Variation in English /L
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The University of Manchester Research Variation in English /l/ Link to publication record in Manchester Research Explorer Citation for published version (APA): Turton, D. (2014). Variation in English /l/: synchronic reections of the life cycle of phonological processes. University of Manchester. Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on Manchester Research Explorer is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Proof version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Explorer are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Takedown policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please refer to the University of Manchester’s Takedown Procedures [http://man.ac.uk/04Y6Bo] or contact [email protected] providing relevant details, so we can investigate your claim. Download date:08. Oct. 2021 Variation in English /l/: Synchronic reections of the life cycle of phonological processes A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities 2014 Danielle Turton School of Arts, Languages and Cultures Contents List of Figures 7 List of Tables 11 Abstract 15 Declaration 16 Copyright 17 Acknowledgements 18 1 Introduction 20 1.1 Goals of the thesis . 21 1.1.1 Theoretical issues . 21 1.1.2 Empirical issues . 22 1.1.3 Peripheral goals . 22 1.1.4 Questions which will not be addressed . 23 1.1.5 Outcome of the present investigation . 24 1.1.6 Organisation of the thesis . 24 2 Previous studies of English /l/ 27 2.1 Phonological analyses . 28 2.1.1 Morphosyntactically conditioned phonological processes . 29 2.1.2 A note on syllabication . 31 2.2 Phonetic analyses . 33 2.2.1 Acoustic analyses . 33 2.2.2 Articulatory analyses . 35 2.2.2.1 Articulatory methodologies . 36 2.2.2.1.1 Ultrasound . 36 2.2.2.1.2 Electropalatography (EPG) . 37 2.2.2.1.3 X-ray microbeam . 37 2.2.2.1.4 Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) . 37 2.2.2.1.5 Electromagnetic (mid-sagittal) articulography (EM[M]A) . 37 2.2.2.1.6 Cineuorography . 38 2.2.3 Articulatory studies of /l/ . 38 2 Contents 2.2.3.1 Temporal Analysis . 40 2.2.3.2 Pharyngealisation vs. velarisation . 41 2.2.3.3 Frequency eects . 42 2.2.4 Duration . 43 2.2.5 Coarticulation . 45 2.2.5.1 Vowel o-glide . 46 2.3 /l/ in varieties of English . 47 2.3.1 /l/-darkening . 47 2.3.2 Vocalised /l/ . 51 2.3.2.1 Style-shifting . 52 2.3.2.2 Intrusive /l/ . 53 2.4 Summary . 53 3 The Life Cycle of Phonological Processes 55 3.1 The life cycle . 55 3.1.1 Phonologisation . 57 3.1.2 Stabilisation . 58 3.1.3 Domain narrowing . 59 3.2 Evidence for the life cycle . 60 3.2.1 English /l/ . 60 3.3 Rule generalisation . 63 3.4 Lenition trajectories . 66 3.5 Rule scattering . 68 3.6 Summary . 69 4 Categorical vs. Gradient Processes 70 4.1 Gradience and Categoricity . 70 4.1.1 Phonetics-phonology interactions and the speech community . 72 4.2 Approaches to /l/-darkening . 73 4.2.1 A categorical approach . 73 4.2.2 A gradient approach . 74 4.2.3 Evidence for both categoricity and gradience . 75 4.2.4 Further arguments for categoricity and gradience . 79 4.3 A modular approach . 81 4.4 Empirical diagnostics for categoricity . 82 4.5 Summary . 84 5 Methodology 86 5.1 Research Questions . 86 5.2 Experimental Procedure . 87 5.2.1 Recruiting participants . 87 5.2.2 Data collection . 88 5.2.2.1 Probe stabilisation . 89 5.2.3 Target Stimuli . 89 5.2.3.1 Experiment 1 stimuli . 90 5.2.3.2 Experiment 2 stimuli . 91 5.2.4 Participants . 92 5.2.4.1 Participants taking part in both experiments . 93 5.2.4.1.1 RP . 93 5.2.4.1.2 Manchester WC . 93 3 Contents 5.2.4.2 Experiment 1 . 93 5.2.4.2.1 Middlesbrough . 93 5.2.4.2.2 Essex . 93 5.2.4.2.3 American English . 93 5.2.4.3 Experiment 2 . 95 5.2.4.3.1 London Female . 95 5.2.4.3.2 London Male . 95 5.2.4.3.3 Manchester MC . 95 5.2.4.3.4 Belfast . 95 5.2.4.3.5 Liverpool . 95 5.3 Data analysis . 95 5.3.1 Data labelling and coding . 95 5.3.2 Spline selection . 98 5.3.3 Temporal analysis . 99 5.3.4 The problem of inter-speaker comparison . 99 5.3.5 Plotting splines . 100 5.4 Acoustic measures . 100 5.4.1 /l/-darkness . 100 5.4.2 Normalisation . 102 5.4.3 Duration . 103 5.5 Quantitative analysis . 103 5.5.1 Spline comparison and Smoothing Spline ANOVA . 103 5.5.2 Principal Components Analysis (PCA) . 106 5.5.2.1 Loadings plots and variable importance . 107 5.5.2.2 Drawbacks of PCA on spline data . 108 5.5.3 Statistical tests on PCA values . 110 5.5.3.1 Tukey’s Honest Signicant Dierence test . 110 5.5.3.2 Hartigan’s dip test . 110 5.5.3.3 Correlations . 111 5.5.4 Category formation . 111 5.5.5 Statistical models . 112 5.5.5.1 Linear regression models . 112 5.5.5.2 Mixed-eects linear regression models . 113 5.5.6 Model comparison . 114 5.5.7 Diagnosing categoricity with quantitative methods . 114 5.6 Qualitative articulatory analysis . 115 5.7 Summary . 115 6 Experiment 1: Morphosyntactic conditioning 116 6.1 RP........................................ 117 6.2 Manchester WC . 119 6.3 Middlesbrough . 122 6.4 American English . 123 6.5 Essex . 127 6.6 Acoustic comparison . 130 6.7 Preliminaries to a temporal analysis . 132 6.8 Summary . 134 4 Contents 7 Experiment 2: Categorical vs. Gradient Processes 136 7.1 Introduction . 136 7.1.1 The experiment . 137 7.1.2 Data analysis . 137 7.1.2.1 Excluded tokens . 139 7.2 RP........................................ 139 7.2.1 Ultrasound splines . 139 7.2.2 PCA . 141 7.2.2.1 Variable importance and loadings . 141 7.2.2.2 PCA results . 142 7.2.3 Acoustics . ..