard pairs of nonsense words and they had to say whether they were different or the same. The use of nonsense words was intended to avoid the effect of lexical priming on the selection of words. Appendix 4 includes a list of 112 nonsense words containing [f], [x], [ β] and [ ɣ] followed by the five Spanish vowels and the diphthongs [we] and [wi]. For instance, on the headphone subjects would hear 1) [f]oga ~ [x]oga and they were expected to say ‘different’, 2) [ ɣ]esa ~ [ ɣ]esa, and they were expected to say ‘same’. Slide 1) would have two stimuli differing only by one consonant, while slide 2) would contain the same stimulus twice. A one second interval was inserted between stimuli. Since the listening experiment was conducted in a normal room (not sound proof),
46 stimuli were presented using a noise canceling Logitech USB headset 350. The perception test was also recorded.
The perception stimuli were recorded by the researcher (a 33 year-old female native speaker of Corrientes Spanish) in a quiet room. The original plan was to have somebody external to the study perform the recordings, but it was very difficult for ordinary people with no linguistic training to read the words keeping a constant intonation and rhythm. Moreover, reading nonsense words is very difficult, unless there is substantial training. So, after several unsuccessful trials with a handful of volunteers, I performed the recording myself. The nonsense words were embedded in a carrier phrase ‘digo … porque sí’ I say … just because . Tokens were extracted and saved into .wav files.
The stimuli were attached to Power Point slides, which were completely blank, i.e. without any visual cues. The slides advanced automatically every 5 seconds. The stimuli were heard only once, unless some external noise (e.g. dogs barking, loud cars) or interruption (e.g. cell phones, knockings on the door, etc.) prevented the subject from properly hearing it the first time. The stimuli were distributed randomly over a total of 168 slides. The order was re-arranged 3 times and saved in different documents: Perception_A, Perception_B and Perception_C. Subjects were exposed to either one of these tests at random. This was done to determine whether factors such as tiredness play a role in perception. Thus, if subjects from the three groups made increasing errors in the last portion of the experiment, regardless of the sounds being played, then tiredness rather than perceptual difficulty was considered to be a factor involved.
The first five trials were ‘familiarization’ trials meant to acquaint the listener to the sounds and the task. Responses to these trials were not analyzed. The training tokens included [s] in the group fricatives and [ ð] in the group of approximants. Distracters were not included in the actual trial to avoid lengthening the experiment and loosing participant’s attention. Ideally, research studies such as this, which consist of several tasks, would require participants to attend to more than one session. However, due to the nature of the population under study (discussed in section 3.1.1) and how difficult it was for participants to commit to coming to even one session, I designed the tasks in such a way that all three parts could be done in one session.
47
Participants sat in front of a laptop computer and they provided their responses orally. They said ‘same’ if the words heard did no differ in any sound and ‘different’ if the words differed in any sound. During the trial, I recorded their answers on an answer sheet. Normally, participants themselves would write down their own responses. However, since almost half of the participants were illiterate, it was necessary to modify the task so that it could be equally performed by all participants.
Participants did not receive any feedback during the familiarization or the experimental phases. There was a short break after the familiarization in case the participant had any questions regarding the administration of the experiment. All the participants, except for three could successfully complete the experiment. The three participants, who also happened to be illiterate, could not hear any phonemic difference (see Chapter 6 for further comments). 3.3 The location: Caá Catí city
Caá Catí is one of the oldest settlements in the province. Its origin dates back to the 18 th century when a group of ranchers (hacendados) arrived in this rather deserted area with the aim of establishing farms for cattle raising (Cáceres de Romero 1989). With the growth in population and the expansion of the area, in 1856 the village was given the status of city. Following this rapid initial increase in population, however, the information from the census shows that the population in Caá Catí tends to decrease in time. For instance, in 1820 Caá Catí city had 3.790 inhabitants and thirteen years later the number became 4.737, but in 1841 it dropped to 1.773. Unfortunately, the Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INDEC) ‘National Institute for Census and Statistics’ website only shows information of the last two censuses 1991 and 2001, where in a ten-year span the population has increased slightly, 3646 and 4007 respectively. One of the reasons for the low growth in population has to do with the lack of economic prosperity in the city. Unemployment drew large percentages of the younger population to bigger urban centres, mainly Corrientes city and Buenos Aires. Another important reason why young people leave Caá Catí is the lack of possibilities to pursue college and university education. Caá Catí has only one primary school and one secondary school. There is also a brand new school for special children, but no college or university. Thus, those students who want to further their education are forced to leave for the big cities. While some of them return to their native town when they
48 graduate, most of them find jobs in the big cities and remain there. The social mobility in Caá Catí is, therefore, unidirectional; many people emigrate, but very few immigrate to the town.
An important reason for choosing Caá Catí as the location for my study has to do with the low level of education of most of its residents. As previously stated, those who want to pursue further education have to leave the city, and therefore the ones who remain have either secondary or primary school educations. However, some people from the lowest end of social strata, some farmers and older people remain illiterate or have less than six years of schooling. Since I hypothesize that education or, rather the lack of it, favours the spread of the labial-velar alternation to other speakers, it was necessary to test this hypothesis on a population that would have an important number of illiterate or semi-illiterate speakers. These speakers are not so easily found in larger cities where there are more and better options for education. Thus, Caá Catí was the most appropriate place to carry out this investigation; since both types of participants, literate and illiterate, can be found.
In terms of people’s occupations, it is possible to devise two main categories into which most of them fall: State workers , the largest majority, and non-State workers . State workers are administrative workers of the city hall, educators, hospital employees, cleaning staff and ‘changarines’ (contract workers hired for temporary projects such as building or laying pavement). Non-state workers are shop owners/assistants, doctors, lawyers or self-employed construction workers, cleaning personnel, babysitters, dressmakers, etc. This distinction has further implications on the social stratification of participants.
The participants’ classification into different social classes presents some challenges for the particular speech community under study. While early sociolinguistic studies (Labov 1966; Wolfram 1969; Trudgill 1974; Feagin 1979) have applied social scales devised by Warner et al. (1949) for large industrialized societies such as Philadelphia and New York, such social classification was inappropriate for the Caá Catí speech community. Rickford (1986) has already pointed out the sociological limitations of this classification system for smaller agricultural societies. For instance, in his study in Cane Walk, Rickford (1979) devised a local stratification system with only two primary groups, which he labeled the Estate and the Non-Estate Class. The Estate Class was composed entirely of field-workers on the sugar estate, and the Non-Estate
49
Class included drivers, clerks, shop-owners, etc. Although the economy in Caá Catí is not agricultural, Rickford’s social classification system is more relevant to the speech community under study. However, since I hypothesize that it is literacy rather than social class, which influences the labial-velar alternation I did not consider social class as factor in the analysis. 3.4 Caá Catí Spanish in contact with Guaraní
Speakers of Caá Catí Spanish are Spanish/Guaraní bilinguals or Spanish monoliguals. Guaraní is an aboriginal language spoken in Paraguay by around five million people. It is also spoken at the south of Brazil, northeast of Argentina (Corrientes and Misiones), Bolivia and north of Uruguay. Together with Spanish, Guaraní is the official language in Paraguay and the province of Corrientes. With regards to Guaraní phonology, the following table shows the consonants found in the language (Walker 1999:68): Bilabial Labio- Dental Alveolar Pre- Velar Labial- Glottal dental palatal velar m n Plosive/Nasal p b/m t d/n k ŋɡ/ŋ kw ŋɡw/ŋw Ɂ
Affricate/Nasal dj/ ɲ
Flap ɾ/ɾ̃
Fricative s ʃ x/h
Approximant ʋ/ʋ̃ ɰ/ɰ̃ ɰw/ɰ̃ w
Lateral l/l ̃ Approximant
Table 3.1. Guaraní consonant inventory
As shown in this table, Guaraní lacks [f] and [ β], which could partly explain why speakers of this dialect use [x] instead of standard [f] and [ ɣ] instead of standard [ β] in words such as fuego ‘fire’ and abuelo ‘grandfather’. Yet, the fact that the same speakers are able to use standard [ β] and [f] in other phonetic contexts weakens the substratum hypothesis. In addition, since labio-velar alternations are frequent in child speech and in different Spanish dialects suggest that the explanation could not be restricted to a language contact situation with Guaraní.
50
3.5 Sample population and participants
Speakers that participated in the study were born in Caá Catí and lived there for most of their lives. Speakers who were absent from Caá Catí for more than five years were not chosen for the study. This was done to prevent obtaining speech samples that have been influenced by other varieties of Spanish. Children and adolescents were excluded from the study because they either have not completed the acquisition of the language or their speech may not be representative of standard adult varieties. Since the main purpose of this study is to analyze speech sounds, participants with hearing difficulties were excluded 15 .
From a total of fourty-five participants, twenty two native speakers from Caa Cati were selected for analysis. They were informed about the nature of the study in a consent form given at the beginning of the session 16 (see Appendix 5 and 6 for English and Spanish versions). Participants were explained that the researcher was interested in Caá Catí, its people, culture and language. They were advised that their participation would involve three stages: an interview about their everyday life, hobbies, interests and plans for the future, a picture description task and a sound discrimination task. Their participation was voluntary and they could stop at any stage. Nobody objected to participating in the study.
Twelve participants were female and ten were male. Participants with six years of primary school and beyond were considered High Education, while those with no schooling or with incomplete primary school were considered Low (or no) Education. Three age groups were arbitrarily devised: young (15-33), adults (34-65), and older (66-)17 . The distribution of participants according to social categories is shown in Table 3.2:
15 A 72 year-old man who could not perform the perception experiment. 16 The fieldwork proposal was approved by the Ethics Review Office (protocol reference #17646) 17 The classification into different age groups was based on previous sociolinguistic studies on Argentine Spanish (Weinberg 1974, Terrell 1978, Sonou de los Rios 1989).
51
Education
High Education Low Education
Age/Sex Females Males Females Males
Young 3 4 1 2
Adult 3 3 2
Older 1 1 2
Total 22 7 8 5 2
Table 3.2. Distribution of Participants according to Social Categories: Age, Sex and Literacy
Table 3.1 shows that participants are unevenly distributed along the categories devised. For instance, there are fewer illiterate or semiliterate subjects participating in the study. It was difficult to find young participants with low levels of education, yet it was easy to find older people with low levels of education. Interestingly too, I was able to find more young male illiterates than young female illiterates. In fact, it was almost impossible to locate young illiterate women in the population. It appears that education is the principal means for women to improve their socio-economic status. Although I interviewed three Older Male 18 speakers, their data is not included in this study. Probably due to hearing problems, these speakers were unable to discriminate phonemes. Since this research explores the correlation between sociolinguistic, perception and production data, participants that did not complete the three parts of the study were not included.
The greater number of young literate speakers as compared to the illiterate ones is due to improved possibilities of education and a greater awareness of its importance for professional development. Even those people who live in the countryside recognize the importance of education for their own business and the future of their children. In the past, people in rural
18 Capital letters are used for sociolinguistic factors.
52 communities did not need high levels of education to sustain themselves. As soon as they finished primary school they could work as administrative assistants, commercial sellers, etc. Gauchos (Argentine cowboys) and farmers did not need to complete primary school to perform their jobs. Since mathematics was the only useful subject in their daily lives, as soon as they acquired enough training in arithmetic they would leave school to work in the farm. Women married very young (18 years on average) and they stayed home to raise their children and do the house work.
3.6 Data analysis
3.6.1 Sociolinguistic interviews
Tokens containing all the phonetic variants of /f, x, b, g/ were extracted and coded from the interviews. The token extraction was done using Nat (Lazzari 2009), a custom made software that handles both the audio and transcribed version of the interviews. Both the audio file and the transcribed text file are open in Nat. The program is first used to synchronize audio and text information. Then it automatically detects the relevant tokens from the transcriptions of the interviews, and assigns values for each of the independent factors considered (e.g. following and previous context, stress). Because the original audio recording and the transcribed text were previously synchronized, when the program finds a token in the text file, it can automatically play the corresponding audio. Since the identification of relevant tokens by Nat is done on the text file, which is the transcribed interview, all forms are considered, including the unrealized forms. That is, even when a subject produced ‘canta[Ø]a’ used to sing instead of the standard ‘canta[β]a’, Nat would detect the token because it reads the written form of the word ‘cantaba’, which will be later manually classified as a deletion.
The value for the dependent variable (realization of the sound) was manually selected. For instance, for each
53
Figure 3.1. Analysis of tokens from the sociolinguistic interviews using Nat
Each phoneme and its variants are listed below together with a sample token extracted from the interviews:
/b/
• Voiced labial approximant [ β] or stop [b]
(1)
116 0:01:28 Y yo [ β]ine acá cuando ya tenía 15 años.
116 0:01:28 I came here when I was 15 years old.
• Voiced velar approximant [ ɣ]
54
(2)
119 0:06:20 Acá por ejemplo a la [ɣ]uelta hay un doctor que le gusta el dulce de mamón que hago yo.
119 0:06:20 Here, for instance, there is a doctor around the corner who likes the papaya jam that I make.
• Deletion
(3)
119 0:41:02 me gusta mucho hablar en guaraní pero sa[Ø]es que a [β]eces me atajo un poco […]
119 0:41:02 I like to speak in Guaraní a lot but, you know what, sometimes I stop myself from doing it […]
/ɡɡɡ/
• Voiced velar approximant [ ɣ] or stop [ ɡ]
(4)
116 0:01:05 […] estaba perdiendo 1 a 0, pero después rapidito le empató y se ve que hizo el otro, yo no vi el se[Ø]undo [ ɣ]ol, yo escuché que gritaron todos nomás.
116 0:01:05 (Argentina) was loosing 1 - 0, but quickly we tied and then we scored a second goal. I didn’t see the goal, I just heard everybody shouting.
• Voiced labial approximant [β]
(5)
119 0:06:53 si hay mucho que le [β]usta el dulce de mamón si.
119 0:06:53 Yes, there are a lot of people who like papaya jam.
• Deletion
55
(6) see (4)
/f/
• Voiceless labial fricative [f]
(7)
121 0:54:58 Y él [f]alleció cuando mis tíos eran chicos todavía.
121 0:54:58 And he passed away when my uncles were still young.
• Voiceless velar fricative [x]
(8)
116 0:33:06 Yo le dije a la señora del ingeniero para ir a[x]uera
116 0:33:06 I told the engineer’s wife that we go outside
• Deletion
(9)
128 0:02:14 No, pro[Ø]esor de boxeo era.
128 0:02:14 No, he was boxing coach.
/x/
• Voiceless velar fricative [x]
(10)
110 0:22:57 Un palito que se rompió detras del baño que era todo de [f]unco nuestro baño la pared le hacen todo la de [x]unco como techo de paja le armo este la pared del baño
110 0:22:57 A stick that broke behind the washroom, which was made of rush. He made our washroom with rush and the roof he made with straw.
• Voiceless labial fricative[f]
(11) see (10)
56
• Deletion
(12)
122 0:10:34 […] vino la profe y me di[Ø]o vos no actuaste todavía me di[x]o así
122 0:10:34 […] and the instructor came and she said ‘you haven’t acted yet’ she said like that
For every phoneme there was one more possibility called ‘other’, where ambiguous tokens were placed. For instance, in the case of a word like bueno ‘well/good’, it was not always clear whether it was realized as [ ɣ]weno or [Ø]weno. In addition, all the variants of /b/ were collapsed together: the bilabial stop [b], the bilabial approximant [ β], and the labiodental approximant [ ʋ] (see Chapter 6 section 6.2.1). Likewise, the stop and approximant realizations of / ɡ/ ([ ɡ] and [ ɣ] respectively) were collapsed into one group, since at this point I was interested in comparing the frequencies of the standard vs. the non-standard realizations. Since /x/ was almost categorically realized as [x], it was excluded from the analysis. All relevant tokens were coded and the files saved in an Excel document, which as then entered into Goldvarb X (Sankoff D., Tagliamonte S.A. & E. Smith, 2005) a logistic regression analysis application for Windows, which estimates the percentages and probabilities of occurrence of a particular variant form for each contextual factor specified.
3.6.1.1 External (Social) Factors
The social factors hypothesized to influence the occurrence of each variant are Age, Literacy and Sex. Regarding the influence of age on the realization of the labio-velar alternation, its higher occurrence in the younger age group as compared to the adult and the older groups would suggest a change in progress. The study of different age groups to determine whether a particular linguistic phenomenon is a case of language change is related to the ‘apparent-time hypothesis’ whereby:
Speech differences between people of different ages reflect differences in the times when their linguistic abilities were being formed. Conversely, in the prototypical pattern for stable variation , each cohort of the same class, gender, ethnic background, and other social characteristics, will be similar to each other in their use of variants and the amount of style shifting (Chambers 1995:107).
57
Research shows that during literacy acquisition, the correspondence between phoneme and grapheme become tightly interconnected such that they could be considered as two faces of the same coin (Frost & Ziegler 2007). Phonological awareness, that is the capacity to consciously manipulate phonemes, is also dependent on literacy (Carroll et al . 2003, Port 2007, 2008). If the onset of literacy shapes the perceptual system with hearers integrating the orthographic input with the audio input when establishing phonetic/phonemic categories, then for literate participants there would be a sharper distinction between /f/ ~ /x/ and /b/ ~ /g/ than for illiterate ones. Thus, I hypothesize more variation in pronunciation, i.e. more labial-velar alternation, in illiterate speakers. Since there is a certain social awareness attached to labial-velar alternation, it would be possible to expect that children at school are corrected when they say me [x]uí ‘I went’ instead of me [f]uí or a[ ɣ]uelo ‘grandfather’ instead of a[ β]buelo . Thus, literate speakers who have had some years of education are expected to have less labial-velar alternation in their speech.
Concerning the linguistic differentiation of men and women, among the clearest and most consistent results of sociolinguistic research are the findings that:
i) In stable sociolinguistic stratification, men use a higher frequency of nonstandard forms than women. ii) In the majority of linguistic changes, women use a higher frequency of the incoming forms than men […] Principles i) and ii) show two distinct kinds of differences between men and women. In the stable situations described by principle i) women appear to be more conservative and favor variants with overt social prestige, whereas men do the reverse. But in unstable situations described by principle ii), it is men who show a more conservative character, and women who use forms that deviate more from the standard and are in fact stigmatized when they are overtly recognized (Labov 1990:206) .
If labio-velar alternation is a case of stable sociolinguistic variation, then overall percentages should show that women use the non-standard form less frequently than men. However, if there is a change in progress, then women should favour the use of the non-standard form more than men. The interaction of sex and social class is evident, especially as the language change proceeds. The Philadelphia Project (Labov 1991) on Linguistic Change and Variation indicated that sexual differences are independent of social class at the beginning of the change, but that interaction develops gradually as social awareness of the change increases. For instance, the tendency to avoid stigmatized forms and prefer prestige forms is greatest for the women of the
58 lower middle class, and is often minimal for the lower class and the upper middle class (1991:221). However, since literacy rather than social class was the factor hypothesized to influence the occurrence of the labio-velar alternation, this study will look at the intersection of sex and literacy as a way to elucidate the social dimension of linguistic variation.
3.6.1.2 Internal (Linguistic) Factors
Preliminary studies of the labio-velar alternation in fricatives (Mazzaro 2005) and approximants (Mazzaro 2010) show that these phenomena are constrained by following back round vowels [o] and [u] and diphthongs [we] and [wi]. I hypothesize that the labio-velar alternation is motivated by the perceptual similarity between /f/ ~ /x/ and /b/ ~ /g/ in the proximity of round vowels [o, u] and the glide [w]. In articulatory terms, a velar [x] followed by [u] has double articulation, back of tongue and rounding of the lips in preparation for the articulation of [u]. Thus, [xu] is articulatorily similar to [fu], since both have double articulation, rounding of the lips and back of the tongue. The same explanation accounts for the articulatory and perceptual similarities between [ β] and [ ɣ] followed by back round vowels. Thus, I hypothesize that confusion in perception between [β] and [ ɣ] occurs because such sounds are acoustically similar to each other in the context of round [o, u] and [w]. Further, I argue that perceptual confusion leads to more variation in production (Ohala 1993).
The influence of stress has been observed on a variety of phonological processes such as /s/ deletion in Spanish (Ma and Herasimchuk 1971, Cedergren 1973, Poplack 1980 among others) and lenition of voiced stops (Cole et al. 1999; Ortega-Llebaría 2004, Colantoni & Marinescu 2010). Since there are no previous studies of the labio-velar alternation affecting fricatives and approximants in Spanish, it is not clear how stress would affect the occurrence of such variation in speech. In general, stressed syllables are more prominent than unstressed ones due to the combination of pitch, vowel duration and greater intensity in the former. In child language acquisition, it has been observed that children drop unstressed syllables when they produce a word (Roca & Johnson, 1999). This indicates perceptual advantage of stressed syllables over unstressed syllables. Since increased prominence yields perceptual saliency, less confusion and less variation is expected to occur in stressed syllables, while increased confusion and variation will occur in unstressed ones.
59
The articulation of segments is also influenced by their position in relation to a constituent boundary (Fougeron 1999). At different prosodic levels (syllable, word or higher levels), it has been observed that the articulation of segments is different in initial, medial or final position within a constituent. Variations in lingual articulation according to the position within a word or a syllable were observed long ago in French by l’Abbé Rousselot (1901, quoted in Fougeron 1999a:24). He noted from palatography data that the area of contact of the tongue against the palate is wider in initial than in final consonants. These results were confirmed by the palatography data in Straka (1963, quoted in Fougeron 1999a). Dart (1991) also noted a difference in the articulation of French and English anterior consonants in word-initial and word- final position. Other variations in consonants according to their position within the syllable consist in higher raising of the tongue in onset position (Browman & Goldstein 1995). For the fricative /s/, Byrd (1994) noted that the constriction is longer in onset than coda position. Farnetani and Vayra (1996) observed an increase in linguopalatal contact word-initially in Italian. In that study the authors compare the articulation of /t/ word-initially to that of /t/ syllable-initially but word-medially in CVCVCV sequences. They showed that /t/ exhibits more linguopalatal contact word-initially than word-medially. Farnetani (1986) also showed that linguopalatal contact for /n/ in Italian is longer and greater word-initially (after a pause) than word-medially.
Other studies have compared the rate of variation of certain consonants according to whether these consonants were in syllable-onset or coda positions. /s/ aspiration and deletion in Spanish apply more frequently when /s/ is in coda rather than onset position (Ma and Herasimchuk 1971, Cedergren 1973, Poplack 1980, Guy 1996, Mazzaro 2001). Other processes such as velar insertion (MacLeod 2008) and glide strengthening (Lozano 1979; Harris & Kaisse 1999) occur in syllable onset position. Yet, informal observation of the data in the present study does not suggest differences in the rate of labio-velar alternation in syllable onset positions word-initially and word-medially. Therefore, I do not expect to find significant differences in the degree of labio-velar alternation of fricatives and approximants in such positions.
The frequency of words is another important factor to consider in the spread of sound variation and change. Bybee (2002) has observed that some phonetically based variation can affect more frequent words first while more infrequent lexical items lag behind. For instance, frequent words typically suffer greater lenition, that is, reduction in articulatory and auditory distinctness, than
60 infrequent words (Bybee 2001, Lieberman 1965, Phillips 1984). Concerning the phenomena under study, a higher percentage of labio-velar alternation is expected in more frequent words and a lower percentage in less frequent ones. Each word was assigned a lemma, or canonical form of a lexeme, and the frequency of the lemma (i.e. how many times it was used in the corpus) was entered into the program. The analysis of lexical frequency was carried out in Rbrul (Johnson 2008), which can handle continuous (numeric) factors. The program compares the percentage of use of a certain variant with the frequency of the lemma and determines if there is any significant correlation between them.
There are very few function words with the relevant sounds in Spanish. Such function words, such as bajo ‘under’, are not very frequent in speech, thus the analysis of labio-velar alternation in function words vs. lexical items was not relevant in this study.
The following list summarizes the external and internal factors considered in the analysis:
External (social) factors Internal (linguistic) factors
Age Following context o Young (18-33), o Vowels [a], [e], [i], [o], [u] o Adults (34-65), o Diphthongs [we], [wi] o Older (66-) Stress Literacy o Stressed o Literates (primary complete and o Unstressed beyond) o Illiterates or Semiliterates (no Position schooling or primary o Initial incomplete) o Medial
Sex Frequency o Female o Male
61
3.6.2 Production Experiment
Target words were extracted from the signal, and analyzed with Praat 4.0.41. The acoustic parameters used to identify place of articulation and influence of vocalic context in fricatives were i) duration, ii) overall and relative intensity, iii) spectral moments (centre of gravity, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis), iv) second formant at mid-consonant point, and v) second formant at onset and mid-vowel points. These acoustic measurements were previously used in studies of English and Spanish fricatives (Harries 1958, Borzone de Manrique and Massone 1981, Gurlekian 1981, Behrens and Blumstein 1998, Jongman et al. 2000).
The acoustic values extracted were exported to Excel and statistical tests were carried out in R (R Development Core Team). R is a programming language and software environment for statistical computing and graphics, which allows researchers to perform a statistical analysis of the data using a script. Data were pooled across vowel contexts for individual speakers and the group. ANOVAS were used to compare the acoustic values of /f/ vs. /x/ and /b/ vs. /g/. In addition, tests of correlation were performed to test the effect of lexical frequency and the rate of labio-velar alternation.
Duration was measured on the fricative and the following vowel. For instance, the duration of [f] in the word ‘feria’ fair is 170ms. (see Figure 3.1), while the duration of [e] is 120ms. Normalized duration was calculated as the ratio of the duration of the fricative to the duration of the vowel:
D = fricative DNORM Dvowel
The normalized duration of [f] in the word ‘feria’ is 1.42 (0.17/0.12=1.42).
Intensity, or power per unit area, was measured in decibels. The mean-energy intensity of [f] in Figure 3.1 is 62.44 decibels, calculated by selecting the relevant segment and going to the ‘Get Intensity’ menu. Relative intensity was calculated as the difference between the intensity of the vowel and that of the preceding fricative:
= − I REL I vowel I fricative
In this case, the relative intensity of [f] in ‘feria’ is 11.38 decibels (73.82 - 62.44 = 11.38 dB).
62
Following Jongman et al . (2000), moments of probability density function were used to identify place of articulation in fricatives. The particular statistical measures performed were centre of gravity, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis of the computed FFTs. Centre of gravity is the frequency that divides the spectrum into two portions of the same energy. Standard deviation refers to the range of energy concentration. Jongman et al. (2000) described and explained these metrics in phonetic terms:
Skewness is an indicator of a distribution’s asymmetry. A skewness of zero indicates a symmetrical distribution around the mean. Skewness is positive when the right tail of the distribution extends further than the left tail. Likewise, skewness is negative when the left tail of the distribution extends further than the right tail. In phonetic terms, skewness refers to spectral tilt, the overall slant of the energy distribution. Positive skewness suggests a negative tilt with a concentration of energy in the lower frequencies. Negative skewness is associated with a positive tilt and a predominance of energy in the higher frequencies. Finally, kurtosis is an indicator of the peakedness of the distribution. Positive kurtosis values indicate a relatively high peakedness (the higher the value, the more peaked the distribution), while negative values indicate a relatively flat distribution. Positive kurtosis thus suggests a clearly defined spectrum with well-resolved peaks, while negative kurtosis indicates a flat spectrum without clearly defined peaks. The spectral moments metric thus incorporates both (spectral peak) and more global (spectral shape) information (Jongman et al. 2000:1253).
To analyze centre of gravity, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis, the central portion of the fricative (about half of its duration) was extracted using a Hamming window. For instance, if the fricative was 80ms long, the central 40ms were extracted (see Chapter 6 for further details). The extraction of this window and the calculation of the four moments were done using a script in Praat. Acoustic information about place of articulation is also available from formant transitions, especially F2. The second formant was measured at three different points, mid-consonant, vowel onset and mid-vowel points.
63
Figure 3.2. Duration of [f] in the word feria ‘fair’ embedded in carrier phrase ‘Digo … porque sí’.
Concerning the acoustic analysis of approximants the following measurements were taken: i) F1, F2 and F3 at mid-consonant point, and ii) F1, F2 and F3 at vowel onset and mid-vowel points. In addition, I calculated iii) relative intensity, iv) normalized duration, and iv) locus equation. Relative intensity and normalized duration were calculated following the same procedure as with fricatives. The data extracted was exported to Excel and ANOVAS were carried out in R (R Development Core Team).
Sussman’s et al. (1991) locus equations were employed as a metric capable of illustrating relational invariance for place of articulation. Although Sussman et al. (1991) used locus equations to study voiced stop consonants, I used it to characterize place of articulation in approximants independently of vowel context. To analyze approximants, it was necessary to change the original measurements proposed by Sussman et al. (1991), since they were measuring “the frequency value at the first discernable glottal pulse after the release burst”. These measurements were based on the concept of Locus Equation, originally conceived by Lindblom (1963) to derive relationally invariant acoustic properties for place of articulation in Swedish /b, d, g/. Lindblom (1963) derived Locus Equation from the following formula: F2onset=k*F2vowel+c, where k and c are constants (slope and y intercept, respectively).
Since approximants lack release bursts, the CV transition was located at the maximum intensity slope between the consonant and the vowel. The maximum intensity slope was found using a
64 script in Praat (Appendix 7). First, a portion of the signal around the CV transition was manually selected and then an automated script was used to detect the most abrupt change in intensity within that selection. Mid-vowel formants were measured where the formants become more stable. In the case of diphthongs such as [we], formants were measured at the midpoint of [w].
