1 / 27

Phonetics of Mono Lake Northern Paiute medial stops

Phonetics of Mono Lake Northern Paiute medial stops. Reiko Kataoka SSILA annual meeting January 5, 2007. Introduction: Language Area. Western Numic. NorthernPaiute. Shoshone. Ute. Mono. Panamint. Southern Paiute. Kawaiisu. Chemehuevi. Comanche.

stew
Download Presentation

Phonetics of Mono Lake Northern Paiute medial stops

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Phonetics of Mono Lake Northern Paiute medial stops Reiko Kataoka SSILA annual meeting January 5, 2007

  2. Introduction: Language Area Western Numic NorthernPaiute Shoshone Ute Mono Panamint Southern Paiute Kawaiisu Chemehuevi Comanche 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)

  3. 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.

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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)

  9. Segmentation (V, H, C, VOT, V) [ t a kk a ] Fortis -VCV V H C VOT V [ aa ɣ a ] Lenis-VCV (Hz) 5000 0 V C V 750 ms

  10. 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’

  11. Auditory impressionsLiljeblad (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

  12. Instrumental Studies • Waterman 1911 (physiological data) • Fortis has twice longer closure duration than lenis • NP lenis does not have pre-voicing • Vowels have final aspiration before fortis • Babel 2006 (acoustic data) • Closure duration: fortis > voiced fortis > lenis

  13. Acoustic evidence 1: consonantal duration Fortis [takka] V-fortis [paggwi] Lenis [toɣaa]

  14. Acoustic evidence 2: manner and VOT abrupt transition clear burst Fortis [takka] ‘arrowhead’ weak burst V-fortis [paggwi] ‘fish’ voiceless period smooth transition Lenis [toɣaa] ‘crow’ no stop burst

  15. Consonantal duration (N = 87) ANOVA: [ F (2, 84) = 147.29, P < 0.001 ]Scheffe: Fortis vs. V-fortis vs. Lenis Converges to: Waterman 1911; Babel 2006 243 ms Fortis: n=21 h1 C2 VOT2 197 ms V-fortis: n=9 Lenis: n=57 79 ms

  16. Manner and Voice Type and its frequency (n=87)

  17. With or without extra laryngeal involvement V C Lenis : [toɣaa] ‘crow’ no laryngeal involvement V C Fortis: [takka] ‘arrowhead’ aspiration V C V-fortis [tɨhɨɟɟa] ‘deer’ glottalization

  18. Frequency of laryngeal involvement

  19. Voice quality: from the last 30ms of [V1] [ t a kk a ] Fortis -VCV 30 ms V1 h1 C2 VOT2 V2 [ aa ɣ a ] Lenis-VCV 30 ms V1 C2 V2

  20. Vowel spectra Schematic Representation of Expected pattern Relative Amplitude (dB) Relative Amplitude (dB) A1 glottalized H2 modal H1 breathy F1 F2 F3 Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

  21. Relative amplitude at H1, H2, & A1 (N=25) 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 23.26 19.75 n=13 n= 5 11.16 11.13 9.24 n= 7 6.67 H1 H2 F1 Point at frequency domain

  22. 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

  23. 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

  24. 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

  25. Implication 3: source of voiced fortis in MLNP • Possible scenario • VɁC > voiced fortis • Supporting evidence • Fortis sonorant freely varies with [Ɂ C] e.g. kwinna ~ kwiɁna ‘eagle’ mommogoni ~ moɁmogoni ‘women’

  26. 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

  27. Thank You!

More Related