Phonetics of Mono Lake Northern Paiute medial stops
Reiko KataokaSSILA annual meetingJanuary 5, 2007
Introduction: Language Area
adapted from: Early Indian tribes, Cultures and Linguistic Stocks-Western U.S. U of Texas (http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/united_states/early_indian_west.jpg)
No
rth
ern
Pai
ute
Mono
Southern Paiute
Chemehuevi
Panamint
Shos
hone
Kawaiisu
Ute
Comanche
Western Numic
Research
Interest: Mono Lake Northen Paiute (MLNP)Three-way contrast in medial obstruents
(fortis, voiced fortis, lenis)
Problem: Existence of the three-way contrast has been long recognized; however, phonetic properties of each sound are not well understood.
Goal: Identify acoustic properties that make fortis, voiced fortis, and lenis as distinctive type of sound.
Background: MLNP consonant Inventory (UCB Field Methods Class: Fall 2005-Spring 2006)
Bilabial Alveolar Velar L-velar Glottal
Stop: p/bb/b t/dd/d k/gg/g kw/ggw/gw ’
Fricative: s/z h
Affricate: ts/ddz/dz
Nasal: mm / m nn / n
Glide: y w
Background: MLNP consonant Inventory (UCB Field Methods Class: Fall 2005-Spring 2006)
Bilabial Alveolar Velar L-velar Glottal
Stop: p/bb/b t/dd/d k/gg/g kw/ggw/gw ’
Fricative: s/z h
Affricate: ts/ddz/dz
Nasal: mm / m nn / n
Glide: y w
Background: MLNP consonant Inventory (UCB Field Methods Class: Fall 2005-Spring 2006)
Bilabial Alveolar Velar L-velar Glottal
Stop: p/bb/b t/dd/d k/gg/g kw/ggw/gw ’
Fricative: s/z h
Affricate: ts/ddz/dz
Nasal: mm / m nn / n
Glide: y w
Background: MLNP consonant Inventory (UCB Field Methods Class: Fall 2005-Spring 2006)
Bilabial Alveolar Velar L-velar Glottal
Stop: p/bb/b t/dd/d k/gg/g kw/ggw/gw ’
Fricative: s/z h
Affricate: ts/ddz/dz
Nasal: mm / m nn / n
Glide: y w
Language Material and Data
Description: Audio in Berkeley Language Center (BLC)
BLC ID: LA114 Collector: Margaret Wheat Depositor: Sidney MacDonald Lamb Year: 1950-52 Speaker: AS (75) born in Mill City, lived in
the Stillwater and Fallen area Token used: mono-morphemic noun, 2 or 3
syllables-long, clear signal throughout (179 tokens)
For Statistics: 2-syllable words; CVVCV, CVCCV, or CVCV form; medial stop/affricate (87 tokens)
Segmentation (V, H, C, VOT, V) [ t a kk a ]
[ aa ɣ a ]
V H C VOT V
V C V
750 ms
(Hz)5000
0
Lenis-VCV
Fortis -VCV
Examples
Lenis Fortis V-fortis
paabi [paabi] opo [oppo] tɨbba [tɨbba] ‘brother’ ‘kettle’ ‘mouth’
aadɨ [aaɹɨ] puta [putta] tɨhɨdda[tɨhɨɟɟa] ‘bow’ ‘arm’ ‘deer’
aaga [aaɣa] taka [takka] kɨggɨ [kɨggɨ] ’crow’ ‘arrowhead’ ‘leg’
Auditory impressions
Liljeblad (1950, 1966), Nichols (1974), Thornes (2003) Often mentioned parameters
Duration: fortis > lenis Voicing: fortis - voiceless; lenis - voiced Manner: lenis - continuant; fortis - stop
Canonical fortis = long voiceless stop Canonical lenis = short voiced continuant
*But great deal of free variation
Characteristics accompanying fortis Preaspiration & Preglottalization Abrupt vowel-stop transition
Instrumental Studies
Waterman 1911 (physiological data)Fortis has twice longer closure duration than
lenisNP lenis does not have pre-voicingVowels have final aspiration before fortis
Babel 2006 (acoustic data)Closure duration: fortis > voiced fortis > lenis
Acoustic evidence 1: consonantal duration