Thus, the following measurements were taken: (1) second formant (F2 onset ) at the maximum intensity slope in a CV transition (2) second formant (F2 vowel ) at the midvowel nucleus. Figure 3.3 shows the points of measurement.
F1, F2 and F3 at mid-consonant F1, F2 and F3 at vowel onset F1, F2 and F3 at mid-vowel
Figure 3.3. Measurements of F1, F2 and F3 at vowel onset, in the middle of the consonant and in the middle of the vowel, from the word guerra ‘war’ embedded in carrier phrase ‘Digo … porque si’.
3.6.3 Perception Experiment
For the perception experiment subjects performed an AX discrimination task, which consisted on listening to pairs of nonsense words and saying whether they were different or the same (see section 3.1.3 for detailed explanation of task). In order to calculate the degree of discrimination scores for [f] ~ [x] and [ β] ~ [ ɣ], correct and incorrect responses were counted per individual speaker and the group. This was done to evaluate whether individuals match the group pattern or whether there are individual differences in discrimination performance. The hypothesis that following back vowels and diphthongs affect the discrimination of labial and velar fricatives and approximants was tested by analyzing the degree of confusion by vowel context. If the confusion of [f], [x], [ β] and [ ɣ] increases with following [o, u, we, wi], then this would confirm the
65 hypothesis that the vocalic environment influences the discrimination of these sounds. If there is no difference in the discrimination of [f] vs. [x] and [ β] vs. [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts, then this might suggest that labial and velar categories are similar, and thus likely to be confused, regardless of the nature of the following vowel. Given that some participants were illiterate, the answers given orally by participants were marked on a piece of paper by the researcher. Thus, reaction times were not recorded.
Since literacy shapes the perceptual system with hearers integrating the orthographic input with the audio input when establishing phonetic/phonemic categories (see section 3.4.1.1), it is hypothesized that subjects’ judgments will be affected by their level of literacy. In particular, literate subjects are expected to have more target percepts than illiterate subjects in the perception test. It could be possible to expect that illiterate speakers have a merged category for pairs of phonemes in certain phonetic contexts. For example, [xu] and [fu] are assigned to /fu/. In a non-experimental environment, the ability of illiterate speakers to distinguish words with /f/ and /x/ is based solely on the use of semantic/pragmatic or frequency cues for word recognition. Since, as stated in Chapter 2, orthography helps to develop a phoneme based phonological representation, literate speakers should be able to perform well in the discrimination of phoneme categories even with nonce words. On the other hand, illiterate speakers would find it difficult to make a phonemic distinction of consonants in certain vocalic contexts, which may increase the amount of non-target percepts in the discrimination task.
The results of perception will be correlated with those of the sociolinguistic interviews and production experiments. First, I explore whether more non-target percepts are correlated with more variation in the sociolinguistic interviews. This is done across vocalic contexts, for individual participants and the group. Second, I investigate the correlation between the amount of non-target percepts and the acoustic similarity of sounds in production. That is, if more non- target percepts are correlated with the acoustically similarity of the sounds in question, then this would corroborate that acoustic similarity leads to perceptual confusion.
The methods of data collection presented in this chapter were designed to answer the main research questions on the acoustic/perceptual motivations of the labio-velar alternation and its diffusion in the speech community. Chapter 4 presents the results of the sociolinguistic analysis
66 where the influence of social and linguistic factors on the occurrence of the labio-velar alternations ([f] vs. [x] and [ β] vs. [ ɣ]) are investigated.
67
Chapter 4 Sociolinguistic analysis of variable /f/ and /b/ 4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents a variationist sociolinguistic analysis of two variables affecting /f/ and /b/. Results are based on twenty-two interviews conducted in Caá Catí, Argentina (see description of method of data collection in Chapter 3). The variables analyzed, described and exemplified in Chapter 3 (section 3.4), are reproduced in Table 4.1:
The linguistic variables The linguistic variants
Variable /f/ Standard [f]
121 0:54:58 Y él [f]alleció cuando mis tíos eran chicos todavía.
121 0:54:58 And he passed away when my uncles were still young.
Non-standard [x]
116 0:33:06 Yo le dije a la señora del ingeniero para ir a[x]uera
116 0:33:06 I told the engineer’s wife that we go outside
Non-standard ØØØ
128 0:02:14 No, pro[Ø]esor de boxeo era.
128 0:02:14 No, he was boxing coach.
68
19 Variable /b/ Standard [b] or [ βββ]
116 0:01:28 Y yo [ β]ine acá cuando ya tenía 15 años.
116 0:01:28 I came here when I was 15 years old.
Non-standard [ ɡ] or [[ɣ]ɣ]ɣ]ɣ]
119 0:06:20 Acá por ejemplo a la [ɣ]uelta hay un doctor que le gusta el dulce de mamón que hago yo.
119 0:06:20 Here, for instance, there is a doctor around the corner who likes the papaya jam that I make.
Non-standard ØØØ
119 0:41:02 me gusta mucho hablar en guaraní pero sa[Ø]es que a [β]eces me atajo un poco […]
119 0:41:02 I like to speak in Guaraní a lot but, you know what, sometimes I stop myself from doing it […]
Table 4.1. Variable /f/ and variable /b/
Tokens containing the phonetic variants of /f/ and /b/ were extracted and coded from the interviews using Nat (Lazzari 2009). The distribution and probabilities of occurrence of the variants across linguistic (Preceding Segment, Following Segment, Stress, Position of the Variant in the Word and Lexical Frequency) and social (Education, Sex and Age) factors are analyzed using Goldvarb (Sankoff D., Tagliamonte S.A. & E. Smith, 2005), a logistic regression analysis application for Windows, and Rbrul (Johnson 2008), an interface to the R statistical software environment capable of running regression functions and fitting mixed models. As explained in section 4.3, Rbrul was only used for the analysis of lexical frequency.
19 /b/ and / ɡ/ can be realized as either stops ([b] and [ ɡ]) or approximants ([ β] and [ ɣ])
69
4.2 Overall distribution of /f/ variants
The overall distribution of /f/ variants in Caá Catí Spanish is presented in Table 4.2. Note that for 20 the sociolinguistic analysis of the interviews, the classification of variants into [f], [x] and Ø was auditory.
[f] [x] Ø % N % N % N 91.7 1661 7.3 132 1.0 18 Total N 1811
Table 4.2 Overall distribution of /f/ variants in Caá Catí Spanish
Table 4.2 shows that [f] has the highest percentage of use (91.7%). The rate of [x] is 7.3% and the rate of Ø is 1%. The distribution of [f], [x] and Ø across the linguistic and social factor groups considered in the analysis is shown in Table 4.3.
Factor groups [f] [x] Ø Preceding Context % N % N % N Liquids (/l/ and /r/) 94.5 120 5.5 7 0 0 [h] 21 92.9 144 7.1 11 0.7 1 Nasals (/n/ and /m/) 99.5 191 0.5 1 0 0 Pause 93.4 71 6.6 5 0 0 [a] 94.4 301 5.6 18 0 0 [e] 85.1 418 14.7 72 0.2 1 [o] 88.3 212 5.8 14 5.8 14 [i] 97.5 194 2.0 4 0.5 1 [u] 83 10 0 0 16.7 2 Following context [a] 100 325 0 0 0 0
20 Note that since there is no acoustic analysis, the non-labial realizations of [f] are included under [x] 21 Note that in Corrientes Spanish syllable final /s/ is realized mainly as [h] (Mazzaro 2003:53)
70
[e] 95.6 347 0.3 1 4.1 15 [i] 99.1 336 0.3 1 0.6 2 [o] 100 159 0 0 0 0 [u] 84.2 101 15.8 19 0 0 [we, wi] 77.8 393 22 111 0.2 1 Stress Stressed 88.6 899 11.3 115 0.1 1 Unstressed 95.7 761 2.1 17 2.1 17 Position in the word Initial 90.7 1140 9.2 116 0.1 1 Medial 94.2 520 2.9 16 3.1 17 Total N 1811
Table 4.3 Distribution of /f/ variants by internal linguistic factors: Preceding and Following Contexts, Stress and Position in the Word.
Table 4.3 shows that the occurrence of [x] is localized to preceding [we, wi] (22%, N=111) and [u] (15.8%, N=19). Interestingly, a following [e] yielded 4.1% (N=15) of Ø, which all come from the word profesor ‘professor’, profesora ‘professor (female form)’ and profesores ‘professors’. With regards to the Preceding Segment effect, there is 14.7% (N=72) of [x] with a preceding [e] and 16.7% (N=2) of Ø with a preceding [u]. The cases of Ø with a preceding [u] come from the same word suficiente ‘suficient’ and the same speaker (SP140). Since the total count number of deletion Ø is too low, it will not be included in the multivariate analysis (Table 4.7). All the other contexts had a high percentage of occurrences of [f].
Regarding the influence of Stress, more [x] was found in Stressed and Initial Position in the word. The tendency of [x] to occur in initial and stressed position was confirmed by cross tabulating these two factors as shown in Table 4.4.
71
stressed unstressed Total N N % N % Initial [f] 700 87 440 96 1142 [x] 100 12 16 4 114 Ø 1 0 0 0 1 Medial [f] 199 93 321 95 521 [x] 15 7 1 0 15 Ø 0 0 17 5 17 Total N 1810
Table 4.4 Influence of Stress and Position on the occurrence of [x]
The cross-tabulation indicates that 12% of [x] occurs in stressed initial position, while all the other environments show an almost categorical occurrence of [f]. The 16 tokens found in unstressed initial position correspond to the forms fulano/a ‘so and so’ (also fulanito/a ), fumar ‘to smoke’, fundir ‘spoil’ and fundamental ‘important’. The 15 tokens of alternation in medial stressed position correspond to afuera ‘outside’, while the 15 of the 17 tokens of /f/ deletion in unstressed position correspond to the Spanish word for ‘professor’ profesor and two tokens for the Spanish word suficiente ‘enough’. The occurrence of /f/ deletion in suficiente is a peculiar phenomenon, since following [i] is a highly conservative environment. The male adult speaker who used suficiente is a free-lance newspaper editor who completed secondary school as an adult. Although he has formal education, he comes from a large family with low socio-economic background. In the interview he mentioned that going to school was not a priority in his family, since from a very young age he and his siblings had to work in the farm. This can partly explain why his linguistic behavior is not typical of the literate group. It may be the case that going to school during the childhood formative years has a stronger impact on speech than doing it when one is an adult.
Concerning the influence of social factors on the realization of [x], as hypothesized, there is a higher percentage of [x] in illiterate speakers (20%) than in literate speakers (3.1%); it follows conversely, the rate of [f] in literate speakers is higher (95.7%) than in illiterate ones (79.8%). These trends seem to confirm the hypothesis that literacy positively affects the occurrence of [f],
72 in other words: more of the non-standard variant is found in less literate speakers. Table 4.5 presents the results of the influence of Literacy, Sex and Age on the realization of /f/ variants.
Factor groups [f] [x] Ø Education % N % N % N Higher Education 95.7 1316 3.1 42 1.2 17 Lower (or no) Education 79.1 344 20.7 90 0.2 1 Sex Female 89.2 816 10.6 97 0.2 2 Male 94.3 844 3.9 35 1.8 16 Age Young 91.9 476 7.1 37 1 5 Adult 93.8 849 4.9 44 1.3 12 Old 86.6 336 13.1 51 0.3 1 Total N 1811
Table 4.5 Distribution of /f/ variants by external linguistic factors: Literacy, Sex and Age
More [x] is found in female (10.6%, N=97) than male (3.9%, N=35) speakers, which seems to go against the sociolinguistic principle (Principle I, Labov 1990:210), which states that males use more nonstandard forms than females of the same social class 22 . However, when Education is cross-tabulated with Sex (see Table 4.6), it is male speakers with low levels of formal education who present a higher use of the non-standard variant (male speakers with low education 39% N= 21 vs. female speakers with low education 18%, N=69).
22 There is no analysis of social class in this study, thus it may be difficult to apply this principle directly to this population.
73
Female Male Total N N % N % High [f] 505 95 812 96 1316 Education [x] 28 5 14 2 42 Ø 1 0 16 2 17 Low [f] 311 82 33 61 347 Education [x] 69 18 21 39 87 Ø 1 0 0 0 1 Total N 1811
Table 4.6 Cross-tabulation of /f/ variants by Literacy and Sex
Regarding the use of [f], male speakers with Low Education present a decreased rate of the standard form as compared to females with Low Education (61%, N=33 and 82%, N=311, respectively). Interestingly, from those speakers with High Education there is almost no difference in the rate of occurrence of [f] in females 95% and males 96%. Such speakers have a very low rate of [x] (5% and 2%, respectively).
Concerning the influence of Age on the occurrence of /f/ variants, Older speakers have the highest percentage of [x] (13.1% N=51), followed by Younger speakers (7.1% N=37) and Adults (4.9% N=44). The multivariate analysis (Table 4.7), which separates literate from illiterate speakers, provides a clearer picture of the influence of Age on the occurrence of [x].
Concerning individual patterns of variation, most speakers conform to the expected pattern considering their education levels. This can be seen in Figure 4.1, by comparing the proportions of [x] across speakers (left, from Q to P 23 ) with High Education, as opposed to speakers (right, from T to S) with Low Education. Speaker T, however, has an abnormally low percentage of [x] considering her low level of education. Speaker P, on the other hand, has a very high percentage of [x] considering her high level of education. These two cases are discussed below.
23 Because Goldvarb accepts one character to codify each factor, in this Chapter I am using single letters to identify speakers.
74
100% 80% [0] 60% [x] 40% [f] 20% 0% QINDGOKUVBACJEPTHLMRFS High Education Low Education
Figure 4.1 Distribution of [f], [x] and Ø across individual speakers.
Speaker T, Juana, is a 44-year-old house wife who is highly religious and devoted to the church. Interestingly, whenever she spoke about religion she talked as if she was praying and her speech became more formal. Being a religious person, Juana led prayer groups and organized donations for the poor and spoke about God on the radio in Caá Catí. Although she did not go to school beyond 4 th grade, Juana loved reading religious books, which makes her more literate than would be expected considering her education level. Moreover, since Juana enjoyed spreading God’s word in the media and in public, she was probably more inclined to use a rather formal register of speech, which may account for the low proportion of non-standard [x] in her speech.
Speaker P, Sofía, was a sixteen-year-old teenager who had attended secondary school, but could not complete her education because she got pregnant. Sofía came from a very large and poor family of eight brothers and sisters who were mostly illiterate, and thus it is likely that her input of non-standard forms was high. Although Sofía had almost completed secondary school, her level of [x] was considerably higher (36.7%) than would be expected for somebody of her literacy level. Unlike Juana, Sofïa did not enjoy reading and she commented that language (grammar) was one of her weakest areas at school and that she had problems with spelling, as illustrated by the following excerpt from her interview: S1: como te iba en las materias? Sofïa: en matemática bien, en lengua es que no ando bien, porque yo sé escribir, sé leer eso todo, pero las letras no me acuerdo para hacer dictado, eso vio? La letra de que no me encanta. (SP126 P)
75
S1: how did you do at school? Sofïa: In maths I’m OK, but in language (Spanish grammar) I’m not, because I know how to write, read and all that, but I don’t remember the letters when I do dictation, you know. I don’t love letters. (SP126 P)
Considering Sofía’s difficulties at school and her family and social milieu, it becomes clearer why her speech resembles that of the illiterate population.
Being outliers, these speakers were excluded from the multivariate analysis. As stated above, /f/ deletion was also excluded from the binomial analysis, since it only contained 18 tokens. Considering that alternation is found almost exclusively in initial stressed position (12%, N=100), the other contexts (unstressed and medial) were removed from the run. Finally, the following vowels [a, e, i, o, u], which did not show much variation across contexts were collapsed. This means that the analysis of following segment involved the diphthongs [we, wi] vs. the rest of the vowels. Concerning Preceding Context, [n] and [u] were excluded because they were almost categorically realized with [f] (99.4% and 100%, respectively). The rest of the contexts were retained, except some with similar patterns of variation that were collapsed. This was the case of the medial vowels [e] and [o] and the liquids [l] and [r]. After all these exclusions, 1416 tokens were entered into the logistic regression analysis.
Since the data is not evenly distributed across social factor groups, it was difficult to run the regression analysis without interaction between the social factor groups. There were empty cells for some combinations such as ‘adult male with low education’ and ‘old male with low education’. To solve the interaction, social factor groups were combined into one single group which contained ten different categories: ‘young male with high education’, ‘young male with low education, ‘adult male with high education’, ‘old male speaker with high education’, ‘young female with high education’, ‘young female with low education’, ‘adult female with high education’, ‘adult female with low education’, ‘old female with high education’ and ‘old female speaker with low education’. Subsequently, female and male speakers with high education were collapsed into three groups according to the age category to which they belong. This was done because the distribution of the variants was very similar for males and for females. In fact, with the exception of adults, speakers with high education had almost no [x] in their speech (see
76
Figure 4.1). Table 4.7 presents the results of the multivariate analysis of non-standard [x] 24 . Factors are ordered by probability value, starting with the highest.
[x] Input 0.002 Log Likelihood -149.450 Total N 1416 Sex + Literacy + Age Prob. % N Young male with low ed. .95 37 46 Old female with low ed. .93 30.4 161 Adult female with low ed. .92 25.6 43 Young female with low ed. .83 12 25 Adult female and male with high ed .46 3.2 616 Young female and male with high ed. .18 0.6 330 Old female and Male with high ed. .11 0.5 195 Range 84 FG4: Preceding Segment [a] [.43] 4.8 293 [e,o] [.65] 10.9 644 [i] [.20] 1.6 185 Liquids [.26] 2.2 91 [h] [.51] 6.4 140 Pause [.60] 7.9 63 FG3: Following context Vowels [a, e, i, o, u] .12 0.2 957 Diphthongs [we, wi] .98 22 459 Range 86
25 Table 4.7. Variable rule analysis of factors contributing to the probability of [x].
24 Appendix 8 presents a multivariate analysis with illiterate speakers only.
77
Following Segment is the strongest constraint on the probability of occurrence of /f/ alternation (range 86), with the diphthongs [we, wi] favouring the realization of [x] (.98) and the vowels disfavouring it (.12). Preceding Segment was not selected as significant by the multivariate analysis. The social factor group also constitutes a strong constraint on the probability of occurrence [x] (range 84). The clearest division is between subjects with High Education and with Low Education: all subjects with low education favour the occurrence of [x], subjects with high education disfavour it. From the groups with Low Education, ‘young males’ have the highest probability of [x] (.95), followed by ‘older females’ (.93) and ‘adults’ (.92). Interestingly, ‘younger females’ have the lowest probability of [x] (.83). Two observations can account for the higher probability of [x] in ‘young males’ than ‘young females’. One of the males interviewed was completely illiterate, while the other had very little schooling. There was only one young female interviewed, and although she had not finished primary school, she had five years of education. Unfortunately, it was difficult to find young illiterate females (see chapter 3) in the community, which makes the comparison with ‘young males with low education’ impossible.
Regarding Age, the results for ‘females with low education’ show a higher probability of occurrence of [x] by ‘older’ (.93) speakers, closely followed by ‘adults’ (.92) and ‘young females’ (.83), as shown in Figure 4.2.
25 •8/16/2010 4:20:23 PM. • Token file: F tokens with age recode NO Mariela y Berta.tkn (Excel: F_prec context collapsed with social fact recode). Condition file: binomial run for X with social factors recode NO Berta and Mariela.cnd. Results file: binomial run for X with following segment recode.
78
100
80
60 [x] percentage 40
20
0 Younger Adult Older
Figure 4.2. Percentage of [x] in Young, Adult and Older subjects with low education
Figure 4.2 shows that the rate of [x] in females with low education decreases down the age scale. Unfortunately, it was not possible to compare the results of age groups within ‘males with low education’, since there is only one age group. The fact that older speakers, who in this study had less schooling than their younger counterparts, had both low levels of schooling and higher probability of occurrence of the non-standard variant gives more strength to the importance of literacy in preventing the spread of [x]. In addition, the decrease of [x] down the age scale may suggest that the non-standard variant is gradually disappearing. As explained earlier, it was not possible to run social factor groups (Education, Age and Sex) individually in Goldvarb, since there were empty cells and interaction between social factor groups. So, to test whether Age was selected as significant, the same data was analyzed with Rbrul (see Appendix 9), which can handle empty cells (knockouts). Rbrul confirms the analysis presented in Table 4.6: the factors selected as significant are Education, Following Context and Stress, yet Age and Sex were not selected as significant. With the data presented here it is not be possible to argue for a case of linguistic change with enough certainty. Ideally, more speakers with low education would be needed to complete all the categories to run this analysis again, but given the difficulty of finding such speakers in urban communities, this task may be difficult, if not impossible.
Although all the speakers with high education disfavour the use of [x], adults’ higher probability of occurrence of [x] is somehow unexpected, given that adults tend to have more standard speech
79 than younger and older speakers of the same social group 26 . This could be the due to the combination of two factors; first, younger groups are overall more educated (more years of schooling) than adults. Second, adults’ higher rates of [x] could be due to two female speakers, a nurse and a cleaning lady (J and E in Figure 4.1), who had high rates of [x] in their speech.
The nurse, Mar ía, was born in the country side near Caá Catí and completed primary school there. Like most people in the countryside in Corrientes, she is bilingual in Spanish and Guaran í. 27 Mar ía moved to Corrientes city for three years to attend nursing school and then went back to Ca á Cat í where she now lives with her family. María currently works at a hospital, where she is in great demand not only for her professional skills but also for her language skills. Every time a patient from the countryside is hospitalized, María is the one who will communicate with them and their relatives in Guaraní and who would translate what they say to the doctors, as she comments below:
[…] hay mucha gente (en el campo) que realmente se manejan hablando guaraní, vos le hablas en castellano y no entienden, porque nosotros tenemos pacientes que vienen acá, en Caá Catí que hablan en guaraní, todo guaraní, vos le preguntás en castellano y ellos se quedan y te miran, entonces el doctor me solía decir “vení gordita, traducime qué es lo que me dice, hablale en guaraní a ver si nos entendemos más (SP116 J).
[…] There are a lot of people (in the countryside) that communicate in Guaraní, you speak to them in Spanish and they don’t understand, because we have patients that come to Caá Catí and they speak in Guaraní, everything in Guaraní. You ask them in Spanish and they stare at you (without responding), so the doctor tells me “María come, please translate what s/he is telling me, talk to them in Guaraní so that we can understand each other” (SP116 J).
Thus, although María now lives in the city, has a higher level of formal education and is surrounded by city people who are mostly literate, she has greater gains from keeping her
26 A study by Sankoff and Sankoff (1973) reveals the phenomenon of young adults’ re-adapting their speech to the requirements of the job market. Due to the pressures of the market place, adults tend to use more standard forms than younger and older speakers. 27 This is a special kind of professional training called auxiliar de enfermeria ‘assistant nurse’ that does not require the completion of secondary school first. In Argentina there are two options for nursing, University Nursing or Assistant Nursing training at the Red Cross or other institutions. Assistant nurses, who have a shorter training program, are in charge of less technical tasks such as cleaning the patients, feeding them, etc.
80 linguistic skill from the countryside intact than from changing it to sound more like the people around her.
Speaker E, Inés, is a thirty-nine-year-old cleaning lady who completed primary school. She was born and raised at the outskirts of Ca á Cat í and then moved to the countryside where she spent a couple of years. Back in Ca á Cat í, Inés works part-time cleaning different houses. Although Inés has completed her primary education and she now interacts with people who maintain the contrast between labial and velar fricatives and approximants, her formative years were mainly in the countryside, with a mother who was illiterate. These facts can partly explain why Inés speech a higher than normal rate of [x].
The observations made for Mar ía and In és speech suggest that other social factors such as occupation, social network and upbringing are at play. Ideally, such factors should also be considered in a sociolinguistic analysis; however adding more factors groups to the analysis, without increasing the number of subjects, would yield empty cells and increase interaction between factor groups.
On the whole, the hypotheses that following [we, wi] and lack of literacy promote the occurrence of [x] were confirmed (.98 and .95, respectively). The rates of [x] by females with low education suggest a decrease of use of the non-standard variant down the age scale. It appears that with increased opportunities of education in the community, the use of [x] is receding in time. Further analysis with more speakers is needed to confirm this observation.
The positive influence of Stress on the probability of occurrence of [x] is an important piece of evidence, which indicates that the variation constitutes a fortition process (since its occurrence is restricted to more prominent phonetic environments 28 ). The comparison of these results with those of /b/ labio-velar alternation will confirm whether fortition is a general process that affects both types of alternation.
28 For instance, Fougeron & Keating (1997) report overall greater articulatory effort for initial segments.
81
4.3 Overall distribution of /b/ variants
The overall distribution of /b/ variants in Caá Catí Spanish is presented in Table 4.8.
Standard /b/ 29 [ɣ] Ø % N % N % N 84 6927 3.5 286 12.5 1032 Total N 8245
Table 4.8 Overall distribution of /b/ variants in Caá Catí Spanish
From a total number of 8245 tokens, /b/ is the most frequently used variant (84%), followed by /b/ deletion (12.5%) and [ ɣ] (3.5%). Compared to /f/ deletion, /b/ deletion is much more frequent in speech (12.5% vs. 1%, respectively); however, [x] is more common than [ ɣ] (7.3% vs. 3.5%, respectively). The lenition and deletion of approximants is a frequent phenomenon across Spanish dialects, and it has been highly investigated in Spanish (e.g. Cole, Hualde & Iskarous, 1999; Ortega-Llebaria, 2004, Colantoni & Marinescu 2010). However, to the best of my knowledge, no sociolinguistic studies of the labio-velar alternation have been conducted, and thus the results of this study have no parallel comparisons in the literature.
The distribution of /b/, [ ɣ], and deletion across linguistic factor groups is presented in Table 4.9. First, I discuss the results of [ ɣ]. The results for /b/ deletion will be discussed in section 4.2.2. Similarly to /f/, preceding segments which share manner of articulation and had similar patterns of variation were collapsed as follows: /r/ and /l/ into ‘liquid’, /n/ and /m/ into ‘nasal’ and, /b/ and /d/ into ‘approximant’.
29 /b/ includes the variants [b, β, ʋ]. As stated in Chapter 6 (section 6.2.2), the labiodental approximant [ʋ] is he most commonly occurring variant in Corrientes Spanish. In this Chapter, I am only concerned in the contrast between the standard [b, β, ʋ] vs. non-standard realizations [ɣ, Ø].
82
Factor groups /b/ [ɣ] Ø Preceding Context % N % N % N Liquids (/l/ and /r/) 98.1 462 1.3 6 0.6 3 [h] 90.1 401 2.9 13 7 31 Nasals (/n/ and /m/) 92.3 381 6.1 25 1.7 7 Pause 87.4 304 7.2 25 5.5 19 [a] 76.7 2287 3.6 108 19.7 588 [e] 85.4 1254 2.5 36 12.2 179 [o] 87.3 570 2.6 17 10.1 66 [i] 86.7 982 4.9 56 8.3 94 [u] 84.4 243 0 0 15.6 45 Following context [a] 80.7 2298 0.0 1 19.3 549 [e] 86.4 1543 0.1 1 13.5 242 [i] 95.3 1619 0.0 0 4.7 80 [o] 91.8 1030 0.2 2 8 90 [u] 73.1 95 1.5 2 25.4 33 [we, wi] 51.8 342 42.4 280 5.8 38 Stress Stressed 85 4033 5.9 281 9.1 433 Unstressed 82.7 2894 0.1 5 17.1 599 Position in the word Initial 87.2 3692 5.1 215 7.8 329 Medial 80.7 3235 1.8 71 17.5 703 Total N 8245
Table 4.9. Distribution of /b/ variants by internal linguistic factors: Preceding and Following Contexts, 30 Stress and Position in the Word .
30 • 19/05/2011 6:25:38 PM
83
4.3.1 /b/ labio-velar alternation
The distribution of /b/ variants in Table 4.9 reveals that the occurrence of [ ɣ] is constrained by Following Segment, with high rates of variation before the diphthongs [we, wi] (51.8%). Contrary to what was hypothesized, [ ɣ] before [o] and [u] is infrequent (0.2% and 1.5%, respectively). In this respect, the distribution of [ ɣ] is similar to the distribution [x], their occurrence is virtually restricted to post [we, wi] contexts. [ɣ] is mostly found in stressed initial position (7%), similar to [x] (see Table 4.10)
unstressed stressed Total N N % N % Initial [b/ β] 963 95 2729 85 3692 [ɣ] 4 0 211 7 215 Ø 43 4 286 9 329 Medial [b/ β] 1931 78 1304 86 3235 [ɣ] 1 0 70 5 71 Ø 556 22 147 10 703 Total N 8245
Table 4.10. Occurrence of [b/ β], [ɣ] and deletion according to Stress and Position.
As shown in Table 4.10, [ ɣ] also occurs in ‘stressed medial position’ (5%). This differs from the pattern found for /f/, where alternation is strictly found in ‘initial stressed’ syllables. However, there is a strong lexical effect that biases this result, since all the tokens (except for two: laburé ‘I worked’ and revuelto ‘mix’) with alternation in stressed medial position belong to the word abuelo ‘grandfather’. Excluding the word abuelo from the analysis, alternation occurs mainly in stressed initial position. Due to this strong lexical effect, and also because abuelo is pronounced with [ ɣ] by almost all the speakers, regardless of social background, the word abuelo was excluded from the analysis. The relevance of Position and Stress was not foreseen by the hypotheses originally set in this study, but, it is important to note that these effects are at play in both, fricative and approximant labio-velar alternation.
