Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T23:01:21.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lengthened affricates as a test case for the phonetics–phonology interface

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2009

Anne Pycha
Anne Pycha*
Affiliation:
Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvaniapycha@sas.upenn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many phonetic and phonological processes resemble one another, which has led some researchers to suggest that phonetics and phonology are essentially the same. This study compares phonetic and phonological processes of consonant lengthening by analyzing duration measurements collected from Hungarian speakers (n = 14). Affricates, which crucially possess a two-part structure, were placed in target positions. Results show that affricates regularly undergo phonetic lengthening at phrase boundaries, and the affected portion of the affricate is always that which lies closer to the boundary. Affricates also regularly undergo phonological lengthening when next to a geminating suffix, but the affected portion of the affricate is always the stop closure. Thus, while phonetic lengthening observes a strict respect for locality, phonological lengthening does not, and we conclude that the two processes are in fact quite different from one another.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , April 2009 , pp. 1 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © Journal of the International Phonetic Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adelaar, Willem F. H. with Muysken, Pieter C.. 2004. The languages of the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Norman H. 2001. Empirical direction in design and analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arvaniti, Amalia & Tserdanelis, Georgios. 2000. On the phonetics of geminates: Evidence from Cypriot Greek. 6th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Beijing, China, vol. 2, 559–562.Google Scholar
Asher, R. E. & Kumari, T. C.. 1997. Malayalam. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barnes, Jonathan. 2002. The phonetics and phonology of positional neutralization. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Beckman, Mary, Edwards, Jan & Fletcher, Janet. 1992. Prosodic structure and tempo in a sonority model of articulatory dynamics. In Docherty, Gerard J. & Ladd, D. Robert (eds.), Segment, gesture, prosody (Papers in Laboratory Phonology 2), 68–86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blevins, Juliette. 2004. Evolutionary phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette & Garrett, Andrew. 1998. The origins of consonant-vowel metathesis. Language 74, 508–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2007. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.3.22). http://www.praat.org/.Google Scholar
Bullock, Barbara E. 2000. Consonant gemination in Neopolitan. In Repetti, Lori (ed.), Phonological theory and the dialects of Italy, 45–58. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrd, Dani, Kaun, Abigail, Narayanan, Shrikanth & Saltzman, Eliot. 2000. Phrasal signatures in articulation. In Broe, Michael B. & Pierrehumbert, Janet B. (eds.), Acquisition and the lexicon (Papers in Laboratory Phonology 5), 70–87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Byrd, Dani, Lee, Sungbok, Riggs, Daylen & Adams, Jason. 2005. Interacting effects of syllable and phrase position on consonant articulation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118 (6), 3860–3873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cho, Taehong & Keating, Patricia A.. 2001. Articulatory and acoustic studies on domain-initial strengthening in Korean. Journal of Phonetics 29, 155–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christdas, Prathima. 1988. The phonology and morphology of Tamil. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. 1986. Compensatory lengthening and consonant gemination in LuGanda. In Wetzels, Leo & Sezer, Engin (eds.), Studies in compensatory lengthening, 37–77. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, George, N. 1999. Affricates as noncontoured stops. In Fujimura, Osamu, Joseph, Brian D. & Palek, Bohumil (eds.), LP '98: Item order in language and speech, 271–299. Prague: Karolinum Press.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. & Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1983. CV phonology: A generative theory of the syllable (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail. 1993. Nasalization in English: Phonology or phonetics? Phonology 10, 43–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutting, James E. & Rosner, Burton S.. 1974. Categories and boundaries in speech and music. Perception and Psychophysics 14, 564–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorman, Michael F., Raphael, Lawrence J. & Isenberg, David. 1980. Acoustic cues for a fricative-affricate contrast in word-final position. Journal of Phonetics 8, 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 1993. Gemination and spirantization in Hebrew, Berber and Tigrinya: A ‘Fortis–Lenis Module’ analysis. Linguistica Communicatio 5, 55–64.Google Scholar
Faluschi, Simone & Di Benedetto, Maria-Gabriella. 2001. Acoustic analysis of singleton and geminate affri-cates in Italian. The European Student Journal of Language and Speech. www.essex.ac.uk/web-sls.Google Scholar
