Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Summary and Research Questions
Materials
Segmental Corpus Analysis
Acoustic Analysis
Data Collection
Introduction
Background and Hypotheses
Summary
Background
Hypotheses
Methods
Results
Statistics
Discussion
Review of Hypotheses with Current Findings
Future Research
Conclusion
Discussion and Conclusions
Implications for Phonetics, Phonology and Typology
References
FAQs
All Topics
Languages and Linguistics
Phonetics

Laryngealization in Upper Necaxa Totonac

Profile image of Rebekka PuderbaughRebekka Puderbaugh

2019

visibility

…

description

194 pages

Abstract

This dissertation examines laryngealization contrasts in vowels and fricatives in Upper Necaxa Totonac. In vowels the contrast is presumed to be realized as a form of nonmodal phonation, while fricatives are supposed to differ according to their production mechanism. The goal of this dissertation is to provide evidence that will help to determine whether the phonetic characteristics of these sounds align with the impressionistic descriptions of their phonological categories. Laryngealization categories were first examined via a corpus analysis in Chapter 3. The analysis revealed a highly frequent co-occurrence of laryngealized vowels and following glottal stops. No relationship was found between vowel laryngealization and ejective fricatives. In Chapter 4 an analysis of the difference in amplitude between the first and second harmonics (H1-H2) in laryngealized and non-laryngealized vowels showed that H1-H2 values were not influenced by vowel laryngealization categories, but were influenced the presence of a glottal stop following the vowel. This finding suggests that the laryngealization contrast neutralizes in vowels before glottal stops. In order to consider the potentially glottalic nature of ejective fricatives in UNT, Chapter 5 compared durations of phonetic events that occur during fricative production, including oral closure and frication. Contrary to expectations, ejective fricatives were longer than pulmonic fricatives in overall duration due to longer silent intervals between the end of frication and the onset of vowel phonation. The closure intervals of the ejective fricatives fit nicely into a cross-linguistically attested continuum of decreasing closure duration at places of articulation nearer the back of the oral cavity, suggesting that ejective fricatives may be phonetic clusters in Upper Necaxa Totonac.

Related papers

On English Dental Fricatives
David Rosewarne

2018

En este articulo, se lleva a cabo un analisis de las fricativas dentales inglesas. Nos llama la atencion que estas consonantes no gozan de estabilidad en ciertos contextos, por ello los nativos de habla inglesa a veces seleccionan el fonema sordo y otras el sonoro. Ademas, se abordan los procesos fonologicos de elision y variacion y finalmente, se hacen algunos comentarios sobre la ensenanza y aprendizaje de estas fricativas.

View PDFchevron_right
The Influence of Occlusal Class in the Production of Voiceless Fricatives
André Araújo

2005

View PDFchevron_right
The 'whistled' fricative in Xitsonga: its articulation and acoustics
Seunghun J Lee

Phonetica, 2014

The present study examines the articulation and acoustics of the typologically rare and understudied 'whistled' fricative sound in Xitsonga, a Southern Bantu language. Using ultrasound imaging and video recording, we examine the lingual and labial articulation of the whistled fricative. For the acoustic analysis, we employ the multitaper spectral analysis, which ensures reliable spectral estimates. The results revealed an interplay between multiple articulators involved in the production of the sound: the retroflex lingual gesture and the narrowing of the lower lip toward the upper teeth. Acoustically, the spectra of the whistled fricative are more peaked and compact than the acoustically similar palatoalveolar fricative, and the differences manifest themselves most clearly in two acoustic parameters, dynamic amplitude (Ad) and M2 (variance). The acoustic differences are also manifested in F2 and F3 in the surrounding vowels. Additionally, the 'whistled' fricative in...

View PDFchevron_right
Bilabial and Labio-dental Fricatives in Ewe
Ian Maddieson

UC Berkeley Phonology Lab Annual Reports, 2005

View PDFchevron_right
The rise and fall of aspirated fricatives
Radu Craioveanu

Proceedings of CLA 2013

* Thanks to Keren Rice and Alexei Kochetov for their extremely helpful comments and feedback over the course of this research; thanks go also to the participants of the CLA 2013 annual meeting for their insightful questions and suggestions.

View PDFchevron_right
Phonology and Phonetics (w/ Nora C. England)
Brandon Baird

The Mayan Languages, 2017

View PDFchevron_right
ASPIRATION IN ALVEOLAR FRICATIVES IN BODO
Phunuma Mazumdar, Priyankoo Sarmah

Aspirated fricatives are typologically rare in world’s languages, occurring mostly in the Sino–Tibetan languages. However, they are hitherto unreported in the Tibeto–Burman languages spoken in North–East India. In this study we present data from Bodo, a Tibeto–Burman language spoken in Assam, India and argue that the Bodo voiceless alveolar fricative is an aspirated voiceless alveolar fricative. To substantiate our argument, we consider a set of acoustic analysis and compare the results with acoustic properties reported for Korean, as it attests aspirated alveolar fricative. Results confirm that while aspiration duration and F1onset follows the pattern reported for aspirated fricatives in Korean, intensity, H1– H2, centre of gravity and onset f0, do not have any patterns consistent with aspiration.

View PDFchevron_right
THE PHONETICS OF NASAL-FRICATIVE SEQUENCES IN LATIN
Jessica DeLisi

Transactions of the Philological Society, 2021

Inscriptional material and descriptions by grammarians from the classical period indicate that vowels were regularly lengthened before-ns-and-nf-sequences in Latin, e.g., c onsul andīnfēlīx. Additionally, nasals were often lost in this environment. The nasal deletion was driven by articulatory mechanisms, namely the difficulty of articulating a nasal directly before an anterior fricative. Diverting air to the nasal cavity reduces oral air pressure; however, the articulation of fricatives requires high air pressure at the point of constriction in order for frication of the air stream to occur. Speakers of Latin reduced the articulatory burden of these sequences by reducing nasal air flow, and over time the nasals were deleted. Preceding vowels were then lengthened to compensate for the lost mora associated with the deleted nasal. The articulatory explanation for the development of nasal-fricative sequences will be supported by the facts of sociolinguistics: the reintroduction of nasals inns and -nf-sequences is associated with elite speech and formal contexts, where the coarticulation between these two segments can be closely monitored by speakers.

View PDFchevron_right
A contrastive typology of aspirated fricatives
Radu Craioveanu
View PDFchevron_right
Mehri ejective fricatives: An acoustic study
Rajesh Khatiwada

2015

Ejective consonants are not very common cross-linguistically. Even less common is the occurrence of ejective fricatives. This infrequency is generally attributed to the incompatibility of two aerodynamic requirements: a continuing flow of air to create noise frication and an increasing intraoral air pressure to implement ejectivity. This study reports on an acoustic investigation of initial and intervocalic ejective fricatives in Mehri, a Modern South Arabian language spoken in Oman, and seeks to determine how this incompatibility is solved by the 5 subjects recorded. The analysis of different temporal and non-temporal parameters shows a high degree of variability in the way this contrast is implemented. Much of this variability is shaped by the position of the fricatives within the word.

View PDFchevron_right

References (123)

  1. Alarc ón Montero, R. (2008). Indicios ac ústicos de las vocales rechinadas del totonaco.
  2. Arana Osnaya, E. (1953). Reconstruccion del protototonaco. Revista mexicana de estudios antropologicos, (pp. 123-130).
  3. Arppe, A. (2009). Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate methods in corpus-based lexicography -a study of synonymy. PhD thesis, University of Helsinki.
  4. Aschmann, H. P. (1946). Totonaco phonemes. International Journal of American Linguistics, 12(1), 34-43.
  5. Baayen, R. H. (2006). Analyzing Linguistic Data. Cambridge University Press.
  6. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390-412.
  7. Bao, M. (2009). Phonetic realization of glottal stop in Shugni. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 126, 2181.
  8. Barnier, J., Briatte, F., & Larmarange, J. (2017). questionr: Functions to Make Surveys Processing Easier.
  9. Bauer, L. (2015). English phonotactics. English Language and Linguistics, 19(3), 437-475.
  10. Beck, D. (2004). Upper Necaxa Totonac. Muenchen: Lincom Europe.
  11. Beck, D. (2006). The emergence of ejective fricatives in Upper Necaxa Totonac. University of Alberta Working Papers in Linguistics, 1, 1-18.
  12. Beck, D. (2008). Ideophones, adverbs, and predicate qualification in Upper Necaxa Totonac. International Journal of American Linguistics, 74(1), 1-46.
  13. Beck, D. (2011a). Nuevo diccionario del idioma totonaco del Río Necaxa. Self-published.
  14. Beck, D. (2011b). Upper Necaxa Totonac Dictionary. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.
  15. Blankenship, B. (2002). The timing of nonmodal phonation in vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 30, 163-191.
  16. Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2018). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program].
  17. Bowern, C. (2008). Linguistic Fieldwork: A practical guide. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 1st edition.
  18. Brown, C. H., Beck, D., Kondrak, G., Watters, J. K., & Wichmann, S. (2011). Totozoquean. International Journal of American Linguistics, 77(3), 323-372.
  19. Catford, J. C. (1964). Phonation types. In D. Abercrombie, D. Fry, M. P.A.D., N. Scott, & J. Trim (Eds.), In honour of Daniel Jones (pp. 26-37). University of Chicago.
  20. Catford, J. C. (2010). On the classification of stop consonants (1939). Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 40(3), 287-291.
  21. Chao, K.-y.
  22. & Chen, L.-m. (2008). A Cross-Linguistic Study of Voice Onset Time in Stop Consonant Productions. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 13(2), 215-232.
  23. Cho, T. & Ladefoged, P. (1999). Variation and universals in VOT: evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics, 27(2), 207-229.
  24. Demolin, D. (2002). The search for primitives in phonology and the explanation of sound patterns: The contribution of fieldwork studies. In C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory Phonology 7 (pp. 455-514). The Hague: Walter de Gruyter.
  25. Demolin, D. (2015). Dynamics and articulatory control in Amharic ejectives. Presented at LabPhon15, Cornell University.
  26. DiCanio, C. T. (2010). Itunyoso Trique. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 40(2), 227-238.
  27. DiCanio, C. T. (2011). Perceptual cues of laryngeal contrasts in Trique. Linguistics Society of America.
  28. Dowle, M. & Srinivasan, A. (2017). data.table: Extension of 'data.frame'. R package version 1.10.4.
  29. Elías-Ulloa, J. (2016). The role of prominent prosodic positions in governing laryngeal- ization in vowels: A case study of two panoan languages. In H. Avelino, M. Coler, & L. Wetzels (Eds.), The Phonetics and Phonology of Laryngeal Features in Native American Languages. Brill.
  30. Esling, J. H. (1999). Language and Speech Laryngoscopic Observations of Pharyngeal Articulations and Larynx Height. Language and Speech, 42, 349-72.
  31. Esling, J. H., Fraser, K. E., & Harris, J. G. (2005). Glottal stop, glottalized resonants, and pharyngeals: A reinterpretation with evidence from a laryngoscopic study of Nuuchahnulth (Nootka). Journal of Phonetics, 33, 383-410.
  32. Esposito, C. M. (2006). The Effects of Linguistic Experience on the Perception of Phonation. PhD thesis, University of California Los Angeles.
  33. Esposito, C. M. (2010a). The effects of linguistic experience on the perception of phona- tion. Journal of Phonetics, 38(2), 306-316.
  34. Esposito, C. M. (2010b). Variation in contrastive phonation in Santa Ana Del Valle Zapotec. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 40(2), 181-198.
  35. Forrest, K., W. G. M. P. D. R. (1988). Statistical analysis of word-initial voiceless obstru- ents: Preliminary data. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84(1), 115-123.
  36. García Ramos, C. (1979). Fonología del totonaco del Tajín, Veracruz. Cuadernos Antropológicos (Veracruz), 2, 133-176.
  37. Garcia-Vega, M. & Tucker, B. V. (2019). Acoustic properties of vowels in Upper Necaxa Totonac. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, to appear.
  38. Garellek, M. (2010). The acoustics of coarticulated non-modal phonation. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 108, 66-112.
  39. Garellek, M. (2013). Production and perception of glottal stops. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
  40. Garellek, M. (2019). Acoustic discriminability of the complex phonation system in !x ó õ. Phonetica, to appear.
  41. Gerfen, C. & Baker, K. (2005). The production and perception of laryngealized vowels in Coatzospan Mixtec. Journal of Phonetics, 33(3), 311-334.
  42. Gerratt, B. & Kreiman, J. (2001). Toward a taxonomy of nonmodal phonation. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 365-381.
  43. Gobl, C., N. C. A. (1992). Acoustic characteristics of voice quality. Speech Communication, 11, 481-490.
  44. Gordon, M. (2001). Laryngeal timing and correspondence in Hupa. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, 7.
  45. Gordon, M. (2016). Consonant-tone interactions: A phonetic study of four indigenous languages of the Americas. In Phonetics and Phonology of Laryngeal Features in Native American Languages (pp. 129-156). Leiden: Brill.
  46. Gordon, M. & Applebaum, A. (2006). Phonetic structures of Turkish Kabardian. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 36(02), 159.
  47. Gordon, M. & Ladefoged, P. (2001). Phonation types: A cross-linguistic overview. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 383-406.
  48. Grawunder, S., Simpson, A., & Khalilov, M. (2010). Phonetic characteristics of ejectives - samples from caucasian languages. In T. M. Z. M. Fuchs, S. (Ed.), Turbulent Sounds: An Interdisciplinary Guide (pp. 209-244). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  49. Gries, S. T. (2013). Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction. Berlin and New York: Mouton DeGruyter, 2 edition.
  50. Gries, S. T. (2015). The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: Multi- level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora, 10(1), 95-125.
  51. Hanson, H. M. (1997). Glottal characteristics of female speakers: acoustic correlates. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101(1), 466-481.
  52. Hanson, H. M., Stevens, K. N., Kuo, H.-K. J., Hill, M., Chen, M. Y., & Slifka, J. (2001). Towards models of phonation. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 451-480.
  53. Henton, C., Ladefoged, P., & Maddieson, I. (1992). Stops in the world's languages. Phonetica, 49, 65-101.
  54. Herrera Zendejas, E. (2014). Mapa fónico de las lenguas mexicanas: formas sonoras 1 y 2, 2nd edition. Mexico, D.F.: El Colégio de México.
  55. Iseli, M. & Alwan, A. (2004). An improved correction formula for the estimation of harmonic magnitudes and its application to Open Quotient Estimation. In Proceedings of ICASSP (pp. 669-672). Montreal.
  56. Jesus, L. M. T. & Shadle, C. H. (2002). A parametric study of the spectral characteristics of European Portuguese fricatives. Journal of Phonetics, (pp. 437-464).
  57. Keating, P. & Esposito, C. (2006). Linguistic Voice Quality. In SST 2006 Proceedings.
  58. Keating, P. & Esposito, C. (2007). Linguistic Voice Quality. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 105(105), 85-91.
  59. Keating, P., Esposito, C. M., Garellek, M., Khan, S., & Kuang, J. (2011). Phonation contrasts across languages. In Proceedings of the XVII International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 1046-1049).
  60. Keating, P., Garellek, M., & Kreiman, J. (2015). Acoustic properties of different kinds of creaky voice. In The Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2015) (pp. Paper number 821, 1-5).
  61. Kim, Y. & Valdovinos, M. (2014). The interaction of laryngealized vowels, stress, and falling pitch in Mariteco Cora. In R. Bennett, R. Dockum, E. Gasser, D. Goldenberg, R. Kasak, & P. Patterson (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on the Sound Systems of Mexico and Central America New Haven.
  62. Kirchner, R. & Varelas, E. (2002). A cue-based approach to the phonotactics of Upper Necaxa Totonac. In 7th Workshop on Structure and Constituency in the Languages of the Americas.
  63. Kreiman, J., G. B. u. D. K. S. (2010). Effects of native language on the perception of voice quality. Journal of Phonetics, 38, 588-593.
  64. Kreiman, J., B., G., & Antonanzas-Barroso (2007). Measures of the glottal source spec- trum. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 595-610.
  65. Kreiman, J. & Gerratt, B. (2010). Perceptual sensitivity to first harmonic amplitude in the voice source. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128, 2085-2089.
  66. Kreiman, J., Gerratt, B. R., Garellek, M., Samlan, R., & Zhang, Z. (2014). Toward a unified theory of voice production and perception. Loquens, 1(1), e009.
  67. Kreiman, J., Shue, Y.-L., Chen, G., Iseli, M., Gerratt, B., Neubauer, J., & A., A. (2012). Variability in the relationships among voice quality, harmonic amplitudes, open quotient, and glottal area waveform shape in sustained phonation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 132(4), 2625--2632.
  68. Kung, S. S. (2007). A Descriptive Grammar of Huehuetla Tepehua. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin.
  69. Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1-26.
  70. Ladefoged, P. (1971). Preliminaries to Linguistic Phonetics. Chicago: University of Chicago.
  71. Ladefoged, P. & Cho, T. (2001). Linking linguistic contrasts to reality: The case of VOT. In Travaux du cercle linguistique de Copenhague, volume XXXI (pp. 212-225).
  72. Lam, Y. (2012). Oportunidad, ideologia y la perdida del totonaco del rio Necaxa [Opportunity, ideology and the loss of Upper Necaxa Totonac].
  73. In P. Levy & D. Beck (Eds.), Las lenguas totonacas y tepehuas: Textos y otros materiales para su estudio [The Totonac and Tepehua languages: Texts and other reference materials] (pp. 519-543). Mexico City, Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.
  74. Laver, J. (1980). The phonetic description of voice quality. Cambridge University Press.
  75. Lenth, R. V. (2016). Least-squares means: The R package lsmeans. Journal of Statistical Software, 69(1), 1-33.
  76. Levy, P. (1987). Fonología del totonaco de Papantla, Veracruz. Mexico City, Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Filol ógicas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de México.
  77. Levy, P. (2015). La fonología pros ódica del totonaco de Coatepec: Los textos totonacos de N. A. McQuown (1938-1940). In Memorias del VII Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica, 29-31 de octubre de 2015, Universidad de Texas en Austin.
  78. Levy, P. & Beck, D., Eds. (2012). Las lenguas totonacas y tepehuas: Textos y otros materiales para su estudio [The Totonac and Tepehua languages: Texts and other reference materials].
  79. MacKay, C. J. (1994). A Sketch of Misantla Totonac Phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics, 60(4), 369-419.
  80. MacKay, C. J. & Trechsel, F. R. (2011). Relaciones internas de las lenguas totonaco- tepehuas. In Memorias del V Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica, 6-8 de octubre de 2011, Universidad de Texas en Austin (pp. 2-26).
  81. MacKay, C. J. & Trechsel, F. R. (2013). A Sketch of Pisaflores Tepehua Phonology. International journal of American Linguistics, 79(2), 189-218.
  82. Mackay, C. J. & Trechsel, F. R. (2015). Totonac-Tepehua Genetic Relationships. Amerindia, 37(2), 121-158.
  83. Mackay, C. J. & Trechsel, F. R. (2018). An alternative reconstructino of Proto-Totonac- Tepehua. International Journal of American Linguistics, 84(1), 51-92.
  84. Maddieson, I. (1984). Patterns of Sounds. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
  85. Maddieson, I. (1998). Why make life hard? -resolutions to problems of rare and difficult sounds types. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session and Parasession on Phonetics and Phonological Universals (pp. 367-380).
  86. Maddieson, I. (2001). Good timing : Place-dependent voice onset time in ejective stops. In Eurospeech-2001 (pp. 823-826).
  87. Maddieson, I. (2013). Glottalized Consonants. In M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), World Atlas of Linguistic Structures. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
  88. Maddieson, I. & Precoda, K. (1990). Updating UPSID. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics.
  89. Maddieson, I., Smith, C. L., & Bessell, N. J. (2001). Aspects of the phonetics of Tlingit. Anthropological Linguistics, 43(2), 135-176.
  90. Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 305-315.
  91. McFarland, T. A. (2009). The phonology and morphology of Filomeno Mata Totonac. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
  92. McGraw, R. (2009). Language Attitudes and Opportunities for Speaking a Minority Language What Lies Ahead for Ozelonacaxtla Totonac? PhD thesis, University of Alberta.
  93. McQuown, N. (1940). A Grammar of the Totonac Language. PhD thesis, Yale University.
  94. McQuown, N. A. (1990). Grámatica de la lengua totonaca (Coatepec, Sierra Norte de Puebla). México: UNAM.
  95. Mielke, J. (2008). The Emergence of Distinctive Features. Oxford University Press.
  96. Moran, S. & McCloy, D., Eds. (2019). PHOIBLE 2.0. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.
  97. Moran, S., McCloy, D., & Wright, R., Eds. (2014). PHOIBLE Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
  98. Ohala, J. J. (1997). Emergent Stops. In Proc. 4th Seoul International Conf. on Linguistics [SICOL] (pp. 84-91).: Linguistic Society of Korea, Seoul.
  99. Peterson, G. E. (1961). Parameters of vowel quality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 4, 10-29.
  100. Pickett, V. B., Villalobos, M. V., & Marlett, S. a. (2010). Isthmus (Juchitán) Zapotec. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 40(03), 365-372.
  101. Puderbaugh, R. (2015). Contextual effects on the duration of ejective fricatives in Upper Necaxa Totonac. In The Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2015) (pp. Paper number 931, 1-5)
  102. Glasgow, UK: University of Glasgow.
  103. Puderbaugh, R. (2019). Phonetics and phonotactics of vowel laryngealization in Upper Necaxa Totonac. In S. Calhoun, P. Escudero, M. Tabain, & P. Warren (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Melbourne, Australia 2019 (pp. 2085- 2089). Canberra, Australia: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association Inc.
  104. Quick, P. (2003). A grammar of the Pendau language of central Sulawesi, Indonesia. PhD thesis, Australian National University.
  105. R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Ramos, C. G. (2007). Diccionario -Totonaco -Espa ñol.
  106. Repp, B. H. (1984). Closure duration and release burst amplitude cues to stop consonant manner and place of articulation. Language and Speech, 27(3), 245-254.
  107. Ridouane, R., Gendrot, C., & Khatiwada, R. (2015). Mehri ejective fricatives: an acoustic study. In The Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2015) (pp. Paper number 995, 1-5). Glasgow, UK: University of Glasgow.
  108. Seidl, H., Rajendran, S., & Yegnanarayana, B. (2009). Acoustic characteristics of ejectives in amharic. In INTERSPEECH 2009 -10th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, September 6-10, 2009 Brighton, UK: ISCA Archive.
  109. Shosted, R. K. & Rose, S. (2011). Affricating ejective fricatives: The case of Tigrinya. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 41(1), 41-65.
  110. Shue, Y.-L., Keating, P., Vicenik, C., & Yu, K. (2011). Voicesauce: A program for voice analysis. In W. S. Lee & E. Zee (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 1846-1849). Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.
  111. Silverman, D., Blankenship, B., Kirk, P., & Ladefoged, P. (1995). Phonetic structures in Jalapa Mazatec. Anthropological Linguistics, 37(1), 70-88.
  112. Simpson, A. & Brandt, E. (2019). Detecting larynx movement in non-pulmonic conso- nants using dual-channel electroglottography. In Proceedings of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2019).
  113. Slifka, J. (2006). Some physiological correlates to regular and irregular phonation at the end of an utterance. Journal of Voice: Official Journal of the Voice Foundation, 20(2), 171-86.
  114. Traunm üller, H. (1981). Perceptual dimension of openness in vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69(5), 1465-1475.
  115. Trechsel, F. R. & Faber, A. (1992). Acoustic properties of plain and laryngealized vowels in the Misantla dialect of Totonac. Ms.
  116. Vicenik, C. (2009). Praat voicesauce imitator.
  117. Watters, J. K. (1980). Aspects of Tlachichilco Tepehua (Totonacan) Phonology. Summer Institute of Linguistics. SIL-Mexico Workpapers, 4, 85-129.
  118. Watters, J. K. (1988). Topics in Tepehua Grammar. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
  119. Watters, J. K. (2010). Phrase-final glottals in Tlachichilco Tepehua. In Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, Baltimore, Maryland, January 2010 (pp. 1-17).
  120. Whalen, D. H. (2016). Acoustic realization of a distinctive, frequent glottal stop: The Arapaho example. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 139(4), 2212-2213.
  121. Wittenburg, P., Brugman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A., & Sloetjes, H. (2006). ELAN: a Professional Framework for Multimodality Research. In Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.
  122. Wright, R., Hargus, S., & Davis, K. (2002). On the categorization of ejectives: data from Witsuwit'en. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 32(01), 43-77.
  123. Yates, F. (1934). Contingency Tables Involving Small Numbers and the χ2 Test. Supple- ment to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1(2), 217-235.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What are the acoustic characteristics of laryngealized vowels in Upper Necaxa Totonac?add

The study finds that laryngealized vowels exhibit lower H1-H2 values, particularly when adjacent to glottal stops, indicating a possible allophonic rather than contrastive laryngealization in those contexts.

How do ejective fricatives function in Upper Necaxa Totonac phonology?add

Ejective fricatives in UNT are revealed to behave similarly to fricative-glottal stop clusters, as their acoustic characteristics indicate a combination of frication and glottal closure without significant distinction from pulmonic fricatives.

What methodologies were used to analyze Upper Necaxa Totonac's phonetic contrasts?add

The research applied acoustic analysis using H1-H2 measurements and employed statistical models to correlate segmental contexts with phonetic outcomes, revealing significant findings across vowel and fricative categories.

What historical context supports the existence of ejective fricatives in UNT?add

The study suggests that the origin of ejective fricatives in UNT may stem from historical fricative + uvular stop clusters, highlighting a complex phonetic evolution unique to the language.

What implications do the findings in UNT have for laryngealization in other languages?add

The results imply that the emergent patterns of laryngealization in UNT may challenge existing typological frameworks, as they display redundancy and co-articulatory effects not universally observed in similar phonetic contexts.

About the author
Rebekka Puderbaugh
University of Edinburgh, Department Member
Papers
5
Followers
42
View all papers from Rebekka Puderbaugharrow_forward

Related papers

The emergence of ejective fricatives in Upper Necaxa Totonac
David Beck

2006

Upper Necaxa Totonac (a.k.a. Patla-Chicontla Totonac) has an unusual phonemic inventory in that it has a series of three ejective fricatives (including the rare / ̊’/), but no ejective stops. This paper examines the diachronic path that has lead to the current situation and dis- cusses some of the phonetic and phonological characteristics.

View PDFchevron_right
The Laryngeal Specifications of Fricatives
Bert Vaux

Linguistic Inquiry, 1998

View PDFchevron_right
The evolution of English dental fricatives: variation and change
Mateusz Jekiel

Unpublished MA thesis, 2012

Non-sibilant dental fricatives /θ/ and /ð/ are highly marked sounds: they are rare in the world’s languages, occurring in 43 (7.6%) out of 566 UPSID languages (Maddieson 2005: 83), they bear a low functional load (few minimal pairs, e.g. thigh~thy) (Smith 2008: 1), are difficult and problematic in first and second language acquisition (Cruttenden 2008: 196- 197) and relatively understudied within the field of acoustic phonetics. Moreover, /θ/ and /ð/ undergo sound changes across many modern varieties of English, being replaced by alveolar stops /t/ and /d/ or labio-dentals /f/ and /v/ respectively (Blevins 2006: 11). The aim of this thesis is to outline the history of English dental fricatives and find potential parallels between the present ongoing changes and the past developments that occurred in OE, ME and EMnE. Although, traditionally, /θ/ and /ð/ in the PDE consonant system are considered as two separate phonemes, studies by Smith (2007, 2010a) show that the phonologization process of these sounds is still incomplete, meaning that they are not in contrastive, but rather in complementary distribution. Hence, the current phonological status of dental fricatives is similar to the one found in OE, when /θ/ was the only voiceless dental fricative phoneme while [ð] was a voiced allophone appearing between voiced sounds (Lass 1994: 71-72). However, while most linguists agree that the phonologization of English dental fricatives took place after the Norman Conquest due to the French influence (Lass 1992: 59), a different explanation is put forward by Laker (2009: 213), who suggests that /θ/ and th th /ð/ became phonemic as early as in the 5 -6 c. due to Old English-Late British language contact, further complicating the issue of the phonemicisation of these sounds. A matter of equivalent importance concerns the graphemes, as dental fricatives in OE were represented generally by thorn <þ> and edh <ð> (used interchangeably for /θ/ and [ð]) but also, in the earliest OE manuscripts, by a digraph <th> (Hogg 1992: 33). Although, in the ME period, the former two symbols were being successfully replaced by <th> (Bourcier 1981: 128), Barber et al. (2009: 162) argue that <þ> and <ð> remained even until ca 1400. Moreover, studies by Kristensson (1987, 1995, 2001) and Diensberg (1995) show that there was a great deal of variation in ME writing, as the proper symbols for /θ, ð/ were frequently replaced by <t> and <d>, providing a possible link to the current phonological changes. There are a number of modern varieties of English (e.g. Cockney English, West Midlands English, New York City English or AAVE), where /θ, ð/ are frequently realised as /f, v/ or /t, d/ sounds (Blevins 2006: 11). According to Blevins (2004: 134), the former change, th-fronting, is a perceptually based sound change, due to a strong perceptual simi- larity between dental and labio-dental fricatives. On the other hand, the latter change, th- stopping, can be also found in OE and ME, due to WGmc strengthening of fricatives (Lass 1994: 76) or pre-sonorant and post-fricative strengthening (Lass 1992: 64). This thesis is divided into four chapters: (1) a presentation of selected theories of and approaches to sound change (2) the presence of dental fricatives among the world’s languages, their phonetic features, production, perception and acquisition issues, (3) a dia- chronic study of dental fricatives in OE, ME and EMnE, as well as in other Gmc languages and (4) an analysis of the loss of dental fricatives in selected modern varieties of English. The results of this study will hopefully shed light on finding possible parallels between past and present phonological developments, confirming that the current loss of dental fricatives in PDE is not a novelty sound change, but rather a reoccurrence of earlier innovations that took place in the previous stages of the English language.

View PDFchevron_right
A panchronic study of aspirated fricatives, with new evidence from Pumi
Guillaume Jacques
View PDFchevron_right
A phonetic study of the tongue root contrast in Buriat and Ewen
Seongyeon Ko

LSA Annual Meeting Extended Abstracts, 2011

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Phonetics
  • Acoustic Phonetics
  • Lingustics and Phonetics
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2026 Academia. All rights reserved