A cross tabulation was performed to explore the distribution of /b/ variants by Education and Sex (see Table 4.11). A higher rate of non-standard [ ɣ] is found in male speakers with low education
84
(9%, N=29) than in female speakers with low education (4%, N=87), which matches the results of /f/ alternation. A much more pronounced difference between male and female speakers with low education is found in /b/ deletion, where male speakers have almost three times more deletion than female speakers (Males: 36%, N=124 and Females: 14%, N=272).
Male Female Total N N % N % High Ed. [b/ β] 2253 85 2907 88 5160 [ɣ] 100 4 70 2 170 Ø 306 12 330 10 636 Low Ed. [b/ β] 187 55 1580 81 1767 [ɣ] 29 9 87 4 116 Ø 124 36 272 14 396 Total N 8245
Table 4.11 Cross-tabulation of /b/ variants by Education and Sex
It is interesting to note that while male and female speakers with high education have an almost identical distribution of /b/ variants, male speakers with low education have a higher rate of non- standard forms than female speakers with low education, which seems to suggest that these variables are playing a social role. This is further discussed below.
Table 4.12 displays the result of the multivariate analysis for each of the internal and external factor groups hypothesized to be relevant to the occurrence of [ ɣ]. Since alternation mainly occurs in stressed initial syllables, the binomial analysis for [ ɣ] includes tokens in this position only. The Input of 0.378 corresponds to the overall probability of [ ɣ] in stressed initial position. For preceding context, [u] was excluded from the analysis because it was not variable. Since variability only occurs with following [we] and [wi], the rest of the following vowels were not considered in the analysis of alternation. Finally, 145 tokens of abuelo were excluded from the 31 data leaving a total of 705 tokens where there is a variation between [b/ β], [ ɣ] and [ Ø] . Note
31 The three variants were entered in the run.
85 that due to the fact that Following Segment, Stress and Position are not longer contrastive, they do not appear in the results presented in Table 4.12.
Argentine Spanish [ɣ] Input 0.378 Log Likelihood -395.459 Total N 705 FG1: Education Prob. % N Low Education .73 53.4 208 High Education .40 34 497 Range 33 FG2: Age Young (15-33) .70 62.7 220 Adult (34-65) .42 29.3 300 Old (66-) .38 29.2 185 Range 32 FG3: Sex Male .62 51.2 248 Female .43 33.5 457 Range 19 FG4: Preceding Segment Liquids /r, l/ .58 50 8 [a] .68 60.3 174 [e] .50 39.8 88 Nasals .52 41 61 [h] .40 36.1 36 [o] .49 37.8 45 [i] .47 32.6 183 Pause .34 22.7 110
86
Range 34
Table 4.12. Multivariate analysis of the contribution of internal and external factors selected as significant 32 to the probability of [ ɣ] .
Amongst the social factor groups, the strongest effect on the probability of occurrence of the [ ɣ] is Education (range 33). This result confirms the hypothesis that speakers with low education favour the use of [ ɣ] (.73), while speakers with high education disfavor it (.40). Regarding the effect of Age, Younger speakers have a higher probability of occurrence [ ɣ] (.70) than Adults (.42) and Older (.38) speakers. This finding goes in the opposite direction of what has been observed for [x]. The fact that younger speakers have a higher probability of [ɣ] would suggest that it is a case of language change. However, when considering the effect of sex on the probability of occurrence of [ ɣ], the results show that male speakers tend to favour it more than females (.62 and .43, respectively). According to Labov (1990:206) “In stable sociolinguistic stratification, men use a higher frequency of nonstandard forms than women (while) in the majority of linguistic changes, women use a higher frequency of the incoming forms than men […]”. The idea that the labio-velar alternation affecting approximants is a case of stable variation seems attuned with the observation made by Vidal the Battini in her book on Argentine Spanish:
El cambio bue > g üe es regular en el habla vulgar y rústica de todo el país: güeno, g üelta, ag üelo. Se observa en el espa ñol de todas partes y es antiguo en la lengua. Ha sido ya muy corregido por la escuela (Vidal the Battini 1964:99).
The shift bue > g üe is common in ordinary and rustic speech in all the country: for example, words such as bueno ‘well’, vuelta ‘return’ and abuelo ‘grandfather’ are pronounced as güeno , güelta , ag üelo . This alternation is observed in the Spanish from all parts and it is old in the language. It has long been corrected by school (Vidal the Battini 1964:99).
Vidal de Battini’s (1964) assertion that /b/ labio-velar alternation has long been corrected at school, suggests two main points: first, the labio-velar alternation has been present in Spanish for
32 • 31/03/2011 12:44:52 PM. Token file: B tokens sin errores.tkn - Condition file: exclude unstressed medial position for following W.
87 a long time; second, there is some social awareness of this non-standard feature. The fact that men have a higher frequency of use of [ ɣ] goes well with this assertion, since they tend to favour the use of non-standard forms. Thus, it appears that /b/ labio-velar alternation is a case of age- grading, being highly used by the younger generation and decreasing in the Adult and Older age groups. One piece of evidence that supports this idea is that abuelo ‘grandfather’, which is one of the first words learned by children, is almost always realized with [ ɣ]. As children’s linguistic skills mature, they learn to replace [ ɣ] with the standard variant. Moreover, since adult speakers 33 have almost the same rate of [ ɣ] as older speakers (29.3%), age-grading seems to be a better interpretation of the data.
Unlike the labio-velar alternation affecting fricatives, the Preceding Segment was selected as significant by the multivariate analysis of [ ɣ]. The occurrence of [ ɣ] is favoured by preceding liquids (.63), [a] (.62), [e] (.58) nasals (.54) and disfavoured by [i] (.47) and pause (.31). The fact that preceding segment is significant in the occurrence of [ ɣ] suggests that approximants are more susceptible to coarticulation with neighbouring elements than fricatives. Since there is no clear transition between approximants and nearby vocalic elements (approximants are vowel-like in that they are voiced and with clear formant structure), it is likely that neighbouring vowels have a strong effect on approximants.
To sum up, following segment constitutes the strongest influence on the occurrence of the labio- velar alternation affecting approximants, since most of the variation occurred in the context of the diphthongs [we, wi]. Although it had been predicted that the following segment would influence the variation (Chapter 3, section 3.4.1.2), it is important to note that [ ɣ] is not constrained by the following back round vowels [o] and [u] as originally hypothesized, but it is mainly constrained by the diphthongs [we] and [wi], with some isolated examples of [ ɣ] before [u], e.g. gurro ‘donkey’.
In addition, the interaction of Stress and Position plays a decisive role on the frequency of occurrence of [ ɣ], since variation occurs almost exclusively in stressed initial position. Concerning the effect of stress on variation, the prediction that “increased prominence yields
33 Age grading means that all speakers shift from one variant to another according to their age (Labov 2001:446).
88 perceptual saliency, and thus less confusion and less variation is expected to occur in stressed syllables” (Chapter 3, section 3.4.1.2) is not relevant for labio-velar alternation, since more [ ɣ] was found in stressed position. However, the hypothesis was found to be relevant for /b/ deletion, where less deletion is found in stressed syllables (see section 4.2.2). The suggestion that both /f/ and /b/ labio-velar alternations constitute forms of fortition is evidenced by the significantly higher proportion of alternation in stressed syllables.
The fact that most alternation occurs in initial position was not foreseen by the hypothesis (see Chapter 3, section 3.4.1.2), which stated that “an informal observation of the data in the present study did not suggest differences in the rate of labiovelar alternation in syllable onset positions word-initially and word-medially. Therefore, I do not expect to find significant differences in the degree of labio-velar alternation of fricatives and approximants in such positions”. Although the effect of position was found in the results of both [x] and [ ɣ], this effect was not encountered in the results of the production experiment, where there is a more even distribution of the relevant sounds in initial and medial positions. As seen in Chapter 6, only Stress seems to be relevant in the occurrence of labio-velar alternation.
Concerning the influence of extra-linguistic factors on [ ɣ], Education has been found to be a strong constraint on the probability of its occurrence. This was demonstrated by the fact that speakers with low education favoured the use of [ɣ] (.73), while speakers with high education disfavour it (.40). Comparing the rates of [x] and [ ɣ] with subjects’ education ([x] speakers with high education 3.1%, speakers with low education 20.7% and [ ɣ] speakers with high education 34%, speakers with low education 53.4%), there is a smaller difference between High and Low Education for [ɣ]. In other words, although both /f/ and /b/ labio-velar alternations are non- standard, education seems to be a stronger constraint on /f/ labio-velar alternation. This may suggest that there is more social awareness and, possibly also stigma, attached to the [x] variant. In Chapter 5, I argue that the difference in social awareness attached to the /f/ and /b/ variables is due to the fact that approximants are difficult to perceive regardless of the level of education of speakers, which is not the case with fricatives. The difficulty in the perception of approximants explains why there is so much variation affecting the sounds in question.
89
4.3.2 /b/ deletion
This section presents the analysis of /b/ deletion. A total of 8673 tokens were entered in the run. Table 4.13 presents the distribution of percentages and probabilities of occurrence of /b/ deletion across the factor groups hypothesized to influence its occurrence. All the factor groups analyzed were selected as significant. Due to small ends and similar rates, preceding consonants were collapsed into one single factor. A binomial one-step analysis was performed to identify anomalies in the data. This anomalies include fillers such as sabes ‘ you know’, vos ‘you’, viste ‘you see’, and bueno ‘well’, which have a higher than expected rate of deletion (more than 95%). Another exceptional case was with the verb ending –aba , for the imperfect preterit, which contained a high level of /b/ deletion.
Argentine Spanish
Ø Input 0.085 Log Likelihood -2791.940 Total N 8673
FG1: Education Prob. % N Low education .63 16.5 2399 High Education .45 10.1 6274 Range .18 FG2: Age Prob. % N Young .60 16.1 2841 Adult .46 10 3878 Old .43 9.6 1954 Range 17 FG3: Sex Male .53 13.6 3169 Female .48 10.9 5504 Range 5 FG2: Following Segment
90
/u/ .75 23.9 138 /a/ .61 18.7 2785 /e/ .55 14.6 1695 /o/ .45 8.3 1077 /w/ .41 7.2 652 /i/ .32 4.8 1661 Range 43 FG3: Preceding Segment /a/ .62 19.8 2911 /u/ .59 14.9 269 /e/ .55 11.8 1445 /o/ .55 9.8 634 pause .45 9.8 347 consonant .22 3.3 1295 Range 40 FG4: Position Medial .56 17.6 3873 Initial .44 8.1 4135 Range 12 FG5: Stress Unstressed .54 17.3 3440 Stressed .47 9.2 4568 Range 7
Table 4.13. Multivariate analysis of the contribution of internal and external factors selected as significant 34 to the probability of /b/ deletion; all factor groups selected as significant .
The factor group that influences /b/ deletion the most is Following Context (range 43). Deletion is favoured by following [u] (.75), [a] (.61) and [e] (.55). The same distribution was observed by
34 • 01/04/2011 11:58:21 AM. Token file: B tokens sin errores.tkn - Condition file: B deletion vs other, binomial recode consonant.cnd - Name of results file: B deletion vs other_binomial_sin social recode.res)
91
Colantoni and Marinescu (2010), although they reported higher deletion before [o] instead of [e], as found in this study 35 . The second most significant effect on the occurrence of deletion is preceding segment (range=40). A preceding [a] favours deletion the most (.62), followed by [u] (.59) and [e] (.55). Note that although the hierarchy of constraint is not the same, [a], [e] and [u] are also the Following Segments with the highest probability of deletion. Preceding consonants (.22) and preceding pause disfavour deletion (.45).
A cross-tabulation between Preceding and Following Context shows a high rate of deletion when the approximant is preceded and followed by [a] (28%). Other sequences with a high rate of deletion include: e_u (48%), a_u (38%), u_o (19%), u_e (17%), e_a (16%). All these combinations contain either [a], [u] and [e] which, as mentioned before, yield a high percentage of deletion. Bybee (2002) and Colantoni & Marinescu (2010) have reported a similar effect for intervocalic /d/ in the past participle ending of verbs. Bybee (2001) attributed this pattern to the high frequency of past participles, whereas Colantoni & Marinescu (2010) argue that lenition and deletion in -ado is better accounted for by looking at the coarticulatory pattern of such sequence. In the case of the sequence
The occurrence of /b/ deletion is significantly affected by the position of the segment in question (range 12) and stress (range 7). /b/ deletion is promoted in medial position (.56) and inhibited in initial position (.44). With regards to stress, unstressed syllables have a higher probability of deletion (.54) than stressed ones (.47). The tendency of stress to inhibit consonant weakening and deletion is a highly natural and cited phonological effect in Spanish (e.g. Cole et al., 1999; Ortega-Llebaria, 2004, Colantoni and Marinescu 2010), as well as in other languages. As shown in Table 4.10 above, a cross-tabulation between stress and position indicates that the highest proportion of deletion occurs in unstressed medial position (23%).
35 Note that their study also looked at /d/, which might account for the different distribution observed. For instance, /d/ is frequently lenited and deleted in –ado , past participle verb ending.
92
Concerning the influence of social factor groups on the occurrence of /b/ deletion, the strongest effect is Education (range 18). Subjects with low education favour deletion (.63) while subjects with high education disfavour it (.45). Within each education group, Younger speakers have higher probabilities of deletion (.60) than Adults (.46) and Older (.43) speakers. In addition, male speakers have a higher probability of deletion (.53) than female speakers (.48), yet the difference in the range of effect is small (range 5).
Although a high education level disfavours deletion, it is interesting to note that deletion is present in the speech of subjects with both high and low education. Previous studies have reported that the lenition and deletion of approximants are frequent phenomena across Spanish dialects (e.g. Cole, Hualde & Iskarous, 1999; Ortega-Llebaria, 2004, Colantoni & Marinescu 2010); in addition, the results of the present study suggest that /b/ deletion occurs in all speakers, regardless of their level of formal education, which may suggest a low level of awareness of this non-standard variant.
Concerning the influence of Age on the probability of occurrence of /b/ deletion, Younger speakers favour Ø (.60), while adult and older speakers disfavour it (.46 and .43, respectively). Since the probabilities and percentages of /b/ deletion increase down the age scale, it could be possible that language change is underway. According to Labov’s (1990:206) Principle II, in cases of linguistic change women have a higher rate of the innovative form than men. However, the results of this study show that men favour /b/ deletion more than women (men .53 and women .48). Heffernan (2007) reported that men typically produce less distinct contrasts than women, and that they are the leaders of those changes in which the innovative form results in the loss of phonetic distinctiveness (such as merging). This leads to new predictions about the outcome of /b/ deletion, since it could be possible that the lenition and deletion of voiced obstruents are part of a linguistic change led by men.
Alternatively, the reason why younger speakers have a higher frequency of /b/ deletion could be due to age grading rather than generational change. Since adolescents often have a rebellious nature, they tend to adopt the urban variants to an extent that goes beyond those of their parents (Chambers 1995). Yet, considering that intervocalic voiced stops went through weakening (e.g. LUPU > lobo ‘wolf’) and deletion (e.g. CRUDELE > cruel ‘cruel’) in the various stages of the evolution from Latin to Castillian (Lloyd 1997), and that /b/ deletion is one of the three voiced
93 stops (/d/, /b/ and /g/) that is currently undergoing weakening and deletion in Spanish (Colantoni and Marinescu 2010), it may be possible that /b/ deletion is part of more general linguistic change affecting all Spanish voiced stops. Future research should explore the rates of deletion for /d/ and / ɡ/ across different age groups.
4.4 Analysis of Lexical Frequency
Given that /f/ and /b/ alternation and /b/ deletion are common variables found across Spanish dialects, the last question to consider is how these variants spread in the population. Do alternation and deletion proceed in an exceptionless manner affecting every word in which the relevant sounds occur, as the neogrammarians would contend, or affecting one word at a time, as the diffusionists would claim (see Chapter 2, section 2.2)? If the neogrammarians were correct, we should find evidence of variation in every relevant phonetic environment, regardless of the frequency of the word. If the diffusionists were correct, we should find higher rates of alternation and deletion in more frequent words. Labov (1994:543) argued that variation that involves a change in place of articulation (such as labio-velar alternation) should show signs of lexical diffusion. To illustrate this point, Labov offered examples of the shift from [x] to [f] in English, where there are lexical irregularities such as cough vs. dough and daughter vs. laughter .
To determine whether labio-velar alternation and deletion are influenced by word frequency or phonetic conditioning, an analysis using Rbrul was conducted. Rbrul was used instead of Goldvarb because it can handle knock-outs (factors that appear with only one variant). This is an important consideration when dealing with individual words, since words that have low frequency tend appear with either one or the other variant. One way to resolve this problem is collapsing factors, for instance comparing more frequent words vs. less frequent ones. However, there is a certain degree of arbitrariness implied in the classification of words, since the analyst has to decide how frequent is frequent. Moreover, since phonetic context is important in this study, collapsing words with different phonetic compositions would have obscured the results obtained. One more reason to use Rbrul is that it can handle continuous factors, thus the frequency of words which are numeric (Johnson, 2010:1).
Before the data were entered into the run, each word in the corpus was assigned a lemma, or canonical form of a lexeme. For instance, plural nouns were given singular lemmas and
94 conjugated verbs were assigned infinitive lemmas. This was done to unify the different forms of the same word, which otherwise would have been counted as different words. For example, abuelo, abuela, abuelita, abuelos , etc. were all assigned the form abuelo . Separate analyses of lexical frequency were conducted for /f/ alternation, /b/ alternation and /b/ deletion.
Frequency was not selected as significant on the probability of occurrence of /f/ and /b/ alternation and /b/ deletion. To visually confirm these results a plot of means was generated as illustrated in figures 4.3, 4.5 and 4.7. These figures show the proportion of variants across word frequency. Figure 4.3 displays the proportions of [x]. The dots group all the words with a specific frequency. For instance, the first dot includes: físico ‘body’, fisicamente ‘physically’, fúnebre ‘translation?’, fundir ‘spoil’, full (borrowed from English), firmar ‘sign’ and ficha ‘file’, which appear twice in the data set. As can be visually ascertained, there is no clear relationship between word frequency and rate of variation.
Físico Fuego Físicamente Fúnebre Fundir Full Firmar Fuerte Ir Ficha Fácil Fuerza Física Fecha Ser
Figure 4.3: Proportion of [x] across individual words
The word with the highest proportion of /f/ labio-velar alternation is fuego ‘fire’ (60%), yet this is not the most frequent word in the corpus. The most frequent words are the verbs ser ‘to be’ and ir ‘to go’ in the preterit form fui and fue . The verb ir, which occurred 310 times, has a lower rate of alternation than fuego , which occurred seven times in the corpus (20% and 60%, respectively). Likewise, the word fuerte ‘strong’ occurring 16 times has less alternation (5%) than fuerza ‘strength’ (15%) occurring 7 times. In addition, from the group of words that appears
95
16 times, only fuerte has alternation. The same applies to fuerza and fundir , which are the only words in their respective groups that have alternation. Although lexical diffusion does not rule out the possibility of phonetic conditioning, diffusionists would find it difficult to explain how fuego can have more variation than fue or fui, since they are more than 200 times more frequent than fuego . In the first group of words with only two occurrences in the corpus, only the word fundir is variable. Interestingly, full and fúnebre in the same group do not vary, yet they all have [fu] in them. The answer to this question will need to consider the speakers that used each form. While fundir was uttered by an illiterate speaker, full was used by two speakers with high education. Fúnebre was also uttered by an illiterate speaker, however this speaker did not have variation with the [fu] sequence in her speech, as the first speaker had. The speaker with [fu] ~ [xu] variation also had [ βu] ~ [ ɣu] variation in her speech. As mentioned earlier, /f/ and /b/ variation with a following [u] is very rare and this speaker was one of the only ones who produced it.
Figure 4.4 confirms the low correlation (R 2=0.034) between lexical frequency and proportion of [x].
Figure 4.4. Correlation between lexical frequency and proportion of [x]
With regards to [ ɣ], Figure 4.5 shows that the most frequent words are not the ones with the highest proportions of [ ɣ].
96
Buey Vela Volver Buenos (Aires) Base (vuelve, Bicho vuelvo, Vino vuelven) Biblia Bueno Boba Bala Bife Villa Be Beron Bence Balde
Figure 4.5: Proportion of [ ɣ] across individual words
The word bueno ‘well’ or ‘good’ with 427 tokens has a lower percentage of alternation than the proper name Buenos Aires with 93 tokens. Of all the words appearing twice, buey ‘ox’ is the only one with [ ɣ]. This would reinforce the idea that phonetic conditioning has more influence on the occurrence of [ ɣ], since all the tokens in that group have the same frequency, yet only buey has variation. All of the dots which mark 0% alternation correspond to words which do not contain [we, wi].
The following graph (Figure 4.6) shows the low correlation (R 2=0.014) between lexical frequency and proportion of [ ɣ].
97
Figure 4.6. Correlation between lexical frequency and proportion of [ ɣ]
With regards to the influence of lexical frequency on the rate of /b/ deletion, Figure 4.7 shows no clear pattern that would suggest that more frequent words have a higher rate of deletion.
va
vida
viste vivir
Figure 4.7: Proportion of /b/ deletion by individual words
98
The highest pick corresponds to the verb va 36 ‘go’ with 60% deletion, yet this is not the most frequent word. The token viste ‘see’ is much more frequent (N=396), but with a lower rate of deletion (around 12%). The token vivir ‘live’ which appears 286 times in the corpus has a lower rate of deletion (8%) than the token vida ‘life’ (20%) with only 56 tokens.
The low correlation (R 2 < 0.01) between lexical frequency and /b/ deletion is illustrated in Figure 4.8.
Figure 4.8. Correlation between lexical frequency and proportion of /b/ deletion
By looking at all these figures, it is clear that there is no direct relationship between lexical frequency and the occurrence of either [x], [ ɣ] or /b/ deletion. Instead, phonetic conditioning and social factors exert a much stronger effect on the application of the rule (see Tables 4.7, 4.12, 4.13). Going back to the neogrammarian and diffusionist controversy, the analyses hereby presented show signs of sound variation under phonetic conditioning, thus providing further evidence to support the neogrammarian position. Labov’s (1994:543) contention that “variation that involves a change in place of articulation (such as labio-velar alternation) should show signs of lexical diffusion” is not in line with the findings of this study.
36 Note that the verb ir ‘to go’ that is a periphrastic form of the future was not assigned the lemma ir , instead each conjugation of the verb was kept separate as voy ‘I go’, vas ‘you go’, va ‘s/he goes’, vamos ‘we go’, van ‘they go’.
99
As stated earlier, /f/ and /b/ labio-velar alternations are common phenomena in Spanish, which have been observed in New Mexico, South of Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Perú, Chile and Paraguay, among others (Quilis 1993). One obvious question is how these linguistic features come to be so widespread. How is it that the labio-velar alternation can be found in two distant places such as rural New Mexico and Argentina? As stated by Chambers (2005:1015), “the only answer with any credibility is that these features arise spontaneously, as it were, as products or by-products of some primitive mechanism of the language faculty”. Another possible explanation is that they were transmitted by mediating people and established by contact. However, this argument is problematic when it comes to finding the evidence of migration, social connection or trade between these disparate linguistic communities. Since labial-to-velar and velar-to-labial alternations are found not only in Spanish, but also in other languages (such as English, Dutch, Russian, Romanian, and Chinese, among others), it is likely that, as Chambers claims, they are part of the mechanism of the language faculty.
The labio-velar alternation, which appears in the speech of non-literate people from different geographical areas, relates to the Vernacular Roots theory proposed by Chambers (2005). Vernacular Roots refers to innate and primitive linguistic features that emerge as a default mechanism in the language faculty (Chambers 2005). Default mechanisms relate to the articulatory and perceptual processes that constrain phonological development (Braine 1974). With regard to the labio-velar alternations, they appear in children’s speech and continue to be present unless corrected by the educational or social media. In Chamber (2005:232) words “Urbanization, embourgeoisement, mass literacy and other factors have reduced the vernacular speakers to a minority in most of the industrialized nations” (my emphasis). This point is related to the findings of this study, where education has been found to be one of the stronger constraints disfavouring alternation and deletion.
The results reported in this study reveal that Following Segment, Stress, Position and Education significantly influence the occurrence of [x]. Specifically, [x] mainly occurs in ‘initial stressed’ position followed by [we, wi], The analysis of individual speakers clearly shows that most speakers with high education favour the use of the standard variant [f], while speakers with low education favour the use of non-standard [x]. Interestingly, the same factors are at play in /b/ labio-velar alternation. However, Preceding Segment is also a significant constraint on its
100 occurrence, which is compatible with the account of velar insertion (Harris 1969). Since both [x] and [ ɣ] occur in stressed initial position, they are considered forms of fortition. /b/ deletion, however, has a very different pattern, since it is more frequent in ‘medial unstressed’ position. In addition, it is favoured by the vowels [a], [u] and [e], which are contexts where labio-velar alternation does not occur. Although lack of literacy tends to favour it, /b/ deletion is found in the speech of all speakers, regardless of their social background.
The analysis of Age shows that [ ɣ] is a case of age grading, since it is very frequent in younger speakers and not so frequent in adults and older speakers. Although [ ɣ] is old in the language (appeared in José Hernández ‘ El Gaucho Martín Fierro’ in 1872, see Chapter 2), its use is circumscribed to specific phonetic environments and it does not seem to spread to other contexts. There are signs of linguistic change in the use of [x], which is decreasing down the age scale. As stated earlier, this could be due to the combination of two variables: there is an overall higher level of formal education in the younger population, and there is a high degree of stigma attached to [x]. /b/ deletion also seems to be a case of language change, but in the opposite direction. The analysis of more than eight thousand tokens shows that /b/ deletion is more frequent in the younger generation and gradually less frequent in the adult and older generations. The fact that the other voiced approximants (/ ð/ and / ɣ/) are also frequently deleted in Spanish suggests that /b/ deletion may be part of a larger sound change affecting all Spanish approximants. Given that male speakers favour the use of deletion, it could be possible to suggest that men are the leaders of this type of linguistic change.
Finally, the analysis of Lexical Fequency did not reveal a significant effect on the occurrence of [x], [ ɣ] and /b/ deletion. These findings demonstrate that the phenomena in question occur in every word with the relevant phonetic context regardless of its frequency, thus adding evidence to the neogrammarian theory.
Chapter 5 will discuss the perception experiment used to test the hypothesis that [f] ~ [x] and [b/ β] ~ [ ɣ/ɡ ] are perceptually similar in certain phonetic environments. I argue that perceptual similarity leads to the variation observed in sociolinguistic production. Thus, Chapter 5 will analyze the perceptual/acoustic motivations of the labio-velar alternations.
101
Chapter 5 The perception of fricatives and approximants 5.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the results of the perception experiment, which tested the influence of social (Education) and linguistic factors (Phonetic environment, Position and Stress) on the discrimination of fricatives and approximants. To test the hypothesis that similarity between phonetic categories leads to confusion in perception (see chapter 3), an AX discrimination task was carried out with twenty two native speakers of Corrientes – Caa Catí – Spanish. The main purpose of this experiment was to identify areas of difficulty in the identification of labial and velar fricatives, on one hand, and labial and velar approximants on the other. Three statistical tests were used: 2 sample T-tests (two-tailed) to compare the performance between two groups, analysis of variance where there were more than two factors considered, and chi-square to analyze frequencies of occurrence of discrimination errors. The results of all statistical tests were considered significant at the 0.05 level. Results are presented as mean (M) and standard deviation (SD), unless otherwise indicated.
5.2 Method
The perception experiment consisted of 112 nonsense words (56 for the contrast [f] vs. [x] and 56 for the contrast [ β] and [ ɣ]) used to test the discrimination of fricatives and approximants. Appendix 4 contains a list of the stimuli used. The relevant sounds were placed in initial and medial position followed by the five Spanish vowels and the diphthongs
The stimuli were recorded by the researcher using Audacity 1.2.6 (audio editor for recording, slicing, and mixing audio). As explained in Chapter 3 (section 3.1.3), the nonsense words were embedded in a carrier phrase ‘digo … porque sí’ I say … just because . Tokens were extracted from the acoustic signal and saved into .wav files, which were later inserted in Power Point slides. One slide would contain the same nonce word twice, and another slide would have two
102 nonsense words differing only by one consonant. A one second interval was inserted between the stimuli. The slides were completely blank and they changed automatically every 5 seconds. The stimuli were distributed randomly over a total of 168 slides. The order was re-arranged 3 times and saved in different documents: Perception_A, Perception_B and Perception_C. Subjects were exposed to one of these tests at random. Because some subjects were illiterate, I wrote down their answers on an answer sheet. See Chapter 3: Methodology for a more detailed explanation of the procedure of data collection.
5.3 Acoustic analysis of the perception stimuli
Before analyzing the results of the perception experiment, I performed an acoustic analysis of the 112 nonsense words used in the perception experiment. This analysis is important to evaluate the appropriateness of the stimuli used, that is, to determine whether there is a significant acoustic difference between each type of fricative and approximant. As explained in chapter 3, the stimuli had to be recorded by the researcher since, after several successive trials with different volunteers, it was not possible to obtain readings of the stimuli that did not vary in speed, stress and intonation.
For consistency, approximants [ β] [ ɣ] and fricatives [f], [x] were measured as in the production experiment (see chapter 6), i.e. that the same acoustic measurements were used for each consonant in back vs. non-back vowel contexts.
5.3.1 Approximants
Approximants were measured for first, second and third formants (F1, F2, and F3) at consonant midpoint. The F1, F2 and F3 of following vowels were measured at two different points: vowel onset and mid-vowel point. The intensity of the approximant and that of the following vowel were measured in decibels. Relative intensity was calculated as the difference between vowel and consonant. Duration of the approximant and of the following vowel was measured in milliseconds. Normalized duration of the approximant was calculated as the ratio of the duration of the approximant to the duration of the word. In this section, I will only discuss F1 and F2 measurements, since the F3, duration and intensity have not been found significant by the statistical tests. Nevertheless, the averages of F3, duration and intensity for individual
103 approximants in different vocalic contexts are included in Appendix 10. Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 present the F1 and F2 of [β] and [ ɣ], respectively.
Following vowel F1 Hz F2 Hz Mid -Cons Vowel o nset Mid -Cons Vowel o nset [a] 454.82 564.45 1578.24 1339.79 [e] 411.43 495.58 1817.31 1747.09 [i] 365.27 409.15 1819.66 2002.83 [o] 411.84 504.07 1549.49 996.96 [u] 391.48 432. 22 789.48 898.2 2 [w e] 383.19 505.61 1448.44 673.82 [w i] 444.57 454.09 1774.42 1055.62
Table 5.1. Mid-consonant and vowel onset F1 and F2 for the bilabial approximant [ β] across vocalic contexts
Following vowel F1 Hz F2 Hz Mid -cons vowel onset Mid -Con s Vowel Onset [a] 454.58 503.51 1711.57 1711.33 [e] 403.31 418.74 842.18 2567.48 [i] 372.45 387.32 1198.70 2783.12 [o] 435.85 482.46 1502.27 1070.31 [u] 472.54 431.98 938.52 1242.28 [we] 458.53 471.28 1782.08 654.31 [wi] 465.59 451.96 2003.76 723.71
Table 5.2. Mid-consonant and vowel onset F1 and F2 for the velar approximant [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts
The values shown in Table 5.1 of F1 and F2 vowel onset for [ β] are illustrated in Figure 5.1
104
Vowel onset F1 vs. F2 for /b/
3500 3000 a 2500 e i 2000 o F2 1500 u 1000 we 500 wi 0 0 200 400 600 800 F1
Figure 5.1. Vowel onset F1 vs. F2 for [β] across vocalic contexts.
Figure 5.1 shows that F2 values at the transition between [β] and [-back] vowels are above 1500Hz, while F2 values at the transition between [β] and [+back] vowels are below 1500Hz. [β]’s lower F2 when followed by [+back] is expected, since [+back] vowels are characterized by a lower F2.
105
Vowel onset F1 vs. F2 for /g/
3500
3000 a 2500 e 2000 i o F2 1500 u we 1000 wi 500
0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 F1
Figure 5.2. Vowel onset F1 vs. F2 for [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts.
As illustrated in Figure 5.2, F2 values at the CV transition for [ ɣ] are more dispersed around the scatter plot than the values for [β]. [ ɣ]’s F2 values range from 500Hz to 3000Hz, while [β]’s F2 values range from 500Hz to 2000Hz. The higher degree of F2 variation for [ ɣ] is due to the fact that the spectral characteristics of velar approximants and fricatives are highly affected by following vowels (Borzone de Manrique & Massone 1981, Mazzaro 2010). Similarly to [β], F2 of [ ɣ] lowers in [+back] vowel contexts, while in [-back] contexts it remains above 1600Hz.
This section will explore the means and SD of F2 at vowel onset, which is the only acoustic parameter that could reliably distinguish between the labial and velar approximants in the acoustic analysis of the production data (see Chapter 6 section 6.2.2.2). As shown in Table 5.3, the only significant difference between [β] and [ ɣ] was found in the context of [a] (p<.01) and [e] (p=.02).
106
Variant N Mean SD SE Mean p [β]+all 28 1356.18 474.71 89.71 .56 [ɣ]+all 28 1462.49 837.90 158.35
[β]+[a] 4 1339.79 51.42 25,71 <.01 [ɣ]+[a] 4 1711.33 102.58 51,29
[β]+[e] 4 1747.09 246.30 123,15 .02 [ɣ]+[e] 4 2499.63 392.94 196,47
[β]+[i] 4 2002.82 185.21 92,60 .84 [ɣ]+[i] 3 2142.81 1375.37 794,07
[β]+[o] 4 996.96 78.31 39,15 .65 [ɣ]+[o] 4 1070.31 293.73 146,87
[β]+[u] 4 1386.01 498.82 249,41 .69 [ɣ]+[u] 4 1242.28 483.73 241,87
[β]+[we] 4 964.99 608.18 304,09 .35 [ɣ]+[we] 4 654.31 112.01 56,00
[β]+[wi] 4 1055.62 215.24 107,62 .84 [ɣ]+[wi] 5 1161.95 983.28 439,74
Table 5.3. T-tests on F2 vowel onset for [β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts.
The statistical analyses showed no significant difference between [ β] and [ ɣ] with all the vowels (p=.56). Likewise, the t-tests showed no significant difference between [β] and [ɣ] followed by [i] ( p=.84) [o] ( p=.65) [u] ( p=.69) [we] ( p=.35) [wi] ( p=.84). These results were surprising, since Borzone de Manrique and Massone (1980) and Sussman et al . (1991) found that the place of articulation of velar consonants is highly variable depending on the following vocalic context. Thus, I would have expected to find significant differences between [β] and [ɣ] for individual vowels. Although these results do not demonstrate that a clear distinction between [ β] and [ɣ] was kept throughout the recorded stimuli, the same lack of significant difference was obtained in
107 the acoustic analysis of approximants in Chapter 6 (section 6.2.2.2). As will be explained later on, these results seem to suggest that F2 at vowel onset may not be a relevant acoustic parameter to identify place of articulation in approximants.
5.3.2 Fricatives
The F2 at the CV transition and mid-vowel points are known to cue place of articulation in consonants (Harris 1958, Strange 1999, Jongman et al. 2000). First, I focused on these acoustic measurements in the analysis. However, F2 was not useful in distinguishing place of articulation for [f] and [x] across vocalic contexts (see Appendix 11). According to Jongman et al. (2000), who studied sibilant and non-sibilant fricatives, the spectral mean (or centre of gravity), spectral peak location, spectral moments, and both normalized and relative amplitude serve to distinguish all four places of fricative articulation (labiodental /f,v/, (inter)dental / θ,ð/ , alveolar /s,z/, and palato-alveolar / ʃ,ʒ /). Out of all the metrics they used, in my study I will focus on the centre of gravity, because it is the one that yields better discrimination rates for fricative place of articulation (Jongman 2000 et al., Ladefoged 2003).
Centre of gravity is the frequency that divides the spectrum into two portions of the same energy. It was computed on the spectrum corresponding to the central half of the fricative sliced through a Hamming window. If the fricative was 80ms long, I would extract 40ms in its centre. The extraction of this window and the calculation of the four moments (centre of gravity, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis) were done using a script in Praat. This method of measurement is further discussed in Chapter 6 (section 6.1.1).
Table 5.4 shows the results of the statistical analysis performed for [f] and [x] across vocalic contexts. The values for mean and standard deviation (SD) are expressed in Hz.
108
Token N Mean SD SE Mean p
[f] + all vowels 28 5966 996 188
[x] + all vowels 28 2867 1110 210 <0.0001
[f] + [back] 16 5847 956 239
[f] + [-back] 12 6123 1068 308 .49
[x] + [back] 16 2104 416 104
[x] + [-back] 12 3885 899 260 <0.0001
[f] + [-back] 12 6123 1068 308
[x] + [-back] 12 3885 899 260 <0.0001
[f] + [back] 16 5847 956 239
[x] + [back] 16 2104 416 104 <0.0001
Table 5.4: Summary of statistical analysis for centre of gravity for [f] and [x] across vocalic contexts
Considering centre of gravity, [f] was significantly different from [x] when all the vowels were pooled together ( p<0.0001). In [back] vowel context, the statistical analysis showed a significant difference between [f] and [x] ( p<0.0001). Likewise, there was significant difference between [f] and [x] before [-back] vowels ( p<0.0001). Interestingly, though, the statistical tests showed that [f] before [back] vowels wa s not significantly different to [f] before [-back] vowels ( p=0.49). These results coincide with those of Borzone de Manrique & Massone (1981), who found that [f], as opposed to [x], can be well recognized by the friction portion alone. In other words, the percept of [f] is not as highly influenced by the vocalic context as the percept of [x] is. With regards to [x], there was significant difference between [x] before [back] vowels and [x] before [- back] vowels ( p<0.0001). In other words, while the centre of gravity of [f] remains more stable across vocalic contexts, the centre of gravity of [x] seems to be more affected by the following vowel context. Borzone de Manrique and Massone (1981:1151) stated that “the acoustic cues provided by the vocalic portion are necessary for the identification of the velar [x] fricative and approximant [ ɣ]. Thus the velar consonants are highly variable depending on the following
109 vocalic context. Table 5.5 illustrates these results graphically. ‘Different’ means statistically different, ‘similar’ means not significantly different and the empty cells are not relevant combinations.
CV combinations [x] before [-back] [x] before [back] [f] before [-back] vowels vowels vowels
[f] before [-back] vowels different
[f] before [back] vowels different similar
[x] before [back] vowels different
Table 5.5. Comparison of fricatives in the perception stimuli using centre of gravity.
In this section, I have presented the results of the acoustic analysis of the perception stimuli. It was difficult to obtain a metric that could distinguish place of articulation in labial and velar approximants independent of vocalic context. This will be further discussed in Chapter 6, where I present the acoustic analysis of the production experiment. Nevertheless, for the present purposes, the acoustic analysis of the perception stimuli suggests that there is significant difference between [f] vs. [x] and [β] vs. [ ɣ]. Thus, the stimuli used are considered appropriate for the perception experiment. 5.4 The perception test 5.4.1 Hypotheses
This section will discuss the results of the perception experiment. The following are the predictions considered in the analysis:
1) More confusion between labial and velar approximants and fricatives will arise in the context of [back/round] vowels and diphthongs.
2) There will be fewer discrimination errors in stressed syllables, since they are more prominent than unstressed ones.
110
3) There will be no word position effects in the discrimination of initial and medial consonants in the word, since previous research (e.g. Ma and Herasimchuk 1971, Cedergren 1973, Poplack 1980, Guy 1996, Mazzaro 2001) has suggested that syllable position (whether the sound is in onset or coda position) is more relevant in phonological variation.
4) Informants with high education will have fewer non-target percepts than informants with low education, due to the positive influence of orthography in monolingual speech perception (Frost & Katz 1989, Ohala 1989, 1993, Treiman & Bourassa 2000).
5.4.2 Results
To determine the degree of misperception between labial and velar approximants and fricatives, I counted the number of correct and incorrect responses across vowel context for all the speakers. Two sample T-tests (two-tailed) and chi-square tests were performed to determine if there were significant differences in the degree of confusion of approximants and fricatives across linguistic and sociolinguistic factors.
The confusion matrix presented in Table 5.6, compares predicted with obtained responses for approximants. Table 5.7 presents the results for fricatives
/b/ vs. / ɡɡɡ/ Responses
AA + BB AB Total N AA + BB 97.44% 2.56% 1232 type type
Stimuli AB 47.56% 52.44% 616
Table 5.6. Confusion matrix for /b/ vs. / ɡ/
The results for approximants show that when the stimuli heard were the same (AA or BB), subjects responses were almost always correct (97.44%). When the stimuli pair were AB, subjects’ responses were correct at a rate of 52.44%. In other words, subjects were able to discriminate a difference between /b/ and / ɡ/ in nonsense words only half percent of the time.
111
/f/ vs. / xxx/ Responses
AA + BB AB Total N AA + BB 96.51% 3.49% 1232 type type
Stimuli AB 27.11% 72.89% 616
Table 5.7. Confusion matrix for /f/ vs. / x/
Similarly to approximants, the responses for fricatives show that when the stimuli heard were the same (AA or BB), subjects responses were almost always correct (96.51%). However, when the stimuli were AB, fricatives had high recognition scores (72.89%). The AB responses for fricatives show they can be discriminated much better than approximants, which goes in line with the results presented below.
Overall, the number of discrimination errors in approximants (329) is higher than in fricatives (210). Yet, approximants and fricatives have the exact same number of combinations in the experiment. The difference in discrimination errors in approximants and fricatives is only marginally significant [t(128)=1.92, p=0.057]. Figure 5.3 presents the number of discrimination errors for [ β, ɣ] and [f, x] according to vowel context
100 90 80 70 60 50 /b/ and /g/ 40 /f/ and /x/
Number errors of 30 20 10 0 [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi]
Figure 5.3. Number of discrimination errors between [f] and [x], [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic context.
112
A following [u] yields the highest proportion of discrimination errors for labial and velar approximants and fricatives ( β] and [ ɣ] = 79 errors and [f] and [x] = 50 errors). In second place is [wi] with 73 errors for [ β] and [ ɣ] and 37 errors for [f] and [x]; followed by [we] with 68 errors for [ β] and [ ɣ] and 36 errors for [f] and [x]. The influence exerted by the rest of the vowels ([a, e, i, o]) depends on the type of consonant in question. For [β] and [ ɣ], the next vowels with the highest amount of discrimination errors are [o] and [e], 35 and 29 respectively. [i] and [a] rank lowest in rate of discrimination errors, 22 and 23 respectively. In the case of [f] and [x], [o] and [i] compete for the fourth place in discrimination errors (25 each); while [e] and [a] rank lowest, 21 and 16 respectively.
Overall, [a] is the vowel with better discrimination rates (36 errors counting both approximants and fricatives), while [u] is the vowel with most discrimination errors (129 errors including approximants and fricatives). In their acoustic and perceptual analysis of Spanish voiced and voiceless fricatives, Borzone de Manrique and Massone 37 (1980:1151) found that “fricative identification is, in most cases, affected by the following vowel. The amount of influence exerted by each vowel varies according to the fricative that precedes it. In syllables with [a], the three fricatives [s, f, ʃ] are well identified. Before [e] and [i], [ ʃ] is better identified than [s] and [f], [f] yielding lower scores than [s], in syllables with [o] and [u], the fricatives [s] and [ ʃ] are confused with [f] ” (my emphasis).
Chi-square tests were used to determine statistical differences in the degree of discrimination across different vowel types. To maintain consistency, I included [-back] vowels [a, e, i] in one group and [back] vowels and diphthongs [o, u, we, wi] in another. The results show a significant difference in the level of discrimination of [β] and [ ɣ] in the context of [-back] vowels as opposed to [back] vowels and diphthongs χ2 (1, n=329)= 55.7 p<0.0001) with the [back] vowel context obtaining 72% of the discrimination errors (see Table 5.8). The results of [f] and [x] also show a significant difference in the degree of discrimination of [-back] vowels as opposed to back vowels and diphthongs χ2 (1, n=210) = 15.2 p<0.0001) with the [back] vowel context
37 These authors refer to [ β] and [ ɣ] as voiced fricatives, rather than approximants. However, since there is hardly any audible friction in these so-called voiced fricatives, the term approximant, rather than fricative was proposed (Ladefoged 1982, Martínez-Celdrán 1984, 1991, Romero 1995)
113 obtaining 64% of the discrimination errors. These results confirm the hypothesis that there is a higher degree of confusion of approximants and fricatives in the context of [back] vowels. It is important to note that the percentage of discrimination errors for approximants before [back] vowels is higher than that of the fricatives in the same context. Table 5.8 shows a normalized percentage of discrimination errors for [ β] ~ [ ɣ] and [f] ~ [x] in [back] vs. [-back] vowel contexts
[β] ~ [ ɣ] + [-back] vowels [β] ~ [ ɣ] + [back] vowels
27.9% 72.1% [f] ~ [x] + [-back] vowels [f] ~[x] + [back] vowels
35.8% 64.2%
Table 5.8: Normalized percentage of discrimination errors for [ β] vs. [ɣ] and [f] vs. [x] in [back] vs. [-back] vowel contexts
Overall, approximants were more difficult to discriminate than fricatives. Moreover, the vocalic context seemed to affect approximants more than fricatives, since the degree of confusion increased in the combination approximant + [back] vowels. Table 5.9 presents the number and percentages of discrimination errors for approximants and fricatives in stressed vs. unstressed syllables and in initial vs. medial positions.
Consonants Stress Position Total
Stressed % Unstressed % Initial % Medial %
[β] and [ ɣɣɣ] 139 42 190 58 180 55 149 45 329
[f] and [x] 104 50 106 50 93 44 117 56 210
Table 5.9: Number and percentages of discrimination errors for [ β] and [ ɣ], [f] and [x] according to stress and position in the word
There was a higher percentage of misperception for approximants in initial position (initial 55% vs. medial 45%), and for fricatives in medial position (initial 44% vs. medial 56%). However, a chi-square test (see Table 5.10 for approximants and Table 5.11 for fricatives), which compares
114 observed frequencies with expected frequencies (expected frequencies are equal to 50%), showed no significant differences in the degree of discrimination of initial and medial approximants χ2 (1, n=329)= 2.92 p=.087) and fricatives χ2 (1, n=210)= 2.74 p=.097). These results were expected since, as stated earlier (see Chapter 4), it appears that most phonological variables in Spanish are affected by the position in the syllable (whether the relevant sound is in onset or coda position) rather than the position in the word.
Approximants N % χ2 p Initial 180 55 2.92 .087 Medial 149 45 Stressed 139 42 7.9 .0049 Unstressed 190 58
Table 5.10. Chi-square tests on the influence of Position and Stress on the discrimination of [β] and [ ɣ]
Regarding the influence of stress on the perception of labial and velar approximants and fricatives, the chi-square test showed that stressed approximants are better discriminated than unstressed approximants χ2 (1, n=329)= 7.9 p=.0049). On the other hand, there was no significant difference between stressed and unstressed fricatives χ2 (1, n=210)= 0.02 p=.89).
Fricatives N % χ2 p Initial 83 44 2.74 .097 Medial 117 56 Stressed 104 49.5 0.02 .89 Unstressed 106 50.5
Table 5.11. Chi-square tests on the influence of Position and Stress on the discrimination of [f] and [x]
The fact that stress has an influence on the discrimination of approximants and not fricatives is intriguing. Yet, considering the high rate of lenition that affect unstressed voiced stops (Cole et al. 1999; Ortega-Llebaría 2004, Colantoni & Marinescu 2010), this finding is not surprising.
115
Turning now to the sociolinguistic factors, I evaluated the influence of education on the perception of approximants and fricatives. As mentioned in Chapter 3, five years of education was the cutting point used to divide subjects into High and Low Education. That is, subjects with less than five years of education were placed in the Low Education group, whereas those with six years of education or more were placed in the High Education group. In older generations, primary school lasted for six years, whereas now it lasts for seven years. So the five-year cutting point in the Low Education group included those people who had not finished primary school in either the old or the new education systems.
The statistical analysis of the data showed that there is a significant difference in the discrimination performance of subjects with high and low educations for fricatives and approximants (see Table 5.12). Informants with high education had fewer discrimination errors than informants with low education (Fricatives: High Education M=6.86 vs. Low Education= M=14.25 and Approximants: High Education M=12.36 vs. Low Education M=18.88).
Approximants Fricatives High Education M=12.36 SD=3.89 M=6.86 SD=3.59 Low Education M=18.88 SD=5.67 M=14.25 SD=8.81 (t(10)=2.89, p=.016) (t(8)=2.27, p=.053)
Table 5.12. Statistical tests showing significant differences between literate and illiterate participants in the discrimination task.
The means show that there is a smaller (compared to fricatives) difference in discrimination errors of approximants between informants with high and low education levels. On the contrary, there is an increased difference in the discrimination errors of fricatives between informants with high and low education levels. This suggests that, in the case of fricatives, education has a greater influence on the discrimination of [f] and [x], than in the case of [β] and [ ɣ]. Interestingly, the same difference is observed in sociolinguistic interviews, where the labio-velar alternation affecting approximants occurs in both high and low education levels, yet the alternation affecting fricatives is almost exclusively found in the speech of participants with low education.
116
Figure 5.4 shows the distribution of speakers along two axis, y = number of non-target percepts and x = years of formal education. The dots that were circled correspond to the subjects with low education, who had the highest number of discrimination errors. The trend line illustrates the decrease of discrimination errors in subjects with high education. Although subjects were grouped into High and Low Education, within each group there was enormous variation with regards to the number of years of formal education. This can be seen by the scattered dots on the table.
100
80
60
40
20
Number of non-target percepts Number of non-target 0 0 5 10 15 20 Years of formal education
Total Errors Expon. (Total Errors)
Figure 5.4 Distribution of speakers by years of education and number of discrimination errors
Within the literate group, those subjects with the highest education are not the ones with the lowest number of discrimination errors. It seems that once a certain level of literacy has been reached, the number of years of education does not influence perception. For instance, the speakers with the highest number of years of education were a university student and a policeman, who have attended school for 15 years. Yet, these subjects are not the ones with the lowest rate of discrimination errors. The three speakers with highest number of discrimination errors were those with almost no schooling. The speaker with four years of educations (speaker 130) is a 29 year-old male, the speaker with three years of education (speaker 119) is a 43-year- old female, and the speaker with no years of education (speaker 131) is a 24-year-old male. The other four subjects with low education, who also had a high number of discrimination errors,
117 attended school for five years. It seems that their brief exposure to Spanish spelling was insufficient to affect these participant’s phonological representations.
An important study that investigated the influence of literacy on the perception of sounds found that our capacity to consciously manipulate phonemes (phonological awareness) is largely dependent on literacy (Morais et al. 1979). For example, a person who has never acquired an orthographic system may find it relatively difficult to delete a phoneme at the beginning of a word or a non-word. In contrast, literate people do not have any difficulties with this task. During the data collection stage, some illiterate participants were excluded from the study because they could not recognize any differences in the stimuli presented. However, it could be possible to explain their inability to perform the perception task as not having phonological awareness. Thus, lack of literacy can both affect people’s phonological representation and in other cases prevent the development of phonological awareness.
Figure 5.4 shows two dots (one on top of the other) within a rectangle. These speakers did not behave as expected, since although having a low level of formal education, they had fewer misperception scores than other speakers with similar education levels. Speaker 117 – Jorge - was a 42-year-old construction worker doing some repair work in the house that I was renting for the study. While I was interviewing him he disclosed that he lived in Buenos Aires – on and off - for several years. He moved to Buenos Aires when he was eight years old and attended there some years of primary school. Although he said that he did not finish primary school, because he had to start working to support himself, he took courses in electricity, computer repair and refrigeration. He also liked to read and was very strict with his daughter’s education. Jorge confessed that he was very conscious of his speech, since he was highly criticized and laughed at while he lived in Buenos Aires. During his stay in Buenos Aires, his brothers prohibited Jorge from using Guaraní, as shown in the following excerpt from his interview:
SP117: […] yo la primera vez que me fui a Buenos Aires hace más de 30 años y eran mis hermanos.... no hables por que yo era chico hablaba todo guaraní casi poco y como mis hermanos entienden guaraní dicho todo el tiempo le hablaba en guaraní y mis hermanos era shhhh.... callate.. Y yo hablaba en el colectivo, en el tren, en el subte y yo me daba cuenta en ese tiempo que yo hablaba en guaraní y toda la gente decía quién es que está hablando y miraban.
SP117: […] the first time I went to Buenos Aires, 30 years ago, my siblings were like “shhh … don’t speak like that here”, because I was speaking in guaraní to them
118
on the bus, on the train, on the subway and I realized that everybody was looking to see who was speaking like that.
Since Jorge was exposed to Buenos Aires Spanish in his childhood, at the same time that he was trying to hide any sign of Corrientes Spanish or Guaraní in his speech, it is possible that the input of a dialect with different phonology might have influenced his capacity to perceive and produce certain sounds. Moreover, as explained before, although Jorge had a low level of education, he was highly literate. This would account for his low percentage of [x] and low misperception scores. Speaker 109 –Inés – was a thirty-nine-year-old cleaning lady who finished primary school. She worked part-time in different houses of well-off families 38 , who may have also had higher education than her. Similarly to Jorge, since Inés was exposed to an input that probably contained a larger contrast between labial and velar fricatives and approximants, she may be able to perceive such contrasts in speech. Inés was also a highly religious person, often designated to say the payers in the church. She commented that she was appointed this task because people thought her speech was very clear.
In a study on the relation between production and the perception of sounds, Perkell (2006) studied perceivers’ ability to discriminate between /u - ʊ/ and / ɑ - Ʌ/, and between the sibilants /s - ʃ/. Perkell’s (2006) results corroborated his hypothesis that subjects with higher acuity were also able to produce the contrasts more distinctly. In other words, the most distinct sibilant productions were obtained from subjects who had high discrimination scores. Perkell’s study matches the results of this study, since it is often those subjects that have a larger contrast between labial and velar fricative and approximants that have high levels of discrimination between such sounds in perception. In the case of Jorge and Inés, it would be possible to assume that because they have been exposed to varieties that maintain the contrast between labial and velar fricatives and approximants, they are better able to discriminate such sounds in perception.
An opposite trend is observed in the speakers enclosed within the triangle (see Figure 5.4). Speakers 104, 126 and 107 are all young women with high education who had high scores of misperception in their speech. Speakers 104 and 120 were fifteen-year-old teenagers who were
38 Meaning ‘better-off’ since, as explained in Chapter 3, there are no rich people in Ca á Cat í and the socio- economic stratification of the population is not so marked
119 attending high school at the time of the interview. Speaker 107 was a twenty-seven-year-old administrative assistant working at the municipality centre in Caá Catí. Although these speakers have achieved a certain level of literacy, they all came from very large poor families, with parents who were illiterate. It may be possible that having been exposed to a variety that has no contrast between labial and velar approximants and fricatives in certain phonetic contexts makes them less able to discriminate such contrasts in perception. Speaker 141 was a sixty-one-year-old retired man, who used to be a school teacher and a school director. Regarding his upbringing, he mentioned that he was raised and educated in Caá Catí. Because he was an older person, it may also be possible that he lost part of his hearing and could not discriminate finer distinctions. Since there is not enough information to arrive at a more conclusive analysis of speaker 141 discrimination performance, I will leave this question open.
Going back to the general results of this perception study, there is a positive relation between education and the perception of contrasts. Several studies have suggested that literacy leads to phoneme awareness (Carroll et al. 2003, Treiman and Bourassa 2000, Byrne 1998, Hulme et al. 2002, Muter et al. 1998, Wagner et al. 1994, Bassetti 2006). Thus, the differences in the discrimination performance between subjects with high and low education levels should be expected. That is, if speakers’ phonological representations can be affected by orthographic input, then adults with high education would be expected to have a different phoneme-based phonological representation. Based on Perkell’s (2006) study, it was also suggested that early exposure to a variety that has a larger contrast between labial and velar approximants and fricatives may influence people’s ability to perceive and produce such sounds. However, since information on subjects’ family background and their upbringing was not always obtained in the interviews, I am not able to explore this question in the present study.
This chapter presented the results of the perception test focusing on the discrimination of labial and velar approximants and fricatives. To summarize the main findings, both vowel context and education had a significant effect on the perception of labial and velar fricatives. Back vowels yielded more confusion between labials and velar approximants and fricatives and approximants. Subjects with high education had lower scores of misperception than subjects with low education. Although the perception of approximants significantly increased in stressed syllables, the influence of stress on the perception of fricatives was not significant. Approximants were
120 better perceived in initial position, while fricatives were equally perceived in both initial and medial position in the word. However, the chi-square tests showed no significant differences for position in the word.
Chapter 6 discusses the acoustic characteristics of the labial and velar fricatives and approximants. The aim of this investigation is to test the hypothesis that misperception between the variants is related to their acoustic similarity. The influence of social and linguistic factors will be considered in the acoustic analysis.
121
Chapter 6 Acoustic Analysis 6.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the results of the acoustic analysis of the labial and velar fricatives and approximants. With the acoustic analysis I test the hypothesis that labial fricatives and approximants become acoustically similar to their velar counterparts in the context of [u], [we] and [wi]. To test the hypothesis that acoustic similarity between pairs of sounds increases in the speech of subjects with low education, the influence of literacy on the perception of sounds is also investigated.
The tokens analyzed were extracted from the production experiment. These tokens contain the relevant sounds in all seven vocalic contexts ([a, e, i, o, u, we, wi]), in initial and medial position and in stressed and unstressed syllables. First, I present the phonetic variants of /f/, /x/, /b/ and / ɡ/ and their distribution in the data. The acoustic analysis of these sounds was carried out with Praat 5.1.15 (Boersma & Weenik 2009; see Chapter 3 for more details). The acoustic parameters considered for the analysis of fricatives include: vocalic formants at CV transition, centre of gravity, relative duration and intensity. The acoustic parameters for the analysis of approximants include: formants at mid-consonant, vowel onset and mid-vowel, duration and intensity. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA were conducted using R (R Development Core Team) and Goldvarb (Sankoff D. et al . 2005) was used to analyze the distribution of the variants across factor groups. In all cases, significance was set at .05.
6.2 The fricatives
A total of 463 tokens for /f/ and 479 for /x/ were extracted from a fifteen-minute picture description task (see Appendix 3 for list of words) performed by the same 22 speakers (twelve women and ten men) who participated in the sociolinguistic interviews. As explained in Chapter 4, there were seven speakers with low education and fifteen speakers with high education.
122
Around 47 tokens were extracted for each of the participants 39 (i.e. words containing /f/ and /x/ x position x stress x vowel). Note that although these combinations should yield 56 words for each fricative, not all combinations are possible in Spanish (e.g. [fwi] and [xwi] in medial position) or they are difficult to elicit with pictures (e.g. [ βwe] in unstressed medial position).