Fenyvesi, Anna. 2005. Hungarian in the United States. In Fenyvesi, Anna (ed.), Hungarian language contact outside Hungary, 265–318. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flemming, Edward. 2001. Scalar and categorical phenomena in a unified model of phonetics and phonology. Phonology 18, 7–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fougeron, Cécile & Keating, Patricia A.. 1997. Articulatory strengthening at the edges of prosodic domains. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 101 (6), 3728–3740.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilley, Leoma G. 1992. An autosegmental approach to Shilluk phonology. Arlington, TX: University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Gósy, Mária (ed.). 1991. Temporal factors in speech: A collection of papers. Budapest: Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Gósy, Mária. 2001. The VOT of Hungarian voiceless plosives in words and in spontaneous speech. International Journal of Speech Technology 4, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ham, William H. 2001. Phonetic and phonological aspects of geminate timing (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1986a. Inalterability in CV phonology. Language 62, 321–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1986b. Assimilation as spreading in Toba Batak. Linguistic Inquiry 17 (3), 467–499.Google Scholar
Hockey, Beth Ann & Fagyal, Zsuzsanna. 1999. Phonemic length and pre-boundary lengthening: An experimental investigation on the use of durational cues in Hungarian. 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Berkeley, University of California, 313–316.Google Scholar
Hölterhoff, Julia. 2006. Acoustic cues of German obstruents in the speech signal and in speech perception: A contribution to automatic speech recognition. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
Howell, Peter & Rosen, Stuart. 1983. Production and perception of rise time in the voiceless affricate/fricative distinction. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 73 (3), 976–984.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hualde, José Ignacio. 1988. Affricates are not contour segments. Seventh West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 143–158. Stanford, CA: Stanford Linguistics Association.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1985. A theory of phonological weight. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon & Yu Cho, Young-mee. 1993. Inalterability as prespecification. Language 69 (3), 529–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Keith. 2008. Quantitative methods in linguistics. Boston, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ka, Omar. 1994. Wolof phonology and morphology. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Kassai, Ilona. 1979. Időtartam és kvantitaás a magyar nyelvben [Duration and quantity in Hungarian] (Nyelvtudományi értekezések 102). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Kassai, Ilona. 1980. A magyar affrikatákról időtartamuk alapján [Duration of the Hungarian affricates]. Magyar Nyelvőr 104 (2), 232–245.Google Scholar
Kassai, Ilona. 1982. A magyar beszédhangok időtartamviszonyai [Temporal relationships of Hungarian speech sounds]. In Bolla, Kálmán (ed.), Chapters of Hungarian descriptive phonetics, 115–154. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia A. 1984. Phonetic and phonological representation of stop consonant voicing. Language 60, 286–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, Patricia A., Cho, Taehong, Fougeron, Cécile & Hsu, Chai-Shune. 2003. Domain-initial articulatory strengthening in four languages. In Local et al. (eds.), 143–161.Google Scholar
Kenesei, István, Vago, Robert M. & Fenyvesi, Anna. 1998. Hungarian. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1982. Gemination and spirantization in Tigrinya. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 12, 103–122.Google Scholar
Kirchner, Robert. 2000. Geminate inalterability and lenition. Language 76 (3), 509–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klatt, Dennis. 1976. Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic and perceptual evidence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 59 (5), 1208–1221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ladd, D. Robert & Scobbie, James M.. 2003. External sandhi as gestural overlap? Counterevidence from Sardinian. In Local et al. (eds.), 164–182.Google Scholar
Lahiri, Aditi & Hankamer, Jorge. 1988. The timing of geminate consonants. Journal of Phonetics 16 (3), 327–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavoie, Lisa. 2001. Consonant strength: Phonological patterns and phonetic manifestations. New York: Garland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Local, John, Ogden, Richard & Temple, Rosalind (eds.). 2003. Phonetic interpretation (Papers in Laboratory Phonology 6), 164–182. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Local, John & Simpson, Adrian P.. 1988. The domain of gemination in Malayalam. In Bradley, David, Henderson, Eugénie J. A. & Mazaudon, Martine (eds.), Prosodic analysis and Asian linguistics: To honour R. K. Sprigg (Pacific Linguistics Series C – No. 104), 33–42. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Local, John & Simpson, Adrian P.. 1999. Phonetic implementation of geminates in Malayalam nouns. 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Berkeley, University of California, 595–598.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda. 1990. The nonlinear organization of the affricate. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 8, 375–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, John. 2000. A grammar of Anejom. Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Magdics, Klara. 1969. Studies in the acoustic characteristics of Hungarian speech sounds (Uralic and Altaic 97). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Publications.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1986. OCP Effects: Gemination and anti-gemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17 (2), 207–263.Google Scholar