V-fortis
Fortis
Lenis
[takka]
[toɣaa]
[paggwi]
Acoustic evidence 2: manner and VOT
V-fortis
Fortis
Lenis
[takka] ‘arrowhead’
[toɣaa] ‘crow’
[paggwi] ‘fish’
no stop burst
clear burst
weak burst
smooth transition
voiceless period
abrupt transition
Consonantal duration (N = 87)
V-fortis: n=9
Fortis: n=21
Lenis: n=57
VOT2C2h1
79 ms
197 ms
243 ms
ANOVA: [ F (2, 84) = 147.29, P < 0.001 ] Scheffe: Fortis vs. V-fortis vs. Lenis
Converges to: Waterman 1911; Babel 2006
Manner and Voice Type and its frequency (n=87)
Medial Consonant
Realization of manner and voicing
Total
Continuant
No burst
Negative VOT
Positive VOT
Lenis 33 7 10 7(10.3ms)
57
Fortis 0 6 0 15(32.7ms)
21
Voiced fortis 0 2 0 7(19.8ms)
9
Total 33 15 10 29 87
With or without extra laryngeal involvementV C
no laryngeal involvement
V C
aspiration
V C
glottalization
V-fortis
[tɨhɨɟɟa]
‘deer’
Fortis: [takka] ‘arrowhead’
Lenis : [toɣaa] ‘crow’
Frequency of laryngeal involvement
Medial consonant
[h/Ɂ] at VC juncture?
TotalNo Yes
lenis 50 7 57
fortis 6 15 21
v_fortis 3 6 9
Total 59 28 87
Voice quality: from the last 30ms of [V1]
[ t a kk a ]
[ aa ɣ a ] V1 h1 C2 VOT2 V2
V1 C2 V2 30 ms
Lenis-VCV
Fortis -VCV
30 ms
Vowel spectra
H1
H2
A1
Rel
ativ
e A
mpl
itude
(d
B)
Frequency (Hz)
Schematic Representation of
Expected pattern
Frequency (Hz)
breathy
modal
glottalized
Rel
ativ
e A
mpl
itude
(d
B)
F1 F2 F3
Relative amplitude at H1, H2, & A1 (N=25)
0
5
10
15
20
25
H1 H2 A1
Rel
ativ
e am
plit
ud
e (d
B)
lenis
v-fortis
fortis
Point at frequency domainF1H2H1
n=13
n= 5
n= 7
ANOVA
H1-H2: F=1.35 (2, 22); p=0.27
H1-A1: F=3.84 (2, 22); p<0.05
Scheffe
fortis vs. lenis & v-fortis
11.1611.13
6.67
19.75
9.24
23.26
Summary
Consonantal duration:
fortis, voiced fortis > lenis Consonantal period = [h/Ɂ] + [C] Lenis: smooth VC transition Fortis: Preaspiration Voiced fortis: Preglottalization(?) VOT: fortis > voiced fortis
Implication 1: on the typology of fortis/lenis contrast
Ladefoged & Maddieson (1997)
Fortis: increased respiratory or articulatory effort in the production of the segment (Lenis: opposite)
Articulatory effort in MLNP fortis: use of laryngeal involvement at VC juncture
Locus of force exertion
Korean: CV, no word-final F/L contrast MLNP: VC, no word-initial F/L contrast
Implication 2: on the typology of stop
Rarity of long voiced stop due to Aerodynamic Voicing Constraints Ohala (1983)
Extra articulatory effort is required to maintain vocal fold vibration throughout the oral closure.
Phonological long voiced stop → phonetic voiceless unaspirated stop (e.g. MLNP voiced fortis)
Subtle difference in VOT between fortis and voiced fortis
Merger to fortis in other NP dialects
Implication 3: source of voiced fortis in MLNP
Possible scenarioVɁC > voiced fortis
Supporting evidenceFortis sonorant freely varies with [Ɂ C]
e.g. kwinna ~ kwiɁna ‘eagle’
mommogoni ~ moɁmogoni ‘women’
Acknowledgement
UC Berkeley Field Methods Class Andrew Garrett, Molly Babel, Erin Haynes, Michael Houser,
Fanny Liu, Nicole Marcus, Ruth Rouvier, Maziar Toosarvandani
Group of American Indian Languages (GAIL) Leanne Hinton, Donna Fenton, and audience members
Friends of Uto-Aztecan Tim Thornes, Christopher Loether
John Ohala, Ian Maddieson
Thank You!
Top Related