Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T08:40:21.726Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Non-durational acoustic correlates of word-initial consonant gemination in Kelantan Malay: The potential roles of amplitude and f0

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2018

Mohd Hilmi Hamzah Open the ORCID record for Mohd Hilmi Hamzah [Opens in a new window] ,
John Hajek  and
Janet Fletcher
Mohd Hilmi Hamzah
Affiliation:
School of Languages, Civilisation and Philosophy, Universiti Utara Malaysiahilmihamzah@uum.edu.my
John Hajek
Affiliation:
School of Languages & Linguistics, The University of Melbournej.hajek@unimelb.edu.au
Janet Fletcher
Affiliation:
School of Languages & Linguistics, The University of Melbournej.fletcher@unimelb.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study reports on non-durational acoustic correlates of typologically rare word-initial consonant gemination in Kelantan Malay (KM) by focusing on two acoustic parameters – amplitude and f0. Given the unusual characteristics of the word-initial consonant contrast and its potential maintenance in domain-initial environments, this study sets to examine the extent to which amplitude and f0 can potentially characterise such a contrast in KM in addition to the cross-linguistically established acoustic correlate of closure duration. The production data involved elicited materials from sixteen KM native speakers. RMS and f0 values were measured at the start of the vowel following stops and sonorants produced in isolation (i.e. utterance-initial position) and in a carrier sentence (i.e. utterance-medial position). Results indicate that the consonant contrast is reflected in systematic differences in (i) vowel onset amplitude and f0 following the target consonant and (ii) the ratios of amplitude and f0 across two syllables of disyllabic words. There are also effects of utterance position, manner of articulation and voicing type on the magnitude of contrast between singletons and geminates with utterance-initial voiceless stops generally showing the greatest magnitude difference. The conclusion is drawn that the KM word-initial singleton/geminate consonant contrast can be associated with a set of acoustic parameters alongside closure duration.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , April 2020 , pp. 23 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © International Phonetic Association 2018

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

Abramson, Arthur S. 1986. The perception of word-initial consonant length: Pattani Malay. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 16, 8–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramson, Arthur S. 1987. Word-initial consonant length in Pattani Malay. In Gamkrelidze, Thomas V. (ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XI), 68–70. Tallinn: Academy of Sciences of the Estonian S.S.R.Google Scholar
Abramson, Arthur S. 1998. The complex acoustic output of a single articulatory gesture: Pattani Malay word-initial consonant length. In Warotamasikkhadit, Udom & Panakul, Thanyarat (eds.), Papers from the 4th Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 1994, 1–20. Tempe, AZ: Monograph Series Press.Google Scholar
Abramson, Arthur S. 2003. Acoustic cues to word-initial stop length in Pattani Malay. In Solé, Maria-Josep, Recasens, Daniel & Romero, Joaquin (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XV), 387–390. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Abramson, Arthur S. 2004. The plausibility of phonetic explanations of tonogenesis. In Fant, Gunnar, Fujisaki, Hiroya, Cao, Jianfen & Xu, Yi (eds.), From traditional phonology to modern speech processing: Festschrift for Professor Wu Zongji's 95th Birthday, 17–29. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Google Scholar
Al-Tamimi, Jalal & Khattab, Ghada. 2011. Multiple cues for the singleton–geminate contrast in Lebanese Arabic: Acoustic investigation of stops and fricatives. In Lee, Wai Sum & Zee, Eric (eds.), Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XVII), 212–215. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Aoyama, Katsura & Reid, Lawrence A.. 2006. Cross-linguistic tendencies and durational contrasts in geminate consonants: An examination of Guinaang Bontok geminates. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 36 (2), 145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnhold, Anja. 2016. Complex prosodic focus marking in Finnish: Expanding the data landscape. Journal of Phonetics 56, 85–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arvaniti, Amalia & Tserdanelis, Georgios. 2000. On the phonetics of geminates: Evidence from Cypriot Greek. In Yuan, Baozong, Huang, Taiyi & Tang, Xiaofang (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (Interspeech 2000), 559–562. Beijing: International Speech Communication Association.Google Scholar
Avesani, Cinzia, Vayra, Mario & Zmarich, Claudio. 2007. On the articulatory bases of prominence in Italian. In Trouvain, Jürgen & Barry, William J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XVI), 981–984. Saarbrücken: ICPhS.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Davidson, Douglas J. & Bates, Douglas. 2008. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 59 (4), 390– 412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul. 2001. Praat: A system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International 5 (9–10), 341–345.Google Scholar
Chang, Charles B. 2007. Analyzing the Korean laryngeal contrast: Evidence from cross-linguistic perception. Presented at the 2007 UNC-Chapel Hill Spring Linguistics Colloquium. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Cho, Taehong. 2001. Effects of prosody on articulation in English. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Cho, Taehong & Jun, Sun-Ah. 2000. Domain-initial strengthening as featural enhancement: Aerodynamic evidence from Korean. Chicago Linguistic Society 36 (1), 31–44.Google Scholar
Cho, Taehong & Keating, Patricia. 2001. Articulatory and acoustic studies on domain-initial strengthening in Korean. Journal of Phonetics 29, 155–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, Taehong & Keating, Patricia. 2009. Effects of initial position versus prominence in English. Journal of Phonetics 37 (4), 466–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, Taehong, Lee, Yoonjeong & Kim, Sahyang. 2014. Prosodic strengthening on the /s/-stop cluster and the phonetic implementation of an allophonic rule in English. Journal of Phonetics 46, 128– 146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croot, Karen & Taylor, Belinda. 1995. Criteria for acoustic-phonetic segmentation and word labelling in the Australian National Database for Spoken Language. http://clasmq.edu.au/speech/andosl/croot&underscore;taylor&underscore;1995.pdf, 2 July 2016.Google Scholar
Doty, Christopher S., Idemaru, Kaori & Guion, Susan G.. 2007. Singleton and geminate stops in Finnish: Acoustic correlates. In van Hamme, Hugo & van Son, Rob (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (Interspeech 2007), 2737–2740. Antwerp: Curran Associates.Google Scholar
Faluschi, Simone & Di Benedetto, Maria Gabriella. 2001. Acoustic analysis of singleton and geminate affricates in Italian. The European Student Journal of Language and Speech 1, 1–13.Google Scholar
Farnetani, Edda. 1990. V–C–V lingual coarticulation and its spatiotemporal domain. In Hardcastle, William J. & Marchal, Alain (eds.), Speech production and speech modelling, 93–130. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ham, William H. 2001. Phonetic and phonological aspects of geminate timing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi. 2010. Durational properties of initial geminate consonants in Kelantan Malay. In Tabain, Maria, Fletcher, Janet, Grayden, David, Hajek, John & Butcher, Andy (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, 18–21. Melbourne: Australian Speech Science and Technology Association.Google Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi, Fletcher, Janet & Hajek, John. 2011. Durational correlates of word-initial voiceless geminate stops: The case of Kelantan Malay. In Lee, Wai Sum & Zee, Eric (eds.), Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XVII), 815–818. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi, Fletcher, Janet & Hajek, John. 2012. An acoustic analysis of release burst amplitude in the Kelantan Malay singleton/geminate stop contrast. In Cox, Felicity, Demuth, Katherine, Lin, Susan, Miles, Kelly, Palethorpe, Sallyanne, Shaw, Jason & Yuen, Ivan (eds.), Proceedings of the 14th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, 85–88. Sydney: Australian Speech Science and Technology Association.Google Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi, Fletcher, Janet & Hajek, John. 2014. Amplitude and f0 as acoustic correlates of Kelantan Malay word-initial geminates. In Hay, Jennifer & Parnell, Emma (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, 63–66. Christchurch: Australian Speech Science and Technology Association.Google Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi, Fletcher, Janet & Hajek, John. 2015. Word-initial voiceless stop geminates in Kelantan Malay: Acoustic evidence from amplitude/f0 ratios. In Wolters, Maria, Livingstone, Judy, Beattie, Bernie, Smith, Rachel, MacMahon, Mike, Stuart-Smith, Jane & Scobbie, Jim (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XVIII). Glasgow: The University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi, Fletcher, Janet & Hajek, John. 2016. Closure duration as an acoustic correlate of the word-initial singleton/geminate consonant contrast in Kelantan Malay. Journal of Phonetics 58, 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi, Hajek, John & Fletcher, Janet. 2012. A taste of prosody: Possible effects of the word-initial singleton–geminate contrast on post-consonantal vowel duration in Kelantan Malay. In Ma, Qiuwu, Ding, Hongwei & Hirst, Daniel (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Speech Prosody, 490–493. Shanghai: Tongji University Press.Google Scholar
Hamzah, M. Hilmi, Hajek, John & Fletcher, Janet. 2016. The role of closure duration in the perception of word-initial geminates in Kelantan Malay. In Carignan, Christopher & Tyler, Michael D. (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, 85–88. Parramatta: Australian Speech Science and Technology Association.Google Scholar
Hankamer, Jorge, Lahiri, Aditi & Koreman, Jacques. 1989. Perception of consonant length: Voiceless stops in Turkish and Bengali. Journal of Phonetics 17, 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Benjamin B. 2004. Production of Persian geminate stops: Effects of varying speaking rate. In Agwele, Augustine, Warren, Willis & Park, Sang-Hoon (eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Texas Linguistics Society Conference, 86–95. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan. 2010. The phonetic analysis of speech corpora. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
House, Arthur S. & Fairbanks, Grant. 1953. The influence of consonant environment upon the secondary acoustical characteristics of vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 25, 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idemaru, Kaori & Guion, Susan G.. 2008. Acoustic covariants of length contrast in Japanese stops. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 38 (2), 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, Kyoung-Ho & Guion, Susan G.. 2008. Clear speech production of Korean stops: Changing phonetic targets and enhancement strategies. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 124 (6), 3909–3917.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karim, Nik Safiah. 1965. Loghat Melayu Kelantan. Master's thesis, Universiti Malaya.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto. 2005. Voicing and geminacy in Japanese: An acoustic and perceptual study. In Flack, Kathryn & Kawahara, Shigeto (eds.), Papers in Experimental Phonetics and Phonology (University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 31), 87–120. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association Publications.Google Scholar
Kawahara, Shigeto. 2007. Sonorancy and geminacy. In Bateman, Leah, O'Keefe, Michael, Reilly, Ehren & Werle, Adam (eds.), Papers in Optimality Theory 3 (University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 32), 145–186. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association Publications.Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia, Cho, Taehong, Fougeron, Cécile & Hsu, Chai-Shune. 2003. Domain-initial articulatory strengthening in four languages. In Local, John, Ogden, Richard & Temple, Rosalind (eds.), Phonetic interpretation (Papers in Laboratory Phonology 6), 143–161. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keyser, Samuel J. & Stevens, Kenneth N.. 2006. Enhancement and overlap in the speech chain. Language 82, 33–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Mi-Ryoung, Beddor, Patrice S. & Horrocks, Julie. 2002. The contribution of consonantal and vocalic information to the perception of Korean initial stops. Journal of Phonetics 30, 77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klatt, Dennis H. 1973. Discrimination of fundamental frequency contours in synthetic speech: Implications for models of speech perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 53, 8–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krull, Diana & Traunmüller, Hartmut. 2002. Perception of quantity in Estonian (part II). In Eriksson, Anders & Lindh, Jonas (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Swedish Phonetics Conference (FONETIK 2002), 57–60. Stockholm: Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Kubozono, Haruo, Takeyasu, Hajime, Giriko, Mikio & Hirayama, Manami. 2011. Pitch cues to the perception of consonant length in Japanese. In Lee, Wai Sum & Zee, Eric (eds.), Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XVII), 1150–1153. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, Alexandra, Brockhoff, Per B. & Christensen, Rune H. B.. 2016. Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2, 0–32.Google Scholar
Local, John & Simpson, Adrian P.. 1999. Phonetic implementation of geminates in Malayalam nouns. In Ohala, John J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XIV), 595–598. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Muller, Jennifer. 2001. The phonology and phonetics of word-initial geminates. Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Ohde, Ralph N. 1984. Fundamental frequency as an acoustic correlate of stop consonant voicing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 75, 224–230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piccinini, Page & Arvaniti, Amalia. 2015. Voice onset time in Spanish–English spontaneous code-switching. Journal of Phonetics 52, 121–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pind, Jörgen. 1999. Speech segment durations and quantity in Icelandic. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106 (2), 1045–1053.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/, 13 January 2015.Google Scholar
Ridouane, Rachid. 2007. Gemination in Tashlhiyt Berber: An acoustic and articulatory study. Journal of International Phonetic Association 37 (2), 119–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaefer-Vincent, Kurt. 1983. Pitch period detection and chaining: Method and evaluation. Phonetica 40, 177–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. 2000. Acoustic phonetics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. & Keyser, Samuel J.. 1989. Primary features and their enhancement in consonants. Language 65, 81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. & Keyser, Samuel J.. 2010. Quantal theory, enhancement and overlap. Journal of Phonetics 38, 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. & Klatt, Dennis H.. 1974. Role of formant transitions in the voiced–voiceless distinction for stops. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 55, 653–659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toole, Floyd E. & Olive, Sean E.. 1988. The modification of timbre by resonances: Perception and measurements. Journal of Audio Engineering Society 36 (3), 122–142.Google Scholar