6.2.1 Data analysis
As with the sociolinguistic analysis, all target words were coded for the following factors: (1) underlying form (phoneme); (2) surface realization (allophones); (3) preceding and following vowel; (4) stress; (5) position in the word. In addition, the following acoustic measurements were taken using Praat. First, F1, F2 and F3 were measured at CV transition and at the centre of the vowel. If a diphthong followed the consonant, the formants were measured in onset and centre of [w], as shown in Figure 1.
Central slice for COG F2 at vowel onset and F2 at mid-vowel points
Figure 6.1: segment [afwe] extracted from the word afuera ‘outside’. The two arrows show the points at which the formants were measured in the diphthong [we]. The vertical dotted lines indicate the slice of fricative that was measured for COG (Centre of Gravity).
Second, the four spectral moments (centre of gravity, variance, skewness and kurtosis) were computed following the procedure described in Jongman et al. (2000) with one modification. Instead of extracting a fixed 40ms slice, the spectrum was calculated from the central half of the fricative (Figure 1), i.e. if the fricative was 90ms long, the central slice extracted was 45ms long.
39 Since some participants did not respond to some visual prompts or their speech was not clear for a particular token, I did not extract the same amount of tokens for all the participants.
123
This was done due to the variable length of /f/ and /x/ across speakers and speech rate. For instance, while in some cases /f/ was 120ms in other was 45ms. The higher degree of variability in my data could be due to the more informal elicitation technique used in this study, that is, while the tokens in this study were extracted from natural speech, in Jongman et al. they were (CVC) syllables in a carrier phrase. As in Jongman et al. (2000), the extracted slice was filtered using a full Hamming window where all the spectral parameters were obtained.
Third, the total duration (in ms) and overall intensity (in dB) of the fricative and the following vowel were measured (Figure 2). The values of these measurements were transferred to a spread sheet where further analyses were performed. Relative duration was calculated as the ratio of the duration of the consonant to that of the following vowel, while relative intensity was calculated as the difference between the intensity of the following vowel and that of the consonant.
Fricative duration/intensity Vowel duration and intensity
Figure 6.2: Duration and intensity of the fricative [x] and the following vowel [o] in the word ojota ‘flip flops’ from speaker 109.
124
6.2.2 Results for fricatives
6.2.2.1 Distribution of the variants
This section presents the distribution of /f/ ([f], [x]) and /x/ ([x], [h], [f]) variants. Starting with /f/, the overall percentage of occurrence of [f] was 90.6% (N 423) and [x] 9.4% (N 44) (Table 6.1). Note that in the production experiment, as opposed to the interview, there were no cases of /f/ deletion, and thus it is not reported here.
Standard [f] Non-standard [x] % N % N 90.6 423 9.4 44 Total N 467
Table 6.1 Overall distributions of /f/ variants in the production experiment in Caá Catí Spanish
The rates of [f] and [x] in the production experiment are very similar to the ones found in sociolinguistic interviews ([f] 91.7% [x] 7.3%) showing consistency in subjects’ linguistic performances throughout the tasks. However, given that the picture description task was a more controlled type of activity in which subjects became anxious to give the right answer, a lower proportion of [x] was expected. One possibility to explain the slightly higher rate of [x] in the picture description task could be that there is no social awareness of this non-standard variant in the population. However, the fact that education disfavours the use of [x] (see Chapter 4) suggests that, at least within the literate speakers, there is social stigma attached to this variant. Thus, the increase of [x] in the production experiment could be due to a more even distribution of [f] and [x] in different phonetic contexts.
Although information on the overall proportion of the variants is useful, it is important to explore the distribution of the variants along the social and linguistic factors considered in the analysis. This information will provide further evidence to support or reject some of the observations made in the sociolinguistic analysis.
A total number of 463 tokens were entered into Goldvarb and their distribution across social (Education, Age and Sex) and linguistic (Preceding and Following Context, Stress and Position) factors was calculated (Table 6.2). Twelve tokens were excluded from the analysis: festejando
125
‘celebrating’ was realized with [v] instead of [f] by six speakers. Three tokens with /f/ and three tokens with /x/ were realized as voiced by an older female speaker (SP118). Few tokens whose recordings were not clear were also excluded.
/f/ variants [f] [x] Education % N % N High 94 300 6 19 Low 83 123 16.9 25 Age Young 90.1 191 9.9 21 Adult 89.4 152 10.6 18 Older 94.1 80 5.9 5 Sex Female 90.9 230 9.1 23 Male 90.2 193 9.8 21 Preceding Context [s] or [h] 100 7 0 0 [i] 100 29 0 0 [n] 96.4 144 7.1 11 [o] 96 48 4 2 pause 94 47 6 3 [a] 91.8 123 8.2 11 [l] 89.3 50 10.7 6 [e] 87.3 62 12.7 9 [r] 71.4 30 28.6 12 Following context [e] 100 75 0 0 [i] 100 81 0 0 [a] 98.8 83 1.2 1 [o] 98.8 81 1.2 1 [u] 78.3 65 21.7 18 [we, wi] 61.3 38 38.7 24 Stress Unstressed 93.9 184 6.1 12 Stressed 88.2 239 11.8 32 Position in the word
126
Medial 90.7 204 9.3 21 Initial 90.5 219 9.5 23 Total 467
Table 6.2 Distribution of /f/ variants by external (literacy, age and sex) and internal (preceding and following context, stress and position) factors.
There is a higher proportion of [x] in speakers with lower education (Low 16.9% and High 6%), which confirms the sociolinguistic results (see Chapter 4) that the velar variant is strongly favoured by speakers with low levels of education. Table 6.2 shows that adult speakers have the highest percentage of [x] (Adult 10.6%, Young 9.9, Older 5.9%), which is unexpected, since adult speakers tend to have a more standard style of speech (Sankoff, D. & Laberge 1978) and the sociolinguistic results (in Chapter 4) show that older speakers have the highest percentage of [x]. This contradicting result is due to interaction between the social factor groups, which becomes more evident when social factors groups are kept separate. For instance, there were no old male subjects with low education and the speakers with high education were both school teachers, which might explain their more standard style of speech. These old speakers with high education also had the lowest rates of the labio-velar variant [w] and /b/ deletion. Since the analysis presented in Chapter 4 was based on more than 1400 tokens (vs. 463 for this analysis), I will rely on the findings presented in Chapter 4, where the interaction was resolved by combining and recoding the social factor groups 40 . In other words, I argue that [x] is a case of language change, which is receding in time with increasing opportunities of education in the future generations. Regarding the use of [x] by female and male subjects, there is a similar proportion of [x] in both sex groups (Females 9.1% Males 9.8%). These results do not match the pattern found in the sociolinguistic analysis, where females had a higher proportion of [x] than males (Females 10.6% Males 3.9%). However, given the more formal nature of the task and that women tend to use a more standard type of speech than men, it could be possible that during this task they were monitoring and correcting their speech more actively than men.
Regarding the linguistic factors, the Following Context effect is again one of the clearest constraints on [x] with higher proportions of occurrence following [we, wi] (38.7%) and [u]
40 Since a reduced number of tokens per cell decreases reliability in the results obtained, a multivariate analysis with recoding of the social factor groups will not be performed at this stage.
127
(21.7%). The effect of stress shows that [x] is more common in stressed position, a pattern that was also observed in the sociolinguistic analysis. This result strengthens the idea that /f/ alternation is a fortition process that affects sounds in prominent environments. In contrast, Position does not seem to be a strong constraint on [x], since almost the same percentage is seen in both initial and medial positions (9.5% and 9.3%, respectively). This was not the case in the sociolinguistic analysis, where a higher rate of [x] was seen in initial position (initial 5.1% and medial 1.8%). Since in the production experiment the words elicited were more even with respect to the distribution of the sounds under study, it may be possible that in speech alternation is more common in initial position (see Chapter 4) only because there are highly frequent words, such as the preterit of the verbs ser ‘to be’ and ir ‘to go’, with the sequences [xwe] and [xwi] in this position. Thus, despite the reduced amount of tokens from the production experiment, it appears that the following context and the prominence of the syllable where /f/ occurs are the two factors that consistently influence [x].
The effect of Preceding Context shows a high percentage of alternation with the liquids [r] (28.6%), [l] (10.7%) and with the vowels [e] (12.7%), [a] (8.2%). These results partially match the ones reported in the sociolinguistic analysis where [e] (14.7%), [h] (7.1%), pause (6.6%), [o] (5.8%) and [a] (5.6%) yielded the highest percentage of alternation. However, since in the production experiment the pictures and the questions were fixed, certain sequences of sounds were very frequent in the data. For instance, one of the pictures showed a firefighter extinguishing fire, to which most subjects responded el bombero está apagando el fuego ‘the firefighter is putting out the fire’. Here, [l] was always preceding the word fuego, a word which is frequently realized with [x] by speakers with low education. Similarly, the high rate of alternation with a preceding [r] is due to the word perfume , which was one of the pictures used to elicit the sequence /fu/ in medial position. From these results, and the ones presented in Chapter 4, Preceding Context does not appear to be playing a significant role in /f/ alternation, as Following Context clearly does.
Regarding the distribution of /x/, it is almost categorically realized as [x] (98.7%), as shown in Table 6.3.
128
Standard [x] [h] [f] % N % N % N 98.7 473 1 5 0.3 1 Total N 479
Table 6.3 Overall distributions of /x/ variants in the production experiment
There is a very low rate of [h] (1%) and a single case of [f] in the word alfajor ‘cookie’ realized as alfa[f]or (SP119). The five tokens of [h] correspond to gente ‘people’, Jesús, mujer ‘woman’, juegos ‘games’, jamón ‘ham’ realized with [h] and lentejuela ‘sequin’. Auditorily, [h] is different from [x] in that the aspiration overlaps with the realization of the vowel for [h], and the frication of [x] ends before the vowel begins. Also, [h] has a lower intensity noise than [x] and, therefore, it sounds softer. Regarding the specific tokens occurring with [h], it is interesting to note that three out of five [h] were followed by unrounded [e]. This is intriguing, since [a] should trigger a more open articulation than [e] (Colantoni & Marinescu 2010). However, since the tokens are so few, I will leave this question for further analysis. The next section will explore the acoustic characteristics of the fricatives and will draw a connection between this and the sociolinguistic analysis.
6.2.2.2 Acoustic analysis of the variants
Relative duration and relative intensity were not useful in distinguishing /f/ and /x/, nor did they vary significantly across vocalic contexts (see Appendix 12 Table 12.1). The F2 measured in the onset of the following vowel was successful in distinguishing between /f/ and /x/ only in the context of [a] and [e] (see Appendix 12 Table 12.3). The acoustic parameter capable of significantly distinguishing between /f/ and /x/ across vocalic contexts was the Centre of Gravity (henceforth COG).
6.2.2.2.1 Centre of gravity for [f] and [x]
To the best of my knowledge, no previous work has analyzed the COG of [x], so it is not possible to elaborate a hypothesis based on previous analysis. Nevertheless, it is possible to construct a hypothesis based on the articulatory realization of the sounds. The COG of [x] is expected to be lower than the COG of [f] due to its back constriction, which allows the air to be
129 filtered through the vocal cavity. When [f] is followed by round [o, u, w], the protrusion of the lips lengthens the oral cavity, lowering the COG. Thus, I hypothesize that the COG of [f] and [x] will become more similar in the context of round vowels due to this lengthening of the oral cavity. Table 6.4 presents the mean and standard deviation (SD) of the centre of gravity for [f] and [x] across different vowels for speakers with high and low education.
Following Vowel [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] [f] Low Ed. Mean 3553 3973 4196 3375 4196 4796 4154
SD 2069 2178 1819 1692 2401 2352 3730
High Ed. Mean 3883 3986 4159 3781 3927 4089 4530
SD 1561 1589 1268 1578 1617 1562 2176
[x] Low Ed. Mean 2106 2551 2555 1919 1956 1759 1923
SD 619 822 792 553 1028 545 384
High Ed. Mean 2748 2735 2625 2163 1929 1904 1826
SD 749 938 991 615 683 643 869
Table 6.4 COG mean and SD for [f] and [x] across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty-two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish.
The COG of [f] followed by [u] and [w] is higher in subjects with high and low education. Following [a] and [o] have the lowest COG. These results are unexpected since the COG of [f] followed by [u], which is the most rounded vowel in Spanish, should have lower values than the COG of [f] followed by [o]. However, there is a clear drop in the COG of [x] followed by [o, u, w], which is expected given that the round vowels lengthen the oral cavity. There are no statistically significant differences in [f]’s COG across vocalic contexts for subjects with either high education (F(6,276) = 0.5, p=0.81) or low education (F(6,111) = 0.67, p=0.67), but there are statistically significant differences in [x]’s COG across vocalic contexts in subjects with both high (F(6,289) = 10.92, p<0.01) and low education (F(6,156) = 3.96, p=<0.01). The differences in the COG of [x] are especially marked between [back] vs. [-back] vowels.
130
Figure 6.3 illustrates the values shown in Table 6.4. The [f]s of subjects with high and low education are very similar to each other; the same holds for the [x]s of subjects with high and low education. The lines for [f] and [x] remain quite apart from each other, thus visually showing how different their COG values are. These results confirm that COG is a useful acoustic parameter to distinguish non-sibilant fricatives (Jongman et al. 2000), where [f] has values above 3000 Hz and [x] has values below 3000 Hz.
Figure 6.3 COG values of [f] and [x] for subjects with high and low education
The fact that [f] and [x] are acoustically different from each other in the context of [u, w] does not confirm my hypothesis that the perceptual similarity between [f] and [x] can be accounted for by the lowering of COG when [f] is followed by [u] and [w]. Since the results of perception show that confusion of fricatives in the context [u] and [w] is very frequent, the hypothesis should not be dropped, but investigated further. Thus, a future analysis should focus on other acoustic parameters such as peak frequency or on a combination of this and F2 at vowel onset (see discussion in Chapter 7).
131
6.2.2.2.2 Centre of gravity for /f/ and /x/
In this section, the analysis was performed on each phoneme /f/ and /x/, rather than on their allophones, as in the previous section. That is, the statistical analysis was performed collapsing all of /f/’s variants ([f, h~x]) on one hand, and all of /x/’s variants ([x, h, f]) on the other. This was done to observe the acoustic realization of all the variants, and their extent of variation. The results show that the realization of /f/ has more variability than that of /x/, which is shown by the higher standard deviation of /f/ across vocalic contexts for subjects with high and low education. Conversely, the COG of /x/ closely resembles that of [x], which indicates minimal allophonic variation in subjects with both high and low education. There are no statistical differences for /f/ across vocalic contexts, which show that the labial phoneme is more stable in different phonetic environments. The realization of /x/, on the other hand, showed statistically significant differences across vocalic contexts, (t(649)=15.0894, p < .0001, two-tailed). These results match those of [x] (see section 5.1.3.2.1) and are also consistent with previous research, which report that velar consonants such [ ɡ] and [k] tend to be more influenced by the vocalic context than labial or alveolar consonants (Borzone de Manrique & Massone 1981, Sussman 1991, Mazzaro 2010). Table 6.5 shows that the COG of /f/ and /x/.
132
Following Vowel [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] /f/ Low Ed. Mean 3533 3973 4196 3284 3011 2351 2777
SD 2030 2178 1819 1721 2155 1854 2012
High Ed. Mean 3883 3986 4159 3781 3721 3641 3932
SD 1561 1589 1268 1578 1678 1668 2365
/x/ Low Ed. Mean 2266 2536 2708 1999 2093 1937 1758
SD 847 869 958 562 1155 474 229
High Ed. Mean 2772 2723 2675 2186 1966 1868 1834
SD 779 942 999 601 720 529 917
Table 6.5 COG mean and SD for /f/ and /x/ across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty-two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish.
For subjects with low education, the COG of /f/ is quite stable in the context of the [-back] vowels [a, e, i], yet in the context of [back] vowels [o, u] and the diphthongs [we, wi] the COG of /f/ decreases markedly. This decrease in the COG of /f/ is more marked in the data from subjects with low education. Increased variation in the speech of subjects with low education is further confirmed by the higher SD of /f/ for these speakers. In subjects with high education, the COG of /f/ and /x/ tend to be more distinct from each other and their SD is lower than those of subjects with low education. In other words, the values of /f/ and /x/ in subjects with high education closely match those of [f] and [x], respectively, suggesting less variation in their realization. Furthermore, the COG values of /f/ in the context of [back] vowels [o, u, we, wi] decrease much more for subjects with low education, which suggests that /f/ and /x/ are not so acoustically different from each other.
133
Figure 6.4: COG values of /f/ and /x/ for subjects with high and low education
The COG of /f/ in the subjects with low education drops markedly in the context of [u, w]. These values drop below 3000Hz approaching the COG of /x/. This decrease in COG indicates that a large number of /f/s are realized as [x] by subjects with low education. More important of all, it may indicate the presence of a boundary at 3000Hz, where /x/ has a COG lower than 3000Hz and /f/ a COG higher than 3000Hz. The categorical perception of /f/ and /x/ may be compromised when this boundary is crossed. Further research is needed test this observation for Spanish and different languages.
Previous research has successfully used COG to distinguish between voiceless fricatives in English (Forrest et al. 1988, ZSiga 1993, Jongman et al. 2000) and in Aleut, Apache, Chickasaw, Gaelic, Hupa, Montana Salish, and Toda (Gordon et al. 2002). This chapter has presented empirical evidence to suggest that the same acoustic parameter can be used to successfully distinguish between the Spanish non-sibilant fricatives [f] and [x] for all the vowels. The fact that there was a significant difference between the two fricatives in the context of [u] and [w] disconfirms the hypothesis that the confusion is due to the lowering of COG for [f] followed by [u] and [w], which makes it acoustically similar to [x]. However, the evidence that the COG of /f/ decreases markedly in these vocalic contexts in the subjects with low education confirms the
134 sociolinguistic result that [x] is favoured by these subjects and that, unless formal education prevents its development, this feature will appear as a default mechanism in the population. This is confirmed by the widespread occurrence of labio-velar alternation in the rural areas of dispersed geographic regions such as Colombia, New Mexico, El Salvador, Ecuador, Chile, and Peru. Interestingly, the pattern is similar in all these places (labio-velar alternation is more frequent before [w]). 6.3 The approximants
The same picture description task (see Section 6.1) was used to elicit tokens containing the approximants /b/ and / ɡ/. With regard to /b/, the variants in use in Corrientes Spanish are the labiodental approximant [ʋ], the bilabial approximant [ β], the bilabial stop [b] and the labiovelar variant [w]. The acoustic analysis of approximants is discussed in sections 6.2.1 and 6.2.2.2. The distribution of /b/ and / ɡ/ variants along the linguistic and social factors is explored in section 6.2.2.1.
6.3.1 Data analysis
All target words containing the approximants /b/ and / ɡ/ were coded for the following factors: (1) underlying form (phoneme); (2) surface realization (allophones); (3) preceding and following vowel; (4) stress; (5) position in the word. Overall intensity and duration were measured for the consonant and the following vowel. These measurements were transferred to a spread sheet for further analysis. Relative intensity and duration were calculated using the same formula as for fricatives (see section 6.1.2). Since approximants are very similar to vowels in terms of their formant structure, it was very difficult to reliably identify the approximant-vowel transition. Thus, the CV transition was measured at the maximum intensity slope (Figure 6.5), which was automatically located using a script in Praat (see Chapter 3).
135
F1, F2, F3 CV transition
Figure 6.5: segment [xoʋen] joven ‘young’. The three arrows show the points at which the formants were measured: mid-consonant, CV transition and mid-vowel. The CV transition was automatically located using a script in Praat.
Figure 6.5 illustrates the three points at which F1, F2 and F3 were measured (mid-consonant point, CV transition and at the centre of the vowel). Following diphthongs were measured in the same manner described for the fricatives (i.e. at [w] onset and midpoint).
6.3.2 Results for approximants
6.3.2.1 Distribution of /b/ variants
The overall distribution of /b/ variants is presented in Table 6.6. A total of 481 tokens for /b/ was extracted from the production experiment. Four variants were identified for /b/, whose occurrences are heavily dependent on their phonetic environment (as shown in Table 6.7): a labio-dental approximant [ ʋ], a bilabial approximant [ β], a bilabial stop [b] and the labiovelar glide [w].
136
[ʋ] [β] [b] [w]
% N % N % N % N 51.1 246 12.1 58 24.1 116 12.7 61 Total N 481
Table 6.6 Overall distributions of /b/ variants in Corrientes Spanish.
With 51.1%, [ ʋ] is the most commonly occurring variant in Corrientes Spanish. Interestingly, many Spanish phonetic books do not recognize [ ʋ] as a possible allophone in their charts of Spanish consonants (Schwegler et al. 2010, Dalbor 1997). Dalbor stated that:
/b/ has two principal allophones in Spanish: [b], a voiced bilabial stop, and [ β], a voiced bilabial slit fricative . Some speakers occasionally use a third allophone: [v], a voiced labio-dental slit fricative . […] The use of labio-dental [v] is also an example of linguistic HYPERCORRECTION, that is, the result of misguided effort by educated native speakers to show that they know how a given word is spelled. Such speakers make an attempt to use [v] in words spelled with
Dalbor (1997) refers to [β] as “slit fricative”. However, given that there is no frication in the production of [β] and that it is articulated with a wide constriction (see Chapter 2), [β] is considered an approximant rather than a fricative by other authors (Ladefoged 1982, Romero 1995, Martínez-Celdrán 2004). When Dalbor refers to [v], it is not clear whether he is referring to the fricative [v] (similar to the English one) or to the labiodental approximant [ ʋ] (as in Corrientes Spanish), which has a clear formant structure and no noise, as shown in Figure 6.3.
It is not very difficult to identify a [ ʋ] auditorily and visually, since most Spanish speakers have been exposed to their different realizations at school. In the realization of a [ β] the two lips approach each other, while in the realization of a [ ʋ] the lower lip approaches the upper teeth. The use of [ ʋ] in Corrientes Spanish is not “hypercorrection”, as Dalbor (1997:205) stated, but a frequent (and not “occasionally used”) allophone of /b/, which appears mostly with the unrounded vowels [a, e, i] (see Table 6.7). It may be possible to suggest that the occurrence of [ʋ] in Corrientes Spanish is due to influence from Guaraní, since the same allophone is found in
137 the language (see Chapter 2). However, the analysis of the possible origin of [ ʋ] in Corrientes Spanish is beyond the purposes of this dissertation, thus I will not purse this question further.
Despite its high rate of usage, the labiodental [ ʋ] has not been noticed by Vidal de Battini (1964) in her book on Argentine Spanish,
En el habla del país, en todos los niveles culturales, la y la
In all cultural levels of Argentine Spanish, and
Vidal de Battini (1964), as well as Dalbor (1997), refers to the pronunciation of the grapheme
Table 6.7 presents the distribution of /b/ variants across social and linguistic factor groups. For Preceding Context, consonants with the same manner of articulation and having similar patterns of variation were collapsed: liquids [r] and [l], fricatives [s] and [h], nasals [n] and [m]. Vowels were kept separate, since their distributions are quite distinct from each other. Many tokens had to be excluded because either /b/ or / ɡ/ was deleted. Regarding /b/, it was frequently deleted in dibujito ‘cartoons’ (N:4), joven ‘young’, (N:2), and lavarropa ‘washing machine’ (N:1).
138
/b/ variants [ʋ] [b] [β] [w] Education % N % N % N % N High 49.7 160 14 45 26.7 86 9.6 31 Low 54.1 86 8.2 13 18.9 30 18.9 30 Age Young 52.5 116 7.2 16 26.7 59 13.6 30 Adult 50.8 91 16.8 30 21.8 39 10.6 19 Older 48.1 39 14.8 12 22.2 18 14.8 12 Sex Female 51.9 136 11.5 30 23.7 62 13 34 Male 50.2 110 12.8 28 24.7 54 12.3 27 Preceding Context [r] and [l] 85.4 35 0 0 14.4 6 0 0 [s] and [h] 76.5 13 0 0 5.9 1 17.6 3 [n] and [m] 0 0 89.3 25 3.6 1 7.1 2 pause 27.3 24 33 29 12.5 11 27.3 24 [a] 67.1 102 0.7 1 23 35 9.2 14 [e] 51.7 31 0 0 38.3 23 10 6 [i] 18.9 10 3.8 2 67.9 36 9.4 5 [o] 75.6 31 2.4 1 7.3 3 14.6 6 [u] 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 1 Following context [e] 92.4 73 5.1 4 2.5 2 0 0 [i] 83.5 71 9.4 8 7.1 6 0 0 [a] 69.4 59 10.6 9 20 17 0 0 [o] 32.8 21 10.9 7 56.2 36 0 0 [u] 15.2 10 25.8 17 53 35 6.1 4 [w] 11.8 12 12.7 13 19.6 20 55.9 57 Stress Stressed 53.1 129 9.5 23 18.5 45 18.9 46 Unstressed 49.2 117 14.7 35 24.1 116 12.7 61 Position Medial 61.6 130 0.5 1 29.9 63 8.1 17 Initial 43 116 21.1 57 19.6 53 16.3 44
139
Total 481
Table 6.7. Distribution of /b/ variants by external (Education, Age and Sex) and internal (Preceding and Following Context, Stress and Position) factors.
Starting with the linguistic factors, the Following Context effect presents clear patterns of distribution: [ ʋ] tends to occur with [e], [i] and [a] (92.4%, 83.5%, 69.4%, respectively), while [β] is more frequent with [o] and [u] (56.2% and 53%, respectively). In other words, [ ʋ] occurs with unrounded vowels [a, e, i], while [ β] occurs with rounded ones [o, u]. The distribution can be explained in coarticulatory and in perceptual terms, since it could be possible that the rounding of the lips to produce [o] and [u] play a role in the perception of [ β]. As expected, the occurrence of labiovelar variant is restricted to following [we, wi] (55.9%); this matches the results reported in Chapter 4.
The effect of the Preceding Context is less clear and the low number of tokens makes it more difficult to identify patterns of distribution. Nevertheless, certain combinations seem more prone to occur: the bilabial stop [b] occurs mostly with preceding nasals (89.3%), while [ ʋ] occurs more often with preceding liquids (85.4%) and vowels ([a] 67.1%, [e] 51.7%, [o] 75.6%). Strangely, preceding [i] differs from other vowels in that it has a high rate of occurrence with [ β], rather than [ ʋ]. This may have to do with the fact that there was a following [u] (i.e. [i βu]) in the sequence, which as mentioned earlier has a high rate of occurrence with [ β]. This observation serves to reinforce the idea that the following context exerts more influence than the preceding context. There was only one token with a preceding [u], thus it will not be discussed here. Finally, the occurrence of the labiovelar variant seems to be positively influenced by a preceding pause (27.3%), which ties well with the results of Position described below.
Regarding the influence of Stress and Position in the word, a cross-tabulation of these two factors shows that the labiovelar variant [w] has a higher rate of occurrence in stressed initial position, which coincides with the sociolinguistic results reported in Chapter 4. The stop [b] is more frequent in initial position, as would be expected, and [ ʋ] and [ β] have similar and even proportions across factor groups (See Table 6.8).
140
stressed unstressed Total N N % N % Initial [ʋ] 62 45 54 41 116 [w] 33 24 11 8 44 [b] 22 16 35 27 57 [β] 22 16 31 24 53 Medial [ʋ] 67 64 63 59 130 [w] 13 12 4 4 17 [b] 1 1 0 0 1 [β] 23 22 40 37 63 Total N 481
Table 6.8. Cross tabulation of /b/ by Stress and Position.
The analysis of social factor groups confirms, once more, the strong influence of Education on the occurrence of [w] (Low Education: 18.9% and High Education: 9.6%, respectively). Speakers with high education have a higher proportion of the standard variants [ β] (26.7%) and [b] (14%) than speakers with low education ([ β] 18.9% and [b] 8.2%). The labiovelar variant seems to be more frequent in the younger and the older generations (Younger 13.6%, Adult 10.6%, Older 14.8%) which confirms the hypothesis that /b/ labio-velar alternation is a case of age-grading (see Chapter 4 section 4.2.1). Younger speakers have the highest rate of [ β], while adult and older speakers have a higher proportion of [b]. Similar rates of [ ʋ] are found in all three age groups (Younger 52.5% Adults 50.8%, Older 48.1%) with a small increase down the generational scale, which shows that [ ʋ] is quite stable and strong in Corrientes Spanish. Regarding the factor group Sex, it does not seem to influence the occurrence of [ ʋ, b, β, w], since such variants have similar patterns of occurrence in the speech of both women and men.
6.3.2.2 Distribution of / ɡ/ variants
Two variants were identified for / ɡ/; the velar stop [ ɡ] and the velar approximant [ ɣ], whose overall distribution is presented in Table 6.9. A total of 396 tokens were extracted for analysis. There were many cases of / ɡ/ deletion in tokens such as agujero ‘hole’ (N:9), laguna ‘lagoon’ (1), gustan ‘they like’ (N:1), mago ‘magician’ (3), jueguito ‘video game’ (1), Che Guevara (1), which were excluded from the analysis, since at this point we are interested in the acoustic
141 characteristics of / ɡ/ variants. It is interesting to note, however, that deletion was much more frequent in / ɡ/ followed by [u], e.g. agujero, laguna, gusta which matches the pattern found in the sociolinguistic analysis (Chapter 4) and in Colantoni & Marinescu (2010).
Approximant [ ɣ] Stop [ ɡ] % N % N 80.6 283 19.4 68 Total N 351
Table 6.9. Overall distribution of / ɡ/ variants in the production experiment
The approximant [ ɣ] has the highest rate of occurrence (80.6%), while the stop [ ɡ] has a much lower rate (19.4%). This distribution of [ ɣ] and [ ɡ] is very similar to the one reported by Colantoni & Marinescu (2010), although the authors found a higher rate of approximants (90%). The small difference, which is probably not significant, may be due to the fact that the sounds analyzed in Colantoni & Marinescu (2010) were all preceded and followed by vowels, which is the standard context for lenition to occur. On the other hand, preceding pauses and nasals have a higher occurrence of the stop variant (see Table 6.10), as would be expected.
/ɡ/ variants Approximant [ ɣ] Stop [ ɡ] Education % N % N High 81.7 196 18.3 44 Low 78.4 87 21.6 24 Age Young 82.2 125 17.8 27 Adult 79.7 106 20.3 27 Older 78.8 52 21.2 14 Sex Female 81.8 166 18.2 37 Male 79.1 117 20.9 31 Preceding Context [r] and [l] 100 43 0 0 [s] and [h] 100 6 0 0 vowels 99.5 181 0.5 1
142
pause 67.2 39 32.8 19 [n] and [m] 22.6 14 77.4 48 Following context [w] 100 6 0 0 [a] 86.4 70 13.6 11 [u] 84.4 38 15.6 7 [e] 80.3 61 19.7 15 [i] 77.8 56 22.2 16 [o] 73.2 52 26.8 19 Stress Unstressed 83.2 144 16.8 29 Stressed 78.1 139 21.9 39 Position Medial 100 170 0 0 Initial 62.4 113 37.6 69 Total 351
Table 6.10. Distribution of / ɡ/ variants by external (Education, Age and Sex) and internal (Preceding and Following Context, Stress and Position) factors.
The approximant is the preferred variant by all the speakers in all social groups and in most phonetic contexts. The factors that most clearly contribute to the occurrence of the stop are Preceding Context and Position; [ ɡ] has a high rate of occurrence with preceding nasals (77.4%) and pauses (32.8%). These distributions have been frequently observed in Spanish (e.g. Navarro Tomás 1957, Harris 1969, Piñeros 2002). The influence of social variables is much more subtle, since [ ɣ] and [ ɡ] display similar distributions across Age, Sex and Education. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that there is a higher rate of [ ɣ] in the speakers with low education and in the younger generations, which suggests that less literacy increases lenition and that the use of the approximant variant is slowly on the rise. Regarding the deletion of / ɡ/, as mentioned earlier, it was more frequent with a following [u], regardless of stress.
6.3.2.3 Acoustic analysis of the variants
This section evaluates the hypothesis of acoustic similarity between [β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts. Specifically, I want to test whether the confusion between these sounds is due to their being acoustically similar. Since the perceptual confusion was more frequent in the context of the
143
[back] vowels [o, u] and diphthongs [we, wi], we expect that there should be more acoustic similarity between [β] and [ɣ] in such vocalic contexts.
Being vowel-like, the approximants [ β] and [ ɣ] were analyzed in terms of their formant structure (F1 and F2). Women were analyzed separately from men. One-way ANOVAS were carried out on F1 and F2 at mid-consonant and vowel onset. Relative intensity and duration were also considered; however no significant differences were found between [ β] and [ ɣ]. This section will explore the means and SD of F2 at vowel onset, which is the only acoustic parameter that was able to significantly distinguish between the labial and velar approximants. It was not possible to compare [ βwi] and [ ɣwi] because there were no tokens with the sequence [ ɣwi]. The means and SD for F1 and F2 mid-consonant, F1 at vowel onset, relative intensity and duration are included in the Appendix 13.
Following Vowel [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] Women [β] Mean 1282.78 1608.36 1981.93 956.23 1045.46 877.71 1055.22 SD 183.78 313.97 394.49 135.19 379.91 295.76 368.46
[ɣ] Mean 1742.49 1788.53 1704.75 1051.02 1001 1016.04 --- SD 389.90 464.69 683.43 234.32 410.55 308.41 ---
Men [β] Mean 1119.07 1464.24 1723.32 960.23 1005.07 932.47 1264.39 SD 97.84 235.92 275.96 181.77 342.12 372.61 479.64
[ɣ] Mean 1507.12 1636.24 1890.35 1057.61 946.21 1197.38 --- SD 232.40 311.72 465.13 175.36 196.51 449.23 ---
Table 6.11 F2 mean and SD for [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty-two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish.
The values of F2 at vowel onset for female subjects are illustrated in Figure 6.6, while those of males are shown in Figure 6.7. The analysis according to Education is discussed afterwards.
144
Figure 6.6. [ β] and [ ɣ] F2 at vowel onset for female subjects
For both [ β] and [ ɣ], the F2 at vowel onset tends to decrease from front to back vowels. This is expected, since the rounding of the lips decreases the F2 values. A one-way ANOVA shows that there is significant difference between [ β] and [ ɣ] for [a, e, i] ([a] F(1,82)=49.73, p<.01, [e] F(1,81)=4.32, p=.04, [i] F(1,83)=5.48, p=02), [o] is marginally significant (F(1,61)=3.83, p=.05), while no significant difference was found between [β] and [ ɣ] followed by [u] (F(1,69)=.22, p 145 Figure 6.7: [ β] and [ ɣ] F2 at vowel onset for male subjects The results for men show the same decrease of F2 as we move from [a, e, i] towards [o, u, we, wi]. As hypothesized, there was significant difference between the labial and velar approximants in the context of [a] (F(1,67)=87.23, p<.01) and [e] (F(1,66)=6.71, p=.01). Similarly to the results for women, the contrast of [ β] and [ ɣ] with following [o] was marginally significant (F(1,51)=3.92, p=.05). As predicted, there was no significant difference between the approximants in the context of [u] (F(1,47)=.50, p=n.s.) and [we] (F(1,36)=3.51, p=n.s.). Strangely enough, [ β] and [ ɣ] were not found significantly different from each other in the context of [i] (F(1,61)=3.17, p=n.s.). As explained in more detail below, this result could be due to the scattered distribution of [i] in the vowel space. Nevertheless, the hypothesis that confusion between [ β] and [ ɣ] is due to their acoustic similarity in the contexts of [u] and [we] has been confirmed by the results presented. 6.3.2.4 The influence of education To test the effect of Education on the degree of acoustic similarity between [ β] and [ ɣ], it was necessary to collapse women and men’s data, since a four way distinction (i.e. Sex x Education) would have reduced the number of tokens per cell and, thus, the confidence in the results 146 obtained. To collapse female and male’s data, first the values of F2 had to be normalized. Z- score was used to normalize the data (see formula below). x − u Z = σ The means and SD of F1, F2 and F3 at the centre of the vowel were calculated for each subject. These values were entered in the formula above: x stands for the raw score to be standardized (i.e. the individual value), while u and σ are the population mean and SD, respectively. The calculated Z-score for each subject was transferred to a new spread sheet where they were later organized into High and Low Education. Finally, a one-way ANOVA was performed to compare [β] and [ ɣ] according to Education. Starting with subjects with high education (see Table 6.12), the one-way ANOVA reveals significant difference between the F2 at vowel onset (Z normalized) of [ β] and [ ɣ] in the context of [a] (F(1,104)=54.82, p<.01) and [e] (F(1,97)=4.69, p=.03). However, no significant differences were found between [ β] and [ ɣ] in the context of [i] (F(1,97)=.41, p=n.s.), [o] (F(1,71)=2.31, p=n.s.), [u] (F(1,78)=.45, p=n.s.) and [we] (F(1,54)=3.82, p=n.s.). The vowel [i] is again behaving unexpectedly, since being front and unrounded it was predicted to pattern like [a] and [e]. Following Vowel [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] [β] Mean -0.41 0.21 0.82 -0.84 -0.67 -0.94 -0.56 SD 0.37 0.59 0.61 0.42 0.71 0.7 0.66 [ɣ] Mean .28 0.5 0.71 -0.68 -0.77 -0.52 N/A SD 0.58 0.73 1.16 0.48 0.59 0.78 N/A ANOVA df Between 1 1 1 1 1 1 N/A df Within 104 97 97 71 78 54 N/A F 54.82 4.69 0.41 2.31 0.45 3.82 N/A Sig. <.01 0.03 0.52 0.13 0.51 0.06 N/A Table 6.12 F2 at vowel onset (Z-normalized) of [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic context for fourteen subjects with high education. 147 As regards subjects with low education (see Table 6.13), there is significant difference between [β] and [ ɣ] followed by [a] (F(1,45)=94.89, p<.01), [e] (F(1,50)=5.80, p=.02) and [o] (F(1,41)=9.28, p<.01). [ β] and [ ɣ] are not significantly different from each other in the context of [i] (F(1,47)=.02, p=n.s.), [u] (F(1,38)=.01, p=n.s.) and [we] (F(1,27)=.84, p=n.s.). Again, no significant difference between [ β] and [ ɣ] in the context [i] is found in the subjects with low education. The same unexpected result was obtained in the data from the subjects with high education. This finding is further discussed below. Following Vowel [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] [β] Mean -0.37 0.3 0.78 -0.83 -0.75 -0.91 -0.32 SD 0.29 0.47 0.58 0.27 0.6 0.57 1.03 [ɣ] Mean 0.69 0.7 0.74 -0.56 -0.77 -0.69 N/A SD 0.45 0.69 1.14 0.3 0.61 0.18 N/A ANOVA df Between 1 1 1 1 1 1 N/A df Within 45 50 47 41 38 27 N/A F 94.89 5.8 0.02 9.28 0.01 0.84 N/A Sig. <.01 0.02 0.89 <.01 0.92 0.37 N/A Table 6.13 F2 at vowel onset (Z-normalized) of [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic context for seven subjects with low education. As mentioned earlier, the fact that there is no significant difference between [ β] and [ ɣ] in the context [i] is intriguing, since being front and unrounded, [i] is expected to behave like [a] and [e]. The scatter plot in Figure 5.8 suggests that [ βi] and [ ɣi] do not occupy a defined (separate) space, but are overlapping. This overlapping in the vowel space may account for the lack of significant difference between them. The scatter plot of [ β] and [ ɣ] for all the vowels is included in the Appendix 14. 148 Figure 6.8: Scatter plot of [βi] and [ ɣi]. F1 and F2 were measured at the vowel onset. Overall, results reveal that [ β] and [ ɣ] become more acoustically similar in the context of [u] and [we] (the [o] effect was marginally significant). This finding confirms the hypothesis that perceptual confusion between [ β] and [ ɣ] followed by [u] and [we] is due to the acoustic similarity between such approximants. In other words, it was possible to identify the origin of the confusion in the acoustic signal. The hypothesis about the role of Education on labio-velar alternation was not confirmed, since acoustic similarity was found for [ β] and [ ɣ] in subjects with high and low education. However, these results seem to make sense: confusion is originated in the acoustic similarity between [ β] and [ ɣ] in certain vocalic contexts, regardless of the education level of the speakers. Literacy may be playing a role later, at the stage where variants are assigned to their corresponding phonemes. In other words, the labial and velar approximants in the context of [u] and [we] are acoustically similar, thus perceptually confusable for all Spanish speakers. However, orthography seems to help literate subjects disambiguate the signal. Illiterate subjects, having no help from orthography, cannot apply the same corrective techniques and they end up taking the signal at face value. The main aim of this dissertation is to present and analyze speech data coming from natural and laboratory elicitation techniques. The comparison between the performance of participants in the three different tasks - interviews, production and perception experiments - will allow us to 149 understand the relationship between perception and speech production. Chapter 7 discusses the main findings of the sociolinguistic, the perception and the acoustic studies in relation to the hypotheses tested. It will then relate the results of the sociolinguistic analysis with those of the perception and production experiment to understand the origin and the distribution of the labio- velar alternation affecting Spanish fricatives and approximants. Chapter 7 will conclude with the implications of this dissertation for the study of sound variation. 150 Chapter 7 Discussion and conclusion 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 Purpose and goals of the dissertation This chapter summarizes the main findings of the present study in relation to the hypotheses tested. It discusses the connection between the sociolinguistic results and those of the perception and production experiments and the implications of these findings for the theories of sound change of Ohala (1989, 1993) and Blevins (2004). The chapter will conclude with future directions of this study. The purpose of this dissertation has been to investigate: (i) the acoustic and perceptual motivations of specific labio-velar alternations and (ii) the social and linguistic factors that influence the choice of one variant (e.g. [x]) over the other (e.g. [f]). The first hypothesis proposed that the labio-velar alternation is due to the perceptual confusion between labial and velar fricatives and approximants. It was further argued that this perceptual confusion was due to the acoustic similarity between [f] ~ [x] and [ β] ~ [ ɣ] in the context of round vowels and diphthongs. The second hypothesis proposed that the standard variants ([f] and [ β]) would be more frequent in speakers with higher literacy levels, due to the fact that their phonological representations are affected by orthography (Bassetti 2006). These hypotheses will be discussed in the next section, as I summarize the results of the three tasks: sociolinguistic interviews, production and perception experiments. 7.1.2 The importance of having three tasks The combination of methods of data collection (interviews + experiments) used in this study has allowed me to analyze linguistic variation from different perspectives. The sociolinguistic analysis shows the frequency and distribution of the variants under study. With this analysis it is possible to evaluate the influence of different social and linguistic factors on the probability of occurrence of the variants and to determine whether they are a case of language change or stable variation. The perception experiment allowed me to test the hypothesis that the labio-velar alternation is a case of perceptually driven variation. In other words, with the perception 151 experiment, it was possible to determine the perceptual/acoustic motivations of the variation. If the sounds are perceptually similar, the similarity should also be reflected in the acoustic signal (Ohala 1993). This idea was tested with an acoustic analysis of the data collected in the production experiment, which allowed me to control for the different contexts where the sounds in question appear. 7.1.3 Some problems in data collection and analysis Some difficulties arose as I collected the data and performed the analysis. In this section, I summarize the main difficulties encountered and how they were tackled. First, it was very difficult to find subjects to fill in all the social factors I was interested in analyzing. For example, I was not able to find young illiterate females for the interviews. Also, older males with low (or no) education were not able to complete the perception task, probably due to hearing problems, so they were later excluded from the study. Some people were not used to the idea of being interviewed and, much less, to the idea of participating in experiments. Some female participants, for instance, showed up with their babies, sons and daughters. Babies and children were amazed by the microphone and kept touching it (this created loud noises in the recording), they also spoke during the interview, overriding their mother’s voice. The place rented for the study was not sound attenuated, and thus some recordings were not very clear, especially if the subject spoke softly. These difficulties in the data collection stage were solved by performing twice the number of interviews and experiments that had been initially planned. Thus, from a total of forty-five participants, twenty-two were selected for this study. With regard to the variationist analysis of the data, the low frequency of /f/ and the fact that subjects were not evenly distributed across social factor groups made it difficult to run the multivariate analysis without having interaction between factor groups. The interaction in the analysis of /f/ was solved by combining social factor groups into one single group which contained ten different categories (see Chapter 4). This had the disadvantage of not allowing the analysis of Age, Sex and Education (as separate categories) on the probability of occurrence of /f/ variants. The acoustic analysis of approximants was challenging, especially locating the following vowel onset. As mentioned previously (see Chapter 6), approximants are realized with voicing and an open constriction in the vocal tract, and because of this they are very similar to vowels in the 152 spectrogram. They also have a similar formant structure to that of the following vowel. Since approximants and their following vowels are so similar, it is not easy to locate the vowel onset to measure acoustic parameters (formants, duration and intensity) at that point. To tackle this difficulty, the vowel onset was defined at the maximum intensity slope in the CV transition using a script in Praat. When run, this script automatically detected the relevant point for measure. Finally, to test the effect of Education on the acoustic similarity between [ β] and [ ɣ], it was necessary to collapse women and men’s data, since a four way distinction (i.e. Sex x Education) would have reduced the number of tokens per cell and, thus, the confidence in the results obtained. In order to collapse female and male’s data, it was first necessary to find a way to normalize the data. The values of F2 for each subject were normalized using Z-score (see procedure in Chapter 6). 7.1.4 Contribution to linguistics This dissertation explored the perceptual motivations of a highly frequent phenomenon of sound variation in Spanish. Understanding a linguistic feature common across languages and Spanish dialects is essential because it can give important insights on phonetic variation as an indicator of the mental representation of sounds. The labio-velar alternation is a contextually based variation that originates in misperception and that appears in speech as a default mechanism, since it is found in first language acquisition. This study has shown that perceptually driven sound variation can be blocked by literacy. Yet, the extent of the influence of literacy on sound variation seems to depend on the perceptual salience of the sounds in question; in other words, on how aware speakers are of this feature in their speech. This is further discussed below. The two types of phenomena investigated in this dissertation, the labio-velar alternation with /f/ and /b/, are similar in two aspects: (i) there is a shift from labial to velar place of articulation, and ii) the alternations are influenced by the same linguistic and social factors (Following Context, Stress and Education). Yet these phenomena are different in one important way: literacy is a stronger influence on /f/ labio-velar alternation, which is shown by the fact that subjects with low education have significantly lower discrimination scores in the perceptual test and a significantly higher frequency of [x] in speech. Subjects with high education had a much lower percentage of use of [x] (3.1%) than subjects with low education (20.7%). Fricative misperception is common 153 in certain contexts such as [u] and [w] in the formative years. With the introduction of orthography and increased experience with speech, speakers are able to apply ‘corrective rules’ (Ohala 1981) to the ambiguous signal and reorganize their mental representation of sounds in line with the graphemes/phonemes of /f/ and /x/. Approximants are acoustically different from fricatives and this has important sociolinguistic consequences. The perceptual test showed an overall lower discrimination score in subjects with both high and low education. Although subjects with low education scored lower than subjects with high education in approximant discrimination, misperception was rather common in both groups (High Education M=12.36 and Low Education M=18.88), especially when approximants were in the context of [u] and [w]. These results suggest that approximants are overall more difficult to discriminate than fricatives, regardless of literacy. With the introduction of orthography and increased experience with speech, listeners are able to normalize the ambiguous signal to arrive at the intended pronunciation, but this seems to be more challenging with approximants, which are acoustically less salient than fricatives (less duration and almost no frication). In addition to this, listeners are faced with five variants for /b/ ([b], [ ʋ], [β], [ ɣ] and /b/ deletion), as opposed to two for /f/ ([f] and [x]), which may increase the challenge to the perceptual system. Being more variable and difficult to perceive, approximants are not so affected by literacy as fricatives are. Due to this, there is a lower level of awareness of the non- standard variants [ ɣ] and /b/ deletion and less stigma attached to them. Since more possibilities of education are increasingly available, the use of [x], which is highly constrained by formal education, may decrease with time. The use of [ ɣ], on the other hand, is stable in the population, as shown by the analysis of Age, Sex and Education. Another contribution of this dissertation to the field of linguistics is the acoustic analysis of the understudied class of non-sibilant fricatives and approximants in Spanish. The acoustic analysis focused on finding relevant cues in the identification of place of articulation in fricatives and approximants. The results obtained showed that the centre of gravity and the second formant may not be relevant in the identification of place of articulation in fricatives and approximants, respectively. It has been proposed that there is probably no single cue, but a complex interplay of acoustic cues that are taken into consideration in the perception of fricatives and approximants. In the case of fricatives, for instance, there was no clear correlation between the results of the 154 acoustic analysis and those of perception. While in the acoustic analysis the centre of gravity allowed me to distinguish between [f] from [x] in all vocalic contexts, in the perceptual experiment listeners were not able to make this distinction consistently. Further studies should be aimed towards finding acoustic cues that are relevant to perception. 7.2 Summary of results 7.2.1 Labio-velar alternation in fricatives 7.2.1.1 Sociolinguistic results As concerns the alternation of fricatives, the sociolinguistic analysis has shown that Education is one of the strongest factors constraining the realization of [h~x] 41 . The non-standard variant is more frequent in speakers with low education (20%) and less frequent in speakers with high education (3.1%). Since orthography helps to clarify ambiguous speech signals, increasing opportunities for education in rural towns will block the diffusion of [x] or at least diminish it. This trend is confirmed by the analysis of Age, which shows that the use of [x] decreases down the age scale suggesting that it is receding in time. Moreover, since younger speakers have, in general, more years of education than older ones, this gives more strength to the proposal that literacy is an important factor in determining the occurrence of labio-velar alternations. Stress and Position are key factors that affect the frequency of occurrence of [x], which mainly occurs in initial stressed syllables. It has been suggested that since [x] occurs in prominent positions, it constituted a form of fortition. However [x] is not acoustically more prominent than [f] (it actually has lower intensity), and thus the frequent occurrence of [x] in initial stressed syllables may be due to a lexical effect. That is, there are more velar variants in stressed initial position because there are more [fw] sequences in this position. This idea is confirmed by the perception study which showed that neither stress nor position is significant in the discrimination of fricatives. Following segment has the second strongest effect on the realization of [x] with [w] favouring its realization (.98) and the rest of the vowels [a, e, i, o, u] disfavouring it (.12). The probabilities of 41 Since the sociolinguistic analysis consisted on an auditory classification of variants and [h] and [x] are difficult to distinguish, they were collapsed. 155 occurrence of [x] according to following context clearly confirm the hypothesis that [w] influences the presence of the velar variant. Furthermore, the results from perception showed that there was higher confusion in this environment, which proves that the velar variant is the result of confusion between [f] and [x] in the context of [w]. However, the fact that the round vowels [o, u] do not positively influence [x] was counter to the hypothesis proposed. As it appears, it is strictly the glide [w] that triggers the occurrence of [x], with some advanced speakers extending it to other contexts. 7.2.1.2 Perception results The results of the perception experiment show that [f] and [x] have low identification scores when followed by [u] and [w]. This result confirms that there is perceptual confusion between [f] and [x] in context of round vowels and diphthongs. Regarding education, there is a significant difference in the discrimination performance of subjects with high and low education. Subjects with high education had overall less non-target percepts than subjects with low education (High Education M=6.86, Low Education M=14.25). However, the fact that a following [o] did not trigger perceptual confusion between [f] and [x] was unexpected, since [o] is also [round]. Thus, it appears that the relevant features favouring the velar variant is [round] and [high]. 7.2.1.3 Acoustic results With regard to the acoustic analysis of fricatives, it was hypothesized that there would not be a significant difference between the centre of gravity of [f] and [x] followed by [u] and [w], since they are supposed to be more acoustically similar in these contexts. To remind the reader, the centre of gravity is the acoustic parameter most commonly used to identify place of articulation in fricatives. The results showed a significant difference between [f] and [x] across all vocalic contexts, which disconfirmed the hypothesis of the similarity of [f] and [x] in the context of [u] and [w]. These results may suggest either that the centre of gravity is not relevant in the distinction between fricatives or, that the centre of gravity is but one of the acoustic aspects that perceivers take into consideration. 156 7.2.2 Labio-velar alternation in approximants 7.2.2.1 Sociolinguistic results Regarding [ ɣ], its use is even more circumscribed than that of [x]: [ ɣ] only occurs with following [w] in initial and stressed syllables. Education is a strong constraint on [ ɣ], since higher probabilities of occurrence are seen in the speech of speakers with low education. It is interesting to note, however, that [ ɣ] was also favoured by some of the speakers with high education, which was not the case with [x] that was only favoured by speakers with low education. Unlike [x], the preceding segment was selected as significant in the occurrence of [ ɣ]. As stated in the sociolinguistics analysis (Chapter 4), this may be related to approximants’ different acoustic characteristics and the phenomenon of velar insertion which is triggered by the lenition of underlying /gw/ and /bw/ to [w]. The comparison of probabilities of use of [ ɣ] by different age groups indicates that younger speakers favour it (.70) while adults and older speakers disfavour it (.42 and .38, respectively). Although this may indicate that labio-velar alternations in approximants is a case of language change, there is evidence that this variation is old in the language (Vidal de Battini 1964) and that, as shown on this study, its use is circumscribed to only one context. It is argued, then, that the labio-velar alternation in approximants is a case of age grading, being very frequent in the younger generation and then receding in use in the adult and older generations. Since this variation is very common in first language acquisition and it is corrected at school, it may be the case that the /b/ labio-velar alternation has become a sociolinguistic marker of formal speech. To determine if this is the case, further analysis should be carried out to compare the use of [ɣ] in formal vs. informal speech. 7.2.2.2 Perception results There are significantly lower identification scores for [β] followed by [u] and [w] than followed by [a]. Although the difference is not significant, in the perception experiment there is more misperception of approximants than fricatives, which indicates that approximants are more difficult to perceive than fricatives. Another factor that significantly affected the identification of [β] and [ ɣ] was stress; approximants in stressed syllables had significantly higher identification score than in unstressed syllables. 157 Regarding the effect of Education, there is a significant difference in the discrimination performance of subjects with High vs. Low Education. Subjects with high education have higher identification scores in the perception task than subjects with low education. However, with approximants there is a smaller range of difference between the discrimination scores of subjects with high and low education (Approximants: High Education M=12.36, Low Education M=18.88 vs. Fricatives: High Education M=6.86, Low Education M=14.25), which indicates that approximants are not as highly influenced by literacy as fricatives are. 7.2.2.3 Acoustic results As stated earlier (Section 1.2), the acoustic analysis tested the hypothesis that there is acoustic similarity between labial and velar approximants, which is why they are confused in perception. The second formant (F2) was the acoustic parameter considered in the analysis, since it is relevant in the classification of place of articulation. The acoustic analysis showed no significant difference in the F2 (measured at vowel onset) of [β] and [ ɣ] followed by [u] and [w]. This result confirms the hypothesis that the confusion between [ β] and [ ɣ] is due to their acoustic similarity in the contexts of [u] and [w]. However, the analysis also showed no significant difference between [ β] and [ɣ] in the context of [o] and [i], which is quite intriguing considering that there is less misperception and labio-velar alternation in such contexts. If the labio-velar alternation were the result of acoustic similarity and perceptual confusion, then a higher frequency of [ ɣ] in the context of [u] would be expected in the sociolinguistic analysis. However, this is not the case, since [ ɣ] is only frequent with [w]. All these facts suggest that the F2 is not the only relevant acoustic cue in the perception of place of articulation in approximants. Considering the scatter plots presented in Chapter 6, it seems that the F2 (measured at vowel onset) is more indicative of place of articulation of following vowels, since clear clusters of vowels were observed in the vocalic space. In other words, while the F2 at vowel onset may be a relevant acoustic cue in the identification of place of articulation in voiced stops (Sussman et al. 1991), this does not seem to be the case for approximants. Again, more research is needed to find those acoustic cues that are relevant in distinguishing place of articulation in approximants. 158 7.3 Comparison of the three tasks In this section subjects’ performances are compared across different tasks. In Section 7.3.1, I discuss fricatives and, in Section 7.3.2 approximants. The analysis is carried out by correlating: (i) the results of sociolinguistic interviews with those of perception, (ii) the results of perception with the acoustic analysis of the production experiment and, (iii) the results of the acoustic analysis with the results of sociolinguistic analysis. R 2 values closer to 1 are considered highly correlated. 7.3.1 Comparison of subjects’ performance in the interviews, perception and production experiments for fricatives. Figure 7.1 shows the regression line (R 2=0.27) between the sociolinguistic analysis and the perception experiment. It shows that speakers with low scores of non-target percepts also have low rates of use of non-standard variants [x ~ Ø]. Figure 7.1. Percentage of [x] and /f/ deletion (sociolinguistic interviews) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment). Figure 7.2 shows the regression line between the sociolinguistic results and the acoustic analysis of the production experiment. The line (R 2=0.13) indicates that those speakers with highest rate 159 of non-standard variants ([x] and /f/ deletion) also tend to have less difference between the centre of gravity of /f/ and /x/, which means an increased percentage of [x] in the production experiment. Figure 7.2. Difference between the COG of /f/ and /x/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of [x] and [Ø] (sociolinguistic interviews) Figure 7.3 illustrates the low correlation (R 2=0.01) between the acoustic and the perception results. I would have expected a decrease in the difference of the centre of gravity, which means more [x], in subjects with the highest percentage of non-target percepts. However, no such result was obtained. This is further discussed in 7.3.3. 160 Figure 7.3 Difference between the COG of /f/ and /x/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment). 7.3.2 Comparison of subjects’ performance in the interviews, perception and production experiments for approximants. Figure 7.4 shows the weak correlation (R 2=0.07) between the sociolinguistic and the perception results. As in the case of fricatives, subjects with high rates of non-target percepts tend to have high rates of non-standard variants ([ ɡ ~ ɣ ~ Ø]). It is interesting to note that the correlation in approximants is lower than in fricatives, which is an indication that approximants are generally more difficult to perceive, regardless of subjects’ literacy levels. 161 Figure 7.4. Percentage of [ ɡ, ɣ, Ø] (sociolinguistic interviews) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment). Figure 7.5 illustrates the regression line (R 2=0.1) between the sociolinguistic results and the acoustic analysis of the production experiment. The line indicates that those speakers with the highest rate of non-standard variants also tend to have less difference between the F2 at vowel onset (Z-normalized), which means an increased percentage of the velar variants in the production experiment. This means a match between the sociolinguistic (auditory) analysis of the variants and the acoustic analysis of the production experiment. 162 Figure 7.5. Difference between (normalized) F2 at vowel onset of /b/ and / ɡ/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of [ ɡ ~ ɣ] (sociolinguistic interviews) Figure 7.6 illustrates the lack of correlation (R 2=0.002) between the acoustic and the perception results. A decrease in the difference between the F2 of /ɡ/ and /b/ at vowel onset (Z-normalized) would have been expected in subjects with the highest non-target percepts. This decrease would mean a higher rate of the velar variant in production. However, no such correlation was found. As stated earlier, this may be due to F2 at vowel onset not being an accurate indication of place of articulation in approximants. 163 Figure 7.6. Difference between (normalized) F2 at vowel onset of /b/ and / ɡ/ (production experiment) vs. percentage of misperception (perception experiment). 7.3.3 General considerations Although the correlations found are rather weak, they tend to support the hypothesis proposed; speakers with high scores of non-target percepts tend to have high scores of non-standard variants. This tendency is more marked in fricatives than in approximants. The perception results presented in Chapter 5 show that approximants are more difficult to perceive overall, even for those speakers with low rates of use of non-standard variants. This may explain why [ ɣ] is favoured by some speakers with high education and why it does not have the stigma that [x] does. The analyses of subjects’ performance in the acoustic experiment and the sociolinguistic interviews for fricatives and approximants show a trend towards less acoustic difference between [f] ~ [x] and [ β] ~ [ ɣ] in those speakers with high rates of use of non-standard variants. In other words, those speakers who have a frequent use of [x] and [ ɣ] in sociolinguistic interviews are also the ones with a frequent use of [x] and [ ɣ] in the production experiment. The weakest correlations were found between the acoustic and the perception results. It was initially expected that lesser acoustic difference between [f] ~ [x] and [ β] ~ [ ɣ] would be found in those speakers with higher rates of non-target percepts; however this was not the case. It has 164 been proposed earlier that this lack of correlation may be due to the fact that the acoustic parameters used in the study of fricatives and approximants may not be relevant in their perception. It could also mean that perceivers use a combination of acoustic parameters to distinguish fricative and approximants’ place of articulation. 7.4 Theoretical implications The present research has tested and confirmed Ohala’s (1989, 1993) theory of ‘mini sound change’ with data coming from both sociolinguistic interviews and experimental conditions. The misperception between [f] ~ [x] and [ β] ~ [ ɣ] is a precondition for their variation in speech. This is confirmed by the results which indicate a high rate of non-target percepts in those speakers that have a high rate of non-standard variants in sociolinguistic interviews. The fact that less variation occurs in the speech of those speakers with low scores of non-standard percepts further confirms that orthography helps to resist perceptually driven variation. This adds evidence to the research (Morais et al. 1979, Bertelson et al. 1989) which suggests that the acquisition of orthography influences speech perception. Since several studies have found that literacy leads to phoneme awareness (Carroll et al. 2003, Treiman and Bourassa 2000, Byrne 1998, Hulme et al. 2002, Muter et al. 1998, Wagner et al. 1994, Bassetti 2006), the differences in the discrimination performance between subjects with high and low education could be due to their different phonological representations. The results of this work are compatible with previous research (Mazzaro 2005) which, within phonological theory, proposed that the labio-velar alternation is a case of debuccalization followed by a fortition process (see Chapter 2). In the case of the fricative, it has been proposed that through a process of weakening, /f/ loses its place features and becomes a glottal aspiration (/f/ > /h/). The hypothesis initially proposed in Mazzaro (2005) stated that when [h] is followed by the back vowels /o, u/, there is spreading of the dorsal features of these vowels onto the preceding segment, yielding a dorsal [x] (i.e. /f/ > /h/ > /x/). The first stage of the change, when [f] turns to [h], is a dissimilation process motivated by an OCP (Obligatory Contour Principle) constraint that disallows two consecutive segments bearing the [+labial] feature. Thus, the OCP would rule out sequences of /f/ followed by labial vowels such as /u/ and /o/ and a glide /w/. However, as mentioned in Chapter 2, this account could not explain why fortition does not occur with /o/ and /u/, which are also [round]. From this study, it becomes clear that weakening affects 165 the fricatives in all phonetic contexts, especially when followed by [round] vowels. The fortition process, then, affects [h] followed by the glide [w] in prominent position (stressed syllables). It could be possible to argue that glides (which are short, have lower intensity than vowels and are heavily influenced by them) are reinforced when in prominent position 42 , thus leading to [x], which is related to [h] in manner and to [w] in place features. Finally, the variation between [f] and [x] is perpetuated by their perceptual similarity. In the case of approximants, previous work on Argentine Spanish (Colantoni & Marinescu 2010) has suggested that they undergo a high rate of deletion (20%) across vocalic contexts. Stress was not significant in the degree of /b/ and / ɡ/ deletion. It could be possible to suggest that strengthening of [w] will occur in those cases where the approximant has been deleted. For example, the /b/ and / ɡ/ in words such as Buenos Aires and Güemes undergo deletion and then strengthening: /b/ deletion strengthening (velar insertion) Buenos Aires: [ βwe]nos Aires [we]nos Aires [ ɣwe]nos Aires It is proposed that /b/ labio-velar alternation is related the phenomenon of velar insertion (see Chapter 2) common across Spanish dialects. This approach would explain why [ ɣ] occurs almost exclusively in the adjacency of [w]. It also helps to explain why the alternation in adult speech goes from labial to velar and not vice versa. 7.5 Conclusion The specific questions initially posed by this investigation asked about: (i) the acoustic and perceptual motivations of the labio-velar alternation, and (ii) the social and linguistic factors that influence the variation. With regards to (i), this study has confirmed that the labio-velar alternation has an origin in the perceptual confusion. This perceptual confusion is related to the acoustic similarity between [β] ~ [ ɣ] and [f] ~ [x]. However more research is needed to establish 42 This process of glide strengthening is well known in Spanish (hielo ‘ice’ [‘jielo] may become [‘d ʒelo]; huevo ‘egg’ [we βo] may be realized as [ ɣwe βo]. 166 acoustic parameters that are relevant to characterize place of articulation in fricatives and approximants. Concerning (ii), the performance in sociolinguistic interviews largely matches the performance in the perception experiment. Following Context was a strong factor constraining the occurrence of the velar variant in the interviews. Likewise, in the perceptual experiment, Following Context influenced the amount of misperception. This means that contextually based phonetic variation, such as the labio-velar alternation, has a perceptual motivation. Regarding the social factors, Education was one of the strongest, confirming the hypothesis that speakers with high education have a lower frequency of non-standard variants due to the influence of orthography in resisting perceptually driven variation. This result provides further evidence that orthographic training affects speakers’ phoneme-based phonological representations. 7.6 Future directions Sixty years of acoustic research have provided a rich body of knowledge on the identification of place and manner features in vowels and consonants. However, it is crucially important to evaluate the relevance of acoustic cues in perception, since it is known that several cues are available to listeners and that listeners are capable of using some or all of them according to the phonetic context. While this study corroborated the perceptual basis of /f/ and /b/ labio-velar alternations, it did not account for this in acoustic terms. In other words, further research needs to be done in order to determine the acoustic parameters that are relevant in the characterization of place of articulation of [f], [x], [ β] and [ɣ]. This research will contribute to the understanding of speech perception and its relation to speech production. An interesting observation from this study is the fact that the labio-velar alternation in children is bidirectional rather than unidirectional as in adults. This observation suggests that children may be paying attention to different acoustic cues than adults (Nittrouer 2002). Further research that compares the production and perception of fricatives in children and adult speakers can shed light on important differences in their perceptual strategies. This will advance understanding in relation to how attention to various acoustic parameters changes as speakers gain experience with their native language. 167 References Abadía de Quant, I. 1993. Observaciones sobre Aspectos del Español de Corrientes. Siglos XVI- XIX. Resistencia, Chaco: Facultad de Humanidades, Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Alba, O. 1990. Variación Fonética y Diversidad Social en el Español Dominicano de Santiago . Santiago: Pontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra. Audacity ® 1.2.6. http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ Bassetti, B. 2006. Orthographic input and phonological representations in learners of Chinese as a foreign language. Written Language & Literacy 9:1, 95-114. Baudouin de Courtenay, J. N. 1910/1972. Phonetic Laws. In A Baudouin de Courtenay Anthology: the Beginnings of Structural Linguistics. Translated and edited with an introduction by Edward Stankiewicz. Bloomington: Indiana University Press Behrens, S. & S. Blumstein. 1988. On the role of amplitude of the fricative noise in the perception of place of articulation in voiceless fricative consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America , 84 (3), September 1988. Bhat, D. 1978. A general study of palatalization; in Greenberg, Universals of Human Language, vol 2: Phonology . Stanford: Standford University Press. 47-92. Blevins, J. 2004. Evolutionary Phonology. The Emergence of Sound Patterns . Cambridge, CUP. Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language . New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Boersma, P. and D. Weenink. 2009. Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer. Version 5.1.15 [computer program] Retrieved August 30, 2009, from http://www.praat.org Bonebrake, V. 1979. Historical labial-velar changes in Germanic. Ume å Studies in the Humanities , 29. Ume å: Acta Universitatis Umensis. Borzone de Manrique, A. M. & M. I. Massone. 1981. Acoustic analysis and perception of Spanish fricative consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69(4). 1145- 1153. Braine, Martin D.S. 1974. On what might constitute learnable phonology. Language 50:270– 299. Browman, C. & L. M. Goldstein. 1991. Gestural structures: distinctiveness, phonological processes, and historical change. In Ignatius Mattingly & Michael Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.) Modularity and the Motor Theory of Speech Perception . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. -----. 1995. Gestural syllable position effects in American English. In F. Bell-Berti and L. J. Raphael (Eds.) Producing Speech: Contemporary Issues. For Katherine Safford Harris. AIP Press: Woodbury, NY. Bybee, J. 2001. Phonology and Language Use . Cambridge: CUP. -----. 2002. Word frequency and context of use in the lexical diffusion of phonetically conditioned sound change. Language Variation and Change 14. 261-290. 168 Byrd, D. (1994) Articulatory timing in English consonant sequences. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics , 86, May 1994. Byrne, B. 1998. The Foundation of Literacy: The Child’s Acquisition of the Alphabetic Principle. Hove, East Sussex, England: Psychology Press Cáceres de Romero, N. I. 1989. Historia de Caá Catí. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias, Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Carroll, J. M., Snowling, M. J., Hulme C. and J. Stevenson. 2003. The development of phonological awareness in preschool children. Developmental Psychology. Vol. 39, No. 5, 913-923. Catford, J. C. 1977. Fundamental Problems in Phonetics . Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Cedergren, H. 1973. The Interplay of Social and Linguistic Factors in Panama . Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University. Cedergren, Henrietta and David Sankoff. 1974. Variable rules: Performance as a statistical reflection of competence. Language. 50: 333-355. Chambers, J. K. 1995. Sociolinguistic Theory: Linguistic Variation and its Social Significance. Language in Society, vol 22. Oxford: Blackwell. -----. 2005. Sociolinguistics and the language faculty. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 50(1-4): 215–239. Chen, M. 1973. Predictive power in phonological description. Lingua 32: 173-191. Chen, M. and W. S.-Y. Wang. 1975. Sound change: Actuation and implementation. Language 51:255-81. Cho, Y-M Y. (1991) On the Universality of the Coronal Articulator. In Paradis, C. and J-F Prunet (eds.), Phonetics and Phonology: The Special Status of Coronals . San Diego: Academic Press, Inc. 101-124. Chomsky, N. & M. Halle. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English . New York: Harper & Row. Colantoni, L. 2011. Laboratory approaches to sound variation and change. In Diaz-Campos, M (ed.), Handbook the Hispanic Sociolinguistics . UK: Wiley-Blackwell. 9-35. Colantoni, L. & I. Marinescu. 2010. The Scope of Stop Weakening in Argentine Spanish. In Selected Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology (ed.) Marta Ortega-Llebaria, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Colantoni L. & Y. Rafat. in press. Las consontes róticas en el español argentino. In Colantoni L. & C. Rodriguez Louro (eds) Perspectivas Teóricas y Experimentales sobre el Español del la Argentina. Editorial Iberoamericana. Cole, J., Hualde, J. I., & Iskarous, K. 1999. Effects of prosodic and segmental context on /g/ deletion in Spanish. In O.Fujimura, B. D. Joseph, & B. Palek (Eds.), Proceedings of the forth linguistics and phonetics conference (pp. 575-589). Dart, S.N. 1991. Articulatory and Acoustic Properties of Apical and Laminal Articulations. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 79, 1991 Escure, G. 1977. Hierarchies and phonological weakening. Lingua, 43, 55-64. 169 Farnetani, E. 1986. A pilot study of the articulation of /n/ in Italian using electropalatography and airflow measurements. Proceedings of the 15e Journées d'Etudes sur la Parole, Aix-en- Provence, France, May 27th-30th , 23-26. Quaderni del Centro di Studio per le Ricerche di Fonetica del C.N.R ., Vol. V, 277-281. Feagin, C. 1979. Variation and Change in Alabama English. Washington, DC.: Georgetown University Press. Fontanella de Weinberg, M.B. 1978. Un cambio lingüístico en marcha: las palatales del español bonaerense. Orbis . 27, 215-247. Fougeron, C. 1999a. Prosodically conditioned articulatory variation: A review. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 97, 1-73. -----. 1999b. Articulatory properties of initial segments in several prosodic constituents in French. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 97, 74-99. Fougeron, C. & P. A. Keating. 1997. Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. J. Acoust. Soc. Am . 101, 3728-3740 Foulkes, P. 1997. Historical laboratory phonology – Investigating /p/ > /f/ > /h/ changes. Language and Speech , 40 (3). 249-276. Fowler, C. A. 1994. Invariants, specifiers, cues: An investigation of locus equations as information for place of articulation. Percept. Psychophys . 55, 597-611. Frost, R & L. Katz. 1989. Orthographic depth and the interaction of visual and auditory processing in word recognition. Memory and Cognition , 17: 302-311. Frost, R. and J. C. Ziegler. 2007. Speech and spelling interaction: the interdependence of visual and auditory word recognition. In Gaskel, G. (ed.) The Handbook of Psycholinguistics . Oxford: OUP, 107-117. Gabriel & Labastía. In press. La entonación en el español de Buenos Aires. In Colantoni L. & C. Rodriguez Louro (eds) Perspectivas Teóricas y Experimentales sobre el Español del la Argentina. Editorial Iberoamericana. Gal, S. 1979. Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic Change in Bilingual Austria. New York: Academic Press. Greenberg, J. 1966. Synchronic and diachronic universals in phonology. Language 42:508-17. Greenberg, J. 1978. Diachrony, synchrony, and language universals. In Greenberg J., Ferguson, C. A. and E. A. Moravcsic (eds.), Universals of Human Language , vol. 3. Stanford, CA: Sanford University Press. 47-82. Guion, S. 1998. The role of perception in sound change of velar palatalization. Phonetica , 55:18- 52. Guitarte, G. 1955. El ensordecimiento del zeísmo porteño. Revista de Filología Española , XXXIX, 19, 261-283. Guy, G. 1980. Variation in the group and the individual: The case of final stop deletion. In W. Labov (ed.) Locating Language in Time and Space. New York: Academic Press, 1-36. -----. 1981. Linguistic variation in Brazilian Portuguese: Aspects of the phonology, syntax and language history . Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. 170 -----. 1993. Quantitative analysis. In Preston D. (ed.), American Dialect Research . Amsterdam. John Benjamins. 223-49. -----. 1996. The General and the Particular: Constraints on /s/ Deletion in Argentine Spanish. Paper presented at the Conference “New Ways of Analyzing Variation”. University of Nevada at Las Vegas. Hammond, M. 2001. The Sounds of Spanish: Analysis and Application. Somerville: Cascadilla Press. Hardcastle, W. J. and N. Hewlett (eds.). 1999. Coarticulation: Theory, Data and Techniques . Cambridge: CUP. Harris, K. S. 1958. Cues for the discrimination of American English fricatives in spoken syllables. Language and Speech, 1, 1-7. Harris, J. W. 1969. Spanish Phonology . Cambridge: the MIT Press. Harris, J. W and E. M. Kaisse. 1999. Palatal vowels, glides and obstruents in Argentinian Spanish Phonology. Cambridge University Press 16: 117-190 Haspelmath, M. 2005. Against Markedness (and what to replace it with). To appear in Journal of Linguistics 41 or 42. Hayward, Katrina. 2000. Experimental Phonetics. Longman Hernández. J. 1967. El Gaucho Martin Fierro . Bilingual Edition by Ward, C. E. United States: State University of New York Press. Hochberg, J. 1986. /s/ deletion and pronoun usage in Puerto Rican Spanish. In Sankoff D. (ed.), Diachrony and Diversity , New York: Academic Press, 199-210. Hock, H. 1991. Principles of Historical Linguistics , 2nd edition. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Hockett, C. 1958. A Course in Modern Linguistics . New York: Macmillan. Holmes, J. 1992. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics . London and New York: Longman. Hualde, J. I. 2005. The Sounds of Spanish . New York: Cambridge University Press. Hulme, C. Hatcher, P. J., Nation, K., Brown, A., Adams, J. and G. Stuart. 2002. Phoneme awareness is a better predictor of early reading skill than onset-rime awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology , 82, 2-28. Hwu, F. (1994). Consonant weakening and strengthening in Spanish dialects . University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (2001) http://www.indec.gov.ar/webcenso/index.asp Jakimik, J., Cole, RA, and Rudnicky, AI 1985. Sound and spelling in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory & Language 24: 165-178. Jesperson, O. 1924. The Philosophy of Grammar . London: Allen and Unwin. Jongman, A., Wayland, R. and S. Wong. 2000. Acoustic characteristic of English fricatives. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 108(3): 1252:1263 Johnson, D. E. 2008. Getting off the GoldVarb standard: introducing Rbrul for mixed-effects variable rule analysis. Language and linguistics compass 3(1): 359-383. 171 -----. 2010. Rbrul Manual. http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~johnson4/Rbrul_manual.html Keating P., Cho T., Fougeron C., & C. Hsu. 2003. Domain-initial articulatory strengthening in four languages. In J. Local, R. Ogden, R. Temple, (Eds.) Phonetic Interpretation (Papers in Laboratory Phonology 6) , Cambridge University Press, pp. 143-161 Kenstowicz, M. 1994. Phonology in Generative Grammar . Oxford: Blackwell. Kingston, J. 2008. Lenition. In L.Colantoni & J. Steele (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 3 rd Conference on Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology (pp. 1-31). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Kiparsky, P. (1988). Phonological change. In Newmeyer, F. J. (ed.) Linguistics: the Cambridge survey , Vol I, Linguistic Theory Foundations . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 363-415. Kirchner, R. 2004. Consonant lenition. In B.Hayes, R. Kirchner, & D. Steriade (Eds.), Phonetically based phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 313-345. Kolinsky, R., Cary, L. & Morais, J. (1987). Awareness of words as phonological entities: The role of literacy. Applied Psycholinguistics , 8, 223-232. Labov, W. 1963. The social motivation of sound change. Word 19: 273-309. -----. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center of Applied Linguistics. -----. 1969. Contraction, deletion and inherent variability of the English copula. Language 45: 715-762. -----. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. -----. 1984. Field methods of the project on linguistic change and variation. In Baugh J. & Sherzer J. (eds.), Language in Use: Readings on Sociolinguistics . Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. 28-54. -----. 1990. The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change 2 (2). 205-254. -----. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change , vol 1, Internal Factors . Cambridge and Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. -----. 2001. Principles of Linguistic Change , vol 2, Social Factors . Cambridge and Oxford: Blackwell Publishers -----. 2007. Transmission and diffusion . Language 83: 344–87 Ladefoged, P. 2003. An Introduction to Fieldwork and Instrumental Techniques . USA: Blackwell Publishing. -----. 1982. A Course in Phonetics . San Diego: Harcourt Brace. -----. 1964. A Phonetic Study of West African Languages . Cambridge: CUP. Ladefogued P. and I. Maddieson. 1996. The Sounds of the World’s Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. Lavoie, L. 2001. Consonant strength: phonological patterns and phonetic manifestations . New York: Routledge 172 Lazzari, M. 2009. Nat: Analysing Sociolinguistic Interviews by Computer. Version 115 [computer program] Lewis, Anthony. (2001). Weakening of Intervocalic /p, t, k/ in Two Spanish Dialects: Toward the Quantification of Lenition Processes . Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Li, P. J.-K. 1982. Linguistic variations of different age groups in the Atayalic dialects. The Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies, new series, 14:167-91. Liberman, A. and I. Mattingly. 1985. The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition , 21, pp. 1-36. Lieberman, P. 1965. On the acoustic basis of the perception of intonation by linguists . Word, 21, 40-54. Lindblom, B. 1963. On vowel reduction. Rep. No. 29, The Royal Institute of Technology, Speech Transmission Laboratory , Stockholm, Sweden. -----. 1990. Explaining phonetic variation: a sketch of the H & H theory. In Hardcastle W. and A. Marchal (eds.), Speech Production and Speech Modelling, pp. 403-39. Dordrecht:Kluwer. Lindblom, B., Guion, S. Hura, S. Moon, S-J. and R. Willerman. 1995. Is sound change adaptive? Rivista di Linguistica , 7.1, pp. 5-37. Lloyd, P. 1987. From Latin to Spanish. Memoirs , vol 173. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. Lozano, M. 1979. Stop and spirant alternations: Fortition and spirantization processes in Spanish phonology . University of Indiana Luce, P. A. 1986. Neighborhoods of Words in the Mental Lexicon , Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Psychology, Indiana University. Ma, R. and E. Herasimchuk. 1968. The linguistic dimensions of a bilingual neighbourhood. In Fishman J. et. al. Bilingualism in the Barrio . Bloomington: Indiana University, 347-464. MacLeod, B. 2008. The Perceptual Basis of Velar Insertion in Costa Rican Spanish. Paper presented at the Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, Quebec City, QC. -----. 2009. The Lenition and Fortition Connection: Velar Insertion in Buenos Aires Spanish. Unpublished paper. University of Toronto. Mann, V.A., and Repp, B.H. 1980. Influence of vocalic context on perception of the [sh]-[s] distinction. Perception & Psychophysics , 28, 213–228. Martinez-Celtran, E. 1991. Sobre la naturaleza fonética de los alófonos de /b, d, g/ en el español y sus distintas denominaciones. Verba 18, 235-253. -----. 2004. Problems in the classification of approximants. Journal of the International Phonetic Association , 34. pp. 201-210. Mazzaro, N. 2010. Changing Perceptions: The Sociophonetic Motivations of the Labial Velar Alternation in Spanish. Selected Proceedings of the 4 th Conference on Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 173 -----. 2008. Operation-approximant’ and how they change identities: The acoustic and perceptual analysis of Spanish labial and velar approximants. Presentation at Laboratory Approaches to Spanish -----. 2005. Aspiration and velarization of /f/ in Argentine Spanish. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, volume 25, pp. 58-67. -----. 2003. Speaking Spanish with Style. A Sociolinguistic Analysis of /s/ in Corrientes, Argentina. M.A. dissertation. Toronto, Canada: York University. -----. Manuscript.a. Labial-Velar Alternation in Argentine Spanish: An Autosegmental Analysis Menéndez Pidal, Ramón. 1964. Cantar de mío Cid, vol 1, Gramática, 4th ed. Madrid: Espasa- Calpe. Milroy, L. 1987. Language and Social Networks . Oxford: Blackwell. Morais, J., Cary, L., Alegria, J. and P. Bertelson. 1979. Does awareness of speech as a sequence of phone arise spontaneously? Cognition , 7(4):323-31. Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M. and S. Taylor. 1998. Segmentation, not rhyming, predicts early process in learning to read. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology , 71, 3-27. Navarro Tomas, T.1918. Manual de Pronunciación Española . 1971 16 th ed. Madrid: CSIC Nittrouer, S. 2002. Learning to perceive speech: How fricative perception changes, and how it stays the same. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112 , 711-719. Ohala, J. J. 1981. Articulatory constraints on the cognitive representation of speech. In: T. Myers, J. Laver, & J. Anderson (eds.), The cognitive representation of speech . Amsterdam: North Holland. 111 - 122. -----. 1989. Sound change is drawn from a pool of synchronic variation. In L. E. Breivik and E. H. Jahr (eds.), Language Change: Contributions to the Study of its Causes. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. -----. 1992. What’s cognitive, what’s not, in sound change. In Kellermann, G. and M.D. Morrissey (eds.), Diachrony within Synchrony: Language History and Cognition. Frankfurt am Main. Peter Lan Verlag, pp. 309-355. ----- 1993. The phonetics of sound change. In Charles Jones (ed.), Historical Linguistics: Problems and Perspectives. London: Longman. 237-278. Ohala, J. J. & Lorentz, J. 1977. The story of [w]: an exercise in the phonetic explanation for sound patterns. Berkeley Ling. Soc., Proc., Ann. Meeting 3.577 - 599. Oliveira, M. de 1983. Phonological variation in Brazilian Portuguese. University of Pennsylvania dissertation. Ortega-Llebaria, M. 2004. Interplay between phonetic and inventory constraints in the degree of spirantization of voiced stops: Comparing intervocalic /b/ and intervocalic /g/ in Spanish and English. In T.Face (Ed.), Laboratory Approaches to Spanish phonetics and phonology . The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter. Pagliuca, W. & Mowrey R. 1987. Articulatory evolution. In A. G. Ramat, O. Carruba and G. Bernini (eds), Papers from the 17 th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamin, pp. 459-472. 174 Penny, R. 1991. The History of the Spanish Language , 2 nd ed. Cambridge: CUP. Perkell, J., Guenther, F., Lane, H., Marrone, N., Matthies, M., Stockmann, E., Tiede, M., & Zandipour, M. 2006. Production and perception of phoneme contrasts covary across speakers. In J. Harrington & M. Tabain (Eds.), Speech Production: Models, Phonetic Processes and Techniques . New York: Psychology Press, pp. 69-84. Phillips, B. 1984. Word frequency and the actuation of sound change. Language , 60, pp. 320- 342. Pickett, J. M. 1999. The Acoustics of Speech Communication. Fundamentals, Speech Perception, Theory, and Technology . Boston Allyn and Bacon. Pierrehumbert, J. 1999. What people know about sound of language. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 29 . 111-20. Poplack, S. 1979. Function and process in a variable phonology . University of Pennsylvania dissertation. Port, R. 2007. How are words stored in memory? Beyond phones and phonemes. New Ideas in Psychology 25 (2007) 143–170 -----. 2008. All is prosody: Phones and phonemes are the ghosts of letters. Prosody 2008 conference proceedings . Campinas, Brazil. Quilis, A. 1993. Tratado de Fonética y Fonología Españolas. Madrid: Editorial Gredos. R Development Core Team. 2009. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing . Version 2.10.1. [computer program] Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org Raphael, L. 2005. Acoustic cues to the perception of segmental phonemes. In Pisoni, D. and R. Remez (eds.), The Handbook of Perception. USA: Blackwell Publishing. Recasens Vives, D. 2008. Métodos de Normalización y de Representación de Datos Acústicos y Articulatorios. Estudios de Fonética Experimental XVII . Barcelona: Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, pp 331-341. -----. 2002. Weakening and strengthening in Romance revisited. Rivista di Linguistica, 14, 327- 373. Rickford, J. 1979. Variation in a Creole Continuum : Quantitative and Implicational Approaches . University of Pennsylvania Ph.D. dissertation -----. 1986. The need for new approaches to social class análisis in sociolinguistics. Language and Communication , Vol. 6, No. 3, pp 215-221. Roca, I. and Johnson, W. 1999: A course in phonology . Cornwall: Blackwell. Rohena-Madrazo, M. in press. Las sibilantes post-alveolares en el espa ñol de Buenos Aires. In Colantoni L. & C. Rodriguez Louro (eds) Perspectivas Teóricas y Experimentales sobre el Español del la Argentina. Editorial Iberoamericana. -----. 2008. Buenos Aires Spanish in real time: the advancement of palatal fricative devoicing. 37th New Ways of Analyzing Variation Conference . Romero, J. 1995. Gestural Organization in Spanish. An Experimental Study of Spirantization and Aspiration. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Connecticut. 175 Rousselot, P.J. 1901. Princepes de Phonétique expérimentale . Paris: Welter Sankoff, G. 1972. A Quantitative Paradigm for the Study of Communicative Competence, Conference on the Ethnography of Speaking, Austin, Texas, April 20-23. Sankoff, D. and S. Laberge. 1978. The linguistic market and the statistical explanation of variability. In Sankoff (ed.), Linguistic Variation: Models and Methods . New York: Academic Press. 239-50. Sankoff, D. and G. Sankoff. 1973. Sample survey methods and computer-assisted analysis in the study of grammatical variation. In Canadian Languages in their Social Context. Regna Darnell (ed.), Edmonton: Linguistic Research Inc 7-63. Sankoff D., Tagliamonte S.A. & E. Smith. 2005. Goldvarb for OS X. Computer Program . University of Toronto. Canada. Shadle, C. H. 1990 Articulatory-acoustic relationships in fricative consonants. In Hardcastle, W. J. and A. Marchal (eds.), Speech Production and Speech Modelling. Dordecht: Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 187-209. Seidenberg, M.S., & Tanenhaus, M.K. 1979. Orthographic effects on rhyme monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, pp.5, 546-554. Sievers, E. 1901/1967. Foundations of Phonetics. In Lehmann, W. P. (ed.), A Reader in Nineteenth-Century Historical Indo-European , pp. 258-266. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Sonou de los Ríos, R. 1989. Variantes de /s/ en San Juan . Universidad Nacional de San Juan, Facultad de Filosofía, Humanidades y Artes. San Juan. Stampe, D. 1969. The acquisition of phonetic representation. In Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society , ed. Robert Binnick, Alice Davison, Georgia Green, and Jerry Morgan, 443–454. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. Stankiewicz, E. 1972. Problems of emotive language. In Approaches to Semiotics: Cultural Anthropology, Education, Linguistics, Psychiatry, Psychology , T.A. Sebeok, A.S. Hayes & M.C. Bateson (eds). The Hague-Paris: Mouton & Co. 239–264. Steeles, J. (Under revision) Perceptually-driven deletion and the positive role of orthography in L2 phonological acquisition. 32pp. Straka, G. 1963. La division de sons du language en voyelles at consonnes peut-elle être justifiée? Travax de Ling. et de Littérature, U de Strasbourg, 1, 17-99. Strange, W. 1999. Perception of consonants: From variance to invariance. In Pickett, J. M. (ed.) The Acoustics of Speech Communication . Allyn and Bacon. 166-182. Sussman, H. M. 1994. The phonological reality of locus equations across manner class distinctions: Preliminary observations. Phonetica 51, 119-131. Sussman, H. M., McCaffrey, H. and S. A. Matthews. 1991. An investigation of locus equations as a source of relational invariance for stop place classification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America . 90 (3), pp. 1309-1325. 176 Sussman, H. M. and J. Shore. 1996. Locus equations and phonetic descriptors of consonantal place of articulation. Percept. Psychophys . 58, 936-946. Sweet, H. 1874. History of English Sounds . London: Trübner. Taft, M. and Hambly, G. 1985. The influence of orthography on phonological representations in the lexicon . Journal of Memory & Language , 24, 320-335. Terrell, T. 1978. La aspiración y elisión de /s/ en el español porteño. Anuario de Letras 16:41-66. -----. 1981. Diachronic reconstruction by dialect comparison of variable constraints: s-aspiration and deletion in Spanish. In Sankoff and Cedergren (eds.) Variation Omnibus. Edmonton, Alberta. Linguistic Research. 115-124. Trask, R. L. 1996. Dictionary of Phonetics and Phonology . London: Routledge Treiman, R. and D. C. Bourassa. 2000. The development of spelling skill. Topics in Language Disorders, 20, 1-18. Trudgill, P. 1974. The Social Stratification of English in Norwich . London: Cambridge University Press. Tsujimura, N. 1996: An Introduction to Japanese Linguistics . Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell. Vidal de Battini, B. 1964. El Español de la Argentina . Buenos Aires: Academia del Plata. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K. and C. A. Rashotte. 1994. Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology , 30, 73-87. Walker, R. 1999. Journal of the International Phonetic Association. Guaraní voiceless stops in oral versus nasal contexts: an acoustical study. 29: 63-94. Wang, W. S-Y. 1969. Competing sound changes as a cause of residue. Language 45: 9-25. Wang, W. and C.-C. Cheng. 1977. Implementation of phonological change: The Shaungfeng Chinese case. In Wang (ed.) The Lexicon in Phonological Change . The Hague:Mouton, 86-100. Weinberg, M. 1974. Un aspecto sociolingüístico del Español Bonaerense. La /s/ en Bahía Blanca. Cuadernos de Sociolingüística . Bahía Blanca. Weinreich, U., Labov, W. and M. Herzong. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann W. and Y. Malkiel (eds.), Directions for Historical Linguistics , Austin: University of Texas Press, 95-188. Wenck, G. 1954-55. Japanische Phonetik . 4 Vols. Weisbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Whitley, S. 2002. Spanish-English contrasts: a course in Spanish linguistics . Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Wilde, L. 1993. Inferring articulatory movements from acoustic properties at fricative vowel boundaries. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America . 94, 1881. Wolf, C. and E. Jiménez. 1979. A sound change in progress: Devoicing of Buenos Aires /z/. Ms. Wolfram, W. 1969. A Sociolinguistic Description of Detroit Negro Speech. Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, DC. 177 Yeou, M. 1997. Locus equations and the degree of coarticulation of Arabic consonants. Phonetica 54, 187-202. Zamora Vicente, A. 1949. Rehilamiento Porteño. Filología . 1, 5-22. Ziegler, J. C., & Ferrand, L. 1998. Orthography shapes the perception of speech: The consistency effect in auditory word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 5, pp. 683-689. Zsiga, E. 1993. Features, gestures, and the temporal aspects of phonological organization . Doctoral dissertation, Yale University. 178 Appendix 1 Map of Argentina 179 Adapted from Rojas, Andres. Provincia de Corrientes (Argentina) , February 21, 2010 via Wikipedia, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike. 180 Appendix 2 Interview Questions Caa Catí (CC) Were you born in CC? Have you always lived here? How are the people? What makes this place better than others? What type of things do you dislike about the town? Is it safe? Have you ever thought of moving out? Why? Why not? How are things different now? What are the most important changes in CC in the last 10/20/30 years? Who was an important person in this town? Corrientes Do you often go to Corrientes? When was the last time you were there? What do you do there? How do you feel in a big city? What things to you dislike about Corrientes? Do you like the new costanera/Junin street? 181 Neighbourhood Where do you live? How are the neighbours? Do you help each other? If you need help, who do you ask first? How is your house? Who lives at home? Work Is it far from work? How do you go to work? What do you do? For how long did you work there? Do you like your job? How did you get this job? What is your function? For how many hours do you work a day? Is it a difficult job? Do you remember your fist day of work? How was it? Which was your fist job? What job would you like to have? Did your parents want you to be (profession)? What does your husband/wife do? Are your parents alive? What is your father’s/mother’s job? 182 Social activities Do you know your neighbours? Do you visit each other? Do you get together during the day? What do you do? Do you have ‘mate’ (a typical Argentinian drink)? Where do you get together? Are there people with whom you’d like to spend more time and cannot? What do you do in CC on a weekend? Do you stay in town? Or, travel somewhere, e.g. Corrientes? Fights Are there fights common in town? Have you ever fought with anybody? Who? Why? When? What was the fight like? Was it a fist fight? Was there kicking? Did someone use a bottle? How old were you? Who won the fight? Education Have you gone to school? Did you like it? Was it useful? Do you remember any good or tough teachers? Do you still see your classmates? Have you ever played truants? 183 Free time What do you often do in your free time? Do you go out with friends? Who do you hang out with? Do you often go to the lake? Do you play soccer? Cards? Who do you play with? Do you have a team? Do you do other sports? Do you like to sing/play musical instruments? Are you part of any group? What’s the name? How many members are there? Where do you play? Do you like to have barbecues on the weekends? With whom? Do you eat together on the weekends? Do you watch TV? What TV programs do you watch? Do you like to watch movies? What’s the best/worst one you’ve seen? Agriculture Do you like gardening? Do you grow your own vegetables? Do you plant anything at home? What? Do you sell it or is it for your own consumption? Do you have problems with insects or animals that eat the crops? What are typical vegetables and fruit in this area? 184 Cooking Do you like to cook? What do you like to cook? Who cooks at home? What type of food do prepare? What are typical CC dishes? How do you cook that? Ingredients? Is there any typical tea in this area? Which one? Health and Medication What do you do when you are sick? Do you go to the doctor or use natural medicine? What remedies do you have for the cold? Stomachache? Headache? Toothache? Insect bites? Cuts? Diarrhea? Who prepares the remedies? Special Celebrations and Holidays Which one is the most important celebration in this town? What do people do? Are there musical instruments/special food? What music do they play? Has somebody ever sung a ‘cerenata’ to you? Tell me about the ‘Angeles somos’ (Angels we are) What do people recite? Is there a carnival? Water or with dancing groups? Do you remember any legends/tales? Is there one from CC? 185 The spirits I was told that CC is a place where the spirits often come. Is this true? Has this ever happened to you? Or somebody that you know? Is there any enchanted house? Do you believe in supernatural phenomena? Spirits? Ghosts? What about the story of the ‘pombero’ or the ‘lobizon’? Dating Are you married? For how long? How did you meet your wife/husband? Have you had other girlfriends/boyfriends? For how long have you been together? Did you marry at the church? How was the ceremony? Do your parents in law like you? Do you get along well with your in-laws? Religion I’ve seen that people are very religious in CC. And you? Do you believe in religion? Do you often go to church? Have you had the first communion? Do you often confess? Is your family religious? Are religious people better than those who are not? 186 Language attitude How do you know when somebody is from CC? Do you think that Caá Catieños speak well? What things characterize your dialect? Would you consider it a compliment if somebody told you that you speak like a Caá Catieño? Do you evaluate this dialect as inferior to others? Do you know people who have changed their way of talking? Have you ever tried to change your way of talking? Do you correct your children when they don’t speak properly? What do you correct? How would you like your children to speak? Some people say that children speak worse now more than ever? Do you think that is true? Do your grand parents speak like you do? What differences do you notice? Are you ever embarrassed by the way your parents or grand parents talk? Guaraní Do you speak Guaraní? When? With whom? Would you like to speak Guaraní? Do you feel confident speaking Guaraní or Spanish? When do you speak Spanish/Guaraní? Do you think Guaraní should be taught at school? At school, did teachers correct the way you talk? What did they usually say to you? Did you think it was right? 187 Did teachers talk to you in Spanish or Guaraní? Did you understand them? Would you have preferred to have been taught in Guaraní? The future of Caá Catí (CC) What do you think about the future of CC? Is it necessary for young people to leave the town? What does CC need to improve? How can you increase job sources? How about tourism? What would you do to increase tourism? What’s the best time to come to CC? 188 Appendix 3 List of words for production task /f/ and /x/ in word initial position Stressed Unstressed /f/ /x/ /f/ /x/ Fábrica Jarra Factura Jamón Feria Gente Festejando Jesús Fino Gil Fideo Gitana Foto Joven Fotógrafo Joyero Futbol Jugo Fumando Jurado/jugando Fuego Juego ------Jueguito Fui(mos) (7) Juicio (7) ------(5) ------(6) /f/ and /x/ in word medial position Stressed Unstressed /f/ /x/ /f/ /x/ Estofado Festejando Alfajor Lenteja Café Mujeres Cafetera Virgen Desfile Dibujito Alfiler Agitado Uniforme Ojota Teléfono Viejo Perfume Conjunto Perfumería Ajustado Afuera Lentejuela ------(6) ------(6) ------(5) ------(5) /b/ and /g/ in word initial position Stressed Unstressed /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ Barco Gato Batidora Galletita Vela Guerra Vecino/velita Guerrillero/guerrilla Virgen Guiso Billetes/bilingüe Guitarra Boca Gol Botella Gorila Burro Gusta Budín Gusano Bueyes ------Buen mozo ------Buitre (7) ------(5) ------(6) ------(5) 189 /b/ and /g/ in word medial position Stressed Unstressed /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ Caballo Alpargata/apagando Lavarropas Cigarrilo Cerveza Juguete Joven Che Bebida/huevito Jueguito Habitación Guevara/hamburguesero ------Agosto Abogado Dogui Dibujo Laguna Dibujito Mago Abuelo Vergüenza (Abuelito) Agujero ------(5) ------(6) Distribuidora (7) ------(5) Total words: 93 190 Appendix 4 List of nonsense words for the perceptual test /f/ and /x/ Word initial position Stressed Unstressed /f/ /x/ /f/ /x/ Faco Jaco Famento Jamento Fesa Jesa Ferrón Jerrón Fiyo Jiyo Fitura Jitura Fora Jora Forado Jorado Fuco Juco Fusar Jusar Fuedo Juedo Fuesón Juesón Fuiro Juiro Fuinar Juinar Word medial position Stressed Unstressed /f/ /x/ /f/ /x/ Trifado Trijado Lofaría Lojaría Drafeno Drajeno Efecina Ejecina Safina Sajina Maficreo Majicreo Sefómeno Sejómeno Dafocado Dajocado Vofúmesis Vojúmesis Befucíon Bejucíon Rafuesa Rajuesa Refuedón Rejuedón Safuín Sajuín Llafuinar Llajuinar 191 /b/ and /g/ Word initial position Stressed Unstressed /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ Bado Gado Bapero Gapero Beco Gueco Besano Guesano Vipa Guipa Vidaco Guidaco Boña Goña Bodan Godan Budo Gudo Bucano Gucano Buello Güello Bueron Güeron Buira Güira Buimano Güimano Word medial position Stressed Unstressed /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ /b/ /ɡɡɡ/ Sebáno Segáno Dabaciar Dagaciar Tibéla Tiguéla Labericia Laguericia Sabíña Saguíña Tebinal Teguinal Rebóda Regóda Sabodan Sagodan Tebúmen Tegúmen Tabución Tagución Pabuero Pagüero Tabuecado Tagüecado Pabuín Pagüín Pabuiñal Pagüiñal Total nonsense words: 112 pluss 56 combinaciones = 168 169 slides in PP 192 Appendix 5 Consent Form – English Version UNIVERSITY of TORONTO DEPARTMENT of SPANISH & PORTUGUESE June 2007 Dear Participant: I am currently conducting research on Corrientes, its people, culture and language. Participation in this study will involve an interview about your everyday life, hobbies, interests and plans for the future. Then, you will be asked to describe a series of pictures. Finally, you will listen to some nonsense words and choose the correct option from an answer sheet. Total time involved will be approximately 1 hour. Please note that all materials will be treated confidentially. Only supervised research assistants and the researcher involved will have access to the forms and data, both of which will be coded with a participant number. The questionnaire and data will be stored separately from any form containing your name and personal information and will contain no links to such forms. Names of participants will never be revealed in any report of this study, however demographic information such as age, sex and education will be used. The data will be reported quantitatively, and some excerpts of the interview might be cited anonymously. The forms and data will not be disposed of after completion of this study, since they might be used in future work. Any part of the conversation can be eliminated upon your request. In which case, you need to inform the researcher, who will later erase them in the computer. The recordings will be digitalized and kept by the researcher. Participation in this study is voluntary, with a monetary compensation of $15 . You may withdraw from the study at any time. I very much appreciate your willingness to participate. To indicate your consent, please sign the attached form. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask me now or to contact my supervisor, Prof. Laura Colantoni (see contact information below), subsequent to your participation. Yours sincerely, Natalia Mazzaro Laura Colantoni Department of Spanish & Portuguese Assistant Professor [email protected] Department of Spanish & Portuguese Phone (Argentina) 446765 [email protected] Phone (Canada) 011 416 901 0297 193 CONSENT FORM I, the undersigned, have been informed of the nature of the present study, including the tasks to be undertaken, and agree to participate. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I may withdraw at any time. Name ( please print ): Signature: Date: 194 Appendix 6 Consent Form – Spanish Version UNIVERSITY of TORONTO DEPARTMENT of SPANISH & PORTUGUESE Junio de 2007 Estimado participante: Estoy realizando una investigación sobre Corrientes, su cultura, su gente, y su lengua. La participación en este estudio incluye una entrevista con preguntas acerca de su vida cotidiana, hobbies, intereses, y proyectos para el futuro. Luego, le pediré que describa una serie de figuras. Finalmente, escuchará un grupo de palabras inventadas y deberá seleccionar la opción apropiada en un papel que le será proporcionado. El tiempo total del encuentro será de 1 hora aproximadamente. Todos los materiales van a ser tratados en forma confidencial. Sólo la que suscribe y sus asistentes tendrán acceso al material, el cual será codificado mediante la asignación de un número a cada participante. El cuestionario y los datos se conservarán por separado de cualquier otro formulario que contenga su nombre e información personal. Los nombres de los participantes no serán revelados en ninguna comunicación de este estudio, pero la información demográfica como edad, sexo, educación, serán utilizados. Los datos son procesados estadísticamente y algunos fragmentos podrían ser citados en forma anónima. Los formularios y datos no se desecharán luego de terminado este estudio, ya que podrían ser utilizados para trabajos futuros. La grabación será digitalizada y quedará en poder de la investigadora. Su participación en este estudio es voluntaria, con una compensación económica de $15 , y podrá ser interrumpida en cualquier momento. Cualquier parte de nuestra conversación puede ser eliminada, si Ud. así lo desea. En este caso, deberá informarlo a la investigadora, quien los eliminará digitalmente. Le agradezco su voluntad de participar. Para indicar su aceptación, por favor, firme el formulario adjunto. Si tiene alguna pregunta, no dude en consultarme ahora o en comunicarse con mi supervisora Prof. Laura Colantoni (información debajo) después de su participación. Cordiales saludos, Natalia Mazzaro Laura Colantoni Dpto. de español y portugués Profesora Adjunta [email protected] Dpto. de español y portugués Teléfono (Argentina) 446765 [email protected] Teléfono (Canadá) 011 416 901 0297 195 UNIVERSITY of TORONTO DEPARTMENT of SPANISH & PORTUGUESE FORMULARIO DE ACEPTACIÓN Yo, el/la que subscribe, he sido informado/a de la naturaleza del presente estudio y de las tareas que tendré que realizar y estoy de acuerdo en participar. Comprendo que mi participación es voluntaria y que puedo interrumpirla en cualquier momento. Nombre: Firma: Fecha: 196 Appendix 7 Script to find maximum intensity slope t1=Get start of selection t2=Get end of selection maxdif=0 dif=0 tmax=t1 Select... t1 t1 lastintens=Get intensity step=0.002 t=t1+step repeat Select... t t intens=Get intensity dif=intens-lastintens ! printline 't:3' 'intens:1' 'dif:2' if dif>maxdif maxdif=dif tmax=t endif lastintens=intens t=t+step until t>t2 Select... tmax tmax 197 Appendix 8 Analysis of [x] - speakers with low education only Since most of the variation is seen in speakers with low education only, a new run was done to include these speakers only. The results are very similar to the ones presented in Table 4.6, but this one has likelihood closer to 0 suggesting a better fit to the data. Yet, I prefer to show an analysis that includes all the subjects and say that speakers with low education favour [x], while speakers with high education disfavor it. In addition, this new analysis has interaction between social factors, which is probably due to the lower number of speakers for each factor. [x] Input 0.047 Log Likelihood -61.791 Total N 275 Sex + Age Prob. % N Young male .87 37 46 Old female .40 30.4 161 Adult female .59 25.6 43 Young female .17 12 25 Range 70 FG4: Preceding Segment [a] [.37] 17.9 56 [e,o] [.66] 41.3 138 [i] [.26] 11.5 26 Liquids [.21] 9.1 22 [h] [.39] 19 21 Pause [.58] 33.3 12 FG3: Following context Vowels [a, e, i, o, u] .06 0.6 168 Diphthongs [we, wi] .98 73.8 107 Range 97 198 Variable rule analysis of factors contributing to the probability of [x] • 3/30/2011 7:23:41 PM. • Token file: F tokens with age recode NO Mariela y Berta.tkn. (Excel: F_prec context collapsed with social fact recode). Condition file: binomial run for X with social factors recode NO literate NO Berta.cnd. Results file: binomial run for X with following segment recode y sin literate.res. 199 Appendix 9 Analysis of [x] with Rbrul For this analysis individuals were entered as random effect BEST STEP-UP MODEL WAS WITH SP_Code (random) + Following (3.73e-69) + Stressed (2.06e-06) + LitGrp (0.00101) [A] STEP-UP AND STEP-DOWN MATCH! STEPPING DOWN: $LitGrp factor logodds tokens x/x+f centered factor weight I 2.4 434 0.207 0.917 L -2.4 1359 0.031 0.083 $Following factor logodds tokens x/x+f centered factor weight w 11.522 504 0.220 >0.999 u 8.282 120 0.158 >0.999 i 1.981 337 0.003 0.879 e 1.517 348 0.003 0.82 o -11.438 159 0.000 <0.001 a -11.864 325 0.000 <0.001 $Stressed factor logodds tokens x/x+f centered factor weight u 1.93 778 0.022 0.873 s -1.93 1015 0.113 0.127 $SP_Code random logodds tokens x/x+f centered factor weight std dev P 5.514 29 0.379 0.994 2.709 C 3.340 116 0.095 0.952 2.709 J 3.091 33 0.121 0.94 2.709 E 2.950 76 0.158 0.931 2.709 S 1.881 16 0.500 0.823 2.709 M 1.794 53 0.283 0.81 2.709 A 1.682 32 0.031 0.792 2.709 R 1.573 38 0.342 0.774 2.709 F 1.341 65 0.415 0.73 2.709 B 0.784 59 0.017 0.608 2.709 V 0.312 105 0.010 0.492 2.709 Q -0.601 15 0.000 0.28 2.709 U -0.692 199 0.005 0.262 2.709 L -0.703 101 0.228 0.26 2.709 D -1.065 124 0.000 0.196 2.709 N -1.227 103 0.000 0.172 2.709 I -1.296 62 0.000 0.162 2.709 H -1.311 35 0.086 0.16 2.709 G -1.546 96 0.000 0.131 2.709 O -1.732 116 0.000 0.111 2.709 200 K -1.972 194 0.000 0.09 2.709 T -4.542 126 0.008 0.007 2.709 $misc deviance df intercept grand mean centered input prob 321.048 9 -10.874 0.074 0 Current model file is: unsaved model SP_Code (random) + Following (2.93e-62) + Stressed (1.77e-06) + LitGrp (0.00101) [D] Current variables are: response.binary: VariantCode (x vs. f) fixed.factor: Sex LitGrp AgeGrp Plevious Following Stressed Position random.intercept: SP_Code THERE WERE ERRORS ON 2 OF 6 STEPS! 201 Appendix 10 Acoustic measurements of approximants in different vocalic contexts Following F3 Mid-Cons F3 Vowel Approx Relative vowel (Hz) onset (Hz) duration (ms) intensity (db) [a] 2886.52 3035.52 0.06 7.43 [e] 2872.30 2846.14 0.07 8.23 [i] 2908.59 2997.73 0.05 8.16 [o] 2743.20 2907.85 0.07 7.33 [u] 3005.05 3064.02 0.07 5.49 [we] 2913.60 2704.00 0.06 9.30 [wi] 3268.01 2652.78 0.06 8.17 Table 10.1 Acoustic measurements for [ β] across vowel contexts Following F3 Mid-Cons F3 Vowel Approx Relative vowel (Hz) onset (Hz) duration (ms) intensity (db) [a] 2993.44 3078.24 0.05 4.45 [e] 2980.84 3052.80 0.06 9.38 [i] 3162.78 3499.79 0.05 5.72 [o] 2944.40 2954.99 0.05 8.56 [u] 2586.57 3057.66 0.05 6.20 [we] 2783.13 2860.34 0.16 6.78 [wi] 2852.92 2782.30 0.04 5.83 Table 10.2. Acoustic measurements for [ ɣ] across vowel contexts 202 Appendix 11 Acoustic measurements of fricatives in different vocalic contexts Following F2 Mid- F2 Vowel F2 mid- F2 Onset/ Center of Relative Fricative vowel cons (Hz) onset (Hz) vowel (Hz) F2 mid- gravity intensity duration vowel (Hz) (db) (ms) [a] 1834.77 1411.50 1418.00 1.00 5998.47 0.12 12.19 [e] 2152.28 1828.41 2266.11 0.81 6077.17 0.12 13.18 [i] 2142.67 2191.82 2844.48 0.77 6294.01 0.15 11.31 [o] 1814.82 1470.00 945.64 1.55 5997.06 0.15 13.64 [u] 1624.85 1413.87 885.88 1.62 5471.22 0.15 12.67 [we] 1773.65 1341.62 833.29 1.62 6144.02 0.14 15.25 [wi] 1865.01 1188.05 825.74 1.47 5777.35 0.15 13.02 Table 11.1. Acoustic measurements for [ f] across vowel contexts Following F2 Mid- F2 Vowel F2 mid- F2 Onset/ Center of Relative Fricative vowel cons (Hz) onset (Hz) vowel F2 mid- gravity intensity duration (Hz) vowel (Hz) (db) (ms) [a] 1771.17 1686.07 1641.35 1.03 2947.87 0.12 12.99 [e] 2441.51 2590.97 2531.12 1.02 4076.92 0.14 14.12 [i] 2662.16 2517.72 2856.88 0.88 4630.32 0.14 9.83 [o] 1259.20 1081.23 908.77 1.19 2302.59 0.15 10.96 [u] 1483.94 1837.89 739.72 2.47 2234.97 0.14 10.71 [we] 1535.25 1294.73 895.30 1.47 1909.67 0.11 11.97 [wi] 1288.13 1461.99 947.05 1.58 1968.06 0.15 12.62 Table 11.2. Acoustic measurements for [ x] across vowel contexts These values are averages of [ f] and [ x] across vocalic contexts. ‘F2 onset/F2 mid-vowel’ is the ratio of the frequency of F2 at vowel onset to the frequency of F2 at mid-vowel. 203 Appendix 12 Descriptive statistics for fricatives Relative duration x Following vowel a e i o u we wi /f/ Low Ed. Mean 1.21 1.27 1.61 1.24 1.93 0.92 1.11 SD 0.60 0.49 0.86 0.48 1.13 0.31 0.23 High Ed. Mean 1.40 1.60 1.60 1.57 1.68 1.10 1.71 SD 0.59 0.92 0.60 0.83 0.80 0.38 0.86 /x/ Low Ed. Mean 1.30 1.36 1.76 1.27 1.64 0.93 0.49 SD 0.56 0.49 0.70 0.60 1.00 0.41 0.08 High Ed. Mean 1.47 1.70 1.74 1.56 1.50 1.11 0.66 SD 0.76 0.85 0.61 0.82 0.64 0.55 0.35 Table 12.1. Relative duration mean and SD for /f/ and /x/ across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty-two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish. t = 0.368, df = 897.256, p-value = 0.713 Relative intensity x Following vowel a e i o u we wi /f/ Low Ed. Mean -10.40 -10.17 -10.09 -9.84 -7.90 -12.02 -11.19 SD 4.06 3.97 3.96 4.02 5.69 4.09 6.11 High Ed. Mean -12.28 -10.21 -10.63 -10.71 -10.68 -12.20 -6.68 SD 3.58 4.26 4.27 4.13 4.43 3.85 5.25 /x/ Low Ed. Mean -9.48 -9.97 -10.07 -11.63 -9.61 -13.13 -11.04 SD 4.47 3.94 3.75 4.92 4.60 3.72 4.35 High Ed. Mean -10.06 -10.32 -8.53 -11.77 -10.03 -11.99 -12.84 SD 4.74 3.70 3.98 3.70 4.75 4.39 4.29 Table 12.2. Relative intensity mean and SD for /f/ and /x/ across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty-two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish. t = -0.3558, df = 899.179, p-value = 0.722 204 F2 x Following vowel a e i o u we wi /f/ Low Ed. Mean 1219.99 1750.86 1953.67 1126.44 1316.40 1019.76 1675.29 SD 240.13 333.56 481.29 414.22 495.70 212.96 505.09 High Ed. Mean 1189.01 1737.09 2081.73 1082.42 1093.78 1046.47 1668.68 SD 222.00 296.43 278.40 237.30 439.37 188.04 344.98 /x/ Low Ed. Mean 1712.70 1972.47 1991.59 976.33 1274.39 1028.09 1002.25 SD 252.32 412.92 600.87 157.20 525.65 172.69 182.76 High Ed. Mean 1557.14 1963.81 1991.85 1045.60 1023.50 1047.59 1020.72 SD 264.85 414.80 427.18 352.55 363.23 323.78 455.29 Table 12.3. F2 mean and SD for /f/ and /x/ across vocalic contexts as produced by the twenty- two speakers of Caá Catí Spanish. t = -1.3957, df = 890.637, p-value = 0.1631 205 Appendix 13 Descriptive statistics for approximants Normalized Duration [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] /b/ Low Ed. mean 0.73 0.71 0.74 0.78 0.77 0.66 0.55 sd 0.25 0.24 0.30 0.23 0.43 0.27 0.22 High Ed. mean 0.68 0.74 0.73 0.76 0.76 0.64 0.64 sd 0.24 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.32 0.24 0.19 /ɡ/ Low Ed. mean 0.79 0.69 0.74 0.84 0.76 0.60 sd 0.37 0.32 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.30 High E d. mean 0.67 0.65 0.70 0.72 0.73 0.45 sd 0.29 0.25 0.26 0.22 0.27 0.23 Difference between approx intensity and vowel intensity [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] /b/ Low Ed. mean -2.85 -4.45 -4.37 -3.44 -4.12 -6.38 -4.06 sd 3.64 3.31 3.62 2.75 2.44 3.22 3.24 High Ed. mean -3.15 -3.22 -3.48 -3.25 -3.27 -5.32 -3.66 sd 2.74 3.09 2.85 3.09 3.61 3.51 3.57 /ɡ/ Low Ed. mean -4.09 -4.68 -3.61 -3.38 -2.82 -3.73 sd 3.89 3.43 3.55 3.77 3.67 2.34 High Ed. mean -4.54 -3.95 -2.13 -2.32 -1.76 -3.54 sd 3.56 3.02 3.88 3.75 2.67 3.22 Z-Normalized F2 in vowel onset [a] [e] [i] [o] [u] [we] [wi] /b/ Lo w Ed. mean -0.37 0.30 0.78 -0.83 -0.75 -0.91 -0.32 sd 0.29 0.47 0.58 0.27 0.60 0.57 1.03 High Ed. mean -0.41 0.21 0.82 -0.84 -0.67 -0.96 -0.56 sd 0.37 0.59 0.61 0.42 0.71 0.70 0.66 /ɡ/ Low Ed. mean 0.69 0.69 0.74 -0.56 -0.77 -0.69 sd 0.45 0.71 1.14 0.30 0.61 0.18 High Ed. mean 0.28 0.50 0.72 -0.68 -0.77 -0.64 sd 0.58 0.73 1.15 0.48 0.59 0.65 206 Appendix 14 Scatter plot of [ β] and [ ɣ] for all the vowels Scatter plot of [ β] and [ ɣ] across vocalic contexts. F1 and F2 were measured at the vowel onset.