Miller-Ockhuisen, Amanda & Zec, Draga. 2002. Durational differences in Serbian palatal affricates. Presented at First Pan-American/Iberian Meeting on Acoustics, Cancun, Mexico.Google Scholar
Mitani, Shigeki,Kitama, Toshihiro & Sato, Yu. 2006. Voiceless affricate/fricative distinction by frication duration and amplitude rise slope. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 120 (3), 1600–1607.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohanan, K. P. & Mohanan, Tara. 1984. Lexical phonology of the consonant system in Malayalam. Linguistic Inquiry 15 (4), 575–602.Google Scholar
Muller, Jennifer S. 2001. The phonology and phonetics of word-initial geminates. Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Vogel, Irene. 1986. Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Sagey, Elizabeth. 1990. The representation of features in non-linear phonology: The Articulator Node Hierarchy. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Niang, Mamadou Ousmane. 1997. Constraints on Pulaar phonology. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. 1990. The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation. In Kingston, John & Beckman, Mary (eds.), Between the grammar and the physics of speech (Papers in Laboratory Phonology 1), 258–275. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ohala, Manjari. 1983. Aspects of Hindi phonology. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
Olaszy, Gábor. 1994. Sound duration measurements in declarative sentences. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 42 (1–2), 51–62.Google Scholar
Olaszy, Gábor. 2000. The prosody structure of dialogue components in Hungarian. International Journal of Speech Technology 3, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olaszy, Gábor. 2002. Predicting Hungarian sound durations for continuous speech. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 49 (3–4), 321–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papp, Ferenc. 1969. Reverse-alphabetized dictionary of the Hungarian language. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Payne, Elinor M. 2005. Phonetic variation in Italian consonant gemination. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 25 (2), 153–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, Elinor & Eftychiou, Eftychia. 2006. Prosodic shaping of consonant gemination in Cypriot Greek. Phonetica 63, 175–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierrehumbert, Janet & Beckman, Mary. 1988. Japanese tone structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Podesva, Robert J. 2002. Segmental constraints on geminates and their implications for typology. Presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Pycha, Anne. 2007. Phonetic vs. phonological lengthening in affricates. 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, University of Saarland, Saarbrücken, 1757–1760.Google Scholar
Repp, Bruno H.,Liberman, Alvin M., Eccardt, Thomas & Pesetsky, David. 1978. Perceptual integration of acoustic cues for stop, fricative, and affricate manner. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 4 (4), 621–637.Google ScholarPubMed
Ridouane, Rachid. 2007. Gemination in Tashlhiyt Berber: An acoustic and articulatory study. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 37 (2), 119–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Sharon. 2000. Rethinking geminates, long-distance geminates, and the OCP. Linguistic Inquiry 31 (1), 85–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubach, Jerzy. 1994. Affricates as strident stops in Polish. Linguistic Inquiry 25, 119–143.Google Scholar
Saltarelli, Mario. 1970. A phonology of Italian in a generative grammar. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schein, Barry & Steriade, Donca. 1986. On geminates. Linguistic Inquiry 17 (4), 691–744.Google Scholar
Siptár, Péter & Törkenczy, Miklós. 2000. The phonology of Hungarian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1993. Closure, release, and nasal contours. In Huffman, Marie K. & Krakow, Rena A. (eds.), Phonetics and phonology, vol. 5: Nasals, nasalization, and the velum, 401–470. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1994. Complex onsets as single segments: The Mazateco pattern. In Cole, Jennifer & Kisseberth, Charles (eds.), Perspectives in phonology, 203–291. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1997. Phonetics in phonology: The case of laryngeal neutralization. Ms., University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 2001. Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: A perceptual account. In Hume, Elizabeth & Johnson, Keith (eds.), Perception in phonology, 219–250. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stroomer, Harry. 1995. A grammar of Boraana Oromo (Kenya). Köln: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag.Google Scholar
Szende, Tamás. 1974. Intervocalic affricates in present-day Hungarian. Annual Report of the Institute of Phonetics of the University of Copenhagen, vol. 8, 129–131.Google Scholar
Szende, Tamás. 1994. Hungarian. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 24 (2), 91–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarnóczy, Tamás. 1987. The formation, analysis, and perception of Hungarian affricates. In Channon, Robert & Shockey, Linda (eds.), In honor of Ilse Lehiste, 255–270. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Thurgood, Ela & Demenko, Grazyna. 2003. Phonetic realizations of Polish geminate affricates. 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, 1895–1898.Google Scholar
Vago, Robert M. 1980. The sound pattern of Hungarian. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar